I'd already replied to LO1014 and then this popped up. Your observations
about what we'd call "storytelling" and what we'd call "a case history"
are perfectly correct, of course. And yet if we strip the context and
nomenclature, don't they start looking a lot alike? Logically,
structurally, like that.
Maybe it's just me. I've been much preoccupied with the question how
stories can contain wisdom. If we're given two storytellers, we can
listen to them for a while and perhaps find one better than the other in
some humanly critical attribute. Is this because one has a better set of
"theories"?
It seems to me we can ask exactly the same questions about case histories.
Isn't "case history" just a fancy-shmancy word for "story"?
I'm open to objections, of course.
Regards
Jim Michmerhuizen
jamzen@world.std.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
: : : : : : : Ideas are cheap; : : \ : : : :
: : : : : Good ideas don't cost any more than lousy ones. : : : : :
: : : It's distinguishing them that's expensive. : : :
On Thu, 4 May 1995 SAMPLEE@ORAU.GOV wrote:
> Eileen Sample
> samplee@orau.gov
> Replying to LO1014
>
> > How is storytelling different from real world case studies?
>
> I think they're different because stories are more personal and
> when you "receive" them your objective isn't to analyze them in
> the way you would a case study. Also, I think of storytelling as
> something that happens at a precise moment in time for a very
> special purpose--sort of short and to the point. Whereas, a case
> study is much more involved. ??
>