31. The Ultimate Effect

The first thirty articles covering Dr. Ackoff’s 1993 presentation, which gives the best explanation I’ve ever heard for how we got to where we are today, can be summarized by:

The ONLY way to improve ANYTHING is to begin at the BIGGEST system and work backwards!

We saw the Biggest System is God’s Will!

The previous article explained how God gets the value to bring about His Will:?

God presents Truth in Love, and Forgives when people reject the Truth.?

This article looks at where we ought to be today if Dr. Ackoff had corrected his presentation and we had begun at the Biggest System and worked backwards with every issue! It’s going to involve audience participation!

How would you handle a problem like alcoholism or crime? Before continuing, take a moment to state your answer out loud or write it down.

Would you ignore the problem?

Love: Giving without expecting anything in return

If you love, ignoring the problem isn't an option, especially because you know you would now be responsible when the problem got worse. Love prevents the Absolve approach.

Would you punish the people causing the problem?

Dr. Ackoff realized this is how most people approach these problems, whether they realize it or not. Here is what he said:

Look at how alcoholism is treated. It is usually treated as a problem to be removed rather than as the alcoholic's solution to a serious personal problem. No wonder that when his "solution" is denied him he often returns to it as soon as he can or develops other "solutions" that are equally damaging. The alcoholic's original problem is usually left unsolved when he is denied alcohol or is induced to abstain.

Problem solving is often directed at the removal of symptoms rather than causes. This is particularly true where society is involved. For example, we define crime as a social problem, and we attempt to solve it by removing the criminal from society. However, crime continues to rise, and mounting evidence shows that prisons make convicts more likely to commit further crimes when they are released. Thus it is increasingly apparent that crime is a symptom, not a disease, and that we have not been treating its causes adequately. In fact, the treatment is widely recognized as a major cause of the continuing problem.

This approach makes the problem worse!

Resolve is when you focus on effects, which is shown when you punish or reward. Basically, you are trying to equal out justice.

Forgive: state your will you won’t equal out your own justice even if you had the opportunity.

A forgiving person would find no delight in punishing the addicted.

Would you try to address the source of the addiction and criminal behavior?

How successful has THAT been in the thirty years since Dr. Ackoff gave his 1993 presentation?

A quick search on the internet finds the following:

A Lancet journal estimates that only 5-8% of people who attend AA successfully maintain abstinence.?

In fact, 85 percent of individuals relapse within a year of treatment, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Moreover, two-thirds of individuals return to drug use within weeks of beginning addiction treatment.

A U.S. Department of Justice analysis of recidivism rates in 24 states concluded that 82 percent of individuals released from state prisons were rearrested at least once during the 10 years following release.

Even though this approach appears to be successful in the short term, Solving by addressing the physical cause seems to be, at best, less than 20% effective in the long term. Why?

When you solve a person’s problem, you create three more problems (Law of Unintended Consequences) and the overall stress from your solution is worse than from the original problem!

We need to go beyond Solve. We need an answer that makes everything better in the long term!

We’ve referenced Love and Forgiveness, which were a part of God’s method to bring about His Will. What was the third part of the method for God’s Will?

Truth: a right WHAT with a right WHY and right HOW

Truth looks for the intangible cause. Focusing on the intangible cause means the answer is CONTEXTLESS!!!

This is WHY a Solve approach to addiction and crime creates three more problems! Everyone involved has to deal with the consequences of the contextual answer in another context!

This “Truth in Love and Forgiveness” approach results in DISSOLVE!!!!

The ultimate effect is Dissolve!

Dissolve is how God handled every issue involving people!

Remember, man looks to the tangible and the quantitative, while God looks to the intangible and qualitative.

Let’s look at an example!

Solomon

7 In that night did God appear unto Solomon, and said unto him, Ask what I shall give thee. 8 And Solomon said unto God, Thou hast showed great lovingkindness unto David my father, and hast made me king in his stead. 9 Now, O Jehovah God, let thy promise unto David my father be established; for thou hast made me king over a people like the dust of the earth in multitude. 10 Give me now wisdom and knowledge, that I may go out and come in before this people; for who can judge this thy people, that is so great? 11 And God said to Solomon, Because this was in thy heart, and thou hast not asked riches, wealth, or honor, nor the life of them that hate thee, neither yet hast asked long life; but hast asked wisdom and knowledge for thyself, that thou mayest judge my people, over whom I have made thee king: 12 wisdom and knowledge is granted unto thee; and I will give thee riches, and wealth, and honor, such as none of the kings have had that have been before thee; neither shall there any after thee have the like. (II Chronicles 1:7-12)

In the first chapter of II Chronicles, the Hebrew word mada was used three times (in verses 10, 11, and 12). The word was translated as knowledge and spoke of what Solomon requested from God instead of riches, long life, and victory over his enemies. God recognized that Solomon requested a cause instead of these effects and God said He would give Solomon this cause as well as the effects.

The Hebrew word mada comes from the root word yada, which means “to know” or “to separate out mentally.” It turns out mada means “to know how you know” and even got translated as the word science in Daniel 1:4. This word mada means “the ability to think about thinking.” Let’s see how it works.?

In I Kings, the same story was told and the immediate application of this mada was seen.?

Then there came two women that were harlots, unto the king, and stood before him. And the one woman said, Oh, my lord, I and this woman dwell in one house; and I was delivered of a child with her in the house. And it came to pass the third day after I was delivered, that this woman was delivered also; and we were together; there was no stranger with us in the house, save we two in the house. And this woman’s child died in the night, because she lay upon it. And she arose at midnight, and took my son from beside me, while thy handmaid slept, and laid it in her bosom, and laid her dead child in my bosom. And when I rose in the morning to give my child suck, behold, it was dead; but when I had looked at it in the morning, behold, it was not my son, whom I did bear. And the other woman said, Nay; but the living is my son, and the dead is thy son. And this said, No; but the dead is thy son, and the living is my son. Thus they spake before the king. (I Kings 3:16-22)

This story is the ideal example to see the different ways Solomon could have dealt with this problem.

-Absolve: Ignore the women and send them away. (Lacking love)

-Resolve: Punish or kill both women for bothering the king. (Lacking forgiveness)

-Solve: Interview the women and their friends to determine who the mother is. (Lacking truth)

Notice, solving this problem is going to take a lot of effort, perhaps causing people to lie or blackmail each other, while matters requiring Solomon’s attention would be ignored, with the possibility Solomon will still reach a wrong conclusion, which would be found out as the child got older and displayed a physical attribute similar to the mom. The woman who lost may have supporters who didn’t agree with the answer and looked for ways to steal the child or kill the woman. The child may even become traumatized, always wondering who their real mother was, as well as Solomon’s handling of this matter opening the door for more of these types of disputes being brought to the king.

Think about it: Solve is our approach today through the courts. Do you think our legal process has made our nation better over time, or is it the best we can hope for to avoid lawlessness? Would a court’s decision be the end of the matter, or would there be appeals? What was Solomon’s approach, especially considering he had mada?

Then said the king, The one saith, This is my son that liveth, and thy son is the dead: and the other saith, Nay; but thy son is the dead, and my son is the living. And the king said, Fetch me a sword. And they brought a sword before the king. And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other. Then spake the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her heart yearned over her son, and she said, Oh, my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said, It shall be neither mine nor thine; divide it. Then the king answered and said, Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it: she is the mother thereof. (I Kings 3:23-27)

Solomon took a step in the opposite direction of Solve. He wasn’t looking for direct information about their case! Solomon said to give him a sword so he could divide the baby in two. What did that answer cause these two women to state?

They stated their thought processes; their intangible causes. Solomon was then able to know for sure which woman was the mother because he got to the intangible causes instead of looking for observable whats. Not only did Solomon’s answer settle the matter forever without any appeals, it also made an interesting impression on all of Israel that was stated in the concluding verse of the chapter:

And all Israel heard of the judgment which the king had judged; and they feared the king: for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him, to do justice. (I Kings 3:28)

Basically, when people heard Solomon’s decision, they thought, “Solomon is wise; however, that decision didn’t come from a man. That decision could only have come from God.” Hmmm, it looks like mada and Dissolve are proofs of the wisdom of God!

Man solves and he makes the world three times worse every time he celebrates his achievement because he looks to the tangible and quantitative.

God Dissolves and the world becomes better because He looks to the intangible and qualitative!

Who is leading you?

Our second example is documented in John chapter 8.?

Jesus

Jesus was in the temple when the Pharisees brought a woman caught in the act of adultery. The Pharisees stated that the law said the woman ought to be stoned; however, they asked Jesus what ought to be done.?

They trapped Jesus in a no-win situation. Either He had to encourage everyone to stone her and break Roman Law or tell everyone not to stone her and prove He wasn’t keeping Moses’ Law. Remember, the Jews were under Roman Law, so getting Jesus to break Roman Law would have gotten Him removed from society. Either way, the religious leaders thought they had solved their “Jesus problem.”?

Here were Jesus’ options:

-Absolve: Ignore the situation, maybe it goes away. (The Pharisees continued to ask.)

-Resolve: Jesus could have tried to knock the stones out of everyone’s hands so they couldn’t stone her or tried to convince the crowd not to stone her, but this would have only energized the crowd and made Him look like He wasn’t representing God.

-Solve: Jesus could have gotten into a doctrinal debate with the Pharisees, but He would have to admit the Law wasn’t wrong, and the woman would have been stoned. Jesus would have been the cause and arrested by the Romans. Worse, the Pharisees would have turned the crowd from Jesus if He contradicted the Law or lost the debate with the Pharisees.

-Dissolve: Jesus came up with a way to stone her! It appears His response dealt with the intangible cause, the Pharisees’ hypocrisy.

So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. (John 8:7-9)

Jesus sat down after coming up with a way to stone her and He (and the woman) didn’t have to deal with the crowd. Jesus’ statement was a conjunctive (measure for truth), which we are beginning to see is mada.

God's approach makes everything better in the long term.

Man's approach appears to get better in the short term, but makes everything worse in the long term.

There's one characteristic that proves in the moment whether it is God's approach or man's approach: Dissolve!

The ultimate effect is Dissolve!

Dissolve is always according to God’s Will and it would result in the world getting better!

Do you think it's too late to fix this world?

Do you think our problems are so complicated there isn’t one Dissolve answer?

What if there was one Dissolve answer, would you embrace it?

Next week, we will conclude this series with the Ultimate Dissolve answer!

Link to Next Article: 32. The Ultimate Dissolve

Link to Table of Contents: The Decline and Fall of the Machine Age