Can methodism bury pratic?

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » General Discussion
  3. » Can methodism bury pratic?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

manored
 
Reply Mon 4 May, 2009 06:49 pm
I just heard and interesting history today: A toothpaste producing factory was having problems because many toothpaste boxes would come out of the production facilities empty and accidentally get sent to the shops. To solve this problem, the owners hired a team of enginners who projected and built a machine capable of detecting empty boxes by their weight. That costed millions, and the machine would have to be stopped ever time a empty box was detected for removal. The employees eventually got tired of having to stop the machine all the time and bought a big fan wich they put facing the treads, in a strengh sufficient to blow away the empty boxes but not the full boxes, and disabled the system.

So the question is: Can methodism become so strong a habit that it is not challenged even in the most obvious circunstances?
 
Khethil
 
Reply Tue 5 May, 2009 04:21 am
@manored,
Haha, good example,

manored wrote:
So the question is: Can methodism become so strong a habit that it is not challenged even in the most obvious circunstances?


Yes: When procedural emphasis exceeds emphasis on the intent (or result). This is a problem run a muck in large bureaucracies (most large institutions that have a high level of guidance).

... always good to have some fresh minds, free thinkers and nonconformists around to shake things up.
 
manored
 
Reply Tue 5 May, 2009 12:40 pm
@Khethil,
I agree, and I suppose greater emphasis on the procedure happens then the person isnt really interested in solving the problem, but just in doing enough to get its pay... Thinking is actually hard and effort taking, so people who are there just for the money stick to the procedures Smile
 
Khethil
 
Reply Thu 7 May, 2009 12:52 pm
@manored,
manored wrote:
I agree, and I suppose greater emphasis on the procedure happens then the person isnt really interested in solving the problem, but just in doing enough to get its pay... Thinking is actually hard and effort taking, so people who are there just for the money stick to the procedures Smile


Yea you're right. And by and large most people will output the least effort for the most return (Bang for Buck). On its positive side we call this Efficiency! When distaste and anger are present it's dubbed Laziness!
 
chad3006
 
Reply Thu 7 May, 2009 01:24 pm
@manored,
That is a great example.

What effect does (I can't think of a good word) "hierarchy" play in methodism? In other words, no one provides a voice of reason because they are considered subordinates. You could think of this as a "Dilbert" (the cartoon strip) effect.
 
manored
 
Reply Thu 7 May, 2009 05:53 pm
@chad3006,
chad3006 wrote:
That is a great example.

What effect does (I can't think of a good word) "hierarchy" play in methodism? In other words, no one provides a voice of reason because they are considered subordinates. You could think of this as a "Dilbert" (the cartoon strip) effect.
Hierarchy has an influence as well, but I would say that its mostly in that the guy in top cannot de methodic because he is the one making the methods... as in the example given, the subordinate always has things he can change no matter how strict the rules from above.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » General Discussion
  3. » Can methodism bury pratic?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 05/20/2024 at 01:12:19