Chapter 21 on committee

The markers of the self are irreversibly and unambiguously configured in our behavior, whether we meet in groups or walk alone.Outside of the laboratory, no one can know any other person's unique immune markers, and we don't have any confidence in sniffing out the differences in pheromones between individuals.Therefore, we are distinguished from each other only by the way we walk, our voice, the way we write letters, the way we turn our heads, and so on.We cannot go wrong in this matter.No one is really like anyone else; there are here and there likenesses, but no exact replicas; we are four billion unique individuals.

Thus, when the committee meets, each member must be an actor, uncontrollably playing his part, reading the text by which he is identified, and declaring his identity.It takes a lot of time and energy, and once started, there is little chance of getting anything else done.Many committees are appointed in one year and then work on for years and into the next decade, and not much happens beyond these long, uninterrupted displays of each member's badge of conduct. Committees would be a marvelous invention of groupthink if not every individual had this compulsive behavior.But such coercive behavior exists.We seem to be designed and coded to put the individual at the highest priority.We must do this first, no matter the cost, even if it means crippling and crippling the entire community.

This is of course the ideological dynamic behind democracy.It's amazing that the system works, let alone works well.The individual is the true human treasure, and he can be of full value to society only if he is well-bred and able to fully express his individuality.Like many attractive ideas, this one is old-fashioned Chinese.Honesty is the most personal quality.Groups and societies cannot have it unless individual mortals have it.This is the difficult part of the civilization process. But individuality can be stretched too far.You almost always see it in committees.There are some very old words for criticizing excessive display of individuality.If a person is too withdrawn, too solitary, and never interacts with others, his behavior is called solitary (egregios).It used to be a good word, meaning outstanding, meaning outstanding, unique.However, through the process of linguistic derogation, the word has acquired anti-social connotations.People with too strong a personality are called weird, weird, perverse, and the worst word is idiots (idiots), from idios, originally meaning personal or private.

Today, with the increasing complexity of the organizations in which we live, and the denser packing of our numbers, the work of committees can be deadly serious.This is all the more so when predicting the future is required.Each of us knows instinctively that there is a responsibility that cannot be trusted to any single individual; we must do it together. Because of the urgency of the issues ahead, old-fashioned standards committees have devised variations in recent years to allow for better collective thinking.Now, there's the Mind Corporation, which is the hybrid of the committee and the factory, the thinking corporation.There are government committees and boards whose members are summoned to Washington, where they are ordered to sit down, and to come up with collective ideas.Industrial companies have organized their own talk groups, where executives fill rooms, slam each other's tables, stare and yell, hoping to spark new ideas.But the old trouble remains: the people who come together for groupthink are first and foremost individuals, in need of self-expression.

The latest invention to avoid this hassle is the Delphi technique.It was an invention of the 1960s, the brainchild of the RAND folks, who weren't happy with the way the committee was planning for the future.This method sounds a bit simple and silly.Instead of convening a meeting, the problem sheet is distributed to the members of the group, and each person writes down the answer and sends it back silently.These answers are then circulated to all members, who are asked to reconsider and fill out the questionnaire again after paying attention to other people's different opinions.so and so.Usually three cycles are sufficient.The consensus that could be reached at that time was reached, and the final answers were said to be mostly solid, and often more interesting than the first round.In some variations of this method, participants also introduce new questions as they provide answers.

We were almost humiliated to learn that the Delphi method worked, and sometimes remarkably well.People's first reaction was indignation, thinking it was another example of social manipulation, social science snark, behavioral control. But later, numerous examples showed that this technology really works.And for this example - at least in the future forecasts of industry and government - one must find something good in it. Maybe this is the way after all to preserve the individual with all his ego, while at the same time connecting the minds so that the group can think collectively.In short, it's the best of both worlds.

The essence of the Delphi method is really quiet and thoughtful dialogue.In a conversation, everyone gets a chance to be heard.The background noise of chatter, the recurring sonic boom of vanity, is eliminated from the start.There is time for thinking, but no voice, and therefore no shouting at the top of the voice.In this way, it is a great invention.Before Delphi, true listening was almost always impossible when committees were meeting.The function of each member is to speak.While others were speaking, each member was busy thinking about what to say to support his original position when it was his turn next.What the committee really does is debate, not ideas.Take out all the activities of asking for points, leading the discussion, saving face, winning plaudits, silencing the naysayers, scaring off the naysayers, and so on, and a group of smart people can sit down and think quietly.It's a great idea, and I'm glad it works.

The name Delphi is very interesting, obviously implying that it plays the role of prophecy of the apocalypse.The original Delphi was where Apollo was, and Apollo was the god of prophecy.It doesn't stop there.He was also the source of some of the finest Greek virtues, Temperance, Moderation, Care, Discipline, and Prudence.In fact, Apollo may have started out as a committee, semantically speaking.The word apollo (perhaps the related word apello) originally meant a political gathering.People must have realized very early that the public meeting is very important for considering what to do next, and it is basic to human society, so it needs to be integrated into mythology, and a god of command must be created, so Apollo came into being. , the god of prophecy of the Dorians.

It is not really believed that the seers of Delphi gave definite answers to questions about the future.Instead, her announcements often contain the same ambiguities as her designs, which likewise offer multiple options from which to choose.She symbolizes more like a committee agenda.When she fell on the cauldron in a frenzy and muttered ambiguous words, she became today's problem list.The elaboration of details involves the elaboration of the prophet's statement, which is the task of the exegetai (interpreter).It was a council of citizens, partly elected by the citizens of Athens, partly appointed by the Delphic seers.This system seems to have worked well for a long time and formed the decree and legal basis of Greek religion.

Today's Delphi, then, represents an improved ancient social design, with a novel modification of the committee procedure that conditions groups of people to think more quietly and listen more quietly.This method, which may seem new as a formal procedure, is actually very old, perhaps as old as human society itself.Because in real life, that's always how we make decisions, albeit always in a disorganized way.We spread the word; we meditate on what different people would say about the issue; we read poetry; we meditate on literature; we play music; we change our minds; we reach an understanding.Society evolves in this way, not by shouting loudly to overwhelm each other, but by the unique ability of unique individuals to understand each other.