118 If it isn't right, fix it [4 June 2021]
Two perspectives
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
--Proverb
If you don't like what you see in the mirror, change it.
--Cher
It takes keen insight to change only the
proper things. Does change mean to remove, to add, or to modify
by way of correction? Any of those cases seriously involves the
feelings of others. One person might cling to the familiar.
Another might agitate for whatever change is suggested. What
bothers one person might be just the quirk that satisfies
somebody else. We must perceive with sensitivity.
Remove
Does change mean to omit? When
unnecessary steps become habits, we start to regard them as
required. Consider complex recipes that somebody shortens to
fewer steps. We can expect some holdouts who prefer the old
methods. Some years ago, when an American visitor offered to help
an elderly Swiss woman do her laundry, the volunteer was
surprised to find out that the chore began with chopping firewood
to heat the wash water. Even the automatic washing machines in
that region were programmed to bring the water to or close to
boiling.
Add
Does change mean to supply what is
missing? When I was young, the church congregation provided a set
of bed sheets to a woman who likely needed to refresh her bedding
more frequently. After a trial period, the recipient brought the
sheets back because laundering them frequently was more work than
she intended. Her familiar norm was her comfort zone, and
recommendations to do otherwise hurt her feelings.
Modify
Does change mean to alter an established
pattern, essentially replacing it with something different?
Modernizing involves a learning curve, not the least of which is
adjusting to new results as well as to new means of achieving
them. When we propose the desirable "after," someone
may harbor an attachment to the "before." The
definition of improvement varies vastly throughout the populace.
Article 39 tells of the community that was enthusiastic about a
proposal to install a sewer system until they heard rumors that
the neighborhood clean-up campaign would include penalizing
residents who did not clean up personal property. When people had
to live the change, it became too much for them.
After deciding to fix it
Along with deciding what to change and
how to change it, we must ask who should change it. Is there
ownership of the "it"? If you think an empty space
invites putting something into it, just try building a shed in a
public park. Alternatively, try to beautify a feature (of the
land or of someone's face) whose natural beauty defies
improvement by cosmetic meddling. People do not want changes of
the landscape around them any more than they want changes to
their own bodies. Sometimes they call for site beautification or
muscle building training, but the landscapers and trainers are
stymied until the prospective clients sincerely want the changes.
Often people feel they own that which is familiar to them.
Someone who uses a nearby traffic light as a timer for cooking
eggs is likely to be upset if the signal is moved out of zir
view. Private feelings range from eager anticipation to rage.
Citizens welcome a time-saving traffic reroute, but the world was
horrified by Taliban destruction of 1,000-year-old Buddha
statues. Decisions by individuals and small bodies have enormous
repercussions. Consequences impact personal and world peace. When
there is an agreement in favor of change, there are still details
to work out: who should do what, and when. Unenthusiastic
participation dulls any success. Engaged individuals will
appreciate progress.
When you see the need
Article 56
referred to Ernstraud Magazine
for a story about the tree that fell across the road in front of
my house. Five volunteers cleared the roadblock before the city
was aware of the problem. This efficient response depended on the
residents' ability to perceive what was wrong and promptly
fix it. A young religious teacher was trying to teach lessons to
a group of Native Americans. Early in his service, he was on the
way to a meeting when he noticed a fallen fence post along the
road. Fortunately, the young man had grown up in ranch country,
and he knew what to do in this situation. He was familiar with
the unwritten ranchers' code that required passsersby to stop
and repair fencing wherever they saw it before the cattle
escaped. By the time the young man finished, a local chieftain
rode up on his horse and expressed his gratitude by welcoming the
teacher to come visit his tribe.
Caveats
In both stories there is no question of
ownership of the property. The universal understanding is that
anyone owns the problem who is aware of it. The rule is that if
you see what is wrong, you fix it. You can't beat that
approach for timely efficiency. However, there is also a caution
here: awareness. If nobody else thinks a condition is a problem,
perhaps it is not something for me to fix. For example, if I
think you are misaligning your TV antenna or planting your garden
all wrong, the problem is more likely my (lack of) awareness, not
your construction or garden.
Additionally, we keep our
expectations reasonable. If a car goes out of control, we jump
out of the way. We don't try to stop it with our bare hands.
If the house next door burns down, we don't show up the next
morning expecting to rebuild it. It is all right to need help
when we are overwhelmed. Nevertheless, we are never justified for
using the magnitude argument as a reason for not caring. Enter
the concept of cooperation!
Perceiving together
Our cooperation is most effective when we see things together. If I am the only
person in town aware of a homeless man living under the bridge, I
have some publicity to do if I expect help fixing the problem.
Bringing the man a meal every day I could do by myself. On the
other hand, addressing the principles that underlie homelessness
is beyond my individual capacity. Since I can't cop out with
a magnitude argument, I have to find a path that expands my
awareness to the community that can take action. In this story, I
am the first person to see the problem. Therefore, it rests on me
to start the process that fixes it. This is a moral duty because
there is a society around me which I am obligated to inform.
Consider a levee at the edge of the river. If in my visits to the
homeless man I am the first to notice an impending rupture of the
levee, I cannot escape a social duty to spread the alarm. There
is no option to look the other way. I use care how I validate and
spread the alarm, but I do not shirk my duty.
Now we are considering what it means to be a civilization. Social contract
binds us humans together not just for survival but for the
quality of life we have from being hard-wired for collaboration.
The distinctively human capacity is that through collective
attention all of us can survive as long as our bodies are
capable. Being a contemporary human comes with that shared
obligation. I am born to this responsibility to the whole. By the
same reasoning, we are all born to have the same opportunity.
What you post here may also be used anywhere by Kent Busse d.b.a. Ernstraud Magazine and attributed to your pen name or "a reader." Your email address will not be published.
Being For Others Blog copyright © 2021 Kent Busse
Have you shared this with someone?
