Replying to LO27831 --
Greetings,
Fred Nickols wrote in his humble style:
> Hmm. I'm no great thinker and I don't pretend for a minute to grasp the
> seven Es but I don't think their own "wholeness" could be one of them,
> although the more general notion of wholeness certainly might. To my way
> of thinking, wholeness of anything consists of the parts AND their
> relationships. The parts are members of one class of things and their
> relationships are members of another. Thus, the Es are members of one
> class and the relationships between and among them belong to another.
> The wholeness of the Es would consist of the Es and the set of
> relationships between and among them. That set is a separate concept or
> construct, to be sure, but it is not of the same class as the Es and so
> cannot be added to them as another element of the same kind.
>
> On the other hand, "wholeness" could itself be a member of class to which
> the other Es could also belong. This, I believe, is the case; wholeness
> being one of the seven Es or essentialities of creativity. In this case,
> the E that is wholeness does not apply to the seven Es or to itself,
> although it could well apply to any one of the other six.
I like this interpretation very much. It is called the "Power Set", and it
containes the members of a set as well as all it's sub-sets (which are
clearly relations).
IMHO, Fred's intuitive approach is perfect, better than any formal
definition.
> Does this make sense or am I muddying the waters?
Yes, yes. It makes a lot of sense. With this notion, your comment Fred on
team-training (under another subject), can be phrased as a necessary
condition:
Wholeness is achieved when each member in the PowerSet is "measured"
(viewed/treated/considered/managed/ ...) individually.
Regards,
Judy
Judy Tal, Ph. D.
LCL - Learning Cycles, Israel
--Judy Tal <judyt@netvision.net.il>
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.