In so far as this involves an allusion to T.S.Kuhn, particularly his 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions', could someone venture to elucidate the difference between 'normal' and 'revolutionary' thinking (without using question-begging explanations like 'well, one is paradigmmatic and the other non-paradigmmatic thinking' or "well, one is 'in the box' and the other 'out of the box" thinking). What, in current terms, is the difference between 'in the box' and 'outside the box' thinking? [To paraphrase Q.Quarantino, if we cannot answer this, let us not ask questions - that beg a difference between "Normal and Revolutionary Learning" - and merely suck each others's pseudo-learned dicks][[Ok.Ok. I'm working on a better example, Walter]]. Even if no such allusion was intended, what is the difference in the distinction drawn in the title of this thread? Donal Following Bob Dylan to 'Victoria's Secret' And feeling aroused to the point of provocation --- David Ritchie <ritchierd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Aug 12, 2007, at 12:18 PM, Andreas Ramos wrote: > > > It's usually not a problem. Gaffes have foam cores. When the gaffer > > drops the gaffe in the water, it floats. > > > > > Foam cores? > Bloody luxury. > We had to make ours out of kapok trees. > And grow our own trees. > From dandelion seeds. > > David Ritchie > proud owner of a three dollar estate sale gaffe, sans core, but good > enough for crabbing in > Oregon > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html > ___________________________________________________________ Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html