Dear Organlearners,
Some weeks ago
Winfried Dressler <winfried.dressler@voith.de> wrote:
>I am wondering how spontaneous and non-spontaneous relate
>to inside-world and outside-world.
(snip)
>A second guess is that a happening is non-spontaneous, when
>energy has to be added constantly to the system from outside.
>It is spontaneous when available free energy within the system
>is converted into heat and may be a new order.
(snip)
>So this inside/outside seem not to be very helpful with respect
>to spontanous or non-spontaneous happenings.
Greetings Winfried,
Your second guess is correct. Organised energy, better know as work,
must flow from the outside to the inside of the system to sustain a
non-spontaneous change. If we have to pay for the work, which is the
case in the world of business, then maintaining non-spontaneous
changes can be very costly. In a spontaneous change the system itself
is the source of free energy. The free energy decreases to maintain
the spontaneous change. Because of the essentiality spareness, the
system must be recharged again. This can happen spontaneously through
emergences or non-spontaneously by an energy transfer from the
outside.
The one thing about spontaneous/nonspontaneous changes is the cost
involved. Nonspontaneous changes are very costly. Another thing about
spontaneous/nonspontaneous changes is their bearing. A spontaneous
change is persistently directive. For example, if water has to flow
spontaneously, it will flow downhill while decreasing its free energy
due to gravitation. The water will always seek the closest downhill
path, even when reaching an obstruction. On the other hand, the uphill
flow of water is nonspontaneously. It need work like a pump to flow
uphill. Its flow is not persistent because as soon as the pump stops
working, it flows downhill again. Furthermore, the water must be
enclosed by a pipe to prevent it from going sidewards rather than
upwards. Thus nonspontaneous changes call for closed and linear flows.
When we think of spirituality, it is clear that its development has to
be spontaneous. As soon as we have to develop it spontaneously, it
becomes very costly with unsure outcomes.
>Yet, I think that there are important differences: When exposed
>to a question, it is a big difference whether I read the answer
>(non-spontaneous) or whether I create the answer by myself
>(spontanous). To be exposed to a question only to get the
>answer taught is somehow insulting.
Your example with questions is very good. Yes, a nonspontaneous change
is an insult when a spontaneous change is also possible. It is
outrageous to squander our assests just to have the nonspontaneous
change. It is wise to seek the spontaneous path because it is
sustainable.
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 <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>