Can decisions based on META-VALUES improve outcomes?
Fritjof Capra said that from a systems perspective, ethical behavior is always related to community; it is behaviour for the common good. Using this perspective, I would define Meta-Values as those values that promote the well-being of human beings and safeguard the biosphere on which that well-being ultimately depends. Considering meta-values as an overriding criteria and rejecting an automatic acceptance the narrow options offered by doctrines and ideologies provides a much larger choice on which to base decisions. Doctrines and ideologies could then serve to provide explanations, views of how the world works, that could be used if found appropriate in a particular situation - but viewed from an agnostic stance and not from a quasi religious belief in their truth. As Donella Meadows once said, 'No paradigm is true'. Actions based on aspects of doctrinal beliefs that are false are very likely to lead to unintended negative consequences. Can carefully considered decisions based on Meta-Values avoid most of these negative side effects? The CLD shows the dynamic that could be at work if this assumption is true.