Posts tagged learning

finagle’s Law

Well. I imagine I am way behind the rest of the cool people <who already know what finagle’s law is> but I just discovered it. Maybe because I had always known it as Murphy’s Law.

The generalized or `folk’ version of Murphy’s Law, fully named “Finagle’s Law of Dynamic Negatives” and usually rendered “Anything that can go wrong, will” (source: Urban Dictionary)

Finagle’s Law comes from science fiction author Larry Niven who, in several stories, depicted a frontier culture which celebrated a religion <or a running joke> which involved the worship of the dread god Finagle … and his mad prophet Murphy <hence the source of ‘murphy’s law’>.

Ok. About Finagles ´Law <before I get to the point of this little writeup>. It is an amazingly cool extraordinary mixture of cruel logic … as well as somewhat scarily indicative of everyday life. Just in case you didn’t know here is Finagle’s logic:

-          What we have is not what we need.

-          What we want is not what we need.

-          What we need is impossible to get.

-          You can get hold of this information for a much higher price then you are prepared to pay.

Ok. Here is the coolest thought. One of my favorite blogs, 50topmodels, actually wondered if Finagle´s Law got it all wrong and reexamined it as … Yhprum´s Law (Yhprum is Murphy backwards).

They actually analyzed it under the theory that ‘everything that can work, will work’ quoting Richard Zeckhauser <Harvard> “sometimes systems that should not work, work nevertheless.“

Ok. It is that last thought that made me sit up and think and decide to write.

Why?

Well. “Systems that should not work …do.” How often do people design perfect systems in the workplace, under the guise of ‘this is the way its done’ and, ultimately, it is just another inefficient process & system? Or maybe it is easy to do so everyone just does things going through the motions? Or the perfect system is <gasp> measured on its efficiency and therefore everyone simply tries to ‘hit the measurement numbers”?

On the other hand.

Someone else builds a system and has everyone working within this system that has those ‘people who designed perfect systems’ scratching their heads and saying that will never work … and, uh oh, it does work.

Yhprum´s Law. Huh? Well. Organizations are living organisms.

And just as placebos can work (lets call that the power of the mind) … a system that should not work … well … does. Why?

Because whether things work or not is often up to the people. And people are inconsistent in that they consistently do unexpectedly great things. In addition sometimes mistakes become stepping stones to blinding success. Oh. And the systems that shouldn’t work gain significant improvements thru some trial & error while the perfect systems remain … well … stagnant – never improving. Maybe it is that last thought that is so controversial in my thinking.

Perfection is often a thief. It steals fresh thinking.

Business, in general, like life, is messy. Sure. We seek perfection. It is kind of like the holy grail of ‘job well done.’

Here is the funny thing about attaining perfection.

Realistically we should be seeking to immediately change, rather than replicate, if we actually stumble upon it. ‘Doing it right’ is simply a level. And attaining levels of ‘perfection’ is good but also breeds an aspect of complacency or rote. And unless you are putting together a car, or a bomb <as an example>, in my mind we should always be aware the process is a means to an end.

Another sad thing about perfection. Nothing is ever really perfect. So when we put the label on something we are already in a bad place. As noted in alternative phrases for Finagle’s Law … let’s maybe call it “not quite the right thing.” It seems to me that systems & process reside most often closest to that phrase. And to a perfectionist that is bad and to others it is just not quite the right thing.

Ok. As for systems that shouldn’t work? the imperfect systems? The power of the mind suggest that everything that can work will work … sometimes better than others.

Oh.

And if you have that attitude .. an attitude to, rather than finding the flaws, instead focusing on the mistakes made … in my mind you end up seeking to better the system.

Ok. Moving on.

There is another aspect to Murphy’s Law … “If there are two or more ways to do something, and one of those ways can result in a catastrophe, then someone will do it.”

Now. If you think about that from a logic perspective …  this suggests <for example> that if someone plugs in a toaster backwards and it fries itself, the problem isn’t just that some idiot plugged it in backward, but that it was able to be plugged in backwards in the first place.

In other words … the flaw isn’t in the person … but rather the design. And people just make mistakes <and are not flawed>.

If you believe that … then maybe when mistakes are made we shouldn’t be blaming people but rather seeking to design a better system. Not ‘perfect’ systems but systems with the minimum opportunity for flaws. Call it constant improvement.

If you don’t believe that then you end up simply assuming people will make mistakes, some big … some small … some stupid <or some derivative of stupid> … some smart <yeah … you can still do something really smart and make a mistake>. As I stated earlier … systems are a means to an end therefore using Finagle’s Law everyone should be focusing more on the people aspect. And not in a “you suck” perspective but rather a deeper understanding for why  and how mistakes are made.

Mistakes are part of life.

I actually believe more managers should have the chart above in their offices and when mistakes are made identify which aspect the mistake characterizes. It may make us better managers and it may make for better systems (and certainly better managers of people).

Anyway.

The true Finagle’s Law is much more twisted than “anything that can go wrong will go wrong.” The Law also allows for things going well. It’s like as if the universe is merely lulling you into a false sense of security before proceeding to screw you. It also allows for things that can’t go wrong … going wrong <and within Finagle’s Law this counts as Gone Horribly Right.>

Regardless.To end this I wanted to share some last thoughts on Finagle’s Law. The law owes its existence more or less entirely to the Rule of Drama, and is especially common in Crapsack Worlds where things that do go wrong tend to go wrong in the worst possible way.

