Jimbo Wales, founder of Wikipedia has begun to launch a campaign wiki for the masses to discuss politics. It's noteworthy, of course, because he believes that people from all political persuasions can discuss, argue, and debate using this wiki. I'd like it to succeed. I joined the mailing list and I'm hopeful. But if I was a betting man, I'd put my money on failure.
Greek classical rhetoric contains a valuable theory called stasis, which uses questions to find the location of agreement among competing arguments (or people). This is the challenge of using a wiki to stimulate debate in politics - can parties find stasis? In other words, can they even agree on the points of disagreement. Rhetoric (the true art, not the pejorative term) seeks to invent the proper argument or language based on the point of stasis. It cannot overcome the emotional attachment people have to their political beliefs.
I'd like to believe I'm open to changing my opinion. But not always. Oddly enough, my experience with academia shows that professors are one of the worst groups for changing opinions related to politics or social sciences (where no absolute evidence exists). Even when evidence is shown towards the contrary, professors deconstruct the research to justify their beliefs.
Jimbo's wiki has many analogs in business technology. The technology exists in business to share knowledge and negotiate situations. Unfortuately, the culture and organizational behavior (or maturity) hasn't caught up. Stories abound of employees that won't put important knowledge into the company system because they feel it's their competitive advantage or they don't see the individal ROI.
Jimbo's campaign wiki is a wonderful technology that will provide a technology platform for people of different political beliefs to debate. The question is, are humans ready or equipped?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment