Replying to LO24711 --
Dear Organlearners,
Andrew Campbell < ACampnona@aol.com > writes:
>Rick, I found your 'unique' posting to At interesting. I debated
>within myself whether or not to not respond to it, exercise
>some 'manners' and wait for At and maybe others to respond
>to it first and then reply or to reply pretty much 'a la prima' as
>the painters say it.
Greetings Andrew,
I did respond -- see LO24720
Now a question for you.
Is a unification of Personal Mastery and Team Learning possible without
creative collapses?
>(The addition of an "e" to "semiology" to become "semeilogy"
>escaped me too; which is one reason why I followed the brief
>thread I did, in fact just as I sit here I am wondering if the term
>"semen" has some connection, perhaps someone can tell us
>about that;-))
Aha -- form and content again. I am so happy that I do not have a rote
spell checker. The desert is indeed a dessert, but emerging is not an
immerging. Sorry for the typing mistakes sometimes!
I have explained it --- why do I write so much?
Now I will summarise it -- oh, why so much mysticism?
Too much meiosis can become abusive just as too little mitosis can become
abusive too. Do lotions with vitamin E in it not get pushed for selling?
What is all that sales talk about oxidation? Why can any acid function as
an oxider, but not vice versa?
>Purely speaking as a painter trained in that (another) way to
>see form and content perhaps differingly I noticed how often
>it is in your reply that you contradict yourself. Or perhaps just
>seem to in my limited apprehension?
Dear Andrew, thank you for speaking out what is becoming more and more
obvious to many other fellow learners too.
Contradictions are dialecticals. But as I have explained to you in an
earlier reply today, please try to see the deeper complementary duals
otherwise your own authentic learning may go astray! Pointing out
dialecticism is one thing, but working towards the deeper complementary
duality of liveness is quite another thing.
Perhaps that was unnecessary because you indeed write:
>You and I both know ;-) that many great authentic learners
>and expressers were 'self contradictors'.
You also write:
>As we know, Nietzsche died alone and mad with syphilis.
I wonder how many fellow learners read whatever they read with the utmost
concentration to look at even the finest detail? (This is not intended at
all as any hint to any condition of anyone on the list.)
Let us make a thought experiment. Let us remove mentallly in Husserl
fashion all creations from the culture of humankind coming from any person
the moment when it became publically known that such a person has syphilis
irrespective of the way it was contracted. What will we have lost?
Today it is AIDS and PRIONs. Soon it will be something else which only God
now knows and my imagination merely suspects.
The more I learn of destructive creativity, the more I know how important
it becomes for me to avoid it.
Where is it so that I can avoid it? It is in the evil of my own heart.
Let IT Pass? Never!
How can I avoid it? My struggle is with myself, not with the body and
souls of others, even should they think so. It is difficult not to deluge
another learner by me producing self the entropy, but it is far more
difficult to produce and deluge myself with entropy so as to become
authentic rather than let evil flourish.
With care and best wishes
--At de Lange <amdelange@gold.up.ac.za> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South Africa
Learning-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.