Replying to LO27768 --
Dear Organlearners,
Don Dwiggins <dond@advancedmp.com> writes:
>At, now that we've done some associativity, how
>about some words on monadicity: when is an
>organization a monad? when is a community of
>practice a monad? I'd give it a try, but it's been
>20+ years since I studied Montague's logic, and
>even more since my brief brush with Leibniz.
Greetings dear Dwig,
Were it not for what happened yesterday, I would have tried to give it a
go.
At our computer centre we also have a discovery centre. Long ago somebody
made A2 enlargements of pictures of famous people (basic sciences). We
decided to put more information at each picture. I had to do the job, one
that I am enjoying more and more as I delve into the past of these famous
people.
Eventually I reached Benjamin Franklin's picture. Our unversity library
has little information on him. So I also searched the web. It is then when
I came deeply under the impression what a remarkable person this American
was. I suspect that his thinking had similarities to that of Jan Smuts
(father of holism), even though Smuts lived almost two centuries after
Franklin. Both were indeed men of many talents.
The reason why I mentioned Franklin, is that one site
< http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2001/2839_clone_prince.html >
mentions his name in connection to monads, but not anything which
Frankin self said in connection to monads. Did Franklin himself had
anything to say on monads? Will somebody please find out for us!!
The fact that Franklin was one of the main driving forces in the formation
of the United States (like Smuts were in the formation of the Union of
South Africa after the British Boer war) shows to me that he was deeply
convinced of the monad as an "indivisable unity".
Here is an experiment which every fellow learner can do self physically or
even by imagination. Take a twig. It is a monad. Break it in two. Press
the two pieces together where they have been broken so that the break
cannot be seen. It has not become monad again because by taking the
support of the one hand away will let that piece fall away.
We can fix the two pieces together with super glue. But that is an
external support system. It is still visible under a microscope. The fixed
twig lacks in monadicity. The only way to fix it monadically is to let
nature grwo such a twig again. But as Dollo's law says, nature does not
follow the same route twice. Such an identical twig will never grow again.
That is why I am so against destructive creativity, i.e. creative
destructions (NB, not "creative collapses"). After the destruction has
been repaired, it still shows the scars. Only when when we begin to think
of constructive creativity as something sacred, will we begin to have
things without scars.
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.