Finagle’s Law also suggests that Life has a pretty warped sense of humor in that it is obsessed with making your life as difficult and humiliating as possible.

On a slightly serious note … I imagine the potential for danger in everyday Life, within the Law, can do one of two things:

- make you scared to do anything

- make you assume that you cannot ever do anything right

I could write gobs about both of those but instead I am hoping that what I have written about Finagle’s Law suggests that successfully navigating Life takes some flexibility. If perfection is your thing … well … Finagle will be your constant companion and friend.

Take Life with a grain of salt. Things go wrong. Even when they aren’t supposed to. And things go right. Even when they aren’t supposed to.

Last. And just so you are fully aware of ‘the Law’ here are optional expressions of Finagle’s Law <so you recognize them>:

-          A Simple Plan

-          Butterfly of Doom

-          Consolation Backfire

-          Cosmic Plaything

-          Disaster Dominoes

-          Destructive Saviour

-          Deus Angst Machina when taken Up to Eleven

-          Everything Trying to Kill You in videogames

-          Failsafe Failure

-          Failure Is the Only Option

-          The Fun in Funeral

-          Gave Up Too Soon

-          Law of Disproportionate Response

-          Inverse Law of Utility and Lethality

-          It Got Worse

-          Magnum Opus Dissonance

-          Mistimed Revival

-          Murphy’s Bed

-          Murphy’s Bullet

-          My Car Hates Me

-          Not Quite The Right Thing

-          Out with a Bang

-          Phlebotinum Breakdown

-          Ashes to Crashes

-          Doomed New Clothes

-          Watch the Paint Job

-          The Precious, Precious Car

-          Random Number God

-          Retirony

-          Springtime for Hitler

-          Tempting Fate

-          Unspoken Plan Guarantee

-          Useless Superpowers

-          What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

-          You Can’t Thwart Stage One

-          Your Princess is in Another Castle

Anyway.

Finagle’s Law. Murphy’s Law. Or. My favorite? “Not quite the right thing.” Life is perfectly imperfect. You can either accept it or end up in a loony bin some day.

the flaw in creativity collaboration

Ok.

This is not a popular point of view these days.

I am a firm believer, that in the creativity business, collaboration isn’t good.

Well. “isn’t good” is like saying “never” or “it always sucks” or something like that.

Let’s just say creativity isn’t about collaboration.

And I found a quote that says it perfectly:

“Art is I; science is we.” – Claude Bernard

I didn’t know who good ole Claude was until I found this quote … he was a man of science … in fact .. among many other accomplishments, he was one of the first to suggest the use of blind experiments to ensure the objectivity of scientific observations.

Anyway.

He says it best.

Art, and true creativity, is really an ‘I’ business. Ideas generated from an individual.  Where creativity is sparked within.  Look. Others can stoke the fire but an individual has to provide the spark. There you go … an original idea originates from an individual,

And let me dig myself into a deeper hole … in addition … by including others the original idea is rarely sharpened but rather dulled.

Ok. Science on the other hand is about We.

A confluence of factors & minds each sharpening that type of idea.

Ok.

He also said:

“The living body, though it has need of the surrounding environment, is nevertheless relatively independent of it. This independence which the organism has of its external environment, derives from the fact that in the living being, the tissues are in fact withdrawn from direct external influences and are protected by a veritable internal environment which is constituted.”

Once again.

A science thought … but a good life thought.

And a nice thought to complete the thought on creativity and collaboration.

Original creativity in thinking is relatively independent from the external environment. In the end an individual can absorb, can discuss, can incorporate as much of the ‘external environment’ that is necessary to feed creativity … but the idea resides within the individual.

That’s it.

That’s my thought.

that I have not been

“’pray for nothing, say every night in bed, I have been a king, I have been a slave, nor is there anything, fool, rascal, knave, that I have not been, yet upon my breast a myriad of hearts have lain.” Mohini Chatterjee by Yeats

If I had not known that Yeats was enamored with mysticism and reincarnation I … well … would have ended up writing what I am going to write.

My first thought?

It has to do with living life however the cards are dealt … and regardless of whether you are a fool or an intellect … you will find someone ‘upon your breast will lay’ <that means you will have love & loves>.

I like that.

Doesn’t matter who you are and what you do … there will always be someone for you.

Oh.

And beyond having someone love you <assuming you allow it and you stop worrying about whether you are good enough> … there is a really big thought in there that there are lives within lives … and I imagine another way of saying that is … you can live several lives within one lifetime.

That’s what I think when I read this.

That’s a lot but I think it is a lot of good stuff.

Yeats wrote a lot about his belief that the soul of man is eternal. And that existence is cycles within cycles. I may not buy that whole “eternal” thing but I do believe that Life is cycles within cycles. It really only has one true beginning and end … but multiple starts and stops … and detours and exits … and … well … you get it. Cycles within cycles.

With that in mind I wanted to end this post with the conclusion of the poem used in the beginning … “men dance on deathless feet.”

Birth-hour and death-hour meet,

Or, as great sages say,

Men dance on deathless feet.

Now that is awesome.

You are either living or dying.

But your footsteps on Life will never die.

Oh.

One last thought <regarding this quote>.

If you truly believe that you live many lives within one life … well … then isn’t it worth setting aside desire and ambition as secondary to whatever type of life you want to lead?

