Replying to LO27014 --
Fred Nickols Wrote
> I kind of like what Elliott Jaques had to say about "operational
> definitions"..."the definition not of things but of dimensions or qualities
> of things by
> means of a description of the operations necessary to measure those
> dimensions or qualities." (p.23 in A General Theory of Bureaucracy.)
In certain way, the definition of 'operational definition' is misleading,
and what the aim for striving for 'operational thinking or operational
meaning' is summarized in Bridgman's "The Logic of Modern Physics":¤
"Operational thinking will at first prove to be an unsocial virtue; one
will find oneself perpetually unable to understand the simplest
conversation of one's friends, and will make oneself universally unpopular
by demanding the meaning of apparently the simplest terms of every
argument. Possibly after every one has schooled himself to this better
way, there will remain a permanent unsocial tendency, because doubtless
much of our present conversation will then become unnecessary. The
socially optimistic may venture to hope, however, that the ultimate effect
will be to release one's energies for more stimulating and interesting
interchange of ideas." ( I use the quote by Michael Round's post in DEN.)
This might be somehow naive but what a brave dream.
So perhaps Fred like to tell us his hero Elliott's masterpiece's work on
this aspect.
For Deming, this is one important step toward 'the new economics' or
'ecology of mind'. I am please his book Out of the Crisis was selected as
on of most influential management books of last century. ( Please see
Organizational Dynamics, 2001 Winter.)
Hanching Chung
http://www.deming.com.tw
--demingtw <demingtw@ms17.hinet.net>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.