wili.....I will try to briefly reply.....I am currently working on research and hope to publish within a year. I briefly considered pursuing a PhD but have come to the conclusion that I lack the discipline to do this.
My research interest was born out of my 30 plus year career in manufacturing. As a manager (upwards to 400 direct reports) I developed the ability (trial by error) over my career to develop vibrant, effective organizations where the vast majority of employees loved coming to work. I had very low turnover and highly productive teams. These teams stood in stark contrast to groups led by my peers. My basic method was to foster communication throughout my organization. I would create, very methodically, a rich communication network where this communication not only built relationships but the sharing of individual perspectives caused the organization to become very flexible and solve problems quickly and effectively. I went back to school 3 years ago to try to understand why I was effective as a manager.
My interest was in the "learning organization". How do organizations learn how to learn.
What I have discovered applies not only to manufacturing groups but, in fact applies to any bounded entity (group of individuals who see themselves as that group) These bounded entities can be small (a family) or large (a country) or massive (human civilization).
1. All of reality can be viewed as a system, a bounded entity that acts rationally within a set of beliefs.
2. Larger systems are made up of subsystems and these subsystems are, in turn, made up of smaller systems.
3. Systems overlap. Their boundaries can include parts of other systems (e.g. Various religions are included in the larger system of the U.S. but these systems also span the boundaries of individual nation states).
4. All systems have an overriding purpose, the perpetuation of the system. The reason for this is that all individuals within the system or bounded entity have an overriding interest in its perpetuation.
5. Systems that have a robust network, interconnections within the individual components of the system, are more robust than systems that are less well interconnected. (My success as a manager was directly related to my success at creating these highly interconnected communication networks within my organization. I had inadvertently created a highly resilient bounded entity.)
6. A resilient system is more flexible and adaptable, able to withstand shocks.
7. Smaller, less complex systems are more resilient than larger complex systems.
8. A previously robust system can become less resilient if the robust interconnections within the system are broken or weaken. Systems can weaken due to attacks from within or without.
9. Just as the creation of larger systems are the result of the integration of subsystems through the creation of interconnections, the collapse of larger systems is a dis-integrative process, a breaking of the robust connections that form the larger system.
10. All systems have as their foundation, a set of shared beliefs, a paradigm that guides the systems behavior and deliver the logical results. Individuals, as rational actors within the system, make decisions consistent with the foundational paradigms without usually being aware of their existence.
11. System results are the logical outcome of rational behavior of the system. This system behavior cannot be altered from without. The system will see such attempts as a threat to its existence and will either destroy or coopt the external agents for change.
12. System behavior and the logical results of this behavior can only be altered from within, although the system will see these internal efforts as threats as well. While there are many ways to alter system behavior from within, the most powerful way is at the level of paradigm. It is also paradoxically the easiest as, for each individual, it can occur in an instant, as the veil is lifted, pulled away, exposing the existing paradigm and allowing for choosing a new paradigm to operate which is transformative and can alter the behavior of the system.
Modern industrial capitalism is just such a system. As western Europe began the transformation from a feudalistic society to what ultimately became the modern system of global capitalism, brilliant philosophers worked to understand and define the nature of economic man. Five of the most influential were Descartes, Mandeville, Locke, Hume and Adam Smith. Together and with contributions from other thinkers of the day, they created the foundation, the very paradigm that guides the system, its behavior and results.
This paradigm or concept is that of the "Invisible Hand". Mandeville proposed that "private ethics did not matter; anything that happens, be it moral or amoral, contributes to the general welfare." As others explored this idea, ethics became seemingly irrelevant. The originally universal notion of the relationship between ethics and economics, which we encounter in the Old Testament, was turned on its head. The argument began that the more vices there were, the more material well-being there could be. "Greed is good" is not an accident but a desired feature of the emerging system. Adam Smith refined this and argued that the individual pursuit of pure self interest, would logically result in the common good. This paradigm forms the foundation and continues to guide the system of capitalism today. It can be found in public discourse everywhere and serves as a justification of the pursuit of wealth. Each of us, as rational actors within the system, make economic choices guided by this paradigm. We seek to improve our standing within the system, to improve our lives and the lives of our family.
While a very useful construct to build a philosophical foundation for the creation of the modern economy, this concept or paradigm is patently false. Any student of economics is well acquainted with the "tragedy of the commons". The pursuit by individuals of pure self interest is the root cause of all of the ills of modern human civilization. This selfish pursuit does not contribute at all to the common good but is the source of misery. Pollution, poverty, overfishing of fisheries are all logical results of the pursuit of pure self interest. Because the paradigm is a falsehood or lie, all forms of institutions have arisen to mitigate the effects of (e.g. prisons to incarcerate the desperately poor) or limit the destruction that the pure pursuit of self interest causes. Despite this, the paradigm continues to form the very foundation of the system of capitalism. We continue to act as rational actors within the system pursuing our own self interest while railing against the logical results of such a pursuit, the destruction of the environment, rampant poverty and injustice and now the existential threat that is AGW.
What is needed is a new paradigm. New paradigms always occur on the individual level and they attain their power as more and more adopt and operate from the new paradigm. Each person continues to participate in the existing economic system but by having the new paradigm guide their economic choices they will transform the system from within. All systems, true for the system of Capitalism as well, see new paradigms as a threat to their very existence and will fight this threat.
We need to discard or "withdraw from" the old paradigm, "The Invisible Hand" and fashion a new paradigm to guide our economic being. This new paradigm must recognize that every economic transaction has a value that is attached and communicated to the rest of humanity. Each transaction made by the individual must also contribute to the common good, to benefit ourselves while simultaneously benefitting those who are party to the transaction and society as a whole. It is no longer possible for us to separate ethics from economic choice but ethical decisions need to be at the foundation of each and every choice we make as economic beings. Do we value the environment? Then every economic choice must be made so that it contributes to its well being. Keep in mind that adopting this paradigm means that we can no longer make economic choices out of pure self interest. We must decide for ourselves if we choose to continue to be rational actors, guided by the existing paradigm, and serve to perpetuate the system or choose to operate from the new paradigm with its attendant impact on the realization of pure and amoral self interest.
Adopting this new paradigm will transform the current system and individuals can adopt this new paradigm in an instant. As more and more operate rationally from this new paradigm the system of capitalism will be transformed and many of the ills that are a result of the existing paradigm will disappear. Perhaps we can avoid the existential threat that is AGW.
I would like to add that no actions within the existing paradigm have any hope of saving us from the logical results of the system of capitalism. We will continue to inhabit a world of desperate want and injustice and environmental degradation that threatens our very existence.