Bringing wider perspective to decision-making

Bringing a much wider perspective to the decision-making process is likely to enable far better decisions than has been evidently practiced in much of government in recent times. A wider perspective becomes far harder to evaluate, of course; and even harder to justify results to others. Since women are inherently better at integrating the wider view with the detailed view of things, longer range positive results ought to happen.

Yet the range of problems needing best-possible solutions is enormous, when the needs are of a country in a world of nations on a planetary ecosystem much shared by all. A lot of the data will need to be boiled down to amounts digestible by leadership, and that process too needs to fully observe the details within the context of the whole picture, at each step.

Mechanisms for doing this need to be developed, tested, and put into practice, since current conferences of specialists miss the bigger picture, and conferences of members of diverse disciplines don't talk each other's language. This seems to be a priority that goes unmentioned as far as I can tell. Increased value needs to be ascribed to being a generalist.

Such broader range thinking may come up with off-the-beaten-path conclusions such as that of integrating the body-mind of each person using "Brain Gym" and similar kinesthetic-involving techniques would provide for higher individual human functionality; understanding the 16 types of human temperament's interconnectiveness may solve many communication and interrelationship problems; and something as un-obvious as widespread supply & consumption of long-chain Omega-3's in nutrition for proper brain function may be better at quelling international & internal aggression than is dropping bombs on them. The acknowledgment of needs of the human ego for esteem among peers, and of limits of corporate product options to that which produces maximum profits instead of maximum human value, needs to be understood firmly and taken into consideration as both strengths and weaknesses in the broader picture of advancing a worldwide civilization in a closed world ecosystem, that also "has to do something" with industrial civilization's waste products, as well as waste material that is normally biologically recycled. Perhaps even near-future new forms of high capacity and efficiency space transportation structures can enable the world ecosystem to no longer be predominantly a closed system; but until then, we need to cope with what we have got. Such options need to be evaluated outside of the context of existing corporate profit maximization and maintenance of current elite status; both of these very powerful concerns are likely to block changes, and so this needs to involve governmental decisions for the people of civilization and in our case, America's involvements in the greater picture.

The challenges involved in such an undertaking are enormous. The evaluation of the true efficiency of the multiplicity of uses of energy and materials is likely to result in unexpected ways for civilization's processes, yet such evaluation techniques have yet to be adequately created, thus needs to be done sooner rather than later. Time is not on our side, the clock is ticking, the mess is getting bigger and usable resources are fading.

A far better comprehension of what we are doing as parts of the overall worldwide civilization context, may be able to keep us from making more big messes that have to be cleaned up, as well as soon enabling far more wholesome ways of life for everybody. This seems a very worthy effort for new leadership.