Collaboratively building concepts

Conceptualizing happens everyday

To conceptualize is to engage in the art of constructing a mental image or model of something that cannot be easily defined or measured under physical methods. For example, a "dog" is not a concept because it is a visible object that takes up a presence in physical space.

Concepts, in this sense, are usually ideas that are shared across societies. The idea of "happiness" is a concept that most people from Peru to Pakistan will recognize on similar ("intersubjective") standards. It is only when discussing the particulars of what may constitute happiness, does one begin to observe a divergence in the way different societies conceive the mental models which fuel concepts of "happiness" for them. For example, in some societies, there may be a close relationship between the dual concepts of "vocational success" and "happiness", whereas in others, there may be no obvious correlation.

Even under circumstances of extreme agreement over the nature of a concept between two thinkers, there is still room to explore the specific shape and form these concepts take within the cognizer's mental imagery. Chances are, the way they measure what is and what is not a part of the concept, diverges at a certain point. This is to say, in other words, that the human mind understands concepts by relating it to information previously acquired through lived experience. Understanding through association has the effect of "coloring" cognition. In other words, we are seeing the same "thing," but we are all seeing it a bit differently since we cannot escape our life narrative which imbues the field of vision with the intimately personal, mental schemata possessed by every individual.

The Exercise: Backing away from knowledge, or "knowledge-building from scratch"

This exercise would still harness the powers of Wiki collaboration, but departs drastically from the Wikipedia model in one sense: the exercise, rather than drawing from the genealogy of produced knowledge (that has already cast its definitions onto concepts), it is attempting to start all over again, from scratch. Since the introduction of the Gutenberg Press, there may have been, let's say, 678 books written to serve the purpose of explaining what happiness is. The traditional encyclopedic task then, is to synthesize all the authoritative literature on happiness into a knowledge compendium format. Wikipedia's happiness article does exactly just that.

As noble as that may be, this particular exercise isn't about building on top of the shoulders of giants. Rather, the exercise, by design, guides students to think through the legacy of human-made mental constructs (thanks to literature and research) of the phenomena and ideas that constitute our lived experiences. There are so many socially-shared ideas out there that can and should be re-conceived by way of the conceptualization process: terrorism, freedom, war, modernity, God-- to name a few.

Conceptualizing within the context of this project entails drawing from one's inner voice when searching for the right language to explain a concept. Imagine having to write a book on a newly discovered emotion, but you are confined to a jail cell that affords you no access to any books or reference materials. You are now in the position of producing knowledge from the first link onward.

The benefits of collaboratively building concepts

• Co-participants get to discover how their own mental models for understanding purportedly "obvious" characteristics of a given concept will interact with others. They may find commonalities or differences, or refine their mental images.

• Without any sources to draw (and depend) from, participants are strengthening their own critical thinking and compositions skills.

How the Conceptualization exercise would work in the Wikiversity

• Guidelines (let's propose some here)

• Neutral Point of View. How does neutrality play a role in concept building?

Template:Plp