deletions | additions       diff --git a/section_Linking_Theory_with_Practice__.tex b/section_Linking_Theory_with_Practice__.tex  index 1856b04..928d247 100644  --- a/section_Linking_Theory_with_Practice__.tex  +++ b/section_Linking_Theory_with_Practice__.tex 
...
\section{Linking Theory with Practice}  The tools described above began from an individual point of view. They emerged from interdisciplinary discussion of three investigators and grounded local application and refinement by another. The reality of being-in-the-world as humans is deeply personal, dependent on when and where we live our lives, our language, mentors and experience. It became very apparent to us that we had to work to understand each other' even when speaking the same language and using the same words. The world of experience both separated and stimulated us by discovered differences and gaps. Specific examples, closely observed Linking Theory  with tools we developed led to a new way of examining human error. Multiple perspectives allowed us to see the biases of out customary and even treasured biases. Recognition of how emotion is vitally linked to selection of perspective, cognition, value and meaning.   Organizations and systems, and academic disciplines keep work manageable, their structure intact, ans limit their responsibilities through language. Special meanings violate common usage, or special terms limit what can be used in action. This is out of awareness most of the time for those outside the group or discipline. These limiting usages become apparent when one deviates from standard behavior, tries to change behavior or simply applies for something using the wrong language. The problem grows directly with the size of the organization or system and the rigidity of so-called intelligent systems. Misunderstanding increases with the loss of face to face human contact and the precision of language, when achieved is matched by the difficulty of changing the supposed mathematical certainty of the input, processing, and output back to human behavior. This is a reason \emph{things don't change.} Practice  When we embedded in the structure of the tools recognition of the following concepts, we knew, we had learned through experience in application, that initial cognition was necessary but not sufficient. Cognition has to be repeated and corrected for at least these variables. We do not presume we have exhausted the possible variables, cognitive versions or meaningful questions. We are trying to increase the awareness of them.  The tools described above began from an interdisciplinary discussion of three investigators and local application and refinement of another researcher. The reality of being-in-the-world as humans is deeply personal, dependent on when and where we live, our language, our mentors and life experiences. As we worked together it became apparent to us that we had to work to understand each other even when speaking the same language and using the same words. Our separate disciplines and experiences both separated us and bound us together with a sense of inspiration. The discovery of gaps and differences in in our knowledge and communications between us led to the development of new tools to examine cases of human error. Multiple perspectives allowed us to see biases in customary and even treasured viewpoints. The recognition of how emotion is vitally linked to perspective, values and meaning proved to be transformative.  Why don't things change? Organizations, systems and academic disciplines exist to keep work manageable, their structures intact, and limit responsibilities to those within and without through language. Internal special language meanings violate common usage, or special terms limit what speech can be used for action. This is out of awareness most of the time for those outside the group or discipline. These limiting usages become apparent when one deviates from the standard behavior, tries to change behavior or simply applies for something using the wrong language. The problem grows directly with the size of the organization or system and increases with the designed rigidity of so-called intelligent systems. Misunderstandings increase with the loss of face to face human contact and the decline of a shared language with commonly understood meanings. This is matched by the difficulty of changing the supposed mathematical certainty of a designed process through corrective behavior changes, such as in the recent travails of the mortgage lending industry.  The explanation We embed in the structure of the our tools recognition that initial cognition  of the error is necessary but not sufficient. Our  narrative reflection tools requires require require  discussion of how our personal development, means of communication, communication  and social and cultural setting influences settings influence  our body/mind/brain \cite{Hutchins_2013} (Hutchins 2013)  and therefore our world view \cite{Clark_2008} \cite{Clark_1998}. New language is (Clark 2008) (Clark 1998). We  used here new language  to define for our purposes terms that are too vague,or  overlapping or frequently used, with almost are used across fields that give them nearly  opposite meanings. This confusion of language and communication and communication, combined with  the lack of \emph{thick description} a thick description,  is oneof  the major sources ofboth  errors in our thinking and resistances resistance  to change in ourconceptions and  actions.