Ideas represent potential, and often it takes a good number of ideas before one of sufficient quality comes along that it’s worth developing. Interestingly, ideas and the freedom to develop them represent a fundamental of western society. And it just so happens that the less relevant ideas are rejected by consensus in an almost Darwinian manner. This is something that we all experience but seldom appreciate. It also happens to be the best social model we have, at the moment.
Some people have lots of ideas, that’s a good thing and realistically you can’t assume that they’re all going to be good. Nonetheless, some ideas happen to be so good that they become a part of our social fabric. If we were to consider the climbing community, 8a.nu might pass as an example. But before I digress, the breadth of ideas, another good thing, is a result of our acceptance of freedom of speech. When used within our social framework this concept serves us well to weed out those less than savory ideas that will always spring up along the road. The criteria being that we abide by a Darwinian model with imposed moral bounds.
So what am I getting at… Say what you will, but attempt to be constructive and advance ideas and concepts, if they don’t meet the test they will naturally go the way of the Dodo. Which brings me to the topic of 8a.nu. …
Jens Larssen has a great wealth of ideas and knowledge when it comes to climbing and, quite naturally, not all of these will pass the test of group consensus. So be it, ideas are how we grow as a community, if you disagree, help shape them or present alternatives, it’s called being constructive. The fact of the matter is that you have already, unknowingly, acknowledged this if you happen to have dropped by www.8a.nu. The converse being that should you wholeheartedly disagree, abstain, as I do from time to time. It’s really your only options for provoking change, should that be what you desire.
While on the topic of democracy and the will of the majority it suffices to say that only fascist or the ignorant consider preventing the freedom to voice ideas and opinions. The deconstruction of ideas without suggesting viable alternatives only debases the very fundamental the critic is relying on. One can only hope that the likes of Charles Graham and Jon Smedsaas can provide more constructive input toward improving 8a.nu, and other aspects of our climbing community, in the future. And that Mr. Larssen will listen to their suggestions.
There are, of course, many other climbing related issues that should be considered within our accepted social constructs, such as the ethics behind first ascents, grades and the use of bolts but I’ll save those considerations for another day…
