Hi David,
Thanks. Well spotted.
My perspective hasn't changed. I'd assumed people would understand the
implied insertion of 'in this particular case' in my writing (see below).
All analyses have a focus and context and reasoning that only makes valid
sense in relation to them. My comments were that Birger was using evidence
from a different context to the focus of analysis, and in relation to both
'complex system' and 'success', when his proposed evidence was replaced by
the evidence relevant to the focus, context and reasoning, the reasoning
supported a different conclusion.
You are right that there is a shift in this case, Most of the analyses I do
are of theory qua theory and hence a lot of it requires a high level view.
Looking at evidence of the limits to competence of us as individual humans
is different.
All the best,
Terry
Amended snip
> .the relevant complexity is how each individual sees it - not the
> complexity as seen from a rationalist all-seeing helicopter view. It is us
> as individual humans that are the unit of analysis, IN THIS PARTICULAR
CASE, and it is the situation
> as seen from our individual viewpoint, IN THIS CASE, rather than the
overall world view.
|