As I re-do my blog, and very carefully re-create categories (they seemed haphazard and over-numerous in my old blog) I notice that categories multiply faster than actual blog entries (articles). How could this be? The answer is that each article can go in more than one category. In fact, I can often think of many categories that certain articles could potentially go into, but am not sure if there is a reason to actually create or use those categories.

For example, my article “The Future is in The CODE” clearly can be categorized under “science-biology”, and “computer science”, but also mentions a science-fiction author. Should I then also clasify it under “Science & Speculative Fiction”? That would probably be more appropriately a “tag”.

Another conceptual issue has to do with the hierarchy of categories. This is also related to the to a cultural issue: how we separate the “sciences” from the “humanities” and arts, even though, to my mind, they at minimum overlap, and many times are not truly separated in reality. There is much science and technology that goes into art. Depending on the person, this can be informal, learned-in-the-field technique, or well-researched and analyzed scientific approach to the materials and processes that one uses in their art-making. Likewise, there is much art in science.

This very article itself is an example of the issues involved: since it touches on both the humanities and the sciences, should I create a new blog category - “philosophy” - to cover that, as well as putting it under Writing/Literature/Publishing and “blogging”?

I’ll have to ponder this and perhaps do a little research…

Now, as far as Tags go, my impression is that tags are more particularized, whereas categories are more general and hierarchical. Think of a tag cloud: you can see how many posts have to do with a particular topic, and if you see some juicy fruit, you pick it - it’s a way of connecting that primate visual ability with that abstract linguistic human left-brain thing …