Dr. Steve Eskow wrote:
> A few Talmudic footnotes to some comments by Simon Buckingham:
>
> Your ideas, it seems to me, are not able to be discussed as "true" or
> "false"--that is, there is no real way to verify them empirically: they
> will either be judged useful or not useful, or , better, sometimes useful,
> sometimes a hindrance.
I wish I could at this stage pass you over to a guy called Bob Klassen in
California who is highly syntactical- his papers on economic as opposed to
political government are published on http://www.wkpub.com and are highly
recommended. I believe that there is a scale running between lies and
truth and that there is such a thing as absolute unarguable truth. It is
this that we should seek.
> Language favors and privileges , invariably, one of the two terms in such
> dichotomies. That is, language seems to insist that it is better to be
> "dynamic" than "static", better to be "voluntary" than "forced."
I hear you Steve- just as when I say we have changed fundamentally from an
orderly organized world to a diverse global unorganized world- of course
this is just a degree of change on a dynamic spectrum- you are absolutely
correct philosophically but we cannot always express those degrees without
busyness taking over and detracting from the business in hand.
regards simon buckingham
http://www.unorg.com/europe
--Simon Buckingham <go57@dial.pipex.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>