Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Faith or Obedience

"Control the framework (questions) and you have a way to sustain power? The framework has to remain relevant to those who are impacted by it then, I suspect."

"An issue of discernment then?"

"I think so."

The biggest vulnerability to those who would choose the available framework(s) for others is losing track of what is relevant to the people who did not participate in that choice and are subject to it. A given stewardship of a constituency lasts only as long as it is a best choice.

And one should not confuse ONLY choice with BEST choice. Without a robust competitive environment, an only choice's efficacy will naturally deteriorate for lack of something with which to compare it.

"One can argue that mistakes of an abstraction engine constitute 'sin'. Put another way, actions of the unmoderated ego are short-sighted and often destructive. Creating symbols is a key component of putting high level abstraction to work. In the process of doing so, we humans can inadvertently carry along unintended consequences. Discernment is best a collaborative process.  Our individuality then blends the discernment soup making it 'tastier' (more effective) in the process.

"At long last ..."
"Difficult to believe that action based on fear is as wise as action based wisdom. If 'faith' is based on fear one would logically surmise the proponent is asking one to switch off one of the mind's greatest capacities, to anticipate a likely outcome. If 'faith' is based on historical success, the contributing detail can be disregarded and action on the belief can proceed with an expectation that it is, in some important global sense, desirable. In a group that encourages robust communication the high-integrity 'faith' effect is amplified dramatically. Blind obedience - not so much."

© 2010 Buzz Hill

No comments:

Post a Comment