Dear Organlearners,
Sherri Malouf <sherri@maloufinc.com> writes in LO15652:
> Hi folks -- the complexity list decided not to deal with this one so I
> thought I would see what you folks thought -- guess it is too comlex (-:
Sherri, we cannot partcipate in something if we do not have the free
(creative) energy to do so. We cannot have free energy to think about
something of which we are ignorant. People who follow a version of
complexity theory which fragments or reduces the complexity of reality,
will be ignorant of the rest of reality, will have no free energy for it
and thus will not participate in it.
What is the cause of a person's ignorance? It is the paradigm according to
which that person creates. A paradigm enables us to perceive all those
things connected to the paradigm. But a paradigm also makes us ignorant of
those things which are not connected to the paradigm. Thus your issue does
not connect to the paradigms which the active members of the complexity
list follow.
I will now cut out most of your message except the essential parts.
> >I live in a rural town of approximately 1100 people. I live on a dead end
> >road surrounded by lots of trees. Although we hear the noise of a nearby
> >road occasionaly, our noises are primarily wildlife -- tree frogs, birds,
> >coyotes... We are here for the peacefulness.
...snip...
> >Last year NH passed a law which states that a person can land and take
> >off fromhis/her own land.
...snip...
> >My neighbor has cleared at least a mile long strip which is at least two
> >to three hundred feet wide. He has to land from our direction because of
> >the prevailing winds. We will have a DC3 landing over our heads -- the
> >strip is about 400 yards from our house. All agree the vibration will be
> >significant.
> >
> >The law was pushed by a man who is a state rep who has friends everywhere.
...snip...
> >I had my rights eliminated by a man representing a special interest group.
> >The law was passed on the taxpayers penny. For me to fight this law it
> >has to be my penny.
...snip...
> >We have a system here which is incredibly complex in what it is intended to
> >achieve and I believe it falls very short. Our culture of individual
> >freedom surely needs to be changed somehow to include respect for others
> >and taking care of others in the pusuit of our dreams. We are not a
> >community and we are not a democracy....and it is a great disapointment to
> >me.
Sherri, you have clearly described an anomaly in the system of government
of the USA. If your government cannot resolve such anomalies and if the
number of anomalies are increasing, then civil life in the USA will move
further from equilbrium until a bifurcation is reached - the Second
American Revolution. Whether this bifucation will lead to the emergence of
a New USA or the immergence of the Old USA, will depend on the citizins of
the USA.
There are so many things which you have mentioned that I will stick to
only one of them, namely "we are not a democracy". What we have to realise
is that we can have various brands of democracy. Each brand of democracy
depends on its founding paradigm. It is very difficult for me as an
outsider to know for sure what is the founding paradigm of the present
democracy in the USA. The best I can make it out, is: "each USA citizen
has the freedom to create his/her own dream".
The only trouble is that one person's dream can be very much another
person's nightmare. There was a time when people all over the world fled
from the nightmares in their countries to pursue their dreams freely in
the USA. Thus the USA had a good supply of dreams to counteract its
nightmares. It is not possible any more. Firstly, the USA cannot handle
the free flux of immigrants any more. Secondly, the USA has developed a
common dream of "anything which you can do, we can do better" which is now
fast becoming its nightmare.
To GIVE freely what has been self created is a dream, but to TAKE
possession of what has not been self created is a nightmare. To me as an
outsider, it appears that self-interest has become the norm in many levels
of society in the USA. It is now even the norm in the USA's international
relationships. What your neighbour is doing to you with his aeroplane, the
USA is doing to other countries of the world in political, economical and
social matters.
I think that the founding paradigm of the present democracy in the USA is
not connected enough with creativity itself. The paradigm "each USA
citizen has the freedom to create his/her own dream" refers to two facets
of creativity, namely "freedom" and "dream", but not creativity itself.
Were it to refer to creativity itself, the other facets of creativity
would also have become important.
For example, emergences are essential to creativity. Since emergences are
highly contingent, immergences will happen much easier than emergences
when chaos intensifies. Your neighbour is responsible for both the
increase in chaos as well as impairing some of the essential
contingencies. Thus your neighbour will be responsible for some future
immergences in your family. This is what you wish to avoid.
It is said that the law must weigh out judgement in a blindfolded manner
in order to do it justly. But even the law is subjected to the
ignorant-learned splitting of a paradigm. Thus you will have a very
difficult time to proof your case. Since the far majority of present
experts on emergences claim that the cause of emergences cannot be known
while they do not even contemplate immergences, you will also get no help
from them. You will have to wait until a paradigm shift has happened among
the experts which will transform their ignorance to knowledge.
Unfortunately, the law of the USA, like the law of each other country in
the world, do not take into account the few crazy thinkers who have
already shifted their paradigm. This is another nail in the coffin of the
present founding paradigm of democracy in the USA.
But your articulated outcry "we are not a democracy" has an immense tacit
dimension to it because of the simple word "not" in it. If we say that we
are commited to learning, then we have to articulate this tacit dimension
because it is essential to emergent learning.
However, my reply to you has already become very long. If members of this
forum wish me to try and articulate this tacit dimension any futher, I
will be honoured to do so.
(Actually, I already did it. I have merely cut it away. Since it is an
emergence with happiness, pryness and fondness as its adjoints, I have
already had my share of these adjoints!)
Best whishes
--At de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre for Education University of Pretoria Pretoria, South Africa email: amdelange@gold.up.ac.za
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>