Brain-storming (was: barometer parable)

[Brian Whatcott <inet@INTELLISYS.NET>]

At 09:51 PM 6/7/02, Hugh wrote:
> At 12:30 -0700 6/7/02, William Beaty wrote:
> >
> >I don't quite know what to make of this.   One technique of thinking is
> >the brainstorm/triage pair.   These "skeptics" have apparently fallen
> >in love with "triage" or "idea bashing" to such an extent that they
> >perceive the "brainstorming" side of the process as some kind of sin.
> >As if Occam's Razor forbids brainstorming.  It does!  Brainstorming is
> >"multiplying entities."
>
> Unfortunately, pure brainstormers eschew the part of this idea that
> should make it work--the triage side. I have been in brainstorming
> sessions where no one was allowed to criticize any of the idea
> proposed, no matter how ridiculous ("ask Superman to come in a take
> care of the problem"). It was painful. Brainstorming is a good
> technique if the triage is kept in place and ideas can be critiqued
> as you go. To do it otherwise is to check your brain at the door.
>
> I refuse to do that.
>
> Hugh
> --
>
> Hugh Haskell
> <mailto:haskell@ncssm.edu>
> <mailto:hhaskell@mindspring.com>
>
> (919) 467-7610


Some of you will have gathered over time, an impression
of Hugh as a reasonable and well-prepared contributor to this list.
 You might be surprised [with me] at this relatively dismissive, intolerant
posture to brain-storming, which he confessed.

I take this as an indicator of some interesting personality feature
 which might make one intolerant of brain-storming.

Here's one possibility.   Let's suppose we characterize people in the
recently popular pigeonholes; convergent: divergent.
Let us suppose that physicists who teach are usually convergent:
they know or want to know "the correct answer" if there is one to be had.
 They would be unfamiliar with the concept sometimes heard in other
circles, that "there are a thousand roads to home".

The idea of a genetic algorithm to optimize some engineering design
would have little appeal for that sort of person: a little more of this factor,
 a little less of that.
An equation solver that can digest the input and specify the n correct
roots of a huge equation would be immensely more satisfying to them,
perhaps.

Is this a plausible argument for the mathematic and physical sciences
being relatively infertile to brain-storming?

[You will recognize that I am brain-storming this issue]



Brian Whatcott
  Altus OK                      Eureka!