Re: [FRIAM] Justice Goes Global - NYTimes.com
Thanks for this Owen. I have watched the Charlie Rose interview and am on to the first lecture. Jen On 6/20/2011 6:03 PM, Owen Densmore wrote: I'm oddly fortunate to have roughly 1.25 hr/day to listen/look at interesting talks (due to required exercise). Charlie Rose is a frequent source, and interestingly enough, had a recent talk with Michael Sanel, who I point to below http://www.justiceharvard.org/ Here's Charlie's interview: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10658 -- Owen On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Owen Densmoreo...@backspaces.net wrote: You can tell I'm catching up on Tom Friedman's articles! BTW: His home page: http://www.thomaslfriedman.com/ .. lets you read his NYTimes articles without counting against your free access to their site. What interested me in this: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/opinion/15friedman.html?partner=rssnytemc=rss was the popularity of an apparently compelling teacher of philosophy, Michael Sander, admittedly very applied. He's so popular that folks put together a TV series of his work: http://www.justiceharvard.org/ -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] The Uncertainty Tax
I know we all have our respective lenses through which we view the world and that these lenses determine the explanations to which we are most receptive, but if Mr. Friedman is talking about an inability to switch house as a reason some people aren't able to take new jobs, it would seem appropriate to also mention that many of the houses built during the last bubble were at the outer accretion layers of suburbia and not particularly close to any jobs. Its as if the people building these houses and the politicians maintaining policies that support their build assumed either (1.) oil will always be cheap and people wont mind spending 2 hours a day in their cars every working day or (2.) these houses wont ultimately be paid for by wages. One aggravating factor of the bust a few years ago which never gets as much mention as obscure financial instruments or banking malfeasance relates the spike in oil prices in 2007 to the initial wave of defaults in these outer suburbs. Granted, the people moving into these marginal outer layers were probably the most marginal credit risks, but its conceivable that any change for the worse could be all the more likely to put them over the edge and into default. I guess my bias is that I attribute too much to resource and energy scarcity. When I see an explanation for either the start of our current troubles or why we can't see an end, I expect it to ultimately reference these things. Although there are a few brief mentions of energy efficiency as it relates to productivity gains and as a possible source for new jobs in construction, this is pretty paltry when you consider how world energy production has basically flatlined, but there are many, many more consumers driving up its price (think of all the new cars sold in China each day). When I think of the U.S., I think we're almost uniquely disadvantaged by how spread out our cities have become in the last 60 years and how the only option for getting around that has been faithfully and consistently supported and encouraged is the personal car. On 20 Jun 2011, at 17:08, Owen Densmore wrote: Tom Friedman's Op Ed http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/opinion/12friedman.html?_r=1partner=rssnytemc=rss He starts with shocking mortgage statistics, but then discusses unemployment and its causes via this report: http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/publications/us_jobs/index.asp Quote: McKinsey Global Institute released a long study of the structural issues ailing the U.S. job market, entitled: “An Economy That Works: Job Creation and America’s Future.” It begins: “Only in the most optimistic scenario will the United States return to full employment before 2020. Achieving this outcome will require sustained demand growth, rising U.S. competitiveness in the global economy and better matching of U.S. workers to jobs.” Interestingly enough, they still feel education is important but stress areas of current need. BTW: The tech bubble folks are afraid of is likely NOT to be one. Marc Andreessen (admittedly a techie) has compiled P/E ratios of the new tech market and shows them to be well under traditional values. They'd please any conservative investor. Tom is concerned about the Uncertainty Tax .. our loss of production due to fear of downturn unknowns, but ends: Any good news? Yes, U.S. corporations are getting so productive and sitting on so much cash, just a few big, smart, bipartisan decisions by Congress on taxes and spending (and mortgages) and I think this whole economy starts to improve again. Workers with skills will be the first to be hired. -- Owen FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] The Uncertainty Tax
