The Empowerment Paradigm

The Empowerment Paradigm

Building the Paradigm

Developing an objective, truth-focused paradigm in its fullness is a daunting task. Fortunately, however, we do not need to complete development of the empowerment paradigm before we can begin practicing it. We'll therefore just start with the basics here. You can then download and read more detailed materials as they become available.

Since the empowerment paradigm is to be based on objective truth, we should start building it using only those tools and building blocks that are not subject to bias. These include primarily the laws of mathematics - rigorous logic - and the fundamental laws of physics. These laws include those for which there is either a solid proof or universal agreement from both a logical and observational standpoint. They do not include theories, however well accepted, that have not actually been proven. Such theories could contain inaccuracies due to bias or ignorance and cannot therefore be accepted as objective truth, although they may approximate it.

The tools of mathematics and building blocks of physics will be the basis for the empowerment paradigm, but alone they will not be sufficient. We will inevitably encounter situations in which we cannot rigorously derive a required element of the paradigm. The only way to proceed will be to make an unproven assumption. Unfortunately all assumptions can contain bias. Since the purpose of building our paradigm from scratch is to minimize bias we'll need to do two things:

Clearly state all assumptions. This will allow us to reduce any bias and improve the assumptions' accuracy as our understanding of the truth increases.
Minimize the unproven aspects of our assumptions and otherwise construct them so as to minimize the degree of bias to which they are subject.

Using these tools of mathematics, fundamental physical laws, and clearly stated, minimally biased assumptions, we must now attempt to construct an objective and accurate paradigm: empowerment.

Purpose

An accurate paradigm - one that corresponds closely with the truth - must be based first and foremost on the purpose of the being that holds that paradigm. Everything that is designed has a purpose. This purpose is the reason the object was originally created. Only unintentional byproducts have no purpose. Further, since the ability to design something requires abstract thought, only sapient beings such as people and some organizations can define a purpose and create an object to fulfill that purpose.

While it is possible to use an object for auxiliary purposes other than that for which it was originally created, this doesn't change the object's original, fundamental purpose. Only an object's designer can alter the object's original purpose, although the designer may delegate that authority to others.

From the standpoint of empowerment we're primarily concerned with the purpose of people and the organizations we create. We'll therefore begin our exploration of purpose with our own purpose and then move on to organizational purpose.

The first and most obvious question is: Do we even have a purpose or are we just random byproducts of the universe's various processes? The law of conservation of energy, probably the most fundamental law of physics, demands that the universe has as its source something that is not bound by that same law. The proof for this assertion is somewhat technical, but it's summed up in the statement "Nothing bound by the law of conservation of energy can create itself." The real question then becomes: Is the source of our universe a sapient God or simply a mindless physical system?

As far as we know, there is no proof or disproof of the sapience of the universe's creator, and therefore we can't be certain whether we have a purpose or not. We therefore need to introduce our first assumption into the paradigm, but should we assume that we do have a purpose or that we don't have one? Since we can't prove which alternative is correct, we'll need to make a choice. If we happen to choose correctly - if our choice indeed corresponds to the truth - then the resulting paradigm will be accurate. We'll therefore need to focus on minimizing the negative consequences of the choice if we choose incorrectly. This type of logic will be helpful throughout the process of building the empowerment paradigm. Any time we can't logically determine the best choice, we must select the choice that will cause the least harm if it is the wrong choice. In other words,

When you can't be sure you're doing what's best,
At least be sure you're not doing what's worst.

We can apply this principle to the determination of whether we have a purpose or not using the following diagram, which illustrates the consequences of making each assumption vs. what the truth actually is.

This diagram illustrates that choosing wrong can result in one of two consequences: either we fail to fulfill the fundamental purpose for which we were created or we fail to fulfill other, auxiliary purposes. Since from an objective viewpoint it would be worse to fail in fulfilling the purpose for which we exist than any other purpose, we should assume that we have a fundamental purpose and use our resources to try to discover that purpose.

Human Purpose

Since we can't directly deduce our fundamental purpose based on the laws of mathematics and physics we'll have to make another assumption. We know that if we have a purpose then our creator must be sapient because only sapient beings can define a purpose and design objects to fulfill that purpose. We'll therefore refer to this creator as God, although at this point we can say nothing more than that God is sapient, created the universe, and is unbound by the law of conservation of energy. If we make the likely assumption that we were designed to augment God's behavior then we can at least partially accomplish our purpose by emulating that behavior. One of the few things we know about God's behavior is that God created the universe. Since the universe still exists God creates more than God destroys. Therefore, to emulate our creator we should maximize creation and minimize destruction. This principle is simply the objective, dispassionate version of the subjective motivation common to all sentient creatures: maximize pleasure and minimize pain. Therefore unless and until we can more accurately discern our fundamental purpose, we should accept that it likely involves this principle. We'll therefore start building the empowerment paradigm with the assumption that a good first approximation of our fundamental purpose is:

Maximize creation and minimize destruction.

