Messages from Edward de Bono

Where permission has been obtained messages written by Edward de Bono have been copied from his web site, and are presented below .

Gun Control - NRA

Following the Colorado/Columbine shootings there has been the usual concern with gun control. As usual the NRA (National Rifle Association - USA) is seen as the powerful lobby that might oppose such control. I see the organisation not as an 'enemy' but as a partner in the following concept.

Each gun owner should belong to the local branch of the NRA. The NRA will issue a licence (paid for) alongside the government licence. If the NRA refuses to issue a licence or withdraws such a licence then the government licence becomes invalid. Both are needed. The NRA will sell and periodically inspect secure cabinets so guns do not get into the hands of children. The NRA will sell insurance to gun owners to cover costs of accidents and misuse of guns. The NRA (local) will also take out a general insurance to cover such abuse by any of its members.

It is unusual to have rights without responsibilities or obligations. The NRA defends the right to 'bear arms' and would happily accept the responsibilities that go with the right.

Edward de Bono 16 May, 1999

TV - Violence

The usual question arises as to whether violence on TV, movies and net games encourages children to violence in real life. Statistics are hard to come by as only a small percentage of people may be affected by such violence. Non-susceptible people may be immune.

The following idea is one that I suggested some years ago.

There could be a tax on media violence. If you need to shoot a certain scene in Tahiti that is a production cost. If you need a well known actor that is a production cost. If your drama required a murder scene that is a production cost. I you insist on five murder scenes then the cost is five times as high.

So there would be a tax tariff. So much for a murder scene. So much for for rape scene. So much for annihilation etc. The tax could either be paid as a lump sum when the production is made or else it could be a 'per view' tax: for example $5,000 every time the production was aired. The money would go to a 'victim's fund' or to pay insurance premiums for violence insurance.

In this way there is no 'censorship' as such. Nothing is now forbidden. But there is a cost. A cost means choices. Instead of mindless violence which is inserted because it may 'sell' the programme, there is now a cost consideration. "Do we really need four murders - would three not do?" Where violence is strictly necessary the cost would be met just as the cost of going to Tahiti is met if this is judged to be necessary.

Such a scheme would gradually drive down the violence content.

Edward de Bono Malta 23rd May 1999

Teach America To Think

The world should be grateful that the U.S.A. is so idealistic and provides so much. It is easy to be cynical and to claim that all U.S. intervention is for 'self-interest'. I do not believe this to be the case.  In some instances there may be elements of this but in many cases the self-interest is remote. The U.S.A. is idealistic and does see its role as helping the world and keeping world peace. This may not be done in the best way and may, indeed, sometimes be clumsy. Neverthless the rest of the world should be grateful and appreciative.

I believe that it is time the rest of the world gave something back to the U.S.A. Doing so may also be in the best interests of the rest of the world.

What I am proposing and launching here is a new project called:

T.A.T.T.

What is the T.A.T.T. project?

Teach
America
To
Think

I do not believe that the U.S.A. is any worse at thinking than than other countries. But it is very important to the rest of the world that the U.S.A. becomes better at thinking than other countries.

Education does a very poor job of teaching thinking. The concern is with the traditional 'what is' thinking. This means analysis, judgement and argument. These methods are limited and old-fashioned. They are not much use for the 'what can be' type of thinking.

You can anlyse the past - but you have to design the future.

Ninety per cent of the errors in thinking are errors of perception but we still pretend that logic is enough.

Problems cannot be solved by finding and removing the cause. Somrimes there is a need to design a way forward. 'Design' thinking is different from analytical thinking.

Critical thinking is indeed taught in some schools but this is limited and old-fashioned and totally insufficient for real life.

So the T.A.T.T. project is launched. I would like tgo compile a register of those who want to join and want to take part in this major project. It would help if you indicated in what way you believe you could help. (email: edwdebono@msn.com subject: T.A.T.T.)

Edward de Bono
London
30th May 1999

..all the time in the world to think!

In Malta, Norman Damanin Demajo is teaching thinking inside the prison. There has been work in this regard in Norway and New Zealannd. The head of the Fremeont Correction Institute in California once told me that he had tried everything with the youngsters and the only thing which had worked was my CoRT thinking programme.