our respective lenses You have your Apollonians and your Dionysians; Apollonians are your planters, your gardeners, your planners. They can defer pleasure because, for them, the future seems assured. Dionysians are your impulsive types: they grab pleasure and excitement now because the future is not assured. There are a LOT of Dionysians in the sfComplex. I think it's because advanced technology is so self-undermining and ephemeral. Opportunities come fast and are lost in a wink. Who can really plan? According to one complex sociobiological theory, these two personality types are laid down in infancy by the attachment relation. Were the circumstances that surrounding your primary caregiver (usually your mom) stable enough so that you could form a firm attachment to her? Or sufficiently unstable, that that attachment was in doubt. If the first, you are an Apollonian; if the latter a Dionysian. These two kinds of folks really cannot talk to one another because their assumptions about the future are so different. One of the most alarming features of our current political discourse in the united states is the way in which the modern Dionysians (libertarians, etc.) have tried to bridge the gap between these two personalities by asserting the Dionysian philosophy as a form of planning for the future. Ayn Rand; objectivism. It's kind of the reverse of the equally horrifying religion thing in which people without hope (who SHOULD be Dionysians) are recruited for Apollonian values by getting them to believe in an after-life. Both versions I deplore. They are confusions. Corruptions of the two basic approaches to life, both of which make Darwinian sense in their pure form. This sort of email is what happens when you put Thompson beside his weed-filled garden and then prevent him from doing anything about it by busting his knee. You probably will hear more from me in this vein. Ugh! Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Richard Harris Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 1:02 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The Uncertainty Tax I know we all have our respective lenses through which we view the world and that these lenses determine the explanations to which we are most receptive, but if Mr. Friedman is talking about an inability to switch house as a reason some people aren't able to take new jobs, it would seem appropriate to also mention that many of the houses built during the last bubble were at the outer accretion layers of suburbia and not particularly close to any jobs. Its as if the people building these houses and the politicians maintaining policies that support their build assumed either (1.) oil will always be cheap and people wont mind spending 2 hours a day in their cars every working day or (2.) these houses wont ultimately be paid for by wages. One aggravating factor of the bust a few years ago which never gets as much mention as obscure financial instruments or banking malfeasance relates the spike in oil prices in 2007 to the initial wave of defaults in these outer suburbs. Granted, the people moving into these marginal outer layers were probably the most marginal credit risks, but its conceivable that any change for the worse could be all the more likely to put them over the edge and into default. I guess my bias is that I attribute too much to resource and energy scarcity. When I see an explanation for either the start of our current troubles or why we can't see an end, I expect it to ultimately reference these things. Although there are a few brief mentions of energy efficiency as it relates to productivity gains and as a possible source for new jobs in construction, this is pretty paltry when you consider how world energy production has basically flatlined, but there are many, many more consumers driving up its price (think of all the new cars sold in China each day). When I think of the U.S., I think we're almost uniquely disadvantaged by how spread out our cities have become in the last 60 years and how the only option for getting around that has been faithfully and consistently supported and encouraged is the personal car. On 20 Jun 2011, at 17:08, Owen Densmore wrote: Tom Friedman's Op Ed http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/opinion/12friedman.html?_r=1partner =rssnytemc=rss He starts with shocking mortgage statistics, but then discusses unemployment and its causes via this report: http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/publications/us_jobs/index.asp Quote: McKinsey Global Institute released a long study of the structural issues ailing the U.S. job market, entitled: An Economy That Works: Job Creation and America's Future. It begins: Only in the most optimistic scenario will the United States return to full employment before 2020. Achieving this outcome will require sustained demand growth, rising U.S. competitiveness in the global
Re: [FRIAM] The Uncertainty Tax
Interesting way to parse an 'us versus them' situation. From my study and work with creatives, Dionysians are the classic artist type: great ideas, spontaneous behaviour, courting risk and adventure, off on their own and near an edge. Edges are interesting, because change happens there, and change can be good, often better than where one is in the moment. Apollonians come to people like me for help to loosen up and enjoy the unknown and find satisfaction and mastery within it. Particularly once they've realized that ultimately - and especially now - the known is fluctuating more wildly, and morphing into the unknown. Dionysians will tolerate change more easily and see it as positive, Apollonians will tolerate routine more easily and see it as positive. Victoria On Jun 21, 2011, at 12:03 PM, Nicholas Thompson wrote: our respective lenses You have your Apollonians and your Dionysians; Apollonians are your planters, your gardeners, your planners. They can defer pleasure because, for them, the future seems assured. Dionysians are your impulsive types: they grab pleasure and excitement now because the future is not assured. There are a LOT of Dionysians in the sfComplex. I think it's because advanced technology is so self-undermining and ephemeral. Opportunities come fast and are lost in a wink. Who can really plan? According to one complex sociobiological theory, these two personality types are laid down in infancy by the