Greeting fellow learners.
In LO25005 Efficiency and Emergence At said
" I live in South Africa, the most southern country in Southern Africa
(south of the Sahara). In my opinion the plight of all the countries in
Southern Africa is that they have been confronted by colonialism with a
complexity several levels higher than their own. Rather than gradually
leading them up the ladder of complexity bearing in mind the "Law of
Requisite Complexity" and "Intimidation by Digestor action" as I have
argued above, they were recklessly exposed to the "clash" between
different levels of complexity".
I feel that this is also true for we indigenous New Zealanders and I see
similar happenings in our education system. The students are at a
different level of understanding of the complexities of maths, biology,
physics etc. I feel that educations systems have only developed to the
stage where the tolerance level for want of a better description is such
that just a certain "breed", MBTI, IQ is able to negotiate it's obstacle
course - 'emmerge'. At goes on to say;
"This caused many of the destructive immergences over many years which
you have been reading about in your papers and seeing on TV reports".
In New Zealand in this same context it culminated in land occupations by
Maori and the constitution of a tribunal to address the wrongs or failures
to adhere to the 1840 treaty of Waitangi.
In the edcuational context the clash of different levels of complexity,
fuelled by the inflexibility of the system, creates immergences. They hit
the newspapers in the form of crime and social disorder, the result of the
education systems failure to create emmegences in all of its participants.
Following At's contribution LO25005 Efficiency and Emergence, he says;
"I am trying to avoid the same thing happening on our dear LO-dialogue. I
am trying to create an example in the field" by so as to give an
indication how to deal anew with Southern Africa. Perhaps my "field
example" will be a gross failure, but it is better for me to try creating
it than to applaude the rigid interaction with Southern Africa which has
been with us since colonial times".
In New Zealand the much maligned Waitangi Tribunal has in my view been the
safety valve. It provides a forum where Maori can vent the pressure of
long unheeded grievances allowing many of our leaders to understand at
that level of complexity and get to grips with higher levels.
Our education system has/is dealing with a similar situation and began
addressing the perceived complexity misalignment of itself and our
societal needs for this century. The 1984 Education Reform Act moved
system barriers allowing more flexibility but individuals need time to
flex the mind to the new boundaries -- understand a higher (different)
level before the tacit feeling of discomfort is removed. (Hopefully each
remembers the parable of the boiled frog).
Now, in LO24994 Efficiency and Emergence Gavin said
" I have responded many times to this thread and others, I have also
shared with this group some very pertinent things about the issues of
emergence, being and becoming, complexity, energy, logic, variables,
feedback, complexity of information, the interdependence of these
variables, power etc, etc".
In my terms and within the context of complexity, offering assistance for
us learners to move to a different sphere of understanding. He goes on to
say;
"However At and company have not actually registered the learning, they
are too busy shoring up what they know (I am "being" a bit harsh here).
There are some key issues that have never got a frame of reference, e.g.
what are the variables and the logic we are using, where does all this fit
in terms of LO's. I shared with some a key on the issues of emergence not
long ago and its linkages to TIME and the continuos field. (from a
different point of view). AND MOST OF ALL THE REALISATION THAT AS SOON AS
WE CREATE A VARIABLE (LIKE EMERGENCE OR ESSENTIALITIES OR BEING) IT IS
IMMEDIATELY DISCRIMINATED HENCE NO LONGER A COMPLEXITY APPROACH. That is
why Progogine, Jaques, Bohm (holographic theory) and company are so
focused on Time (the time of chronos and kairos) and becoming because it
tries to take the continuous field into account.(which is no variable,
(the fact that I say this means I am now discriminating again, because I
am now bringing it into being or creation again) it has the all, the ends,
ideals, the systems, the universe, the creation, the interactions, all the
variables, all the logic, all the knowledge past present and future, we
are it part of it in it)".
In the context of my analysis can you see a common thread? When Gavin
talks about holographic theory here (something I know little about) it
brings to mind the conversations between me and my younger brother at
probably 9 or 10 years old -- where do you think space ends? In our
juvenile minds there was probably a brick wall there but even at that
tender age there was still the question, yes but what the hell is on the
other side? So is this what you are saying Gavin? Is the seven of this
or the 21 of these, the brick wall me and my brother talked about so long
ago? And you go on;
"The biggest error made on these threads by At and company is the use of
the discriminated object (or variable) and the naming of them like
(emergence), as we do this we lose the continuous field and hence the
complexity approach. We immediately "become" reductionist. All systems
thinkers seem to do this and be totally oblivious to it. It is like
looking at the vase and the face profiles we see only one or the other.
"from an old thread" Emergence is seeing it all at once (very difficult)
the dog and the lives of all dogs through history in continuum, their
purposes, ideals, interactions and ends".
But are we all just in different intervals of understanding?
Something has troubled me for some time now, how much does ego affect
ones ability to assist people into different spheres of understanding? Is
ego the central motivator of the reptillian mind? I suspect that losing
face is traumatic in Maori psyche as it is in Japanese as it is in
European etc etc. Is ego the anchor for people in whatever sphere of
complexity of thinking they are in. And, is this thing "love" a knife with
which to cut the anchor rope?
Regards to all learners,
Dennis.
--"Dennis Rolleston" <dennisr@ps.gen.nz>
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.