Dear Organlearners,
Doc Holloway <learnshops@thresholds.com> writes
in reply to my question:
> > Here is another question to think of in the mean time:
> > Can we and may we manipulate other people?
>
> ahhh, a question which, in a slightly different form, frequently occupies
> my mind. I know that I can and do manipulate people. My question is an
> ethical one--should I manipulate other people?
Doc, it is much the same with me. The more I succeed in fitting chaos,
order and complexity in the general pattern of creativity, and thus the
more I empower my own creativity, the more I am confronted with ethical
questions for which I have to seek the answers.
On a different listserver dedicated to creativity, somebody else asked
why, after almost 50 years of promoting creativity formally (since the
work of Guilford), so little have been accomplished after so much efforts.
Some very interesting answers were given. I replied that the absence of an
accessing paradigm, among others, was responsible for the lack of the
formal development of creativity.
Now let us assume a scenario in which the correct paradigm is operative.
Assume that many people become a thousand times more creative than today.
Assume in that scenario the same lack of ethics as today. Can you imagine
how and to what extend those creative people will manipulate the other
people? Yet we have to contemplate such nightmares.
> In organizations and societies, we manipulate through norms--and when
> those don't work, coercion or punishment works. That's why I find this an
> issue of ethics. I try to apply the principle of harm when considering
> whether or not to behave in a manipulative way. The problem lies in not
> forseeing the consequences of manipulating people, so that despite a
> benign motive, errors are made.
Doc, you have traced out in a succint manner the bifurcative (constructive
or destructive) nature of human manipulations. You have also shown how
humankind wish to manipulate these bifurcations with bifurcations, almost
like trying to fight fire with fire or to fight hate with hate. In the
great majority of cases it does not work.
> That is why I am becoming more and more convinced that I should avoid all
> attempts at manipulation.
Doc, what sense of manipulation do you avoid?
1) Positive: A skillful and assertive use of the faculties
2) Negative: A deceptive tampering with anything.
3) Neutral: A change of anything on purpose.
Or do you avoid all of them.
> Instead, by exercising openness,
> self-differentiation, advocacy and assertion, I can express myself and my
> needs in very direct ways.
Stated in this way, it seems as if you should avoid all neutral and
negative manipulations. (It reminds me much of the dialogue initiated by
Winfried on Strategic development. I used the phrases "frontroom
operations", "middleroom operations" and "backroom operations" and
explained why I will go only for "frontroom operations".)
However, here in South Africa where the European cultures and the African
cultures meets every day, we are dialy reminded of the lesson to be not
ignorant of self-deception. In other words, what appears to be positive (a
skillful and assertive use of the faculties) or not even a manipulation in
the one culture, becomes a negative (a deceptive tampering with anything)
manipulation in the other culture.
Thus, although I am delighted with what you have written and respect it
very much, it is incomplete with respect to different paradigms. We are
now entering the terrain of the seventh essentiality of creativity which I
call "paradigm-openness" - the joker card among the seven pack. Keeping a
cool head and balanced act through a jungle of paradigms is for me one of
the most difficult things to do. Thus, when asking you to qualify how you
will avoid self-deception and thus negative tamperings, I know that I am
asking you a very difficult thing.
> This doesn't eliminate being direct--even
> being directive--when the need arises--but it does eliminate the need to
> control other people's lives and behavior through deceptive or indirect
> means.
Now you are speaking - control of other people's lives. I hate it and I
try to avoid it at all costs. But, what is control of other people's
lives. How much does your and my description of it correspond?
Best wishes
--At de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre for Education University of Pretoria Pretoria, South Africa email: amdelange@gold.up.ac.za
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>