> For me ubuntu goes beyond respect, or accepting the importance of
> others. It recognises the worth of the other person without question.
Cornie,
your note is all I know about ubuntu, so maybe I got something wrong.
Ubuntu reminds me of social systems, in which persons are identified with
given roles (son, brother, father...) in given contexts (the other
person).
What happens to a person who does not behave according to the rules of his
role in ubuntu, i.e. a "father" who violates the rules of being a
"father"? Is the worth of this person still recognised without question?
I believe that there will be some social punishment, which is independent
of the person as an individuum.
In Maslow's pyramid there is one stage, where social security is most
valuable, but this stage is not beyond but below the "higher" individual
values.
Nevertheless I agree with you, if you regret that in our "civilized"
"western" world, patterns of good social behaviour are not well
established and that you are often fooled if you act according them. Yet
social security as well as physical security (food, clothing, housing) is
the ground on which higher values can develop and grow.
With this, I assume that ubuntu is not beyond respect etc. as you wrote
but it can be a good basis to go a step further to also recognise the
worth of the other person without question, i.e. the person behind the
role.
I think that the balance between playing a role (including the ability to
change the role if necessary) and being an individual person is a big
issue for learning organisations and also in this list.
I like to distinguish between learning (skills to play roles) and growing
(as an individual person). Learning can, but need not lead to growing. In
this sense, social systems as ubuntu can support but also supress growth.
Regards, Winfried
--Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>