[bhouston]

> Poor critiques of disruption like this one are only going to come thicker and faster now that many academics are starting to feel threatened by MOOCs and online learning.

Most of the article is actually a pretty good critique of Disruptive Innovation theory as being selectively applied in a post hoc manner that is also lacking predictive abilities.

Even though I consider my current business endeavor a "disruptive innovation", I still thought this was a really good article that breaks through the often mindless praise of disruption (which I myself have been a part of.)

I think that these types of counter arguments are valid in a self-correcting society.

(Although I found the article ended on a weak note, even though it started strong.)

[jval]

I don't disagree with you that disruption is often misapplied and mindlessly praised, I just think this article didn't do a good job of illustrating either of those points.

I think the NYT article I cited did a much better job of addressing both points.