| CARVIEW |
Compassion in Politics: Christian Social Entrepreneurship, Education Innovation, & Base of the Pyramid/BOP Solutions
- Mission | About
- Best of Social Media, Innovation, and E-Learning
- Introduce Yourself
- Translate This
- Christian and Faith Based Resources
- Books I Recommend
- Business as Missions Resources
- Social Enterprise & Base of the Pyramid (BOP) Resources
- Cool Stuff
- Love and the Purpose of Life
- Startup Links
- Linking to this Website & Sharing with Friends
- Innovation & the Future of Education
- Life Hacks
- On Creativity and business
- Communication
- Coaching & Consulting Links
- Freelancer Possibilities
- Critical Thinking
- Scientism & Reductionism
- Book Ideas
- Response to the Problem of Suffering and Evil
- Design for Social Innovations Interview of Paul Polak
- Theology/Philosophy, Etc…
- Evidence for the Historical Jesus
- Christian Resources–CoC Specific
- Happiness and Well Being
- Resilience/Dyslexia
- Biblical Counseling/Coaching
- Church and Poverty
- Conflict Resolution Resources
- Missions Resources
I would suggest the following 12:
1) Relevance (to the question under consideration)
2) Gravity/Scope/Impact/Implication/Significance in Size or Degree
3) Purpose/Meaning/Values (Ethics, Empathy, Compassion, Character, the Human Spirit, Self-Actualization, etc…)
4) Defines those purposes and objectives clearly
5) Backed by Good Reasons (Quality, Credible)
6) Distinctions/Nuance
7) Clear defining of terms (i.e. not via obsfication, over-vagueness, or confusion)
8) Honesty (including doesn’t engage in logical fallacies in a malicious way)
9) Engages the other side (in either a direct or indirect way)–thus facilitating
10) Perspective (ideally multi-perspective or multi-diciplinary)
11) Includes and/or identifies assumptions (or conditions)
12) Understands options and/or opportunity costs (and defines them clearly)
Ideally/Optional:
Optional: why? who? what difference does it make? who cares?
Optional: Audience Adapted (language, empathy, common ground, common experience, their experience with the subject at hand in the past, present, and future, etc…)
Optional: Sense of priority and focus.
Optional: Kairos/Timing (Unique time in history)
Optional: System & Context (its understanding of these & stakeholders and their interest, perspectives, and behavior or probable behavior)
Optional: Understanding of Human History & Human Motives/Psychology
Optional: Juxtaposition and Contrast (isolate and specify the difference. demonstrates it even.). Isolates the stark choice, the line in the sand, or the gut check.
Optional: Interactivity–in terms of values/priorities, premises, arguments, warrants/data, and/or other core concerns
Optional: Builds on common ground (common values, common wisdom, common experiences, the human experience, etc…)
Optional: Understands micro & macro & their interrelation
Optional: Vividness & Concreteness (not just abstractness)
Optional: Consistency/General Consistency (I think this should go with the original 12 probably)
Optional: Framing
Optional: Use of rhetoric & literary devices (analogies, metaphors, similies, allegorical stories, alliteration, parallelism, etc..)
Optional: Memorable (VACOK)
Optional: Summary phrase (catchy slogan???)
Optional: Call to Action
Optional: Rhetorical Question/Self-reflective questions (illicit common ground or agreement)
For Historical Perspective you can learn about the Toulmin Model of Argument–the most trusted in addition to Aristotle in the field of logic, argument, and rhetoric–explained here and here. (the former is the Wikipedia entry for Toulmin, whereas the later is the visualization of his model along with an explanation)
Renegade Millionaire Marketing: Dan Kennedy Wisdom on Marketing, Entrepreneurship, and Small Business Growth
1. Go into the fire–embrace your fear.
2. Go the opposite way of the herd.
3. Patterns, patterns, patterns–bad ones & good ones. (its ingrained–conformity, follow the masses, follow the crowd/herd–Lexus versus pick-up truck–or Cowboy boots–Dallas to Boston. Weird. conditioned to conform.)
4. Out of category advertising. Out of category advertising in phone book, trade show, car auction, and racehorse auction.
5. When people are poor or when they follow the herd. There is a reason.
6. Lines they won’t cross to get money.
7. Hyper-servant behavior aren’t going to work (email, text, phone). Opposite is a salesman–strip that down. (eliminate both–its somewhere in the middle). Manage access.
8] Manage positioning.
