Dear Organlearners,
Leo Minnigh <L.D.Minnigh@library.tudelft.nl> writes:
>But what does the icebreaker do? It breaks the coherency,
>but there will be still ice. Instead of a cold group, one creates
>cold individuals floating in a warmer environment (the water).
>Is that what the icebreaker is ment for? Is that the purpose?
>Does the facilitator likes to work with individuals or with a group?
>
>I think that the intention is to get the ice fluid. It cannot be the
>goal of the starter to keep the individuals rigid and only the
>environment fluid.
Greetings Leo,
I have followed this "Icebreaker" topic with much interest. One reason
is that once again it is a topic which leads to a astounding variety
of contributions. It reflects the first manifestation of entropy
production as chaos (diversity of becoming). When this entropy is
produced fast enough, the system will reach the edge of chaos where
bifurcations happen. Which system? The members making up this list!
It is my experience that often a person has built around him/her an
impenetrable crust like a cocoon of ice. In my Systems Thinking it
means that the system (person) reduces the openness (an essentiality)
of its boundary, thus becoming more closed. The more a system gets
closed, the less susceptible it becomes to entropy producing forces
operating from the surroundings (environment).
It was never my experience that people succeeded in forming a coherent
group by employing the same technique. But I cannot rule out such a
possibility because often people try to form a coherent group by
inflicting closures on the group. In fact, this was a major strategy
by which the ruling National Party tried to create coherency among the
great diversity of white people during the apartheid era of South
Africa. The more liberal whites chastised the nationalists by calling
it their "laager" mentality. The Dutch word "laager" referd to the
historical drawing of wagons in closed circle to fend of the enemy
(black people).
I began many years ago as a teacher to try and understand by
observation and reflection why a person creates a "cocoon of ice"
around himself/herself. I found many reasons which made the picture
more and more confusing. Eventually, as my understanding of entropy
production in the abstract world of mind grew, I became aware of a
basic reason which worked at the background of all these confusing
reasons. This reason is related to the fact that the continued
organising of each living species is a spontaneous process.
Please bear with me the following detailed explanation of all what may
happen during any spontaneous or non-spontaneous process. The details
are of PARAMOUNT importance to understand in irreversible
self-organisation in general and to understand specifically the
central feature of human culture up to now in the present
dispensation. Afterwards I will use this understanding to explain why
people build ice cocoons around themselves.
SPONTANEOUS living means that despite the conditions outside the
living system, the system changes ON ITS OWN ACCORD its organisation
in terms of those very conditions. In terms of physical quantities
"spontaneous" means that the "system's free energy must decrease".
This is not indefinitely possible since all sources of free energy are
limited. In order to escape the lower bound of equilibrium when the
system will have used up all its available free energy, it has to
follow a new, different path. The new path has to be such that it can
use up some of its organisation gained along the old path as the new
source of free energy along the new path. The result is the meandering
or fractaling of the overall path.
The most remarkable property of any spontaneous change (lowering of
free energy) in any system is that the system can be "harnessed" as
source of work. (Bear in mind that work is an organised flow of energy
between the system and its surroundings.) It means that although the
system may not be doing any work by changing spontaneously, it will
always be able to deliver work when needed. This relationship between
"lowering of free energy" and "delivering of work" in spontaneous
changes, is described by the order relation
/_\F < W.
Gibbs derived this relation from the Law of Enegy Conservation and the
Law of Entropy Production.
Let us first study this order relation for spontaneous changes.
In the case of spontaneous changes /_\F has a negative value. When the
system delivers work W during spontaneous changes, its value is also
taken as negative. Why? Work flows OUT of the system, thus DECREASING
its total internal energy E. Let us now assume for learning purposes
that the free energy decreases by -7joule, i.e.
/_\F = -7joule < 0
The order relation entails that the W (work delivered) may have
negative values such as -5joule or -2joule. If we compare the
magnitudes of /_\F and W without the signs, it means that only some
(less than 7joule) of the change in free energy has been converted
into work. It is impossible for the system, when the change in free
energy is -7joule, to deliver more than 7joule of work. If it would
have happened, it means that the system would have created energy,
something clearly forbidden by the Law of Energy Conservation. For
example, assume it has to deliver -9joule of work. In such a case the
expression
-7joule < -9joule
would be false.
So what becomes of the change in free energy which is not converted
into work? It is converted into other forms of energy such that there
is an associated production (increase) in the entropy of the universe.
When the spontaneously changing system does no work, all its change in
free energy is converted into other forms of energy with an associated
entropy production. This entropy production can be dispersed to the
rest of the universe as chaos (diversity of becoming) or concentrated
in the system as order (diversity of being). The latter will happen
only after the edge of chaos has been reached.
But when the spontaneous changing system has to deliver work
(organised flow of energy), its rate of entropy production decreases
and thus its rate of organisational change. When the system reaches
the limit of efficiency (i.e. when almost all of its change in free
energy is converted into work), the system is very close to a
dynamical equilbrium. Hence organisational changes will happen very
slowly. In other words, making a spontaneous working system more
effficiently in converting its free energy into work, one major
disadvantage comes to the surface -- organisational changes in such a
system will happen more slowly.
In order to step up the rate of organisational change in a spontaneous
system which delivers work to the surroundings close to its maximum
efficiency, other work must flow from the environment INTO the system.
This extra work will then have a positive value so that when it is
added to the systems own work which is negative, it will REDUCE the
total flow work W. Thus the difference between the total work W and
the free energy change /_\F will again increase, leading to more
entropy production and hence faster organisational change.
This technical description in the paragraphs above sounds terrible,
but it is exactly what happens when a slave driver (in the
surroundings) thrashes a working slave (the spontaneous working
system) to deliver better organisation while working. Through
thousands of years of collective experience humankind has become very
sensitive to this slave driving by the surroundings, trying to
imbetter the spontaneous changes in humans to obtain more
organisation. Africa was the last victim to this practice in the
literal sense of the word slavery. But what about many modern
organisations in which the management (slave drivers) still work
themselves into a frenzy to force the other employees (slaves) to
deliver not only much work, but also work with a higher organisational
value? Anyway, in order to prevent this practice, humankind has
gradually learnt how to built a spiritual cocoon of ice to prevent
this external work being done on humans. This cocoon of ice involves
very much the impairing of the seven essentialities, especially
openness.
If this is not enough, humankind has discovered something else which
makes this complex issue much more complicated. Humankind disovered
how to make non-spontaneous processes happen AT WILL. This discovery
is one of the main distinctions between the human species and all
other living species. I have often stressed that humans cannot create
anything in the void -- only the Creator can do that. But the Allwise
Creator created a way in which non-spontaneous process which will
never happen on their own accord, may still happen. Why? To make it
possible for humans to gain experience as images of the Creator. How
may this seemingly impossible happen? Again the order relation
/_\F < W
sheds some light on the answer.
A non-spontaneous process is one for which the change in free energy
has to increase. Symbolically
/_\F > 0
A non-spontaneous process will never happen on its own accord, ie.
when no work (W=0) is involved because for all processes, spontaneous
or non-spontaneous, the order relation
/_\F < W
must hold (be true). In this case (non-spontaneous and no work) we
have
/_\F > 0 = W
which is false.
Almost all human artifacts are the result of non-spontaneous
processes. A piece of wood will never become on its own accord a sheet
of paper. A piece of clay will never become on its own accord a
ceramic beaker to drink from. A piece of cotton will never become on
its own accord a T shirt. A heap of minerals will never become on its
own accord the computer in front of you. These are all examples of
non-spontaneous processes which will never happen on their own accord.
Yet humankind has discovered how to make them happen. How can they
happen?
They will happen when "at least"
/_\F < W.
The "at least" means that the order relation is necessary, but not
sufficient, for self-organisation The suffiencies involve the seven
essentialities. Let us assume for learning purposes that the change in
free energy for the non-spontaneous process is +6joule (note the
sign). Should the surroundings do work on the system less than
+6joule, say +4joule, the expression
+6joule < +4joule
becomes false. Thus the non-spontaneous change will not happen.
However, should the surroundings do +8joule of work, the expression
+6joule < +8joule
becomes true. In other words, the surroundings have to do MORE work ON
the system to enable its non-spontaneous process than its associated
increase in free energy.
The most effective coercion in terms of energy is when the work done
by the surroundings on the system is only slightly larger than its own
increase in free energy. Thus little work will be wasted. But since
the entropy production is very low for such a small difference and
hence the system acts close to equilibrium, organisational changes
will happen very slowly. To speed up the organisational changes, far
more work has to be done on the system than its own increase in free
energy. This larger difference between the work and the change in free
energy is again associated with an increased entropy production. As
the difference becomes greater, this entropy production will drive the
system closer to the edge of chaos where bifurcations will happen.
However, unlike in spontaneous changes, the bifurcations will usually
lead to destructive immergences rather than constructive emergences.
Why? Should the system have produced its own entropy to reach the edge
of chaos, the seven essentialities would have been developed much
better IN THE SYSTEM to accomplish it. But deluging the system with
entropy produced outside the system means that only somewhere in the
surroundings the essentialities need not to be impaired. Most
irreversible self-organising systems (even the human species) will
object to such immergences in terms of their past self-organising
history (experience). Again the strategy of many humans is to
construct a spiritual cocoon of ice around each of them to prevent
such work and associate entropy deluge entering and upsetting their
lives.
Leo, I have tried to explain above what had gradually became the
central feature of all human culture. Allow me to summarise it. Human
culture is now predominantly concerned with making systems with
non-spontaneous processes (in which free energy has to increase)
active. Work has to be done on such systems to have any outcome at
all. Unfortunately, this work leads to an excessive production of
entropy. This additional entropy usually leads to destructive outcomes
apart from enabling the non-spontaneous process and its outcome to
happen. The outcomes of these destructive processes are generally
recognisable as pollution, the very opposite of the constructive
processes happening in the rest of nature. Humans often react TACITLY
against this overkill in non-spontaneous culture by constructing a
spiritual cocoon of ice around each of them. Thus, as humankind
proceeds further on this path of non-spontaneous culture, not
complementing it with a culture of spontaneous changes, it needs more
and more "icebreakers" without really understanding its significance.
