OK, but I hope I communicated my concern that you seemed to be putting
yourself in an exposed position by attempting to scope the problem. I still
do not regard that as necessary. Mapping the scope achieved by the
participants onto the scope of the literature would be interesting, but a
large task.
best wishes
Michael
At 10:37 02/10/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>Dear Michael,
>
>Your note asks a question about my summary: "Is there a reason why
>the only references are to earlier correspondents?"
>
>There is.
>
>I am trying to state the questions apparent here in our discussion
>rather than review the literature. This does not prevent referring to
>the extensive literature on false consciousness, contradiction, and
>self-deception. It involves restating and examining the conversation
>on this list.
>
>Several of us have referred to the literature. I have cited
>Kierkegaard, Becker, and Freud on false consciousness, and discussed
>Argyris and Schon on reflective practice and organizational learning
>in terms of design learning.
>
>It is important to clarify our thoughts and the way we understand and
>apply ideas. When the thread recurred several times, I decided to
>summarize the various issues and questions to see where an inquiry
>might lead.
>
>One feature of a literature review would be helpful in the
>discussion. In addition to noting the external sources, it helps to
>summarize what the cited authors say and explain how their views
>apply here. I have done this for Kierkegaard to some degree, as Keith
>Russell has done for Sartre. I also related Argyris and Schon relate
>to the thread without developing the comment fully. In contrast, I
>have merely noted that issues are considered in Becker and Freud, and
>in others, such as Goffman, Damasio, Lakoff, and Johnson. Perhaps I
>should have discussed their views.
>
>When I have completed a summary of questions, I hope to return to the
>issues and perhaps to some of the scholars who have addressed them.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Ken
>
>
>
>
>-snip-
>
>I am curious about the course this discussion has taken.
>
>While I admire Ken's ability to analyze and summarize the threads
>that occur on this list, I feel that the present summary risks
>contradicting our other [implicit] approaches to research. A lot of
>work is in the public domain in the fields of the philosophy of
>psychology and psychology, on false consciousness. When such work is
>available we usually encourage referencing rather than thinking the
>matter through from scratch. Ken's admirable summary seems like the
>sort of thing that would be useful if there were no work in the
>public domain on this subject.
>
>I have already suggested Fingarette. I could also suggest
>Wittgenstein (on the ability to know one's internal states), and I
>think others have already cited Kierkegaard and Sartre.
>
>May I add that I think the subject is very relevant for anyone
>seeking to validate reflective practice as a research method.
>
>-snip-
>
>--
>
>Ken Friedman, Ph.D.
>Associate Professor of Leadership and Strategic Design
>Department of Leadership and Organization
>Norwegian School of Management
>
>Visiting Professor
>Advanced Research Institute
>Faculty of Art, Media, and Design
>Staffordshire University
************************************************************
Dr Michael A R Biggs
Associate Dean (Research)
Reader in Visual Communication
Faculty of Art and Design, University of Hertfordshire
College Lane, Hatfield, Herts. AL10 9AB
United Kingdom
Telephone +44 (0)1707 285341
Fax +44 (0)1707 285350
E-mail [log in to unmask]
Internet http://www.herts.ac.uk/artdes/research/creac/html/intrombiggs.html
Coordinator of the Centre for Research into Practice
http://www.herts.ac.uk/artdes/research/cr2p/index.htm
************************************************************
|