Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 13:33:58 -0800
From: | Clark Quinn |
cquinn@knowledgeplanet.com Reply-To: unrev-II@onelist.com |
To: | unrev-II@onelist.com |
Subject: | OHS/DKR for regulating markets |
I have been very impressed with a number of posts, particularly Eric Armstrong's and Paul Fernhout's. I wish to bring up a point that I think may affect the design of the system.
Quoting from
Paul Fernhout
Paul Fernhout
The point about taking it upon themselves has to do with their values,
whether they believe this is an important thing to do. It is clear that
there are people whose values including making profit at the expense of
others, even indirectly
I'd like to argue that we have lost a community-wide moral compass. This is
a role religion used to fill, but I agree with Joseph Campbell that the
established religions have lost their relevance. And communities have grown
and become heterogeneous as well, which means that we don't necessarily have
shared values.
There is a need and an opportunity. My personal belief is that a society
needs a core set of values that are shared and include our attitude towards
those less fortunate, among other things. There has to be coherency between
the values professed and the actions of the community, and explicit
education and feedback on actions, for that value system to be persistent.
(I believe that myth and ritual play a part, and am interested in how that
happens.)
You are likely asking, what role does and OHS/DKR have in this? Sure, it's a
possible topic to address through an OHS/DKR, but is there more?
I have already argued, I think, that an OHS/DKR needs to serve not only as a
collaboration tool, but as an education tool. Properly construed, it should
scaffold those wishing to learn about the issues to become participants, as
well as those who are up on the issues and working towards a solution. The
system needs to be 'explorable'. This implies that there be marking of
components and introduction to the framework. I note that the Technology
Template Project /OHS Framework does mention that addresses and links are
readable and interpretable, but I think you need to make the conceptual
model clear as well.
Quoting from
Paul Fernhout
Paul Fernhout
My point here is that an OHS/DKR may also need to support developing beliefs
and values, as well as ideas, to support legitimate participation. What
this may mean, concretely, is linking arguments and assumptions to an
underlying belief structure. The question is, is this explicit to the
system, or merely a use of the system to document another facet.
Sincerely,
Clark
Clark Quinn
KnowledgePlanet.com
(510) 768-2408
cquinn@knowledgeplanet.com