(1) Tricia Lustig <Tricia@lasa.demon.co.uk> writes in LO23033
>>> Perhaps this is not about REASONING about love, but about
>>> just plain accepting love, being and becoming love and doing
>>> love. Isn't that all there is which is of worth in life?
(2) Winfried Deijmann <wmdeijmann@hetnet.nl> replies in LO23121
>> The ship doesn't asks why waves exist, does it?
(3) Nick Heap <nickheap@tesco.net> responds in LO23137
>A ship does not have the capacity to ask that question. We do.
>Humans are different in kind we have material existence, life,
>conciousness and self awareness. There is an execellent
>discussion in "AGuide to the Perplexed" by E F Schumacher
>of these different levels of being. He also argues that small
>understanding of the higher things, like love(?), is worth much
>more than vast understanding of lower material things.
Greetings Tricia, Winfried, Nick and others who follow the topic,
I think we must take great care not to "praat verby mekaar". I do not how
to say it English, but literally it means "talk past each other".
Let me speak for myself because in this topic it is impossible for me to
speak of others. When you read it, perhaps it may "speak past you". But
perhaps it may also "speak into you" so that it might help you to think
how it happens for yourself -- either in the same manner or in a different
manner.
I have a belief which have emerged out of my knowledge already many years
ago: All things are are related to each other.
When I ask any question of the form "What is X?", I first try to establish
the relationship between the thing (which I name X) and myself (who have,
among other things, an already existing knowledge). What I then do, is to
elaborate on the name X in terms of my existing knowledge such that the
name+eloboration corresponds (harmonises) with the relationship between
the thing and me. I belief this correspondence ensures that
"name+elaboration" is additional knowledge to me. I then try to establish
the relationship between the thing (of which I now have some extra
knowledge) and other things (of which I have little, if any, knowledge)
by elaborating on these new things using the extra knowledge on the thing
X such that these elaborations again correspond to the relationships
between X and these things. Thus my extra knowledge on the thing X grows
even further.
I speak of the "name+elaboration" as "extra knowledge" because
I believe that the mere giving of the name X to the thing is already
a profound step in creating knowledge. It is the first emergence
from my tacit knowledge on the thing to my formal knowledge on it.
However, I try to take care not to confuse my knowledge gained on
the thing X with the thing X. In other words, for me my
"knowledge on the thing X"
is never equal to
"the thing X and its relationships to me and other things"
Should you inspect the account above, you will find four beliefs:
(1) All things are are related to each other
(2) Knowledge (formal) emerges by naming things.
(3) Knowledge (formal) inside me evolves in correspondence
with relationships between me and things outside me and
between the things themselves.
(4) Knowledge (formal) is only an emergeing picture of interacting
things, but it can never replace these interacting things.
All this also apply to the very question "What is love?". When I ask this
question, I try to create knowledge on love because of the interactive
relationship between love and all other things. The knowledge which I
hence form of love, does not replace love, nor does it become superior to
love. It is, after all, merely a picture of love bridging all things so
that reality becomes one whole. But, even when merely a picture, it helps
me to follow love by seeking the interactive relationships between me and
all other things and not merely the knowledge of it.
I perceive that Tricia is saying to me that she distinguishes between
"love" and "knowledge of love" as well as that "love" is superior to
"knowledge of love". This corresponds well with me.
I think that Winfried is saying that the behaviour of the "ship" responds
to the action of the "waves on the sea". Now, since for me "knowledge of
love" is a response to "love" even should love emerge via faith from
knowledge, the "knowledge of love" is the "ship" and "love" is the "waves
on the sea". Thus I perceive that Winfried is saying that "love" is
superior to "knowledge of love". This then again corresonds with me.
One thing about Winfried's metaphor still needs to be said. The "waves on
the sea" wave the "ship", but the "ship" itself makes smaller waves on the
sea. This "moving ship making waves " is then a metaphor how "love"
emerges from "knowledge" other than "knowledge of love".
What Nick says to me, can be best described by Winfried's metaphor taken
to all its consequences. There are "big waves on the sea" irrespective of
the ship, all going in a certain direction because of a current inside the
sea and wind blowing over the sea. Their size and direction changes only
slowly in respons to the changes in the wind. Then there are innumerous
little waves moving in all sorts of directions continuously changing their
shape. Finally there are the regular "waves formed by the moving ship"
which gradually gets smaller and irregular further away from the ship,
eventually adding up to the innumerous other small waves.
Let us now jump into this complexity of waves to see what love might be.
All three kinds of waves get superimposed on each other to produce a
complexity of wave patterns on the sea close to the ship. This complexity
of wave patterns is like love to me. Can we detect from this complexity of
wave patterns the motion of the wind over the sea, the motion of current
in the sea, the motion of the ship and the motions of all other things in
the innumerous irregular waves? Look carefully an you will even see a
small fish close to the surgace making a small irregular wave.
The wind blowing over the sea is for me like the Holy Spirit blowing
through Creation at present moment. The current in the sea at the present
moment is the result of the wind blowing having blown through all moments
of the past over all of the seas. This current in the sea is for me the
"arrow of time" through all of the universe. The waves coming from the
ship are for me like the loving acts of a person with a mission. Only
when we are close enough to that person, can we detect the V shape pattern
made by all these waves and thus determine the direction in which that
ship is moving. The innumerous irregular small waves are for me like the
loving acts of all people all over the world through all the ages.
It is very important to note that there are many waves of each kind. All
these many waves of the all three kinds propagate themselves with the same
velocity. The fact that they are different in origin, numbers, sizes and
distance in which they travel, does not change their velocity of
propagation. We may call them "politons" because of this fact. Of all
politions, that created by the wind becames the largest and travel the
furthest, up to a hundred kilometer or so. All these politions satisfy one
and the same mathematical equation called the "Wave Equation". It is
exactly the same equation as the one which we find in the quantum
mechanics of the microscopic world. It is also exactly the same equation
as the one which applies to electromagnetic radiation over distances so
vast as to span other galaxies.
However, occasionally we find a very strange wave (note
the singular) traveling over the sea. It is called a solition.
(I have not created this word, but I definitely used it to
create the word "politons"). It does not satisfy the Wave
Equation of the politons spoken above. It satisfy a different
equation called the Korteweg-Devries equation. It is not
created by a regular change, but by a very fast, massive,
singular event like an explosion of a nuclear bomb, a volcano
erupting or a large meteorite hitting the sea at a supersonic
speed. All properties of this solition are roughly ten times
larger than that for politons at their greatest. Thus it travels
at a much higher velocity. Its crest is much higher than that
of the largest wind blown waves and its crest never toppels
over. It travels over distances greater than a thousand
kilometers with little dissipation. It travels silently. It is really
a "shock wave" in all the meanings of the word.
When a soliton travels over the sea surface, all the other three kinds of
waves become superimposed on it wherever it lifts them up onto its own
crest. For a brief interval of time during that superposition, they
acquire its properties relative to the ocean floor itself. It is as if the
Wave Eqaution bows for a brief moment in time to the Korteweg-Devries
Equation, as if the politions acknowledge the soliton as their superior.
Yet, when the solition has gone past them they go on behaving as if never
for even a brief interval in time they had been contact with this soliton.
What a harmonious connection of majestic complexity between this unique
wave of one kind and the many waves of three different kinds. Can we have
a better metaphor of love?
Yet, for most people such a soliton wave on sea as a fourth kind of wave
can never be part of the metaphor of the love as is the complexity of
three kinds of waves. It is as if the number three has a godliness to it
whereas the number four has an omnious ring to it like humanliness. It is
as if the three dimensions of Euclidean space which Newton kept apart from
time in his dynamics had a serenity to it whereas Einstein's bringing
together of all four into one space-time continuum unlocked the strongest
of all forces in the atom's nucleus giving birth to horrific bombs.
Is it not that people who are ignorant to a soliton lack to plan for it?
Is it not in the creations of such ignorant people which get completely
destroyed when the soliton connects with them? Whereas a very small boat
just lifts quickly up and down, a large supertanker breaks in two as
easily as a twig. Whereas a house on a solid, high cliff next to the sea
may remain untouched, a house easily built at sea level close to the beach
gets squashed and swept away.
How can we prevent such a catastrophe with such devastating consequences
happening to these unfortunate people? We cannot prevent the invention of
the atomic bomb just as we cannot prevent an eartquack, a volcano erupting
or a meteorite hitting the ocean surface. But we can prevent the
catastrophe by telling them that there are not only three kinds of waves
which are very common, but also that there is a fourth kind of wave which
is very rare and completly different. By telling them that all four kinds
of waves harmonise for a brief interval of time since they are waves after
all. By telling them that creatures as they and their creations like their
houses are not waves and thus may not automatically harmonise with these
waves, especially not the soliton. By telling them that although not in
their lifetime nor that of their great grandchildren a soliton may hit
them, they still have to expect its coming, perhaps that very night in the
dark hours. By telling them what they have to expect from such an event,
how to plan for it and thus get prepared for it.
Metaphorically speaking, the safest place to be when such a soliton
arrives is not on land or in ship which are too rigid for wave motion, nor
in a boat on sea which is too sluggish for following the wave motion. The
safest place is in the very sea itself where we are swimming between the
three usual kinds of waves, bouncing up and down with every crest of love
moving past us. When the soliton of love eventually passes us, we briefly
get lifted very quick and very high. Humans cannot swim day in and out
like this, but dolphins can because their swimming is like authentic
learning. I believe that the Learning Organisation must be such a place
where we can swim, dive and play like dolphins enjoying all four kinds of
waves, chatting to each other in strange sounds, caring for each other
when the sharks arrive.
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>