LO & Big Layoffs LO6318 [ self-evident truths question-mark]

Sat, 30 Mar 1996 09:33:24 -0800

Replying to LO6230 --

Rol and I seem to have started a conversation which probably needs to escape
from this thread.

>From his last post

>If said, "So how do we create societies in which it is in the interests of
the phylum Corporation to act in our interest as well as its own?"

>To which I responded, "It's a great question. It assumes that we a) have
a common interest, and b) that we know what it is, and c) therefore a
corporation can also easily know what that common interest is.

>All our recent history says that none of a, b, or c hold. Now what should
a corporation do?"

>In abbreviated form, If responded, "If however we can get clearer on your
a and b then it may be that societies can set or evolve norms, values,
polical structures etc that encourage the evolution of appropriate
corporate behaviour.

>What a and b seem to me to amount to is a declaration into the world of
some [more?] truths that those who declare them hold to be self-evident.
The last time that was tried it laid the foundation for the emergence of a
fairly successful 'corporation'."

---- End quotes ----

>If, I am completely in agreement with your position on this. I am
expressing concern only with the notion that corporations may somehow
perceive self-evident truths and be able to act on them without the
leadership of society at large.

Rol, I too am in complete agreement. I do not see how corporations can be
expected to perceive and act on self-evident truths without the leadership
of society at large.

So what does society at large want? Is it ready to set the rules of the
corporate game to encourage such behaviour by corporations. Michael
Rothschild in Bionomiocs [Futura 1992] and Tom Lloyd in The 'Nice' Company
[Bloomsbury 1990] give example ideas starting from the proposition that
corporations are organisms bent on their own survival.

You went on

>I perceive a fair amount of we/they dichotomy on these very difficult issues
-- both on this list and in the world at large. If only it weren't for
[examples deleted]

People always talk as if THEIR values are self-evidently the correct ones.
Unfortunately that is seldom the case.

Again I agree completely. Dare I say it is self evident to me?

Then [ cutting a bit]
> we should perhaps try to take the next step forward. But it is we who
should do that, not not any subset of our society. Another opportunity for
personal responsibility.

Again I agree and you have got me reflecting on whether I personally act
consistently with my values whatever they are. Yet I also detect some
shared concerns and personal beliefs on this list [for sustainability, for
learning, for a future that is not simply a reflection of some patterns
that have worked well for 100 or 500 years. Is there any way of creating
or at least starting some declaration of those values which become
self-evident only because those who declare them say so. Until this
happens, until personal responsibilities interconnect into a wider system
of values will anything change?

P.S Sorry for the delayed reply. The gremlins delayed digest 578

If Price
The Harrow Partnership
Pewley Fort Guildford UK
Now on 101701.3454@compuserve.com



Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>