Responding to David Hanson:
David, I have always been a strong believer that, in scientific thinking
at least and perhaps in every other area of mental life, "a difference
that makes no difference is no difference."
So, when you write,
>> But rewards do influence performance and people do
>> things because of them.
I would state this differently. I would suggest "people do things for the
purpose of them." This subtle distinction takes us from determinism to
immanent teleology, i.e., from be "driven" by something to "choosing a
purpose" toward something.
I would ask, what actual, observable difference(s) does this make?
This may sound like a smart-alec comment -- I apologize for that since I
sincerely am curious what you see are the most important differences
between your conception and the one you quoted.
By the way, the mere fact that someone can TALK differently about
something doesn't mean very much to me. I'm much more interested in how a
purported difference would lead to different decisions, different actions,
different results.
Is that enough of a challenge for you on a Wednesday?
--"John Gunkler" <jgunkler@sprintmail.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>