re: core constructs
Charles Smith (sigma@globalnet.co.uk)
Tue, 17 Dec 1996 23:04:18 GMT
Devi Jankowicz refers to a contribution I made a few weeks ago, and points
out, quite rightly, that:
>
>To ask "why is being a manager important _to you_" is to ask about core
>constructs and personal values.
>
>To ask "why is being a manager important" is a different question, which
>may or may not relate to core constructs; it's certainly a more abstract
>and less personally relevant question.
>
However, in the context of the conversation I was reporting, it was quite
clear that the question I asked was of the first type, concerning personal
values, and it was certainly understood that way by my respondent. I am
inclined to believe, as Esteban Laso recently suggests, that his difficulty
in replying arose from a fear that a construct that was affecting a
significant part of his life was, in fact, really not important. I find it
difficult to accept that 'being a manager' could be described as a value
held by my respondent - I certainly didn't 'feel daft' for questioning it -
so it doesn't seem to fit as a core construct.
This takes me back to my original question. Can we have a construct which
cannot reasonably be considered core, which nevertheless has no evident
super-ordinate?
Regards
Charles Smith
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%