Template:Form and substance capsule: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page with "====Form versus substance in a nutshell==== Form is the map; substance the territory. Form is simplified, rationalised, modularised: it establishes through followable rules, a safe passage through the incomprehensible thickness of the jungle. It ''tries'' to reduces ''complexity'' to ''complication'' by prescribing fixed rules and procedures which maybe followed even by those with no particular experience or expertise of the territory. The only..."
 
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
 
(8 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
====Form versus substance in a nutshell====
====Form versus substance in a nutshell====
Form is the [[Map|map]]; substance the [[Territory|territory]]. Form is simplified, rationalised, modularised: it establishes through followable rules, a safe passage through the incomprehensible thickness of the jungle. It ''tries'' to reduces ''complexity'' to ''complication'' by prescribing fixed rules and procedures which maybe followed even by those with no particular experience or expertise of the [[territory]]. The only judgment made of one in a formal system is, ''did you faithfully follow the rules?''
[[Form]] is the [[Map|map]]: simplified, rationalised, modularised: it establishes, through followable rules, a safe passage through the incomprehensible thickness of the jungle. It tries to reduce ''[[complexity]]'' — scary, unmanageable, [[non-linear]] — to mere ''[[Complicated system|complication]]'' — fiddly, but tameable by punctilious attention to detail — by prescribing fixed rules and procedures — [[process]] — which may be followed even by those with no particular experience or expertise of the [[territory]]. As long as you can read, and are generally disposed to quickly and quietly doing what you are told, the only question which is asked of you in such a [[formal]] system will be: ''did you faithfully follow the rules?''


Substance
[[Substance and form|Substance]] is the [[Territory|territory]]: the fractal, inchoate, indeterminate, dancing, organic mass of messiness in which we are consigned to play our mortal games. Without a map, there is only one way to navigate the territory: by ''knowing'' it.  Given that it moves — like some diabolical, shapeshifting labyrinth, doors disappear, staircases vanish, chambers and oubliettes wink in and out of existence— knowing it is hard, and takes continuing application, investment, time, patience, energy and skill. A map is a proxy for knowledge, not a substitute: one who has the knowledge, and knows the territory — an ''[[Subject matter expert|expert]]'' — will bridle upon being told to use a map.


The modern world is blighted by the comforting embrace of [[Tick box exercise|tickable boxes]], checkable [[Checklist|checklists]], and [[Internal audit|auditable trails]], all of which give their comfort by taking the ''easy'' road: rather than evaluate the ''qualities'' of your organisation, tally up its countable dimensions, however superficial they are.
Put it this way: would ''you'' use a map to navigate from the station to your own home?
 
There is a logic to this: the power of [[big data]] is their emergent properties: you can extract from a mass of data qualities you can’t see from individual instances. That one kettle goes on at 4:30 in the afternoon signifies nothing in particular; that fourteen million do tells you it’s half time in the football.
 
This is a [[correlation]], though, not [[causation]], and it won’t flow the other way. Just because you put the kettle on at 4:30 doesn’t mean you were watching the football, however likely it might seem. Probability is an ''is'', not an ''ought''.
 
''Hume'': you cannot derive an “ought” from an “is”.
 
''The [[JC]]'': you cannot derive an “is” from an “ought”.

Latest revision as of 11:44, 5 September 2023

Form versus substance in a nutshell

Form is the map: simplified, rationalised, modularised: it establishes, through followable rules, a safe passage through the incomprehensible thickness of the jungle. It tries to reduce complexity — scary, unmanageable, non-linear — to mere complication — fiddly, but tameable by punctilious attention to detail — by prescribing fixed rules and procedures — process — which may be followed even by those with no particular experience or expertise of the territory. As long as you can read, and are generally disposed to quickly and quietly doing what you are told, the only question which is asked of you in such a formal system will be: did you faithfully follow the rules?

Substance is the territory: the fractal, inchoate, indeterminate, dancing, organic mass of messiness in which we are consigned to play our mortal games. Without a map, there is only one way to navigate the territory: by knowing it. Given that it moves — like some diabolical, shapeshifting labyrinth, doors disappear, staircases vanish, chambers and oubliettes wink in and out of existence— knowing it is hard, and takes continuing application, investment, time, patience, energy and skill. A map is a proxy for knowledge, not a substitute: one who has the knowledge, and knows the territory — an expert — will bridle upon being told to use a map.

Put it this way: would you use a map to navigate from the station to your own home?