Replying to LO24238 --
Thank you Andrew, for expressing what was roaming in my mind on my way
home after I wrote that part of ''artistry' of high cumulative thinking.'
'Caring love' - 'care TO love'
via positiva and via negativa
actio equals reactio
action and backaction
evolution and involution
><The work after acquiring necessary basic skills,
>is in the development of ´understanding of the self.
>This is where the really hard work is. The level of the
>use of tools is a direct reflection of the level of the user...>
'TO LEARN IS TO CREATE.' (At de Lange)
"We are fascinated by the concept of self-knowledge, our minds and our
purpose in life...Most people presume that the question Who are we? is
important. I once spent an evening with a charming man who had written
many books on philosophy and metaphysics.
"Who am I? is the most important question you can ever ask yourself," he
said. No one had ever questioned his premise before he met me. I didn't
agree. "The way to answer the question is simple," I said. "First ask this
question: Who wants to know?"
"I think it is a good idea to know what you do, how you do it, what you
want to create, what you like and don't like, as well as your personal
rhythms, your loves, your opinions, your history and your current reality.
But none of these insights can tell you who you are. After years of
watching many people interest themselves in who they are, I have made an
observation and a conclusion. First the observation: These people usually
are not very good creators. Perhaps all the attention they give to the
question of who they are distracts them from the question of what they
want to create, and that is why they are not especially good at creating.
Many of these people do want to create, but somehow they think that
self-knowledge is a prerequisite. Now for my conclusion: You do not need
to know yourself." ... "Think of it: not needing to know who you are.
What an interesting notion. If you are creating your life, you are not
your life. If you function as the creator of your own life, there is you,
working as a creator, and there is your life, the subject matte r of your
creative process. This will not tell you who you are, but the question Who
am I? is irrelevant when creating your life." ... "I don't really care
who we are. I am interested in what we want and what we do. If I am
creating a painting, I do not obsess about myself as painter; rather I
think about the painting. Who do I have to be to make a painting? I don't
even need to be a pai nter. When you are creating, where is the focus? In
the real creative process, it is on the creation and not on one's self.
Who do you have to be to create what you want?"
"We often reach depths of ourselves when we create. But we are not the
depths we reach, any more than we are the more mundane and superficial
aspects of ourselves. If we begin to confuse the depths we can reach with
a notion of self-knowledge, we are less able to include these depths in
(From Robert Fritz, Creating)
And if the depths are not included in our lives, 'the use of the tools'
will not reflect this depth. But 'really hard work'? I thought of it
(reaching the depth - 'understanding the self') as either inner necessity
(when you have the guts for it) or impossible. May be 'guts-building' IS
hard work, but if it is PERCEICED as hard work, it wouldn't work. So, what
is the value of stating, that it is 'really hard work'?
if you care for yourself, creating may be the path to follow.
if you care TO love, caring love may be the continuous becoming.
"Winfried Dressler" <email@example.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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.