Let me leave you with that thought.

lighting the way

“As we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.” - Nelson Mandela

So.

I began with this quote and then kind of got pretty passionate about this topic the more I thought about it (that is a warning).

We all have things that matter to us.

A big or small issue that kinda gets the heart pumping a little bit.

The difference between people is that even though we all have something that gets us ‘going’ (heart pumping, anger, heartache, whatever) some remain silent, some speak softly and some speak loudly (or shine a light as it were) on what matters to them.

And while I abhor loud bombastic people … what I do give many of them credit for is the fact that by shining their own light (albeit a frickin’ spotlight) they have unconsciously liberated the rest of us to take whatever wattage our light is and bring it forth against some pretty dark things (if we elect to).

There is no shortage of issues that deserve some light.

-          Statistics show that a woman is battered every 15 seconds in the United States by an “intimate.” That’s two million women annually who are battered or abused by their partners. Even more frightening is that every day (yeah … I just typed every day) 4 women lose their lives to violence … an estimated 1/3 of the women who are abused. Oh. And those 4 women are murdered by a husband or a boyfriend (not some stranger).

One in four women who commit suicide is a victim of domestic violence.

And. If that bothers you think about this … there are 3 times more animal shelters (approximately 4300) than battered women shelters (approximately 1500). <and I like pets but this seems kind of insane>

Here is a staggering number.

1 in 4 women will fall victim to Domestic Violence in their lifetime. 1 in 4.

Uhm. How about I make this personal.

That means that 1 of 4 of your female friends/relatives/neighbors is a potential victim.

Or.

-          115+ million kids globally not in school. More important than domestic violence? Yikes. It is all important stuff.

Or.

-          In 2009, US child abuse involved an estimated 6 million children.

One in 4 girls will be sexually abused.

One in 6 boys will be sexually abused.

The numbers are stunning.

Stunningly horrible.

Dark numbers.

Or.

-          There are 1.4 billion people globally living in poverty – under $1.25 a day.

Or.

-          925 million people are hungry. Every day, almost 16000 children die from hunger-related causes. That’s one child every five seconds. Hunger and malnutrition are the underlying cause of more than half of all child deaths, killing nearly 5.8+ million children each year.

Or.

-          Women’s rights (which isn’t just about ‘the glass ceiling’ gentlemen). Women’s rights around the world are an important indicator to understand global well-being. Despite the fact a major global women’s rights treaty was ratified by the majority of the world’s nations a few decades ago … numerous issues still exist in all areas of life, ranging from the cultural, political to the economic. For example, women often work more than men, yet are paid less; gender discrimination affects girls and women throughout their lifetime; and women and girls are often are the ones that suffer the most poverty.

Gender equality furthers the cause of child survival and development for all of society, so the importance of women’s rights and gender equality should not be underestimated.

Or.

-           Contaminated water. Bad water is still the primary cause of death in the world today. Each year, it leads to deadly illnesses like cholera, typhoid, malaria, etc., in some 8 million people, including 1.5 million children.

Ok.

I could go on but if you have any hesitation with regard to where you shine your light I suggest you begin here … with the UN The Universal Declaration of Human Rights which begins with these words:

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

Pick any article & issue from the Declaration and think about it. You don’t have to address it globally … it could be locally or it could be in your community.

Unfortunately … I can guarantee you one thing … while you will be tempted to think “oh, that’s not an issue we have ..” … well … do not fall into that trap.

Every issue resides in your community and in your neighborhood. Things like this are sneaky. And hide in dark corners.

Hence people need to step up and shine a light on these things.

Me?

I use words.

Others use pictures.

There is no one way to shine a light …

I call it enlightened conflict.

Frankly I don’t care what I call it, you call it or what anyone calls it.

Everyone can make an impact.

Even if you only carry a 15watt bulb. It is light.

In the end maybe think about it this way … by lighting the way you are removing some darkness … the darkness of ignorance … the darkness that maybe stops someone from seeing a way out of their situation … the darkness of hopelessness.

Yep.

Anyone one of us can provide some light if we choose to.

So.

This is one of the few times you will ever hear me recommend speaking out – being vocal. I typically don’t like people on a mission with a cause. I tend to believe if you speak softer more people will actually listen – and believe. But in this case I will err on the side of I don’t care if you whisper .. croak .. or shout.

Speak. Each word is a light shining on a dark spot in humanity (or the shadows that are a reflection of lack of humanity).

Choose to speak out.

Think of it as shining a light on some darkness.

And maybe, if you are really really lucky, it will light the way for someone out of the darkness.

spinal tap marketing

Ok.

This is about the senseless marketing inflation that is becoming prevalent in the marketing world and I am going to use the movie Spinal Tap to show how bad it is.

Just in case you don’t remember the movie Spinal Tap, or the moment I am going to reference, here it is:

“Our speakers no longer just go to ten … they go to 11! Well, it’s one louder, isn’t it? It’s not 10. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at 10. You’re on 10 here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you’re on 10 on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?”

<Nigel Tufnel, explaining why his amp goes up to 11>

Here’s the deal. Look around at some marketing these days. If you are kind you will call it ‘value inflation’ … if you aren’t kind it is puffery.

And good ole The Economist actually gave me some great fodder in a recent edition (so I am going to steal some of their words shamelessly).

Their article showcased an aspect of how marketing is inflating everything.

Marketing inflation?

