5 ms·

Both lose out to pragmatism in my opinion. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism

by ixxie 9y ago

jadbox 9y ago
Something of an Achilles heel to pragmatism is that it can lead those that follow the principle concretely to never seek to take the long jumps in innovation or product design... those pragmatists are doomed to incrementalism. Now incrementalism is not bad in itself; on the contrary it is more often useful than other approaches. However, sometimes you cannot increment and climb your way to the next great invention, company, or just reaching success. Sometimes it takes faith... and risk to reach those high places. Pragmatism doesn't forbid risks or leaps, but it's doctrine is to look at your feet, take small steps, and measure success of each incremental step. I say the best executive combos are one person who is idealistic rationalist (the Visionary), one experienced pragmatist (the Voice of reason), and a grounded traditionalist empiricist (the Sergeant). The Visionary pulls the Voice to take direction leaps as needed, and the Voice develops reasonable as-incremental-as-possible steps to get there. The Sergeant is meticulous in the day-to-day work, doesn't care much of the future, and deals with the active problems that need to be addressed. The Voice relies on data from the Sergeant to judge how well things are progressing. The trick is embodying all three characters. There are times to be a dreamer to know your future. There are times to just work and not think about tomorrow, and times to reflect over the past and determine the next small steps forward.
- coldtea 9y ago
  >Something of an Achilles heel to pragmatism is that it can lead those that follow the principle concretely to never seek to take the long jumps in innovation or product design... those pragmatists are doomed to incrementalism. That's why I'm in favor of real-world-ism. In the real world and actual practice we are Rational, Empiricist and Pragmatist in various degrees, not one or the other. We can also be totally irrational or visionary or whatever.
- ixxie 9y ago
  You are conflating the colloquial sense of pragmatism with the technical philosophical sense of pragmatism.
osullivj 9y ago
My director of studies, Eddie Craig [1], used to assert that there are sound pragmatic reasons for rejecting pragmatism. I think he was only half joking... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Craig_(philosopher) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Craig_(philosopher)
chongli 9y ago
We need all three. Pragmatism for the incremental progress and reason for the disruptive changes. Empiricism being used in both. "There are two kinds of scientific progress: the methodical experimentation and categorization which gradually extend the boundaries of knowledge, and the revolutionary leap of genius which redefines and transcends those boundaries. Acknowledging our debt to the former, we yearn, nonetheless, for the latter." Academician Prokhor Zakharov, "Address to the Faculty"

Both lose out to pragmatism in my opinion. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism

by ixxie 9y ago

Both lose out to pragmatism in my opinion. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism

jadbox 9y ago

Something of an Achilles heel to pragmatism is that it can lead those that follow the principle concretely to never seek to take the long jumps in innovation or product design... those pragmatists are doomed to incrementalism. Now incrementalism is not bad in itself; on the contrary it is more often useful than other approaches. However, sometimes you cannot increment and climb your way to the next great invention, company, or just reaching success. Sometimes it takes faith... and risk to reach those high places. Pragmatism doesn't forbid risks or leaps, but it's doctrine is to look at your feet, take small steps, and measure success of each incremental step. I say the best executive combos are one person who is idealistic rationalist (the Visionary), one experienced pragmatist (the Voice of reason), and a grounded traditionalist empiricist (the Sergeant). The Visionary pulls the Voice to take direction leaps as needed, and the Voice develops reasonable as-incremental-as-possible steps to get there. The Sergeant is meticulous in the day-to-day work, doesn't care much of the future, and deals with the active problems that need to be addressed. The Voice relies on data from the Sergeant to judge how well things are progressing. The trick is embodying all three characters. There are times to be a dreamer to know your future. There are times to just work and not think about tomorrow, and times to reflect over the past and determine the next small steps forward.

coldtea 9y ago
>Something of an Achilles heel to pragmatism is that it can lead those that follow the principle concretely to never seek to take the long jumps in innovation or product design... those pragmatists are doomed to incrementalism. That's why I'm in favor of real-world-ism. In the real world and actual practice we are Rational, Empiricist and Pragmatist in various degrees, not one or the other. We can also be totally irrational or visionary or whatever.
ixxie 9y ago
You are conflating the colloquial sense of pragmatism with the technical philosophical sense of pragmatism.

osullivj 9y ago

My director of studies, Eddie Craig [1], used to assert that there are sound pragmatic reasons for rejecting pragmatism. I think he was only half joking... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Craig_(philosopher) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Craig_(philosopher)

chongli 9y ago

We need all three. Pragmatism for the incremental progress and reason for the disruptive changes. Empiricism being used in both. "There are two kinds of scientific progress: the methodical experimentation and categorization which gradually extend the boundaries of knowledge, and the revolutionary leap of genius which redefines and transcends those boundaries. Acknowledging our debt to the former, we yearn, nonetheless, for the latter." Academician Prokhor Zakharov, "Address to the Faculty"