progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, INDIVIDUALISM, AND THE PUBLIC INTELLECTUAL An architecture, secondly, is also determined by effectors available, these may be the people, technology, the financial elements, the legal elements, or in the broadest sense what is available to make the elements function. People or technology for example places bounds on what is achievable, however those bounds are typically well beyond the limits that are self-imposed by the designer or architect in their view of the user in their world. This concept of architecture and the use of design elements is critical in understanding the paradigms used in the structure of information systems 188 . World view is the most powerful driver in the development of an architecture. We argue in this paper that it is essential to develop a philosophical perspective and understanding of how to view what the architecture implements 189 . We argue with Winograd and Flores, and in turn with Heidegger, that we must be thrown into the embodiment itself, to understand the needs of the users, and to understand the structure of the paradigms that are used to construct the world view. To better understand the importance of an architecture we develop the concept of the historicity of architectures and world views based upon the classic work of Kuhn and then that of McLuhan. Kuhn begins his thesis of how scientific revolutions occur by the introduction of the concept of paradigms. He defines these as 190 ; "...the term paradigm is used in two different senses. On the one hand, it stands for the entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques, and so on shared by the members of a given community. On the other, it denotes one sort of element in that constellation, the concrete puzzle-solutions which, employed as models or examples, can replace explicit rules as a basis for the remaining puzzles of normal science, The first sense of the term, call it sociological, ..., “ The concept of a paradigm is in essence the specific example, experiment, demonstration, that all those who follow a specific theory are explicitly or implicitly relying upon or basing their world view upon. The world is flat, man was created out of whole cloth, the universe is 4,000 years old, or that the speed of light is limited, or that DNA controls all life. The paradigm is that specific event, experiment, defining moment, from and upon which the believes will refer back to and build their world view upon. Thus we return to TR and his Progressive view of the Trusts. Yes there were trusts, a few, and yes they controlled some important portions of the US industry but there were a few facts that TR had not paid attention to. 188 See Winograd and Flores, pp 34-50, especially their discussion of Heidegger and Throwness in terms of design 189 See Kuhn, pp 72-85 190 see Kuhn p. 175 Page 190
The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, INDIVIDUALISM, AND THE PUBLIC INTELLECTUAL Namely, the Trusts had control of very small portions of US production, farmers dominated in 1910, and he would not have understood the Creative Destruction of Schumpeter who saw the engine of the economy the entrepreneur who found alternatives to the Trust's and their specific monopoly niches. In fact it was the Government controlling the Trusts, such as AT&T and the Kingsbury Decision of 1913, that memorialized the Trust like structure and it was economists who for almost a century perpetuated the idea that monopolies in telecommunications were unavoidable. It was Government which in the Progressives world view would control the Trusts in the interest of the people allowed them perpetual existence until there was no other choice and plain black phones disappeared, with the FCC kicking and screaming! But it was the example of the Trusts, the paradigm in Kuhnian sense, that placed that in the world view of TR and the Progressives. Wilson had a different world view, his example was the English Parliament and for that he wanted a consolidation of Executive and Legislative branches, and if that were no possible he interpreted Presidential powers as extensive and pre-empting Congressional intervention. Kuhn, then goes on to demonstrate that the world view, that is how we view ourselves and our environment is based upon the our acceptance of these paradigms, as either collections of techniques and technologies or as collections of embodiments of these techniques and technologies in "examples". We then end to accept this as the way things are and should be. Then Kuhn argues, as the technologies change, changes in the paradigms do not occur in a continuous fashion but almost in quantum leaps. The new paradigms build and congeal until they burst forth with new world views. It is this model that we ague applies to the evolution of the neo-Progressives and neo- Individualists. It is this philosophical view, Hegelian in form, that is essential in understanding the underlying and formative changes in paradigms that will change our world view. It is not Hegelian in that there is no teleological end point of necessity for which it is progressing. There will be this continual Thesis, Anti-thesis and Synthesis and it starts again. Beneath each is a paradigm or set of paradigms which have elicited the corresponding world views of the players. As a second perspective of the impact of technology as a dominant driver, we can refer to McLuhan and his development of the concept of media. Drucker has referred to the presentation of McLuhan's doctoral thesis and McLuhan is quoted as follows 191 : "Movable type, rather than Petrarch, Copernicus, or Columbus was the creator of the modern world view.. "Did I hear you right," asked one of the professors as McLuhan had finished reading, 191 See Drucker, p. 250 Page 191
Page 1 and 2:
+++ The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM
Page 3 and 4:
The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, IN
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
The Telmarc Group Preface PROGRESSI
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
The Telmarc Group 4.1.3 Hobbes and
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
The Telmarc Group 4.5.2 The New Fre
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140: The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, IN
Page 147 and 148: The Telmarc Group Hofstadter contin
Page 189: The Telmarc Group PROGRESSIVISM, IN
Page 223: The Telmarc Group and the Progressi
show all

progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?