-          Take the grossly underreported problem of “size inflation”, where clothes of any particular labelled size have steadily expanded over time. Estimates by The Economist suggest that the average British size 14 pair of women’s trousers is now more than four inches wider at the waist than it was in the 1970s. In other words, today’s size 14 is really what used to be labelled a size 18; a size 10 is really a size 14. (American sizing is different, but the trend is largely the same.) Fashion firms seem to think that women are more likely to spend if they can happily squeeze into a smaller label size.

-          Inflation is also distorting the travel business. A five-star hotel used to mean the ultimate in luxury, but now six- and seven-star resorts are popping up as new hotels award themselves inflated ratings as a marketing tool. “Deluxe” rooms have been devalued, too: many hotels no longer have “standard” rooms, but instead offer a choice of “deluxe” (the new standard), “luxury”, “superior luxury” or “grand superior luxury”. Likewise, most airlines no longer talk about “economy” class. British Airways instead offers World Traveller; Air France has Voyageur. Sardine class would be more honest. The value of frequent-flyer miles is also being eroded by inflation: it is increasingly hard to book “free” flights; they cost more miles, and redemption fees have increased. This was inevitable: airlines have been issuing so many miles (for spending on the ground as well as in the air) that the total stock is worth more than all the dollar notes and coins in circulation.

-          Food-portion inflation has also made it harder to fight the flab. Pizzas now come in regular, large and very large. Starbucks coffees are Tall, Grande, Venti or (soon) Trenta. “Small” seems to be a forbidden word.

I believe this shameless hyperbole has become a plague in marketing. It is puffery at its worst.

And it is shameful for 2, among many, reasons:

-          It inspires confusion.

Confusion in that the value equation has been disrupted. Marketers have assumed we will value a ‘7 star’ over a ‘5 star’ because … well … it has more stars. Instead marketers have simply devalued an individual star to a point people are so confused they simply assess value on their own. Oh. And by doing THAT people will inevitably focus on the wrong things (commodity attributes & price). Confusion is bad in marketing.

-          In inspires distrust.

Because in the act of building false value <under the guise of differentiation> we are discrediting what we actually do. Inevitably this makes people basically lose trust in what we say. With the lack of trust marketers have no value to people … leading to simply ignoring or tuning out any messaging. Oh. And if marketers have no value then why have them? Regardless. No one is clear what is the ‘truth.’ And when that happens they disregard what is being said and simply ignore it. And ignore it for what it really is <as a truth> hyperbole.

Oh.

And it is shameful because it is lazy. Yes. Lazy. I fully admit that it is significantly harder to discern what is really true in today’s world. But that is no excuse for marketers. In fact rather than try to take the ‘easy road’ <albeit the road with some horrible long term repercussions> marketers should be focusing on the more difficult road – truth.

Anyway. Back to the spinal tap marketing issue. The Economist suggests it is a form of inflation.

I am less kind.

It is hyperbole. And the worst kind. Because we are trying to skew what people think by stretching the truth <is that lying?>.

Lying sounds harsh but what else do we call it when we ‘create’ differentiation.

I fully understand that marketers need to respond to the market in order to help ‘sell their stuff.’ In this case this bad marketing behavior was exhibited in response to a couple of trends as identified by trendwatching – Mass Class and its opposite trend Massclusivity.

Increasing general prosperity spawned millions of new consumers interested in copying the tastes and preferences of the ‘rich & famous.’ This meant that manufacturers jumped on the enormous economies of scale as represented by this new mass of consumers by imitating the best of the best with lower cost alternatives. In some cases they imitated well. in other cases they simply imitated … with a lesser product. Regardless of their true quality, or non-quality, they imitated. And in doing so ultimately lowered the value of that which actually deserved the value.

This trend also spawned the next level called Massclusivity. Offering a level of privilege or status to the masses. Unfortunately it most likely offered neither privilege nor status to the traditional old style upper middle class.

So. In order to try and solve the problem marketers started ‘creating value’ in these absurd ways. The real problem? The imitators did it as well as the ‘real quality value’ providers. The imitators, in their falseness, blurred value.

It is too late but one would have wished that marketers would have been strong enough to stand up to the false imitators and stopped the problem before it began. But I imagine that means the marketing ‘hacks’ would have left money on the table and missed out on their opportunity for personal prosperity.

Oh well.

Marty DiBergi: David St. Hubbins… I must admit I’ve never heard anybody with that name.
David St. Hubbins: It’s an unusual name, well, he was an unusual saint, he’s not a very well known saint.
Marty DiBergi: Oh, there actually is, uh… there was a Saint Hubbins?
David St. Hubbins: That’s right, yes.
Marty DiBergi: What was he the saint of?
David St. Hubbins: He was the patron saint of quality footwear.

An entirely different level is of absurdity is that marketers also create spokespeople for random products & services hoping that they embody some type of credibility. In the attempt at borrowed interest the marketer simply gains a lack of believability. Ok. Good intentions … bad result.

Hopefully it never becomes as absurd as a ‘patron saint of quality footwear.’

And, yes, even beyond the spokespeople endorsers … it all becomes absurd at some point.

And in its absurdity it actually devalues everything it come in contact with <the second most disturbing would be the devaluing of trust>.  The foremost disturbing is that it distorts behavior because so many people are confused they aren’t sure what is actually the best thing to do <because inflating thru marketing suggest there is no real ‘best’ alternative>.

