REPLY Society Strategy Development (SD6979)

[SDMAIL Jack Harich]

Posted by  Jack Harich <register at thwink.org>



SDMAIL Bill Harris wrote:
> Posted by  Bill Harris <bill_harris at facilitatedsystems.com>
>
> - From what I read of these strategy ideas, I gather that we as a group
> think the world of 2028 will likely be the world of 2008 with a bit more
> age and wisdom (especially wisdom of the sort we offer).
>
> Yet we have an early and long tradition of SD work that suggests we may
> be on the threshold of major transitions due to a growing population and
> shortages of food, energy, clean water and air, and the like.
>
> Do we think those changes, perhaps first discussed in the Club of Rome
> work, are unlikely?  As I've blogged about a number of times (e.g.,
> http://www.facilitatedsystems.com/weblog/2008/03/more-on-ltg.html), the
> "outside" world seems to be starting to get the message of LTG -- why
> not us?
(snip)
> In the spirit of initiating thought about various scenarios, here's an
> alternative future (and not necessarily one I seek):
>
>   There won't be a global SD meeting in 2028 (and may not have been for
>   some years), for the time delays inherent in the ship crossing to
>   wherever it would have been scheduled are too great.  Air travel has
>   disappeared except for the most urgent purposes and by the wealthiest
>   people, and such uses are hotly debated for their perceived waste of
>   shrinking oil reserves and impact on global climate change, now seen
>   to be all too real.
(long snip)

It would seem from this scenario that the Society would be better off 
spending its time solving the "limits to growth" sustainability problem, 
rather than solving its own "no growth" problem.

This runs along the lines of the SD rule of don't model a system, model 
a problem. Or in science, solve the specific problem first, and then 
develop a more powerful generalization from that. The latter is the real 
payoff.

So far, all that's really happened is that the Limits to Growth project 
and book of 1972 identified the sustainability problem. Realistically, 
no comprehensive solution is in sight. The complete problematique 
continues to grow exponentially worse, just as the World2 and World3 
models predicted, unless....

If the Society could make a crucial contribution to the sustainability 
problem analysis and solution, what it learns from that would (?) lead 
to solution of its own smaller and more generalized problem. SD would 
have hit a second home run.

Only this time, 46 years later, the bases are loaded.

If SD can't solve large social problems of critical importance, does it 
really make sense to gaze at our navels and contemplate how to make the 
field grow?

Thanks for the thoughtful scenario, Bill.

Jack
Posted by  Jack Harich <register at thwink.org>
posting date  Mon, 28 Apr 2008 17:12:06 -0400