> Scott wrote:
>
> But don't you then run the risk of only looking for that which
> validates your theory rather than that which disproves it?
>
Sure, but in business that's usually ok as long as the execution is
done well (e.g., is making an iPod a good or a bad idea? Jobs used
his feelings - and data - to make the call and then executed seemingly
flawlessly).
In science, think of Einstein's "God doesn't play dice"; is that a
data driven conclusion? It's a gut-call he can't prove with data, but
then we can't for sure QM is right - only that the math works within a
certain scope (Planck length).
Good critical thinkers develop their emotions as a driver for data.
(which if you think of QM and Schrodinger's Cat might make a lot of
sense!)
People that lead with data chase their tail.
For example, anyone who doesn't FEEL that there's something odd about
the weather is denying their gut-check. As you start
trusting-but-verifying you start to learn about yourself which
improves your "gut". Pretty soon you go from, say, 50-50 to 70-30.
So how come people like Jobs have the Midas touch? lots of reasons,
but one is a well developed sense of "gut".
But back to your question, yeah it's a *risk* but then a good team
will be made up of people who are comfortable with debate and have
different viewpoints ("no-men" instead of "yes-men").
That type of group ring any bells?
8-D
^--- I never use emoticons.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:300557
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