I imagine to be fair to those in marketing it appears this senseless inflation is prevalent throughout society.

There is grade inflation, the tendency for comparable academic performance to be awarded higher grades over time. In Britain the proportion of A-level students given “A” grades has risen from 9% to 27% over the past 25 years. Yet other tests find that children are no cleverer than they were. A study by Durham University concluded that an A grade today is the equivalent of a C in the 1980s. In American universities almost 45% of graduates now get the top grade, compared with 15% in 1960. Grade inflation makes students feel better about themselves, but because the highest grade is fixed, it also causes grade compression, which distorts relative prices. This is unfair to the brightest, whose grades are devalued against those of average students. It also makes it harder for employers to identify the best applicants.

There is job title inflation, where a fancier-sounding title is cheaper than a pay raise. Companies now have an excess of chiefs and directors. Job title inflation has economic costs if it makes it more difficult to assess proper compensation for skills.

Anyway.

Now that I have been fair to marketing people I will suggest it is no excuse.

I have already mentioned the professional laziness.

But, the bigger issue is that marketing, in many ways, can influence society and attitudes and ultimately behavior.

Marketing can lead.

Marketing has in fact a responsibility to lead society. Inflation is ultimately a value equation. If marketing establishes non-absurd value equations attitudes are established.

I know it seems absurd that I wrote a serious piece about marketing using Spinal Tap.

But it moves beyond absurdity with me when I realize I can write a serious piece on marketing using Spinal Tap as an example.

It disturbs me.

Which leads me to the close:

“It does disturb me, but I rise above it. I’m a professional” – Nigel

Trying to inflate value simply means we devalue what really is.

And if marketing does it ultimately it establishes a devalued benchmark. Yeah … yeah … yeah … some smartass is going to suggest that marketing is establishing a ‘new value economy.’

Baloney.

It is simply devaluing the existing one.

canadian cheese

Figured I would start off on the right foot …

Knock Knock!

Who’s there?

Cheese!

Cheese who?

Cheese a cute girl!

Yup. This one is gonna be that bad. But I couldn’t resist. Oh. And please note the picture to the right … “say cheese” … ah … cheese humor. The best comedians in the world couldn’t make up stuff like this.

And, yes, I am really writing about Canadian cheese.

Well. Actually I am writing about what someone else wrote about Canadian cheese (just wanted to make sure no one thought I had completely lost it).

Anyway.

I was inspired by … uhmmmmmm … Canadian cheese (this isn’t a joke … this is serious shit in the world of cheese … think Vermont cheese … Wisconsin cheese … France and cheese … and … well … Canadian cheese!)

(yup … no shit).

So.

Let’s take a second about how I got inspired to write about Canadian cheese.

I met the person who wrote the ‘pocket guide to Canadian cheese’ while on a Caribbean island.

(oh … the people you can meet if you are sitting alone at a bar …)

Yup (again).

I was fascinated that someone had come to a Caribbean island to write a book about Canadian cheese. Let alone they had actually elected to write about cheese.

Oh.

But not any cheese.

Canadian cheese.

And the book is a pocket guide (sitting right next to “what to do on the island” and the island maps).

Ok.

All that said. Gosh. Where to begin?

Let’s begin at the beginning.

The foreword is titled “cheese and me.”

It is in this section where you are immediately profiled … because it sets the stage with ‘like elite cheesemongers’ (I would hate to meet a non-elite cheesemonger in a back alley) and a reference to the “cheese renaissance.”

First.

I feel compelled to talk about what it takes to be an elite cheesemonger.

I vaguely remember the Mongols were ‘mongers’ of something. But cheese? Well.  Oddly enough (and I am too lazy at the moment to research so this is from memory) I believe the Mongols put dairy products under their saddle to ferment it for future … well … eating.

Geez.

No wonder the Mongols kicked the shit out of everyone.  They were eating fermented horse saddle cuisine. Tasty stuff I am sure.

Sadly … I am not sure a Canadian has ever been in the Mongol category of mongers, therefore, they created their own segment of mongers … cheesemongers.

Ah. But, to be on the safe side, they become elite cheesemongers (I believe most of them have mansions in upper Newfoundland).

Anyway.

Being a cheesemonger is tougher than you think in Canada (I actually did some research).

This comes from the Cheese Lover blog:

I am amazed how fantastic Canadian cheese is – both the quality and the way chefs use it. This despite the fact that Canada, like the US, bans the production of young raw milk or unpasteurized cheeses. However many of the most interesting cheeses come from Quebec whose government has recently reversed that position to allow the sale of raw milk cheeses under the age of 60 days.

Cheesemakers in Ontario also labour under the additional handicap of not being free to choose the style of cheese they make. If they want to use cows’ milk (the restriction doesn’t apply to sheep and goats’) they must be able to prove to the province’s Dairy Farmers’ Association that no similar cheese is being made. Popular styles are on allocation so you can’t for example make a cheddar if the cheddar quota is already taken up.

Ok.

Seriously.

First … the cheddar quota is taken up ? … quotas on canadian cheese? Oh my. And Americans think their government is too involved?

Anyway. Second <and most importantly>. Someone writes a blog solely on cheese <must be a monger> … and knows about the cheese quota?

(by the way … I am still slightly stunned, and amused, there is a quota on cheddar cheese  … not just any cheese … cheddar cheese … what’s up with that).

Anyway.