9. Law of averages & law of bell curve (income pyramid: 99 & 1 percent). Its pretty much a law.
10. Revolution of info at your fingertips. Also, lower barriers to entry for business.
11. Earl Nightengale–the majority is wrong. (you can also find old Earl Nightengale audios on YouTube)
12. Great systems create freedom and leverage.
13. You don’t have to be everything to everybody.
14. Be a better student of marketing & copy writing & learning & honing skills. Direct marketing. Copy writing. Discipline. Words are like weapons. (ie professional football player–the film room is 70%)
15. Always be learning.
16. Referrals, referrals, referrals.
* The last 5 are from Dan Kennedy’s students/protegees.
** These ideas were from his promo video–this is not from the product itself, although I’m sure some of the principles are re-iterated.
17. Media agendas. Media needs bad news. (24 hour news didn’t help–crisis & horror show of the day). Absurd story about the picture of cars on black ice–car crashes!
18. The reason people are broke vs. successful.
19. Contrary to the behavior of most people. Fear & wait & withdraw…..less people doing anything. (Example: consumer show or trade show). Use the opportunity well (2 vs 5 companies). $6 a dollar gas = less people on the road and in our way. (and who cares…except poor people…you’re going to buy gas anyway). The norm of recession–spend less & risk less (on the assumption that there is less to get). You miss the opportunity.
20. Exercises, Missions, (& Projects)
21. Niching issue: You need passion, backstory, and/or affinity to your customer.
22. Motivational tapes story. Pure manifestation doesn’t work. You need people “ready, able, & willing to give you money” (it doesn’t matter)
23. Behavior over thought. And how you do it over thinking. Thinking is good. (productive vs. unproductive, profitable vs. unprofitable). Must get through unprofitable thoughts when behavior isn’t there. (Donald Trump story about wanting to hide–instead of facing press & others). (Thinking positively–its not a complete toolkit)
24. Tupperware, the Circus guy is the same as selling on QVC with Joan Rivers. Principles the same.
25. 4 Boxes: Human media, broadcast, and online (fake media).
–Who is the biggest Google ad buyer in America? Missed it.
26. Online magic button. Shovel. (They all got on an airplane & physically came here). And 50% that were there responded to a direct marketing piece. Telemarketing, salesforce on the street, etc… Hardly anyone exists in just one of the boxes. For instance Guthry Renker.
27. All the money is in the complexity (?) How can I play in all 4 boxes (from #25)?
28. Pricing tactics, bundling continuity.
29. Strategic–ROI maximization & leverage. Its a trust relationship. (Ah-has!). Three parts: strategies, tactics, & mindset.
30. Write a book, follow up marketing campaign, etc…
31. Demonstrate the dream (what its meant to me, how it made me feel, how life is different, and what daily life looks like in my business, and specific insights).
32. Always be selling the next thing. Selling is not a dirty word.
33. Post card…Report/sales letter (or could be free DVD/CD/Webinar, etc…). Lead gen about you….about benefits, promises. Rarely–about the thing. {Haystack vs. needles ratio = down}
34. Rookie mistake. more than one call to action. integrate your sales message. (not one & then call to action). Also, find out what works best by testing (split test one thing against the other instead of guessing or norms). Learn from experience.
35. When George bites….people buy. You put that in 3 times with Call to Action.
36. Relevance gives us permission to sell. Be candid. (??? what to do/what not to do/don’t deliver how….). List is valuable. Speech has 3 parts: message, market (USP, example of USP, and key ingredients–how to analyze your biz). Its bare bones.
37. Can a seminar change someones life? A seminar can create awareness. Behavior modification. (3 day or 90 minute speech).
Three parts: Awareness, decision, & action. Requires active participation.
38. Lifestyle/Typical Day/Organize Day:
—How you organize things
—How you set expectations on access
—Scripting
—Liberty through rigid discipline (paradox)
Unscripted consulting day. They run the agenda.
Phone calls with start & finish times (not just start times)
Begin with the end in mind–know what outcome you want. (you want a linear plan).
“If you don’t have an agenda–everyone else will have one for you.” George W. Bush
You have to decide: Spontaneous vs. Rich
7 am to 7pm–Phone activity all in one day/Coaching call
Good news/bad news–
Writing Day: Copywriting & content (environment & no phone interruptions)
The right system for you….
Very few businesses look like bail-bondsman (don’t force yourself into that thinking)
39. Marketing is theatre & drama. Be entertaining.
40. Joining the movement. Social proof
41. Avoid trading dollars for hours. (= leverage & freedom)
42. Here is one of Dan’s clients from the promo (link).
43. Process of growth. Sky is the limit. No glass ceiling. (Flexibility in scheduling)
44. Mastermind. Avoid burnout.
45. Don’t do things sequentially–do them simultaneously. (Dan K changes all your life & making a difference–take control of your life.). Assumption based on the “norm” in society (karate & financial & k-12 education). Swartznagger was doing real estate while sleeping on couches.
