But once you have established an
industry and a business, the machinery rolls and generates the
conditions, the rationality, the politics and belief systems
to make it work. I find it’s very difficult to pull away from
this undertow.
Is really important.
One of the things I've been giving thought to is how there is
a need for people to focus and fractionalize on creating
systems--as a part of well-being--without considering their
long-term affect, or effect.
What I mean is that we have a lot
more people who live in horizontal layers than in vertical
levels, and there is a specific reason (mostly
likely--obliquely--genetic)...as it is a lot easier for the
ego position to express itself
horizontally--fractionally--focused on achievement, or
avoidance, power, even responsibility when that lens is a
bounded reality....
So, this quote from you is critical because even though we may
know different, the system continues to gather and aggregate
horizontal knowledge, skills and experience--where expressed
as a horizontal layer of complexity.
One of the things I have realized over the past decade living
in emerging markets where culture has a lot more
range/levels...is that when you cross into a particular level
that doesn't fit well with your level, or layers of KSEs, it
becomes difficult to shift...because all the things you
learned and have grown skills around is not useful...and you
must abandon them for learning and the development of
different skills.
BUT it doesn't stop there.
The emotional apparatus, beliefs, and self-hugging that is
already in place also must be abandoned.
In my own personal experience, MOST, if not all people, will
NOT abandon their sunk (costs) KSEs and move into other areas.
There are probably several reasons why this is critical, and
why development is MOSTLY horizontal as most people go through
2 major developmental transitions in their lifetime, usually
surrounding child/adulthood and midlife...therefore this
stratification of development aligns with Mark's quote
above...we get comfortable/attuned with a set of beliefs that
fit (our genes more than likely) and off we go...not focusing
on whether or not, the degrees of affect, or effect are good
or bad, but tunnel-visioned in to developing the horizontal
density (ways of doing things) and frequency (amount of time
spent doing things), rather than in introspection, reflection
or deliberation--all of which slow down this system.
Now, let's get real.
People are not going to want or need to do things that don't
fit them.
There are a 1-5% crowd that are genetically-guided to morph,
so they love moving and shaking (morphers), another 1-5% of
people who never met something they didn't want to change
(innovators), and probably another 1-5% who are just flat
opposed to anything traditional or conventional
(opposers)...and there is your 15% who change the world--those
which Hayak wants to protect in liberalism of freedoms, so
what this group does creates benefits for mankind.
Therefore people change when they have to?
More than likely, that is the case, for the reasons I've
stated above, most of which are beyond the control and
capability of most.
Freedom is a strange bedfellow, IMHO.
If you look into all the good things
we have today, they are most likely coming out of limiting
freedom, choice and change, yet freedom as a double-edged
sword is necessary for the group above to do their thing....
Freedom @F-L-O-W works under a
different set of assumptions than does freedom @BS...and this
will continue to be a very tricky, if not taboo subject for
most, as no one likes to think they are luddites, yet in all
cases, each of us is when contrasted with ground which we are
unfamiliar or subject too.
AS I wander around in my mind looking for the things I
lost...?
We have to recurse back to why life is, what is the purpose of
life and why life is in fact living.
MOST do NOT want to entertain these questions...a la Mark's
quote, it's just a hell of a lot easier to focus on getting
things done better, rather than always questioning why.
We are subject to those primitive assumptions that no one has
taken a look at...and i'm not saying you should, but
everything is riding on those assumptions--we all are making
them, subject to them, and yet, we don't want to open the
box...to talk to Pandora.
Each layer in each level has a set of assumptions it is
subject too.
For those who want to study these assumptions--for whatever
reason, good or bad--the design work is key, because for the
most part, your life and mine is just running the program....
FOR MOST, this is fine, life is living, not contemplation,
reflection, deliberation or design, and certainly while we are
all scaffolded by these assumptions, few want to pull apart
that scaffolding to reveal the design...or could see it if it
was staring them in the face.
So why all the bother?
That is a good question.
Here's a quick exchange I am always reminded of from iRobot,
where the good Dr. has created this puzzle for the detective:
Detective Del Spooner: Is there a problem with the Three Laws?
Dr. Alfred Lanning: The Three Laws are perfect.
Detective Del Spooner: Then why would you build a robot that
could function without them?
Dr. Alfred Lanning: The Three Laws will lead to only one
logical outcome.
Detective Del Spooner: What? What outcome?
Dr. Alfred Lanning: Revolution.
Detective Del Spooner: Whose revolution?
Dr. Alfred Lanning: *That*, Detective, is the right question.
Program terminated.
|
© Generati |
|
