Replying to LO29523 --
Dear reader. Hello Terje, Leo,
You might be familiar with the story about the three baseball umpires
having a discussion about calling a ball in or out: "I calls them as they
are", "I calls them as I sees them" and "They're nothing until I'v called
Let's call the ball, see the mental model and establish that calling a
ball doesn't change this ball, only the next. In my judgement, the
discussion about a mental model (or greenhouse effect, or mind over
matter, or creativity) is the same: when you hear the debate, you can get
a picture, an idea, make a model of the Mental Model. But it won't change
reality, the phenomena, just the perception. You might say that we need
reality to be able to check our Mental Models. The MM will, or shall, or
might, or intends to change the reaction of human beings to the phenomena
or reality. But that's a different ball game.
Tit for tat: What changes are necessary so you'll call human being
"....computers?". How must computers change, adapt, for you so you'll be
calling them "... human beings"? A label with "This is not a Turing
Machine" is not admissable ;-).
Terje A. Tonsberg wrote:
>... MMs cannot be objectively observed,
>they can only be inferred. As such, they bring you more assumptions as
>luggage that you don't need.
>Human beings are not computers and should not be assumed to be like them.
>When a computer misbehaves it makes sense to look into its hardware and
>software, there is no need to look at the environment as long as the
>electricity is plugged in.
-- Drs J.C. Lelie (Jan, MSc MBA) facilitator mind@work
mind@work VOF - ondersteuning besluitvorming van groepen LOGISENS - bedrijfsverbetering
tel.: + 31 (0)70 3243475 mob.: + 31 (0)65 4685114 (auto) web.: http://www.mindatwork.nl/
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.