46. Focus on who–who is my ideal avatar client. my ideal customer–what i’ve got or am willing to build is a perfect match. what media do they respond to? How can I best reach them?
47. Hard sell/Super turn around near the end. Testimonial juxtaposition before & after.
48. Message/market match.
49. Describe the mental/physical/emotional act of marketing (finger on the mouse button)
50. Investing in education before you need it or can afford it. (a bit self serving–yes–but true). Rich/poor distinction.
51. Useful strategies or tactics……Choice: soup vs. education/book. Pick ramen noodles.
52. You need to keep your lights on & keep the baby fed. (You are going to need resources to implement). Vs. its inconvienient or uncomfortable. Behavior of what you prioritize & what you invest in. Not based on your current…but as a percentage of future income. Personal example of speaker–“I couldn’t afford not to.” Poor vs. rich quote from Jim Rohn about poor people having big tvs….rich people having big libraries. Poor people find ways. Its a behavioral decision vs. a monetary decision. [listing of some potential objections/objectors lines of reasoning….and answering them]. Nervous thinking….good kind of nervous thinking. Every time i’ve stretched…I’ve grown. The real deal.
53. B2B is mythical. People buy.
54. Relationship & process are points of leverage. (ie tuperware process–multiple processes–recruitment of sales agents & getting home parties book–and having every party beget a party–they have 5 key processes. customer & focus doesn’t matter.). You probably won’t find leverage in the thing.
55. See things differently….than you have before. People totally focused on the wrong things. (open your mind…to different looking…with tools and tactics…so you can see the results).
56. 3 Books–Buy Now–Rick Czari (infomercial business). Mystery novel. Storytelling is a really good skill–learn by modeling.
1) Left versus right. Heart and intention. Biblical grounded for that.
2) Integrative (of BOTH ideas)
3) Marketplace of ideas (certainly not all is valuable–but we need a grace period for some ideas)
4) Church Unity (???)–Borg or Mosaic (metaphorically loaded). Matrix (???)
Having actual debates with the argument and feedback from debates helps you get better–much more than a simple surprise will. Relying on surprise is a one-trick pony and one that takes WAY more effort than actually figuring out the. Read that sentance again 10 times and internalize it–and act on it.
If you look at health, disease models, strength training, hegels dialectic, or almost any model with opposing forces (especially when those opposing forces have to collide multiple times)–it helps to be less secretive with your team.
Perhaps you can encourage the coach or the team to have a more reciprocal evidence sharing on the squad or you can trade for arguments on the squad (something to encourage more openness).
Se also: open source debate argument.
Your assumption seems to be that if something is failing or ineffective we should abandon it completely. I think this obscures a vast range of options.
This is an argument for a common language by Monty Python
There are many other examples of the miscommunication or warped communication which might result from having radically different standards/rules/norms.
You will also want a rant/overview which explains the quote–and unpacks the full meaning.
You still probably have to turn their -ism (racism, sexism)–because they will use that to indict your particular type of education from an ideological perspective.
Arguably….this is a bit of a straw person, but despite that it demonstrates the fundamental need at a fundamental level to have common rules of the road in terms of communication for both education and transformation–particularly when we are persuading others to take action.
This proves their model is flawed at a foundational level–it also proves that the skills and education derived may be severly curtailed or destroyed.
Are there other allegories, metaphors, or clips which make this same argument?
1) Missions
–benchmarking, etc..
2) Youth Employment
3) University
——————————————
I need something to make money. Side gig.
Maybe because the money is better spent educating kids so they stay out of poverty and become tax payers so they can support the next generation? And because the logical extension of that argument is pretty much armed guards and guns everywhere for defense–not to mention perhaps a liberalization of gun policies around dangerous areas (ie places that serve alcohol). What would it be like to be in a parent-teacher meeting when the parent gets angry if they happen to have their gun on them (post legal change). I don’t want to be Israel thank you very much. I too wish we lived in a place where we would invest more effective dollars in our kids so that we had a better tomorrow. I just think that investment should be in a slightly different place.
