How did the means become the goal itself?
Just a short question that has surfaced in my head lately. When and how did the means to achieve something become the goal itself in many fields?
For example profit/sustainability/economic freedom only being the means to achieve the goal.
Lately experienced through discussions with journalists/media people (even for half-way public service broadcasters) being infuriated by the suggestion that profit/sustainability only is the mean to achieve the goal of independent media, the fourth state power, the medium for a local community, a platform for conversations leading to shared meaning, the democratizing power of information and knowledge, etc. and not the goal itself.
How and when did we got lost in the game of means and lost sight of the big goals – in such a substantial way that the game of means is our only perspective?
(thought probably partly inspired by Doc).
I’m reading John Irving’s “Hotel New Hampshire” from 1981 where he claims that terrorists are more interested in the means than the goal.
But: Would you rather have fun and live in a little house or not have fun and live in a big house? The 2 things doesn’t always collide – but often the bigger the goal is, the road to the goal gets bumpier…..(or something like that). So when the society gets richer (and houses get bigger/better) people tend to focus on the means.
Irving’s argument – could you explain a bit more?
I like you don’t see it as a binary thing. But i guess you could say that the houses have grown so big and empty we’re looking for the big goal again.
That said i keep meeting spirited people making a lot of money that always steer towards the goal – this isn’t a left-wing anti-globalization argument.
Leave your response!
Recent Posts
Categories
Tags
Blogroll