yak
[Top] [All Lists]

[yak@collab] Re: Dangling Threads 2003-03-17

To: <yak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: <cdent@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 03:31:06 -0500 (EST)
Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0303220319380.25782-100000@hot.burningchrome.com>
On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Tom Munnecke wrote:    (01)

> This is all a long way of answering the question.  It depends on whether
> we are talking about systems (or spaces) within which we expect emergent
> properties, or those which we expect "clockwork" like precision?  If we
> are talking about how to integrate the work efforts between two aircraft
> manufacturers, it is the latter.  If we are talking about a fundamental
> change in the health care system, it is the former.    (02)

This is a more general version of, or related to, the formal
argumentation versus "conversation" dichotomy that I think we see
play out between the people who want to semi-automate dialog with
tools like IBIS and the people who react poorly to such ideas.    (03)

I'm in the latter camp.    (04)

I think the poor reaction has to do with, perhaps unfortunately,
rather fundamental philosophical differences which may create a
chasm that cannot be crossed (and thus must be considered an
opportunity for bridge building rather than a disappointment).    (05)

Consider this: if we are using or creating systems that have, use
or expect "clockwork" precision we implicitly make the assumption
that understanding is something that already exists that is to be
discovered through our work. If, instead, we are expecting
emergence we implicitly make the assumption that understanding is
something we create (together).    (06)

If we are building something that has a known set of requirements
(create a transport that stays off the ground while in motion),
clockwork precision is appropriate (to a degree) because the
thing to be created is not actually being created, but rather
cloned. We already have planes, we just want some more, maybe
some that are more efficient.    (07)

In much of the collaborative work that we discuss, we are not
cloning. In fact we have no idea what we are doing, so therefore
we need to allow for emergence.    (08)

> Perhaps having an anthropologist on the team is reasonable.    (09)

A trained anthropologist, you mean? Aren't we all
anthropologists?    (010)


-- 
Chris Dent
cdent@blueoxen.org    (011)


-- 
This message is archived at:    (012)

http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=yak&i=Pine.LNX.4.30.0303220319380.25782-100000@hot.burningchrome.com    (013)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>