Categories
2015 January

Interesting Read-Metaread

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/10/young-minds-in-critical-condition/

as I read through this (I luckily found myself in a critical path, hehe)…

as I’m working/focusing on levels right now in LBMS, I see what the professor is discussing as more than just the experience-led opportunity but that the level of thinking is at play.

at one level of thinking, it’s easy for us to look for the critical elements and discover their continuity per se…

at another level, it’s also important (tim pointed out in the 2 quarters and a dollar example), how thinking is not about the literal meaning, but other factors that might have been going on in the process…

at the level of thinking where the critical work is done, we lose or never find the ability to look at the why it might exist in that way, such as the 2 quarters being taken by the boy…

what might be happening in culture today was noted by the author as “sophistication”–a┬áterm I started using in coach training more than 2 decades ago to describe horizontal and oblique complexity (which builds density and frequency in most horizontal, stripping off parts of the vertical to create oblique maturation)…

while that is mouthful, it’s becoming more clear to me that what is occurring in society is a plateauing of hierarchical capability and we are plowing more and more energy and information into sophisticating our level of thinking rather than understanding ourselves and why we think the way we do–I think an indirect point about the context of the author’s concerns…

much of what can be explained today is what I call a level mismatch…

where the conditions/role, situation is an inappropriate match for the capability–which destined to solve, sophisticates the underlying level of capability in mostly horizontal fashion, guided by some oblique sophisticating and maturation of vertical elements…

that’s how we are mostly dealing with complexity, and of course it’s ok, because we can…

however, as designers, and scaffoldists (you heard it here first, hehe)…

we need to get/grok that people are using particular tools that emerge at particular levels of thinking/feeling (in the case of ego complexity and emotional intelligence)…

and what are likely level mismatches between capability and complexity are being attributed to other cause and effect…

I am seeing (because I am looking) more and more cause and effect that should be attributed to this level mismatch, than what is popular, in fact (IMHO), MOST of what is happening today is clearly level mismatch, I see it among the poor and among the rich alike, in different forms.

The metasystematic design and scaffolding tools in the Leadership Behavior Modeling System that is emerging @F-L-O-W is going to provide the tools necessary for designers and scaffoldists to formulate behavioral design and scaffolds such that more energy and information flows into productivity, rather than in the infrastructure of productivity, if you catch my meaning.

Our personal, and perhaps collective energy and information is finite (at least IN TIME) and therefore it is a resource to be guarded and guided…personal change is much LESS efficient than using fitting tools…and designing behavior and productivity plans are one way to increase efficiency, but it must be done absent in large part, of BS.

mike

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *