Team Learning using books by Masters. LO24860

From: AM de Lange (amdelange@gold.up.ac.za)
Date: 06/13/00


Dear Organlearners,

Should I ever have to make a choice between species of nature or books
from masters to study, I will rather die than to make an exclusive choice.

When people make use of books, there are Mental Models of which they may
be using some. I will introduce two of them so that fellow learners can
continue with discussing others too.

One Mental Model is that the latest books on a topic is also the most
authoritative. This MM is not unqualified true.

We ought to bear in mind that there is an evolution of thoughts
contributed by many thinkers on the topic. Obviously, locking in on this
past evolution and not working towards future evolution, can become a
serious Mental Model too. This evolution increases by way of digestion
gradually in one level and then increases rapidly by way of an emergence
to a next level. When a book reflects both the rapid rise and the gradual
leveling of an evolutionary cycle, it is a "better" book for me. When that
book reflects the rise and leveling of the highest level against all the
past lower levels, that book is "best" for me. Few of the latest books are
"better" or "best" books.

Another Mental Model is that the name of the book, summarising its
contents, must connect to the topic we want to study.

We ought to bear in mind that the name given by the first authors to
capture the relatively common content of their books and which indicate a
"sequential team learning", may later restrict any thinking to this topic.
Although these books, indictated by their very names, may be highly
focussed on their subject, they often lack serious contemplation and even
comprehension of other subjects too. For example, an authorative book on
biochemistry may say nothing on soil chemistry and water chemistry. To add
the latter two into one whole body of knowledge is not just a case of
reading them too, but careful weaving of all three in terms of effective
connections. Often books on soil chemistry and water chemistry will have
vital information to make biochemistry sensible and practical.

I love to read an "authentic book" whatever the subject. I mean by
"authentic book" a book in which authentic learning becomes evident as I
work though the book. This authentic learning has two facets -- Personal
Mastery and Team Learning. The author's personal mastery of the subject
becomes quickly evident. By a skillful weaving in of thoughts by other
authors (often not agreeing) on the same subject, also the Team Learning
becomes gradually evident. Authentic books are relatively rare to get hold
of.

I can bear studying a few books which are "first hand commentaries" on an
"authentic book". I find them bearable because they illustrate the
interaction between thinking personalties. Sometimes I do find a "first
hand commentary" which give me just as much pleasure as studying the
"authentic book" self, but they are rarer than even the "authentic books".
I cannot bear studying books which are "second hand commentaries" on
"first hand commentaries" on "authentic books". These books usually
exhibit too much rote learning, too much criticism, too much playing
personalties off against each other and too much dogma while they lack
feeling, creativity, wisdom and a genuine search for spiritual qualities.

I do not have the money to buy even a hundredth of all the books
recommended on this LO-dialogue. I would have loved reading them. Firstly,
it helps me to understand the personality of the fellow learner who
recommended them better. Secondly, it helps me to question my own
understanding of the topic. Sadly, we live in a country which does not
have the finances to keep large libraries (building, staff) operating, nor
to buy books other than those prescribed in some or other course or highly
recommended by many reviewers. Even here in Pretoria where the learned
libraries are the densest in all South Africa, it is difficult to get hold
of recommended books. Sometimes the book shops are a better choice than a
library if the book is still in print.

Perhaps we may one day be able to load down from Internet electronic
copies of books we really want to read, but of which a physical copy is
not available because of a lack of money. In the mean time we may try to
provide some sort of solution like a summary of a book. But here I have to
voice again my own opinion strongly. I will not like a 20 page summary
(condensed version) of a 400 page book in which all 20 pages are clearly
an exposition of how the summariser perceived the book. I have studied
some of these summaries which are appearing more and more because of a
lack of time of people to study the full length original book. They are
awfull to me.

I would much rather like the "condensator" (summariser) to spend roughly
15 of the 20 pages quoting sentences or even paragraphs which struck the
condensator profoundly. This "condensate" of the original book helps me to
get perspective on the authenticity of both the original author and the
condensator. I must confess that I have seen very few such "condensates"
on merely one book. But I have often encountered such a 200 page
"condensate" as a biography of an author whose collected works amount to
tens of thousands of pages, or as an anthology of the sociology or history
of the community in a certain region or the final report of a commission
with an extensive survey as directive. I have spent many a happy hour
browsing through such a hundred or more page "condensate".

Many of the contributions of Andrew Campbell contains the germ of what I
have in mind by this 20-to-1 "condensate" of an "authentic book". Andrew,
I have to thank you, for example, for your recent quotes of William Blake.
He was 200 years before his time. His later work was nothing else, to use
a metaphor from modern technology, than "experimenting with HTML", the
language used to create web pages. He was not a mystic or agnostic as many
in his time criticised him to be. Perhaps you will do me the pleasure of
doing the same for a one certain Alvarroes of whom I have become very
curious.

Would a list of "condensates" to the LO-archive not be fine? Should 100
of us each produce one condensate, the power of it all will help us
tremendously.

With care and 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 <Richard@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.