I wonder what I will think of this passage in 8 years (written in Dec 2012):
The following seems to lack any distinctions or nuance which takes into account differences among theologians or what the New Testament says or what Jesus actually said. I would expect a higher level analytical & fact-based precision from a philosopher, rather than borderline hate speech against any entire class of people. If I said all academics were small minded and evil or all philosophers were small minded and evil–I suspect you might feel somewhat the same. Its the same kinds of over-generalizations which give rise to sexism, racism, and any other number of -isms. There’s simply no need to be hurtful.
There’s actually a great deal of diversity among theologians and actually a lot of love–but I guess its easier to throw stones from inside the walls of academic bunker–rather than seek out disconfirming proofs. Certainly, if you go out looking for fundamentalist or even cynical Christians–you’ll probably find them. But, I’m sure Texas has dozens of hippie churches:
In a strange way, we thus become the mirror image of the theologians, yet with the caveat that where they can commit by virtue of their belief in a transcendent term– a horrific God that would condemn trillions to eternal suffering –we can say nothing. Like the theologians we find sin in everything, seeing all as fallen. Like the theologians or the fundamentalist freaks of today, we discard all science as really being masked strategems of power, of interest, that are ultimately constructed and without any truth.
To many, including me, the fundamentalist principle of the bible is founded in the Jesus–the Sermon on the Mount–and the call to love.
It would seem your critique of the church–in its own selectivity and cynicism may just be hoisted on its own petard.
(link)
It seems odd to me that someone would posit freedom versus wisdom….or innovation versus history.
The status quo isn’t always bad.
Systems for Leadership & Marketing
• Seven Habits of Highly Effective People Stephen Covey
• John Maxwell Leadership
• Leadership Challenge Couzes
• Predictable Success
Entrepreneur Mastermind Groups
• Dan Kennedy (GKIC)
• Gazelle
• Entrepreneurs Organization (EO)
• Vistage
• Various Associations in Coaching & Consulting
• Human Performance Institute (HPI)
Various Christian Organizations
don’t see how the 4 forces argument excludes other explanations–it only justifies those existing 4. Your argument is that physics doesn’t fully understand (or have categories for) free will or consciousness–not that it doesn’t exist.
Your explanation at the top seems to be “common sense explanations of choice” are different from how we typically view them–not a denial of free choice or free will.
Its probably not quite fair comparison–but I would imagine that math (although probability and outliers might find hints)–equally would have problems finding identity, choice, etc…
———
By definition an “I” or an imagination seems beyond physics and physical force. The brain seems like too powerful, too dynamic an organism to be governed solely by the laws of physics. The brain from personal experience and just the fundamental cause and effect of brains suggest this.
If I’m not mistaken (and I very well may be), but that seems to suggest that if it doesn’t show up on an fMRI it doesn’t exist (or certainly pretty close). Why can’t we think about it like a black box–and theorize it as we really understand it–as a bit of a black box–a black box which seems to show signs of different kinds of physicality than we are used to outside the context of the brain, identity, consciousness, etc..
The second line seems more like a thought experiment than a claim about reality.
It would seem that your stance might be physicalism or reductive physicalism:
Physicalism (ok after reading the Stanford version it might not be a reductive physicalism, but it seems hand in hand with other types of methodological reductionism)
I think the suitcase metaphor might be helpful here–in terms of the scientific/non-scientific dichotomy. It confuses me that reductionist interpretations which sees science as rigid tool rather than selective, context specific, and temporally relevant. Science is quick to cut off the clothing that falls from inside to outside–excluding it entirely.
In terms of duality–you can deny duality–and yet accept the identities as distinct, but not a polarity. For instance, you might criticize the self/other dichotomy, but still ultimately say that acting in terms of a self is still important. (i.e. the boundaries are distinct, sure, but permeable).
What are the best books on negotiation?
1. Getting to Yes, Ury and Fisher
2. Almost anything by the Harvard Negotiation Project (ie Fisher or William Ury)
3. Bargaining for Power: Negotiation Strategies for Reasonable People
4. Negotiation Genius: How to Achieve Brilliant Results at the Bargaining Table, Deepak Molhotra, Max Bazerman
5. Art of Woo
6. Getting More
7. Heart and Mind of a Negotiator, Leigh L. Thompson
8. Beyond Reason
And there are a number of immenently practical and brass tacks negotiation books which may prove helpful.
1. Co-create, feedback.
2. Listening, understanding, and empathizing.
3. Doing life with. (meals, etc..)
4. Open approach and orientation. Low pressure. (a posture of help and service)
5. Creating meaning with.
6. Sharing human, life, and family stories/experiences
7. Healing division.
8. Spiritual mission/spiritual leader
9. Helping the helpless.
10. Integrity, honesty, authenticity.
11. Good will. Becoming a hero.
12. Scarcity.
13. Enemy. (Key differentiator versus the competition or what the customer perceives as the alternative)
14. Archetype, story
15. Wisdom, Expertism. (mostly wisdom. expertism could be alienating)
16. Rhetoric of we
17. Human experiences–suffering, joy, etc…
18] Reciprocity.
