http://katzenfabrik.cat/blog/renommierschmiss

found in this critic of Christensen disruption by Gosset

https://mondaynote.com/clayton-christensen-becomes-his-own-devil-s-advocate-c6511e3fac44

also strateachery on what Christenesen got wrong https://stratechery.com/2013/clayton-christensen-got-wrong/

disruption works on cost-minded business but not on consumers that value “the ineffable”

ideas: Gosset make epistemic remarks, Christensen claims scientificity and uses a rigourous framework of “dimensionality reduction” of complexity (world to tech trajectories, 2-dimensional and value networks maybe 3-d.

Strateachery correctly point to rigorous counter-argument, C. theory works B2B not B2C.

Staying epistemic, we could say scientific in business can’t be like physics because of complexity, byt complexity is a weak definition of the business world where among the many loops of complexity we have a concience/explicitation (hermeneutic) loop whereas a theory like Disruption and innovator dilemma gets mainstream changes perception, postures and eventually negates itself. of averages and outliers, suprises, a biology-like dynamic of population for example. Of course, just intuition, better stay rigorous like C.