82,903
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The existential dilemma — the {{tag|paradox}} — of form and substance was first adverted to in [[Otto Büchstein]]’s now largely forgotten tragicomic opera ''[[La Vittoria della Forma sulla Sostanza]]'' (often performed, if performed at all, in German, as ''[[Die Eroberung der Form durch Substanz]]''). | {{g}}The existential dilemma — the {{tag|paradox}} — of form and substance was first adverted to in [[Otto Büchstein]]’s now largely forgotten tragicomic opera ''[[La Vittoria della Forma sulla Sostanza]]'' (often performed, if performed at all, in German, as ''[[Die Eroberung der Form durch Substanz]]''). | ||
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. | |||
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. | 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 | 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”. | ''Hume'': you cannot derive an “ought” from an “is”. | ||
The [[JC]]: you cannot derive an “is” from an “ought”. | ''The [[JC]]'': you cannot derive an “is” from an “ought”. | ||
{{Tabletop}} | {{Tabletop}} | ||
Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
{{tablebottom}} | {{tablebottom}} | ||
{{ | {{sa}} | ||
*Closely related to the [[technology paradox]] | *Closely related to the [[technology paradox]] | ||
*[[Policy]] | *[[Policy]] | ||
*[[Root cause analysis]] | *[[Root cause analysis]] |