Hi,
Brian Gordon posted:
> Greg Haworth and I have been having an offline discussion about the
> dangers of organizations being primarily motivated by profit
I am, and perhaps others are, having difficulty following the arguments
when the word(s) 'organization(s)' is used seemingly as a euphemism for
for-profit corporations (fpc's). There are other types of organizations.
Perhaps, we could clear that up by being a bit more precise?
Brian Gordon posted:
>Greg has made the point that LOs will simply make such organizations more
>efficient at destroying the planet
I have, in fact, experienced repeated approach-avoidance conflicts with
the subject of this list. I am strongly attracted to learning and learning
about learning as well as new models and tools for experiencing both. To
the contrary, I am repulsed that the primary driving energy in the field
is derived from the motive of higher profits for fpc's. (That perception,
being mine, is open to debate, of course.)
I am repulsed at the most basic level because fpc's are by definition
anti-life. They were and are created to make profits. All significant
action and energy in the system is value-defined in terms of profit.
Profit is not life-affirming. It is power and score affirming- basically,
a win-lose game in the short run, a lose-lose game in the long run. I do
not wish to support this game or to assist in enabling the players to make
higher scores.
Perhaps, we (the previous posters and I) are simply complaining about the
use of tools as is common in the public discourse about weapons.
Going back to mediating with my conflicts,
Greg Brown
theraven@stlnet.com
--"Greg Brown" <theraven@stlnet.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>