Maybe the concept of "winning" should be a little more complex. The
usual meaning requires an exclusive question, and all situations in
nature seem to provide large numbers of opportunities for framing them.
I prefer asking "what happened" rather than "who won", and then sort
through how that strikes my values.
As I usually say it, the point is more that everyone is a 'winner' if
you just select the right point of view... Nope, it doesn't quite tell
me what to say to people who's only interest is in 'who won'.
Phil Henshaw ????.?? ? `?.????
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
680 Ft. Washington Ave
NY NY 10040
tel: 212-795-4844
e-mail: pfh at synapse9.com
explorations: www.synapse9.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: friam-bounces at redfish.com
> [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 11:53 AM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group; Jeff Cares
> Subject: [FRIAM] Open Source ? Blog Archive ? Who Won in Iraq?
>
>
> During Jeff's wedtech chat, I mentioned this program:
>
http://www.radioopensource.org/who-won-in-iraq/> .. on the Foreign Policy article on Who Won in Iraq:
>
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/3661>
> Interesting that you can make such a good case for 10
> different winners.
>
> -- Owen
>
> Owen Densmore
http://backspaces.net> "You can do Anything, but not Everything!"
>
>
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
http://www.friam.org>
>
Locked
