The hallmarks of good leadership

"Who will be our next president?” "Will Zuma get re-elected?", “What do we think are the characteristics that our next leader should have?” These questions are vigorously debated in every newspaper and radio show. So, I thought that some insights from leading leadership researchers might shed some light.

A classic way to understand a concept more clearly is to concentrate for a while on what it isn’t before turning to what it is. And the first thing that needs mentioning about leadership is that it isn’t necessarily good or desirable in itself! Leadership is always a means to an end, and the question of where we are being lead, is after all of major importance. Our last century has had its fair share of “outstanding” leaders who managed to mislead their followers into situations of untold suffering and tragedy.

Though strong leaders, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Gaddafi, Mubarak and Mugabe, are hardly models of excellence likely to inspire a new crop of aspiring leaders. For the question must always be asked: to what end are they leading people; how valid is their vision? A second issue is that leadership is not simply a case of charisma. In fact, the Hitler’s, Mao’s and gang probably suffered an overdose of charisma which was their Achilles’ heel, rendering them over-confident, inflexible and ultimately focused on themselves rather than their original cause. In contrast, Peter Drucker, a management philosopher, identifies three American Presidents who were singularly effective leaders (e.g. Harry Truman), yet none of whom “possessed any more charisma than a dead mackerel!”

I do not want to argue that charisma doesn’t help the leadership function, but rather that, by itself, charisma does not guarantee good leadership. Also, many effective leaders are short on charisma. To summarise what good leadership isn’t: leadership isn’t necessarily good or desirable in itself - it must always be judged by the ethical and spiritual validity of the vision it promotes; and leadership is not simply a matter of charisma. What then does constitute good leadership?

A number of surveys on what constituents regard as the characteristics of admired leaders, place honesty and integrity at the top of the list by far. It is as though people everywhere are saying to leaders: no more bullshit! Tell us the truth, even if it is unpalatable! If we find out you have been lying to us we’ll attack you and unseat you; if you are consistently honest with us, we’ll support you.

A second important insight is that people want leaders who inspire them. This is the heart of leadership. If you are trying to exercise leadership in a local situation, ask yourself: does my thinking, my talking, my behaviour, my enthusiasm, my energy, my honesty and integrity, my care and encouragement inspire the people around me? If yes, then you are exercising some leadership. If no, then whatever else you are doing it’s not exercising leadership. You will see that inspiring people is not one simple thing. It is the result of how passionately and sincerely you do a number of things. Leaders often inspire people because they love what they are doing – and it shows. Their vision is a love affair with an idea or an ideal; it’s about wild, intemperate love that touches people, raises their sights and energises their spirits.    

A third critical characteristic is that leaders must have the ability to make things absolutely clear and simple; they must cut through complexity and communicate the essentials. The skill of clarifying situations, goals, priorities, direction and vision is what people are often crying out for in their leaders. And after clarification comes clear communication. We don’t want mixed messages but we also don’t want long silences from our leaders. Good leaders clarify the issues and communicate regularly with their constituents; they take care to keep you in the picture.

A final insight is that the functions of leadership and management are different and equally essential to the health and survival of our organisations, our communities, our institutions and our nations. While management focuses on enabling people to deliver, it is leadership that inspires people to perform beyond the ordinary. Leadership engages people’s spirits and aligns organisational energy by focusing on the fundamentals – cause, purpose, vision and values. So, leadership provides us with direction and hope. It inspires people to keep going when things are tough.

So, given these insights on leadership, how do our South African leaders past and present stack up? What about other world leaders, especially the present crop? And what about us: those of us involved in leadership of any sort in our communities? How do we measure up to the hallmarks: Do we have an ethically and spiritually sound vision? Is our honesty and integrity beyond reproach? Is our leadership inspirational, are our messages clear? Is our communication focused on the fundamentals and is it regular and consistent? Where do we need to improve?

The importance of going round in circles

We all tend to think in a simple linear fashion. That “x#@*!!” taxi driver passed me on the left hand side, cut right in front of me and caused me to swerve to avoid him, resulting in my crashing into the side barrier while he disappeared into the traffic. Now in a cause-effect way that may describe what happened. But it doesn’t get us anywhere in understanding (and ultimately rectifying) the problem of accidents caused by the bad driving of many taxi drivers. To crack that nut we need to think systemically, in circles rather than in straight lines.

While systems thinking dates back to the early Greeks, in modern times we should probably start with biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy who published his book on General Systems Theory in 1968. Since then it permeates the thinking of virtually every discipline and provides essential insights necessary for successful living. As you will see, some of these insights are pretty counter-intuitive!

Major insight:  everything is dependent on, and influences everything else. Fritjof Capra, a physicist who lectures in the philosophy of science has written some marvellous books on this theme: The Web of Life, and Hidden Connections. His thesis is that we are all linked in myriads of ways, some obvious, others obscure, others hidden. And our biggest delusion as a species is that we are independent individuals able to act without reference to our considerable interconnections.

The problem for us, despite what these great thinkers say, is that we find their complexity theories, well…too damn complex. Some of them, however, offer us a great way out: the method of thinking in systems circles as a way of understanding and then solving complex problems. Take the infuriating taxi drivers.

Event A: Taxi owners pay drivers commission per passenger carried and per trip made. So, the more trips they make, the more passengers they carry, the more they earn.

Event B: Drivers are encouraged to speed and break the traffic rules to get the extra trips and passengers because this earns them more money!

Event C: Inadequate traffic policing, results in very few negative consequences to bad, illegal, discourteous driving.

Event D: My imaginary accident, in which the driver gets away without any negative consequences to himself. In fact, he is rewarded by the taxi owner for his extra passengers and extra trips. And the taxi owner is better off by perpetuating the commission system. It’s a vicious circle!

So, to break this negative, vicious circle what can we do? Well, the only thing that makes long-term sense is to campaign for tackling the source of the problem: the commission system used to remunerate drivers. Anything short of this will only result in isolated redress to particular accident sufferers without any real impact on the rogue system that is causing so much stress.

Let me finish with a positive circle.

Event A: A group of “white” residents in a smallish rural town offer to teach English to classes of Afrikaans speaking, “coloured” children at the local Primary School. The children begin to respond positively to the weekly language classes and to the English speaking teachers.

Event B: The teachers and the children begin to react warmly and positively to one another when they meet outside the classroom in the town shopping area.

