Replying to LO24816 --
Dear Organlearners,
Richard Karash <Richard@Karash.com> writes:
>Chuck Saur asks a very important question:
>
>>... I am constantly asking, and will ask again: In our world
>>of education, does the word learning really mean control?
(snip)
>I see a genuine dilemma in your question. A genuine dilemma
>is one in which choosing one thing or the other is NOT the right
>course. In a genuine dilemma you have to create a balance or
>a breakthrough.
Greetings Rick,
Can you see how LEM (Law of Excluded Middle) is lurking in the background
as a Mental Model here?
LEM belongs to "binary logic" (true-false logic). Our computers are binary
logical machines working strictly on the basis of LEM. What troubles me
is that working with computers may be fixing LEM as a Mental Model rather
than relieving us from it.
There are a number of ways to overcome LEM. They all point to a
complexification of binary logic.
The first is to make use of "fuzzy logic". It means that a proposition P
is not either 100%T (true) or 0%T (100%F -- false) but not both. It means
that P is, for example 60%T AND thus 40%F. Some powerful theorems can be
proved in "fuzzy logic" to soften the "hard core theorems" of binary
logic.
The second is to make use of "multivalued logic". It means that a
proposition has different truth values T(1), T(2) and T(3) for true and
one value F for false. Also here some powerful theorems can be proved to
soften the "hard core theorems" of binary logic.
The third is to bring "form" back into the study of the binary logic as a
study of "content". Binary logic works with "well formed formulae" as
prerequisite givens and then categorises them into content (meaning) using
T (true) and F (false). Since "well formed formulae" are the outcomes
(beings) of evolution (becoming), it means that we have to introduce
evolution into the "well formed formulae" itself like I have done with the
seven essentialities.
>The genuine dilemma I see in your question is this:
> - Control, and attempts to control, are devastating for learning.
> - Boundaries, however, are necessary for learning.
>
>How to have effective boundaries without controlling?
>
>What's the role of boundaries? I believe boundaries create the
>possibility of being selective, and that being selective is the key
>to staying alive and fresh in this modern age. I think getting the
>right boundary is an important and subtle skill. In this public
>on-line dialogue, the boundary determines who is present.
I like your linking of control to boundaries very much. All living
organisms consists of one or more cells. Every cell has a boundary. This
boundary is called "closed". Please, do not view this "closed" in terms of
LEM as Mental Model. This "closed" is between "isolated" and "open". It
means that some and not all things can enter the cell through the
boundary. It means that some of these "some things" as well as some other
things can also leave the cell through the boundaries. These "somethings"
that can cross the boundary is in almost all cases simple rather than
complex things. One profound exception is the "white blood cells" of
vertebrata animals as part of their immunological system. Perhaps one day
I will have to write on it.
The one discipline mentally created upon this "closed" (devoid of LEM)
boundary of any system is nothing else than irreversible thermodynamics
(the study of "entropy production"). This exclusion of LEM makes the
mastery of "entropy production" a dilemma should we cling mentally to
LEM. I often find it sad that biologists are not aware of the
correspondence in the "closed" between the wall of a cell and the boundary
of any entropy producing and thus changing system. I would suggest that we
extend this awareness to systems of human culture like organisations too.
This would reduce much of the dilemma we are now facing.
>Our commonality is our interest in organizational learning.
>My purpose in creating and hosting the learning-org dialogue
>is to support the world-wide community of those interested
>in organizational learning. We'll know we have the right
>boundary when the commonality of interest is clear in our
>dialogue.
I have deep empathy for the many fellow learners who want simple and
concise contributions to the LO-dialogue. They do what almost every cell
(except the white blood cells) in our bodies do -- to be open for simple
things and otherwise to be closed for complex things. But let us bear the
white blood cells also in mind.
>Over the years, I too have found this a "rainbow of opportunity."
>I've learned much from our dialogue here. That's why I've been
>very slow to make changes.
It is much the same for me in both respects. I am often
reminded of Proverbs 18:2
A fool does not delight in understanding,
but only in revealing his own mind.
Even though I have studied many minds affording me many hours
of delight, what I have written above comes from my own mind
and is thus the work of a fool. The only way to overcome it is
by the very LO-dialogue itself when as many as possible fellow
learners speak their own minds too so as to augment what a
certain fellow learner has spoken from her/his mind. That is why
you have replied to Charlie (Chuck) and why I have replied to you,
even though I wish to write much less as I have indicated in
"singularity of complexity".
>p.s. In case anyone is not aware, I'll summarize my operating
>principles for the learning-org dialogue.
>
>My principles are to distribute any writing from anyone which
>meets these criteria:
(snip)
>And, I try to refuse anything that does not meet the above
>criteria. For example, I refuse
(snip)
Rick, I have enjoyed finding the correspondences between them and cell
biology! Perhaps you should do this excercise too. I do appreciate that
you are willing to act as a white blood cell too, allowing also some
complex things to enter the LO-dialogue ;-)
>How tightly to draw the boundary? I hope all readers will
>agree that I have been using a "loose" definition, not a "tight"
>one, in deciding what is org learning and what is not. I intend
>to continue to use a "loose" definition.
What a fine way to say "suspending LEM" !!
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.