21st Century Philosopher: The CONLIB©
Abdul - Kadir O. Etuazim
July 28, 2005
Do not check the word CONLIB© in any dictionary or encyclopedia yet. Its existence has never been made public until today. You are privileged to be one of the potential millions, if not billions, who would have the bragging rights to reading it first. The birth of the word came in my graduate class on Ethics. In one of our many arguments, I was accused of not having a known philosophy. At the end of the day, after explaining my different take on varying scenarios, I was put on the spot to name my philosophy. I just heard the word CONLIB© flow from my mouth. Then who is a CONLIB© ?
A CONLIB© does not hold static views on issues even in the face of evidence to the contrary. It is not possible to pigeonhole a CONLIB© into hardcore conservative or die hard liberal camp. Issues at stake are seen to transcend geo – political and socio-economic gibberish. In addition, philosophy to a CONLIB© is not such that opposing views are regarded as evil and the protagonists must be annihilated. Philosophy to the CONLIB© is dictated by facts and circumstances laced with other antecedents. The essential skeleton remains the same; the shapes could be different. A CONLIB© is one who uses modern day tools and common sense to analyze issues and take a stand.
The CONLIB© utilizes the tools to make sense in a world that behaves true to the basic natural law: THE ONLY PERMANENT THING IS CHANGE. In other words, philosophical stand is treated as a moving target and not as a fixed and unchangeable position. A CONLIB© does not jump an idea, some absurd, because it comes from another CONLIB© just to be seen as acting in sync. This herd-like thinking is common among the non-CONLIB© crowd. The first tirade fired by an arrowhead of any of the two camps becomes a group mantra. One of the tools is found in the realm of quantum physics.
The mention of physics should not serve as a turn off. Quantum physics deals with the incredibly small. The interest is how matter interacts with matter. This evolved as a result of the fact that physics’ laws are, generally, rubbished when applied at the micro level. Quantum physics has as one of its anchors, Chaos Theory. The theory posits multifaceted and unpredictable changes when the initial conditions in a complex system occur. These changes pose challenges. Change is the only permanent phenomenon in nature. Change, according to the theory, results in seeming disorganized state of affairs. However, when the change is observed the difference is in shape not structure. There is always a pattern of repetition of the initial structure. Therefore, it is incumbent on the observer to adapt as transformations occur.
One of the kernels of Chaos Theory, as applied to management and other segments of life, is to allow freedom of all sorts. What we regard as a vacuum does not exist. Nature abhors vacuum and ensures that it ever comes up. Since change is inevitable, trying to dam the waters of change could result in near death experience. The best way to flow with changing situations is to lay down simple standards of expectations; simple values and freedoms; and allow individuals to come to terms with new situations. This is what our philosophy should be. Dogmatic adherence is not one of the qualities of a CONLIB© .
Physics has always played a part in management theories and by extension on ideology. Put differently, there is proven connection between new physics’ laws and other spheres of human endeavor. For example, the advent of Newtonian age led to the invention of the motorcar and other technological marvels that transformed the world in the 20th century. The Newtonian epoch had its principles that governed management and by extension politics and other fields. The results of adopting and adapting quantum physics to every day life are evident to the discerning eyes. A good example can be found in new management techniques that deemphasize linear and rigid structures. Successful companies, such as Microsoft and Virgin Group embraced these practices ahead of the curve. It is the quest to adapt to transformation that leads to new management practices.
Man is always scared of the unknown yet that is what we wake up daily to face. We want to maintain equilibrium. A present equilibrium cannot remain ad infinitum. As such, the very notion of striving to be seen as being constantly identifiable with the extreme position of any an ideology is as stupid as it is unnatural. Conversely, deriding one who – while keeping to the structure of his/her ideology - supports views attributable to the other side is a manifestation of extremist and fundamentalist mindset. Unfortunately, this attitude permeates the world today. Purging this outlook would save us from the precipice that humanity is at its brink. By the way, who decreed any thought to be sacrosanct to the left or the right?
Margaret J. Wheatley’s “Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World”, argues against maintaining equilibrium at all costs. She goes on to hypothesize that there is always order in a seeming chaotic environment. The thesis of the book is predicated on the aforementioned Chaos Theory. Equilibrium is defined a state of inertia. Furthermore, disequilibrium is welcomed as a vehicle to a new equilibrium that sustains evolution. The stifling of voices for and of change is condemned. These, the voices that is, should be seen as the real protectors against intolerance. Respect should be the appropriate word and not tolerance. They are the building blocks of growth and development. Love or hate it, change has been here, is here and will continue to be here.
Wheatley advances the cause of encouraging change by stating “ When leaders strive for equilibrium and stability by imposing control, constricting people’s freedom and inhibiting local changes, they only create the conditions that threaten the organization’s survival.” A CONLIB© sees the leaders as the ideologues on both sides of the divide. Their presence bestrides all spheres of life. They have peculiar key words or phrases to signal an attack. Illustrations include “This is unacceptable” “ It is inappropriate”. Both extremists share one thing in common - the deployment of the argument of force. A CONLIB© sets out with the force of argument. He/she accepts provable and logical opinions that are contrary to his/her earlier stance.