Teaching thinking raises self-esteem and nothing is more important than that. Youngsters taught thinking have a way of coping with life; a way of making choices; a way of making decisions. Such youngsters see more broadly. They can look at the consequences of action. They can consider other people.

I would say, without any hestitation, that teaching thinking is by far the most imporrtant thing that can be taught in all prisons. By this I mean the CoRT programme and its 'tools' method. There is a lot of stuff out there on teaching thinking which is complex and has little effect.

Quite apart from the teaching of thinking to prisoners, there is another project. Norman Darmanin Demajo is going to enlist the help of prisoners as part of a world-wide think tank (the Creative Team) to think about world problems. Prisoners have all the time in the world to think. Given some training and some structure there could be a vast think tank of thousands of prisoners around the world. If you would like to help in getting this going let me know.

Edward de Bono
Vancouver, Canada
2nd July 1999

'Jokes for Gore'

Edward de Bono
London
19th July 1999

SHOULD STUPIDITY BE PITIED?

Unwitting stupidity may be sad. Arrogant stupidity is pathetic.

A gem is flawless and complete in its perfection. I remember very clearly a perfect gem of 'boredom' that I experienced in 1954 at Oxford. It was the most perfectly boring lecture I had ever attended. It was exquisite in its boredom. The subject was Wittgenstein. There is no need to recall the lecturer's name.

Recently I came across another gem - also exquisite in its perfection. This was a gem of 'stupidity' from the Guardian newspaper (where else?). A reviewer of my book (New Thinking for the Millennium) makes it quite clear that he does not understand the book - and then asks to be pitied for his obviously limited intelligence. It was perfect because it was precisely what I had been writing about in the book - the inadequacy of thinking that is limited to analysis and judgement.

Of course, the reviewer asks to be 'pitied' for such stupidity. Presumably this was meant ironically - but it has to be taken seriously because the self-diagnosis is so obviously true.

Is it a case for pity or for sadness?

Stupidity that recognises its own stupidity does have some merit. But when the acknowledged stupidity is proudly displayed as some badge of honour, it is indeed pathetic and hardly a matter for pity.

If I were one of the more intelligent journalists on the Guardian I would be embarrassed to work alongside such limited intelligence.

If I were the proprietor of the Guardian I would consider changing the editor for someone with more respect for the readers' interests and intelligence.

If I was an advertiser I would be reluctant to advertise in such a negative publication because the "halo effect" of negativity would carry over to the advertisement (the chemical changes in the brain are quite slow).

It has always been a matter of interest to me that (in the UK alone) reviews of my books have tended to be negative. The reviews, of course, are written by people sitting in their offices with no knowledge whatsoever of what is actually happening.

#In the Karee platinum mine in South Africa there used to be 210 fights and disputes a month between the seven tribes working there. After the teaching of thinking to the totally illiterate miners the figure was reduced from 210 to just 4. Human nature had not changed and history had not changed - but behaviour had.

#A major corporation (ABB) used to spend 20 days on their multi-national project team discussions. Using parallel thinking this was reduced to two days.

#The head of the Fremont correction establishment in the U.S.A. tells how he tried everything with delinquent youngsters. The only thing that worked was teaching them thinking.

#In Australia Jennifer O'Sullivan had two job clubs for chronically unemployed youth. Every one of those youngsters was completely deaf. The average employment out of a job club was forty per cent. She obtained one hundred per cent in one club and seventy per cent in another. The difference was that she had given them six hours of instruction in thinking. In the UK a pilot project with New Deal youngsters showed that six out of seven found employment. Thinking does make a difference.

#Ingwe Coal recount how a lateral thinking provocation led to the first new way of cutting coal in eighty years. This gave them some 20,000 tonnes a week extra from one part of one colliery.

##The methods are used by Prudential (USA), NTT, IBM, NASA, Marzotto, BT etc, etc.

#At one Boeing plant the parallel thinking method averted two strikes. The third time the unions refused to negotiate with management unless parallel thinking was to be used.

#In Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Venezuela, Mexico, South Africa, Botswana, India, Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan etc the materials are widely used in schools. The Italian government (through the University of Verona) carried research, which showed the value of these methods. In the U.S.A. the forth-biggest school district (Dade County) uses some of the methods. In Argentina the biggest private University includes the material in every faculty. In the Philippines the material is part of the gifted programme. There is use in Japanese schools. The UAE have put this thinking on the school curriculum etc. etc.