Event C: The Headmaster and staff begin to accept the English speaking teachers as part-time volunteer colleagues, and the relationship between the “coloured” school and the mainly white towns people improves with the town seeing these kids and this school as “ours”.

Event D: who knows?

Event E: who knows?

It has been a systemic intervention that has created a positive circle. It may be one that eventually draws people from the economically divided communities together. However, we don’t know because while social change can be led, the complexity of social systems will ultimately determine what emerges or evolves.

Positive circles as well as negative ones can be changed, but our interventions need careful consideration. We need to think systemically, in circles before we decide what to do to bolster positive systems or break negative ones. And change takes time: there are often delays, which if we are not expecting them can make us despondent. However, this is a further benefit of thinking in circles: it provides us with an accurate perception of reality rather than the impatient, uncomprehending distortion that demands change immediately.

Try using the 80/20 principle

Richard Koch has authored and co-authored 18 books, the best-known of which is his The 80/20 Principle. The 80/20 principle started as an economic theory put forward by Vilfredo Pareto in 1897. Not surprisingly some people still call it the Pareto Principle. It has also been called the Rule of the Vital Few and the Trivial Many, and you will soon see why.

First insight: the universe is wonky, it’s not neatly balanced! There appears to be an inbuilt imbalance between inputs and outputs, causes and consequences, efforts and results. The 80/20 Principle is a neat way of stating this imbalance. For example, in business approximately 20% of your products will usually account for more or less 80% of your total sales and profits; and 20% of your customers will usually account for 80% of your sales and profits. In communities, organisations and institutions 20% of the people make 80% of the positive contributions. And conversely 80% of the negative vibes circulating are caused by 20% of the people – the Vicious Few!

Typically then, causes, inputs or effort divide into two categories: the majority that have little impact and a small minority that have a major, dominant impact on outputs or results. For example, take “effort”: smart students know that 80% or more of exam papers can be well answered with in depth knowledge of 20% of the subject matter that the syllabus was meant to cover. The examiners are usually much more impressed by a student who knows a great deal about a relatively narrow range than only a fair amount about a wide range of topics.

Second insight: focusing on the vital few will dramatically improve the quality of your life! There are always a few things, a few people, a few friends, a few organisations, a few institutions (and so on) that are far more important to your happiness and well-being than the majority. This is invariably true. Richard Koch asserts that 80/20 thinking will definitely improve your life. The habit of looking everywhere for 80/20 insights will make your life more pleasant, easier and far happier. For example, putting effort into your vital few true friendships instead of spreading yourself too thin usually brings great rewards. Focusing your efforts on the vital few institutions or organisations you consider crucially important to Greyton will result in a far greater contribution to the well-being of our town than if you give a little of your time and effort to all of them.

Third insight: become what Koch calls a “time revolutionary” and only spend time on the 20% of activities that produce 80% of your achievements or happiness. In other words, forget managing time; rather identify the vital few things that really bring you joy – and focus totally on them. Also, identify the vital few things that result in your best accomplishments and focus your energy on them. And forget about the 80% of activities that are of relatively low value. Time revolutionaries make very good use of 20% of available time and in doing so discover that there is in fact no shortage of time! On the contrary, by making 20% of your time really count you can without guilt relax and play in the remaining 80%!

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe summed it up neatly many years before Richard Koch. “Things that matter most must never be at the mercy of things that matter least”

Go on; think about how the 80/20 Principle can apply to an area of your life right now; and ensure that you go and implement it. Then sooner rather than later look for a return on your investment far in excess to your input effort!

The importance of those few vital friends

Philosophers have had different views on the essentials of real friendship. Aristotle took the view that friendship is personal and mutual: “friendship is a single soul dwelling in two bodies!” So for Aristotle friendship is a fairly exclusive relationship between two people. He helps us understand what he means by true friendship by highlighting two forms of friendship which he regards as shallow impostors.

First, he rejects friendship based on the reciprocation of pleasure – when the pleasure palls the friendship dissolves.  Similarly the second shallow imitation of real friendship is one based on usefulness – when the other party is no longer useful s/he gets dropped.

Soren Kierkegaard rejected Aristotle’s view on the Christian ground that people should love all their neighbours, which cuts out friendships that exclude any neighbours. A.C. Grayling, a great 21^st Century philosopher, contends that the two views need not be inconsistent. You can nourish benevolent feelings towards humanity in general, and work for its good, while at the same time enjoying deep friendships with one or a few others.

Against this philosophical background it is fascinating to discover that the importance of friendships to our lives has been studied quite recently by Tom Rath who heads up research at The Gallup Organisation. Gallup Press published a book by Rath on this research: Vital Friends. Here are some of the insights.

First insight: friendship is better than Prozac! Research from numerous scientific studies highlights that people who have a few deep friendships thrive better than those who don’t. Lonely people suffer psychologically and physically. The absence of deep, vital friendships impacts negatively on our health, our spirits, our productivity and our longevity!

Second insight: friendship is the silver lining in a marriage!  According to philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche “It is not a lack of love, but a lack of friendship that makes unhappy marriages”. And Tom Rath’s Gallup research indicates that the quality of a couple’s friendship could account for as much as 70% of overall marital satisfaction. So in answer to the question: “What drives marital satisfaction, sex or friendship?” the quality of a couple’s friendship is five times as important as physical intimacy. (Hey, I’m only reporting what the research shows…)

Third insight: no one best friend can be all things to your friendship needs. People are different. Even if your husband or wife or partner is genuinely your best friend, Tom Rath suggests that you probably need at least two more Vital Friends in order to be fully engaged and energised by your key relationships. Rath reckons that in friendships, because we are all different, we usually give different things than we receive. He proposes that there are at least eight vital roles that we and our special friends play and that no single friend is capable of playing all eight roles. So, it is unfair to expect that you or your best friends can be “everything” to each other.

Fourth insight: focus on the positive roles that people play in your life and on what roles you play for them. No one person can be a “fun buddy”, a “mind opener”, a “network connector”, a “lifelong companion”, a “fellow crusader” and so on. So, Rath’s advice is: don’t be hard on yourself or your friends when none of you can be all things to all people. Focus on the great role that your fun buddy plays in lightening up your life and don’t expect him/her to necessarily be the fellow crusader who shares your deepest values and will work passionately alongside you in your favourite organisation.

Tom Rath’s parting thoughts are that, on reflection, he realised that throughout his life he had taken his closest relationships for granted. He had several malnourished friendships; they were by no means starved, but he had spent very little time consciously improving his best friendships. When he realised this he took concerted action to remedy the situation and his life took a dramatic upward turn.

