Re: On the entire "Quality Cost" Debate

[DANSWART@aol.com]

In a message dated 09/09/2000 10:19:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
roger.key@onet.co.uk writes:

<< I have argued in the past and will argue again that this is to do with 
SPECIFICATION and FEATURES. >>
-------------------
Roger,

Interesting thoughts.  I believe the emphasis on specifications and features 
follows directly from the C. I. Lewis/Shewhart/Deming chain of reasoning 
about what knowledge is (evidence, prediction, and degree of belief) and the 
requirement of operationally verifiable meanings.  Within this framework 
valid predictions (the process of accumulating knowledge) must be susceptible 
to experimental verification.

Since this framework of the scientific method in the workplace places the 
highest value (validity) on empirically verifiable meanings, it seems not to 
address very well the metaphysical questions such as "should cruise missiles 
exist, should this feature been viewed as Quality, do people have a right to 
joy in work, in pride of workmanship" etc.

I admire any attempt to grapple with the larger questions of life such as 
these, but is the scientific method described above a limiting factor (a 
constraint) on understanding the SoPK in relation to the metaphysical issues? 
 Should the DEN strive to integrate the metaphysics of Quality with the 14 
points and the techniques of SPC?

Thanks for listening.

Dan
Dan Swart, CPA, APC
2720-21st Street
Sacramento, CA  95818-3129

danswart@aol.com
(916) 451-1040     local voice
(916) 451-1047     fax
(888) 706-1040     toll-free
========================================================================