The technology isn’t the problem. There have been between 3 and 6 attempts at solving philosophy using mind mapping applications[*] They pretty much all failed, not as technology, but for reasons of content… the web 2.0 aspect. It’s hard for these projects to attract contributors who know the subject, and easy for them to attract cranks.
There’s already a successful general purpose technology for interlinking any kind of subject, and that’s the wiki. Wikipedia has interlinked philosophy articles along with everything else. Other resources, such as the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and the Internet Encyclopedia of philosophy contain higher quality material (they are used as sources by Wikipedia, but not vice versa) which is less interlinked .. but could be made more so, for a reasonable investment of effort. IOW, do it content-first, not technology-first.
The technology isn’t the problem. There have been between 3 and 6 attempts at solving philosophy using mind mapping applications[*] They pretty much all failed, not as technology, but for reasons of content… the web 2.0 aspect. It’s hard for these projects to attract contributors who know the subject, and easy for them to attract cranks.
There’s already a successful general purpose technology for interlinking any kind of subject, and that’s the wiki. Wikipedia has interlinked philosophy articles along with everything else. Other resources, such as the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and the Internet Encyclopedia of philosophy contain higher quality material (they are used as sources by Wikipedia, but not vice versa) which is less interlinked .. but could be made more so, for a reasonable investment of effort. IOW, do it content-first, not technology-first.
[*] including a version of Arbital.