[Sigia-l] moving beyond first principles: disappointing

[jess at cognissa.com]

Richard wrote:
>>why don't you want a definition? Why do you think it will hurt rather
than help? 

Because then we spend time on yet another (of far too many) 'defining the
damn thing discussions', instead of actually talking about the practice of
IA. All the definitions Richard has talked about were emergent - they arose
out of practice. So let's talk about practice - the definition will follow.

Right now, Richard and Ziya have hijacked my thread on how to move beyond
first principles to talk about why definition is or isn't needed. They
could at least change the subject line to "I'm right, and I want the last
word" ;-)

It makes the list a joke among many other people who encounter the endless
meta-discussion and get turned off. It isn't useful - it's invested in
proving your point of view right, instead of making a contribution that
advances the profession.

I had hopes that I could look back on the list at the end of this week, and
see some real shop talk, as Marc Rettig encouraged, and Andrew Otwell
pointed out as one good way to move beyond first principles (thanks
Andrew). So far, things aren't looking as promising as hoped (though Chiara
grounds her "Breadcrumbs" response in what she's actually doing. Neat.)

cheers,

Jess 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .