Who chose the colours of the six thinking hats?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by jf on -
HI!.
It seems that EdB has a slight antecedent still without investigating. It is apparently the origin of the famous 6 hats to think.
Parece que EdB tiene un ligero antecedente todavia sin investigar. Al parecer se trata del origen de los tan famosos 6 sombreros para pensar.
Link 1 of Dr Michael Hewitt-Gleeson.
?
Link 2 of Dr Michael Hewitt-Gleeson.
?
-
Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on -
Michael Hewitt-Gleeson always makes a big song and dance about his former association with Edward de Bono, but you only need to read the first page of one of Hewitt-Gleeson's books to see that he has a quality and style quite different to the person who wrote the "Six Thinking Hats".
Dr de Bono's take on the matter is published here: http://www.edwdebono.com/msg21q.htm
One interesting side note, when I posted a comment on Hewitt-Gleeson's site offering my view (years ago), it was not published. By contrast, there has never been a hint of censorship on the de Bono Society. It's kind of a neat marketing trick when you think about it: You write something controversial - invite comments - then publish the ones that make you look good. In a single stroke you've created the perception that you're a leader.
-
Permalink Reply by Kim Jones on -
This is exactly how Facebook works. Everyone's a leader. Negative, critical comments are deleted by most people which means there is an unspoken rule that "thou shallt post only warm, fuzzy and encouraging comments, no matter how demented and beyond hope the item being commented upon." I do enjoy FB, however the word "antiseptic" leaps to mind rather often.
The internet needs the De Bono Society. We are a free-thinking oasis.
-
Permalink Reply by jf on
-
Hello Phil!
Do you say that you comment has not been published?.I hope that you're not talking about this;
Phil Bachmann Says:
April 3rd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
In answer to your question:
>> There are those that say I should take Edward’s claims as a compliment. Why?
Why? Because it would:
– Make Dr de Bono look good.
– Make you look generous and benevolent to your friends.
– Show respect to someone who is older than you.
– Be a way of thanking Dr de Bono for the benefits he has conferred on you in the past.
– Enhance the stature of two of the most important people pushing thinking into the school curriculum.
– Complete the phrase “Success has many fathers…” with the words “…and that’s OK”.
– Allow you to focus your efforts into building upon on your already considerable achievements.
– Show youngsters who dream of being an army General that you can be happy being a contented Captain.
-
Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on
-
HI Juan,
No, this was a conciliatory comment I had made earlier.
I followed up with a rebuke ridiculing the idea tha he was the author of the Six Thinking Hats. This comment was not published.
Which illustrates my point that MIchael Hewitt-Gleeson selectively censors comments to give the impression that he is generally well regarded.
Notwithstanding Hewitt-Gleeson's riding de Bono's coat-tails then claiming superiority - I actually find much to commend him. His writing has a direct, practical style; he has invented useful acronyms (eg. QRH) which I still remember after 20 years, and I have no reason to doubt his claim to have helped push thinking into Victorian schools (via VELS).
-
Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on
-
... also Juan,
The comment of mine you posted starts with a quote from Hewitt-Gleeson (">> There are those who say...").
Now if you go to the web page featuring my comment, you find that Gleeson's article does not include that phase!
This sad little fellow has taken my response to another one of his (now apparently deleted) articles and made it look like I was responding to this one. Of course there is no way I would read his half-witted appraisal of "King of Australia" and not have lost my temper - and this would have been clearly reflected in any response.
I suppose Mr Gleeson would not say he's a sad little fellow - rather a cheeful and clever one. Why? Because if you Google Edward de Bono Australia and search through the first few entries - there is the page in question!
And because of its controversial title "Dispute with Edward de Bono" - many people will click this link first.
Can you imagine? The first thing that many people in Australia will find if they search for Edward de Bono in their country is a page ridiculing him and questioning his authenticity - with a lot of apparently impartial people voicing their approval.
I guess winning means a lot to some people.
