Thoughts
Occasional daydreams — a blog — about real world problems that might benefit from a system dynamics perspective.
The Ten Commandments in Classrooms?
Over the years there have been on-again, off-again calls to put the Ten Commandments in school classrooms. We are now in one of those “on-again” times.
The people who advocate posting the Ten Commandments appear to want to emphasize Christianity in the schools, to help bring up our children as Christians. But our first Amendment to the Constitution clearly bars that. Even more problematic is the fact that the Ten Commandments is not strictly a Christian list.
Wikipedia says
The Ten Commandments, or the Decalogue, are religious and ethical directives, structured as a covenant document, that, according to the Hebrew Bible, were given by YHWH to Moses. The text of the Ten Commandments appears in three markedly distinct versions in the Bible: at Exodus 20:1–17, Deuteronomy 5:6–21, and the "Ritual Decalogue" of Exodus 34:11–26. [Wikipedia]
Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are thought of as the “Abrahamic” religions as they all trace to the early stories in what many call the Old Testament. All three could thus lay claim the Ten Commandments, but Judaism probably has priority, as it was Moses who delivered them.
But no one needs to argue about who owns them, or whether they should be in schools. There is a much better way to put great moral principles in our schools. We could be sure a great, almost universal spiritual principle is heard by all people growing up in the United States simply by posting the “Golden Rule” in every classroom. There is a version of that in almost every major religion in the world — no single ‘wisdom tradition' would be advocated, no violation of the Constitution, and a great overarching moral principle highlighted for all our children every day.
Versions of the Golden Rule from different Wisdom Traditions [Wikipedia]
Buddhism – Hurt not others with that which pains yourself. Udanavarga 5.18.
Christianity – Always treat others as you would like them to treat you. Matthew 7:12.
Confucianism – Do not unto others what you would not they should do unto you. Analects 15.23.
Hinduism – This is the sum of duty: Do nothing to others which if done to you, would cause you pain. Mahabharata 5.15.17
Islam – No one of you is a believer until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself. Traditions.
Jainism – In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self, and therefore should refrain from inflicting upon others such injury as would appear undesirable to us if inflicted upon ourselves. Yogashastra 2.20.
Judaism – What is hurtful to yourself do not to your fellow man. That is the whole of the Torah and the remainder is but commentary. Go learn it. Talmud.
Sikhism – As you deem yourself so deem others. Then you will become a partner in partner to Heaven. Kabir.
Taoism – Regard your neighbor’s loss as your own loss. T’ai shang kan ying p’ien.
List them all. Think of all that could be learned and ingrained from such a list, made ubiquitous. The Talmud says “that is the whole of the Torah”, and I think all the other wisdom traditions would say the same thing in their own ways.
For system dynamics thinkers: What are the structure and dynamics of such a transition? Who are the stakeholders? What are their goals? What barriers stand in the way?
Today’s Thought
Do you get requests every day for money from candidates and political parties? I get at least ten a day. The requests I get never tell me what they’re going to do with the money, they just want money.
Cue the music: O beautiful for Oligarchs… .Do you get requests every day for money from candidates and political parties? I get at least ten a day. The requests I get never tell me what they’re going to do with the money, they just want money. I’ve stopped giving.
You would think the Dems and Independents would learn from the Republican example. Those guys worked for years to create “Project 2025”, full of plans for how they would turn the country into an oligarchy. The Plan contained details on how they would eliminate the checks and balances now in our Constitution and substitute executive “emergency” whims for Congressional legislation. There’s lots to say about Project 2025, but the short story is that it worked. The Republicans managed to elect a Republican dominated government, which is now in the process of destroying our Constitutional democracy.
The Dems and Independents apparently haven’t learned anything from their humiliation. They appear not to be planning how to take control back from the Project 2025 guys. They just want us to give money, which I guess they’ll use to take out ads pushing their candidates in the next election. It won’t work — money doesn’t change minds, concrete plans do. I wish they’ed ask me for reactions to actual plans for how they will get democracy back. When that happens I may start giving money again.
The structure and dynamics of returning to Democracy
The current U.S. President, Donald Trump, has turned our 250-year old representative democracy upside down. We are now ruled by executive actions invented by Trump and his believers, rather than by legislation enacted by Congress, as our Constitution dictates in its first Article. Many of us are thinking about how to turn us back to a well-structured government with legislative, executive, and judicial branches balanced by a wise system of checks and balances.
Antidote model picture
The current U.S. President, Donald Trump, has turned our 250-year old representative democracy upside down. We are now ruled by executive actions invented by Trump and his believers, rather than by legislation enacted by Congress, as our Constitution dictates in its first Article. Many of us are thinking about how to turn us back to a well-structured government with legislative, executive, and judicial branches balanced by a wise system of checks and balances.
The structure sketched in the paper on this website, titled ‘Can Systems Thinking be an Antidote to Extensive Evil?’,may be a good starting place. There is the question of whether Trump and his followers are, or will become, an “extensive evil” — we are a divided nation on that question. To avoid getting sidetracked into what’s evil and what’s not, let’s refer to that paper as ‘Antidote’, and note that the structure it develops and the early stages it traces (e.g., up to Figure 3 or 4) are much like our current U.S. dynamic situation.
‘Antidote’ has a section on counter-revolutionary structure and behavior. Could we use the ‘Antidote’ structure and these potential leverage points to study how the U.S. could return to Democracy?
Refusal to be open to the rhetoric of the new order
Refusal to accept the goals and traditions of the new order
Refusal to accept the new goals, customs, and habits of speech
Refusal to accept the new regulations, manners, and mores
Refusal to accept the belief that the new order is inevitable
Willingness, even headstrong choice, to be left behind
Unwillingness to downplay or ignore signs of danger
Refusal to succumb to coercion
Note that ‘Antidote’ has not been quantified — it’s a map, not a model. That would be our first step, and we could turn the map into a model using quantities that make sense in the current U.S. situation. Or better: we could follow Forrester’s wise choice in Urban Dynamics and set it to start before Trump’s first term, e.g., 1980, the election of Ronald Reagan. That’s where a variety of trends and forces began to move in the Trump direction. We could watch it transition into the Trump era, as Forrester watched his city grow, stagnate and decline. And then we could explore how to turn us back into a Democracy.
It’s a good thing to think about.