One of the most remarkable facets of the recent demolishing of
apartheid in South Africa without resorting to the worst blood bath of
this century, is how many people realised TACITLY that apartheid was a
vile system because it was FORCED BY EXTERNAL WORK upon systems of
self-organising peoples. I have managed above to articulate above some
of the tacit knowledge gained by many South Africans. They are
beginning to realise that forced changes are futile. I know that my
own articulation is advance and highly technical. But South Africans
are indeed beginning to articulate their own tacit knowledge on it.
One of the best examples is the Belhar Confession of some South
African churces. In this confession they clearly identify the FORCED
segregation of people (in contrast to spontaneous association and
diversification) as one of the hideous characterestics of apartheid.
Leo, thank you very much for describing to us what happens in a
clacier. The self-organisation in a clacier is even slower than in the
Ostwald digestion process on which the model of the Digestor is
based -- involving hundreds of years rather than a couple of weeks. It
is because there is no mobile phase in the clacier. Every change has
to happen in the solid phase. Unfortunately, I never had the
opportunity to get even close to a clacier. All which I have
experienced about them, are the scratch marks which they have left on
some rocks in the deserts as well as rubble left behind (rocks coming
from a different places).
You also end with the following very important questions:
>As a conclusion of the icebreaker-metaphor, we end up in
>confusion. Do we like to break the ice, do we like to create
>flow with or without the saving of the individuals? Do we like
>to preserve the coherence of the group?
I cannot answer them directly. But what I can say, is that we ought to
stop trying to change people who cannot change themselves
spontaneously, or who change too slowly to our liking. However, this
is not enough. All humans will also have to transform human culture
radically -- but only if it can be done spontaneously. Through the
ages human culture got fixed upon letting non-spontaneous processes
happen, thus loosing focus on spontaneous processes. This culture
requires sources of free energy which will do the work to force such
changes. Hence humankind has develop the master-slave mentality, using
humans, animals and now even machines to affect the non-spontaneous
changes which it craves for. Humankind now considers itself to be rich
in terms of a great diversity in non-spontaneous outcomes, regardless
of the pollution associated with it.
But in reality humankind has diverged from the path which nature
follows, namely spontaneous, irreversible self-organisation. Perhaps
such a change in path was necessary to gain that high mental free
energy so that humans could become thinking organisms with a superior
intelligence. However, I am absolutely convinced that we humans are
very close to the end of this path. Hence we will have to change once
again the path of human evolution to regain our spontaneity, breaking
the spiritual cocoon of ice we have created between us and the rest of
Creation as well as the Creator. Otherwise we will keep on speeding
towards a head on clash with the rest of Creation and its Creator.
This change of path is the greatest paradigm shift to happen since the
days when Homo erectus became Homo sapiens (the thinking species) --
the days when Homo erectus recieved the spiritual breath of God to
become creative as no other living species. The metaphor of the
"icebreaker" is but one tiny piece of evidence pointing to this grand
paradigm shift laying ahead of us.
Please skip the following paragraph if it will offend you.
Whether humankind will be able to act on its own as the icebreaker to
accomplish this paradigm shift, is another question. Some people deny
the asking of the question. Others try to answer the question through
their religions. Some say that only godheads other than humans can
break this ice. Others say that only humans can function as such
godheads. Is this not an answer based on the master-slave mentality, a
mentality depending on forcing non-sponatenous processes to happen?
There are many versions of the Christian religion. As a Christian I
believe that this grand paradigm shift requires a "partnership"
between God and humankind. This partnership was prophesied and became
actual in the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. One
of the extraordinary lessons which He had to teach His disciples after
His resurrection, is that the master-slave mentality does fit them any
more. They have become friends of God through His work -- the unique
example of spontaneous self-organisation.
>Just some philosophies triggered by a metaphor.
The same here Leo.
Thank you for this triggering. It is part of the domino effect -- the
"butterfly effect" as the "new scientists" would say. I cannot help to
think that the butterfly did not began to flap its wings recently, but
that its flapping started approximately 150 years ago when scientists
discovered the Law of Energy Conservation and the Law of Entropy
Production. The excitement of those who participated in those
discoveries was unique in the history of humankind. They all felt that
they got an unprecedented glimpse into the real nature of Creation
with humankind as the key player. It is that excitement which I wanted
to bring out in my Primer on Entropy. Today I had to complement that
excitement with another adjoint of emergences experienced by humans.
This adjoint is anticipation -- a sense of destiny -- the "strange
attractor" as the "new scinetists" would say.
We have work to do as partners in a gigantic LO which comprises
humankind itself. Therefore we need to change spontaneously to escape
the master-slave mental model. Constructing spiritual cocoons of ice
will not do.
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>