Challenges to Comprehension Implied by the Logo of Laetus in Praesens
Laetus in Praesens Alternative view of segmented documents via Kairos
30 October 2023 | Draft

Disparate Strategic Possibilities Dangerously Neglected

Recognizing controversial challenges to conventional silo thinking in times of crisis

-- / --

Introduction
Transformative recognition of "work" by other species
Transformative reframing of categories
Contrasting modalities of expression and their "re-cognition"
Enabling existential occupation of distinctive "spaces"
Transformative reframing of relationships

References

Introduction

A preceding argument suggested that a disparate array of neglected strategic preoccupation may in all probability invite consideration under catastrophic circumstances (Contrarian Analysis as a Means of Avoiding Intelligence Failure, 2023). According to that argument, collective intelligence is organized in a manner subject to a high degree of confirmation bias -- whether inadvertent or deliberate. This is necessarily a consequence of the cognitive comfort zone cultivated globally  by mainstream discourse -- appropriately framed metaphorically as a "bubble", even a "filter bubble". It would seem that intelligence is much handicapped in its ability to "prick" that bubble creatively (Pricking the Bubble of Global Complacent Complicity, 2017). Society is tragically dependent on Hamas-style events to do so.

However the radically divisive discourse evoked by such events is indicative of how dangerously primitive is the dialogue space from which it might be assumed that relevant insights might emerge. The possibility of such insight could be explored in terms of how existentially challenging such questions need to be -- to be of strategic relevance at this time -- thereby challenging any focus on an illusory "safe space" of more limited scope.

Of some relevance is the early experiment conducted by systems specialists, Stafford Beer and Gordon Pask, on a gathering of systems researchers of the Society for General Systems Research. Each participant was invited to formulate a question which they believed would divide the gathering 50-50. Each then answered that array of questions before forumulating another. Both sets of results were analyzed to form two maps: one of interlinked disparate issues  and another of interrelated participants more or less closely associated by their views on particular issues (Metaconferencing: discovering people / viewpoint networks in conferences, 1980).

As noted previously, the challenge to collective reflection on the future, in the gatherings variously proposed, is the identification of an array of appropriately "deadly questions" capable of reframing current discourse modalities (World Futures Conference as Catastrophic Question, 2013). These may well be articulated by voices faintly heard -- if at all -- as suggested with respect to climate change (Hearing the Variety of Voices in Climate Change Discourse, 2019). Ignoring them, it is little wonder that the mainstream "voice" does not evoke the expected response and support.

From a hypothetical future perspective, the concern might be framed as to the nature of the strategic possibilities which will then be regretted as not having been "on the table" at the present time. Given their controversial nature as a trigger for new insight, the difficulty is how best to frame them to enable their fruitful consideration at this time. A major effort in this respect has been the initiative of the Edge Foundation with its annual question to specialists over many years -- terminated with What is the Last Question (2018).

Of similar relevance is the Global Ideas Bank originally instigated by the Institute for Social Inventions. Another approach is the insights which remain to be derived from recent "revolutions" and their role in engendering new paradigms (Leonid Grinin, et al., 20th Century revolutions: characteristics, types, and waves, Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9, 2022, 124; R Alexander Bentley, et al., Machine learning for rediscovering revolutionary ideas of the past, Adaptive Behavior, 30, 2022, 3) 30, Issue 3). These contrast with available resources on technical innovations (Innovation Database, SpringWise).

One appropriately provocative challenge to the global strategic comfort zone is the consideration of "negative strategies", namely the promotion of those which are the antithesis of what is otherwise considered reasonable (Liberating Provocations: use of negative and paradoxical strategies, 2005). It is the consequent shock effect which offers the possibility of evoking more appropriate engagement.

The following selection of disparate strategies is presented as an indication of speculative possibilities for consideration. References indicated are typically to web resources in which a possibility is framed in the light of further references -- more of which could be integrated into the checklists below. Missing in the current knowledge-based society is the context in which challenging possibilities are held and juxtaposed -- however controversial -- in order to evoke reflection and debate.