A CONLIB© acknowledges the impact of self-reference based on traditions, dreams, history, experience and values. The structure, invariably, remains an evolutionary journey towards greater freedoms and improvement of the world. Cognizance of the self-referencing points deters a CONLIB© from filtering the world through parochial lenses. The points also portray a CONLIB© as a truly globalized citizen capable of breaking artificial boundaries created by fundamentalist and extremist reasoning.
Stemming from the above, any delusionary desire to hold on to the past when the present is different is akin to racing a 1930 formula one car against present models. Anyone that harbors such a mindset would be a prime candidate for psychiatric examinations. Therefore, a CONLIB© is, also, one who is observant enough to change old beliefs in the light of new knowledge and facts. The disturbing reality is that man has refused to learn to survive in an environment that is in constant flux. Deep down, we deceive ourselves that things will remain static.
Unfortunately, we are now at a point where it is a badge of honor to be labeled a bare knuckle conservative; and it is equally gratifying to be branded the poster face of hard-core liberalism. Such accolades account for most of the problems facing humanity. Many people as so pig-headed in their extreme philosophies – sure bet for airtime and media exposure – that would-be moderates are forced into either camp for the sake of relevance. No one wants to be dispassionate in appraisals any longer. The attitude has frighteningly shifted to my way or the highway. This is a recipe for disaster.
A CONLIB© ought not be caught in such a web. Any accusation of a CONLIB© trying to waffle should be ignored with scant ceremony. The emergence of CONLIB© Ó cannot be more auspicious than in this period when there is so much confusion all over. Given that knowledge is mutable and that there is room for further discoveries and improvements, developing CONLIB© attributes could serve as a shock absorber of the effects of rapid changes. The fear about spreading this new philosophy is mainly due to the resistance to change by the leaders. Leaders refer to the media, print and electronic, which determine what should make headlines. Thanks to the Internet. The CONLIB© philosophy can spread like summer fire within a short time
There is a lot of meaning in the cliché ‘there is nothing new under the sun’. Early philosophers registered their mastery of the basic principles underlying the theories enumerated above in allegorical and categorical statements. . For example, it is held that one cannot step into the same river twice. Initial philosophical theories remain the bedrock of many, probably all, modern philosophical schools. Though original thoughts have been improved upon over the years, a trace back would - however - lead to a common source. This is in keeping with changes occurring in shape not structure. If you have any of the CONLIB© characteristics listed above or can work on developing them, then tell the world: I AM A CONLIB© . For me, I am a CONLIB© !!! It is better to be wrong some of the time, than to be wrong all the time.
A CONLIB© does not hold static views on issues even in the face of evidence to the contrary. It is not possible to pigeonhole a CONLIB© into hardcore conservative or die hard liberal camp. Issues at stake are seen to transcend geo – political and socio-economic gibberish. In addition, philosophy to a CONLIB© is not such that opposing views are regarded as evil and the protagonists must be annihilated. Philosophy to the CONLIB© is dictated by facts and circumstances laced with other antecedents. The essential skeleton remains the same; the shapes could be different. A CONLIB© is one who uses modern day tools and common sense to analyze issues and take a stand.
The CONLIB© utilizes the tools to make sense in a world that behaves true to the basic natural law: THE ONLY PERMANENT THING IS CHANGE. In other words, philosophical stand is treated as a moving target and not as a fixed and unchangeable position. A CONLIB© does not jump an idea, some absurd, because it comes from another CONLIB© just to be seen as acting in sync. This herd-like thinking is common among the non-CONLIB© crowd. The first tirade fired by an arrowhead of any of the two camps becomes a group mantra. One of the tools is found in the realm of quantum physics.
The mention of physics should not serve as a turn off. Quantum physics deals with the incredibly small. The interest is how matter interacts with matter. This evolved as a result of the fact that physics’ laws are, generally, rubbished when applied at the micro level. Quantum physics has as one of its anchors, Chaos Theory. The theory posits multifaceted and unpredictable changes when the initial conditions in a complex system occur. These changes pose challenges. Change is the only permanent phenomenon in nature. Change, according to the theory, results in seeming disorganized state of affairs. However, when the change is observed the difference is in shape not structure. There is always a pattern of repetition of the initial structure. Therefore, it is incumbent on the observer to adapt as transformations occur.
One of the kernels of Chaos Theory, as applied to management and other segments of life, is to allow freedom of all sorts. What we regard as a vacuum does not exist. Nature abhors vacuum and ensures that it ever comes up. Since change is inevitable, trying to dam the waters of change could result in near death experience. The best way to flow with changing situations is to lay down simple standards of expectations; simple values and freedoms; and allow individuals to come to terms with new situations. This is what our philosophy should be. Dogmatic adherence is not one of the qualities of a CONLIB© .
