Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (12130)	4/20/2001 2:33:27 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

The objective of a scientific community is not to build consensus, but to seek truth. If the consensus is built on false premises, it is one's duty to be a screwball. However, for certain purposes, and assuming general competence, one looks to consensus as a guideline for the "best guess" of a profession or discipline........

To: Lane3 who wrote (12130)	4/20/2001 3:10:29 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

When you design a consensus process This may be the first time I have ever read that term. I imagine whether or nor there is any consensus it is rarely developed through a designed "consensus process". I might be wrong, particularly if I misunderstand what is meant by consensus process. In every group there are some people who just can't open their minds enough or aren't collaborative enough to get with the program. There are lots of process tools and facilitative tools to bring people in. People who just can't participate in such a process probably have, er, something wrong with them, shall we say. Those are the screwballs. They're rare. And you know them when you see them. They confirm it when they are cornered and acknowledge that they aren't willing to work for a consensus even though they said they would. I apparently have less concern for (and in many situations less hope for) consensus then you do. It can be nice to have a consensus, but in any situations achieving one probably is not possible. No matter what structured methods we use the people on this thread would be unlikely to come to a consensus on abortion, or absolute/relative morality, or the existence of God. Perhaps if people truly can't participate in such a process there is something wrong with them but if they don't want to participate or if they do participate but wind up not agreeing with the vast majority that doesn't make them screwballs IMO. Of course, both of those criteria are hard to assess in unstructured situations. Most of life is an unstructured situation in the sense that I think you are using the term. Tim