Transformative recognition of "work" by other species

It could be considered extraordinary that the work, so fundamental to the framing of "economic" transformation at this time, seemingly takes no account whatsoever of the work performed by animals and plants. Together with the processes of nature more generally, "work" is explicitly recognized by the fundamental science of thermodynamics. As stated decades ago by Warren P. Porter and David M. Gates: All processes of life, all physiological events, do work and expend energy (Thermodynamic Equilibria of Animals with Environment, Ecological Monographs, 39, 1969, 3).

Since that time an extensive literature on the relevance of thermodynamics to understanding of the environment and ecosystems has emerged. Curiously it is the particular application of theories of economics to remunerated work -- excluding any recognition of the work done by nature and nonhuman species -- which has resulted in massive degradation of the environment. That degradation is variously recognized as a fundamental challenge to sustainability.

Irrespective of such perceived degradation and threats to viability, an urgent requirement for radical transformation of global "economics" is variously presented (Transformational Economics Commission of the Club of Rome; Jeffrey D. Sachs, et al, Six Transformations to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, Nature Sustainability, 2, 2019). Consistent with silo thinking of this kind, there is a fundamental irony to the fact that the International Labour Organization takes no account whatsover of the "labour" performed by nonhuman species or any recognition of the "workers" fundamental to such activity. Creative arguments for reframing understanding of work also tend to avoid this dimension (André Gorz, Reclaiming Work: Beyond the Wage-Based Society, Polity, 1999).

As might then be expected, the health of such non-human workers is in now way a concern of the "World Health Organization" -- being relegated to the mandate of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Concern for those workers by such institutions is however limited to whether their activities contribute to the health or nourishment of humans. Any preoccupation with threats to the survival of those workers is then framed as the preoccupation of the United Nations Environment Programme -- created by the UN Conference on the Human Environment (1972). Consistent with this pattern, the work performed by nonliving features of the environment -- wind, sea, and the like -- is the focus of other agencies of the United Nations, each with its particular human-oriented bias: World Meteorological Organization, International Maritime Organization. Again with little integrated consideration of the current relevance of such work to the fundamental strategic concern with "economic" transformation.

The discipline of economics, and its influence on legislation, has a problematic track record in recognizing unremunerated work, whether by women, bonded labour, slaves, prisoners, criminals, or volunteers. It is little wonder that it has failed to develop the skills applicable to the work by other species. How it is assumed that those skills will be adapted to the challenges of sustainability calls for clarification.

Although there appears to be no estimate of the work done by all animals on Earth, it is estimated that there are, for example, some 10 quintillion (10,000,000,000,000,000,000) individual insects alive at any one time (Numbers of Insects, Smithsonian, Information Sheet Number 18, 1996). Each insect can be recognized as engaged in work of some kind -- from a thermodynamic perspective.

As noted by the FAO:

Especially controversial is the "work", effectively done "involuntarily", by those animals used in experimental research and testing. It is estimated that more than 115 million animals -- including mice, rats, birds, fish, rabbits, guinea pigs, farm animals, dogs, cats, and non-human primates -- are used and/or killed in laboratory experiments each year around the world (Animal Use Statistics, Humane Society International). In 2020, the USA was the world’s largest such user of animals (20 million), followed by China (16 million) (Annual number of animals used in research and testing in selected countries worldwide as of 2020, Statista; 11 Shocking animal testing statistics that are hard to swallow, PETA). Less controversial is the work done by animals for entertainment in zoos and circuses, and as companion animals (The Economic Importance of Companion Animals, Federation of European Companion Animal Veterinary Associations, February 2007).

