The purpose of any enterprise has two, and only two, possible roots. The purpose may be to improve the present, or the purpose may be to improve the future. While these may combine upon occasion, seem to blend, or, in the case of the future, have varying scales, the basic dichotomy of motivation remains. In an endeavor designed to change the present, the salient questions may be: What do I wish to change?, How does it improve the present?, and, for a perceptive person, Will the change I make still be relevant in the present in which I have made the change?. Was that muddy enough for you? Let's look at a hypothetical example. Mayor Flynn, of some made up city like, say, Boston, observes his city, and says, "Gee, we have more traffic than our major street can handle. I think I'll fix that." He counts and discovers that 350,000 cars are driving on streets designed for 250,000 cars. (I'm an optimist) He designs a change which will enable the streets to handle 400,000 cars, at only ten years of inconvenience. Ten years later, the great project is done, the mess is cleaned up, and "Lo and Behold!" there are 475,000 cars, with more projected. The change he made was no longer relevant in the "Future Present." It's great, if all you want to do is to make some friend smile, or fix a light in your room. That sort of "present changing" is comparatively easy. BUT! The amount of planning which goes into "Future Present" changing is phenomenal. I mean, think about it. (That's enough.)If you have a child, it isn't too early at the child's birth to start planning college. 18-22 years down the road, when most of us don't know when we're going to do the shopping! I know some people who are saving up for their child's college expenses, when they don't have any children yet. If their marriage lives long enough for them to have children. If they live long enough to have children. I'm not even going into that further. On a personal level, it makes a certain sense. On a governmental policy basis, it is a disaster, not even waiting to happen. The only thing which may be worse is no planning at all. I'm not yet convinced which is the more vile. We, the people, need a more anticipatory, proactive planning process. We need a government which is planning for the "Future Future." "Well," I can hear you mumbling, "That's a fine new buzz word. What's it mean?" By Future Future, I mean that we should first look ahead twenty or thirty years, to the "Future Present," and then assess what that time's future will look like. (Twilight Zone music comes up in the background.) We've been trying the quick fix of education for nearly as long as public education has been a major force in this country. Other countries have been trying as long and longer. It doesn't work. By the time we have implemented a set of changes, the circumstances for which we were changing it had changed. Our brand spanking new "Present" was irrelevant. We kept it until the impetus for a new "Future Present" became strong enough to create belated change yet again. of times That's It's a fine notion, I'm sure, but I confess that I am not entirely sure how to do it. "If it were that easy, wouldn't somebody be doing it?" I ask myself that, though I just as blithely respond that "Everything has to be done for the first time, some time. And, besides, who's to say that it isn't being done, somewhere." But how? I have heard the argument that we don't know how to predict the future. If we could even predict it to that first level of Future Present, things wouldn't be as bad as they are. The assumption underlying this otherwise reasonable thought is that if "we" knew what was coming, we would a) want to change it, b) know how to change it, and c) believe the prediction was accurate. I don't know which of these three assumptions holds the most sway, but at least one of them has applied in the past thirty years, as we have had accurate (using hindsight) predictions of the problems we would be facing in many social contexts, and yet, the problems seem to have been as bad as the authors feared. The first assumption is a matter of will. If we fail to make a decision or take an action, we have nobody to blame but our selves. The third assumption is also within our control. If we examine a prediction, and we find its prophecies to be harsh, then, even if we choose not to believe them, we can choose to act in a "worst case scenario" response. That gives a chance to avoid an uncertain problem, without requiring that the problem occur first. It is the middle assumption which must be tested most carefully. In a science fiction series by Anne McCaffrey, a group of people with ESP get together to try to help the world, and themselves. One of the powers which manifests itself is prescience. As part of their effort to win the support of the governments and the people, the leaders of the ESPers announce one of the disaster predictions which their precognition has shown them. They then mobilize to try to decrease the disaster's impact. It works. Well, it sort of works. They prevent the incredible loss of life and property which they had predicted. The response to their efforts was: "You see, there was no disaster. Your predictions were wrong. We didn't need to take all those precautions after all." But I could have predicted that. There are many more instances of predictions being ignored than of their being listened to. Anywhere you find an eroding beach or a flood plain, you will find people who refuse to act on high probability predictions. I can not tell you whether more of them deny the forecast, or merely insist that they will be different, I can only tell you that the spirit which prompts those people to their actions is alive and well in Washington, D.C., and in every state house in the country. The Future
Chapter 1: Future Future Occasion comparatively phenomenal