Once you have gone through mongerer training (lots of gnashing of teeth and multiple meals of plain limburger sandwiches) you become an official cheese mongerer and probably become qualified to monger cheese and wear foam cheese hats and … well … write a pocket guide on cheese.

Next.

Just in case you may have missed it.  The Italian renaissance. The French renaissance. The Canadian cheese renaissance.

Eh?

(Its probably because they have the worlds nicest cheese that you didn’t even notice it)

But, no shit, in this pocket guide you are exposed to the Cheese Renaissance <no dates actually provided> and the Mona Lisa of Canadian cheese. Nope. I did not make that up.  Apparently this Mona Lisa has some kind of rind (and possibly the hint of a smile).

Moving on <quickly>.

Next.

The ladder of cheese appreciation.

Yup. They have a ladder.

And not a one rung ladder but rather one of those extendable ladders that can reach the roof of a three story house.

You gotta REALLY appreciate cheese to climb this frickin ladder.

Ok.

Next.

The raw milk question.

Ah.

The big question. Can raw milk be made in canada?

Can a woodchuck chuck wood?

Do Canadian geese shit?

Do moose make milk (I don’t know what a female moose is called … Moosette. Meese? … are any of the royal canadian mounties gay?)

Big important questions.

Next.

Soft washed rind cheese.

Ok.

Would anyone want to eat unwashed cheese? (rind or not).

Personally I am hoping canada has good personal hygiene and clean everything (not just their soft rind cheese). But I am pleased that whenever they wash their rind cheese they do it softly.

Next.

Firm Canadian cheese.<note: I am skipping any inappropriate jokes about firm cheese>

A quote from the pocket guide:

“Substantial dependable and honest – just like Canadians, eh?”

I cannot make this stuff up <I am not that good>.

I am not sure I can add to anything beyond this quote. It kind of says it all.

Ok.

Chapter 8.

Blue cheese.

“Don’t think just because you got your cheese to the curing room that the hard work is over. It’s not, you can still make a poxy whores melt of it. Imagine what would happen if even a single blue mould spore got into the Gold room? Total disaster even at that late stage in the proceedings. Blue mould in the right place is a gift from god but in the wrong place it spreads like cancer. “

Cmon. Priceless prose.

First.

example of a poxy whore

Poxy whores melt?

Dickens only dreamed of writing this about old England let alone blue cheese.

In fact.  I vaguely remember a line like this in Oliver (or porgy and bess) neither of which is Dickens … but has to count for something.

Second.

And flipping from a ‘gift from god’ to ‘cancer’ is hyperbole at its best (or worst).

Too much good stuff.

And whoda thunk it would be about canadian cheese? (not me)

So.

Having written about cheese, elite cheesmongers, cheese rind … I thought I would end on the challenges cheese creates for leadership:

“How can you govern a country with two hundred and forty six varieties of cheese?”Charles De Gaulle

Who would have thought cheese, from anywhere, could create so much discussion & thought.

turn your back on what you know

“To truly learn turn your back on what you know … leave it all behind. To truly know the world you must immerse yourself in what is not your knowledge.” – Tibetan thought

Oh my.

Immerse yourself in what is not your knowledge.

That may be one of the most difficult things in the world to do.

It is natural to gravitate to what is most comfortable … that which you know and that which is the easiest for you to do.

I imagine many of us do this just as part of every day life and tell ourselves we are still learning as we bump into others who do something different and watch from afar.

But that is having one foot in what you know and maybe dipping a toe into what you don’t.

That isn’t truly ‘learning.’

At some point in order to truly learn you must … well … leave it all behind.

And that is difficult. Really difficult.

I know I cheat. How? I use young people. I try and place the situation in their hands, step back and listen. And I don’t judge <or eliminate possibilities>. It is my way of ‘immersing in what is not your knowledge.’ In their inexperience <within my own experience> they share a world of experiences in which I have no knowledge.

Oh.

I may think I do. But I don’t. It is a difficult thing for most of us to do … turn your back on what you know.

But I find it easier as long as I keep this other Tibetan thought in mind:

“Is being an investigator the opposite of being an artist? Maybe it is just that some mysteries require an artist not an investigator. That an artist has different ways to get to the truth.” – Tibetan thought

The path to truth is not just one path. Sure. I may know one ‘truth.’ But in knowing that I know … well … one thing. And I am sure many people are fine with the knowledge of one truth. And I do not begrudge them of that. For one truth is, at its core, a truth. And I believe everyone needs some truth in their life.

Does knowing more than one truth make someone better? Yikes. I don’t believe I could be a good judge of that. Because knowing multiple truths can be confusing … and in confusion someone just may not end up in a better place. I guess I would suggest that if multiple truths put you on more solid ground than go for it.

But the real point to this is that someone without YOUR knowledge is more likely to teach you something completely new than someone who shares your knowledge.

And, ultimately, if you are trying to understand the world, or simply solve a problem, to truly learn the answer … you may have to turn your back on everything you know.

lines

“Americans believe in straight lines. They believe that all you have to do is get out there and get the job done one step after another. If you don’t do that, you are either lazy or incompetent.  American people seem to think that life is like a mission. That’s how they approach sports and war and sex – even love. That’s what they think when someone’s credit goes bad or there is an accident on the road.  Somebody veered off the straight and narrow. Remember Einstein. He said the connection between A and B was questionable at best and there is no such thing as a straight line.” – Craig Johnson

Life is neither straight nor narrow (although it sure is a lot easier to think that way).

