Very true Don - yet idiocy is also unassailable. I have to go with Vam (amended by Gabby) on the potential of leadership to bring good change, but we won't get to that if we don't free ourselves of much that is bad in current practice.
On 23 Sep, 10:39, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > You are confusing the concept of potentiality with the level of > factuality that already includes the concept of potentiality. I > explained that to Lee just recently in another thread. > > Shouting at the so-perceived deaf with exclamation marks doesn't make > your truth any truer to them. > > On 23 Sep., 09:02, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > " I wonder if you are missing the language point - we can't just take > > 'leadership' as a 'good'. ... at least in our apparent worship of > > it." > > > Worship of what ? Leadership ? Indeed, the language, to be " > > worshiping " leadership ! ? When " Leadership is just an asset, quite > > as many others, and is just as amenable to abuse and misuse. > > > Again, there are indeed massive powers ranged against the potential > > for emancipation. It's just that the fact is elementary. What next ? > > I see leadership as part of the solution, even of the problems it > > itself causes. > > > We, those who are capable and have the opportunity, need to get to > > work, despite the deep and pervasive problems all about us. Writing a > > 50,000 word tome and converting one single individual to this solution > > providing application of leadership ... both have merit, not more or > > less ! > > > On Sep 23, 12:32 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Nothing wrong with what you say Vam. I wonder if you are missing the > > > language point - we can't just take 'leadership' as a 'good'. I sort > > > of go with Orn's point on 'thought' in this sense too - at least in > > > our apparent worship of it. The animal situation is more complex than > > > not being a product of thought. I would not challenge that animals > > > have collective decision-making processes, but am inclined towards > > > thinking this indicates much we believe is the product of our thought > > > has earlier origins. The rub is in what Francis does above - the > > > ideas are great and there is a potential for emancipation, yet there > > > is a massive 'default power' ranged against them. > > > > On 22 Sep, 19:56, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Why must " leadership " be understood only in the political context ? > > > > May be, by doing so, we are giving a meaning to leadership that is > > > > needlessly restrictive. > > > > > When I think of leadership, I have in view a population with varying > > > > measures of ability ( or disability, constraints to ability ) to deal > > > > with looming challenges and tasks, opportunities and threats ... to > > > > take steps in the dark, in uncharted areas, in non - being ... in an > > > > attemp to deliver on what is required, illuminate the terrain, chart > > > > the paths forward, reveal the being. > > > > > This will always be provided by individuals or groups, who 'd ' climb > > > > the Everest ' because it is there. The population could happily > > > > follow. > > > > > I would say we require such leadership everywhere ... in science, > > > > philosophy, society, economy and business, politics and law ... > > > > everywhere. > > > > > And quite as everything with us, leaderships are prone to be corrupt, > > > > subject to greed and ' attaining their levels of incompetence.' > > > > > This calls for more leadership capabilities amongst us, not less, to > > > > continuously replace the old. And, technology supported systems in > > > > place to constantly monitor and control with a parliament and an > > > > independent judiciary, vibrant media, right to information and > > > > vigilance mechanisms, to effectively deal with deviants. > > > > > From what I see, it would take us ( in India ) decades before the > > > > system and individuals evolve to the possibility more ideal leadership > > > > outcomes. > > > > > But that, that we are not yet evolved enough to deliver better than > > > > what we are doing today, is no reason for us to devalue leadership > > > > itself ! > > > > > As a pure asset, leadership is irreplaceable. If I had my way, I'd > > > > multiply it many maniy fold, everywhere ... democratise it, so it > > > > does not remain priviledged and actually be less exceptional or rare > > > > than it is today. > > > > > On Sep 22, 10:58 pm, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > There are fascinating and exciting ideas in the concepts of > > > > > deliberative democracy/deliberative polling. Of course they blow our > > > > > conventional models of power and leadership apart. The second major > > > > > problem is that they make the party systems in our parliamentary > > > > > democratic systems obsolete. And that's an area where so many vested > > > > > interests are dug in so deep that, even if an inspired "leader" might > > > > > be tempted to push ideas coming form the "deliberative" corner, I > > > > > think he/she would be quickly and efficiently shafted by the behind- > > > > > the-scene power-brokers in the (pc-dominated, therefore no longer > > > > > smoke-filled) back-rooms. > > > > > > The rumbustious old Bavarian politician, Franz-Josef Strauss, once > > > > > described a particular definitional comparison from the positive