Phil,
With a bit of well intended humor to make explicit how sometimes we know
without knowing what we know, "the time-space barrier thingie in the TV
series Stargate" of all things happens to be a 'Stargate' :-)... I like the
movie quite a bit, with some reservations... Using that series as a
metaphor I perceive the underlying plot basically revolves around the treat
of the imposition of exploitation vs sustaining a peaceful interaction and
collaboration with mutual benefits.
"The problem is, few people have the courage to push themselves through the
barrier, but once somebody does then others invariably follow". Indeed, in
the original movie (by the same name of stargate) when the thingie is
reactivated it does enable to explore new worlds AND this also opens the
door to the annihilation of the world as we know it by a vastly more
technologically advanced malevolent being which banned education as a means
of remaining in control... My reservations have to do with the exclusion of
God and the portrait of religion within the movie and series (this seems to
just reflect what some consider THE appropriate position). In any case
within the series there exists two kinds of technologically advanced
beings, the ones which will kind of help and the ones which will want to
impose on us their exploitative ways... Those who kind of help only do so
in a limited way because 'undeveloped' ones require to learn the discipline
to prevent disasters that accompany advanced technologies.
Congruency and desirable sustainability becomes the standard test I use to
resolve among options. Thus accepting an idea ought to be independent of
what I happen to want, desire or believe... kind of like truth. Getting
into a deception happens to be easier than getting into the truth,
especially when what we hold may determine what we get...Destructive
patters are much more easily to accomplish and sustain than constructive
ones... Collaboration (BIDFAIR) is much harder to sustain than exploitation
(WIFM), even though BIDFAIR interactions can be more readily sustained and
produce more returns. The shortsightedness of individual benefits of the
moment prevent the overall encompassing better solution...
It seems that the standard business rule happens to be: entities want
others to buy whatever they happen to offer and want others to provide
whatever they happen to desire... forgetting that the ultimate objective of
sustaining a mutually enriching interaction that can be repeated and which
dignifies those involved.
Your statement "many people want things to change but only few have the
courage to actually do something about it", seems quite similar to: most
expect things to change without expecting to change themselves... which
from my position follows the same contradiction of accepting the idea of
exploitation when it benefits us while rejecting it when we become the
exploited ones...
So what can be done to eliminate the contradictions and incongruence
exhibited in society? When does the consumer instead of the provider become
liable for what they consume? When does someone have the right to infringe
upon my liberties and dictate & impose their set of beliefs upon me? (Seem
that the state imposes atheism upon many institutions instead of respecting
religious freedom)
What I perceive right now is that the only way to determine the outcome
requires a personal involvement that propitiates the desired outcome... I
keep wondering what will make others resolve for BIDFAIR instead of WIFM
and what can prevent the degradation of BIDFAIR into WIFM. Do there exists
latent leadership stiles or do humans develop the style in a dynamic
interplay with the situation? What I have found is that the Congruency and
desirable sustainability test resolve of the appropriateness of accepting
an idea independent of wants, desires or believes...
Cordially,
Esteban
____________________________________________________________________________
For your protection, this e-mail message has been scanned for viruses.
Visit us at http://www.neoris.com/