Chapter 2: The Question Short term prognostications have been met with wider acceptance and response than the longer range ones. Weather reports, structural weaknesses, and financial statements are all forms of projection, which we heed to varying degrees, but all of them hold more sway than environmental estimates, population projections, and crime extrapolations. In 1965, the Institute for Policy Studies released a book, The Next Generation: The Prospects Ahead for the Youth of Today and Tomorrow, by Donald N. Michael. It examines life in its future through two major windows, those conditions beyond the control of youth developers and those within youth developers' scope. It goes on to examine the consequences of those conditions. "...and prostitution will become less lucrative as the value of chastity declines." "More and more, major social problems and opportunities will have to be met on a national scale if they are to be met adequately."(italics added) These are examples of the quality of predictions in this book. {The greatest flaw the author and his cohorts make is in their assumption that the most effective response to a national situation is the one the government would choose to take.} "The cost of water will increase, and with the increase may well come inhibitions on the private use of it (in curious contrast to a life style stressing high consumption of almost all other commodities). The second problem that will have to be faced squarely during [the next twenty years] is the application of wide-ranging solutions to the social and economic ghettoizing of some lower-class groups, especially Negroes." "The enormous problems involved in providing slum children with adequate education, and adolescents and adults with adequate job training, means that both young and older Negroes will bear disproportionately the economic and psychological consequences of unemployment and disemployment of the unskilled, at least over the next decade. Poor education and poor income and the associated style of life, with its concomitants of delinquency and violence, will encourage many white entrepreneurs and politicians to fight for the preservation of present housing patterns. Indeed, major extensions of urban renewal and redevelopment will be indefinitely delayed - with all the adverse consequences for urban areas resulting from slums and ghettos - until this problem is resolved." This is not horoscope level prediction. There is a degree of specificity which goes beyond the scattershot approach so many psychics have used. What was done in response to these writings? Were governmental policies modified to try to ameliorate those dire conditions foreseen? If so, what? If not, why not? While that subject is of interest, and I will return to it in a subsequent chapter, the accuracy of Donald Michael's book answers the question of whether such prognostication is possible. It has been done, and can be done again. The question which remains is: "If we have predicted the future, can we change it, and if so, how?"
The sub-question of "can we change it?" is actually moot. If we can't change it, there is no harm in trying. Therefore, I recommend operating on the assumption that we can change a predicted future. The second half of the question has a group of other questions built into it. The first of them is: "To what end?" If I were asked if I can get on a horse, my answer would be "Yes, but I don't think that I could ride it from the position I would be in." I'm not sure whether I wish to suggest that one's motivation is next, or one's goal. While I'm not sure that they are different, I'm unwilling to assert that they are the same. I use "purpose" to suggest elements of both. As we saw in Chapter 1, to have as one's goal the mastering of the Future Present, while non-trivial, is insufficient. The goal must be far enough removed from the time of planning as to give the future people room to move.[???????] The exercise I recommend for starting this level of planning is simple, but involves hard work. Ask yourself, "What do I want?" Take that answer and ask further, "Why do I want it?" If all you get from that second question is a "Because it's good!" then ask "Why do I think that is good?" or "What's so good about it?" Keep chasing those questions and answers with "Why is that important to me?" and other such inquiries. The more you understand what you are truly after, the more effectively you can go after it, and the less baloney you may spill on others along the way. The next question chain to follow starts with "What else would these changes affect?" One of the most persistent problems some of the social programs had was that the changes they made had unanticipated impacts on both the areas of change and on the areas around them. (see also "Ecology") The ripple effect is very subtle and widespread. You may destroy the very thing you set out to save. Talk to the people most likely to be hit with upheaval from your tampering. From them, you may find out who else the ripple may touch or swamp. Keep in mind the maxim, "For want of a nail..." If, as many people find, the sheer scope of what you mean to do is daunting, either before or after the previous exercise, I have some ideas which may help you. (If it doesn't seem daunting, either you haven't put enough work into that exercise, or your confidence level is fantastic.) The first notion I would like to share is that the reason even small changes seem daunting is that everything is connected, even if, at surface level, it doesn't seem that way. You can't know all of the results of your proposed action. You can, however, try to anticipate some of them. If, instead, you find yourself with the quandary of where to start, using the previous search method, seek that area with the most ripples. It is likely to be central to the issue with which you are involved.