You might think such matters would be of more interest to readers of a newspaper than the subjective and prejudiced view of someone sitting in an office with no knowledge whatever of what is really going on? You might think that an editor would show more respect for the intelligence of the readers? You would be wrong in your thinking.

I would claim to have done more for humanity in the last thirty years than has the Guardian with its entire staff in the same period. That may be a boast but it is also a fact.

Interestingly, the reviews rarely, if ever, discuss the substance of the book but seek to focus on the writer. This is inevitable if the reviewer simply does not understand the substance.

Price Edward was correct in claiming that in the UK journalists hate success. This is said to be a carry over from the days of class structure. If you were lower middle class you envied and hated those who broke rank and succeeded in rising into upper middle class. You envied it because you could not see yourself doing the same thing. Many journalists still suffer this inferiority feeling. Many newspapers still feel there are enough envious readers to rejoice in such feelings. I think they are wrong. Those days are over. That may be why the Guardian lost one fifth of its readers in one year recently.

There are fewer and fewer people who want to be given packaged opinions by pretentious and patronising writers. Readers want to read about positive and constructive matters not the prejudiced opinion of 'neggies'.

Newspapers are declining in sales for many reasons. TV and radio are better with the news. Magazines and weekend papers are better with features and constructive suggestions. The Internet will come more and more to provide information. The old model od newspapers is dying - but many editors have not realised this.

My book, "New Thinking for the New Millennium" is about the need to supplement out traditional "what is" thinking (analysis, judgement, argument) with "what can be" thinking (constructive, creative, design). The creation and delivery of value is going to be important. Knowledge is not enough. The information age is over - even if Bill Gates does not realise it.

Edward de Bono nmt
25th September 1999

Education systems ..are a disgrace to civilisation

As we come to the end of this century and this millenium, I find it amazing that we are complacent about an education system that is so very out of date. Much has changed in the last century: transport, telecommunications, computing, values etc etc. The one thing that has changed hardly at all is education. Education has reached a stable equilibrium state from which it cannot be budged.

'Thinking' is the most fundamental of human skills. Our future and our progress and happiness depend, ultimately, on our thinking skills. To be sure, values as provided by religion and culture are what we should be striving towards. But talking about destinations without the means to get there is not very helpful. Thinking is the mechanism by which we deliver and enjoy values. The atrocities committed over the ages in the name of religion indicate that values without thinking are not enough.

So, is this rather important skill the very centre of our education efforts? Not at all. In a few schools 'thinking' is indeed on the curriculum and is taught very well but in others this tends to be very old fashioned and the limited 'critical thinking'. This is the usual judgement thinking which lacks the energy of design, creative and constructive thinking. Judgement thinking has always been part of education - it is the other sorts of thinking which are so lacking.

You have some odd shaped pieces of cardboard on a table and you have to assemble them to get a square. It seems very difficult but in the end you succeed. This is the sort of thinking which has concerned us. We start off with 'given pieces' and then seek to assemble them logically. This is the problem solving model of thinking. This is the sort of experiment psychologists love to run. But this sort of nonesense is almost totally removed from the practical business of thinking.

Ninety per cent of thinking is about perception. This has been confirmed by David Perkins at Harvard. Thinking is not about how you assemble given pieces - but about how you choose the pieces. It is perception which provides the pieces in the first place. Yet for centuries we have taught that thinking is only a matter of logic.

Why do we not teach thinking in education?

1. Because it is not important?
2. Because it cannot be done?
3. Because we do not know how to do it?
4. Because we are already doing it?

Well, it can be done. There is now a great deal of experience to suggest this. New thinking methods that reduce a meeting time of top executives from twenty days to two days is powerful stuff. New thinking methods that reduce the number of fights in a South African mine from 210 a month to just 4 a month is powerful stuff etc. etc.

The idea that many people have that thinking is already being taught is like a person who knows how to boil an egge claiming to be a super-chef. Of course that person is 'cooking'. We believe that teaching information sorting and argument is teaching thinking. It is certainly not teaching 'unthinking' - but it is a very limited and totally inadequate approach to thinking.

Education systems, in all countries, are in my experience full of talented and motivated people - but as systems they are a disgraqce to civilisation.

Edward de Bono nmt
12th December 1999, London

These articles have been reproduced, with permission, from the Edward de Bono Website.