Debates, town halls, primaries, and caucuses are all the
talk since we know we will have a different President in January of 2017. The political stance and personality traits
of the candidates remain in stark contrast from where I sit. As I read Facebook, Twitter, etc. I hear from
a host of folks whom I know to be bright, well-meaning people. And yet, they are all over the place
politically: Trump is wonderful/Trump is
a buffoon, Cruz is our savior/Cruz is scary power-hungry, Hillary is a
doer/Hillary is a lying politician, Bernie is a philosopher/Bernie is a
crackpot. How can so many arrive at such
different conclusions given the same reality?
This is not, it appears to me, to be a case of “I like
vanilla more than chocolate.” It is much
more complicated than that. It is based
on how I view the world and how I interpret the data I receive while viewing
the world.
Rosenthal and Jacobson, (1968), conducted a study of teacher
expectations and student achievement.
They identified for teachers some of the students in their classrooms and
were told these students were “late bloomers” but would do well by the end of
the year. The kids, unbeknownst to the
teachers, were chosen randomly. Low and
behold, the kids teachers believed would bloom soon showed the most growth that
year. Teachers helped make low
performers, but late bloomers, successful.
Teachers expected those results and got them.
We all have experienced the opposite effect as well. Someone thinks we are a failure, inept, etc.,
and no matter what we do they see failure.
I have written about this before under “Black Dots.”
We have paradigms.
Ways we view the world. If I see
the world as one huge multinational conspiracy then every piece of data I take
in will confirm such a conspiracy. I
will ignore data contrary to my paradigm.
If I believe UFO’s are visiting us nightly, then every photo and radar
blip I see will confirm such visits. If
I believe in Christianity, then every good thing is the result of prayer. On and on.
The bottom line is, when we view the world a certain way we only see
data that confirms our view and ignore data that is contrary to our view.
So people who hate Obama have a really hard time seeing the
data that shows our economy has turned around, unemployment has dropped,
national debt has dropped, we have substantially withdrawn from two major
conflicts in the Mideast, and we have provided medical insurance for the first
time to millions of Americans. They will
only see the negative hyperbole.
Educated folks must challenge their paradigm to know whether
they are simply practicing self-fulfilling prophecy or are they collecting
reasonable data that confirm their current view. Am I willing to study the data that conflicts
with my world view? If so, I am willing
to challenge my paradigm. If I only
listen to people who share my paradigm not only will I become more entrenched
in my paradigm and more defensive about it, I will miss opportunities for real
learning and discovery.
When you make a paradigm shift, a change in your world view
from what you saw before to what you see now, there will be a feeling of great
excitement and adventure and possibly fear as you let go of earlier lenses for
a new pair. Once your paradigm has
shifted you will immediately be able to detect the folks still stuck in their
old paradigm. We have all laughed at the
17 year old who screams, “I am an adult!” while acting childlike, knowing that
they do not yet have a clue what being an adult means. But, it is impossible to explain that to the
17 year old.
Futurist Joel Barker tells a fascinating story about
watches. In 1980 95% of all watches made
and sold world-wide came from Switzerland.
Swiss watch makers had research labs to help them improve future watches,
and out of one of their labs came a proposed digital watch. From the Swiss point of view it was not a
watch. It did not have hands, it did not
have gears, it did not have jewels, and therefore, it was not a watch. The Swiss sold the patent to Seiko in Japan
for a mere pittance. Five years later
95% of the watches in the world were made in Japan. Japan made no watches at all in 1980. The Swiss were stuck in their view of a watch
and could not get beyond it.
I think such entrenched paradigms blind us, hold us
back. Here I sit as a 66 year-old man,
upgrading and improving my router, blogging, tweeting, Facebooking, smart
phoning, smart TVing, etc. I have
transitioned from the industrial age to the information age to the digital age
all in my lifetime. I recognize I am not
a native in tech land, but I surely am an immigrant, undocumented at that.
Have you heard someone recently say they long for the good
old days? I hear it a lot. The problem is, of course, that the good old
days were another paradigm. We have
moved beyond that. Everyone grows
comfortable in their current paradigm, and if the world shifts it may seem that
the only source of safety and security lies in yesteryear under old
paradigms. No thank you. I am not going back there because we do so
many more wonderful things now and we do them well. Do not think there is safety in the old
paradigms. Just ask the Swiss
watchmakers.
The following are just a few of the new paradigms I see from
my lofty perch on the Texas Gulf Coast 64 feet above sea level:
Everyone has a smart phone and the world changed. We now have instant video of every event good
or bad. Everybody is now observed all
the time everywhere. We have instant
communication one-on-one, or with millions of people. We have any fact you seek and the current Doppler
radar just a touch away. We ask kids in
school to put away the most modern technological device they have when they
enter the classroom and I think that is just old paradigm stuff. So kids power down while we try to tell them
what they could look up in mere seconds.
Facts are boring because no one knows them all and no one needs to. (I predict a painful demise of spelling bees
as rituals of a much older paradigm – he says while my word processor auto
corrects my boo-boos.)
It appears that everything that matters comes to me
digitally. I shop on line. I get my news on line. I share baby pictures on line. I can meet a spouse on line and check the
news. And heaven forbid that I ever have
to write a letter by hand. It would take
hours and no one could read it.
Teachers and principals and legislators who are over the age
of about 50 tend not to be in touch with these new ways of interacting with the
world, and yet they are the policy makers and the cultural transmitters. The absolutely most challenging group to
teach are members of AARP. When you hear
a sentence that begins, “It was good enough for….” You are listening to a
promoter of past paradigms. PPPers.
With all our technology we are losing the ability to
converse, and the ability to reflect, identify trends and themes and
concepts. Digital music and photos can
never replace a concert or gallery, nor email a hug or a kiss.
In all our new paradigms there is also a risk of organizing
a view of the world, seeking followers, then becoming so rooted in the paradigm
that any one in any other paradigm is bad or wrong or infidel. “My view is the correct view!” they all
yell. And they all have facts to back up
their paradigm. But they do not have the
ability to reflect, identify trends and themes and concepts, and that is scary. Polarization cannot be mistaken for a
strategy to end global warming.
So, if you feel every kid should learn cursive handwriting
and the “old” math, that fossil fuels make us great not weak, that time in
front of any screen is too much time, and that men should be men and women
should be women (whatever that is) then, my friend, you are a poster child of
the old paradigms, a PPPer. We used to
say get on the band wagon. Perhaps now
we should say all aboard the high speed rail.
And keep your cell phones out.
You never know when a once in a lifetime event is going to happen right
in front of you! (The first contact or
the second coming, or just a fight on the playground!)
We also used to say, that’s my 2¢. Now it is more likely my 20¢. Another new pair-a-dimes.
No comments:
Post a Comment