Don't just do something... LO17023

J.C. Lelie (janlelie@wxs.nl)
Sun, 15 Feb 1998 16:13:18 -0800

Replying to LO16961 --

Hi Rol,

your post made me sit here. I've always liked this remark by Deming, in
fact, i use it on my curriculum vitea. I've been sensing the world from
this perspective for a long time now (after all, this universe is going to
be here for the next few billion years, so why hurry? or, as i've said
earlier: four hundred thousand years ago there still were gletchers in The
Netherlands and now we're already discussing the implementation of planing
systems.) and this is what i come up with.

We all feel and act. Feeling presedes thinking (remembering, categorizing,
prioritizing) (A nice proof: the word thought, in het Nederlands:
"gedachte", auf Deutsch: "Gedanken", en Francais: pensie, is a kind of
past tense, while feeling, gevoel, gef|hl, sens, is a present tense) . And
we need, we must, we want to act! So, after some thoughts, we started to
act again. We were so succesful that we gained weight. After missing a
branch for a couple of thousands years, we sat down and thought.
Gravitation is not to be mocked with. We've learned that feeling, then
thinking and then acting doesn't work always, so we started to plan and
organize. So first feeling, then thinking then planning (NEW!) and then
acting. When we perfected language, we were able to communicate toughts
and plans. This brought us, among other things, the automobile. And this
marvelous medium. And we added some fat. And have been missing some
branches (a.k.a. bifurcations) lately. I supposed because we were unable
to communicate feelings in a constructive way.

Now, perhaps it is obvious for you, but for me it became as a great
surprise that we plan by feeling and thinking at the same time, or better,
in synchonisation. It appears to us as if we think logically, but our
thinking is (pre-)conditioned by our feeling. However, we are better able
to communicate thoughts, we think in thoughts, so "I think therefore I
think" (to parafrase Descartes). When we think, however, our feelings are
used to bypass logical analysis, logical thought: it is much quicker to
evaluate through emotions than through calculation. So we make choices, we
branche in our thoughts, not because we think about these choices, but
because we "instinctively" feel our thoughts. As we plan, we project, in a
way, our feelings on our plans, our thoughts, choose emotionally, and
think of something to communicate: thoughts. Much of these mechanisms are
sub-consious, probably because we would miss a branch if it wasn't tuned
for speed. So on the outside, we think therefore we are. (By the way, i
suppose woman are better in logical thinking, just because they are
pre-wired to process, to balance, to listen to feelings better.They talk a
different language)

So now the problem became communicating feelings. To bypass this subject:
this requires: Personal Master, integrating reality, vision, mission,
action, and emotional tension (!). I suppose because we've started out by
resolving tension through action (a billion years ago), that we still tend
to solve problems through action. And most problems can be solved through
action, except those, that are created through tension-action.

> Many people feel a strong need to plan and organize before they begin to
> act. And some projects, especially complicated but well-defined ones, are
> more prone to success under this philosophy.
>
> However, other people have a strong need to act and make something happen.
> Provided this action is accompanied with reflection, this is a powerful
> stimulator of learning, actually far more powerful than the former method.
> Many projects will not and can not succeed under the "plan then do"
> approach. However, if the approach is
> "plan-do-reflect-plan-do-reflect-plan-do-reflect-plan-do-reflect..."
> almost on a daily basis with lots of little steps, then much can be
> accomplished of a totally unpredictable -- and very powerful -- nature.
>
> There are really severe limits to our ability to deduce outcomes through
> logic in real-world systems with people as participants. Just too much
> complexity. These limits constrain the capacity of the first method
> above.
>
> On the other hand, this is not intended as a defense of thoughtless
> action. A little reflection, even in the most complex of situations, is
> likely to increase success. Beyond a certain point, though, further
> reflection does not add to the probability of success.
>
> There is plenty of room for both people in the world.
>
> Rol Fessenden

-- 
Drs J.C. Lelie CPIM (Jan)
janlelie@wxs.nl       
LOGISENS - Sparring Partner in Logistical Development -
Mind@Work - est. 1998 - Powering Your Creative Mind  
+ (31) 70 3243475 Fax: idem GSM: + (31) 654685114

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>