to > > > > > the superlative as going: > > > > > > enemy ... deadly enemy ... party colleague > > > > > > Francis > > > > > > On 22 Sep., 18:55, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > I think the history of leadership shows it is pathologically > > > > > > abhorrent > > > > > > face Vam - but most terms are noble and ignoble. Even when we all > > > > > > think current leadership is bad we can only (if lucky enough) vote > > > > > > in > > > > > > another one. This is a great survival context for leadership, if > > > > > > not > > > > > > for us. George Gallop thought his opinion polls would greatly > > > > > > strengthen democracy, but leadership has rather usurped them. We > > > > > > have > > > > > > the technology for more deliberative polling (I have an academic > > > > > > paper > > > > > > should anyone be interested) and have had a few experiments. The > > > > > > key > > > > > > to living with more of the noble face of leadership starts in more > > > > > > communication of opinion and removing one of the ignoble sides - > > > > > > that > > > > > > of promoting false opinion and propaganda. Deliberative Polling is > > > > > > just one idea - we could also move towards much more localised > > > > > > accounting within a system developed from it. All cultural systems > > > > > > of > > > > > > leadership I've seen rely on some kind of control of the leadership. > > > > > > I suspect now that leadership is everywhere it isn't needed, > > > > > > controlling us, broadly as an unfriendly parasite. We need > > > > > > decision- > > > > > > making in our hands, but even something as obvious as this comes > > > > > > with > > > > > > the knowledge the wrong form of this just slows everything to a > > > > > > trickle as most people can't see beyond their own immediate > > > > > > interests. We need to recognise the Doublespeak of easy sloganising > > > > > > in a path to demystifying social cohesion. I believe the > > > > > > spreadsheet > > > > > > could come to our aid here - as an example of technology enabling > > > > > > decisions in a deliberative context. I must say, old friend, that > > > > > > once I discovered what 'adult talk' to be, I have had little time > > > > > > for > > > > > > it! > > > > > > > On 22 Sep, 16:35, Vam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > " The leadership meme seems to support itself well in survival > > > > > > > and we > > > > > > > are not addressing this well in our discourse." > > > > > > > > This seeming support for leadership in your view is a stranger > > > > > > > for me > > > > > > > here, Neil, considering how pathologically abhorrent an idea you > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > consistently presented it as in your posts here in past. What > > > > > > > happened, in this late age ? > > > > > > > > No, this is a genuine surprise I express. Especially since a ' > > > > > > > collective ' leadership is largely theoretical ... yes, Athens > > > > > > > like ! > > > > > > > > This is adult talk I am attempting. It seldom happens. So if > > > > > > > doesn't > > > > > > > now, I wouldn't be surprised ! > > > > > > > > On Sep 22, 6:27 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Workers of the world were supposed to unite - sadly the > > > > > > > > employers > > > > > > > > did! On greed (somewhat tangentially), we are discovering links > > > > > > > > between emotions and how we come to 'define terms' in our > > > > > > > > arguments. > > > > > > > > Disgust has had a lot of attention in links to morality. Greed > > > > > > > > would > > > > > > > > seem to have some moderated use in putting things away for a > > > > > > > > rainy > > > > > > > > day. In terms of it leaving the hearts of 'people' (no doubt an > > > > > > > > unwanted PC point over Orn here!) I go for a democratic > > > > > > > > technology. > > > > > > > > Like Don I don't fear other peoples, though I'd move from > > > > > > > > dictators to > > > > > > > > 'hierarchies' - these (including ours) are now often 'false > > > > > > > > democracies'. For me, the answers lie in technology - though > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > cannot be the 'heartless form'. The leadership meme seems to > > > > > > > > support > > > > > > > > itself well in survival and we are not addressing this well in > > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > discourse. > > > > > > > > > On 22 Sep, 08:41, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > “…Anyone notice certain harmonies in this stuff and the > > > > > > > > > reaction of > > > > > > > > > Obama's modest national health plans? …” - archy > > > > > > > > > > Yes, much of the same revision of history along with using > > > > > > > > > propaganda > > > > > > > > > (lies) and fear tactics by those with power. Unfortunately, > > > > > > > > > the ‘rest > > > > > > > > > of the story’ includes: > > > > > > > > > > “…The Marian propagandists appealed to a yearning for peace > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > stability. But a whole generation had grown up since Henry’s > > > > > > > > > break > > > > > > > > > with Rome, and much of the Marian effort surely represents the > > > > > > > > > unseemly spectacle of men trying to catch the genie of free > > > > > > > > > thought > > > > > > > > > and put it back in the bottle. Protestantism, certainly, was a > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
