Quote:
Originally Posted by rhinocaster
I've come across many posts over the years on the subject of "Quality" and I have to say that I'm still confused by the term.
We generally refer to items based on their quality. In a perfect world, the higher quality item would have a higher price. This certainly isn't the case in the world we live in. You can pay higher prices for a name, for an image, for desirability, for rarity, for hand work or for higher quality.
I can't say that on an operational level a Ferrari is of higher quality than a Toyota. A Ferrari may (and probably does) require more tuning and I would be surprised if they're more reliable than an economy level Toyota. However, when I think about "Quality" I'm certain that Ferrari is higher quality than Toyota. Why?
I must be figuring performance into the equation. Or tolerances. Or any of the other things I've mentioned. Or.....?
|
this will be fun! the toyota and the ferrari are attempting different things. So, the measure should not be of what they do but what problem they are solving for and the precision and completeness and efficiency in the manner in which they solve their problem.
True, they are both 'cars'. But, their goals as it relates to that experience are very different. A reductionist would simply say 'they are both methods of conveyance' but a reasonable person would quickly sniff that out and say "ahh, there are lists of goals that each vehicle is trying to achieve."
Thus, both can be of high quality and after establishing a measurement tool it is just as likely that the Toyota has a higher degree of quality than the ferrari.
As it relates to the 'classic god quality' if we are talking about 'car-ness' which you may be... I could see how someone could quickly conclude that the ferrari has a higher degree of car-ness... of course, I would not since my perception of the world has more egalitarian values for the concept of car-ness. if that makes any sense.