This principle should therefore be the basis of our motivation and behavior. Based on it we should try to grow and develop and help others do likewise. We should also do everything we can to avoid or minimize damage and destruction. These principles should outweigh the pursuit of personal pleasure. They require us to use our resources wisely to aid the development of ourselves and others rather than squandering them on Hedonism. This is no different that the teachings of a number of the world's major philosophies and religions, at least in their original form. These teachings advocate dispassion and charity and eschew waste and decadence. They can easily be summarized by the principle we have just deduced: maximize creation and minimize destruction. We have only been a little more explicit in defining the logic and assumptions we used to reach this conclusion.

Knowing our purpose, at least roughly, and the general behavior it requires is one thing. Modifying our behavior to best fulfill that purpose is another matter entirely. It requires not only the understanding to develop principles that will help us fulfill our purpose in specific situations, but the discipline to consistently act in accordance with those principles. Empowerment will require a combination of understanding and discipline.

Organizational Purpose

One way in which we can facilitate the practice of the principle "Maximize Creation and Minimize Destruction" is to work cooperatively with others to achieve it. While small groups can work to this end informally, constructively managing the interactions of large groups of people and resources requires structure. We call these structured groups organizations.

Fortunately identifying the purpose of organizations is much easier than identifying it for people because we have direct access to their creators - the people that formed them. We can usually identify the purpose of an organization by observing the way it interacts with its members and environment, particularly its creators. If the organization has been transferred by its creators to new management then they effectively fill the role of the creators. They may even alter the organization's fundamental purpose to something other than that established by the institution's original creators, with corresponding changes to the organization itself. This can result in the organization changing into something it was never meant to be by its organizers.

This is not necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes an organization needs to change its purpose in order to adapt to a changing environment and membership. However, it is also entirely reasonable for an organization's designers to want it to be able to adapt to changes without morphing into something that is antithetical to the purpose for which it was created. For example the framers of the American constitution provided an amendment process to allow it to be adapted to the nation's changing needs. Since they valued freedom as a fundamental right the amendment prohibiting slavery furthered their purpose. However, it would theoretically be possible to amend the constitution to allow a totalitarian government to be established. Were this to happen it would be antithetical to their purpose of establishing a nation based on liberty. For this reason those who create an organization may want to establish an immutable purpose for it.

The constitution (or by-laws) of an organization should essentially be a high level design document for the organization. It should clearly state the purpose of the organization and elucidate which parts of itself are subject to amendment and which, if any, are not. Having a constitution with an immutable purpose and fundamental principles, but that otherwise allows for amendment, generally provides the best combination of stability and adaptability. The general components of a constitution and their relationship to planning and management are illustrated in the following diagram.

We can use a process known as Idealized Design to develop the purpose we would like the organization to serve. However, once we have defined this purpose we need to ensure that it does not mutate into something we never intended. For example, many companies are established with the purpose of "conducting any lawful business". This purpose is too vague to be useful. A careful examination of these organizations will generally reveal that, once formed, their true purpose quickly became "maximize quality of work life for leadership". Leadership may claim to be trying to maximize profit or organizational viability, but these are only done to the extent they coincide with the true purpose of maximizing personal quality of work life. This results in situations like the sub-prime mortgage crisis and the collapse of corporations and nations. Decisions are made that benefit leadership but harm the organization as a whole in the long term.

So how do we prevent mutation of purpose? This is where principles come in. Just as policies provide guidance for making decisions, principles provide guidance for developing policies. Some of these principles will need to be flexible to enhance the organization's adaptability. However, in order to ensure that the organization's stated purpose remains its actual purpose, we must develop fundamental principles that can't be changed. The purpose of these principles is to keep the organization focused on its purpose without unduly constraining it.

We have now established a rough purpose for people. We have also described the means by which we can define the purpose on which to base the organizations we create. These provide us with the basis on which to build the empowerment paradigm in general as well as our specific individual and organizational paradigms. We'll be continuing to construct the empowerment paradigm on this page over time, but if you have any questions you'd like us to answer before then please don't hesitate to contact us. You can also read Empowerment Book I: Fundamentals or Empowerment Book II: Foundation if you'd like more details on purpose and other concepts required to develop the empowerment paradigm. You can purchase a hard copy of these books or download them free here.

Yet To B

Creating Our Future * Tales of Alternate Futures