I was probably a bit hasty, though threw in the qualifier "probably", and
was bearing in mind simply that the book didn't see, on the look I gave
it, to be based on a really rigorous reading. The writers were very clear
that they didn't intend it to be, and in fact I, too, admire the
application aspects and their flexible and phenomenologically more valide
and potent exploration of the computer usage context/situation.
_______________________________________________________________
The survivors who spoke of the "electricity", the "lights", the
"metal tables" and the "needles" had a shrieking question mark
in their eyes that wasn't answered by what what we were reading
in the growing volume of material that was being published.
--excerpt from The Stone Angels survivors' journal
Vol. 6 Thunder Bay, Ontario
_______________________________________________________________
On 2 Feb 1996, Tom Guarriello wrote:
> >A (probably bad) book by Winograd and Flores, Understanding
> >Computers and Cognition, is at pains to characterize communication as a
> >series of breakdowns...
>
> I, for one, found the Winograd and Flores book quite stimulating. I'm an
> organizational development consultant and I think Flores' work, in particular,
> is remarkable in its intent to bring the study of being into the realm of
> everyday praxis.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---