Comments on: NZ Values http://nathan.torkington.com/blog/2008/06/09/nz-values/ FMTYEWTK about stuff and things Tue, 09 Mar 2010 04:53:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: billroberts http://nathan.torkington.com/blog/2008/06/09/nz-values/comment-page-1/#comment-26 billroberts Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:56:09 +0000 http://nathan.torkington.com/blog/?p=82#comment-26 I think this sounds an excellent idea. The more wikipedia-like approach strikes me as probably the better way, as it is likely to promote more active involvement and the process of having this discussion may turn out to be as useful as the actual result. I don't live in NZ (though thanks to my sister in Wellington, I've had the pleasure of visiting a couple of times). I'm based in Scotland but see some parallels: now that Scotland's devolved parliament is 'bedding in' after a few years, the Scottish people are starting to have to think about how they really want the country to be run (instead of just complaining about how things are done in London). And that of course involves deciding what our national priorities are. I think this sounds an excellent idea. The more wikipedia-like approach strikes me as probably the better way, as it is likely to promote more active involvement and the process of having this discussion may turn out to be as useful as the actual result.

I don’t live in NZ (though thanks to my sister in Wellington, I’ve had the pleasure of visiting a couple of times). I’m based in Scotland but see some parallels: now that Scotland’s devolved parliament is ‘bedding in’ after a few years, the Scottish people are starting to have to think about how they really want the country to be run (instead of just complaining about how things are done in London). And that of course involves deciding what our national priorities are.

]]> By: bolowski http://nathan.torkington.com/blog/2008/06/09/nz-values/comment-page-1/#comment-25 bolowski Tue, 17 Jun 2008 01:14:21 +0000 http://nathan.torkington.com/blog/?p=82#comment-25 I think the focus of this is too much on states and not on actions. I suspect that most people's idea of how they'd like things to be will be a reflection of what they've known in the past. What is more interesting to me is what actions would people like to undertake - we won't always get the outcomes we want, but it gives a better handle on our values. Everybody wants pretty much the same state - where values matter is in how we think we can get there, ie 'intervention' vs 'self-reliance', rather than where we are trying to get there. Sort of associated is the question of what values represent - are they what we want or how we want to act? To my mind, your statement "If we can't say what we want, we're unlikely to get it" speaks of a grasping sort of values that focuses on taking rather than giving. Those who are poor in spirit ask "what can I have", those who are rich ask "what can I give". Rather than ask what the next generation can give I think we should be asking what they should have to give to future generations. This approach has the benefit of being potentially recursive, whereas the other must be repeated with every generation. That's my 2 cents worth for today. I think the focus of this is too much on states and not on actions. I suspect that most people’s idea of how they’d like things to be will be a reflection of what they’ve known in the past. What is more interesting to me is what actions would people like to undertake – we won’t always get the outcomes we want, but it gives a better handle on our values.

Everybody wants pretty much the same state – where values matter is in how we think we can get there, ie ‘intervention’ vs ’self-reliance’, rather than where we are trying to get there. Sort of associated is the question of what values represent – are they what we want or how we want to act? To my mind, your statement “If we can’t say what we want, we’re unlikely to get it” speaks of a grasping sort of values that focuses on taking rather than giving. Those who are poor in spirit ask “what can I have”, those who are rich ask “what can I give”. Rather than ask what the next generation can give I think we should be asking what they should have to give to future generations. This approach has the benefit of being potentially recursive, whereas the other must be repeated with every generation.

That’s my 2 cents worth for today.

]]>