Responding to myself in LO29043 (I know, that comes perilously close to
talking to myself but I'm doing a lot of that lately) --
[Host's Note: Fred, it's perfectly OK here... ..Rick]
Earlier, in responding to a post from Andrew, I wrote (in part):
>Gap 2: For as long as I've been hanging around the periphery of the
>behavioral/social/organizational sciences, their reputation for
>first-rate, solid, scientific research has been abysmal. As I might have
>said a few years ago, "It sucks!" Gap 2, then, is using a questionable
>benchmark for benchmarking purposes. It is a prime example of what I call
>"the basic binary split" i.e., of taking an initial step that defines the
>universe in two parts (this and not this or, in this case, "post
>conventional" and not post conventional).
Feeling guilty about shooting off my mouth without not knowing more about
the term in question (post-conventional development), I looked around on
the web and found it to be part of a framework attributed to Lawrence
Kohlberg. The framework describes levels of moral development (see the
link immediately below) for an explication and critique of Kohlberg's
framework.
http://www.xenodochy.org/ex/lists/moraldev.html
Having looked into this a little further, I think I'll stand by my
off-the-cuff remark above.
Regards,
Fred Nickols
740.397.2363
nickols@safe-t.net
"Assistance at a Distance"
http://www.nickols.us
--Fred Nickols <nickols@safe-t.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.