The term “national conversation” seems to be gaining traction as a
desirable activity where people talk with one another at a national
scale about matters of national concern—the United States talking about
the security state, for instance, or Australia calling for discussions
on population, the structure of future economies, and attitudes towards
people seeking asylum. These issues are part of the bigger question of
how nations might define and achieve progress and well-being. And behind
all of this is concern over what sort of future we, the people making
up a nation, would like to have.
But having a conversation about the future is difficult. So how might a nation go about doing it?
In her seminal advice for English society in 1912, Mary Greer Conklin distinguished conversations from other forms of communication. Conversations, she said, are dialogues, not monologues; they are partnerships, not individual activities; they involve listening as well as talking; they are ways to learn from and understand others but are not necessarily a vehicle for information; and they should be polite and respectful.
Conversations among friends are still common, but at community and societal levels we tend these days to argue our case. More often than not we try to convince others that our ideas are best. We often end up in lawsuits or battles to capture media attention. On top of this, humans tend to develop simplified mental models of how the world works; and we are very good at only letting in information that agrees with those models.
This gives rise to a range of so-called thinking flaws, including confirmation bias (only seeking information that agrees with our views) and selective recall (only remembering information that agrees with our views).
Behavioral economist Daniel Ariely describes human decision-making as “predictably irrational.
So how can we have sensible conversations about the future when we don’t manage politeness and respect and are often unaware that our view of the world might differ from the view held by our conversant? The discipline of strategic foresight tries to address these problems, and thereby help us talk about the future. It combines strategy (how and why we do things) with forecasting and insight (casting our minds into the future and seeing things from different perspectives, thinking beyond the obvious).
Read more: Helping a Nation Think About Its Futures | Solutions
But having a conversation about the future is difficult. So how might a nation go about doing it?
In her seminal advice for English society in 1912, Mary Greer Conklin distinguished conversations from other forms of communication. Conversations, she said, are dialogues, not monologues; they are partnerships, not individual activities; they involve listening as well as talking; they are ways to learn from and understand others but are not necessarily a vehicle for information; and they should be polite and respectful.
Conversations among friends are still common, but at community and societal levels we tend these days to argue our case. More often than not we try to convince others that our ideas are best. We often end up in lawsuits or battles to capture media attention. On top of this, humans tend to develop simplified mental models of how the world works; and we are very good at only letting in information that agrees with those models.
This gives rise to a range of so-called thinking flaws, including confirmation bias (only seeking information that agrees with our views) and selective recall (only remembering information that agrees with our views).
Behavioral economist Daniel Ariely describes human decision-making as “predictably irrational.
So how can we have sensible conversations about the future when we don’t manage politeness and respect and are often unaware that our view of the world might differ from the view held by our conversant? The discipline of strategic foresight tries to address these problems, and thereby help us talk about the future. It combines strategy (how and why we do things) with forecasting and insight (casting our minds into the future and seeing things from different perspectives, thinking beyond the obvious).
Read more: Helping a Nation Think About Its Futures | Solutions
No comments:
Post a Comment