[Jim Dundon 06.27.07.1135]
[Bill Powers 2007.06.24.1505 MDT]
With my approach no enforcement is needed.
It is if either party has subordinates.
You sound like everybody who ever said they have the answers to the worlds problems. "if only they would listen to me there would be no fighting". As a scientist it should not be difficult for you to see that the first part of that sentence could be substituted by almost anything, because if people are doing anything other than fighting they are not fighting.
Try it
If only:
They were sleeping.
They would pick their noses
They would commit to planting potatoes.
They would build houses
They would sail boats.
Etc. etc.etc..
Is there not a little self centeredness at work here on the part of the mediator? Is he not looking for a job? Where will he be without conflict? Or does he have faith in its perpetual existance, or does he just know it will always be or has he scientifically proven that will always be?
This may be true if we are speaking of two individuals for a short while but what about tomorrow or a situation like the one in Palestine.
What would have happened toYassar Arafat if he had had listened to you.
What about the islamic community where people believe in killing anyone who doesn't believe in killing the unbelievers and those who negotiate with them.
Each party reaches a decision about what to do based on that party's >understanding of the total situation.
What total situation? Who will declare the boundaries of the "total situation"
Who will decide what is and is not included in "the total situation"?
Is the mediator's interests included in "the total situation"?
Since that decision is based on each party's understanding of its own >interests, there is no reason not to behave accordingly.
Wrong.
Don't you mean own "new interests", and don't you have faith in that statement, and is that faith justified? Not allowed, so you must have proven it scientifically.
How do you know they won't change their minds as soon as they get outside.
What scientific basis is there for believing that your achievement will last more than five minutes, six minutes, six days, three months?
Will the mediator be on call?
Let's not be loose about this.
You are saying that they did not know before what their own interests were.
You dream, and I dream with you, but:
that approach already led to conflict.
Everybody acts on what they believe is in their own intetrests all the the time, and people can believe anything.
The mediator simply tries to make sure that the total situation is considered, >and has no power to dictate solutions.
Again, You are saying there is only one " total situation" and the mediator knows what it is. Or knows how to find it. Or knows when it has been found, or can help the parties find it. What you mean is redefine "the total situation"
Maybe the combatants are satisfied with their view of what constitutes the total situation and do not want it redefined by someone else.
best
Jim D