Technology and Wages LO7580

Michael Erickson (
Thu, 23 May 1996 10:47:51 -0700 (PDT)

Replying to LO7544 --

I've been noticing a trend pertaining to this conversation...

On Wed, 22 May 1996 wrote:
> I believe an increasing percentage of people will be devoted to:
> - knowledge *creation*
> - knowledge *distribution*

I believe it's not just knowledge creation/distribution that is taking
over, but creation or creativity in general is becoming the dominant
factor. When I say creativity, I mean artistic creation as well as
technological creation. (whitness the huge fees paid to Steven King
(writer) and Speilberg (jurasic park,) and others).

Having taught a number of people of all ages how to draw, I'm realizing
that our methods of education is the biggest inhibitor of my students
learning (being based on olde paradigm thinking) that tends to treat the
creative act as if it were something magical, rather that something that
is natural and normal.

I am continuously frustrated by the idea that I'm doing magic when in
truth, I am just seeing what is there and finding connections between
things. My grandfather did the same as I do-when he tinkered together
some of his un-usual solutions to problems he couldn't afford to throw
money at.

> This will tend to accelerate knowledge creation and assimilation -
> learning organizations which do not just learn what is (assimilation) but
> *develop new knowledge where needed* (creation).

This may put is into the mode of some kind of Advanced craftsmanship -
assuming you buy the model that says technological developement goes from
a rough improvisation to a craft to a science-then back around through the
loop again.

I think it's the "magic" of making connections that a). Is something most
of us can attain to and b). creativity is the next logical step in the
process -beyond science and/or the "information" socioty we now inhabit.

> Citing Drucker in Post Capitalist Society (paraphrase): knowledge and
> information capital have replaced the traditional factors of production
> (capital, money, labor) as the most important determinate of wealth.
> Focusing on accelerated knowledge creation and distribution should, thus,
> amass wealth more quickly - ie huge productivity gains will result, more
> *liesure* will be facilitated, and the wealth will be there to pay for it.

I don't see all that much liesure-I see a situation where "the faster you
can go - the faster you must go."

> I see a world that is *less* grim, Fred.

So do I IF we let go of how we think about things. If we become boxed up
in how we view our current "information world" then we will be just as
stuck in this new paradigm as we were in the olde one.

> One caution though: we could learn more and more about less and less
> (specialization) until we know everything about nothing. It is this
> highly specialized knowledge which should fall to automation (AI) while we
> humans should, I think, see a rebirth of the Rennaisance man and woman.

The Generalist is always in a stronger long term condition than the
specialist. How does the idea of a "generative generalist" sound?

Michael Erickson


Michael Erickson <>

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <> -or- <>