Someone who “can’t see the wood for the trees” is a person who gets too focused on the details of a situation to be aware of the broader picture. To busy counting and identifying trees to take in the scope of wood/forest.
I find it a curious statement. It isn’t immediately obvious what it means (which isn’t helped by the use of the word ‘wood’, ‘forest’ is much better). And what stroke of genius hit the person who coined the phrase? And how on earth did it spread?
When we’re experts in trees, it’s hard to talk about forests. And mostly, it’s because we can’t imagine systems.
If our skill is in counting trees, we’ll struggle with the concept of connected ecosystems. If our skill is in identifying the species of a tree, the idea of seasonal changes isn’t on our radar. And if we’ve simply found our favourite tree in the forest, we can’t imagine that there might be similar, or better, trees elsewhere.
This is a lengthy analogy, but the point is simple: If we get lost in the detail, we’ll end up getting lost in discussions about the bigger system.
Our expertise is a critical part of describing the bigger system, but to integrate it we need to learn the language of the broader conversation.
A focus on affordable housing isn’t going to solve the life-cycle environmental costs issues.
A focus on building smaller isn’t going to solve the issue of land prices driven up by speculation.
A focus on cohousing isn’t going to address the needs of those who have lived along their entire life.
And a focus on houses isn’t going to connect us with the land.