Replying to LO24850 --
Dear Organlearners,
Ray Harrell <mcore@idt.net> writes:
>Of all of the wealthy people that I have taught, I have never
>encountered a one who could get beyond their value system
>and conquer the complexity to become a great singer.
(snip)
>That creates a duality on this list that, to my knowledge thus
>far, has neither been questioned or solved.
Greetings Ray,
My own mother's own desire was to best of singers. I can write a book on
her and her singing. But alas, the world was never kind to her.
I do appreciate all your contributions of lately because I discover in
them a most remarkable singularity of complexity. Thank you. Please
contribute more so that I can write less. Your contributions to the
LO-dialogue are most valuable, at least for me.
To master anything complex in terms of the paradigm of simplicity is like
crossing the sands of the Namib desert in a boat with oars.
Perhaps the untold truth of the "law of requisite complexity" is that
"modern human" could have evolved from "ape human", but never could have
evolved directly from "apes" themselves. Is the much debated "missing
link" not the very "law of requisite complexity"?
As for me, I make a careful distinction between solving (the becoming) and
solution (the being). It is one thing to speak of complexity, but another
thing to complexify from simplicity to complexity. It is a spiritual
rebirth. I find the English mode of expression rather insensitive to this.
In my own mother tongue we never ask "What do you want to be?" (wees,
"sein") We ask "What do you want to become?". (word, "werden").
I like your qualification "wealthy people". I have learned from my late
father and grandfather that money degrades virtues into banalities. It
took me a long time to understand what they wanted to teach me because
their poverty was far greater than what I have experienced. Today I can
respond to them in a way which, should both still have lived, would have
perplexed them too. (Times do change ;-) Money is the most serious
fragmentiser of spirituality which I can presently think of.
>I would like to see that distinction between the short term
>discipline required of 99% of the work in the U.S. and the
>long term daily skills that begin in childhood and must be
>nurtured into old age simply to keep up.
Amen.
I have written too many times to count that the more complex an event
becomes, the more time it takes for that event to get created in full. I
even have supplied this claim with an explanation in terms of "entropy
production". Oh, when will people realise that it is not merely a claim,
but indeed a fact of reality.
This brings me to the very essence of art. Many people see art in one
artifact (music, painting, sculpture, literature). Perhaps I am the ass,
but I only become aware of all the full splendour of the art in any
artifact after I have traced the whole history of that artifact in terms
of all the artifacts of the artist which preceded that specific artifact.
Listening to Verdi's works in the order in which they have been created is
most rewarding. The most banal thing for me self is to evaluate the art in
any artifact without its prior evolution.
Those who SPOKE authentically on evolution (Goethe, Lamarck, Darwin,
Smuts, Prigogine) are but few. But those who DID authentically the
evolution are too many to enumerate. Nevertheless, they do have one thing
in common -- they were all artists despite the medium they choosed to work
in !!!!! Eons before evolution was formally explicated, they were al
already doing the evolution.
It brings me back to a question which I asked long ago. How much is the
emergence of any LO an art or not?
Dear Ray, I find your contributions like that of Andrew on
"art-expressing" as one of the five elementary sustainers of creativity
most fascinating. (The other four are: dialogue, problem-solving,
game-playing and exemplar-exploring.)
Thank you Rick for not isolating the artists from our LO-dialogue, even
though they often will not justify themselves in terms of the LO and its
five disciplines. As for me, such justification is not only unnecessary,
but foolish. For example, my granddaughter Jessica does not have to
justify that she is a human whose personality is evolving into
"singularity of complexity". Almost every day we as grandparents sing in
laughter and dance in joy when she perplexes those (even adults, including
her mother ;-) who are into contact with her. Sometimes she even
perplexes my wife, buit up to now I can still manage to keep abreast of
her. The day when she passes me, I think I will have to pack up and sell
vegetables ;-)
Let us drink a toast to our artists, especially our children!
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.