Reset Modernity! , AIME-talk and double stimulation

I think that behind both AIME (http://modesofexistence.org/) and Rest Modernity! (http://zkm.de/en/event/2016/04/globale-reset-modernity) there is a sense of conflict of motives in the moderns.

On the one hand moderns really do have very good intentions and they feel that these intentions have really affected in a positive way the whole planet. They do want to move along this path
On the other hand they see that there are very dagerous patterns unfolding (environmentally, geostrategically) and they Know that action has to be taken but the do not want to loose the "good" things: their exceptional place in the world (everybody has to pass through them and their institutions), their having the upper hand, their standard of living (they think how ridiculous they would be if helping others become better they would end beggars in the others' beautiful homes).
So there is a conflict of motives.

The conflict of motives brings in mind the concept of double stimulation in learning and in particular recent work that presents double stimulation not as a teaching process but as a way for volitional action to come through. Here I use the following work related to Cradle (http://www.helsinki.fi/cradle/) Sannino, A. (2015). The principle of double stimulation: A path to volitional action. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 6, 1-15.

What is double stimulation:
1. "Themethod of double stimulation serves tomake visible internal and unobservable psychological processes (Van der Veer, 2001,2008). Triggered by an initial problematic situation or first stimulus, a second stimulus is an artifact that has become a sign, i.e., a traceable link between the outside world and inner psychological functioning. The use of second stimuli makes therefore accessible processes which remain hidden when external resources are not mobilized. In this sense double stimulation is a method of objectification of inner psychological processes."
2. However double stimulation is also a principle related to the emergence of volitional action in humans  ("double stimulation as a mechanismof will formation and thus as a key to all higher mental functions“) "Behind the play of stimuli–responses what really occurred was active intervention of man in the situation, his active role, his behavior which consisted in introducing new stimuli. And this is exactly what comprises the newprinciple, the new unique relation between behavior and stimulation…The unique activity of the man directed toward mastery of his own behavior…It was manwho beforehand determined the role and function of the stimulus which in itself could not determine behavior.”" (this is from Vigotsky, mentioned in Sannino's article)
3."the conflict of motives [is] a defining component of double stimulation"

From this point of view one can consider the whole performative language proposed in the "Inquiry into the Modes of Existence" and in AIME as an example of a second order stimuli. It is a neutral tool that is introduced into the conflict and helps change the object of the activity

The previous object of the activity was probably: What policy are we to follow?
The new object is more like: what is the patrimony we want to protect and how will we negotiate in a common world?

Now the "new speak" proposed by AIME is not the only 2nd order stimuli that can be added. One might say that internationalized market based educational talk is also a 2nd order stimuli aiming towards changing "who is "us", who are to be counted as the salt of the earth". This educational talk speaks about skills of the 21st century and methods that are conductive to them. This is neutral to the initial conflict of motives. But aren't those who will master the 21st century skills constituting a "new Israel", no matter in what country they may be found? So is this not another way for the object of the activity to change?

Personally I find the second way not interesting and the way suggested by AIME sounds to me way more spiritually valuable.

(I want also to add that I think that strong conflicts of motives are present also to traditionalists in various semi-modern countries and to "converted - moderns" in the same semi-modern countries)

Not having attended the Reset Modernity! exhibition I wander:

• Is the "modes of existence talk" proposed by AIME used as a 2nd order stimuli for the participants in it? 
• What is the activity system (http://www.helsinki.fi/cradle/activitysystem.htm) that is the issue here? 
• Is there sufficient scaffolding so that Reset Modernity! be part of an effort to change the activity system that really changes lives (rather than talk about lives only)? 
• How does the strategy used in Reset Modernity! to effect change  compare with strategies like Change Laboratories (http://www.helsinki.fi/cradle/Change%20laboratory.html)?