Situated on an island between Aeaea and the Rock of Scylla
lived the seductive Sirens. In the
heroic journeys of Odysseus and Orpheus, these mythic seductive beauties figure
mightily into the character refinement of the epic. In the former, the Sirens were temptresses
placed in the story to prove the capacity to suffer through the agony of
self-imposed enticement. In the latter,
the musical enchantresses served as the counterpoint to the power of a
persistent and inviolate "sweeter song". These beauties enticed men to their watery
graves by singing so sweetly that their irresistible attraction overcame
self-preservation and security.
I was reminded of this iconic myth at a recent
conference. Young men and women from
across the globe were invited to "pitch" their entrepreneurial
ventures to panels of acclaimed executives and investors. One by one, they came on stage for their 3
minute catwalk. They were attired in
Silicon Valley chic. Jeans, canvas
sneakers, t-shirts, and, if you're lucky, a sport coat. Fifteen years earlier, none of them would
have been thusly attired and, for that matter, no one in their communities
would have ever engaged in a solicitation for patronage without a remarkably
different decorum. But never mind that,
we were in the Mecca of the Valley rather than the peninsula. Each one of these "entrepreneurs"
entirely conformed to their perception of what it takes to attract monied moths
to their light and were doing their level best in projecting their
desirability. Longing for someone or
something that would evidence non-conformist thinking or bold risk taking, I
was offered tiny glimpses of possible exception but, in the main, saw global
youth joining the vampirish chorus of the Sirens.
But what was more disheartening was what was being promoted
as exciting new ventures. Rather than
identifying new technologies and utilities, the majority of creativity was
localization of a narrow swath of social media where the only innovation was
the millennia-old cipher called language.
From match making to job hunting to gaming - apparently what the Middle
East, Asia, and Africa really need is apps in local languages. And through the cunning use of - hold your
breath for this - language - whole enterprises could be born! Really?
Our brightest, most creative minds should be celebrated for coming up
with the idea of translation? And
seriously, is the 25% unemployment of youth in the Middle East going to be
solved by having an Arabic Linked-In or Monster?
When Edison decided to electrocute dogs, horses and
elephants to prove that Westinghouse's idea of alternating current (which we
now use safely) was dangerous, he was unaware that in a few short years, his
proof-of-danger exhibition would usher in a more "humane" form of
execution for humans. On August 6, 1890,
William Kemmler's 17-second almost death by electric chair was eulogized as
evidence that this "culmination of ten years of work and study,"
allowed humanity to "live in a higher civilization." He also couldn't have imagined that his epic
battle with Westinghouse - in which Nikola Tesla played the role of mercenary
pawn - would exterminate inquiry into distributed energy in any form other than
electricity. His innovation in
harnessing current would in fact form the dominant animating force for human
endeavors and concepts like wind, water, light, heat and gravity would be
marginalized to the point of endanger relegated to serve as
"alternatives" subjugated to feeding the electric currency-based
industrial and social mandate. Innovations
that once harnessed manual, animal, gravitational, magnetic, thermal, and
kinetic forces were enslaved to the 60 Hz, 120V archetype and to this day,
"over unity" and "free energy" still holds itself hostage
to "proofs" based on shoving energy into a 130 year old utility.
Social media and digital content - a miniscule fraction of
the illegitimate offspring of the electrical age - now reign supreme. Our modern innovators are encouraged and
seduced into applying their energies into progressively narrower applications
of an already constrained memetic scaffold.
But the Dawkinsian suggestion that replications of cultural units
(memes) should be discerned and integrated based on the mandate that best
serves their culture or "host" seems to be violated in the fact that
we're celebrating the trivial at the expense of the consequential. More Angry Birds in any language is just an
expanding flock of mentally disengaged humans.
The Words-With-Friends substitution for conversations with friends does
not a community make.
My friend Ed West has come up with a platform called
Hylo. It's a collaborative environment
in which individuals can express their capabilities to act and serve and define
places in which they could use provisions, support or assistance. Ed's trying to suggest that all human
endeavors - digital or analog - will benefit from an environment in which
capacity and capability are ever-present and sufficient to meet the needs of all
actors within a system. And since its
nascent stage, "it" (the impulse and the model) has manifest in real
estate redevelopment, social spaces, inter-personal relationships, new media,
and a host of other outcomes. It's using
the digital utility to enrich the analog world - not be dependent on or
enslaved to it. Ed's toiling to evidence
a model for what it means to step away from the conformity impulse and - with
Sirens as back-up singers - follow an Orphean tune.
Dear Dr Martin,
ReplyDeleteI’m highly intrigued by your BEM 2012 presentation you performed near Amsterdam. Your way of thinking and your approach motivates me to integrate non-monetary ways of compensation in my business and question everything even more.
In your presentation, you mention responsibility. But can you actually say that an individual IS responsible? You can make someone responsible, sure, or someone can claim it. But still, IS he? The primary response is typically “Yes, an individual is responsible for his actions!”. When looking deeper in how and why we act, we see that our actions are firmly linked to how and what we think. Is the average individual aware of his own thinking and along which patterns he thinks? Even more interesting are the questions: how is the way we think created and how much control do we have over this “essential” part of our existence? How much are we in charge of the creation of “how we think”. So, how does responsibility look now? Is the yes still a firm yes? Or is there something more to it and is there more to see beyond our fist hunch?
The results of my investigation into responsibility will be integrated into a methodology I developed to effectively improve the individual and aggregated levels of satisfaction within the triangle employer(s) - employees and (business) partners. Your work definitely inspires me to include more later on. Things like the contribution by the triangle to satisfaction (wellbeing) of community, society, country, planet, …
The methodology activates and motivates people to discover themselves and their own role in the individual and collective level of satisfaction. It shows that pointing to someone else for blame is pointing towards oneself with three fingers. And more things along these lines of logic.
If you are interested in having an open dialogue without any prior expectations, than please let me know.
Warm regards,
Jeroen Krieger
(The Netherlands)
jeroen [at] krieger [dot] nu