PROBLEMS/SOLUTIONS – Inversion of terms
In current days discussions about events like OWS, Arab Spring, Spain 15-M movement, and the demand for a real democracy, it’s astonishingly usual to hear statements like the following:
“But if we don’t have politicians, if we don’t have representatives, then which is the solution, or at least the alternative?”.
“Do you know any country where anything different had succeeded?”
“Are there any examples already, of what you are proposing?”
This is when I find difficult to continue the conversation, since I realize that the person I’m speaking with, has turned the terms of the equation round, i.e.: “since we don’t know the solution, then we’d better not examine the matter, nor ask ourselves what the problem is”, instead of: “we have a real problem, let’s come up with a new/better solution”.
Basically, what’s being said is: “We don’t want anything new if we don’t have any certainty”. Or: “we don’t need to review and/or change the current government system, unless we have something better at hand already”.
Admittedly, I don’t have any solutions, but for me that is not a problem. Ironically, it’s the beginning of the solution itself. The previously described conception, from an Architect/Designer point of view, is deadly, for if we followed it at all times there would be no progress in our designs, no creativeness, no imagination, nothing new to discover, just to avoid facing the void.
So I’m concerned in a double way: on one side, how our minds are structured in logical terms, to frame the relation between PROBLEMS/SOLUTIONS, conditioned to the assurance of a linear process, leaving aside any kind of risk and uncertainty, when actually “NEW” implies “UNCERTAINTY. But most worryingly, it’s the lack of will to bear with this uncertainty, which is unavoidable if we want to foster a change in our societies, what really strikes me.
When any issue is being considered about changing reality, NOT HAVING A PROPOSAL is the necessary beginning. In fact, that’s precisely the reason for developing one. And the more accurate our approach to the problem is, the more suitable and effective the solution will be. If we want to focus on a problem ONLY WHEN we know the solution already, then we have been deceiving ourselves all the time, avoiding to consider the issue, until having the certainty of a feasible solution.
Expecting to have a solution in advance, is exactly the kind of logic the establishment wants all of us to put to practice, since it’s based on the notion that the better solution is the already existing one. Changing status-quo requires handling so many complex issues about society, that very few have the guts to face the task of putting our system to the test.
If I had to think of an example to illustrate how this logical process works, it would be that one of cancer and would have to be expressed as follows: “Since we don’t know what the cure to cancer is, let’s not research”. That way, we won’t have to find ourselves in front of the uncomfortable situation that cancer is beyond our control.
This example too, awfully leads to the conclusion that, maybe for too many of us, our societies are not suffering from cancer (yet?).