19. Objects
20. Mirroring non-verbals and rhetoric.
1) Jesus Proof
2) Bonhoffer
3) Story
4) Something for Teens/Middle School
Creating common ground in negotiation (link)
Creating common ground with rhetoric
Terms of Rhetoric Simplifed (link)
Substance: general nature of a thing
Consubstantiation: (shared substance, commonality)
Identification: (same as consub) degrees of; conscious or unconscious;
1) material identification—goods, possessions, things
2) idealistic identification—values, ideas, feelings, attitudes
3) formal identification—form or arrangement of
act/conventions; roles, customs, etc.
Division—differences with others (source of guilt)
PENTAD
Tool for understanding motives
Act
Scene Agent
Agency Purpose
(Hexad: Attitude: delayed or incipient action)
Statement of motives will answer: What was done (act), when or where it was done (scene), who did it (agent), how it was done (agency), and why it was done (purpose).
Source: link
Religion, at least the Christian religion is certainly no more the opiate of the masses than any other ideology or institution. Is fitness the opiate of the masses? Is nutrition the opiate of the masses? Is rock music and cable television the opiate of the masses? Is addiction the opiate of the masses? Is yoga the opiate of the masses? Plus, Christianity helps you put all the other ones in proper perspective.
Knowledge
1. Feedback
2. Integrated data/Real time data/Up to date data
3. Secrets
4. Summary
5. Projectsions, Commentary on trends/data
6. Models, Visual Representations, Rubrics, Criteria
7. A focus on process
Service delivery:
I can see why you’d think or say that….but if you take a step back and look at the bigger picture–its an answer that makes more sense.
Answering it at the very level of the question….seems to try to answer the question from the level of humans. You have to answer the question from the level of God….or at least above or on a deeper level.
Daniel is answering the question….just not in the way you want him to. He’s answering it at the assumptive and worldview level. Those are the very grounds and fundamentals of where the question came from….not considering those is a failure to answer the question.
God made possible ethics and morality. There isn’t any possibility for them outside him. The very existence of ethics points toward God.
Ultimately, Daniel answered the spirit of the question–the core question that was being asked.
Systems of thought are not facts or math…..as much as they are rivers and systems like trees. Daniel is talking about the deep roots….you are talking about an individual leaf. Its still answering the question of why the tree & what makes up the tree & how does it function?
Rosetta Stone
Code Breakers WWII
Astronomy/Telescope
Hubble Telescope
Glasses
X-Men
Sage/Gandolf or Karate Kid or Biblical parallel
GPS
Map
Maze vs. Map
Explorers (their tools–ie on a boat)
Blog Stats
- 2,842,834 hits
Search
Top Posts
- Movies about Science, Ethics of Technology, and Philosophy
- Top Top Christian Philosophers Through History
- Living out Love in 1 Corinthians 13:4-8 | Francis Chan in Crazy Love
- The Stimulus Package, Green Remodeling, and Home Builders
- Quotes from Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus"
- The Meaning and Message of Jack Johnson's song "Gone"
- The Absolute Best CS Lewis Quotes from "God in the Dock"
- Quotes from NT Wright The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Explore a Cool Subject
barack obama base of the pyramid bible blogging BOP + Social Entrepreneurship bottom of the pyramid business as missions business ethics business strategy Campaign 2008 chris brogan christian apolegetics christian apologetics christian business ethics christianity christian living christian missions christian music christian philosophy christian social justice christian theology church 2.0 church social media corporate social responsibility criticism of atheism critique of atheism democrats design for the other 90 percent design thinking e-learning education 2.0 education innovation education reform education technology election 2008 enterprise 2.0 Environment flickr god god's politics historical jesus Jesus missions Nashville new media news nptech obama philosophy politics politics 2.0 Poverty problem of pain productivity religion social business social change social entrepreneurs social entrepreneurship social entrepreneurship and business social innovation social justice social media social media marketing socialmediamarketing social media optimization social networking society theology university 2.0 viral video war in iraq web 2.0 web2.0 youtubeCategories
-
Join 281 other subscribers
Subscribe to Compassion in Politics (via RSS)
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Compassion in Politics: Christian Social Entrepreneurship, Education Innovation, & Base of the Pyramid/BOP Solutions 