ties will have to be met on a na people some latitude ut it?" Keep chasing those que quandary Let's start with a simple problem area which many people face. To change ones furniture, at home, can be both straight forward and difficult. If you buy a new living room set, you must pay for it, have it delivered, put it into your home, remove the old one, determine where the old one goes, and, possibly, change curtains and carpet to match the new set. The areas with the largest potential ripples are the color match with the room, and the disposition of the previous furniture.
In the first case, the residual ripples aren't yours. Children may have designs on your used chairs or couches. Their friends (or yours) may have use for them. The extent of the ripples can most easily be determined by announcing your intentions to the appropriate groups and waiting to hear the results. In the second case, while disposition of the old set remains, the vast majority of the ripples are yours. Cost, color, style, timing, accoutrements, size, and fit are all part of the picture. Some of these lead to other potential decisions. "Do I want this set, if it means replacing the coffee table as well? Or the lamps? Or the carpet? That table belonged to my great step-Aunt." If you don't have these particular issues, others of there ilk will arise. Cost has more than one aspect. While most people readily identify the immediate cash expense as a cost, and many will see finance charges as a cost, down the road, here are a few considerations which they seldom get to at the time of decision-making. Emotional - attachment to older items, stress of change, stress of decision-making, stress of inconvenience. Financial - removal of old stuff, delivery of new, purchase of ancillary items, time away from other duties, lack of availability of funds for other purposes. Physical - durability of the items, long-term comfort, flexibility for guests, weight/bulk for rearranging it. While there are many folk who just buy their furniture, and then never give it another thought, there are at least as many who have some degree of regret over the furniture for years to come. If you have ever watched the patterns formed in the water by a drop of water, or a tossed pebble, you have seen the ever-widening ripples. What you may have missed, even if you studied waves in a wave or ripple tray, in physics, are the effect reflections have on the original ripples and the impact of other, seemingly unrelated ripples. Currently, the U.S. government is suing M.I.T. for "fixing" its financial aid packages through discussion with the other Ivy League schools, in violation of anti-trust regulations. These regulations were designed to prevent unfair trade practices which would result in the public being gouged. If companies could raise their prices with surety that their competitors would, also, then competition would no longer be a factor. M.I.T. and the Ivies maintain that they could provide more and better assistance to more students through such discussions, and that the dialogue was in the students' and the country's best interests. It never dawned on them that their efforts were in violation of the statute. The prosecutor of the case has indicated that the interests of the students may be superceded by their rights. M.I.T. argues, alone now, that the Sherman Anti-Trust Act was not intended to apply to non-profit, charitable institutions, and the government argues that financial aid is just discounting of a service, and that competition should reign. M.I.T. is surely right. The designers of this Act did not exclude such institutions, but neither did they include them. I doubt the question came up. Equally surely, the question didn't arise for the Ivies when they started the discussions, or they would have looked for ways in which to achieve their purposes, without falling under government oversight. Had either party given consideration to the issue, they would be in a different situatiton, entirely. While chaos theory may indicate that we can never know all of the likely ripples affecting us, practice, and our own hind-sight, have told us that we can see more of them. First, we have to be willing to look, and to figure out where to look. Cause is defined as "something that occasions or effects a result." ve me a place to stand... Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, G.& C. Merriam Co., Springfield, MA, 1969 , speech in New Hampshire, 2/92circa 225 B.C2 Chapter 4: Ripples Chapter 5: Cause and Effect Chapter 6: "Veels vithin veels" implemented
·
McCaffrey, Anne, To Ride Pegasus, Ballantine Books, New York, 1973 Chapter 7: Myopia and Astigmatism Chapter 8: The Vision Thing Chapter 9: "And We He'pped" Chapter 10: "Give me a place to stand..." Chapter 11: Where I Start Chapter 12: Where I Am Going Epilogue: An Invitation
·
McCaffrey, Anne, To Ride Pegasus, Ballantine Books, New York, 1973 |