Comprehension of Appropriateness (Part #15)
[Parts: First | Prev | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]
In exploring the possibility of bringing about a new mode of socio-economic organization appropriate to human development, this paper argues that no single mode is acceptable or is in itself wholly appropriate. Furthermore the appropriate mode by which people are inspired as an ideal is in practice inherently incomprehensible in its entirety, if only in order to function as a form of conceptual genetic pool of requisite variety, but especially since it is natural to prefer not to be consciously aware of the unpleasant realities and remedial measures which are the long-term (or geographically distant) price to be paid for the attractive facets favoured.
The appropriate response to this comprehension dilemma cannot, of necessity, be encapsulated in any particular theory, mode of action or metaphor. Rather the nature of the challenge calls for the use of sets of complementary tools, whether they be theories, modes of action or metaphors. It is through such sets of tools that greater degrees of appropriateness can be approximated, rather than through any particular one of them.
The special feature of this challenge is that the constituent elements of any such sets must of necessity be significantly different from one another, even to the point of mutual incompatibility and beyond. Indeed it would appear that the greater the degree of that incompatibility, containable within the set, the greater the probability that the required appropriateness will be successfully approximated.
Although the nature of such sets may be represented in approximate form by a complex of mathematical functions, their complexity must necessarily render them incomprehensible to most people, if not to everybody. And although the socio-political reality of such a situation may be portrayed as a pattern of struggle between alternative modesof action, the nature of everybody's active or tacit involvement in that struggle obscures any non-partisan understanding of the coherence associated with that pattern.
Whilst the situation may be more fully understood with the aid of particular metaphors, the degree of comprehension required appears to necessitate the use of sets of metaphors. At this point in time, the possibility of developing such sets of metaphors constitutes a significant unexplored opportunity. In the light of the arguments of this paper, the design of such sets amounts to the production of conceptual catalysts whereby the emergence of more appropriate patterns of socio-economic organization can be stimulated from many different perspectives. It is in the light of such sets of metaphors that an improved sense of appropriateness may emerge, both in terms of the ability to distinguish inappropriate, excessive policy initiatives (over-reactions and inadequate responses) and with respect to the timing of complementary policy initiatives (phasing and rhythm).
The challenge in the design of such sets of metaphors lies in discovering fruitful patterns, namely those which are likely to be more 'efficient' catalysts for appropriate human development. At this point it would appear that only metaphors of appropriate richness can provide adequate pointers and guidelines for such investigations. Thus metaphors themselves need to be explored to guide the design of appropriate sets of metaphors.
However, to the extent that this paper is perceived as exaggerating the argument for a particular perspective, that perspective requires that it should itself be vigorously dismissed in favour of other perspectives which complement it and counteract its necessary defects.
[Parts: First | Prev | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]