Rol aptly argues the value in continued probing into concepts on which
there is little consensus. In our studies involving "Spreadthink", we
find inevitable differences in points of view regarding things of
complexity, and seldom even a majority viewpoint that is operational in
any way.
Recently Mike Litzelman examined over 40 publications purporting to
explain the "Japanese Miracle". From all of these, he identified 7
prototypical explanations, or better stated, possible factors.
Of the more than 40 authors, a few considered the integrative impact of 6
of them; a little bit more considered the integrative impact of 5 of them,
etc. The only authors that agreed were those that only saw a single cause
and then, only, one supposes, because so many of them picked only one
cause that the probability of no agreement became 0 within that subset.
Aye, the devil is in the details, and most people prefer to dwell among
the agreeable angels.
-- JOHN N. WARFIELD Johnwfield@aol.comOn the Horns of the Dilemma