It may be my recent move into the Kew Asylum atop a bluff on
the Yarra River in Melbourne that triggered my renewed fascination psychology. Built in the 1870s as the institution for the
insane, the inebriate, and the idiot (wow, did they nail the branding back then
or what?) I often muse about which category would most closely approximate the
diagnosis that would have placed me in line for a room with the view that I now
call home. Over the last few weeks, I’ve
been on a speaking tour of Africa and have encountered plenty of all three
diagnoses – mostly in the form of political, academic and industrial self-proclaimed
“leaders” and those who seek to reinforce said egos. And while there are countless observations
that compete for my fingers’ attention at this keyboard, the one that has immediacy
is my abject abhorrence for the proliferation of “ideas”.
In his 1829 writings, Analysis of the Phenomena of the Human Mind,
James Mill gave us the linguistic gift of the term “ideation”. In his use of the term and throughout the
ensuing few decades, “idea” and “ideation” were used to describe the synthetic
process of placing perceptions and sensations into a representational
construct. In the Journal of Psychological Medicine and Mental Pathology (Vol 9), Dr.
J. Russell Reynolds’ 1855 essay on “The Diagnosis of Diseases of the Brain,
Spinal Cord, Nerves and Their Appendages” clarifies the concept of ideation as
the abstraction of reality which, in
the extreme, leads to a perverted construction of “fixed delusions”. As I listened to countless speakers recite
the unconsidered doctrinal mantras of humans as “markets” or “consumers”,
education as a means to the illusory ideal of employment, enterprise as an
industrial manipulation of finite supply to extinguishing consumption for the purpose
of rent extraction, and money as the single arbiter of social relevance, I was
amused at the number of times I heard the term “idea” being used. In the past three weeks, whenever I heard the
word “idea” mentioned, I found it helpful to appeal to Dr. Reynolds’ notion of “fixed
delusions”.
Now, just in case you’ve been living under a rock, let me
catch you up on the hottest new idea. Nearly all human challenges can be solved
with a blockchain cryptocurrency mobile telephony technology funded with an ICO
deployed by Gen Xers who use their parent’s horded wealth or reputation to
occupy shared workspaces in which echo chambers of ideas proliferate at the
speed of caffeine. The “developing world”
will be “developed” when each wanna-be Silicon Valley incubator funds the
sufficient number of developers coding in Python powering their lithium and cobalt
off-grid mobile devices to more rapidly get ever decreasing tolls on ever
diminishing-in-relevance urban transactions.
Oh, and if you’re at the cutting edge, you’ll have a solar panel on the
roof to trickle charge your “solutions” to the world’s most pressing problems
like ordering take-out food, booking your Uber, or purchasing your tickets to
the next crypto conference in a hackathon warehouse.
I suggested to a room full of academics, policy-makers, and
industrial engineers that the integration of lithium and cobalt batteries (for
which said miners have life expectancies of 45 and 37 years, respectively) into
a pacemaker to animate the heart of a 67-year-old white collar, obese, sedentary,
steak gobbling retired executive may be more industrial disease management than
healthcare. I challenged them to
identify a single component of “innovation” that they integrate into their
devices that didn’t have – somewhere in its engineering history or supply chain
– the unconsidered life or livelihood of person for whom their engineering can
never be effective due to price, access, or entitlement. The room was silent. But when it came time to talk about “ideas”
to build the economy, the room was alight.
“I think we need a professional association.”
“I think we need more funding.”
“I think we need a way to take our ideas to market.”
“We’ve got great ideas but don’t seem to convert them into
business.”
“We’ve got to patent and protect our ideas.”
In the nearly 2 hours of “ideation”, not a single word was
mentioned that I haven’t heard in EVERY U.N. Development, World Bank, World Economic
Forum, YPO, WPO, business school, venture conference, entrepreneurial gathering
for the past 25 years. There were no “ideas”
– merely the recitation of “fixed delusions”.
With roughly 4.5 billion people on Earth who struggle to
access potable water, adequate nutrition, commonly available sanitation and
health technologies, how is it that we can continue to suggest that humanity’s
future is somehow mediated on the proliferation of smartphones and digital
devices? Doesn’t anyone see that our lemming-like
race to the sea of Apple, Samsung, Microsoft, Google and Huawei is lubricated
by the genocide of extractive industries that continue to perpetuate a system
in which:
- Utility is defined by Edison and Westinghouse at 60Hz on 110, 220, or 240 volts of distributed power;
- Communication is defined on narrow RF spectrum at 3G, 4G, or 5G;
- Value is defined by fiat currency accumulation; and,
- Education is defined by consensus facility with approved technology?
We’re using 140-year-old distributed power models to power 95-year-old
radio technology to rent airwaves to disseminate propaganda for which we pay
subscription access fees on the “free” internet. And we congratulate ourselves on “development”
with our modern “ideas”.
James Mill and J. Russell Reynolds offered us a view of the cognitive
process in which we observe the world around us and then abstract it into
social forms which allow for the consensus acceptance or rejection of values
and norms. Upon the fabric of these
normative perspectives, we embroider embellishments which attract more or less
attention based on what we seek to highlight or obscure. But what we don’t do is challenge any of the
underlying compositions of the threads that form the warp, the weave, or the enhancement. And by this I mean we don’t engage in:
- · the explicit consideration of the essence of matter and energy;
- · the unmasking of incentives behind the animating utility energizing the apparatus;
- · the beneficiary of the consensus technology that dictates incumbent modalities; and,
- · the introspection on what alternative mode or method might achieve equal or better results with less phase inefficiency from which rent can be extracted.
Until each of these four steps is routinized into our
acceptance, adoption and integration of technology or behaviors, we haven’t
innovated, we haven’t ideated. We’ve
merely reinforced the fixed delusions and, in so doing, cost someone somewhere their
liberty and in many cases, their life.
x
What small steps can we ordinary people take to affect these four forces within the mirad of complex systems that we all unwittingly a part of? Personal awareness and responsibility of our actions are key to expanding this dialogue ..... otherwise isn't it just more intellectual mastication amist white noise?
ReplyDeleteDebra, the whole reason that I participate in the global community and write about it here is to help people see the ingredients in the stuff we use, the costs of capital and community that we presume to take "as given", and encourage the materials that help articulate the costs of our unconsidered behavior. What I watch very closely is the records of companies who lobby for disclosure limitations and pay attention to the countries they seek deflection from. We all can read the "ingredients" label on ALL the things we engage and consume rather than taking them "as presented".
ReplyDelete