Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  [!! SPAM] Anthropomorphising Groups, Societies, Organisations

    Posted 11-04-2009 22:13
    Fred,
    Good points, but OOOPS, who is this 'they' who can't vote?
    Jack
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: <nickols@att.net>
    To: <MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
    Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 12:22 PM
    Subject: [!! SPAM] Re: Anthropomorphising Groups, Societies, Organisations


    > Well, FWIW, I don't have any quarrel with saying something like "our team
    > won" or "our company is a leader in its field" or any number of other,
    > similar statements. They are verifiable assertions. I would have trouble
    > with statements like "our team believes in itself" or "our company shows
    > compassion toward its employees." These latter statements attribute human
    > characteristics to non-human entities.
    >
    > As for a contract between you and the school where you work, there can
    > indeed be such a contract, legal and binding, because the school is or is
    > part of a legal entity and can in fact enter into binding contracts, own
    > property, etc. (No, they can't vote - at least not yet.)
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Fred Nickols
    > Managing Partner
    > Distance Consulting, LLC
    > nickols@att.net
    > www.nickols.us
    >
    > "Assistance at A Distance"
    >
    > -------------- Original message ----------------------
    > From: "Bolman, Lee G." <BolmanL@UMKC.EDU>
    >>
    >> Would it be an incorrect anthropomorphism to assert, for example, that
    >> "Our team
    >> won"? Or would it only become incorrect if the assertion were expanded
    >> to
    >> something like, "Our team really wanted to win"? And, if you're correct
    >> that
    >> individuals can't have contracts with society, does that also mean that
    >> there
    >> can be no contract between you and the school where you work?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Lee
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> From: Management Education and Development Discussion
    >> [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Romie Littrell
    >> Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 3:43 PM
    >> To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    >> Subject: Anthropomorphising Groups, Societies, Organisations
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I’m critiquing a research paper by a post-graduate student who has
    >> referenced
    >> a quotation from an article by Gray, Owen & Adams (1996) in which they
    >> anthropomorphise “society”, explaining society as “a series of social
    >> contracts between members of society and society itself”. Society is a
    >> network
    >> of various kinds of linkages where people gather to do things. Society is
    >> not a
    >> conscious entity that does things of its own volition. Moreover, the
    >> things done
    >> there are transactions that occur in large numbers, at the volition of
    >> many
    >> people and institutions, motivated by a diverse array of reasons for
    >> engaging in
    >> them. People tell me what groups, societies, organisations did today, why
    >> it did
    >> that, what it is afraid of, what it is struggling to do, or what external
    >> influences are preventing it from accomplishing its intent. None of these
    >> statements is true. To re-emphasise, an organisation, group, society, or
    >> market
    >> is a place where people gather to do things, not a conscious entity that
    >> does
    >> things of its own volition that can be analysed as if it were a human
    >> being.
    >>
    >> Any agreement, disagreement, other ideas?
    >>
    >> Gray, R, Owen, D., & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting and Accountability;
    >> Changes
    >> and Challenges in Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting, Harlow:
    >> UK:
    >> Prentice-Hall Europe.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Do not accustom yourself to use big words for little matters.
    >>
    >> -Samuel Johnson
    >>
    >> Romie F. Littrell, BA, MBA,PhD, FIAIR, An fánaí fiáin
    >> AUT Business School N.Z., romie.littrell@aut.ac.nz
    >> http://www.romielittrellpubs.homestead.com/
    >> http://www.crossculturalcentre.homestead.com/
    >> Facilitator, Leadership & Management in Sub-Sahara Africa Conferences
    >> Contents copyright Romie F. Littrell
    >>
    >>
    >>


  • 2.  [!! SPAM] Anthropomorphising Groups, Societies, Organisations

    Posted 11-05-2009 09:44
    Corporations can't vote. Churches can't vote. Their members can.