More elusive is any recognition of the work done in metabolic processes at the cellular level in animals of diffeent body mass (Fernando J. Ballesteros, et al, On the Thermodynamic Origin of Metabolic Scaling, Scientific Reports, 8, 2018, 1448; Douglas S. Glazier, Variable metabolic scaling breaks the law: from ‘Newtonian’ to ‘Darwinian’ approaches, Proceedings of the Royal Society, 289, 2022, 1985). A common measure is the basal metabolic rate, namely the rate of energy expenditure per unit time. Most of the energy is then consumed in maintaining fluid levels in tissues through osmoregulation, and only about one-tenth is consumed for mechanical work, such as digestion, heartbeat, and breathing. The metabolic changes to fats, carbohydrates, and proteins is energy, can be defined as the ability or capacity to do work. In the case of humans, when awake the brain consumes up to a fifth of the body's total energy needs.

Aside from the literature on ecological and environmental thermodynamics, references of relevance to work by animals could be clustered as follows. Unfortnately the focus is typically on the larger domesticated animals, whereas the major proportion of such work may well be performed by wild animals and smaller animals -- notably birds, bees, termites, and the like -- and even by bacteria (Kendra Coulter, How the hard work of wild animals benefits us too, The Conversation, 4 May 2018).

Animal work:

Ethical and political rights of animals:

Ecosystem services: Key concepts and applications (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Occasional Paper Series No.1, 2010)

Plants and animals "gainfully employed"? The questionable framing by economics of "animal labour" is curiously evident with respect to particular cases, notably "working animals" (Amy Tikkanen, Working Like a Dog: 7 Animals with Jobs, Britannica):

The curious roadside labelling of some forests as "working forests", implies the recognition by economists that other forests are somehow "unemployed" (John Talberthm et al, Forests at Work: a new model for local land protection, World Resources Institute, 21 March 2011). Such a distinction is presumably extended to all wildlife "unemployed" by humans.

Work by artificial intelligence: Concerns have long been evoked with regard to the "rights" of robots. Given the amount of energy required to enable access to large language models like ChatGPT, it is curious that their much-appreciated "work" is not considered -- even though there is considerable concern that AI operation will be a threat to many forms of employment and livelihoods.

Transformative reframing of categories

The case of "work", clarified above by many references, is indicative of a more general issue. In a time of systemic global crisis there is little effort by disciplines and agencies to cultivate a posture calling into question the nature and scope of the categories by which their methodologies have long been defined. The consequence is that it is that same definition which may well be constraining their current relevance to the challenges by which they are faced -- especially when other sectors are dependent on their insights. The point has been made by the policy scientist Geoffrey Vickers: a trap is a function of the nature of the trapped (Freedom in a Rocking Boat: changing values in an unstable society, 1972). The point is also emphasized by the vain efforts of some to reframe an economic system which is proving to be dangerously less than fit for purpose.

The argument above endeavours to show that "economics" has effectively excluded dimensions which would render its principles more applicable to a system understood in global terms -- especially one faced with environmental challenges. Worse still the definition of "labour", as enshrined in the mandate and preoccupations of the ILO, precludes consideration of a very large proportion of work and workers characterizing the environment in which humanity is enmeshed. It is then questionable whether the insights of economics are of sufficiently general scope to enable the global system to be effectively addressed -- as various initiatives claim mistakenly to do.

Given that case, the question is then with what methodology can other instances be found of categories too narrowly defined -- too a potentially dangerous or unfruitful degree in this period. However (necessarily) speculative, examples might include:

Contrasting modalities of expression and their "re-cognition"

Enabling existential occupation of distinctive "spaces"

Transformative reframing of relationships

Trialing potentially transformative alternatives

Dialogue / Discourse

Reframing discourse on the unmentionable 

It could be considered remarkably curious that global civilization is faced with multiple crises -- now framed as a polycrisis -- with very little capacity to  envisage credible remedial strategies, or to explore their lack of credibility (Recognizing the Psychosocial Boundaries of Remedial Action, 2009). The conventional response to this condition mainly takes the form of blaming others for inhibiting the "will to change" -- whilst deriving benefit from the status quo.

