If we replay “boy” with “this population” and replace “ball” with “violence”, then the issue becomes a bit more in doubt. “People in this population are likely to exhibit violent” is not quite the same thing as “violence is likely to be exhibited by people in this population”. This second statement doesn’t differ much from “people in this population are likely to exhibit violent”; however, the left branching statements seem to place some causality in the state of violence: Are people in this population becoming ‘unstable’ because of the violence or do they model their behavior after the violence that is occurring all around them (or is the violence a symptom of the culture that pervades this population)?
On the surface, these variations in the presentation of a description seem trivial; however, I would suggest that they are not and that any thoughtful review of contemporary theories about and strategies for dealing with violence must address the often-subtle issue of implicit (as well as explicit) causality. A sequencing of causality is critical in seeking to understand and address specific human behavioral issues. While semantics plays an important role in the labeling of human behavior, syntax (or at least the fundamental ordering of causality) plays a role in the formulation of assumptions about the etiology and ultimately attempts to address human dysfunction. Experts in the humanities must be just as humble as those in the sciences when presenting themselves as experts regarding the human condition.
Going Beyond the Numbers and Narratives: Diversity of Perspectives
How do we bring both numbers and words to bear upon our own work as Cosmopolitan experts? How do we come to value and use the expertise of other people, as experts, when they offer diverse and often complex perspectives and interpretations? How as coaches, to we assist our clients in identifying and making effective use of Cosmopolitan experts? As a first step toward answers these important questions, I turn to the work of Frans Johansson (2004, 2006) who writes about the dynamic opportunities and challenges of differing perspective and Intersections as they relate to the fostering of creativity within social systems. Johansson focuses on what he calls the Medici Effect and the “Intersections” between different disciplines and cultures—what Thomas Kuhn (1962) might consider the Intersections between differing paradigms.
This represents the positive and generative side of Irony and contradiction (Rorty, 1989): diverse ideas and perspectives create new ideas and perspectives—even new paradigms. Harkening back to the “explosion of remarkable ideas” during the reign of the Medici family in Florence during the Italian Renaissance, Johansson suggests that “if we can just reach an intersection of disciplines or cultures, we will have a greater change of innovating, simply because there are so many unusual ideas to go around.” (Johansson, 2004, p. 20)
Like Florence of the 14th and 15th Centuries, our contemporary world is filled with Intersections that create opportunities for the generation of new ideas. In short, we are living in a Cosmopolitan world. It is a world that offers amply opportunities for creativity and invention. Johansson’s hopes regarding an intersection might even lead to the building of a bridge between Snow’s two cultures. Clearly at the very least, our Cosmopolitan world is saturated with options and choices. Richard Rorty (1989) would suggest that it is a world in which we must live with (and learn from) contingencies. It is also a world that offers potential diffusion of power and control. In a book of the past decade, Moisés Naim (2013) writes about the impact of diversity and complexity on the allocation and application of power. We find that the traditional, centralized sources of power—the government, churches, large corporations—are no longer able to command full authority. In large part this is because there are now many sources and kinds of power. We are living in a Cosmopolitan world that is diverse regarding disciplines (and as Snow suggests competing cultures). It is also diverse regarding power, leading to what Naim calls the “end of power.”
Download Article 1K Club
