Utopian, dystopian, or realist?
The latest edition of David Weinberger's self-described "intermittent" newsletter, JOHO (Journal of the Hyperlinked Organization) was recently released. The first article divides people into three categories:
Web utopian - pretty much what it sounds like, these people believe the web has and is fundamentally changing human society for the better.
Web dystopian - people who think the web is having a profound effect on our lives, but a profoundly negative effect.
Web realist - people who think utopians and dystopians build the web into much more than it is, that it enables some things but has significant limitations.
A quick aside - here's a juicy tidbit to get folks upset with me: Sometime in the not-to-distant future, I plan to wrote a post on the Myers Briggs... it won't be complimentary. One of the arguments will be it's detrimental to think of things in absolutes (thinking or feeling, for example).
Pulling this post back together, I think rather than putting somebody into one of Weinberger's categories, it's more accurate to think of everybody as being on a sliding scale, with utopian on one end and dystopian on the other. (I know, not exactly a brilliant deduction.)
My point in all of this is I'm guessing most people reading this are closer to utopian. And much like the way you're supposed to use the Myers Briggs to learn to interact with those around you based on their type, I think it's useful for web utopian leaners to think about two things when talking about technology with others: (1) does the person lean to utopian or dystopian? and (2) how much does the person really care?
Assessing those two things will help you frame your position in a way that will be most meaningful to the person you are talking to.
| | Permalink |
Comments
Myers-Briggs, eh Scott? You're going to take on the mother-daughter research team? Oh, goody. This should really be exciting. To be credible, however, you'll have to post your full type.
Posted by: Virgil Carter | February 5, 2008 4:22 PM
You see? I guess I should have known the second I bring up the Myers-Briggs that's all anybody would feel passionate to comment on.
I'm saving my arguments for the post (don't ask me when... as soon as I can get to it, but I'm going on a trip soon and have a million things to do before then). But since Virgil asks, my "type" (I can't even write that without cringing -- I prefer the term M-B folks use--typology, because its closer to astrology) is INTP.
Posted by: Scott Briscoe | February 5, 2008 4:52 PM
In a previous association whose purpose was to provide business education and training (a.k.a., a seminar company), we used the Keirsey Temperament Sorter. The KTS was a slimmed-down version of MBTI. We also used the DISC, one of the most widely abused (in my opinion) of those "personality profile instruments." Most of the DISCs were subsequently discredited on statistical grounds (ipsative scales aren't valid).
I'd love to see MBTI taken down a peg or two and, along with the DISC variants, brought back down where they belong: as general indicators of the way people may think or behave, but only a starting point for further interviews and discussions.
Posted by: Richard head | February 6, 2008 12:41 PM
Richard, your comments are good ones. I wonder, however, if the primary problem is the Myers-Briggs research and methodology, or the humongous misuse of the tool for everything from job interviews to annual performance evaluations--none of which MB was ever intended for.
The misunderstanding and misuse of MB even exceeds that of 360-degree processes.
On the other hand, if the only tool one has is a hammer, it's not surprising that every problem looks like a nail.
More and better tools, anyone?
PS: Let's don't let Scott off the MB hook--he raised it, after all! Scott, I'm with you. I'm an ENFJ: flaming 99 pecentile intuiative!
Posted by: Virgil Carter | February 6, 2008 1:32 PM
Sounds like we all share the same opinion... that when Weinberger says the realist position is indefensible and I say it's the only true position, and people just lean one way or the other.
Oh, wait, that's not what these comments are about... surprised there hasn't been any M-B apologists yet.
Posted by: Scott Briscoe | February 6, 2008 2:15 PM
Scott, if you hadn't bannned me from the M-B discussion I could keep this topic going.
On the other hand, if one thinks of people in a utopian-realist-dystopian context, does it seem that there is an abundance of utopian postings, with little or no realist or dystopian points of view being expressed?
In fact, the interesting commentary going on over on Jamie's blog seems focused on utopian frustration over the realist-dystopian reactions of less than passionate endorsement of new ideas--particularly all things web 2.0.
This may get really good before long!
Posted by: Virgil Carter | February 6, 2008 5:30 PM