Replying to LO25591 --
Dear Ray and other Rayders for the Ark of Truth,
So the issue turns out to be language yet again. The process of splitting
starts with the very use of language in communicating. Before language
communicating was analogue, a communion, but not very precise, body
language, dance. Like Non-western Theories of Leadership as practiced long
long ago and still into the present. After the invention of language -
and i imagine that it must have been invented by a blind person - we found
ourselves with a tool for communicating digitally - digits, fingers, like
a sign language. Because of this word - digit, finger, digital - and
because of the songs that went with the dances, i imagine that the
language was invented by poets.("poets" spoken in Dutch, "puts" means a
pratical joke).
The problem with a digital language - as i understand it - is that there
is a "no" as opposite of a "yes". Its strength is its weakness. In an
analogue language, there is no concept of "no". There is just is as is. I
also think that this is the difference - if any - between non-western and
western cultures: in the western culture a "yes" is a "yes" and a "no" is
a "no". In non-western cultures, or perhaps we should call it behavior
now, a "yes" can mean anything from "no" to "yes". However, thanks to the
word no we can talk about no. But it will be confusing, paradoxically. The
best example i can think of is "you cannot not communicate". My father
used to say: "saying nothing is the best argument", a statement, or rather
, a behaviour, that can still infuriate me.
Perhaps we should invent an second language to talk about the meaning of
our communicating. Or perhaps we are already using that language and fail
to notice that we also communicate analogously. As we do in musec and
dances, um.
I've heard of the beer ;-).
Kind regards,
Jan Lelie
> Thanks Jan,
>
> good to hear from you as well. I tend to think of the issue beyond a
> duality. The opposite of monochronic is only polychronic in language but
> there are many multiples. The opposite of linear is non-linear but
> non-linear often breaks down into multi-linear. The issue is to be able
> to imagine a reality that includes all and that all are appropriate to
> their own universe.
>
> Perspective is one of the component parts of reality.
> Far from being a disturbance of its fabric, it is its
> organizing element....Every life is a point of view
> directed upon the universe. Strictly speaking, what
> one sees, no other can....Reality happens to be,
> like a landscape, possessed of an infinite number
> of perspectives, all equally veracious and authentic.
> The sole false perspective is that which claims to be
> the only one there is.
> --Alfred North Whitehead, The Modern Theme
>
> I like Whitehead. His name is great and seems almost fictional in that he
> embodies many of the transcendent elements of Western thought in his
> writings. I often think that Whitehead and Russell are very good
> introductions to non-Western thought from a Western perspective of course.
> Thanks for the recommendation. I will look it up.
>
> Ray Evans Harrell
--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.nl
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.