Replying to LO23733 --
Dear At, Winfried and Organlearners,
In At's msg on LEM he pointed out many of his thoughts which are, as
usual, consistant with other contributions made by him earlier.
In past mesgs, At stated that «Everything is real». I responded (he was in
the desert already) that I believed in something just a bit different:
«Nothing is real». In my view (very briefly), knowledge is the only way to
perceive reality as an objective truth and as knowledge is a flawed
concept, nothing can in honesty be said to be real. We can assume that
there is a reality, we just can't know what it actually is.
Now, At's «everything is real» paradigm leads him through an interesting
path of denying the LEM, as most questions are not relationships of
one-to-one but of one-to-many, and as he showed, in one-to-many
relationships LEM fails. At least that's how I understood it.
My «nothing is real» leads me to reject LEM for different reasons.
Knowledge, in my view, is not made of facts, it is made of beliefs. Now,
beliefs are not objective prepositions, they can never be proven
(actually, proof as a whole is an impossibility; the further we can get
is: «beyond a reasonable doubt»). Beliefs are subjective and, as so, are
based on our emotional and affective system.
In «The Economist»'s last year's Xmas issue, there is an article referring
to the increasingly tendency of economists to assume that most of our
decisions are in fact irrational. It was about time economists got on the
wagon. Welcome all to irrationality and subjective thinking as basic and
general support of everyday life.
It is my belief that most if not all bipolar questions, as good or bad,
yes or no, true or false, are impaired by what psychologist Daniel Sibony
called the «between-two».
When we are babies, everything is bipolar. Mom and I, Me and Mom.
Omnipotence and impotence. Interior and exterior. Decisions are easy or
hard because there is little alternative. One is wet, therefore one cries.
If one is not wet, one does not cry. The understanding of what to do or of
what really is going on is on the other's shoulder (the omnipotent
shoulder - well, i'm simplifying things, just ask me if you need).
This kind of relationship with reality tends to give us a sense of
security. If something is not in one pole, it is certainly in the other.
If one is not good, then one is necessarly bad. This makes decisions to be
easier. There are only two alternatives. We can just exclude one and go
for the other.
The only problem is: reality is not bipolar. Actually we don't even know
exactly what it is. In our urge to understand and take decisions we are
sure of, we oversimplify and rationalize to extremes. Reality is complex,
not simple.
Logic all in all, is flawed by abstraction. Although some mathematicians
have been working in fuzzy logic, many of us don't understand it right
(yours trully included). But let me put an example to you:
warmth+more warmth=more warmth
or
a+b=b
This can only make sense in concrete real terms, not in theory. Because we
oversimplified. Trying to make it easier we made it harder. I get the
feeling your discussion on apartheid got the same way (sometimes I get the
feeling my discussion on rhythm is at it as well).
Reality, whatever it may be, cannot be described in bipolar ways. Or at
least discussed. (Although a discussion can be an interesting reality.)
Of course, this uncertainty leads to fears. One good way of overcoming
these fears is to start to feel instead of reasoning. Start believing
instead of knowing. Start hearing instead of listening. Start looking
instead of seeing. Start dancing to the music instead of saying to
yourself: «1-2-3; 1-2-3.» Our understanding will never be absolute, so let
us get over it! (well, what a bipolar paragraph! see how hard it is?)
Of course, this is not easy. I for one, am far from being there.
Still learning. Still learning.
Abraços,
Bruno
--"Bruno Martins Soares" <bmartins.soares@mail.EUnet.pt>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.