In a sense we are who we eat with. Grayling writes: “friendships need tending and nothing replaces time together, in circumstances where other pressures are lifted so that the gates of communication can spring open, allowing free trade to pass between” Cheers!

Are you a Climber, a Camper or a Quitter?

How good are you at handling adversity? Family problems, financial difficulties, health issues, relationship problems, the impact of crime, major hassles with service providers and so on. Well, this week’s world-class thinker Dr. Paul Stoltz has developed a measure of the attitudes and skills that enable you to turn obstacles into opportunities. He calls it the Adversity Quotient (AQ) and it measures two key differentials of success: persistence and resilience.

Paul Stoltz is not only a research psychologist; he is also an experienced mountaineer. So he uses a mountaineering metaphor to explain how different people deal with our human drive to ascend; to move forward and upward in our instinctual effort to achieve whatever goals we have set ourselves in the limited time we have. In our metaphorical ascent through life we meet three types of people; they have different responses to life’s ascent and we can readily spot them in our organisations, our cities, our towns and village. Also, we ourselves fit into one of the three categories.

First, there are the Quitters: those who opt out, back out, drop out and choose to ignore their core drive to achieve. Their lifestyle is compromised: they have abandoned their dreams and do just enough to get by. In their relationships Quitters shy away from the challenges of commitment; instead they join those who bitch about “the system” as this allows them to vent without doing anything to put things right.

Second, there are the Campers: people who have stopped achieving and ascending and opt instead for comfort and security, and so try to avoid adversity. They are less compromised than Quitters, but they have sacrificed what could be for the illusion of keeping what is. Campers do what is required and have some initiative and drive, but they sacrifice their true potential and opt for relationships and lifestyles that avoid discomfort and are seemingly “safe”.

Third, there are the Climbers: they are dedicated to a life-long ascent; they energetically explore possibilities and live life with a sense of passion and purpose; they enjoy the journey! Climbers are true learners who overcome setbacks, make things happen and strive for their goals. They are unafraid to explore new frontiers and are unafraid of the potential and pain that accompanies deep relationships.

Paul Stoltz posits four dangerous forks in the trail to the top. The “Climber-turned-Camper” option offers the illusion that the campsite will stay stable; but waiting out the storm can lead to waiting out your life, and you risk physical, intellectual, emotional and spiritual atrophy! Then there is the “Technology-as-God” option which is a shift from faith in human solutions to technical ones: technology, not teams of people, will tackle the major problems and issues we face; the “I can’t do anything but someone will invent something, someday” mentality. The third dangerous fork in the trail is the “Pump-up” option. This is the search for the quick fix, the motivational speaker type of solution. Tempting tools that offer pump rather than sustainable content, where euphoria dies quickly, leaving little change. His final fork is the “Helpless-Hopeless” option. Helplessness in the face of adversity can change to hopelessness which sucks one into a vortex of despair. Helplessness is a cancer of the soul for individuals, groups, teams and organisations.

Instead of taking any of the dangerous forks in the trail to the top of your life’s calling, Stoltz says you can strengthen your Adversity Quotient by dealing with the “CORE” elements that determine the level of your persistence and resilience.

C = Control: this is your perceived control over adverse events. When faced with adversity it is vital that you search for ways of increasing your control over the situation. Even if it is exercising greater control over your emotions. There is always something you can do to increase your feeling of control; find it! High AQ people are relatively immune from feeling helpless and unable to control at least part of what is happening.

O = Origin & Ownership: origin is who or what caused the adversity. Here Stoltz says it’s important that we see the bigger picture and don’t simply blame ourselves: “it’s all my/our fault”; “I’m such an idiot” or “we’re just not good enough”. Ownership is accepting accountability for doing something about the adverse situation: “we can learn from our mistakes and do something to correct the situation”

R = Reach: how far we allow any particular adversity to reach into other areas. Do we turn bad events into huge catastrophes? Do we allow them to spread like wildfire and to bleed into other areas? Or are we more likely to limit the reach of the event at hand; deal with adversity in discreet, chewable chunks?

E = Endurance: how long you think the adversity and its causes will last. People with a low AQ tend to think “things will never get better”; “this country/city is doomed”; “the whole local government system is going down the tubes” People with a high AQ are likely to consider adversity as temporary, fleeting and unlikely to recur; they see light at the end of the tunnel no matter how long the tunnel is.

                                                                        

If you are currently facing adversity, Paul Stoltz says don’t give in: difficulty is the nurse of greatness; a harsh nurse who roughly rocks her foster-children into strength and ability. Life is truly known only to those who suffer, lose but endure adversity through persistence and resilience. And emerge resurgent on the other side.

What do you say after hello?

How effectively do we interact with others? How easy are we to deal with? And how do we handle the “difficult people” we encounter? Do you find some people easier to communicate with than others? Do you feel on the same wave length with some, but feel that with certain other people the wires often seem to be crossed?

Eric Berne was a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst who became widely known with the publication of his best selling book Games People Play in 1964. Berne managed to take highly complex psychological concepts and make them accessible to a large non-professional readership. His last book, published the year after he died, had the marvellously simple yet incredibly thoughtful title: What do you say after you say Hello?  In other words, how do we interact with one another; what is our stance towards each other?

Berne’s theory is that when we interact with other people we do so in one of three specific ways or patterns. He calls these three patterns of thinking, feeling and behaving “ego states”. And he names them your Parent, your Adult and your Child. So, when you are in your Parent pattern of dealing with others you tend to think, feel and act just like one of your parents. If you are behaving, thinking and feeling in response to what is going on around you here and now, and using all the resources available to you as a grown up person, then you are in your Adult ego state. If you behave, think and feel like you did when you were 3, 4 or 5 then you will be acting out of your Child ego state.

First insight: it is the inappropriate use of the three ego states that screws up communication. Sometimes it is appropriate to act like a Parent. When you are chairing a fairly rowdy and disorderly meeting, you will need to take charge and act with authority in laying down the rules of conduct at the meeting. On the other hand, if you regularly behave in a bossy, authoritarian and finger wagging manner with other adults this will be a very inappropriate use of your Parent ego state. And it will cause you grief because other bossy parental types will fight with you. Also, people who regularly operate out of their Adult ego states will calmly reject your bossy attitude and suggestions with logical reasoning.

