Drawing Distinctions

Two recents posts got me to thinking about the drawing of distinctions.

Dave Snowden discussed various types of stories, and referenced a Patrick Lambe discussion of the dangers of simple, closed typologies. If you're unfamiliar with this topic, both are well worth reading.

Anyway, my reaction was that there are two extremes that folks tend to react against. At one end is the logical positivist dream of "one taxonomy to rule them all." At the other end is the postmodern "taxonomies are a tool used by the dominant culture to oppress those who are not of it." In this latter perspective, the only appropriate action is to deconstruct the taxonomy to uncover the underlying assumptions and power structures.

Both extremes highlight real concerns. Drawing distinctions is an inescapable activity in creating meaning and taking action. However, the distinctions drawn do reflect historical and environmental considerations that are often invisible to those using them. And, it seems likely that the creation and using of distinctions forms a sort of "strange loop" that is inextricably entwined with identity formation.

Practically speaking, Known/Knowable (Cynefin) domains tend to be Exploitation/Execution-oriented, and generally have relatively stable taxonomies/typologies that are relatively invariant across those who use them (though an expert's will be much richer than a novice's). If you want to push a Known/Knowable context into the Complex domain, deconstruct its taxonomies.

Complex domains, on the other hand, are likely to take a bite out of any taxonomy you bring to the table. This is one of the challenges of probing these domains...you're constantly shuffling a morphing deck of distinctions to keep the useful ones in play...not the sort of thing taught in the average engineering or business curriculum.