Replying to LO29191 --
Dear Alfred, dear rheeder ;-),
Interesting question regarding the "categorical identity". I suppose i've
been having a categorical identity all my life and never knew it! Good
thing Hollywood didn't make a movie "Dancing with Elephants" ;-).
I also like to use this metaphor because of the story of the three blind
man (referees?), discussing the nature of the elephant (it's a snake!
it's a tree! it's brush!). The elephant off course can be seen as "the
problem". To which i've added that (organizational) problems are as big or
as large as an elephant. In fact, the elephant is as large as the
organization. On its back, the top management rides (it's a
vision-thing!), the work floor walks between its legs (it's an
obstruc-ting!) while the middle manager holds his breath (its stink-ing!).
I agree with you that it is more than a tragedy of the commons. We're
confronted with tragedies of the commons (tragedies within tragedies, and
we're the common people too), accidental adversaries ("my solution is your
problem" and vice versa) and drifting goals and standards (for instance:
"we should live according to RoL, except when RoL doesn't suit our
situation").
I think these problems have always existed, exist now and will exist.
They are a kind of visible, explicit symptoms of the paradoxes underlying
our world. Recently a new phenomena was added: "conscious thought (NEW,
with optional language module)", so the system has become self-reflective.
Which is very interesting. It added at least 12 new paradoxes and thus has
sped up the dynamics. It will also support a transition to a situation
were these system archetype can become more "neutral", natural again.
Living will always be the cause of suffering and death. Only our common
soul - immortal and not - has to get used to it. I'm looking for a
solution in the direction of "there is only one soulution* to these
issues: to be (inclusive or) no to be." The (inclusive or) permits one to
be and not to be. But i may be wrong.
When we become able to stand with one "leg" in the situation and with
another "leg" outside, we might be able to see how we ourselves are
involved in this situation. In my opinion this will mean that we'll have
to re-learn - it is not gone, it can not become forgotten, it is just a
completely different language and we've still to invent the translators -
to live with our subconscious counterpart. Common but not plain. Much -
not all - of the trouble we're in has been caused by the process of coming
to grip with our spirit, our soul, our shadow or - pick what you like -
our devil. And i'm confident that we'll learn, everybody in its own way.
Only, be aware of Hofstadters' law: "Everything is more complicated than
you think, even if you take into account Hofstadters' law".
Kind regards,
Jan Lelie
facilitator mind@work
Alfred Rheeder wrote:
>In South Africa we are very familiar with the saying: " When elephants
>fight, the grass suffers". Not only do we often use the saying as a
>metaphor describing the tragedy of the commons, but the phenomena can be
>easily observed in for e.g. The Kruger National Park - South Africa's
>largest wildlife sanctuary. Yearly hundreds of elephants are culled in
>the Park.
>
>I am of the opinion that the "catergorical identity" of the saying is
>important. Where does this saying come from? When did people start to
>observe this phenomena? Did the phenomena always exist? Why does this
>phenomena exist? Etc........
[...snip by your host...]
--Jan Lelie <janlelie@wxs.nl>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.