-
Permalink Reply by Phil Bachmann on
-
Michael Hewitt Gleeson has decided to take issue with the following except:
"I followed up with a rebuke ridiculing the idea tha he was the author of the
Six Thinking Hats. This comment was not published."Mr Hewitt Gleeson objects that I am saying that he is claiming that he wrote the book. Of course I didn't but just to please him I will restate these points more clearly:
1. I have no knowledge of the de Bono/Hewitt Gleeson controversy that is not in the public domain, and any statement I make on the matter is therefore merely my interepretation and opinion.
2. I believe that Edward de Bono is the originator of the concept "Six Thinking Hats" because it is in keeping with his style of thinking and writing. There are strong parallels with his earlier work eg. PMI maps roughly to Yellow, Black and Green hats.
3. I have read Michael Hewitt Gleeson's writings (a book, parts of his website) and attended half of one seminar. I do not find any similarity in Mr Hewitt-Gleeson's work and the contents of the book, "The Six Thinking Hats."
4. Hewitt-Gleeson states on his web site that he has invented a seventh hat, the "Grey Hat of Wisdom." My opinion, having read this article, is that if HG had even a basic understanding of the Six Thinking Hats concept he would not have offered this last hat: To use just one example, the hats have moods, you put yourself in a Yellow Hat mood to see benefits. You would never put yourself in a "Wisdom" mood.
5. I suspect Michael Hewitt Gleeson may well have suggested coloured thinking caps to Edward de Bono at some point, but so what? The hats are meaningless without the words to explain them. Does Ford owe a royalty payment to every kid who suggests that their next model go faster?
-
Permalink Reply by Kim Jones on
-
From the phrase you quote: "I followed up with a rebuke ridiculing the idea tha he was the author of the Six Thinking Hats" I do not receive the message that (you are making the claim that) HG thinks he is the author of the book. He can claim to be the author of the idea if he wants and pursue that battle elsewhere. For our purposes here, Blind Freddy can see that EdB wrote the book the "Six Thinking Hats" because it has the name Edward de Bono on the cover. Actually, it was in fact Blind Freddy Fuck-knuckle who lives 3 doors up the road from Wanda the Fish who suggested to Edward that coloured hats might appeal to 6 year olds.
-
Permalink Reply by Kim Jones on
-
Phil: To use just one example, the hats have moods, you put yourself in a Yellow Hat mood to see benefits. You would never put yourself in a "Wisdom" mood.
Seen this way, it would appear Michael has succeeded only in re-inventing the hH. The hH (Blue) implies a certain element of wisdom in itself because it is the Hat most used by the chairperson who usually (though not exclusively) suggests avenues of exploration via Hats sequences. The hH is in some ways the Ringmaster's Hat although others can also put it on and lead with it. In fact, formal Hats sessions don't technically work at all without a chairperson. This is because the Wisdom Hat (Blue Hat or hH) affords the greatest advantage to those seeking to control the subject exploration! Even in a chaired Hats meeting, you have to be careful that the chairperson isn't manipulating the discussion via the hH. That's why I say that Wisdom is already implied in Blue Hat Thinking. If only Graeme Allan were with us, he would be shedding more light on this.
-
Permalink Reply by LoL on -
I had him in mind, when I posted this question, but I am suspicious of his claims - Don't know why ... I just am
So, I wondered if anyone could confirm it either way around and, for reasons I don't want to discuss just yet, supply the order in which the colours were chosen - The order might be somewhat revealing, after I've subjected it to a specific analytical process ... that I'm not ready to reveal before I know the answer ;)
-
Permalink Reply by Danny Stevens on -
Edward chose them to siut some simple mnemonic associations. There is no meaning to the colours other than culturally specific ones so their definition is somewhat arbitrary.
White - blank sheet of paper ready for information to be written on it.
Red The colour used to draw "love hearts" or fire for feelings.
Yellow The colour of the sun for optimism and logical positive.
Black the colour of judges robes for judgement and logical negative.
Green the colour of verdant life for the growth of new ideas.
Blue the colour of the sky for overview and orchestration.
That's it. They are the primary colours for both direct and reflected light plus black and white, the two tonalities. They are easy to remember. Its nothing to make a big meal out of and could just as easily have been a bunch of secondary colours and tonalities like brown, orange, purple, gold, beige and grey.
© 2013 Created by Administrator.
Powered by
