Dude was a complete genius. Just reading a bio on him and the rigor in his thinking is easily PhD level. Glittering brilliance doesn’t describe him well enough.
I really enjoyed the article, especially the diagram of influences cascading into his work. That diagram provided great insights into the 'how' of his thinking. I first learnt about Boyd, in the military and overtime expanded my reading, including his briefs, but am not an expert so really appreciated this article. Post-military I have applied his thinking and really appreciate the insights.
I have to admit that I am one of the academics who knew little of Boyd's work - other than the simple OODA loop cited by secondary sources. These sources tended to trivialize Boyd's intuitions relative to other sources I had for understanding the closed-loop dynamics of sensemaking - so I had little reason to explore deeper until I ran into you (Mark) and Ponch. When I read Osinga's book based on your recommendation I got a completely different perspective - and in fact discovered that Boyd and I had been on parallel tracks for many years. So, on the one hand, I understand your frustration with academics, but on the other hand, I can understand why Boyd's work was overlooked - even by those who were immersing themselves in the same literature that Boyd was exploring and who were independently coming to similar conclusions about the nature of sensemaking.
John: You are an exemplary model for other academics in that you actually took the time to read and reflect on the original texts, and tear apart the Osinga book.
What spurred all of this was a critic slamming Boyd and then proceeding to recommend 5 different authors that Boyd himself referenced in "Destruction and Creation."
Being overlooked is understandable and expected for lots of reasons.
Flat out dismissal and reduction based on ignorance, jealousy etc is what takes away, intentionally or not, from the real contributions that Boyd made which he left open for all of us to build. on.
AND, Boyd is NEVER beyond criticism. That is never the point. He loved criticism and challenging assumptions as much, if not more, than anyone. But for those who did not do their homework, especially at a basic level, would get, as he would say, hosed.
I regret I never had the chance to sit down with Boyd for a chat - I think we would find that we had a lot in common. But I guess connecting with you and Ponch is the next best thing. It takes a village.
Dude was a complete genius. Just reading a bio on him and the rigor in his thinking is easily PhD level. Glittering brilliance doesn’t describe him well enough.
I really enjoyed the article, especially the diagram of influences cascading into his work. That diagram provided great insights into the 'how' of his thinking. I first learnt about Boyd, in the military and overtime expanded my reading, including his briefs, but am not an expert so really appreciated this article. Post-military I have applied his thinking and really appreciate the insights.
I have to admit that I am one of the academics who knew little of Boyd's work - other than the simple OODA loop cited by secondary sources. These sources tended to trivialize Boyd's intuitions relative to other sources I had for understanding the closed-loop dynamics of sensemaking - so I had little reason to explore deeper until I ran into you (Mark) and Ponch. When I read Osinga's book based on your recommendation I got a completely different perspective - and in fact discovered that Boyd and I had been on parallel tracks for many years. So, on the one hand, I understand your frustration with academics, but on the other hand, I can understand why Boyd's work was overlooked - even by those who were immersing themselves in the same literature that Boyd was exploring and who were independently coming to similar conclusions about the nature of sensemaking.
John: You are an exemplary model for other academics in that you actually took the time to read and reflect on the original texts, and tear apart the Osinga book.
What spurred all of this was a critic slamming Boyd and then proceeding to recommend 5 different authors that Boyd himself referenced in "Destruction and Creation."
Being overlooked is understandable and expected for lots of reasons.
Flat out dismissal and reduction based on ignorance, jealousy etc is what takes away, intentionally or not, from the real contributions that Boyd made which he left open for all of us to build. on.
AND, Boyd is NEVER beyond criticism. That is never the point. He loved criticism and challenging assumptions as much, if not more, than anyone. But for those who did not do their homework, especially at a basic level, would get, as he would say, hosed.
I regret I never had the chance to sit down with Boyd for a chat - I think we would find that we had a lot in common. But I guess connecting with you and Ponch is the next best thing. It takes a village.