- Data deluge, complexity - experts can process the info better and can come to better conclusions than we can
- We give them parental-like authority
- Big problem
- Experts divide themselves into rigid camps, worshiping their own gurus, eschewing dissent
- We have to take them on and persist in the face of their annoyance
- We have to ask questions about their methodologies
- Google CEO actively looks for the arms-crossed disassociated person in the room
- Democratized expertise - shop girls get a say with the forecasting team for the company
- Best Buy introduced a gambling chip - employees could bet on stuff and they discovered important flaws in projects
I don't think 'natural' is good. There are many things that we apply (some almost arbitrary) (some ignorant and backward ideas of natural and not-natural agenda-propagating) rules of morality. I think 'natural' is a political rhetoric, profoundly abused. 'Diversity' is the only defensible rhetoric for 'thinking' beings. We are not, of course, the only creatures that do thinking, but we are the only creatures with the power to oppress others and other creatures whose languages we don't understand. Us (badly) thinking creatures, slowly, ponderously gathering the evidence of our badness (I see no reason for your (god's) patience with us), have the ability to decide to be better than (the fashionable) 'natural' of the day. It is our responsibility to transcend our vileness. Just that. That one task. Our thinkingness I believe is for that. A world (constructed by god) to demonstrate this point. And we will find every rhetor...
Comments