Werner
predicts
his work
will eventually "disappear into the fabric of society". This process
has already begun. The very specific, pointed, unambiguous
language
of
transformation
has already found its way into everyday global conversations.
Werner's
ideas have found their way into
relationships,
into international politics and government, into now accepted business
management practices, and are embraced and presented by
respected academic and
business institutions.
As
anticipated
as this always was, as satisfying as it is to watch it
inexorably
occur, it's also inevitable that as the
language
of
transformation
becomes more and more widely used, there's a real likelihood it will
also be deployed rotely in inappropriate situations in which authentic
transformation
isn't
present,
thus rendering it into jargon.
If (no, when ...) this eventually happens, the
power
of at least some of the
words
in the rich lexicography which is the
language
of
transformation,
will be blunted, muted - especially for those who are unaware they were
sourced
by
Werner's work
in which they carve out very specific distinctions.
Transformation
isn't to be confused with change or with any of the
various colors, flavors, and varieties change comes in.
Transformation
is a particular experience, a particular experience to which you could
assign any descriptor, any name you like. But without the
contextual
shift which goeswith authentic
transformation
(as
Alan Watts
may have said), it's not
transformation
- whatever name it goes by. Conversely if anything labeled
"transformation"
is unaccompanied by a
contextual
shift, then it isn't
transformation
ie it's inaccurately named.
Due almost entirely to the acceptance of
Werner's work
around
the world,
the
word
"transformation"
is now widely known and used where, when the truth is told, it was
neither known nor used before. And because of the sheer unbridled
power
and enthusiasm of the millions and millions of
graduates
of
Werner's work
around
the world
speaking
transformation,
the
word
"transformation"
itself is becoming absorbed into and is being taken on by the rest of
the fabric of society, in the process of which it's almost unavoidably
becoming glamorized and jargonized.
Here, for example, are ten examples of the
word
"transformation"
becoming jargonized to convey a hip glamorized sense of
change in which real, thrilling, authentictransformation
isn't
present
at all (I've provided ten examples - there are hundreds
more):
Also due almost entirely to the acceptance of
Werner's work
around
the world,
the
word
"possibility"
is now widely used in conversations in which it wasn't widely used
before. And because of the sheer unbridled
power
and enthusiasm of the millions and millions of
graduates
of
Werner's work
around
the world
speaking
possibility,
the
word
"possibility"
itself is becoming absorbed into and is being taken on by the rest of
the fabric of society, in the process of which it's almost unavoidably
becoming glamorized and jargonized too.
Just as the
word
"transformation",
when jargonized, is used to erroneously convey change, the
word
"possibility",
when jargonized, also loses it's authentic essence as it's used to
convey someday-colored wishful thinking.
Now there's really
nothing wrong
with any of that. Really there isn't (who doesn't want a
lot of money?). However, is it an authentic
intentionally
invented
possibility
of a new way of being? No it's not.
Here are ten examples of the
word
"possibility"
becoming jargonized (I've provided ten examples - there are hundreds
more):
Turn Your
Possibilities
Into Realities - AARP ie American
Association of Retired People
Calling
transformation
change and / or calling
possibility
wishful thinking, is as off the mark ie is as out of
whack
as calling a spade something else ie as calling a spade
not a spade. Calling a spade a spade, while being the
epitome of
straight talk,
is arguably not as glamorous as calling a spade a diamond, for example,
because a diamond is perceived to have wider reaching
social status and a greater marketable value than a spade.
The only trouble with that logic is it's not true ie it
isn't what a spade is. A spade isn't a diamond.
Transformation
isn't change.
Possibility
isn't wishful thinking.
There's one final point I'd like to make which is this: as the
language
of
transformation
is absorbed into and is taken on by the fabric of society, when these
jargonized, glamorized misuses of the
language
of
transformation
occur, they evidence with regards to
Werner,
the age old adage that imitation is the sincerest form of
flattery. However, flattery doesn't trump this wholly
un-innocent sincerity which, in lacking any tangibly
accurate
world to
word
fit, will prove to be more of a distraction to the
conversation for
transformation
than it's worth.