Science – Fact or Fiction

Science – Fact or Fiction – BBC Radio 4 Today had Humphries in a debate with Steve Jones and George Monbiot about science stories that have a big picture story or “grand narrative” overlaid on what must be hughely complex reality – UK MMR Vaccine, GM Foods, Cloning, Global Warming etc. The fact being that one piece of science (even good science) can be seized on to support the case for the grand narrative, which takes on much greater significance than that specific piece of science, even cutting across scientific evidence to the contrary. Bjorn Lomborg was cited as an example of someone who had dared to pick up on the scientific counter evidence to spin the story opposing the received wisdom behind the global warming “problem”. [See also] Either way both stories are spin – for or against – so how do you decide the truth ?

The interesting point is that whilst both scientists accepted this, both knew which of the grand narratives they believed, and both accepted the reality of the negative reaction generated when someone dares to suggest the opposite view is scientifically supportable.

The Last Post

The Last PostDon Box via Leon. (Follow the link to the Richard Stevens Obit !). Interesting given the concern when Jorn went AWOL – just exactly how is your blog supposed to know when you’ve popped your clogs ? A new opportunity for lawyers perhaps – writing special instructions into wills ? [Jorn is OK by the way, unlike Richard Stevens.]

More Dave Snowden

More Dave SnowdenKurz and Snowden in IBM’s Systems Journal [via Ton]
The paper behind the slide presentation below.
[Interview with Dave Snowden][Also here][And here]

We also discover that ….
Cynefin (pronounced kun-ev’in) is a Welsh word with no direct equivalent in English
As a noun it is translated as “habitat,” as an adjective to convey “acquainted” or “familiar.”

Could I suggest – comfort zone – perhaps ?

KM Meets Pirsig

KM Meets Pirsig – I was impressed by David Snowden’s contribution to the European Knowledge Management conference as reported by Ton. Well I see David’s presentation at the launch of the London Knowledge Network includes a quote from Pirsig as his second slide.

[Quote] Traditional scientific method has always been at the very best 20-20 hindsight. It’s good for seeing where you’ve been. It’s good for testing the truth of what you think you know, but it can’t tell you where you ought to go. [Unquote] Pisrig ZMM

David Snowden is head of IBM’s consultancy Cynefin Centre.

How mainstream can Pirsig get ?

[Post Note : My basic take on this has always been that objective “scientific” rationale tends to be a post-rationalisation, justification, apportioning (or deflecting) blame, showing just-cause, attributing success, etc but has little use in “decision making” about what you should do next.]

Talking of which … On slide 6 (with build) he uses “Edge of Chaos” to denote that transition from ordered to chaotic, just as does Mark Maxwell in his “Sweet Spot” essay on MoQ.

Paul, Seb, Ton, take a look also at slide 7 in our discussion about ontologies – this is my point …. we need “emergent ontologies”, where the data preceeds the fixed framework. I particularly love to see this presented as an anitidote to that old consultancy cliche the Boston Consulting Group’s 2×2 grid ! Although David goes on to use what look like 2×2 grids in caricature, it is significant that the distortion involves non-clear-cut dividing lines and oddly shaped grey-areas or no-man’s-lands.

Also liked the Tom Peters “Ready, Fire, Aim” allusion on slide 8, where the complex and chaotic dynamic patterns involve action before sensing and responding. The “guided missile” response as I like to think of it.

Blogging Categorisation / Taxonomies

Blogging Categorisation / Taxonomies – Been corresponding with Paul Kelly on this subject. I remember starting a similar thread with Seb at least a year ago, and notice [via Paul] that Tim Bray [ongoing] is well on top of this subject. (By the way guys, when we have the tools I have some good sources of very generic taxonomy frameworks, rather than fixed taxonomies – being based on the nature of the relationships rather than intrinsic classification of the nodes.)