Very interesting ideas on how GIS has pervasive qualities. A unique tool that could be used incorrectly.
1962 Ian McHarg uses layers for a project. Maybe a predecessor to CAD?
Interesting correlation between user and tool. Needing to know the right questions in order to gather the information that is most practical, and the philosophical implications.
GIS seems to have evolved with technology- might be an understatement or obvious.
Very cool ideas about how people are more likely to use visual cues more intuitively than how they would interpret raw data. Argument that it allows for better analysis through visualization, and brings science rather than system to the forefront.
*bedtime 2:39am stayed up way to late.
A new Day:
So From my current understanding GIS is a way of gathering quantitative information and utilizing it in multiple layers dependent on philosophical questioning in such a way that the user hopes to gain a better understanding of the information for better or worse, in applying implications to their data. (I could be a bit off on this as it is pretty new to me)
Interesting that GIS allows for spatial relations that were previously impossible.
Importance of local knowledge used in conjunction with mapping to see patterns.
What is most interesting to me in this chapter was the idea of this “pervasive” quality of GIS. It is interesting when we as humans start trying to categorize and set up boundaries how many adverse effects it can have. We seem to be ok for the most part until we add the human element. What happens to the people on the fringe of an area deemed good construction land or people that do not get health care because the line was to narrow to include them. This also brings up ideas of otherness.