Dear Chau Nguyen,
How can I answer to your mail? Just let me say "sorry!" for what my
statement made you understand.
>"Be a good person" is what most people think they are (including the
>greatest criminals). If things turn out to be different of what was
>intended in the beginning they will find somewhere a guilty party. It is
>easier to cope with guilt when you haven't learnt about system thinking -
>it is easier to overlook your own part in the game.
>Did anywhere in my message state that I AM A GOOD PERSON?
>stated that my INTENTION is to be a good person. You are making
>assumption here, big time. The tone of this paragraph offended my being.
In my first two paragraphs, I refered to my experiences with criminals.
Please, please do not mix it with your person!! Sorry, I was not clear
>Sorry to say, Chau, but your statement seems to be not complex enough.
>May I have your definition of "good" (I don't need quantity, qualitative
>statement is fine)?
You started your statement LO12858 that you wish to share your PMS, which
is "to be a good person". With my comment I wanted to say, that I find
nothing, that you share, as long as I do not get an idea of what you mean
by "good". (You even could be a criminal, how should I know? - By no means
I intend or think or believe you are!!! But, if I did, it would be my
problem, or not?) Yes, I am still interested to hear your definition of
"being a good person". In fact I am only little interested in the
definition itself but more in the way you approach such a difficult (in my
eyes) matter. Please feel free to share whatever you wish to share and
keep the unwritten thoughts-part for you, just as it is ok for you.
The "complex"-issue is too difficult for me in english, I cannot tell what
I mean. But I have two questions left: In your first statement, "complex"
is a key for cultural differences and your PMS an example, that complexity
is not necessary. Now you distinguish between complexity in thoughts and
in words. Did I get you right and please can you explain this very
interesting issue a bit more? And what has complexity to do with "our
tendency to quantify stuffs"?
I hope, I got things clear again!?
Peace for you,
Winfried Dressler <email@example.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <firstname.lastname@example.org> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>