Replying to LO24722 --
Hello Judy and co-compagnons on the road to the mine of truth and
delusion,
Judy Tal wrote:
> Dear Co-learners,
>
> While browsing recent messages, wether on methodological or on ethical
> issues, I can't ignore anymore the question that keeps knocking at my
> forehead - How can I adjudicate on a prophecy, How would I know which
> prophecy to believe and which to not-believe?
In fact, you seek answers to the four-some questions:
4. how can i believe?
3. what must i believe?
2. why would i believe? and
1. who may i believe?
However,
> I'll believe any prophecy consistent with my own - it strengthens my stand
> point, it raises my self confidence and it's easy (at least by the
> principle of "least effort").
seems to suggest that to all these questions the answer is: "i see what i
may, would, must, can see". The principle of the least effort doesn't
imply that the best way is the easy way out. Or vice versa. In fact, the
easy way leads to "more of the same" and "more of the same" is the surest
recipe for disaster (more snow will lead to avalanches, more sun will lead
to draughts, more cars give us more pollution, traffic jams, more of the
same questions will lead to more of the same answers, more prophecy to
more heresy). If this is the easy case, i'm inclined to believe in myself
(# it's just me, myself and i...#) because in that case, more of the same
would lead to more of me. Which would be sofort perfect.
> But how should I deal with all prophecies unknown to me?
Ahh, that is an easy one. "wat niet weet, wat niet deert" or "what i / you
do not know doesn't hurt me / you", dare Judy.
> If I happen to be in a phase (along the constant journey of change), when
> confidence becomes boredom, mundane and rigid - I'll probably try to look
> for alternatives - then again I'll have to ask myself the same question:
> How would I know which prophecy to believe?
I'll try to keep count. This is the second time. OK, i'll write it down
too.
> In my private search and re-search, I found out that the world is full and
> rich with approachable prophecies. They can be easily found allover: in
> books, magazines, e-lists, web-sites and coffee shops.
>
> If so, then TIME becomes the major constraint I have to deal with, and the
> question will become then: How would I identify a "worthwhile
> understanding" prophecy when it crosses my path? Well, I detour here a few
> Gedanken-steps, by assuming we all agree that understanding the prophecy
> is a necessary condition in any approach towards evaluation, and that this
> by itself is TIME consuming.
OK, that was the third time, odd but true: you ASSUME that understanding a
prophecy is a NECESSARY (one coffee, two sugar, thank you) condition.
Well, lets assume that this prophecy (called Y) is understood, then what
would under-stand, support, underlie such a prophecy? A different prophecy
called H? And what would under-stand such a prophecy? W? Doesn't that
imply that it is turtles all the way down? That the under-standing is just
hear-a-say? Wat niet weet, wat niet deert, dear Judy.
Gedanken about gedanken are about gedanken. (i'm reminded of an anecdote
described by Pais: Von Neumann, yes the famous, from the
no-this-is-not-a-Turing-Von Neumann-machine, had for some time a game of
calculating the "nebbish"-number (NN) of a sentence. "Nebbish" is Jiddish
for, well, for nebbish, something between rubbish and nonsense but not
bull. The nebbish-number was the ratio between the number of words in a
sentence and the number of times "nebbish" could be added to that
sentence. So the nebbish number of this sentence would be (Nebbish
gedanken about nebbish gedanken are about nebbish gedanken) 0.5).
And moreover, time is not a constraint. In fact, time is all we have. We
have all the time in the world. Not now, off course, not now, but later,
in the mean time. Time, you know, is nature's way to prevent things from
happening all-at-once. That would be the day, when time ran away, that
would be the daa-aay, when we die. We would be pressured for time, like in
a black hole.
> I think I gained a petite understanding from many contributors of this
> list, and I'd like to share with those who were interested enough to
> follow my steps so far:
>
> I found a fairly good question (like a Turing-test), I'd like to ask a
> prophet, before investing TIME into the process of understanding the
> prophecy at question:
> I would like to find out, what portion of the prophet's prophecy is
> manifested in his own organization. Moreover, I would like to investigate
> into the integrity of a prophecy by looking at an instance of
> demonstration, before I'm going into the depth of theoretical details.
well, mine i called mind@work, is that manifestation enough of my
prophecy? So there you have it. you think what you want to think. See for
yourself, look at the demon- stration, the experiment of 'strating the
demons. Please ask for my brochure with the theological details.
> I'm a prophet myself (well, everybody is, to some degree), relatively new
> in the field of Organizational Learning, and sometimes, when the weather
> is nice, the wind tender and the sea friendly - I can make myself remember
> that all conflicts and paradoxes that are transparent to my own eye, are
> actually taking place inside, and not outside me. At these rare moments,
> when I remember the title of this message (it's a clumsy translation from
> Hebrew, and refers to the inner town - unseen by the prophet, as well as
> the prophecy - unheard in it's own town) I can see how beyond the silence
> of my own failure, lies in stillness a precious wisdom.
Have you ever been to Dutchland (were the Dutch live?): there everybody is
a prophet. In fact even not-for-prophet* organizations (by the very nature
of their character) are turned into for-prophet* organizations. Because
that would be more efficient, deliver more quality and be less
bureaucratic. It really turned loose the demons and now some try to get
them back into the box. And it is a believe, a condition nobody
understands. More of the same. (nebbish number: 0.5).
It is the sound of silence, the very sound prophecy. You know, every
prophet that comes to town knows a prophecy is a balancing act and a
balancing act that will fail. Were did you read this before? i say also.
And whether failure is or is not an option - to be or not to be - that is
of no consequence to a follower. So there is the road less travelled: the
destiny to travel, whether to arrive or not, I choose to travel. Life self
is a road to truth. Life self, yourself. And, what we all know, every life
will die, will fail, will end, full stop. We're bound to feel - words fail
to convey what i feel - and through failure live. So it goes. (NN = 0.33).
> Wish to have the courage to share such instances with you, my fellow
> learners.
Close, very close. (NN = 0.67)
> Peace to all,
> Judy Tal
Close (1).
Jan Lelie
-- Drs J.C. Lelie CPIM (Jan) LOGISENS - Sparring Partner in Logistical Development mind@work - est. 1998 - Group Decision Process Support Tel.: (+ 31) (0)70 3243475 or car: (+ 31)(0)65 4685114 http://www.mindatwork.nl and/or taoSystems: + 31 (0)30 6377973 - mindatwork@taoNet.nlLearning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.