Comments on: The overseers http://managingleadership.com/blog/2009/03/18/the-overseers/ The strategic role of the senior executive Sat, 28 Jan 2012 01:35:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Peter Gluck http://managingleadership.com/blog/2009/03/18/the-overseers/comment-page-1/#comment-8414 Peter Gluck Fri, 20 Mar 2009 08:51:52 +0000 http://managingleadership.com/blog/?p=2151#comment-8414 Dear Jim, If you want, you can keep these just for you; they are ideas extracted from my editorials. Truth is very fragmented, so they are diversified. Wisdom of crowds lies in their diversity The Good and Evil are siamese twins The Universe feeds our insatiable curiosity forever Human rights are threatened by Human Privileges Bad septoism is seven words not wise All great crises are crises of thinking The Universe is obsessed to be interesting. Brainair- four parts realism, one part imagination. My favorite metasport is swimming counter-stream. Future is bright but not for Humanity. Astrology offends Human Intelligence but is Business. We live in memecracies, ideas dominate us. Means are swallowing aims and replacing them. People lie because most truths are bad. In need solidarity becomes liquidarity even gasidarity. Greek Gods ruling today: Ares, Hermes, Koalemos. Initiative is the greatest differentiator of humans. Perfectionism is dangerous, we need sustained perfectibilism. Good could take creativity lessons from Evil. Evolution is the inherent perfectibility of Nature. Save the world with the Seriousyne vaccine! Human nature plus idealistic theories equal disaster. Unlimited greed and ignorance lead to disaster. Life is hungry matter and edible too. Victories over your former Self are triumphs. The Future Shock was amortized by irrationality. Lies are shortcuts from problems to solutions. The essence of human nature is discontent. First remove Evil then start building good. Dear Jim,
If you want, you can keep these just for you; they are ideas extracted from my editorials.
Truth is very fragmented, so they are diversified.

Wisdom of crowds lies in their diversity

The Good and Evil are siamese twins

The Universe feeds our insatiable curiosity forever

Human rights are threatened by Human Privileges

Bad septoism is seven words not wise

All great crises are crises of thinking

The Universe is obsessed to be interesting.

Brainair- four parts realism, one part imagination.

My favorite metasport is swimming counter-stream.

Future is bright but not for Humanity.

Astrology offends Human Intelligence but is Business.

We live in memecracies, ideas dominate us.

Means are swallowing aims and replacing them.

People lie because most truths are bad.

In need solidarity becomes liquidarity even gasidarity.

Greek Gods ruling today: Ares, Hermes, Koalemos.

Initiative is the greatest differentiator of humans.

Perfectionism is dangerous, we need sustained perfectibilism.

Good could take creativity lessons from Evil.

Evolution is the inherent perfectibility of Nature.

Save the world with the Seriousyne vaccine!

Human nature plus idealistic theories equal disaster.

Unlimited greed and ignorance lead to disaster.

Life is hungry matter and edible too.

Victories over your former Self are triumphs.

The Future Shock was amortized by irrationality.

Lies are shortcuts from problems to solutions.

The essence of human nature is discontent.

First remove Evil then start building good.

