Don Kerr wrote:
> Kohn finishes the Appendix, "My point is that it is not at all obvious
> what is meant by the phrase intrinsic motivation." ...Why does
> it "feel" obvious, yet reveals itself intellectually as a complicated
> tangle?
This is a very interesting question. I think, intrinsic or extrinsic are
misleading words with respect to not only motivation but generally to
life, person, I myself...
Motivation for me is some energetic feeling like "I want to live", and
life is a continuous giving and taking, a flow. Think about metabolism or
communication. If you look at a flower - where does the flower end and
where do I begin? Motivation: Be part of the flow of life. Love:
Commitment to the flow of life. No Maslow-hierarchy, just changing
contexts and me within. But if motivation is linked to a flow, it is
senseless to distinguish inside and outside where you can look for
something intrinsic or extrinsic.
I think this is the root, why IM reveals itself as a complicated tangle.
Now, why does it "feel" obvious then? I think this has to do with the
logical property of language to be precise and therefore to distinguish
one from another (A is A, A is not NON-A, tertium non datur): So here am
I, thats me and there outside are all the others - what do they/I want
me/them to do? what are they / am I doing with me/them? This "I" is
sometimes called "Ego". The credo of ego is "I am I (and not someone else
and tertium non datur)" - to whom of us does this not feel obvious??
Most religious traditions know about the illusion of ego and the flow of
life. Thinking about IM may be one way to grasp this truth.
In this sense I like to join the wish:
Have a Great Adventure!
Winfried
--Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>