Second insight: if a group is all operating out of the same ego state, their communication can be clear. For example many tea parties are enjoyed by the participants because they are all communicating like a group of parents. They tend to criticise those who are not present, and point their fingers and vent their indignation on outsiders who do not conform to their particular view of life. I call these types of gatherings “isn’t it awful” meetings. “Isn’t it awful how young people behave these days etc. etc.” Most of us at some stage will have been part of an “isn’t it awful” meeting, and thoroughly enjoyed it!

Or you may find a group of friends operating out of their Child ego states. This can be fun, because our Child ego state harks back to a time when we were free of all the restrictions, rules and regulations that parents imposed. A guy “bull session”, or a girl “hen party”, well lubricated by inhibition-lowering glasses of fermented grape or grain can be a raucous evening of fun because everyone present is behaving like kids.  

Then a meeting called to solve the problem of flood damage and what to do about it, could also be an enjoyable one with clear communication if all present operate out of their Adult ego states. When you are all focused on solving an important problem calmly and logically the meeting can be enormously satisfying.  

Third insight: crossed communication usually doesn’t work. By this Berne means that if I address your Child from my Parent ego state and you don’t respond as a Child then the communication is crossed. For example, I may say to you (scowling, pointing and with a bossy voice): “You really should clear all that garden refuse from your pavement. It lowers the tone of the whole street!” Now if you respond from your Child (timid voice): “Gee, sorry about that. I’ll try to get rid of it this afternoon” then you have responded from the ego state I addressed (your Child) and the communication has worked. (Obviously, you will need to ask yourself if you were really happy with that interaction!)

But what if you respond to my bossy rudeness with your Parent? You would probably tell me where to get off in no uncertain terms, resulting in a failed communication – I was expecting you to respond meekly to my bossiness and instead you start yelling at me. Probably the best way to deal with bossy, rude “Parents” is to deal with them out of your Adult: cool, calm and rational as you decline to do what they are instructing! It will result in a crossed communication, but that’s OK because you don’t want them to succeed in hooking a Child response to their Parent bluster!

Perhaps we all need to think a bit about what we say after we say hello…

Yes, but how high is your EQ?

A friend who now lives in Natal visited Joan and I recently. “So, how are you liking Durban?” we asked. “Oh, it’s OK” she said, “But what I really miss is the high level of the gene pool you have here in Greyton!” She was of course referring to the unusually high ratio of intelligent people living in the village. We have more than our fair share of high IQs strolling around the place! And that makes this a very stimulating place in which to live. 

However, IQ is not the only measure there is! There are many people with reasonable rather than razor-sharp brains who are often much more successful than the top brains in the population. And their success stems from their high Emotional and Social Intelligence. Their Emotional Quotient (EQ) is high.

The world-class thinker for this week’s piece is the EQ guru Daniel Goleman. His breakthrough research on the vital importance of emotional intelligence has revolutionised our thinking about leadership and success. His best known works are Emotional Intelligence, Primal Leadership, Destructive Emotions (with the Dalai Lama), and most recently Social Intelligence. Picking out a few key insights from these great books is a real challenge, but here goes:

First insight: how we handle ourselves and our relationships often matters more than our IQ or technical skills. Your emotional intelligence has two main dimensions: a self-dimension and a social dimension. Self-dimension: people with a highly developed EQ are very aware of their emotions and moods and how these impact on others. High EQ people are also good at self-management; they keep disruptive emotions and impulses under control and maintain high levels of optimism, energy and enthusiasm. Social dimension: high EQ people are very aware, empathetic and tuned-in to the emotions of others. They take a genuine interest in other people and are good at managing relationships with others to minimise conflict and maximise cooperation in meeting everyone’s needs and interests.

In many towns and cities you often find a few clubs or associations that seem to consider themselves the intellectual cream of the community. It’s often fascinating to discover that some of these elite clubs or associations have virtually imploded because of fights among their leading lights. It surely demonstrates that while general intelligence (IQ) is very important, if it is not complemented by a high EQ success is not ensured! One is tempted to observe: sure they all have high IQs, but how high is their collective EQ?

Second insight: neuroscience suggests that our brains are “hardwired” to be kind and compassionate. Empathy and compassion are our automatic evolutionary responses to any distress we perceive in others. Another aspect of this is that smiles have the edge over all other facial expressions of emotion. World authority on facial emotions, Paul Ekman, has identified at least 18 different smiles. And the human brain prefers happy faces to those with negative expressions. Goleman calls this the “happy face advantage” Even among complete strangers a moment of playfulness, even outright silliness, forms an instant resonance and rapport. In fact, laughter may well be the shortest distance between two brains.

We don’t need to spell this out, do we? Neuroscience suggests that if we all lighten up, smile and laugh more, then we’ll have better relationships, live longer and enjoy life more. And we don’t have to have genius-level IQs to do that! All we need is a well-developed emotional and social intelligence.

Third insight: our moods are contagious and impact on everyone we encounter. This is especially true of those in leadership positions. So, if you run a business, a committee, or any organisation then be aware that your moods (fair or foul) are always noticed by your staff, your colleagues and your customers. And these moods are contagious; they spread like a virus and impact either positively or negatively on the moods and emotions of these crucial categories of people in your life. How important is it then for you to maintain a high level of energy, enthusiasm and optimism? Perhaps it is critical for your success!

The good news is that we can all improve our EQ (and our success as human beings) by increasing awareness of our own emotions and moods and by exercising better control over them; and we can improve our skills in managing relationships with others so as to ensure creative collaboration rather than destructive competition. It’s worth a try, I reckon!

The importance of a certain slowness

The end of each year is such a frenetic rush of unrelenting activity that most of us would be very receptive to any person who suggests that we really should slow down. So for this month’s Insight Story I shall focus on an article “On the importance of a certain slowness” by Stellenbosch University philosopher, Paul Cilliers. He refers to the idea of slowing down which has been put forward recently by a number of scholars and authors in a variety of situations.

There is the “Slow food” movement which started in Italy (of course!) and now has a worldwide following. “Slow foodies” are passionate about wholesome ingredients, cooked properly and enjoyed lovingly and lingeringly with good friends. The slow food movement rejects and resists fast food and junk food. This resistance is based on aesthetic, nutritional, social and ethical grounds.