attachment relation. Were the circumstances that surrounding your primary caregiver (usually your mom) stable enough so that you could form a firm attachment to her? Or sufficiently unstable, that that attachment was in doubt. If the first, you are an Apollonian; if the latter a Dionysian. These two kinds of folks really cannot talk to one another because their assumptions about the future are so different. One of the most alarming features of our current political discourse in the united states is the way in which the modern Dionysians (libertarians, etc.) have tried to bridge the gap between these two personalities by asserting the Dionysian philosophy as a form of planning for the future. Ayn Rand; objectivism. It's kind of the reverse of the equally horrifying religion thing in which people without hope (who SHOULD be Dionysians) are recruited for Apollonian values by getting them to believe in an after-life. Both versions I deplore. They are confusions. Corruptions of the two basic approaches to life, both of which make Darwinian sense in their pure form. This sort of email is what happens when you put Thompson beside his weed-filled garden and then prevent him from doing anything about it by busting his knee. You probably will hear more from me in this vein. Ugh! Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Richard Harris Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 1:02 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The Uncertainty Tax I know we all have our respective lenses through which we view the world and that these lenses determine the explanations to which we are most receptive, but if Mr. Friedman is talking about an inability to switch house as a reason some people aren't able to take new jobs, it would seem appropriate to also mention that many of the houses built during the last bubble were at the outer accretion layers of suburbia and not particularly close to any jobs. Its as if the people building these houses and the politicians maintaining policies that support their build assumed either (1.) oil will always be cheap and people wont mind spending 2 hours a day in their cars every working day or (2.) these houses wont ultimately be paid for by wages. One aggravating factor of the bust a few years ago which never gets as much mention as obscure financial instruments or banking malfeasance relates the spike in oil prices in 2007 to the initial wave of defaults in these outer suburbs. Granted, the people moving into these marginal outer layers were probably the most marginal credit risks, but its conceivable that any change for the worse could be all the more likely to put them over the edge and into default. I guess my bias is that I attribute too much to resource and energy scarcity. When I see an explanation for either the start of our current troubles or why we can't see an end, I expect it to ultimately reference these things. Although there are a few brief mentions of energy efficiency as it relates to productivity gains and as a possible source for new jobs in construction, this is pretty paltry when you consider how world energy production has basically flatlined, but there are many, many more consumers driving up its price (think of all the new cars sold in China each day). When I think of the U.S., I think we're almost uniquely
Re: [FRIAM] The Uncertainty Tax
Tory Spoken like a Dionysian! Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Victoria Hughes Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 2:19 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The Uncertainty Tax Interesting way to parse an 'us versus them' situation. From my study and work with creatives, Dionysians are the classic artist type: great ideas, spontaneous behaviour, courting risk and adventure, off on their own and near an edge. Edges are interesting, because change happens there, and change can be good, often better than where one is in the moment. Apollonians come to people like me for help to loosen up and enjoy the unknown and find satisfaction and mastery within it. Particularly once they've realized that ultimately - and especially now - the known is fluctuating more wildly, and morphing into the unknown. Dionysians will tolerate change more easily and see it as positive, Apollonians will tolerate routine more easily and see it as positive. Victoria On Jun 21, 2011, at 12:03 PM, Nicholas Thompson wrote: our respective lenses You have your Apollonians and your Dionysians; Apollonians are your planters, your gardeners, your planners. They can defer pleasure because, for them, the future seems assured. Dionysians are your impulsive types: they grab pleasure and excitement now because the future is not assured. There are a LOT of Dionysians in the sfComplex. I think it's because advanced technology is so self-undermining and ephemeral. Opportunities come fast and are lost in a wink. Who can really plan? According to one complex sociobiological theory, these two personality types are laid down in infancy by the attachment relation. Were the circumstances that surrounding your primary caregiver (usually your mom) stable enough so that you could form a firm attachment to her? Or sufficiently unstable, that that attachment was in doubt. If the first, you are an Apollonian; if the latter a Dionysian. These two kinds of folks really cannot talk to one another because their assumptions about the future are so different. One of the most alarming features of our current political discourse in the united states is the way in which the modern Dionysians (libertarians, etc.) have tried to bridge the gap between these two personalities by asserting the Dionysian philosophy as a form of planning for the future. Ayn Rand; objectivism. It's kind of the reverse of the equally horrifying religion thing in which people without hope (who SHOULD be Dionysians) are recruited for Apollonian values by getting them to believe in an after-life. Both versions I deplore. They are confusions. Corruptions of the two basic approaches to life, both of which make Darwinian sense in their pure form. This sort of email is what happens when you put Thompson beside his weed-filled garden and then prevent him from doing anything about it by busting his knee. You probably will hear more from me in this vein. Ugh! Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Richard Harris Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 1:02 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The Uncertainty Tax I know we all have our respective lenses through which we view the world and that these lenses determine the explanations to which we are most receptive, but if Mr. Friedman is talking about an inability to switch house as a reason some people aren't able to take new jobs, it would seem appropriate to also mention that many of the houses built during the last bubble were at the outer accretion layers of suburbia and not particularly close to any jobs. Its as if the people building these houses and the politicians maintaining policies that support their build assumed either (1.) oil will always be cheap and people wont mind spending 2 hours a day in their cars every working day or (2.) these houses wont ultimately be paid for by wages. One aggravating factor of the bust a few years ago which never gets as much mention as obscure financial instruments or banking malfeasance relates the spike in oil prices in 2007 to the initial wave of defaults in these outer suburbs. Granted, the people moving into these marginal outer layers were probably the most marginal credit risks, but its conceivable that any change for the worse could be all the more likely to put them over the edge and into default. I guess my bias is that I attribute too much to resource and energy scarcity. When I see an explanation for either the start of our current troubles or why we can't see an end, I expect it to ultimately reference these things. Although there are a few brief mentions of energy efficiency as it relates to productivity gains and as a possible source
Re: [FRIAM] The Uncertainty Tax
Nick -- You may also be familiar with Charles Handy's book The Gods of Management, which expands the Apollonians and Dionysians to a couple of other dimensions: Zeus, to express the power cult of personality around a founder/visionary, and Athena, the idea of a distributed meritocracy based on creativity. http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Business/Management/?view=usaci=9780195096170 - Claiborne - On Jun 21, 2011, at 14:03, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: our respective lenses You have your Apollonians and your Dionysians; Apollonians are your planters, your gardeners, your planners. They can defer pleasure because, for them, the future seems assured. Dionysians are your impulsive types: they grab pleasure and excitement now because the future is not assured. There are a LOT of Dionysians in the sfComplex. I think it's because advanced technology is so self-undermining and ephemeral. Opportunities come fast and are lost in a wink. Who can really plan? According to one complex sociobiological theory, these two personality types are laid down in infancy by the attachment relation. Were the circumstances that surrounding your primary caregiver (usually your mom) stable enough so that you could form a firm attachment to her? Or sufficiently unstable, that that attachment was in doubt. If the first, you are an Apollonian; if the latter a Dionysian. These two kinds of folks really cannot talk to one another because their assumptions about the future are so different. One of the most alarming features of our current political discourse in the united states is the way in which the modern Dionysians (libertarians, etc.) have tried to bridge the gap between these two personalities by asserting the Dionysian philosophy as a form of planning for the future. Ayn Rand; objectivism. It's kind of the reverse of the equally horrifying religion thing in which people without hope (who SHOULD be Dionysians) are recruited for Apollonian values by getting them to believe in an after-life. Both versions I deplore. They are confusions. Corruptions of the two basic approaches to life, both of which make Darwinian sense in their pure form. This sort of email is what happens when you put Thompson beside his weed-filled garden and then prevent him from doing anything about it by busting his knee. You probably will hear more from me in this vein. Ugh! Nick -Original Message- From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Richard Harris Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 1:02 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] The Uncertainty Tax I know we all have our respective lenses through which we view the world and that these lenses determine the explanations to which we are most receptive, but if Mr. Friedman is talking about an inability to switch house as a reason some people aren't able to take new jobs, it would seem appropriate to also mention that many of the houses built during the last bubble were at the outer accretion layers of suburbia and not particularly close to any jobs. Its as if the people building these houses and the politicians maintaining policies that support their build assumed either (1.) oil will always be