I worked this out once, now let me see if I can remember it:
-> I can extract blood from a stone.
-> I can motivate a stone to give blood.
-> I can empower a stone to motivate itself to give blood
-> I can inspire a stone to empower itself to motivate itself to give blood
-> I can create an invironment which inspires a stone to empower itself to
motivate itself to give blood
This represents varying degress of indirectness, yet regardless of the
indirectness, each represents a state of manipulation.
I think it was Kenneth Boulding, in "The World as a Total System," who
described 5 classes of system interaction:
-> parasitic - one way destructive interaction
-> prey/preditor - mutually beneficial destructive interaction
-> threat - if you do something I want you to I won't do something you don't
want me to
-> exchange - if you do something I want you to I will do something you want
me to
-> integrative - where you and I do something together because of what we
both want to accomplish
It is only when we get to the integrative mode of interaction is there a
potential for real synergy.
Gene Bellinger
From: CrbnBlu@aol.com