Re: Analysis Top Down vs Bottom Up

[Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- YAHOO -dot- COM>]

This is like asking "which is better, to rip the band-aid off really fast or
slowly."  Sheesh, there are about 8 billion different answers to that question
all of which are wrong in some way.

I mean without any context this question cannot be honestly answered in any
practical way.  Sure, some people can quote university egg-heads who did some
alien, brain scan study to prove up or down - but all of that is just academia
nonsense. It has no basis in stark, nasty reality.

I'll ram my point through: when a doctor is about to perform brain surgery on
you, do you really want him to "gloss over" the details until he's wrist deep
in your brain? "What't that?  Some complex gland thing, just toss it aside for
now. We'll figure it out later."

Likewise, when your plane is plummeting to the ground, does it really matter if
you stop to close the lid on the toilet before leaping out the door?

Analysis depends on context - always.

--- Anthony Markatos <tonymar -at- HOTMAIL -dot- COM> wrote:
> Question for all listserv members:
>
> Which is the best way to perform an analysis: top-down or bottom-up?
>
> Some experts say that analysis is all about postponing detail to the
> appropriate time, else the analysis will "drown in all the details".
>
> Others advocate bottom-up.  They say top-down is too complex.  They believe
> in a bit-by-bit approach.
>
> Tony Markatos
> (tonymar -at- hotmail -dot- com)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
>
> From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000==
>
>
>
>


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=