Yo yo peeps, pegs and posers

Today, going along with how yesterday’s emphasis was on action optimization, as inspired by Frederick Winslow Taylor's "scientific management," we will focus again on efficiency.

In trying to implement our conceptualized goal of efficiency we will assume there are three levels of learning. I remember in an intro psych college class I took the professor discussed how people learn first on a nominal, then an abstract and finally a conceptual level.

Now perhaps this hierarchy of 3 levels of information acquisition is inaccurate. Over some limited research for a quick citation to some elite asserting this trifurcation, I could not find a citation quickly enough subject to my search time budget.

This lesson also implicitly discusses the ontological nature of this realm and how due to the nature of our world, we can test theories and provide falsification or confirmation evidence for a theory.

So essentially this approach to learning guitar assumes that in general one must understand things in reference, at least to the extent they have a name for each thing in reference. A name can be as impersonal as A1, or maybe even names can be shared by distinct individuals, but in this case the name would be less useful as an identifier/reference.

2.Abstract

To defeat Rumpelstiltskin you need only call out his name. The Abstract level that will be explored in the next section will discuss chords, scales, modes. Perhaps the difference we will assert in how we use Abstract vs Conceptual (the third highest level), is that abstract is some non fully clear cognitive map of some complex thing in reference that the actor can navigate effectively, but not fully intentionally, whereas conceptual levels would be more intentional an deliberate informed by more accurate maps of constructs and relationships.

3. Conceptual

Perhaps the bifurcation between Abstract and Conceptual levels is total bullshit? Who knows? As Saulf Alinksy may have once asserted: “life is full of contradictions.” The third and highest level shall discuss interval patterns and techniques for working efficiently with others to create a desired sound. It will also ramble about evolutionary theory and music theory and other stuff maybe. While people may do modes because they sound good, why do things sound good? Aren’t the clear relationships of modes scales more appropriately in the conceptual level? Perhaps, but functionally, one might want to do jazzy things and step outside the modes.

Thus the total tones and ideas in a piece of music might better be understood from a rational choice theory of the audience and the composer and amount of computation time/resources/skills of actors devoted toward the composition. Thus to just know names and relationships of tones with no other understanding of context and the meaning/utility of the piece to the actors who made it and it’s audience would only be conceptual level in that view, without a conceptual view of views, the person would still be acting less deliberately if than some person acting with all these views in mind subject to their own perceived self interest.

Author unlicenses any copyright interest in this article, but also does not give any warranties

Any copyrightable material created by the article’s author is released into the public domain. Images and video used are from Pixabay and other sources and may also be unlicensed. If you have questions about what this means and what you can do perhaps hire an attorney since your law is so complex.