| Newsgroups |
gmane.comp.programming.extreme-programming.adoption |
| Message-ID |
<[email protected]> |
Hi Arien,
> > > > Your responses to these "reverse" situations may help you to
> > > > understand:
> > >
> > > Are you assuming that I'm me, or that I'm someone who has been
> > > experiencing problems relevant to the solution?
> >
> > You're Arien, responding as Arien.
>
> But that makes all the difference. I thought the assumption here was
> that the respondant was or *should have been* experiencing serious
> pain that the solution claimed to address.
Yes, you're right. That assumption matters. I couldn't think of a
way to construct scenarios for JB that fit that assumption.
Given how central that assumption is in this situation... What if the
assumption is unwarranted? What if the person isn't experiencing the
problem?
> In fact, if my memory of the e-mail thread is correct, the
> respondant DID state that there was serious pain but still did not
> want to explore the suggested solution.
Here's my model of motivation: I'll do XYZ if
1. I believe I am able to do XYZ, and
2. I have some expectation about what the results would be, and
3. On the whole, I want those results.
If one of those elements is missing, I won't do XYZ. If someone isn't
interested in the "solution" you're describing, one of these elements
is missing.
> I can understand that, with regard to some of the statements you
> produced, in fact someone who was experiencing substantial marital
> problems might AVOID, say, talking about divorce, even if it could
> help with the pain, because it would entail acknowledging the pain.
So in order to accept your solution, the person would have to
acknowledge the problem. And if acknowledging the problem were too
painful...
> In the case of me, as me, all of the statements (but for one) would
> elicit friendly interest, directed either at the person or the
> problem, but would not lead me to apply the solution to my life. But
> I'm not sure that's very relevant to the problem in question,
> because I don't have a heroin addiction (I'm in control, man, I can
> quit anytime I want to), don't produce SEM images, etc.
So if the person didn't clearly see the relevance of your solution...
> > > You sold your books? You madman! You nutcase! I won't ever
> > > listen to a thing you have to say again. Congratulations on the
> > > rest, though.
> >
> > What leads you to respond differently to this scenario than to the
> > others?
>
> Because it touches at something that's core to my self-identity, and
> should be core to the self-identity of any thinking, reasonable
> person (that is, core to how I see other people -- actually, I can
> tolerate those who have a passion for music but not books better
> than those who watch television and drive SUVs).
So if in order to consider your solution the person would have to
change some element that they consider to be core to their
self-identity...
> Again, I can see how someone might regard the pain involved in
> software development as core to their self-identity, and thus seek
> to subvert a possible solution that involves recognizing that pain
> as harmful, but can't see how someone who has that pain could regard
> the XP solutions in the same way that I would regard the heroin
> addiction example.
Okay. Can you see that someone might regard XP solutions as likely to
make their pain worse instead of better?
Dale
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Turn flat surfaces into speakers with the Soundbug.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/QWAVSC/onCFAA/xGHJAA/nhFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/