>
> KMO,
>
> This does help a lot. But I'm not sure it matches what
> Richard has been telling us. It sounds as though Richard is
> promoting level 3 thinking as something that will enable us to
> do things we can't do without it, or at least can't do as well
> without it (if I'm misreading you completely, Richard, please tell
> me so), whereas your description makes it sound like a label
> for one of the ways people think, in the same way that I might say
> that someone is a particularly visual thinker. Looking at your
> description of how Level 3 minds think, I suspect that I'm not
> temperamentally inclined toward working that way, at least right
> now: I'm not focused on a single goal to that extent. Which of
> course doesn't mean that I never will be; people and conditions
> change.
>
> Vicki
> ----------
> From: owner-virus
> To: virus
> Subject: virus: Re: Level 3 Minds
> Date: Thursday, October 31, 1996 3:41PM
>
>
> On Thu, 31 Oct 96 09:42:00 PST Vicki Rosenzweig <rosenzweig@hq.acm.org>
> writes:
> >
> >I didn't mean to say that Hakeeb had convinced me that there
> >are distinct levels. When I said his analogy was promising, what
> >I meant was that it might bring the idea into the realm of the
> >testable: what can Level 3 minds do that Level 2 minds can't,
> >if anything? What, if anything, can they do better?
>
> I had decided to withdraw from this thread, but here I am back in it.
> Vicki, your question is based on the assumption that level 2 minds and
> level 3 minds are engaged in the same sorts of activities and that that
> provides a ready scale for comparing their abilities. The critical
> difference is that people who live significant portions of their lives in
> level 3 have an central goal to which all of their activities are
> subordinate. Once a person selects their goal and specifically
> articulates it, they will then set about collecting the tools necessary
> to see their goal to fruition. Many of the necessary tools are
> conceptual tools. When a person's primary interest is in advancing their
> progress toward some clearly defined goal, they begin to evaluate
> concepts in a new way. Rather than worrying about whether the concepts
> are true, they question how useful they are to the advancement of one's
> goals. When you start evaluating concepts by how useful they are in the
> advancement of your goals, you've moved into level 3.
>
> There isn't anything that a level 3 mind can do that a level 2 mind can't
> do; it's just that when a level 2 mind starts doing the things that
> level 3 minds do, that level 2 mind begins to make the shift to level 3.
>
> You say you aren't convinced that the levels exist. "Level 3" is a label
> which refers to the mode of living I just described. There are people
> who organize their lives around the advancement of a central purpose.
> "Level 3" is a label which conveys information about those people and how
> they live. There is no proving that level 3 exists or that it doesn't
> exist. If I describe someone as a level 3 thinker, that description is
> meant to convey information about how that person lives. Worrying about
> whether level 3 "exists" is odd in the same way that it would be odd if I
> described you as a creative person and you asked me for proof that
> "creative" exists. I'm not claiming there is a thing called "creative."
> Creative is a label that I use to describe you. It is a tool for
> conveying information about how you think. It's not a thing; it's a
> conceptual tool which facilitates my goal of conveying to you my
> appreciation for your style of thinking.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
>
> Take care. -KMO
>