Spring Break
The way things are: an A/B system
Robert Sanchez
Issue date: 8/6/08 Section: Forum
Summer term at OSU: smaller class size and a relaxed atmosphere juxtaposed with three weeks of work packed into one. Hmm... It makes you think. With benefits come costs. The way things are, the way we manage our resources, population, civil infrastructure and government - these collective decisions we make are all based on trade-offs. We attempt, at least in theory, to reach decisions that benefit the most people while harming the fewest. But what manages and facilitates our collective decision-making process?
Basically, human affairs are currently managed by two dominant organizational systems. Let's call them System A and System B. In both systems, wealth is generated through the addition of human labor to natural resources, and monetary considerations are central, or at least important, to the decisions of nearly all individuals and groups.
These two systems combine to control global production and distribution of goods and services, and significantly impact what we as individuals and societies chose, what we imagine to be desirable.
These systems influence our scope of possibility and perception, what we imagine to be possible, and what we understand based on this imagination. Many organizational patterns and institutions could potentially exist: forms of government, economic systems, family and community dynamics. Some of these forms would certainly be worse than what currently exists.
Alternately, some of these forms would certainly be better. Some would just be different. Unless we realize that we are limited by imagination more than by objective barriers, we resign ourselves to living in a narrow world.
One could argue that our current organizational patterns - our preoccupation with wealth, and the two dominant systems that inform these patterns - lead to a general world view that hinders creativity and social evolution. Of course, a stifled creativity is good for the status quo and for those who desire to keep things the way they are. For those who imagine that life could be better than it is today, creativity and an open mind are essential.
Basically, human affairs are currently managed by two dominant organizational systems. Let's call them System A and System B. In both systems, wealth is generated through the addition of human labor to natural resources, and monetary considerations are central, or at least important, to the decisions of nearly all individuals and groups.
These two systems combine to control global production and distribution of goods and services, and significantly impact what we as individuals and societies chose, what we imagine to be desirable.
These systems influence our scope of possibility and perception, what we imagine to be possible, and what we understand based on this imagination. Many organizational patterns and institutions could potentially exist: forms of government, economic systems, family and community dynamics. Some of these forms would certainly be worse than what currently exists.
Alternately, some of these forms would certainly be better. Some would just be different. Unless we realize that we are limited by imagination more than by objective barriers, we resign ourselves to living in a narrow world.
One could argue that our current organizational patterns - our preoccupation with wealth, and the two dominant systems that inform these patterns - lead to a general world view that hinders creativity and social evolution. Of course, a stifled creativity is good for the status quo and for those who desire to keep things the way they are. For those who imagine that life could be better than it is today, creativity and an open mind are essential.
Note: writers will not reply to comments.
Be the first to comment on this story
Comments by registered users are approved by default.