*I really liked that paper, John.* You finished it? I have only got to page 25, but I am hooked and will finish it this morning.
*We all are sinners in regards to our integrity and I welcome the day when we all* *can see the benefit of true integrity.* Yes, but be careful not to collapse sin/fault/wrong/morals with being out of integrity, there is no judgement or meaning or shaming with being out of integrity, just an opportunity to restore integrity by cleaning up the mess and continuing on with integrity. I have done several (quite a few) of the courses and read a book (the 3 laws of performance) based on this work and yet this white paper is giving me a deeper appreciation of integrity than I have previously had. It isn't just about fulfilling on your promises, it is about playing a big enough game that you have to clean up messes that will occur and recognize that cleaning up messes IS honoring your word. That is how such huge increases is performance occur when just integrity is worked on. Another thing that struck me is that if I imagine a world/country/future that really doesn't work, what I notice is that it really is a lack of integrity (whole, complete and perfect) that causes such extreme unworkability. The problem seems clearer when looked at from the outside without all the internal justifications for being out of integrity. Maybe the main thing that is invisible is the follow on effects that being out of integrity has, the way it spreads and this kills any justification for being out of integrity. And perhaps the worst part is that anyone believes there is any justification for not cleaning up once integrity has been breached (which is sometimes necessary) Maybe being out of integrity can be justified in exceptional circumstances, but not cleaning up afterwards is the worst part. I watched the Movie "Extraterrestrial" the other week (I downloaded it illegally, I do not give my word to keeping copyright laws) and the take-away from this rather good movie (if there were an option to fund this film makers next movie I would contribute) it would be that the US Government and Military is far more out of integrity than even some rather nasty 'Grey' aliens. And while it is just a movie, the actions by the military were predictable because of the lack of integrity that everyone knows exists in these organizations. Or a line by 'Root' in Person of Interest that the US Government consists of "the most laughably corrupt people imaginable". And is this a show coming out of Iran? No, it is a show coming out of the US, and the viewer is not meant to shout at the screen that Root is crazy, but lament and chuckle that she is pretty much right. A policy of Plausible deniability has left them with none, even in things they should not even be suspected of or are almost impossible. A person or organization out of integrity works no better than a machine that is out of integrity. John On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Lennart Thornros <[email protected]> wrote: > I really liked that paper, John. > It certainly has validity to most things in our society. > I believe that we will see a paradigm shift in economy and in management / > leadership. > Today information is so fast and so accurate that 'blowing smoke in > people's eyes' > does not work any longer. It did work for old kings and communistic > leaders with > monopoly on the information. > We all are sinners in regards to our integrity and I welcome the day when > we all > can see the benefit of true integrity. > If anyone has a doubt just take examples of how we excuse our lack of > integrity. > “Everyone else is doing it.” > “We’ve always done it.” > “This is the way this business works.” > “If we don’t do it, somebody else will.” > “Nobody’s hurt by it.” > “It doesn’t matter how it gets done, as long as it gets done.” > “It works, so let’s not ask too many questions.” > “No one’s going to notice and besides we will fix it before they do.” > “It’s legal, but . . .” > “It’s too expensive.” > “It has to be done to save the organization, and by the way a lot of > jobs.” > > I will plug for my believe that it requires organizations to be smaller > and autonomous. > GE and GM and big governmental organizations just provide the backdrop for > all those excuses. They do not fly in small organizations. > Most of those statements would not be accepted in your family but are > common at work. > > Another take from this paper is that patents are out dated as an > institution. > First of all the patent office has little integrity. (No LENR can be > patented as it > conflicts with the establishment.) > Second the patent will be used to steal the invention and define how to > circumvent it. > Once again it had its place when information was slow - not today. > > Best Regards , > Lennart Thornros > > www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com > [email protected] > +1 916 436 1899 > 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 > > “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a > commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 5:43 PM, John Berry <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Of course there really isn't a neatly described scientific method. >> >> But I just read a quote that underlies what must be recognized by anyone >> interested in a scientific revolution... >> >> *Kuhn makes clear in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, the >> requirement for change in a scientific paradigm does not arise from even * >> *the best current practices of a given science.* >> >> This is from this paper I am reading about the important (and correct >> definition of) Integrity in economics: >> >> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1985594 >> >> This reminds me of Rossi's device and the anomalous EM, the anomalous >> variability of nuclear products. >> >> Clearly the best practice in conventional nuclear science does not apply >> to this new area. >> >> The same applies to my aetheric research. >> >> John >> > >
