Concerning the generational conflict (a

possible vision)
• Published on May 9, 2017

• Edit article

• View stats

Matheus Parmezani Bergamasco

LA Supply Chain Bus. Ops & Field Inventory Manager, IBM Systems at IBM
5 articles

We live more and better (on average). Of course there are glaring differences from side to side
but we all go in different rhythms into the same direction. Along with greater longevity is
another element to be highlighted, the faster pace of change.

What are these two apparently separate elements contributing to making our world much more
complex together with others? Very old time life expectancy varied from 30 to 40 years (some
times and places to less). Actually until recent times it was like this. After the first industrial
revolution and advances in "n" branches of the health sciences it already exist countries with
average life expectancy of 75 to 80 years. And the same industrial revolution along with the
recent arrival of modern industry and mega cities accelerated the pace of change also by the
advancement of science and new forms and scales of business.

That is, the generational conflict that has always existed is being taken to extremes for two
reasons:

1) There are more generations of people living in the same time and space
2) The faster flow of the changes creates micro-generations (X, Y, Z, etc. ,,,,), sometimes
differences of 10 years of age only show this well

And (3) as a complement, the spread of information and world diversity now more well-known
creates a real world (tangible to more people) multipolar, multidisciplinary and extremely more
complex than that of the twentieth century.

Therefore, we are still in transition and the effects already felt tend to intensify. How, then, can
we anticipate and create mechanisms of discussion, union, and formation of more individuals
capable of transiting as we do among all ages and among the greatest number of distinct groups?

In previous environments it still made sense to vertical hierarchies. Keeping due degree of
educational / cultural advancement this hierarchy needs to take on a new form. The education
and individual freedom prioritized and consequently:

1) Increase the cycles of participation of the society / group

2) Empower new leaders recognized by floating between layers or through them.

Yes, a political role that should not serve to impose your thinking / doctrine, but to help the
atomized people and sectors to understand and respect everything that escapes their perception
and vice versa. Thus creating paths and bridges between seemingly opposing / disjointed or
antagonistic groups per se. Using Bauman's term "liquidity," these people would be the fluid able
to oil or oxygenate various parts of a group, be it business, neighborhood, city, or country. But
what would be the main characteristic of these people? What makes it different from today's
politicians or opinion makers?

Well, over time philosophy took care of all scientific concerns. At one point the sciences as they
evolved began to take control of themselves and the same industrial revolution eventually
created the most numerous specialties. The story and its unpredictable cycles. Today IT gives us
the power to start something different. Structurally we have in our hands the means to gather the
sciences, to create and to extract more of this multidisciplinarity, multigeneration and accelerated
flow. The potency and comprehensiveness of cognitive solutions enable the empowerment of
people to move away from utopian "ideals" to ethical decisions and proposals of value, which are
also more human. These people will have the ability to join elements and individuals never
perhaps imagined before and turn areas, domains, leading edge industries. That is already a fact.
Redefine own science whether human, social, health or exact. Specialties will continue to exist
and new will arise, though this ancient role of the philosopher had gained a new life, no longer as
just the thinker / actor.

It will be much closer to the politician, a diplomat of the new world that awaits us. Advocating
without flags and without answers but ensuring that bridges not only create themselves but learn
to reproduce autonomously and free.

IT has come to close a cycle and once again allow the most disparate sciences to talk. No, it is
not the end of the sciences, new will arise, but from now on, the subjects can be more dynamic
and interactive and keeping a focus on individual education and freedom, each one will be able
to decide more and more the best for himself without ceasing to think about others .

It's just another moment of fusion / synthesis, I do not know how long it will take. But I believe
that there is a duty to be fulfilled so that he can democratize the access of IT and disseminate our
own knowledge in front of the others. And what makes sense for that group, in that place and at
that time, is then respected as their autonomous decision, since they have had the opportunity to
analyze all the odds (or most of them) possible within their wills and goals, and more or so
Important, in relation to those of the others as well.

Published by

Matheus Parmezani Bergamasco

LA Supply Chain Bus. Ops & Field Inventory Manager, IBM Systems at IBM