Then there is a movement promoting “Slow cities”. Also of Italian origin, this movement promotes an understanding of cities that is more humane than our current cauldrons of violence. Walking rather than driving is encouraged. Small shops with local products are fostered rather than the shopping malls so loved by Americans and South Africans. Slow cities provide people with the opportunity to interact rather than live in lonely isolation. Joan and I experienced the joy of a few of these slow cities on a visit to Tuscany last year. They were a celebration of how humans should be living, and our little Greyton shared many of their slow features.

There are also researchers who have examined two other movements which challenge the cult of speed. Slow schooling questions many educational processes in a world that seems drunk with lust for instant knowledge and results rather than an emerging, evolving competence and wisdom. Again, Greyton schools have the potential to offer a deep, slow education alongside the necessary requirement to fit in with the prevailing systems. On a more personal level, “Slow sex” is a movement that seeks to resist the commercialisation of our intimate relationships. It challenges us to recognise that the journey is more important than the destination and that journeys take time. As Cilliers says: “An immediate or perpetual orgasm is really no orgasm at all.”

There are a number of important issues at stake in these social movements. There are underlying principles and insights that make the dialogue on slowness a fundamental one.

First insight: the cult of speed which equates speed with efficiency is a destructive one. A slower approach is essential because it enables us to cope with a complex world much better and ultimately more efficiently. Cilliers is not arguing against appropriate speed. Obviously, “a stew should simmer slowly and a good steak should be grilled intensely but briefly”. His argument is against unreflective speed, against the alignment of speed with notions of efficiency, success, quality and importance. Against speed as a virtue in itself! The prodigious advances in technology have pushed us into what Thomas Eriksen calls “the tyranny of the moment” in which we are forced to live in an eternal present. We are in instantaneous contact with everybody everywhere. Cell phones and emails call for immediate response and tend to cut out the delay that reflection demands. And without reflecting on our past experiences we become knee-jerk reaction puppets, and sadly think that this is being “efficient”.

Second insight: there is a link between a certain slowness and integrity, sticking to one’s principles. Cilliers quotes three novels that explore this link. Sten Nadolny: The Discovery of Slowness is a novel which shows that even in war thorough reflection before action pays dividends. The main character, John Franklin, has the integrity to assimilate, reflect and integrate before he acts. This is sometimes a ponderous process and he pays a price for it. But eventually people turn to him because they trust his wisdom. JM Coetzee’s novel Slow Man also explores the link between integrity and slowness. His character clings to a set of values despite cruel demands that are made on him. However, he is too stubborn and eventually turns out to be too slow and pays dearly for it. In contrast to Coetzee’s darker view, Milan Kundera’s novel Slowness offers a strong, positive understanding of how a certain slowness is a pre-requisite for being fully human. The novel reveals the beauty of a relationship that unfolds over time, the ecstatic nature of a love that evolves slowly through its past history and emerges in rich complexity into a desired future.

Paul Cilliers’ fine article challenges us to resist the cult of speed and ensure that we structure into our lives, our institutions, our town, and our personal patterns sufficient time for reflection before we rush into action. Speed is sometimes required where appropriate. But the journey needs to be enjoyed and not simply endured as we rush to our physical, social, intellectual and personal destinations.

Adult Learning and the University of the Third Age

Malcolm Knowles is widely regarded as the “Father of Adult Learning” and the person whose thinking and writing launched a new profession, called Adult Education as opposed to educating children. He popularized the distinction between these two approaches to education by using the terms Andragogy (the art and science of helping adults to learn) and Pedagogy (the art and science of helping children to learn).

During a distinguished academic career he wrote 18 books and had 230 articles published in education related journals. His final position before his death in 1997 was Professor Emeritus of Adult Education at North Carolina State University. Although the field of Adult Education has developed far beyond Knowles, his original insights are still widely acknowledged as valid. One of the key advances is that many of the andragogic assumptions apply equally to children (but there is no space to deal with that here!). So, we go straight to a few of his key insights:

First insight: adults have a need to be self-directing and decide for themselves what they want to learn. Being told by some “authority” or “expert” what and how to learn is resisted by most adults. You and I prize our independence and we want a major say in whatever learning we think we should engage in. Interestingly, the University of the Third Age (U3A) a worldwide movement pioneered in France (and which has a lively branch in our small village) is firmly based on this insight. Members are invited to suggest courses/topics that interest them and there is no requirement to attend any lecture or seminar that is not of your choice. There are no prerequisites, exams or certificates.

Second insight: adults have an accumulated reservoir of life experiences and knowledge that provides a rich resource for learning. If any piece of knowledge makes no connection with the plethora of past experiences and knowledge that makes us who we are, we tend not to assimilate it. We seem to want and need new information to link with what we already know – even if it convinces us to reject our prior knowledge as wrong and adopt the new insights! It is crucial therefore that U3A lecturers/speakers/tutors engage with their adult learners and refrain from merely lecturing at them. We generally have experiences that give us a view on what is being said and we need to discuss things and relate our views with whatever is presented.

Third insight: adults are relevancy-oriented and goal-oriented. We must see a reason for attending an educational program; it must be relevant to what we are looking for at our current stage of life. For example, no one is going to attend classes in computer basics if they don’t have a computer and have no intention of getting one; no one will battle through a 26 week course on the history of Britain unless they have some interest in or connection with the little green isles. We adults do things for a purpose; we are goal-oriented. For example, your goal in attending a series on Conversational French might be to be competent to converse with French people during a barging vacation you intend taking on the French canals in six month’s time.

Fourth insight: adults are motivated to learn by both extrinsic and intrinsic factors. An extrinsic factor would be a desire to meet and make new friends which is often a welcome bye-product of adult education activities. Another would be the desire to escape boredom or seek mental stimulation in a setting different from the mundane realities of everyday life. An intrinsic motive for getting involved in adult education might be the desire to satisfy an enquiring mind or to ensure that your brain keeps in good working order as you move into your later years. Lifelong learning is not only a worthy motivation and challenging goal; it is also a strategy for prolonging a high quality of life.

 The University of the Third Age is a wonderful world-wide institution. It was formed to provide for people who have the time to pursue intellectual interests not tied to schools and pedagogy (the First Age) nor to the world of work (the Second Age). The Third Age is a time when learning can adhere to Knowles’ insights. It is a time when learning can be fun and entertaining; when a classroom-style set-up should be avoided and more group work offered. It is a time when exams and qualifications and certificates are no longer relevant; rather, interesting topics and entertaining speakers are what counts! I can recommend the U3A to all who have not yet joined a branch. Google it and I’m sure you’ll find a branch near you!

Love, a beautiful thing

Love is such an abused concept that many people are embarrassed to use the word. Yet it is also an absolutely crucial concept in defining our humanity. I have (appropriately I hope) chosen a Frenchman as this month’s world-class thinker: the philosopher Andre Comte-Sponville. A distinguished scholar from the Sorbonne, Comte-Sponville has written many articles and books in French. Thankfully three of his books have been translated into English and I have all three in my library.

Interestingly this philosopher has written a fair bit on “love”. In his best selling book A Short Treatise on the Great Virtues he distils all our human virtues down to a list of eighteen. His opening chapter is on Politeness, which he says precedes morality, and his closing chapter is on Love, which he says exceeds morality. Love he claims is the most interesting of all subjects. The early Greek philosophers had two words for love: eros and philia; and much later a third Greek word was added – agape. Let’s look at some of his insights by examining these three words.

First insight: erotic love strives to possess and to retain what it does not currently have. This is the simplest form of love. New lovers at a St Valentine’s candlelit dinner stare passionately into one another’s eyes. A significant part of their pleasure is their anticipation of what is to follow, what is not yet. The gifts of chocolate and the Valentine’s cards are attempts to get what we don’t yet have. And there’s nothing wrong with that! But as soon as eros possesses what was desired and retains the object of erotic love, passion dissipates. Interest wanes and boredom may even set in. Eros is that driving, almost blind biological love that longs for what one does not have and weakens when one gets it. Eros is such a strong passion, with characteristic butterflies in the tummy that we are often tempted to think that erotic love is what life is all about! However, according to Comte-Sponville, Plato was only partly right when he described love as eros pure and simple; for not all love is erotic, passionate and possessive – spent as soon as it has been attained. There are, as Aristotle argued, other forms of love; “to love is to be joyful” within the context of intimate friendships.

Second insight: philia is the love shared by intimate friends and it is a joyful delight. Usually translated from the Greek as Friendship, Comte-Sponville points out that philia is a “benevolent” love that loves another for the other’s sake. It is a love that rejoices in the pleasure that it gives and is the secret of happy relationships. Parents and children delight in loving one another in this warm way of devotion; so too do spouses, lovers, partners and philia often combines with eros illuminating relationships with the mutual pleasure of ‘making love’. For Aristotle, philia (to love) is to be joyful and to wish happiness on the person one loves. It is the love we experience when we are secure in our relationships; it is the comfort of true friendship rather than the passionate possessiveness of erotic love, though it may combine with eros on occasions.

Third insight: agape is to love one’s neighbour which is to say anyone and everyone. Neither Plato nor Aristotle would have known the Greek word agape. They knew only passion or friendship. Long after their time, Jesus, a seemingly insignificant Jew in a far-off Roman colony began in his strange Semitic tongue to say astonishing things like “love you neighbour” and “love your enemy”. No Greek word for this! Who in their right mind would passionately try to possess humankind? Or who could, absurdly, be close friends with their enemies? The English translation of agape is usually charity which carries the meaning of compassionate care for others who are in need. It is a love that is liberated from egotism and is therefore in itself liberating.

Comte-Sponville argues that while it is okay intellectually to distinguish between these three kinds of love they are not discrete, mutually exclusive entities. He sees them as three points in the single realm of love; three possible impulses in the complex process we call life.  What is great to know and to experience, especially for those of us who are no longer in enthralled bondage to erotic love, is that philia and agape increase in importance and desirability with age. Friendship and compassionate care for others remain ultimately meaningful and incredibly satisfying when eros no longer dominates one’s every waking thought!

I wish you lots of love in all its interesting manifestations my friends…

Getting to grips with the inevitable

A few months’ back one of my sons, Ryan, sent me an email with a website link and the suggestion/instruction: “Watch this”. It turned out to be a full hour video of a lecture given by Randy Pausch, a Professor of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University. The university has a tradition of inviting retiring professors to sum up their wisdom in one public “Last Lecture”. In Pausch’s case, a 47 year old, he was nowhere near retiring; but he was dying of terminal liver cancer. So, the university Principal invited him to give a Last Lecture.

If you have access to the internet, and a computer with a decent sound system, google “Randy Pausch” and find his last lecture. Joan and I were riveted and moved by this all-American optimist. He died this year on 25 July, aged 47 and leaving a wife and three young children. His story and thoughts are also available in his book tilted: The Last Lecture. Here are a few of his many insights.

First insight: we cannot change the cards we are dealt, just the way we play the hand. When Pausch gave his last lecture (not at all about computer science!), he had ten tumours in his liver and only months to live. Fortunately he was still feeling relatively fit. So, he decided to live his remaining months spending as much time as possible enjoying his wife and children, but also writing a book based on the Last Lecture. He was not in denial about his situation. On the contrary, he undertook every medical treatment recommended for prolonging his life. He was definitely not ‘giving up’ but he did consciously decide against depression and decided for being as positive as possible for his family and friends, and for himself. Six years ago a very special friend of ours, Rietta Liebenberg, made a similar decision when she was diagnosed with terminal cancer. She couldn’t change the cards she had been dealt, but she played the hand by telling herself and her family and friends that she was “living with cancer” rather than “dying from cancer”. None of this denies the awfulness of being terminally ill, both for you and for family and friends. But this approach does teach the rest of us that how we handle the shock and terror of approaching death is up to us! A decision is called for.

Second insight: we must strive to live in the now. All of us are going to die; no exceptions. But people generally don’t want to discuss death, and especially not its finality. We shy away from talking about it because we think that it’s morbid to do so. We think and behave as though we will live forever. Most religions understand our seeming inability to get to grips with our own personal end and posit an after-life or a reincarnation. It’s as though we delay facing the finality of death until a doctor pronounces that our end is definitely in sight.

Pausch reminds me of the 18^th century Anglican preacher, John Wesley. When asked what he would do if he discovered he had only a week to live he consulted his diary and said: Well, on Monday I will be doing this and that… and on Tuesday … and so on. He was definitely living in the now of his life – he would change nothing! He was already doing what he felt was important and fulfilling. Pausch says: Time is all you have, and you may find one day that you have less than you think! Use it now, wisely.

Third insight: Make a decision: are you going to be a Tigger or an Eeyore? I suspect that Randy Pausch was genetically addicted to having fun, to enjoying people and events. He claims it is a decision we all have to make. It seems perfectly captured in A.A. Milne’s Winnie-the-Pooh characters. The question is: are you going to be an optimistic, fun-loving Tigger or a pessimistic, sad-sack Eeyore? It really is a choice!

Randy Pausch was the living example of what some Existentialist philosophers call an “authentic existence”. This is a person who really takes on board his or her finitude and lives a good life always acknowledging that this life has an absolute end. I find Pausch an inspiration – his life and death can help people to face the inevitability of their own demise, and to decide in the face of death to live every day as if the last, and to have fun and ensure enjoyment of everything you do.

I am equally inspired by people who have lived well and died well. I am grateful for the example of a number of current friends who are fighting cancer or battling heart disease with grace and a matter-of-fact approach which puts others at ease. I am choked up by the bravery and skill with which Ruth, one of our dearest friends in Johannesburg, is handling her approaching death from the same cancer as Randy Pausch. She is able to cry with her grown children and her friends, to take on board the whole cycle of denial, anger, bargaining, and depression and then move on to acceptance and dealing with it. She is a yet another model of how to live well and die well. Every day is a gift to be appreciated, enjoyed and savoured.

Carpe Diem my friends – seize the day!

The Web of Life and its Hidden Connections

Fritjof Capra, an Austrian Scientist who now lives in the USA and is a founding director of the Centre for Ecoliteracy in California, has written a number of fascinating books on the implications of science. Five of them are international bestsellers: The Tao of Physics; The Turning Point; The Web of Life; Uncommon Wisdom and The Hidden Connections. In addition to his research in physics and systems theory, Capra has been engaged in a systematic examination of the philosophical and social implications of contemporary science for the past 30 years. I will pick a few of his many fascinating insights for your consideration.

First insight: our world is a network of phenomena that are fundamentally interconnected and interdependent. Capra sees everything as forming a complex web of life. He recognises the intrinsic value of all living beings and views humans as just one particular strand in the web of life. This view he calls deep ecological awareness, and he sees it as not just scientific but also spiritual in nature. When our consciousness of the universe of which we are a part gives us a sense of belongingness, of connectedness to the cosmos as a whole, this ecological awareness is spiritual in its deepest essence. The experience of the many mystics of various religious traditions, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu or Taoist, is of a living universe which parallels the paradigms of modern science. Capra describes his own experience like this: I was sitting by the ocean watching the waves roll in and feeling the rhythm of my own breathing when I suddenly became aware of my whole environment as being engaged in a gigantic cosmic dance. As a physicist, I knew that the sand, rocks, air and water around me were made of vibrating molecules and atoms. I knew that the atmosphere was continually bombarded by showers of cosmic rays. I “saw” cascades of energy coming from outer space and the atoms and particles of my body were participating in a cosmic dance of energy!  

Second insight: no individual organism can exist in isolation. I have over the years had the pleasure of marrying a number of very special couples, and often discuss with the couple the reality that if they think that they are only marrying the person who stands next to them they are mistaken. A marriage connects two social systems and extends both. There is no way that you can avoid new links with your in-laws; they are part of your new ecological reality! But for Capra and his fellow scientists the web of life is even more deep-seated than social networks. He claims that outside an ecological system there can be no life for the individual organism. We are not only dead without our social networks, but we cannot survive as individual organisms without the material reality of our environment, for example, food, air, water, and body chemistry. The individualism on which the Western World bases its thinking and actions is an unscientific myth.  

Third insight: global capitalism and the sustainability of life on our planet are on a collision course!  The global economy is now driven by a complex network of computers and global gamblers in the form of major investment banks, pension funds, and multinationals. And their sole driving value is money – to the exclusion of all other values. This global greed uses every resource available in order to make money, and success is judged only by growth in monetary value. But this whole system is unsustainable. The resources that are consumed in the race for sustained growth are finite. The false wealth created by the system cannot but crumble – as we have witnessed recently in the crash in the financial markets. The insane scramble for money has cost, and is costing us severe damage to the ecology that sustains our life; some scientists predict that unless certain environmental threats are tackled relatively soon, the damage may be irreversible. Fortunately, there are a growing number of influential scientists and economists who are calling for global capitalism to be fundamentally redesigned. And there are a growing number of people around the world who reject an economic system whose logic ignores and devalues their humanity as well as their survival.

Fourth insight: we can live more simply and make our children eco-literate! Whenever we discuss global economics and global degradation of the environment, despondency is a possible outcome. What can little old you and I do about it? Well, Fritjof Capra suggests that living “sustainably” simply means fully recognising that we are an inseparable part of the web of life, of human and non-human communities, and that enhancing the dignity and sustainability of any one of them will enhance all the others. So, supporting our community organisations in Greyton will enhance the well-being of all. Capra also promotes ecology and systems thinking in primary and secondary schools and so contributes to the establishment of a value system based on the richness and complexity of the web of life and not the simplistic and dangerous obsession of making more and more money despite the damaging cost to self, others and the environment.

Enjoy your week, and if you manage a quiet moment, try meditating on how everything and everyone around you are connected. Awareness of the web of life can be a deep spiritual experience in the midst of your mad busyness.   

We are all looking for a little wisdom

A Johannesburg colleague, Ruth de Bruyn, suggested that we write a joint article on the nature of wisdom. We are both organisation development specialists, and have found that a number of younger people in organisations are dissatisfied with their personal development plans. They want more than skills acquisition; they are searching for a mentor who could also provide a little wisdom! Ruth and I both felt somewhat threatened and unsettled by these comments and requests. What exactly were these talented youngsters looking for? Could we define wisdom; could they; could any of us identify what it is and where people are likely to find it? We felt an article might help organisations, and ourselves, to identify and nurture the sources of wisdom. What follows are some of the insights I have uncovered in doing my bit of the research toward an article that may appear early next year in one of the Management journals.

First insight: there is a well of wisdom that comes to us from the writings of great men and women of the past. We don’t have to rely solely on our own limited experience in order to draw on the best thinking and advice available. We who live today are linked to the lives of those who came before, especially those whose thoughts and insights were recorded and remain available to us in literature. The list of wise people is long and our own wisdom is enhanced when we study what they have to say to us; their essential insights outlast the context and era in which they were expressed. So, one characteristic of the wisdom possessed by a wise person in an organisation or community is that s/he is aware of the well of wisdom left by past giants in many fields, and is able to draw from that well. The wise person is someone who is “in touch” with the wealth of wisdom that already exists and can access it when needed.

