{"id":25598,"date":"2020-01-27T09:42:55","date_gmt":"2020-01-27T17:42:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/?p=25598"},"modified":"2020-01-27T09:46:09","modified_gmt":"2020-01-27T17:46:09","slug":"a-call-to-resituate-innovation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/a-call-to-resituate-innovation\/","title":{"rendered":"A Call to Resituate Innovation"},"content":{"rendered":"

Capitalism at is worst develops suffocating monopolies. The field of innovation is currently monopolized by the Mammonic grip of the evolving spirit of capitalism. Furthermore, innovation has been taken hostage by the Protestant ethic, and \u201cthe common good\u201d requires innovation to be rescued from its inclusion as an agent of perpetual commodification and resituated as an instrument for justice and peace creation. In this fast-paced post, I will attempt to show historically how innovation was yoked with capitalism, how a particular eschatology helped build that yoke, attempt a prophetic call to resituate innovation as well as finally give some recommended shifts of innovation theory as a result. Buckle up!<\/span><\/p>\n

In Max Weber\u2019s <\/span>The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, <\/span><\/i>innovation is placed within a list of attributes that characterize the Protestant ethic. Weber points to religious beliefs (namely Calvinistic soteriology) and personal asceticism as the starting point for religion (Weber, 95-100). Where Karl Marx would point to economic impulses shaping religion, Weber will focus primarily on the opposite – how religious beliefs impacted economic systems. The Christian elect, Weber\u2019s argument goes, developed a certain ethic in hopes of affirming their status as elect. This affirmation was largely recognized through the divine reward of wealth. Harold B. Jones\u2019s work in the <\/span>Human Relations Journal<\/span><\/i> is helpful both for a visual of Weber\u2019s basic argument and the placing of innovation therin (Jones, 764).<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

From this point forward in Occidental history, innovation is \u201calong for the ride\u201d with the development of capitalism. While Weber relies heavily on Calvinistic soteriology, I believe he makes one of two mistakes. He either doesn\u2019t go deep enough in the worldview of Protestants to find the impetus for the Protestant ethic <\/span>or<\/span><\/i> he minimizes the subsequent deist transformation of the \u201cProtestant ethic.\u201d My critique stems from Weber\u2019s praise of the quintessential capitalistic innovator, Benjamin Franklin, as he relies heavily on Franklin\u2019s ethics and virtue cataloging (48, 50, 180) to be a mouthpiece of sorts for his described ethic. Evoking the deist Franklin shows the development and praise of innovation beyond just the Calvinist Protestants to a larger \u201cspirit\u201d of the age.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Weber also underestimates the long-term desirability of the aesthetic lifestyle (pointing to the Puritans, see Weber, 155). Greed, comfort, power, and love of money are some of those most potent societal ills, and have been used to squeeze maximum profit from innovations. Though after the time Weber writes, slowly and slowly the \u201cdivine reward\u201d portion of Jone\u2019s diagram above gets replaced simply with wealth. This blog post isn\u2019t so much a critique of capitalism in general, but a critique of <\/span>consumer<\/span><\/i> capitalism. (One may argue there is no such thing as one without the other, but that is beyond the scope of this post).<\/span><\/p>\n

In some ways the Protestant ethic stems from Calvinist eschatology (the elect), but it largely relies on the soteriology (assurance) of this narrow view of eschatology. Innovation would align more with the mission of God if it were to be taken theologically from soteriology to prophetic eschatology and the ethical triad of love of neighbor, the common good, and shalom. Eschatology informs missiology, and too little thought has been given to this correlation among the majority of Christians. I\u2019ve observed the selection of an eschatological theology as flippant as ordering off a menu – \u201cI\u2019m pre-trib, pre-mill. What about you?\u201d The ethic of love of neighbor should stand as an evaluative check-and-balance for the implications of eschatology. A large part of the role of the prophets is to make apparent that which is largely unseen – the reality behind the observed – and imagine an alternative future reality.\u00a0 It is challenging to imagine a world where the social innovator is praised as equally as the technological innovator. Of course, technological innovations have social implications, so I don\u2019t create a dualism here. I mean that a movement of people using their power to create added shalom (flourishing) value along with the intended recipient is challenging to believe without a movement of God to rattle the tracks of the engine that is consumeristic capitalism. Resituating innovation primarily in the ethic of love of neighbor would be a great starting place.<\/span><\/p>\n

To dream and employ imagination just for a minute – what would it look like if the main impetus, driver, and evaluation metrics for innovation stemmed from the ethic of love of neighbor?<\/span><\/p>\n

As innovation is resituated out of capital gain, I offer the following shifts of paradigm and practice (Five from the author of <\/span>Innovation Theology<\/span><\/i> and several of my own).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n