Elephant detection: the use of other senses (original) (raw)

Climate Change and the Elephant in the Living Room (Part #10)

The point was made earlier that strategic discourse, as with respect to climate change, is almost entirely reliant on metaphors of "vision". There is a case for considering the use of complementary metaphors based on other senses, given the need for such complementarity in navigating most environments (Metaphor and the Language of Futures, 1992). In the case of invisible elephants, the question is whether they can be detected by other senses.

smell: in addition to their visibility, the fewmets mentioned above might also be detected by odour. Elephants do indeed have a distinctive odour which might render them detectable in the context of any discourse. Given the methane production of ruminants, it is appropriate to ask whether similar emissions might be associated with elephants. However they are not ruminants, having a digestive system similar to horses which is relatively inefficient; they exude some 2000 litres of methane every day. In public discourse, reference is of course occasionally made to the sense that proposals do not "smell right" -- or even "stink" -- possibly indicative of a form of elephant detection. The "cognitive body odour" participating in any discourse may also disguise that of any elephant (Epistemological Challenge of Cognitive Body Odour: exploring the underside of dialogue, 2006).
touch: the use of this sense was indicated above with respect to the 7 blind men. In public discourse, however, reference is more frequently made to the sense that proposals do (or do not) "feel right", possibly indicative of a form of elephant detection.
taste: the sense of taste, in contrast to tastelessness, is occasionally mentioned in public discourse, but it is less evident that it is indicative of elephant detection.
sound: reference is frequently made in public discourse to proposals that sound right or wrong, confused with statements regarding whether they are "sound". Again whether elephants can be said to be detected by sound is unclear. The possibility may be greater if sound is generalized to include vibration -- given its use with respect to good or bad "vibrations" -- and the use of this mode by elephants (Mark Schwartz, Looking for earth-shaking clues to elephant communication, Stanford Report, 1 June 2005

The use of any non-visual sense is typically questionable for conventional strategy development, although not so in the case of marketing strategy -- potentially offering pointers to navigation of the future. Thus Catherine McCormack (Extra Sensory Branding. Voyeur, October 2008, pp. 55-60) describes sensory branding as a somewhat recent phenomenon in the world of marketing -- transcending traditional models of advertising in order to deliver multi-sensory, multi-dimensional experiences that communicate brand values on an experiential level, namely beyond sight and sound. Understood as a form of "neuromarketing", marketing specialists like Martin Lindstrom (Brand Sense: build powerful brands through touch, taste, smell, sight, and sound, 2005) argue that sensory experiences are real, difficult to fake, and therefore recognized as authentic. Simply defining a brand visually is seen as outdated -- perhaps as outdated as some formulations of development strategies. Sensory branding is about activating all the senses. Detecting living room elephants may require such an array of senses -- as with any sustainable strategy that takes them into account.