Up ’til now, I’ve more or less considered being methodical and being logical as being pretty much the same kind of thing. However, there seems some relevant distinction:
Logical: an ability of mind to understand coherent structure
Methodical: a pratical ability to apply a structure consistently
I remember at uni it often used to frustrate me that amazingly logically intelligent people could be so haphazard in their approach to work. (I suppose when I was feeling harsh, I’d blame them for laziness, as I couldn’t rationalise how it could be a lack of ability.)
Yet, it seems this distinction is at the heart of it – perhaps they were logical, but not methodical. So although they could understand and agree with a coherent structure of work (i.e. the plan) they didn’t have the relevant skills to actively carry out that structure.
Hmm… curious!
*time for me to stop havering*
a glass beaker with a star inside 
Melon Zest
Thursday, November 15, 2007 at 5:54 pm
On a slightly diferent note rach, i think probably the other way round is just as notoriously spread 🙂
I noticed a lot of people usually say yes to everything you ask them, especially if you’ve rambled on and on and then you ask them if they understood what was required. They would usually say yes even though though a lot of the time they don’t really understand. and then the usually get stuck! (and this is still the logical bit)
As to the methodical part, we were brought up here to follow the Pavlov principle, and ususally get taught by example. So I think if people understand the example they can methodically follow it again and again and again.. but as they got stuck at the logical level anyway, i’m afraid that their potential to go further was limited from there :P.
Melon Zest
Thursday, November 15, 2007 at 5:55 pm
Oh what! I gave an answer bigger than rachel’s post -> < >
Melon Zest
Thursday, November 15, 2007 at 6:01 pm
“I appologise, for I have made this letter longer than usual, because I lack the time to make it short.”
Blaise Pascal
rach
Tuesday, November 20, 2007 at 12:10 am
Wow… what are you getting all philosophical on me for!! 😛 Not quite your normal style 😉
So to be methodical about my reply:
1. Yes, I do ramble… sorry! But I don’t force you to read my blog… well, not very much.
2. Saying yes when you don’t mean it – I fully agree, its rather a mutual understanding preventer… but then, there’s not an awful lot you can do to change things. Unless you have a very very big bottle of Truth Serum handy!?
3. Pavlov… hmm, I need to do my homework. I love pavlova though – nearly as good as chocolate.
4. Conclusion: “as they got stuck at the logical level anyway, i’m afraid that their potential to go further was limited from there” I’m not sure that method neccessarily always follows logic: someone could be very methodical in just following any instructions given them, whether logical or not. To my logical mind, it seems pointless 😉 to follow a set of non-logical steps… but stranger things have happened!
5. I believe you may have a particular example in mind 😛 *ahem*. However I intend to refrain from any reference to such potential controversy in such a public place. (The whole world reads my blog, remember 😉 )
Hrm, time for bed! 🙂
Pascal ps: so true! My long posts are really laziness after all!