No Boundary Institutions

...man is generally confronted with a rapidly growing condition of stress upon his environment that threatens his welfare and even his survival, and...popular attitudes and public institutions are not generally prepared to cope with this circumstance. 

--Lynton K. Caldwell

(from Man and His Environment: Policy and Administration, p.xi, as quoted in Overshoot, page 1)

Why is this?  One reason is that the specialization of these institutions -- as pointed out by Saul in an excerpt from my last post -- causes them to be unable to see the big picture.  Religions, for example, because they are one story (doctrine and dogma) institutions are unable to see how destructive one story positions are to world health and well-being.  Corporations are a form of one story institution as well.  This now extends to higher education due to the insidious influence of corporations.

I just completed one of Ken Wilber's early books: No Boundary: Eastern and Western Approaches to Personal Growth.  (Probably a good place to start with Ken Wilber -- and maybe a good place to end as well.)

From the preface:

This book will show how each boundary we construct in our experience results in a limitation of our consciousness -- a fragmentation, a conflict, a battle.  There are many such limitations and boundaries in our experience, which together create a spectrum of consciousness.

What Wilber does not do is discuss the boundaries that our dominant institutions impose on personal growth.  Basically all the institutions -- now maybe more than ever -- have imposed -- or by design impose -- very confining boundaries.  The "consumption is god" boundary of corporations and now schools.  The "my god is the only god" and/or "my story is the only story" of most religions.  Non-profit institutions have boundaries that are imposed by the tax laws.  Qualification for tax exempt status requires non-profits to narrowly define what they do.

FROM WHAT TO WHAT TO DO

It seems that while a growing number of people are aware of the problems with our society, they are only focused on the what and not the what to do.  It is as if we are paralyzed in the headlights of our contemporary society.  The severe limitations/boundaries of all of our major institutions makes the what to do simple.  We have to create new institutions without the limitations/boundaries.

I'm going to repeat -- and hopefully further distill -- some of the "what to do" thoughts of earlier posts.  I now think that lifelong education has to be the cornerstone of any new institution.  For one perspective on this, see this excerpt from a Guy Claxton Book.  (Please page down past the book links for the excerpt.  A design gremlin got into my earlier posts and messed with the configuration.)  I also believe that people will increasingly want to escape from the pollution of contemporary society.  So...we need a school and a spa.  One-half spa and one-half school.  In return for room, board, tuition and health care, carefully selected scholarship students spend approximately 20 hours per week designing, building, and operating the spa/school.

The program will be a four-year masters program that will not require any post high school education as a prerequisite.  Throughout the four years students will identify an area that they want to master.  Permaculture, cooking/nutrition, construction, art or some other hands-on ability that will enable them to thrive in a world that will increasingly require fewer and fewer people who earn their living sitting behind a desk -- or driving around in their cars with a cell phone attached to their heads.  I am assuming that there will be an enormous market for this sort of working scholarship.

Spa/school patrons will have access to the infrastructure based on the amount and timing of membership deposits.  Think of it as a bank that does not pay interest, but rather holds costs steady for the entire spa/school infrastructure.  No interest in the system, but no inflation either.  Again, while maybe harder to explain, I am assuming that there is a pent-up demand for this sort of living arrangement.

Now my task is to get out digitally and physically and market the concept.

Related notes:

Parable of the broken window  One thing that neither the Austrian School of Economics nor the Keynesian model seem to consider is the value of leisure time.  Both see this in terms of work rather than leisure.  It is the loss of leisure, i.e. time to develop, that is important.  So the Austrian School is right about this -- they just don't take it far enough.

With respect to moving towards a consumption pattern that maintains a quality environment for ourselves and future generations, it is key to realize that storing up capital and goods is counterproductive.  The most effective way would be to assure ourselves of food and shelter (and a quality of life) without possessing.  One example is home ownership.  Home ownership when combined with debt is the most destructive activity that any civilization can promote.  It is one reason that tremendous increases in productivity have paradoxically led to working more hours.  Anything that gets in the way of learning is destructive.

Hence, my insistence that we need to move from a possession "economy" to access economy.  Anything that is centered around possession is simply not economical.

What do we want?  Self -preservation.  This article outlines the thoughts of Sir Jonathon Porritt who thinks that capitalism is our only hope.  Hmmm.  The devil may be in the label only, but the system that dominates today may not be able to perform.  It seems to me that wisdom will save the day, not cleverness.

Interesting article here. 

Comments

[speedbird]

Interesting post, thanks.

I've encountered a number of good explanations of some of the barriers to the kind of change you describe:

- the concept of homeostasis of living things
- the work of Chris Argyris on 'Action Science'
- the theory of 'transactional analysis (difficult to explain without trying it, but basically if you criticize someone, they will rebel).

I agree that 'what to do' is a problem. Many famous authors have examined 'what is' extremely well - suggestions for change are much rarer.

I'm not sure any 'economic' solution - even as radical as you suggest - is outside the current paradigm. My brain's immune system rejects talk framed in terms of 'deposits', 'banks', 'interest' etc.

There has to be a better way of getting people to do things than money.

My current hunch is to draw the battle lines (not entirely originally) as follows:

- If you're a flawed, isolated individual, you're human
- If you're networked and open, you're a machine.

Our job is to confront the horns of this dilemma.

My suggestion is that dilemmas of this sort can't be confronted head-on. The answer is certain to be hiding nearby, but at first it will only be glimpsed out of the corner of one's eye.

*

I liked the 'broken window' story - interesting. As for storing up goods, I keep getting led back to Pharaoh's dream... not sure about that one.