OK, I'm going to get controversial with regard to the idea of choice as
discussed by Willard just below, with special emphasis on why, given my
assertions, the systems view is so important.
I believe that the idea of choice is an illusion. It suggests that we
somehow can decide to do this or do that with some sense of freedom. And
lots of people would argue for this position. However, what I'd suggest
is that we don't choose or decide what we'll do. What we do instead is
encounter situations and then act in ways that are completely consistent
with our understanding of ourselves in relation to those situations at
that point in time. We can't choose how we understand; that's a function
of how our brains work. Thus we do not really choose what we'll do, we
just act in accordance with our understanding. Being aware that we're
doing this does not give us some sort of omnipotent control over the
process.
Our understandings may change via new experiences, new knowledge (which is
really just vicarious experience), and insight (a special kind of
experience of ourselves and of understanding itself), and thus we may act
differently in light of particular situations and our changing views.
Still, at any time, our behavior will act consistently with our
understanding right then.
For example, if you disagree with me, that will be because these ideas are
not consistent with your understanding of the idea of choice. You could
not do otherwise than to disagree with me. If I go to work everyday, this
is because going to work is what I understand to be consistent with my
best interest. Given that understanding, I could not do otherwise than to
go to work. Nor could you. If our understanding changes, you can be sure
we'll do something else that is consistent with that new understanding.
That's how things work. Our gift is being able to know that.
Now, if our understanding is that the world is a system and that all the
parts of the world are subsystems of the world, then that's going to
affect how you and I behave toward one another and toward the world. The
systems view reminds us that we are part of our organizations and of the
world. It suggests that to look out for ourselves, we must look out for
that of which we are a part. It suggests that to harm that world is to
harm ourselves. Of course we do an exceptionally good job of harming
ourselves these days, and that's because lots of us are unaware that our
individual welfare is directly tied to the organizations and larger world
of which we are a part. We are out there hurting the world big time (and
ourselves at the same time).
To relate these ideas to Chris Argyris's double loop learning, which
suggests that we need to seek dialogue, the exploration of our individual
assumptions, this is the same as saying we need to explore our individual
understandings. If we begin to see each other's understandings (or
assumptions), then we can make sense of our individual actions. Indeed,
we may come to have shared understanding, which makes it more likely that
we will behave in ways that are similar to one another and in our mutual
best interest. I guess Senge was suggesting the same thing in his
chapters on mental models and shared vision.
One final thought, I like to tell people that the Golden Rule is not some
goal we should strive for; it defines human relationships. By definition
we treat others as we would have them treat us, for good or ill. We are
constantly creating memories of ourselves in relation to others in the
minds of others. They will use these memories (and their understandings)
to guide their behavior with us in the future. We can't avoid this. Thus
we should always ask ourselves, how do we want this relationship to be
remembered. If it's an unhappy memory, you can be sure that will guide
that person's interaction with you or me in the future. If it's a
pleasant memory, you can be sure that will guide interaction in the future
as well. It's not quite this simple because we have all kinds of mixed
memories and all kinds of understandings, but at the heart of the matter
this is what's going on. We're likely to want to create positive memories
rather than negative memories if we are aware of this. I suppose this is
what karma is all about (a subject for another time).
To complete what has become a too-long essay, let me say that whatever
your view on choice, that's your view, consistent with your understanding,
just as what I have written here is consistent with my view. I have tried
to share my assumptions with the goal of exploring those with others,
which is, for me, the appeal of participating in this discussion group.
Thanks for the opportunity (and thanks, Rick, for dong such a good job
moderating it).
Best wishes for the holidays (and, as Willard says, every other day as
well),
John Woods
jwoods@execpc.com
>Sometimes we don't like the consequences of the choices we have to make.
>Nonetheless, we do make the choices, i.e., our choices are voluntary.
>Even if someone has a gun to our head, the choices we make are voluntary.
>
>For many of us, who have grown up in a psychologically dependent state, we
>think that the choices are not ours and that we are not responsible and
>that we don't have other choices. This system of collusion is
>self-perpetuating because so many people accept it without questioning it.
>It is easy to fall into the collusion because many of us during our
>formative years only saw as models people who acted as if they were
>independent. That is we saw a lot of people who lived out of win,
>win/lose, or lose/win. Very few of us grew up around people who practiced
>win/win and even fewer who practiced win/win or no deal.
>
>In any case, recognizing that we are all volunteers and we are responsible
>for those results we get in our adult lives enables us to get more of the
>results we want and in a way that adds value for all (practically
>speaking, many) of those people affected by us (and the environment).
>
>Well, Happy Holidays (and of course happy every other day for the rest of
>your life) to everyone out there.
>
>Willard Jule
>75272.3452@compuserve.com
-- jwoods@execpc.com (John Woods)