    --
    Regards,

    Fred Nickols
    Managing Partner
    Distance Consulting, LLC
    nickols@att.net
    www.nickols.us

    "Assistance at A Distance"

    -------------- Original message ----------------------
    From: Jack Ring <jring@AMUG.ORG>
    >
    > Fred,
    > Good points, but OOOPS, who is this 'they' who can't vote?
    > Jack
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: <nickols@att.net>
    > To: <MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU>
    > Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 12:22 PM
    > Subject: [!! SPAM] Re: Anthropomorphising Groups, Societies, Organisations
    >
    >
    > > Well, FWIW, I don't have any quarrel with saying something like "our team
    > > won" or "our company is a leader in its field" or any number of other,
    > > similar statements. They are verifiable assertions. I would have trouble
    > > with statements like "our team believes in itself" or "our company shows
    > > compassion toward its employees." These latter statements attribute human
    > > characteristics to non-human entities.
    > >
    > > As for a contract between you and the school where you work, there can
    > > indeed be such a contract, legal and binding, because the school is or is
    > > part of a legal entity and can in fact enter into binding contracts, own
    > > property, etc. (No, they can't vote - at least not yet.)
    > >
    > > --
    > > Regards,
    > >
    > > Fred Nickols
    > > Managing Partner
    > > Distance Consulting, LLC
    > > nickols@att.net
    > > www.nickols.us
    > >
    > > "Assistance at A Distance"
    > >
    > > -------------- Original message ----------------------
    > > From: "Bolman, Lee G." <BolmanL@UMKC.EDU>
    > >>
    > >> Would it be an incorrect anthropomorphism to assert, for example, that
    > >> "Our team
    > >> won"? Or would it only become incorrect if the assertion were expanded
    > >> to
    > >> something like, "Our team really wanted to win"? And, if you're correct
    > >> that
    > >> individuals can't have contracts with society, does that also mean that
    > >> there
    > >> can be no contract between you and the school where you work?
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Lee
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> From: Management Education and Development Discussion
    > >> [mailto:MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Romie Littrell
    > >> Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 3:43 PM
    > >> To: MG-ED-DV@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU
    > >> Subject: Anthropomorphising Groups, Societies, Organisations
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> I’m critiquing a research paper by a post-graduate student who has
    > >> referenced
    > >> a quotation from an article by Gray, Owen & Adams (1996) in which they
    > >> anthropomorphise “society”, explaining society as “a series of social
    > >> contracts between members of society and society itself”. Society is a
    > >> network
    > >> of various kinds of linkages where people gather to do things. Society is
    > >> not a
    > >> conscious entity that does things of its own volition. Moreover, the
    > >> things done
    > >> there are transactions that occur in large numbers, at the volition of
    > >> many
    > >> people and institutions, motivated by a diverse array of reasons for
    > >> engaging in
    > >> them. People tell me what groups, societies, organisations did today, why
    > >> it did
    > >> that, what it is afraid of, what it is struggling to do, or what external
    > >> influences are preventing it from accomplishing its intent. None of these
    > >> statements is true. To re-emphasise, an organisation, group, society, or
    > >> market
    > >> is a place where people gather to do things, not a conscious entity that
    > >> does
    > >> things of its own volition that can be analysed as if it were a human
    > >> being.
    > >>
    > >> Any agreement, disagreement, other ideas?
    > >>
    > >> Gray, R, Owen, D., & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting and Accountability;
    > >> Changes
    > >> and Challenges in Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting, Harlow:
    > >> UK:
    > >> Prentice-Hall Europe.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> Do not accustom yourself to use big words for little matters.
    > >>
    > >> -Samuel Johnson
    > >>
    > >> Romie F. Littrell, BA, MBA,PhD, FIAIR, An fánaí fiáin
    > >> AUT Business School N.Z., romie.littrell@aut.ac.nz
    > >> http://www.romielittrellpubs.homestead.com/
    > >> http://www.crossculturalcentre.homestead.com/
    > >> Facilitator, Leadership & Management in Sub-Sahara Africa Conferences
    > >> Contents copyright Romie F. Littrell
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>