In other words, maybe everyone says only X Y and Z from their field is necessary/the most important, not (just) because nothing else is on their radar, but because when they think of their field, simply just mentally reasoning about X, Y, or Z is all it takes to take into account all the connected associations, without the feeling this reasoning takes much mental space or effort; and maybe this is an interesting mental fallacy.
ring around the rosy pocket full of posy ashes ashes we all fall down
The inscription date was 538 ad, the second year of the plague of Justinian and the installment of the Biship of Rome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_a_Ring_o%27_Roses#The_Gre...
All seem like reasonable bits of advice from a civilisation that let itself get wiped out,pretty much regardless of the cause.
Now you can include images too!
>“If, in some cataclysm, all of scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one sentence passed on to the next generations of creatures, what statement would contain the most information in the fewest words? I believe it is the atomic hypothesis (or the atomic fact, or whatever you wish to call it) that all things are made of atoms—little particles that move around in perpetual motion, attracting each other when they are a little distance apart, but repelling upon being squeezed into one another.” ― Richard Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics Vol 1
This should be generalized and augmented to the idea of analysis and synthesis in general, what we could call "general alchemy". That is physical and symbolic isolation & scientific controls help to understand the world, but we also need to figure out the "chemistry" so to speak of how things tend to combine and transform so we can understand the whole ecology of the integrated system.
The freedom to choose among terabytes would take a ton of thought to actually come up with some optimal set. You could probably churn over thoughts on the subject for years.