I think we all know this.

But I think we all forget it as we judge others.

Sometimes you can be hard working and extremely competent … and still have a ‘life’ accident. And be hurt. And be hurt bad enough that it becomes difficult to get back on the road.

Sorry folks but that is true.

Also. Because life isn’t always a straight line having an objective & a mission & a goal isn’t always a guarantee of success.

Nor is it always a measurement of success.

And maybe more importantly it isn’t a measurement of failure.

Boy.  Thinking about that … it sure does make life tough doesn’t it.

Seems to make a lot of ‘extenuating circumstances’ in measuring life.

Yup.

Sorry folks <again>. But that is life.

Add in the fact that your own straight line you envision just may not be the only line to follow … oops … actually … it is NOT the only line you could follow. Well … what else can I say.

Life isn’t a mission. And it is rarely a straight line.

Nor should we always judge failure, or success, on whether someone hit some goal or objective.

Or whether they fulfilled a mission.

Oh. And not all missions are equal.

And … well … and bad things do happen to good people.

There are no straight lines to success or in life.

Maybe the real thought here is that all those curvy winding roads may be more difficult to navigate … and you obviously cannot go as fast as a straight line … but they can be far more interesting.

Getting from A to B is rarely a straight and narrow line.

If Albert thought that … well … he sure seemed a smart guy.

integrity: the 99 or the 1?

So.

I am fortunate enough to be part of TED (who I respect). And I have been involved in several discussion threads which are going to inspire some posts.

Lately I have been participating in a maddening discussion thread on “Do you think living by values and having integrity is a thing of the past?”

It’s mostly maddening because we sound old. Heck. The question sounds old.

I know every generation as they get older always thinks it was better “before.”

Another maddening part is what I call <as a generalization> the “1 perspective”.

In that the actions of 1% create a perception that they are bigger than they are <note: 1% is a generalization, possibly hyperbole, and absolutely not research-driven>.

By the way …  I do not believe values/integrity are a thing of the past. I also do not believe that there is a massive downward spiraling of values/integrity taking place. I also do not believe it is the end of the world as we know it <from a values & integrity standpoint … or any standpoint I may add>.

Anyway. All that said.

I am fairly sure I didn’t make many friends in this thread when I suggested integrity is about accountability and not words (or philosophical thoughts). I said something along these lines.

Ok. The original question specifically asks “are values & integrity of the past.” And this conversation is weaving its way through economics (capitalism/materialism destroys morals/values). Religion (a religious laissez faire attitude undermines traditional values). Generational (kids today are all about “me”). Anthropological (some Rappaille reptilian brain driving actions). A beautiful “ignorance is the enemy” thought (higher knowledge & understanding will develop integrity). Even some ‘crisis’ type thoughts (we have never been through anything like this before).

Here are just some random thoughts given all I have read.

All older people believe younger generations don’t have the same values they have (had). Every generation feels that way. They are correct. Integrity is integrity but each generation will implement it in a different voice.

But that’s not really the point.

Here is what I know (in my heart of hearts).

I could put 12 15 year olds from 15 different countries on a panel and show them a 5 minute video on a variety of corruption, inhumane actions, killing or some relatively despicable bullying-like activity from around the world and I will guarantee you that all will know what is wrong. And while they may not know the right words they will say it is some form of value lacking activity or lack of integrity. In other words they certainly know what “right” behavior is.  Inevitably they will ask of us, our generation, “don’t you recognize it is wrong?”

And then … “You do?”  Well. “Then why don’t you do something about it?”

Now. Make that panel 22 year olds and it will go exactly the same way with one additional question to our generation … “if you aren’t going to do anything about it get the hell out of the way so we can do something about it.”

Every ‘old’ generation thinks about what is lost.

Every new generation aims toward what is to be gained.

That is the beauty of generations.  Maddening at times but beautiful.

Now.

The only thing that has changed over time is transparency. Because of the internet we don’t have more social revolutions or social anything … we just have more transparency. No more or no less values or integrity.

But. The transparency dials up accountability and responsibility.

Because now that 1% (or so), who don’t exhibit the behavior or ‘integrity of actions’ that attitudinally we know is wrong, not only can’t get away with it but their transgressions get communicated over that megaphone called the internet, therefore, those responsible for stopping it are held more accountable than ever.

That means we are responsible for the actions of our peers. And our actions reflect upon what future generation’s think (maybe not what they actually do).

Think about that.

Accountability.

Isn’t it possible that our generation’s integrity will be judged by how we respond and lead toward ‘what is right’?”

Maybe before we wonder about whether it is something of the past (which I think we all know isn’t really true) we should be accountable for our present. And who is going to lead (because while it is absolutely about the individuals even ‘individuals’ need leaders)?

Yeah.

Well.

I now have a small group of passionately pro bruce TED fans.

And a bunch of grumpy old folk  who are anti-bruce.

And a bunch of really philosophical mumbo jumbo I had to delete because it made my head hurt.

The funny thing? (or sad I guess). I am an old folk.  Ok. Before someone jumps on that … let me say I am “of an older generation.” And I cannot believe I am in such a small minority.

Regardless.

I do feel a growing sense of responsibility toward the actions of my peers in my generation.

<hence the reason I write ad nausea about it>

Anyway.

One comment said ignorance is the enemy. Of course there are multiple levels to that comment. But most importantly to this topic we can’t use ignorance as an excuse anymore.

