Our hubris is rooted on our systems. We expect accelerating growth without bound. And, by Conway’s Law: “Any organization that designs a system (defined broadly

Our hubris is rooted on our systems. We expect accelerating growth without bound. And, by Conway’s Law: “Any organization that designs a system (defined broadly) will produce a design whose structure is a copy of the organization's communication structure.” We have a social and economic system of Survival of the Fittest, which is loosely based on evolution. Evolution has killed 99.9% of the species that have every existed, and our systems do the same. My internal dialectic tells me that there’s three responses to this: 1) The metaphor is lost, and that the statement is “all over the place”, exemplifying the point of the article, that, we cannot communicate effectively outside of our limited understanding. That we cannot have new thought, in part because it cannot be clearly stated. 2) Full throated support for the system prevents us from being able to objectively question why were doing the things that we are doing, which is precisely what Conway’s Law is trying to state. 3) Having a understanding, but idealistic perception, of the world means not being able to do anything about it. Survival of the Fittest means that cooperation will be exploited, and definitely not reciprocated. In order to find new ground, you may find yourself needing to do something truly out of the ordinary. Try holding board meetings in Swahili. Try “running your business” (which loses context given the next few words) without the concept of ownership or property. Seek sources of knowledge and wisdom outside of the scientific method, religion, business schools, political systems. Of course these would obviously fail (see 3 above) in the current system. We don’t tolerate failure. And we like to see out-of-the-box thinking fail because it further validates our existence systems. We may very well be at a maxima for social and economic development. The cost to try something new would be tremendous. We’re also disadvantaged that we have homogenized culture and thought. Even the simplest changes may require a step back that would be considered another dark age.