[Ailist] AI Introduction

[Bill Scott]

Hi Lionel, Cheri (and others),

This thread has become a very interesting dialogue about the importance of language
and the need to be precise in its use -- an important AI construct to be sure.

This, I think, brings me to my thought on this subject. If language creates meaning
-- and I certainly believe it does -- whose meaning and, ultimately, whose language,
are we talking about? 

What I heard in Mukul's original post is this: The language of AI isn't resonating
for his client group. In my opinion, to be fully in tune with my clients and to be
seen as working with them rather than for them, I need to accept their reality and
use language that does work for them. After all, it is the meaning of the words I am
trying to get across more than the words themselves.

Also, on a second point, if "tactics" isn't the word one would propose, what might
the alternative be? What word is it that we want as opposed to the one that we do not
want?

Regards,
Bill


 
-----Original Message-----
From: Lionel Boxer [mailto:lionel.boxer at rmit.edu.au] 
Sent: February 12, 2007 12:11 PM
To: ailist at lists.business.utah.edu; cheri at mobileteamchallenge.com;
mukul.kumar at rogers.com; wjs.consulting at shaw.ca
Subject: RE: [Ailist] AI Introduction

Yes.  Tactics implies a degree of contrived-choriography inspired by
excessive-wishful-thinking and strategic planners motivated by their
incentive packages, while destiny implies an objective based on the
holistic appreciation of all stakeholders and effects of the
organisation that should occur during an AI intervention.  (how does
that sound?)