TWC - Week 4 discussion

This week's discussion: Driver of Change.
A quote by Heraclitus, a Greek philosopher, "You could not step twice into the same river; for other waters are ever flowing on to you."
 
Let's get one fact straight. Change is ever with us. Maybe it will be stopped if everything is frozen at 0 Kelvin temperature, but humankind still could not reach that absolute temperature yet. Therefore, we have to embrace change - or defy it, there are only two choices (no false dichotomy here, there really are only two choices - comment if you think otherwise).

What are the drivers of change? My classmates pointed out last Monday that increased awareness of sustainability and enlightened self-interest is one, consumer expectation is another one. Now, there is something underlying the two drivers of change, those are drivers of changes for businesses.

I think that money/wealth, prestige (in achievement sense), and status (in social sense) is the real driver of change. Those three things are the main motivational drivers of change in humans. Therefore, change is us, humans.  We are the main driver of change. And how do we actually manifest those drivers in our lives nowadays? Through businesses and economical impact, scientific researches, and social contribution or occupation.

The driver of change in the Ancient times (BC and Middle Age), is something called power and influence. People want to conquer each others' land and resources. Therefore, they innovated, they made strategies to counter a problem/threat, they made ideologies which support their actions, etc.

It just manifested in a little bit different manner in our post-modern era. Everybody wants something called wealth and money. Power and influence in the ancient time is equated to wealth, prestige, and status of the modern era.

I apologize if the above seems like ranting to you, but nevertheless it is true for most people. That's my opinion and I am going to reference myself for that.

Let's go on to the next question: Should we embrace change?

Human will certainly embrace changes which will benefit them. Change that will give them more opportunity to improve their lives. Now let's see, during the Third Reich era of Adolf Hitler, many of the Germans wanted change from their economic woes, hence they support him. President Obama promised change and it gave him the presidential seat. People are naturally attracted to change, but few are willing to initiate it or become the first follower (like the presentation in the class have stated). So, people see a change in different perspectives, but if they perceive that it is going to benefit them, they will certainly embrace the change.

Why don't some people embrace change, then? For example, internet, facebook?
If you think those people are irrational, please hold your tongue. As I have said before, people act in the manner that if it will benefit them, they will certainly embrace it. However, many obstacles are in the way. High learning curve, generational gap, habits, different thought processes, people who have high stakes in the status quo and lack of time to embrace the change (esp for SMU student). These are some of the reasons among the multitude of them.

I, myself, like to distance myself from all form of changes and see how those changes affect our mindset, paradigms, our culture, behaviours, actions, ideologies, society, and individual wants. These are very broad topic of discussion, and many philosophers spent their WHOLE life exploring these issues.

I lament the fact that many people are thinking of change only in terms of technological and monetary (profit) terms nowadays. The virtues and philosophies of the Ancient Greek have been diluted and forgotten.

Even as we embrace change, I want us to keep in mind a few questions: What is the meaning of all those changes in the first place? Why does it occur in the first place?

I sometimes feel like we are trading our soul and humanity for all these superficial changes.

My reflections for this week is a little disorganized, and I apologize for those who read through these haphazard opinions.

Oh, and this week's rating... Maybe around 7/10. The discussion could have been a little bit more in-depth.

Back to my topical research paper...