People are not words
Jeffry Phillips has an interesting discussion about two types of people:
Thinkers versus Doers
In Phillips view, a firm has (and needs) both types. The general idea is probably right. But here is a quest question: “What type of person does the firm need for a CEO?”
After a bit of hesitation, the answer you will probably hear is: “Both types.” And there the koan has exposed the deceptive simplicity of language. Language works by abstraction. To use it, you have to strip off some attributes. One of the attributes you strip off it this case is time. Actually, what the firm needs in the CEO is not both types at the same time. What it needs is a thinker at the appropriate time and a doer at the appropriate time. And a good judge of which role is appropriate in the moment.
Notice that I changed the language here. Type connotes a fixed characteristic. Role connotes a set of behaviors that a person can take on or take off. People take on many different roles. Parent, spouse, customer, employee, teacher, guard. Among other things, people shift between thinker and doer. That is the concept expressed in the title Thinkerer.
In an organization, these roles will be fixed by job assignments. And some individuals are better suited for one assignment or the other. But you, as an individual can’t afford the luxury of sticking to just one role. You’ve just gone one brain, so it will have to do the whole job for you. Just as the company has one CEO, who will have to fill both roles in the top job.
Another thought applies here: “There are two kinds of people in the world. Those who divide people into two kinds and those who do not.” I belong to that small set who do not. There are several kinds of thinking. Philips is talking about mainly about creativity. The fact that he has to use the word thinker to refer to creative people is an example of verbal chauvinism.
I don’t believe that creative people think in the sense that philosophers or logicians think. I believe most creative people will tell you that they understand their ideas well before they have thought out how to explain them in words. So I will create a new word here: ideator. It refers to someone who is skilled in generating new ideas. Or it refers to a job description that calls for such a person.
And in creating a new word, I show that words do not make people. People make words. At least the ideators do.
Thinkers versus Doers
In Phillips view, a firm has (and needs) both types. The general idea is probably right. But here is a quest question: “What type of person does the firm need for a CEO?”
After a bit of hesitation, the answer you will probably hear is: “Both types.” And there the koan has exposed the deceptive simplicity of language. Language works by abstraction. To use it, you have to strip off some attributes. One of the attributes you strip off it this case is time. Actually, what the firm needs in the CEO is not both types at the same time. What it needs is a thinker at the appropriate time and a doer at the appropriate time. And a good judge of which role is appropriate in the moment.
Notice that I changed the language here. Type connotes a fixed characteristic. Role connotes a set of behaviors that a person can take on or take off. People take on many different roles. Parent, spouse, customer, employee, teacher, guard. Among other things, people shift between thinker and doer. That is the concept expressed in the title Thinkerer.
In an organization, these roles will be fixed by job assignments. And some individuals are better suited for one assignment or the other. But you, as an individual can’t afford the luxury of sticking to just one role. You’ve just gone one brain, so it will have to do the whole job for you. Just as the company has one CEO, who will have to fill both roles in the top job.
Another thought applies here: “There are two kinds of people in the world. Those who divide people into two kinds and those who do not.” I belong to that small set who do not. There are several kinds of thinking. Philips is talking about mainly about creativity. The fact that he has to use the word thinker to refer to creative people is an example of verbal chauvinism.
I don’t believe that creative people think in the sense that philosophers or logicians think. I believe most creative people will tell you that they understand their ideas well before they have thought out how to explain them in words. So I will create a new word here: ideator. It refers to someone who is skilled in generating new ideas. Or it refers to a job description that calls for such a person.
And in creating a new word, I show that words do not make people. People make words. At least the ideators do.
posted by Selby Evans at 8:59 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home