We are all too used to make of the term risk a mean  something like hazard, danger, or peril;  in short, something negative to be avoided.

But there are people who make of risk their life’s reason for living.  And, I’m not only thinking of extreme sports people, I’m also thinking of normal people who – wanting it or not – find themselves in risky situations.

Wouldn’t you think that leaving your woman after a ten-year-long relationship wouldn’t be a risk?  Even if there are no children, thank God, you have to start your own life anew.

And what about changing your job?  Isn’t it risky, too?

And what about lotteries, roulette, slot-machines, poker, and so on?  You play: you may lose, you may win.

YOU MAY WIN.

That’s the password to enter the Risk Kingdom.

There’s all evidence that modern culture grows us up to certainty and that leads us away from doubt.  We are more and more instructed to a yes or no, black or white criteria for evaluating everything and everybody.

I tend myself to be a “binary” judge, that is, good or bad, right or wrong.  Yes, I’m aware that such criteria very seldom match reality, unless it’s an extreme case when one commits an unpardonable sin, such as murder.  I’ve no doubt it’s bad and it’s wrong.

But in less extreme cases, eisk is a dance companion.  Risk rhymes with decision-making  even when no decision is made.

The highest risk we can run into, is to run no risk.

Or – the back side of the coin – not to be aware that risk is everywhere, always, with anybody and everybody.  And the back – back side is ignoring its unawareness.  If I were in Deming’s shoes, I would have named my cycle “Risk to Run the Risk Not to be Aware of It” – or 3R’sNAI.

When we marry, we swear in the name of eternity to stay married.  Isn’t it a bit arrogant, since our ascendants, known as Adam and Eve, are still blamed for their “original sin”?  If their DNA is ours – unless we’ve been genetically modified – what prevents us from failing? Are we taught marriage risk management before going to Church?  Or are we only taught “do’s and do not’s”?

I find ruling a good control system, good – and effective – enough.

But it has its own intrinsic weaknesses: first, it is often either too generic or too specific; second, “times are (always) a’changing”.  Rulers tend to be either too strict and / or too lazy – and narcissist, too.  When they write down a rule they like, it’s hard work to make them change their mind, in spite of any “cry wolf” or evidence.

When Mr. Donald J. Wheeler writes on process adjustment, I guess he implies both under- and over-adjustment.  But when a process is stable, why over-adjust it with more ruling?

Wouldn’t “over-rulers” better spend their time playing golf?

My thinking, beyond the fact that risk is what it is, that is a very significant part of everyone’s life.  Risk should not be put on a stake, like the heretics have been  and still are.  We have to be careful not to judge risk as if we were Inquisitors.   Risk can teach us a lot  if we listen to it.  It can be really a wealthy resource.

The world is no monolith, no ptolemaic never changing universe.  It changes all the time, instead and taking chances means taking risks.