Latest LQ Deal: Linux Power User Bundle
Go Back > Blogs > Shingoshi
User Name


Rate this Entry

Validation is determined by function...

Posted 06-25-2009 at 01:57 PM by Shingoshi
Updated 06-25-2009 at 03:07 PM by Shingoshi

The question of concepts often arises, "what makes this thing valid? And in answering that question, we are most often divided into two distinct groups of reasoning. And I'm guessing by how we individually choose to answer that question, our reason for asking is revealed as much if not more than our desire to have the answer.

These are the two distinct positions of reasoning which will likely never find commonality:
1.) Validity derived from Conformance
2.) Validity derived from Performance

The basic question becomes, "what's your objective? Do you want a result that is approved? Or do you want a result that works? If your goal is always to have the approval of the establishment, you will seldom concede approval of what works, if it violates what's accepted. This is especially problematic. Since the establishment of traditional thinking is seldom if ever capable of making the kinds of radical changes to adapt to evolving circumstances (technology in particular).

There are two basic facts here that must be recognized:
1.) Conformance is subjective
2.) Performance is objective

The problem with subjectivity, is that it is almost always vague and arbitrarily defined.
n : judgment based on individual personal impressions and feelings and opinions rather than external facts [syn: subjectiveness]
The result of objectivity, is that it is precisely defined. Ultimately it comes down to what works, not what's approved.
n : judgment based on observable phenomena and uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices [syn: objectiveness]
It should be noted from the comments above, that any group can take on the role of personhood. When a group is comprised of individuals who maintain a single set of characteristics as their collective identity, the group functions as a person. They will have established a corporate identity. And those groups which hold objectivity as their highest concern, are the best positioned to change in the face of necessity.

So let me make a blunt and possibly radical statement.
Anything that doesn't work, isn't valid. But in reality, there's nothing radical about it. Anything that works better than what worked before, should be afforded an even greater validity. If you have a choice between two paths, the shortest one to the goal, is most likely to be the best. If your course of action presents an obstruction to reaching the goal, a different course of action needs to be considered and quickly implemented. And I'm not discussing issues which are governed by morality or ethics. I'm talking only about the selection of tools, and how they're used. Because it is not immoral or unethical to act in rejection of tradition.

In any consideration of any goal, we must precisely define our expected outcome. If we don't do that, we will never know if we have succeeded. The goal must be defined. Limiting ourselves to traditional thinking, only ensures that we will be no more successful than tradition. And if tradition was working, we wouldn't have need for another solution. And when given a choice between a working solution and one that's more efficient, efficiency should be the objective.

Determining the best course of action with the least effort involved, is the most efficient solution that can be obtained. And the highest efficiency, has the highest validity.

You can simply be right (and work), or simply be accepted (and not). The choice is yours.

Views 15077 Comments 1
« Prev     Main     Next »
Total Comments 1


  1. Old Comment
    I think one of the best ways to determine the character of a group, is whether it is isolationist or not. If you find yourself confronted with a wall of "appropriate channels", you're facing an entrenched form of conformity. Objectivity seeks the most channels it can possibly take to a path of better solutions. The more a group defines what are appropriate channels, the less concerned it is with success and meeting goals.

    Conformity is by nature isolationist. Isolationism is a form of corporate restriction. It is exclusionary at it's core, and ultimately determines the ability of any group to survive.

    Objectivism is for the thoughtful. It is maintained by those who desire nothing less than to be always informed. Because with the lack of information comes a lack of options. And the fewer your options, the fewer your chances are to succeed.

    Posted 06-25-2009 at 03:31 PM by Shingoshi Shingoshi is offline


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:21 AM.

Main Menu
Write for LQ is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration