On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Kevin Hilton wrote:
> This is what the health and wellbeing, and the sustainability
> promoters
> amongst us are constantly up against, in seeking to change behaviours
> and develop a more realistic and responsible culture. Oh hang it, it
> really is easier to keep going the way we are, in our social network,
> even if we do appreciate it cannot be sustainable. It doesn't seem
> worth
> the grief, life's too demanding as it is, with information overload
> and
> so many choices to occupy us, and keep us distracted.
>
> Some of us are however more confident and exercised to swim against or
> across the flow, watching and looking to change and to change others,
> with some successes; looking for new patterns of opportunity for
> change
> that start off by going with the flow but become redirective. We
> have to
> find realistic ways of 'baiting' people towards change by letting them
> 'pre-experience' the benefits, with benefits that outweigh the
> investment in effort.
Kev: The problem is that we can no longer just go with the flow: get
more obese when our friends do, continue to waste energy because
others do; refuse to respond to climate change because our competitors
don't; be as greedy as our peer group, etc. (With regard to the last
point there is another very interesting article that goes directly to
this social determinism. It is entitled Rational Irrationality: The
Real Reason that Capitalism is So Crash Prone by John Cassidy in the
current (October 5, 2009) New Yorker magazine (Newyorker.com).
There is a need for the individual willful mind open to consequences
within every social network. We need to reward and protect the
whistle blowers. Think Rachel Carson, or even Teddy Roosevelt when he
put away his rifle and dreams of empire to protect nature from its
despoilers.
One can argue strongly, I believe, that designers have the moral
responsibility to help every group they serve to see better
alternatives than they might collectively do.
Chuck
|