Dear organlearners,
Bill Harris <billh@lsid.hp.com> writes:
> I've been meaning to ask for some time. You keep talking about creativity
> and entropy production as key to self-organization (forgive me if I mess
> up the concepts; I'm getting closer, I think).
Bill, first of all, I am very happy that you distinguish between "entropy"
as a being (like a noun) and "entropy production" as a becoming (like a
verb). You fear that you might mess up the concepts, yet you make such a
distinction. It is something to be proud of.
Self-organisation occurs everywhere in the universe. When a plasma (like
that in a star) cools off, it self-organises into atoms belonging to
various elements. When carbon monoxide CO and hydrogen H2 react under
pressure in the presence of a catalyst, they self-organise (Fischer-Tropps
synthesis) in hundreds of different compounds. In plants (living
organisms) CO2, H2 and NH3 are synthesised into tens of thousands of
different compounds. We can go on and on, but I think you get the idea.
Entropy production is the reason why entropy itself increase from one
value to a new value. It is so trivial that we never even think of it. But
entropy prodution is also the primordial cause of self- organisation. We
can check in each of the above examples with measurements and calculations
how the entropy of the entities increase as they become more complex.
Entropy production and creativity are like two sides of the same coin. The
coin are self-organising systems. Unlike ordinary coins, the two sides of
this coin have much in common in their patterns.
> When I think of
> creativity, I think of making (composing, performing) music, creating art
> work, writing poetry, prose or essays, and the like. (I have found some
> of those stimulating.)
>
> So, is this another example of the creativity you describe? If so, is the
> creativity in the synthesis? If not, how does this fit in?
Yes.
The trouble with the word and concept creativity, is that it emerged after
WWII. At first it was used to distinguish that which a genius like
Einstein posess, but we ordinary folks not. Presently many people believe
that they also posess it, eventhough they will never consider themselves
as genii. Thus the concept changed - it deepened. Some people are already
able to indentify creativity in their dogs and cats. Thus the concept
deepens even more. When I live in the desert and observe plants and
insects, even they do the most creative things in order to survive. This
deepened the concept even more for me. But when I compare as a scientist
entropy production and creativity with each other, the concept creativity
becomes very deep.
So, think of my concept of creativity as "deep creativity" and your
concept as "creativity". By comparing these two, the "deep" will hopefully
wear off. Everything we do is creative, ordered or chaotic, constructive
or destructive, openly or with a hidden agenda, because of love or for
money. To argue whether some behaviour is creative or not, is in itself
creative. But it is also creative to link all behaviours of humans,
animals, plants and even the inanimate world into a coherent and
consistent methodology, namely "deep creativity".
By the way, as we go deeper into entropy, we eventually arrive at entropy
production which happens in both the material and the abstract world.
Think of this as "deep entropy". In "deep entropy" we think of entropy as
primarily a becoming (like a verb) and not as a being (like a noun). That
is why we speak of "entropy production" rather than "entropy".
> What I find helps me very much these days is
> reading and reflecting. It's as if I find it very helpful to read
> and consume new (to me) ideas at some stable rate and then
> synthesize ideas or actions or behaviors from that. It feels as if
> the contribution I can make is somehow proportional to my rate of
> assimilation of new ideas. (Of course --- and borrowing from Tom
> Peter's "Circle of Innovation" book --- it seems also to imply
> forgetting at some perhaps stable rate, too.) If I read too little,
> I eventually begin to feel mentally starved.
Bill, what you have described here is "personal mastery". Personal mastery
for me is to connect the patterns within me (the one part of me) with
patterns outside me (the other part of me). As you have noted, reading is
one way to make such connections, using the personal mastery of others.
Living in the desert is another way of making such connections. Working in
a laboratory or in my succulent nursery is yet another way. Selling my
cultivared succulents plants on the international market with its whims is
another way. Along all these ways creativity is the key to success.
But, allowing my granddaughter to lead me into her world, has become a
very exiting way. I feel very sad that I could not interact in the same
way with my own children. My wife and I tried to bring our children up
into our world. But I am now sure that grandparents have a different and
even more important job in life, namely to interact creatively with their
grandchildren. Leave the upbringing up to the parents.
> Obviously, reading on this list is one example of that inhaling of new
> ideas, but it's only one.
Bill, the spirit of learning is what distinguishes this list from all
others. I want to thank Rick for his stewardship.
Best wishes
--At de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre for Education University of Pretoria Pretoria, South Africa email: amdelange@gold.up.ac.za
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>