Emotional anomalies in Hilbert Solution Space

By far the biggest resistance to the idea of object oriented thinking, Hilbert Solution Space and bottom up strategies is a result of instinctive, negative emotional reactions. It doesn't feel natural. It seems cold and calculating. People don't like to be treated as disposable objects. Common sense tells us that people who treat other people without any consideration for their feelings are unlikely to be able to build co-operative associations and create teams.

This can be evidenced from Yvan's post when he is concerned about the breaking off of a relationship with an expert that is engaged to work on a project. Jacie, also indicated her disapproval when she started her post:

"I've just finished reading Chapter 8 and all the emails I've received over the weekend with their talk of people as objects (as opposed to components in the system, which I think is a more accurate description. I for one refuse to be talked about as an "object", I don't care what current business practices say... and for the most part, current business, or should I say "typical corporate business", practices suck anyway.)"

In another post to a table in the vitual cafe, Elias wrote:

there is a growing objectification or commoditisation of the individual as the book progresses...a bleeding heart liberal (I guess that's me, before anyone gets the wrong idea) might find that a bit uncomfortable

...Peter seems to be used to treating people's 'production' as a resource, while a lot of the participants in this Cafe are rather more used to DOING the production...so the later part of the book highlights the (I consider) almost inevitable (unless we can change the current business model) decline into competitive squabbling over available work for an ever shrinking number of final delivery channels...creative endevour reduced to commodity...

he describes the services of his previous employees...Peter (obviously) ran businesses, and puts things in a certain way which reflects this...there will be a number of people in the online community (and therfore, one assumes, in the Cafe) who believe that the WWW is capable of transforming the market place and instituting a bloodless revolution...to that mind set, Peter is an apostle of doom...

We, as producers, are being turned into farm produce...the farmer is the guy that rakes in the money, and determines what will grow...that probably disturbs a large section of the creative community... Later, the farmers get done over by the bulk buyers (supermarket chains) and they are commoditised in their turn...the only way to stop it happening, as far as I can tell, is to make loose associations and compete directly with the bulk buyers from the outset (they can't move as fast)...while the creative control is still in the hands of the people doing it... The alternative is Wal-Mart for code fragments and graphics... Uh oh...sounds a bit like Marx ;-)

Elias

Another poster, Steve Howard, responded to Elias's post:

In these modern 'liberal' times, there are laws against indiscriminate hiring and firing. If you take offense at Peter's viewpoint, where the employee is just a component, then you should maybe reconsider. he is merely putting into words a basic business fact.

Steve

Elias answered:

Not if you are freelance ... which is what Peter's production model is heading towards (as far as I can tell)...

I was not talking about taking offence (I basically agree)...I was acknowledging that if one were reading the chapters sequentially, this 'fact' is becoming more firmly outlined as the book progresses...and this could cause a sense of ill-ease in reading the text, if one had not noticed or considered this 'fact' previously...

Elias

These posts are typical of many negative reactions to the ideas inherent in the paradigms of object oriented thinking, Hilbert Solution Space and bottom up strategies. Many see this thinking as cold and clinical: devoid of any human emotion or consideration for other people. But, this is only as it appears to be in the conventions that have evolved in the pre Information Age.

Controversially, the CD-ROM "How God Makes God" describes the way in which emotions have probably evolved over time to cause us to act in ways that are most favorable for survival and reproduction. In this view, it does make sense that emotions have evolved that induce us to form groups and associations for the purpose of co-operation. However, these emotions would have evolved to deal with local and physical associations and relationships between people; they will not have evolved to promote or support any of the quite different kinds of associations and relationships that can now occur in the communication environment of the Internet. This is readily apparent on discussion lists, where the lack of visual and auditory clues, can easily cause comments to be totally misunderstood, leading to bitter and heated exchanges.

Besides the possible emotional biases, the protocols and conventions of regular business and social ethics often conflict with the kind of interactions now possible on the Internet. As Jacie's management team building seminar indicated, training is geared towards the associations and group behavior of the type suited specifically for the Industrial Age. Team building is based upon the idea of individuals adapting their behavior to fit in with others. Mavericks and eccentrics are not encouraged. Relationships are associated with stability and permanence. Group cohesion and team spirit are all important. Groups have standards and set protocols.

Although much of the essence of this applies in the communication environment of the Internet, it takes on radically different forms. Of course associations and close cooperations are important. Of course long term stable relationships are necessary. But, the way this takes effect in the communication environment is totally different from the way it works in the world of bricks and mortar.

To understand how individual and group ethics and behaviour can be so radically different in the Information Age, yet, still adhere to the basic tenets imposed by reasoned good behaviour and emotional acceptable conduct, needs a radical paradigm shift. Without this paradigm shift, no one can function efficiently or feel comfortable in the Information Age.

It to this area we go in the next chapter, when we deal with game theory and communication strategies.