Map of Knowledge

A recent New York Times article discussed a new mapping of human knowledge based upon the movement of academics between journals. Using quantitative data about the journals viewed consecutively, scientists mapped the relation of different disciplines of knowledge. A link to the article (from which you can get the map) is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/16/science/16visuals.html?scp=1&sq=map%20of%20knowledge&st=cse.

Now, I don’t really think that this mapping of knowledge is definitive, nor perhaps even remotely accurate. It is interesting, however, to examine it, and to ponder the implications of this layout of human knowledge.

The first place to look, of course, is the center. What we find there is unnamed – simply a cluster of data points from a variety of disciplines. But what are the disciplines which are close? Anthropology is close to the center. As are philosophy, religion, and sociology. Is there something that would combine all of these disciplines? It just so happens to be my self-declared discipline – cultural history (of which intellectual history is a branch). Am I bragging? Yes, of course. It is always rewarding to see one’s discipline valued, and I feel this does that for mine, given the centrality of where I would locate cultural history. Overall, the social sciences and humanities are in the center, and the sciences are around the outside.

On a different know, it is extraordinarily refreshing to see economics relegated to the periphery. If not as peripheral as the sciences, economics is still on the outside of the hub and wheel diagram created – almost at the connecting point between the wheel and the hub. This makes sense given its position (with psychology) as the most scientific of the social sciences. Interestingly, psychology is in a bit of no man’s land in between the hub and wheel. As is (also interestingly), music.

Anyway, I found the map very enticing, and thought you all might enjoy it as well.