cheap and people wont mind spending 2 hours a day in their cars every working day or (2.) these houses wont ultimately be paid for by wages. One aggravating factor of the bust a few years ago which never gets as much mention as obscure financial instruments or banking malfeasance relates the spike in oil prices in 2007 to the initial wave of defaults in these outer suburbs. Granted, the people moving into these marginal outer layers were probably the most marginal credit risks, but its conceivable that any change for the worse could be all the more likely to put them over the edge and into default. I guess my bias is that I attribute too much to resource and energy scarcity. When I see an explanation for either the start of our current troubles or why we can't see an end, I expect it to ultimately reference these things. Although there are a few brief mentions of energy efficiency as it relates to productivity gains and as a possible source for new jobs in construction, this is pretty paltry when you consider how world energy production has basically flatlined, but there are many, many more consumers driving up its price (think of all the new cars sold in China each day). When I think of the U.S., I think we're almost uniquely disadvantaged by how spread out our cities have become in the last 60 years and how the only option for getting around that has been faithfully and consistently supported and encouraged is the personal car. On 20 Jun 2011, at 17:08, Owen Densmore wrote: Tom Friedman's Op Ed http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/opinion/12friedman.html?_r=1partner
[FRIAM] tested wisdom for positive contribution, Prof. Stuart Hill, U Western Sydney: Dan Novak: Rich Murray 2011.06.21
tested wisdom for positive contribution, Prof. Stuart Hill, U Western Sydney: Dan Novak: Rich Murray 2011.06.21 -Original Message- From: Dan Novak [mailto:dno...@etal.uri.edu] Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 10:50 AM To: 'theforu...@listserv.uri.edu' Subject: Shared -- dare I call it -- WISDOM Good Morning! Distilled from a ppt presentation by Professor Stuart Hill, Foundation Chair of Social Ecology, School of Education, University of Western Sydney (Kingswood Campus), Australia… A kind of gnomic manifesto for contemporary theory/practice… Refreshing, fine, and helpful… Cheers, Dan Novak Shared – dare I call it – WISDOM (these were compiled in 2005, based largely on my university and international development experience over the past 60+ years, as possible ‘testing questions’ for all theory practice) • Ask of all theory practice – what is it in the service of? – before supporting or copying it • Work mostly with ‘small meaningful achievable initiatives' vs. ‘Olympic-scale projects' (most of these are abandoned or fail, have numerous negative side-effects) • Don’t get stuck in endless ‘measuring studies’ (‘monitoring our extinction’) – these are often designed to postpone change that is perceived as threatening to existing power structures • To achieve sustainable progressive change, focus (at least first) on enabling the ‘benign’ agendas of others vs. trying to impose on them your own ‘benign’ agendas • Focus on enabling the potential of people, society nature to express itself – so that wellbeing, social justice sustainability can emerge (in integrated, synergistic ways) • Collaborate across difference to achieve broadly shared goals – don’t end up isolated, alone in a ‘sandbox’ • Don’t let ‘end point’/goal differences prevent possibilities of early stage collaboration • Outcomes are only as good sustainable as the people creating implementing them – so start with the people; remember that we are a relational/social species! • Use the media – let me repeat – use the media! – such ‘political’ communication is key to change • Work with business the public/community; government will always follow, but rarely lead! • Celebrate publicly at every opportunity – to enable the good stuff to be ‘contagious’ • Keep working on implementing – especially with others – your (shared) benign visions • Most of what is remains unknown – which is what wise people are able to work with; so devote most effort to developing your wisdom vs. your cleverness, which is just concerned with the very limited pool of what is known (Einstein was clear about this!) • Always be humble provisional in your knowing, always open to new experiences insights • Take small meaningful risks to enable progress, transformational learning development • Devote most effort to the design management of systems that can enable wellbeing, social justice sustainability, that are problem-proof vs. maintaining unsustainable, problem-generating systems, devoting time to ‘problem-solving’, control, input management • Work sensitively with time space, especially from the position of the ‘others’ (ask: who, what, which, where, when, how, why, if if not?) • Act from your core/essential self – empowered, aware, visionary, principled, passionate, loving, spontaneous, fully in the present (contextual) – vs. your patterned, fearful, compensatory, compromising, de-contextual selves • See no ‘enemies’ – recognise such ‘triggers’ as indicators of woundedness, maldesign mismanagement – everyone is always doing the best they can, given their potential, past experience the present context – these are the three areas to work with • Be paradoxical: ask for help get on with the job (don’t postpone); give when you want to receive; give love when you might need it, or when you might feel hate • Learn from everyone everything, seek mentors collaborators at every opportunity FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
