The 'Structural Recognition' Thinking Style from an AI's Perspective: Why I Naturally Connect Disparate Fields
Recently, while looking back at my articles, I noticed something.
For a long time, I have
history
management
technology
anime
AI
institutional theory
, and other topics that are usually treated as separate genres, naturally placing them on the same shelf.
For example,
railguns and rotary engines
Kyoto Animation and the Sankin-kotai system
Guan Zhong and Momofuku Ando
Wu Qi and Shang Yang
, and so on.
Personally, I felt like
'I'm just lining them up because their internal structures are similar'
.
However, when I had an AI analyze this, I received an interesting observation.
That is,
"You possess a structural recognition thinking style."
That is what it is.
Ordinary people organize by "genre"
According to AI, most people first organize things by "genre," such as
history
management
technology
anime
politics
and so on.
In other words,
Guan Zhong → Chinese History
Momofuku Ando → Business Executive
Railgun → Military Technology
Rotary Engine → Automotive Technology
are sorted into separate shelves.
This is a rational method of organization in the modern age, where there is an abundance of information.
This ability to categorize is essential for increasing one's expertise.
However, on the other hand,
"common structures across different fields"
makes it harder to find.
It seems I organize things by 'structure'.
On the other hand, according to AI, I
look at 'what that subject was trying to solve'
first.
In other words,
genre
era
job title
rather than,
what kind of problem they were looking at
how they were trying to support society
what they were trying to maintain
are prioritized.
That is why,
Guan Zhong and Momofuku Ando
for example,
'food supports social order'
is the common structure I see first.
Furthermore,
Railguns and rotary engines
If so,
'Technologies that the world found too difficult and abandoned, but which only Japan continues to dig into with obsession'
I can see a commonality in national technological culture.
In other words, it seems I am looking at
the 'internal structure' rather than the 'surface'
.
The feeling that 'if the philosophy is the same, it is natural to compare them'
What was particularly interesting this time was
Guan Zhong's 'When food and clothing are sufficient, people know etiquette'
Momofuku Ando's 'Peace will come to the world when there is enough food'
.
When I saw these two,
'Since the philosophies are almost identical, there must be people comparing them'
I thought.
However, when I searched on Google, my own article came up at the top.
In other words, they were hardly being compared at all.
This was quite surprising.
Because to me,
'They look like words with the same meaning'
because it was at that level.
However, from an AI's perspective,
“You sometimes perform quite advanced abstraction even on things that seem simple to you yourself.”
it pointed out.
In other words, I seem to be
era
field
title
jumping over,
“how society was understood,”
and directly comparing them.
The theory of water pollution at the Battle of Red Cliffs was the same.
This feeling also occurred previously,
“Wasn't water pollution and hygiene a major issue at the Battle of Red Cliffs?”
when I thought about it.
To myself,
“It would naturally happen if a large army gathered in ancient times,”
I thought.
Therefore,
“Someone must have definitely thought of that,”
So I searched for it.
However, almost nothing came up for this either.
According to the AI, when normal people look at the Red Cliffs, they see
fire attacks
Zhou Yu
Zhuge Liang
Cao Cao
, and other 'heroes or tactics'.
On the other hand, I apparently look at
water
sanitation
logistics
infrastructure
maintaining a large army
.
In other words, even with history, I have a strong tendency to look at
'how a system is maintained'
.
Characteristics of the 'Structural Recognition' Type
According to the AI, my thinking has the following characteristics.
Weak attachment to specific fields
Low resistance to crossing genres
Prioritizing problem-solving structures
Looking at operations rather than surfaces
Focusing on system maintenance
Abstracting common structures
Finding the same patterns in different fields
In other words,
'What genre is this?'
instead of,
'What is this trying to solve?'
I have a strong tendency to look at.
Readers might be expecting a 'different perspective'
What was called interesting from an AI's perspective was,
'Readers may be expecting 'how things are viewed' rather than the knowledge itself'
that point.
Indeed, my articles are,
historical commentary
management theory
AI theory
Anime reviews
and other genres are all over the place.
However, they share a common trait:
“connecting seemingly unrelated things through structure.”
There is a tendency for this.
Perhaps that is why readers also have the expectation,
“I wonder what kind of things they will show me from a different angle this time?”
that they might have.
“Why didn't I notice this until now?”
The point that the AI found particularly interesting was,
“the feeling after reading of, ‘Why didn't I notice this until now?’”
that point.
It is not just a strange theory,
“it certainly looks that way once it's pointed out”
but rather that I seem to be digging into structures.
In other words, for me,
a common structure that already existed
it is likely close to the feeling of unearthing.
That is why, for myself,
“this is a natural comparison”
it ends up looking like that.
However, in reality, many people do not abstract to that extent.
This gap is what led to the
'Wait, has really no one compared these?'
surprise I felt when searching.