]]> By: Peter Gluck http://managingleadership.com/blog/2009/03/18/the-overseers/comment-page-1/#comment-8413 Peter Gluck Fri, 20 Mar 2009 08:44:56 +0000 http://managingleadership.com/blog/?p=2151#comment-8413 Dear Jim, First of all, I perfectly agree with your last sentence in the paper above. The world has problems and problem solving needs responsible leaders. The issue of intellectuals is not an easy one and many ideas have to be confronted. However I think that the first rule of intellectual honesty is that differences in opinion attract smart people and repel only the other ones. There are two intellectual problems with your Jugglers paper: a) what is your definition of an intellectual? Take a look please to the Wikipedia- there are many alternatives... b) the "we" vs "they" thinking needs care and definitions otherwise you can arrive to a Pongo-like statement. Plus other dangers. To tell you and to your readers a few words about my status, I am a retired scientific researcher, I was fascinated by the possibilities of the Internet and in 2002 I have started to write a weekly newsletter aiming to demonstrate that the Internet can be used to problem solving and to mental processing on the data-information-knowledge- wisdom-prediction line. I am writing a book about real-life problemology; that will be in English- if I find an editor. The newsletter is at http://info.kappa.ro and it is in romanian; it belongs to the UPC Romania company (in the US -Liberty Global). The main part is about web-search and therefore Managing Leadership is very much used and appreciated but I am writing editorials (now No. 344), the subject "Intellectuals" was in Nos 213 and 214 and these are exactly along our present discussion. "Wisdom of crowds" also essential for these problems is in No. 267. I think it would be useful if the discussion start with what, in your opinion, intellectuals are, and what they are NOT? Who, in your opinion, are intellectuals from the following ad-hoc list: Edward de Bono, Jim Rohn, Umberto Eco,Alan Sokal, Richard Dawkins, Vaclav Havel, Noam Chomsky, Nicholas Nassim Taleb...? What about the fight of the people with many books vs the people with One Book?Actually vice-versa! What about the elite of the super-rich, compared with the elite of the super-smart? What about the disastruous results of the dominance of the old gods- Ares, Hermes and Koalemos (i.e. violence, greed and stupidity?)All crises are first crises of thinking. What about the oppression of reason and about the modes of thinking? How to cope with ignorance and superstions as astrology, numerology, psychics, snake oil merchants? As long as our societies are lead by moneytheistic thinking-all these cannot be defeated but can be constrained a bit- and that's one of the missions of the genuine thinkers, call them intellectuals or otherwise. Peter P.S You will decide if our dialogue will continue, I am happy to do it but in a festine lento style- I have the newsletter to work for. In a separate posting I will send you some of my ideas in form of "septoes" an invention of Edward de Bono, who in my opinion is an intellectual, a great one. Dear Jim,
First of all, I perfectly agree with your last sentence in the paper above. The world has problems and problem solving needs responsible leaders.
The issue of intellectuals is not an easy one and many ideas have to be confronted. However I think that the first rule of intellectual honesty is that differences in opinion attract smart people and repel only the other ones.
There are two intellectual problems with your Jugglers paper:
a) what is your definition of an intellectual? Take a look please to the Wikipedia- there are many alternatives…
b) the “we” vs “they” thinking needs care and definitions otherwise you can arrive to a Pongo-like statement. Plus other dangers.
To tell you and to your readers
a few words about my status, I am a retired scientific researcher, I was fascinated by the possibilities of the Internet and in 2002 I have started to write a weekly newsletter aiming to demonstrate that the Internet can be used to problem solving
and to mental processing on the data-information-knowledge-
wisdom-prediction line.
I am writing a book about real-life problemology; that will be in English- if I find an editor.
The newsletter is at http://info.kappa.ro and it is in romanian; it belongs to the UPC Romania company (in the US -Liberty Global). The main part is about web-search and therefore Managing Leadership is very much used and appreciated but I am writing editorials (now No. 344), the subject “Intellectuals” was in Nos 213 and 214 and these are exactly along our present discussion. “Wisdom of crowds” also essential for these problems is in No. 267.

I think it would be useful if the discussion start with what, in your opinion, intellectuals are, and what they are NOT?
Who, in your opinion, are intellectuals from the following ad-hoc list: Edward de Bono, Jim Rohn, Umberto Eco,Alan Sokal, Richard Dawkins, Vaclav Havel, Noam Chomsky, Nicholas Nassim Taleb…?
What about the fight of the people with many books vs the people with One Book?Actually vice-versa!
What about the elite of the super-rich, compared with the elite of the super-smart?
What about the disastruous results of the dominance of the old gods- Ares, Hermes and Koalemos (i.e. violence, greed and stupidity?)All crises are first crises of thinking.
What about the oppression of reason and about the modes of thinking?
How to cope with ignorance and superstions as astrology, numerology, psychics, snake oil merchants?
As long as our societies are lead by moneytheistic thinking-all these cannot be defeated but can be constrained a bit- and that’s one of the missions of the genuine thinkers, call them intellectuals or otherwise.
Peter
P.S You will decide if our dialogue will continue, I am happy to do it but in a festine lento style- I have the newsletter to work for.
In a separate posting I will send you some of my ideas in form of “septoes” an invention of Edward de Bono, who in my opinion is an intellectual, a great one.

]]>