Second insight: ethics is the major philosophical discipline underlying all wisdom. Sharon Ryan, a modern philosopher, has argued persuasively that someone is wise if, and only if: s/he has extensive knowledge with very few unjustifiable beliefs; knows how to live a good life and is successful in doing so. So, a large part of wisdom is living a good life, knowing what is right and doing it. We wouldn’t dream of looking for wise counsel from a scoundrel! This has implications for organisations and communities. Wisdom is not found only, or even mainly, in the organisation’s leaders. Rather, people looking for advice and wise counsel will tend to go to those who, in addition to knowing the organisation’s inner workings, are recognised as people of integrity who will tell it as they see it. So, the wise person is not only knowledgeable but is also an authentic, ethical person whose life reflects a dedication to the truth.

Third insight: wisdom enables people to speak the truth to power. Organisations and communities always have people who, legitimately or otherwise, have the power to make decisions that affect others. This is clearly seen in politics, where the power of top politicians can impact negatively or positively on whole classes of citizens. Too often powerful people become surrounded by sycophantic “praise-singers” who avoid delivering bad news or personal feedback to the big man. Really good political or organisational leaders actively look for a wise colleague, often outside the circle of power, who will tell them the truth rather than what it is thought they would like to hear. It obviously takes courage to speak the truth to power, and that courage is certainly a characteristic of the wise person.

Fourth insight: wisdom blends compassion and empathy with the truth. One of America’s best known psychologists, Theodore Isaac Rubin, put it this way: kindness is more important than wisdom, and the recognition of this is the beginning of wisdom. Younger people often look for mentors who exude kindness and empathy, who are able to put themselves into other people’s shoes and see things from their vantage point. It’s not that they don’t want the mentor to be totally honest with them; it’s that they want to hear any bad news from someone who is fundamentally for them.

So, wisdom is a human attribute much valued by all of us. We are all looking for a little wisdom, in our partners, our friends, our colleagues, our leaders. And it is definitely not an age thing: many of the wisest people I know are much younger than me. But it certainly is a rare attribute which we all instinctively recognise and value.

Do you need a Baloney Detection Kit?

Carl Sagan was the Professor of Astronomy and Space Sciences, and also the Director of the Laboratory for Planetary Studies at Cornell University. What made him really famous, however, was his book “Cosmos”, which became the best-selling science book ever published in English. The TV series based on the book has been seen by a billion people in 60 countries. He is also well known for his work with NASA during the Apollo Space Program and more recently in the search for extra-terrestrial life. Sadly Carl Sagan died in 1996 of a rare cancer at the young age of 62. By then he had received 22 honorary degrees for his contributions to science, literature, education and the preservation of the environment. His various awards and prestigious positions are simply too numerous to mention.

Recently, on a trip through Botswana and Namibia, I had the opportunity to re-read his last two books: The Demon-Haunted World and Billions & Billions. From the many gems these last works contain, there are two insights that I particularly want to share with you.

First insight: to date there is NO EVIDENCE of extra-terrestrial life! And please note that this comes from the man who convinced fellow scientists to support the search for life in our and other galaxies; and convinced nations to fund such a search. And the reason for his conviction that, as yet, no hard evidence exists is that Sagan was totally committed to the scientific method. He goes to great lengths to examine the claims of the “UFO” proponents – those who claim to have seen or photographed unidentified flying objects or “flying saucers”. He also examines the testimony of those (almost exclusively Americans!) who claim to have been abducted by “aliens”. All the evidence to date shows that these claims are either fraudulent or clever hoaxes or unsupported private anecdotes. None of them meets the rigorous criteria for hard evidence demanded by the scientific method. As a friend of Sagan’s commented: “Keeping an open mind is a virtue, but not so open that your brains fall out!”

When asked: “Do you believe there is extra-terrestrial intelligence?” Sagan gave his standard answer – there are lots of places out there, the molecules of life in their billions are everywhere. It would be astonishing if there weren’t extra-terrestrial intelligence. But, as yet, there is no compelling evidence for it. So we’ll just have to reserve judgement until the evidence is in. So he died longing for some credible evidence to suggest that other intelligent life exists “out there”, but nothing had surfaced. Nor has anything since.

Second insight: because we humans are so incredibly gullible we need a baloney detection kit! Sagan traces the story of human gullibility down through the ages, right to our present time. He shows convincingly that we humans are prone to believe the most astonishing nonsense on the scantiest of evidence (yes, us too!). We tend to live in a “demon-haunted world” in which Sagan suggests that science is a candle in the dark. In the course of their training, scientists are equipped with a baloney detection kit which is brought into use whenever new ideas or claims are offered for consideration. This detection kit may help us to sniff out some of the hogwash that modern society tries to get us to accept. Here are some of the tools for sceptical thinking contained in his kit.

·         Wherever possible ask for independent confirmation of the ‘facts’ being presented

·         Encourage debate on the claim by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view

·         Don’t trust arguments from authority – authorities have made many bad mistakes

·         Quantify whenever you can, as much as you can – measure everything!

·         If there’s a chain of argument, every link in the chain, including the premise, must work

·         Apply Occam’s Razor: the rule of thumb that urges us, when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well, to chose the simpler

·         Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified. Claims that are untestable and unfalsifiable are usually not worth much

The Baloney Detection Kit also has a comprehensive list of logical fallacies. Here are a few of the better known ones to watch out for.

·         Attacking the arguer and not the argument! (e.g. Mr Vavi is an avowed communist so his objections to current economic policy need not be taken seriously)

·         Begging the question, also called assuming the answer! (e.g. we must institute the death penalty to discourage violent crime. But does the violent crime rate in fact fall when the death penalty is introduced?)

·          Excluded middle, or false dichotomy – considering only the two extremes in a continuum of intermediate possibilities. (e.g. “Sure, take his side; my husband’s perfect; I’m always wrong.” Or, “either you hate country living or you love it!”)

·         The Slippery Slope, related to the excluded middle. (e.g. if we encourage tourism, we’ll soon have busloads of visitors taking over the entire village)

Sagan’s energy in his last years was passionately focused on encouraging educators to ensure that their charges were adequately schooled in the scientific method and in the tools of rational argumentation. He firmly believed that humanity’s destruction of its own environment will only be halted if sufficient numbers of ordinary people understand the consequences of our attitudes and actions. He saw teaching science and logical reasoning in school as a key way to spread this necessary understanding. He is probably right!