The alarm system for safeguards against the herd immunization policy might be increasing occurrence of debates about who should receive the most care and who should “tragically” be allowed to die (for the sake of the “herd”). Major social unrest might arise among those populations receiving the least care and witnessing what seems to be cavalier societal disregard for their welfare. Control of health care policies might become more centralized and embedded in vested social and economic interests. At this point, the herd policies might be saving lives in the long term—but destroying (forever) the social fabric of the communities in which these policies are being implemented.
Hopefully, with the safeguards in place and the alarm signals clearly articulated, we can address the negative consequences of each option in a constructive manner. As a result, we might even be in a place to formulate an integrative, global policy regarding the handling of recurrent global pandemics (which will occur inevitably in our boundaryless world). Optimally, this formulation could be thought through in a slow manner with broader, often counter-intuitive and systemic dynamics taken into consideration. Johnson’s polarity management would be joined with the wisdom of Forrester’s systems thinking and Kahneman’s slow thinking.
Consideration and Compassion: A Personal Integrative Strategy
What then are we to do personally when confronted with new pandemic outbreaks? A cursory analysis would suggest that we have three choices. Meadow’s systems thinking and Kahneman’s slow and fast thinking are relevant to each of these choices. Each choice also involves the polarity of consideration and compassion.