Physics has always played a part in management theories and by extension on ideology. Put differently, there is proven connection between new physics’ laws and other spheres of human endeavor. For example, the advent of Newtonian age led to the invention of the motorcar and other technological marvels that transformed the world in the 20th century. The Newtonian epoch had its principles that governed management and by extension politics and other fields. The results of adopting and adapting quantum physics to every day life are evident to the discerning eyes. A good example can be found in new management techniques that deemphasize linear and rigid structures. Successful companies, such as Microsoft and Virgin Group embraced these practices ahead of the curve. It is the quest to adapt to transformation that leads to new management practices.
Man is always scared of the unknown yet that is what we wake up daily to face. We want to maintain equilibrium. A present equilibrium cannot remain ad infinitum. As such, the very notion of striving to be seen as being constantly identifiable with the extreme position of any an ideology is as stupid as it is unnatural. Conversely, deriding one who – while keeping to the structure of his/her ideology - supports views attributable to the other side is a manifestation of extremist and fundamentalist mindset. Unfortunately, this attitude permeates the world today. Purging this outlook would save us from the precipice that humanity is at its brink. By the way, who decreed any thought to be sacrosanct to the left or the right?
Margaret J. Wheatley’s “Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World”, argues against maintaining equilibrium at all costs. She goes on to hypothesize that there is always order in a seeming chaotic environment. The thesis of the book is predicated on the aforementioned Chaos Theory. Equilibrium is defined a state of inertia. Furthermore, disequilibrium is welcomed as a vehicle to a new equilibrium that sustains evolution. The stifling of voices for and of change is condemned. These, the voices that is, should be seen as the real protectors against intolerance. Respect should be the appropriate word and not tolerance. They are the building blocks of growth and development. Love or hate it, change has been here, is here and will continue to be here.
Wheatley advances the cause of encouraging change by stating “ When leaders strive for equilibrium and stability by imposing control, constricting people’s freedom and inhibiting local changes, they only create the conditions that threaten the organization’s survival.” A CONLIB© sees the leaders as the ideologues on both sides of the divide. Their presence bestrides all spheres of life. They have peculiar key words or phrases to signal an attack. Illustrations include “This is unacceptable” “ It is inappropriate”. Both extremists share one thing in common - the deployment of the argument of force. A CONLIB© sets out with the force of argument. He/she accepts provable and logical opinions that are contrary to his/her earlier stance.
A CONLIB© acknowledges the impact of self-reference based on traditions, dreams, history, experience and values. The structure, invariably, remains an evolutionary journey towards greater freedoms and improvement of the world. Cognizance of the self-referencing points deters a CONLIB© from filtering the world through parochial lenses. The points also portray a CONLIB© as a truly globalized citizen capable of breaking artificial boundaries created by fundamentalist and extremist reasoning.
Stemming from the above, any delusionary desire to hold on to the past when the present is different is akin to racing a 1930 formula one car against present models. Anyone that harbors such a mindset would be a prime candidate for psychiatric examinations. Therefore, a CONLIB© is, also, one who is observant enough to change old beliefs in the light of new knowledge and facts. The disturbing reality is that man has refused to learn to survive in an environment that is in constant flux. Deep down, we deceive ourselves that things will remain static.
Unfortunately, we are now at a point where it is a badge of honor to be labeled a bare knuckle conservative; and it is equally gratifying to be branded the poster face of hard-core liberalism. Such accolades account for most of the problems facing humanity. Many people as so pig-headed in their extreme philosophies – sure bet for airtime and media exposure – that would-be moderates are forced into either camp for the sake of relevance. No one wants to be dispassionate in appraisals any longer. The attitude has frighteningly shifted to my way or the highway. This is a recipe for disaster.
A CONLIB© ought not be caught in such a web. Any accusation of a CONLIB© trying to waffle should be ignored with scant ceremony. The emergence of CONLIB© Ó cannot be more auspicious than in this period when there is so much confusion all over. Given that knowledge is mutable and that there is room for further discoveries and improvements, developing CONLIB© attributes could serve as a shock absorber of the effects of rapid changes. The fear about spreading this new philosophy is mainly due to the resistance to change by the leaders. Leaders refer to the media, print and electronic, which determine what should make headlines. Thanks to the Internet. The CONLIB© philosophy can spread like summer fire within a short time
There is a lot of meaning in the cliché ‘there is nothing new under the sun’. Early philosophers registered their mastery of the basic principles underlying the theories enumerated above in allegorical and categorical statements. . For example, it is held that one cannot step into the same river twice. Initial philosophical theories remain the bedrock of many, probably all, modern philosophical schools. Though original thoughts have been improved upon over the years, a trace back would - however - lead to a common source. This is in keeping with changes occurring in shape not structure. If you have any of the CONLIB© characteristics listed above or can work on developing them, then tell the world: I AM A CONLIB© . For me, I am a CONLIB© !!! It is better to be wrong some of the time, than to be wrong all the time.
Print
Email
