Ray Evans Harrell wrote:
So if there are no social intelligences then there are no "organizations
that learn?"
[snip]
I wrote (and you quote):
I will never use that phrase "social intelligence" again.
I don't why I didn't see for myself how antithetical
it is to my beliefs. Engineering and designing systems
which are easy and pleasant to use for social welfare and
creative cultural endeavor, and difficult
to hijack for private greed is a little closer
to what I think -- I think.
[snip]
No, I do not think organizations can learn, except in the
metaphorical sense I stated above -- which may for all
practical purposes accomplish the desirable part of
the myth of organizations learning.
I'll stick with the Hegelian notion of objectivation
of spirit in the products of human labor. The way in
which organizations learn is the same as the way stones learn:
An electric dental drill has more intelligence in it
than a twig or pebble we pick off the ground and try to use to
poke at a pain in our tooth. But, like the light of
the moon, [obviously] the intelligence in the drill
is *reflected* intelligence: the incorporation of
the knowledge of medical instrument makers in the
instruments thay make.
What makes persons want to attribute human attributes to
non-human entities? My guess is that it is some
kind of correlate to them not attributing human attributes
to themselves.
\brad mccormick
--
Let your light so shine before men,
that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
