I’ve been thinking this morning about the difference between Planned Obsolescence and Generous Thinking, and why the latter, and the response to it, means so much to me right now. When I was writing Planned Obsolescence, I thought I had answers to big problems, and that I needed to get them in front of a sometimes recalcitrant academy, to press it in directions I thought would be better. With Generous Thinking, I am certain I have more questions than answers, and while I have some thoughts about the approaches we might take in solving our biggest problems, I’m all too aware that my perspective is partial. Even more, I am aware that I am at best an imperfect model of the directions I’d like to see us take. In some key ways, I am the primary audience for Generous Thinking, trying as hard as I can to guide myself toward better ways of being.
17 September 2019, 08:20
Published
This really resonated w/me Kathleen: “I am the primary audience for Generous Thinking, trying as hard as I can to guide myself toward better ways of being.”
I, too, am primary audience for my musings/writings ?—I write to process the “world”?—& am ever grateful for engagement.
This kind of engagement matters so much — thanks, Beronda!