Dear co-developers of meaning (a.k.a. as learning, aka as entropy
production, a.k.a. finding your own spirituality also refered to as living
- acting, planning, thinking, doing - also known to giving rise to
organising and high rise building (including pyramids, temples, cathedrals
and twin towers)) just stop thinking about procreating meaning long enough
to resconsider :-):
What's the meaning of life, the universe and everything? In my humble
meaning: expressing meaning recursively. What is the meaning of meaning?
The way nature prevents all becoming being all (abba, father: pun
intended) at once. And a funny thing happened on the way to creating
meaning by creating meaningful life: it happened. Happy happending.
Now in order to separate being from becoming, being and becoming had to be
seperated (because no separation would mean no meaning). This separation
became two beings: being and becoming. Becoming being a being that wants
to become being (becoming differentiates in order to be) and being
becoming a becomming that wants to be becomming (being conventionalises in
order to become).
This dual nature, this dual structure is reflected in every process:
either it differentiates (creates beings) either it conventionalises
(creates becomings). See for instance yin/yang. With a minimum of
differences (I create therefore I -Occ-am) creating a maximum on
possibilities (I am, therefore I create) - hmmm, couldn't help noticing
that i use I -.
We've always known this, but had to learn to express ourselves effectively
- still learning. In the old days we had a superficial understanding,
guided mostly by fear of knowing, because knowing generates acceptance of
responsibilities (for instance: may we knowingly err?) - as expressed in
the tales and writings of these times. The poets wanted to create poetry
with as much ambiguity as possible and at the same time as precise as
possible.
Everybody has a prefered world view - an expression of your self and the
way your self expresses it(her his)self (we'll have to find a new
notation, a different expression) - consisting of an unequal mix of four
different views -- i was asked yesterday whether it would stay at four,
and i think it will, because two (one separation) times two (another
separation) makes four and these two separations are not completely
orthogonal (can influence each other) -- depending on this mix, your
outlook on the world, the way you - have learned to - experience yourself,
you'll be inclined to think and feel that
a. the world is based on facts and figures, nothing changes, and/or
b. the world is ruled by principles and laws, interpration changes
and/or
c. the world will be a world of possibilities and ideas, vision creates
and/or
d. the world feels like a home at heart, people becoming and/or etc.
For short: general, accurate, simple and passionate, GASP.
Gradually, as we develop our selves, we'll become aware of these
differences. We'll learn were our capabilities are, by accepting what
we're uncapable of. We become a human being. That would be my definition,
my operationalisation of spiritual development. Developing needs two
processes, one that conserves and one that disserves (?). The first one we
experience as transforming energies, the second one as producing entropy.
> John has asked At, among other things to,
>
> > Please explain your empirical?
> >demonstration of the law of entropy production in the spiritual world
> >without (1) messing around with the meaning of "empirical" and without
> >(2) requiring us to share your religious beliefs or faith.
>
> I will risk appearing the fool because the rewards will be great for me if
> I too can understand what John means to understand, but first I have to
> ask something, so John, Please explain to me 'without any messing about
> with meanings' demonstrate your metaphysic of the terms 'spiritual,'
> 'beliefs' and 'faiths'.
>
> My foolish mind has always found them the same -apart that is, from the
> spelling ;-)
Only a fool would knowingly err, err very wise
With kind regards - met vriendelijke groeten,
Jan Lelie
PS: i think it is funny that all this wisdom on parts and wholes emerges
from South Africa, the land formally known for its "apartheid", don't
you?. Perhaps there was an acute need in apartheid to invent wholisme - or
was it the other way around?
--Drs J.C. Lelie CPIM (Jan) LOGISENS - Sparring Partner in Logistical Development Mind@Work est. 1998 - Group Resolution Process Support Tel.: (+ 31) (0)70 3243475 or car: (+ 31)(0)65 4685114 http://www.mindatwork.nl and/or taoSystems: + 31 (0)30 6377973 - Mindatwork@taoNet.nl
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>