We see lack of integrity more than ever before – not because there is necessarily more of it just that what there is cannot be hidden as well as it may have been in the past.

We will be judged by what we do, or don’t do, with this transparency.

And we are accountable not only for our generation but also the message, and example, we set for future generations.

But here is the good news.

Young people know what is right. And if we do nothing they will just shove our butts out of the way and deal with it themselves.

I continue to believe we don’t have diminished values or integrity overall. Although I tend to believe some generations have a skewed perspective, or tainted perspectives, yet our youth is still good to go if we adults give them some direction.

And I do believe globally we are going through some issues <crisis?> that makes us question overall value & integrity. Some thoughts just because I have seen what people have been discussing:

-          Web. Just my opinion. The web is simply a facilitator. The web doesn’t create anything. People create. The web simply disseminates what people say and think. I could argue that the web hasn’t facilitated any crisis but rather has grinded us down into inaction through information overload. Regardless.  That is a different discussion. Let’s just say I don’t believe the web is degrading our values or integrity.

-          We have seen all of this before. These aren’t really unprecedented times. The web is new but the world had the same values discussions in the 1920’s (and there was a world wide depression). The world had the same values discussion in 1521 with Martin Luther. And all of these same values discussions went worldwide even without the web. Strauss & Howe have argued we are a historically generation cyclical civilization … doomed to make similar mistakes as generations cycle through and experiences change which affects our ability to solve the problems.

Which leads me to …

-          Crisis and facilitating change. A lot of smart people in TED wonder if we are destined to face a crisis if we don’t do ‘something.’ Well. this is a chicken or egg discussion. As a civilization, large populations of people, do we need a crisis to create change or do we facilitate the change to resolve a crisis (which inevitably will need to be resolved).

We people are pretty consistent. It typically takes a pretty big problem <crisis> before we step up to the plate and make the big changes in behavior needed to resolve it. And there is a cycle in that also.

People see crisis looming.

People talk.

Some people do.

There is a lot of angst <and gnashing of teeth>.

A larger group steps up and takes control and solves the crisis.

In the end? The world will not cease to exist. It just may cease to exist as we know it today.

And you know what? That’s okay. The majority of people will still value human life and choice and conduct themselves with integrity. A minority will always do the opposite.

Schumpeter called all this Creative Destruction.

All I know is this. There will be a crisis. There will be a solution. And life will go on <changed or not>.

Next.

The tough majority or minority discussion where values & integrity plays a role.

-          Economic inequality. Or Capitalism (or greed).

<note: I am not going to suggest socialism or even economic equality … just fairness>

Any time historically economic equality (or maybe better said … at least a realm of believability between the haves and have nots) has gone out of whack people have:

  1. Bitched, and
  2. Did something.

There are so many types of capitalism out there but suffice it to say I think unmanaged capitalism will always lead to inequality. Those who have … want to have more. And those who don’t have … want what they don’t have. That inevitably leads to crisis when it is clearly out of whack. And, once again, history has shown this again and again … on a country by country basis as well as globally.

What is going to happen (no … I do not have a crystal ball).

-          Leadership. Ah. Crisis leads to leadership. Inevitably we need someone (or a small group of people) to guide us through the crisis. And maybe that is where his whole values & integrity discussion circles back to. Can we find leaders who are pragmatic enough … with integrity we can hold onto … to guide us through to whatever the next phase is. And that is where I get jammed up. I don’t doubt that there are leaders out there with our best interests in mind … I struggle to see how they can fight their way through the ones who use “values” to forward their own agenda.

But. I have faith … and I have hope. I have the belief that someone who is a shitload smarter than I am who has the same good intentions that I have will step up to the plate and lead.

Anyway.

In the end … this whole thing really is about integrity.

(defintion): Integrity is a concept of consistency (lack of contradiction) of actions, values, methods, measures, principles, expectations and outcomes. In western ethics, integrity is regarded as the quality of having an intuitive sense of honesty and truthfulness in regard to the motivations for one’s actions. The word “integrity” stems from the Latin adjective integer (whole, complete). In this context, integrity is the inner sense of “wholeness” deriving from qualities such as honesty and consistency of character.

99%, by in large, do act with integrity.

That 1% just looks huge.

And, no, I do not think we’ve turned into a nation, or world, based on nothing but greed <or “what’s in it for me”>.

I do believe many of us have gone into a defensive mode … meaning “I need to protect my interests” but that is much much different than “what’s in it for me” mentality.

We may need to take a radically different approach.

But I tend to believe we just need a radically good leader.

The 99% will diminish the 1% if led correctly.

I am not absolving the 99% of doing something … for even in their own actions they can affect what will happen … and even where we end up going.
The road will be long and slow and will take the commitment of everyone not just leaders.

By the way … that last thought is a biggie.

There is a big danger in wanting too much, of asking too much, too fast. This is not in the immediate gratification category.

We often criticize our leaders for not doing enough or for not solving the problems.

We refuse to accept the complexity of the world and the somewhat limited power of leaders to have an immediate effect.

One of the biggest issues we need to face is the simplification of reality and believing that simple solutions will solve the problems.

Yes. Some things can be handled simply. But most are pretty compex issues that need to be untangled.

As one TED commenter said … “

“The reality is that this world is muddling along in the right direction. Of course if 7 billion people are willing to do the right thing it will go a lot faster.”