The trick to the clean-up exercise is to avoid the temptation to rigorously analyze the history of the concept and propose a cleaned up definition. Thar be legalism and bureaucracy. Instead, just impose a *private* definition on yourself and stick to it with discipline.
-
-
Most of the terms people are suggesting in the replies: community, agile, data-driven, fit this pattern. They are reifications in search of a locus of agency that may or may not exist, and you won't know till you try to "land" the concept on a pattern of agency that seems to work
Show this thread -
How do you know your attempt at semantic disruption is working? Two signs: Social proof: people resonate wit your sense of usage. They train on, and add to, your use instances. Material proof: navigating with that concept yields better-than-random results, ie it finds agency
Show this thread -
I'd like to try and teach semantic disruption skills at some point, but I don't yet have a clear sense of what kind of preparedness you'd need to pick up on this. It's a bit like being a meme VC, knowing when a concept is right for disruption and that an angle on it is working
Show this thread -
Implicit in this model is that conceptual meaning is not something that evolves from fluid usages and eventually "arrives" by landing in a dictionary or other canonical reference work, like an IPO. Conceptual meanings are like companies with stocks on a meaning stock market.
Show this thread -
The value of the stock goes up and down as the clarity and agency go up and down through use and abuse. Successful concepts ossify and attract growing abuse, creating disruption opportunities. As a memester, you have to watch the meme markets for "startup" opps basically.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.