[Niels Hoffmann]

<div>Hi Ruth, thank you for your questions to Iain. I love your passion for ‘pathways to impact’, note, plural paths. William James: intelligence is the ability to reach the same goal by different means. This looks to me like Right Hemisphere mechanics! <strong style=”font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; color: var(–bb-body-text-color); background-color: var(–bb-content-background-color);”>
</div>

<strong style=”font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; color: var(–bb-body-text-color); background-color: var(–bb-content-background-color);”>Question 6: Ruth Crick: Hi Iain, thank you for producing this crucial body of work….I think you articulate the pathology of modernity accurately and also point powerfully towards an alternative paradigm. I am an academic but my passion has always been on ‘pathways to impact’. My question is about how you see this new paradigm (ontology/epistemology/anthropology) actually emerging in practice to change the course of history? By definition it can’t be mandated from the ‘top down’, in my view. Also, in my experience, whilst there are many people out there who will resonate with this new way of thinking at a ‘gut level’ they are usually stuck in socio-political-technical systems which are pathologically designed to reproduce the old paradigm. Often this is because the measurement models and regulatory frameworks used are reductionist, materialist and individualistic and what we measure is what we get. My question is ‘how do you think change will happen’?