It bears saying that some of the verbiage of his work is unclear to me, probably because he is using terms that are, for me, loaded in a way they are not for him, or are, but differently. "Values" has a special CPI meaning that is not the same as his meaning for it. Being steeped in CPI jargon for the past three years makes this distinction a little harder than it would be coming from somewhere else.
The most fundamental principle in this book, by its author's own admission is this:
Truth - more precisely, an accurate understanding of reality - is the essential foundation for producing good outcomes.
I think I am having some trouble here. Maybe it's too social-science-y of me, but there are things in the world I do not believe to be that definite and objective. I think there are things of which it is impossible to ask, "is it true?" There are experiences people have that cannot be assessed with this metric. Two people may experience the same episode of something from different sides - the blind men and the elephant - and both be accurate and right in describing what they experienced as reality, without either having a complete picture. That doesn't mean what they hang their hats on is untrue. Asking the binary "is it true" question does not help suss out what is really going on there. I guess I take issue with the absence of the phrase "and complete" from "accurate understanding of reality." Perhaps that's pedantic, but I am WordGirl(tm), and pedantry is the way of my people.
So for me, a truth-based priority - which I'm very much into, as I think a firm grounding in reality is the only way to make change happen - must include these shades of gray. (Not those Shades of Gray. Get your mind out of the gutter). It makes decisions more difficult, but I think that the service it does by respecting everyone's right to their own self-knowledge is worth that. I'm still figuring out the details, because there is a point at which deviation from the accepted reality is indicative of a truly crazy person, but there is a lot of room before we get there that deserves accounting. A rewrite I'd be okay with:
Truth - more precisely, an accurate and complete understanding of a shared reality (requiring knowledge and understanding of the reality as experienced by others) - is the essential foundation for producing good outcomes in a given context (i.e., the one defined by the group with which you're sharing).
Super clunky, but now includes all the pieces I was giving myself agita about before. Now, maybe these are implied components of the original text, but I have not, having read sections 1 and 2 in full, and working on section 3, found that to be substantiated.
I can't wait to see how all the tenets I've heard and read about are enacted by real live humans! I will not report back after I have seen, as I have already signed an NDA preventing me from doing so, but I will vaguely express satisfaction or dis- at the deployment for your wondering eyes. Keep them peeled.
