I mostly agree with what's in this article, not simply because disagreements within organizations are essential for democratic processes, but because (as I've often said) diversity is necessary for any organization to learn and adapt. There's a nice way of putting it buried in the centre of this article: "If neutrality is impossible, pluralism is an essential ideal." It doesn't matter whether we're talking about a person, a company, a university or a society: we have to make decisions. We cannot remain neutral (whatever that even means). And in such a case, the best and only reasonable approach is to consider various possibilities and negotiate our way to a resolution. These are never final; we have to do it each time. And as the article notes, the trick is to do it without rending ourselves in the process. "Hannah Arendt argued that a good life requires consequential debate among equals who are meaningfully different; Jürgen Habermas insisted that collective legitimacy depends on free, inclusive, and reasoned deliberation." This isn't just the responsibility of leaders. Everybody has a role to play. That's why, in any company, university or society, everybody is important.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
