Replying to LO30911 --
"Andrew, QuaSyLaTic" <andrew@360q.com> wrote:
> My thoughts on the above as per
> http://www.360q.com/Open/A048.htm
---------------- Excerpts from Andrew's article:
> Malaysia: Rape, Reaction, and Systems Thinking
> By Andrew Wong (22 Jan 2004)
>
> Malaysia is outraged at the recent rape and murder
> of young girls.
>
> ... We have a pictorial representation of the web
> of relationship of the many issues we discussed
> in this paper.
>
> [Web of Relationship (Influence Diagram)]
>
> ... We need to have the ability to deal with
> multiple and complex variables and see the pattern
> of relationships among them in order to under the
> underlying structures that drive behavior and
> producing the many outcome we experience.
>
> ... We need to develop new skills in systems
> thinking, not just logic, cause-and-effect
> and box-thinking.
>
> When we build a community of systems thinkers,
> we begin to realize a learning society, daily
> increasing our capacity to create the results
> we truly desire--not wanting to see another
> innocent child raped and murdered, not
> experiencing corruption but integrity, no road
> accidents, no economic crisis, not terrorists
> but humanists.
-----------------
Dear Andrew and others,
I have read your article with interest. It reminds me of my initial
encounter with systems thinking in 1991. Your arguments are exactly
like the ones I learnt initially, during my familiarisation with
systems thinking. [Even today, on topics like 'managing complexity', I
make use of influence diagrams, to make points similar to those made
in your article.] However, there is a set of issues that have arises
subsequently for me ...
What is a better way to deal with rape and such other violence? Or,
what is a more systemic way to deal with violence in society?
I will mention three types of responses I have seen discussed in the
systems literature:
1. Large-scale social planning: Improve prosperity in the society,
invest in job creation in the hinterlands, improve economic position
of women in society, allow free and respectful interaction among boys
and girls, provide safe and socially non-disruptive sexual outlets for
boys and girls, etc. etc. [This type of thinking has its appeal,
however, it is very long-term, uncertain, and expensive. Besides,
there is a problem of political governance: Why should any government
allocate resources to such programmes? They can always find
'electorally more lucrative' projects to fund.]
2. Create capacity for self-defence: Teach potential victims the
skills of self-defence. Of course, it might seem an 'un-systemic'
idea, but it can have a system-wide impact, if successful. [It is
similar to 'disaster management' in spirit. In this, you see 'rape' as
some kind of disaster, like cyclone or earthquake. All you do is to
prepare better to face it.]
3. Re-order the interdependence: In other words, create new
observations and new communications. This involves answering the
following questions: What kind of observation (or communication) could
provide the actors with new alternatives? For example, would girls
like to know how other girls 'avoid rape'? Would boys like to know
what is 'more interesting' than rape? Would mothers like to know which
areas of the town are likely to be unsafe tonight? Etc.
[This third option is the least clear in the systems literature, but,
in my humble opinion, the most promising. I have been working on this
perspective. Recently, I have explored this approach on traffic
accident problems. The results are interesting. I will have a report
ready in 2/3 weeks.]
DP
DP Dash, PhD
India
--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.