RE: Criticism

[dhartman@phdinc.com]

Doug Thomas stated, "My definition, therefore, would be: Criticism is that form
of discussing the work of another in which the individual criticizing considers
himself or herself to be superior or better versed in the product than the
author or maker. So-called constructive criticism is a thinly-veiled cover for
the same type of superior attitude, usually unwarranted."..."The exception would
be those whose profession allows professional criticism, such as theatre
reviewers, those who review books and movies, and other arts or professional
work products, such as a reviewer of a publicly-published paper, which by its
nature invites peer review."
So if I understand what your saying (`though I say this knowing that it will be
considered as a "thinly-veiled cover for my superior attitude"), it is always
acceptable for someone with whose "profession" allows them to critisize, but
anyone else offering criticism is just demonstrating their superior attitude.  I
only have one question: Where would the entrepreneur's of either the industrial
age or today's information age be, if they had listened ONLY to the
"professional" critics?  Where would we be if the "professionals" that knew that
the horse and buggy would not be replaced, that the Earth was the center of the
solar system, or that there would be no market for personal computers had been
the only ones given an ear?

I thought that being willing to learn at all times and not limiting our sources,
points-of-view, or "criticisms" would be more in-line with the teachings of Dr.
Deming.

David Hartman

dhartman@phdinc.com