On Changing the World
Here’s a quote from Rob Siltanen, an advertising executive who worked at TBWA/Chiat/Day, the agency that created Apple’s “Think Different” campaign. While I enjoyed it, and I hope you will too, I point out that there is nothing crazy at all about the belief that one can change the world.
In fact, it’s easier to question the sanity and moral soundness of people who see no imperative to change the reality of today’s world, i.e., that the greed of a few is destroying the environment and the quality of life for everyone else living on this planet, and all those yet to be born in the future. If you think that’s OK, let’s just say “you have issues.”
Here’s that quote:
“Here’s to the crazy ones.
The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently.
They’re not fond of rules.
And they have no respect for the status quo.
You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them.
About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them.
Because they change things. They push the human race forward.
And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.
Because the people who are crazy enough
to think they can change the world,
are the ones who do.”
Craig,
I can understand why Margret Mead is one of your heroes. Mead was one of those authors who should be right, whom many want to be right, for the right reasons.
Regrettably, Mead’s legacy is an example of how even the best intentioned and brightest intellects can fall into the trap of claiming something is true, simply because it ought to be true.
Starting with a conclusion or belief and working backwards to select facts to support a conclusion is not only unscientific, but invariably leads to errors and inaccuracies.
Poor old Margaret got it all wrong! Her life’s work as an anthropologist was based on nonsense, poor research and failure to adhere to scientific principles.
Yet her influence lives on. Her many defenders argue even if her work as an anthropologist was inaccurate and based on self deluded fantasy, her feminist and sexual liberationist writings and lifestyle were important social advances even if her ‘scientific ‘ justifications proved incorrect.
Mead was a ‘Crusader’, and like most ‘Crusading advocates’, reality wasn’t as important as the aims of the ‘Crusade’.
Sound a little familiar ? 🙂
I smell ad hominem… again.