More curious, and suspiciously so, is the remarkable extent to which discourse relies for its authenticity on the use of "fuck" and its derivatives as an expletive (Expletives as fundamental to a pattern of problematic "speech acts"? 2023). This is now a paradoxical feature of most private discourse, executive decision-making, and movies -- whilst being deprecated in formal public discourse as politically incorrect, as separately clarified (Mysterious Complementarity between Capitalism and Arsenalism, 2020).

Corresponding to this dynamic is the ever more explicit reference to intercourse and its many implications (and aberrations) as a primary objective or as evoking commentary of collective interest. It is framed as central to consummation of family life and values -- exemplifying individual freedom in an increasingly depressing context.

Any implication that reproduction might be beneficially constrained is conflated with a high degree of suspicion regarding a covert depopulation agenda of malign intent (The Shocking Truth about the Global Depopulation Agenda, The Burning Platform, 10 July 2022; Depopulation as a Policy Challenge in the context of Global Demographic Trends, UNDP, 20 October 2020). Consideration is further exacerbatedd by the intense controversy regarding pro-life versus abortion. Despite indications to the contrary, the assumption cultivated is that  planetary resources can (and should) be adapted to unconstrained population growth and families of whatever size desired. The ethical and natalist policies promoted by the Abrahamic religions are especially significant is that respect (Root Irresponsibility for Major World Problems, 2007).

Careful discourse on constraining population growth in any way is now virtually impossible within any institutional context or in the mainstream media. This is especially evident in the case of global consideration of resource and environmental constraints (Laudato Si' on Care of Our Common Home, 2015; Commentary on the Environment Encyclical, 2015). Curiously, if acknowledged, any concerns in that regard are reframed as issues of "overcrowding" and the measures appropriate to its constraint -- as is now frequently the case with mass tourism attracted by popular destinations (Local Reality of Overcrowding -- Global Unreality of Overpopulation, 2019).

Given the strategic reliance on scientific methodologies, especially curious is the manner in which these claim to engage in a form of root cause analysis which avoids identification of a seemingly obvious root cause, but with no explicit justification. This is exemplified by a current study of the Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS) of the United Nations University (Interconnected Disaster Risks, 2023).  The section on "root causes" notes:

Root causes are the underlying factors that create conditions for disasters to occur. If we think of a disaster as the tip of an iceberg, the visible part of a much larger structure that remains hidden under the water’s surface, root causes form the deeper structures that created conditions for the disaster to occur, and they are surprisingly similar for many seemingly unrelated events.

Noting that one of the root causes is "global demand pressures", this is described as:

Growing global demand for finite resources has the potential to increase disaster risk and the reaching of risk tipping points. Driven by a growing population and increasing development, the global demand pressures for food, water, energy, land and other materials foster practices that maximize production at the cost of our environmental and social systems.

However, whilst identifying "growing population" as driving that demand, such a "driver" is in no way recognized as a "root cause" in systemic terms. Artful strategic analysis of this kind merits caricature (Lipoproblems: Developing a Strategy Omitting a Key Problem, 2009). It invites the question as to which crises merit recognition (by more assiduous systemic analysis) as not being driven by "growing population".

Sensitivity on this unquestionable dimension can be variously and controversially highlighted -- following its early consideration by Paul Ehrlich and  Anne Ehrlich (The Population Bomb: population control or race to oblivision, 1968;  The Population Bomb Revisited,  The Electronic Journal of Sustainable Development, 1, 2009, 3).

Transformative recognition of complicity and responsibility

Promotion of contrarian strategies

negative / paralysis

References

Geoffrey Vickers. Freedom in a Rocking Boat: changing values in an unstable society. Allen Lane, 1972

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License .

For further updates on this site, subscribe here