Dear Organlearners,
Freetings to all of you
We have in our mother tongue Afrikaans the saying "onbekend maak
onbemind". Translated into English it means "unknown makes unloved".
Somehow this saying does not bring under our attention exactly what the
five words above do. Let us call it our rule of thumb for no's. I love
these five words because if one says them, it sounds confusing unless one
understands what one is saying.
Have you ever noticed how often, when a person says no to something, that
person knows very little, if anything, about it. Sometimes the person
knows a lot about it, but because of a negative attitude, the person will
say no. Yet the same rule of thumb applies because the person knows
little, if anything, how detrimental this negative attitude is to
learning.
We all have to interact daily with persons saying no when we actually want
them to say yes. It is then when this rule of thumb becomes important in
planning our strategy and tactics. When we want a person to say yes for
something and we know that this person knows little or nothing of it, we
will first have to get that person knowledgeable on it. It is exactly here
where the kind of learning becomes crucial.
In the case of rote learning (memorising information and reproducing it
exactly) the person will usually still say no. The reason is that this
rote learning merely informed the person, but did not lead to personal
knowledge. Forced rote learning is even worse because the person will at
most become superficially informed. Hence a little more know will still
makes much no.
In the case of authentic learning we will have to allow much more time for
the person to make a decision. Rote learning is much faster than authentic
learning. The difference is like reading a certain text from a computer's
hard disk or typing it pain stakedly in from the keyboard by hand.
*****Fractal Path ("Steigerung") of Authentic Learning*****
The keyboard of our personal knowledge is our five sense organs. They
receive signals which, when not discriminated against, lead to sensations.
When we allow these sensations to integrate holistically with our past
sensations, they emerge into experiences. Consequently our experiential
knowledge grows. Likewise, when we integrate these experiences through
skills with our past skilled experiences, they emerge into tacit
knowledge. Afterwards we will have to formulate externally such inner
tacit knowledge, how difficult and time consuming it often may be, so that
it can emerge into formal knowledge. These articulations are then commonly
known as information. When we begin to understand the vast difference
between external information and internal knowledge, we enter the level of
sapient knowledge (wisdom). Only when information has been formulated with
wisdom will it be recognised as a work of art. (Beethoven was deeply aware
of this so that his tolerance for stupid information was zero.) All four
these levels of knowledge (experiential, tacit, formal and sapient) have
to act in unison to make an authentic decision.
*****Fractal Path ("Steigerung") of Authentic Learning*****
I think we all want the other person to make an authentic decision,
whether it will be yes or no or even neither. However, we then need to
know that such an authentic decision may take a long time. It all depends
on how far the person has proceeded on the path of authentic learning. A
person at the tacit level will take a longer time as a person at the
sapient level to make a decision.
Entropy production is the arrow of time. To make an authentic
decision requires much entropy production. There is a nice
example we can take from the "moon shine" industry to illustrate
why an authentic decision may take such a long time. I refer to
figure 1 with URL
http://www.learning-org.com/graphics/LO27793_1_distsimp.gif
Some source of carbohydrates (fruits or grain) is allowed to ferment in
water. Afterwards this fermented liquid is poured into a distiller. The
bottom of the distiller is then heated with a fire so that the liquid
begins to boil. (Fire is our symbol for entropy production). The liquid
contains water, alcohol, aromatic oils and insoluble stuff. Since the
boiling point of alcohol (and many aromatic oils) is lower than that of
water, the ratio of alcohol to water in the vapour is higher than in the
liquid. This vapour passes through a tube which is cooled with a coil
turned around it. Hence the vapour condenses into a liquid called the
condensate. Consequently the ratio of alcohol to water in the condensate
is higher than in the original fermented liquid. The condensate is shown
dripping out of the end of the tube.
To transform "moon shine" in "white lightning", the condensate can be
redistilled by boiling it once again in a clean distiller. Since we have
less condensate than the original fermented liquid, the time for the
second distillation will be less. The total time taken is the time for the
second distillate added to time for the first distillate.
Should we already have "moon shine" and not merely the fermented liquid,
then less time is needed for the second distillate. Here in South Africa
the second distillate is called "witblits"="white lightning" while the
third distillate is called "mampoer". Perhaps the "mam" comes from
"mamba", a most poisonous snake. It is black, it can become three metres
long and it strikes as fast as lightning. The "poer" means fast -- death
sets in minutes after being bitten by a mamba.
Producers of "witblits" and "mampoer" cannot afford to string
distillers in series. They have to work unobtrusively and also
every additional distiller costs money. But the oil industry has
enough money to afford such strings of distillers and the right
to erect their grotesque setups. Such a string of distillers
connected in series is called technically a fractional distiller. It
could very much also have been called a fractal distiller, using
a term from complexity thinking. How would such a fract(ion)al
distiller look like and how may we use it to illustrate making an
authentic decision based on authentic learning? Let us look at
figure 2.
http://www.learning-org.com/graphics/LO27793_2_distfrac.gif
Please read again the description of authentic learning given
between the two separators
*****Fractal Path ("Steigerung") of Authentic Learning*****
Try to imagine how this description fits to the very details of
figure 2. If you ever had the experience of participating in
making "moon shine", "witblits" and "mampoer", tasting the
condensate distiller after disteller, then such imagination would
not be too difficult. I remember how I once participated in such
a ceremony in our famous "Waterberge" (Water Mountains).
When we reached the fourth step, we had to sit down. The
most able among us collected the condensate and gave each
a sip. I was the first to sip. Fire went down my throat. I tried
to got up and fell backwards as if the shock wave of a "tsunami"
(oceanic shock wave) had hit me. I passed out. I woke up after
an hour, feeling awful in body, but excited in spirit.
>From the distiller called "sensations" to the "experential" distiller
may take many months. From the "experential" distiller to the
"tacit" distiller may take many weeks. From "tacit" distiller to the
"formal" distiller may take many days. From the "formal" distiller
to the "sapient" distiller may take many hours. This is how
understanding which leads to wisdom works -- it self takes
only hours, but it needs to be backed up by days, weeks and
months for the previous stages of authentic learning. Hence,
should we want the person to make an authentic decision, let us
try to fathom where along the
*****Fractal Path ("Steigerung") of Authentic Learning*****
the person is proceeding.
Have you ever noticed how a wise saying operates? It often hits me like a
"tsunami" shock wave on sea!
What worries me immensely is when a person is not willing to proceed along
the path of authentic learning. The person usually begins with little know
to say much no. In the reasons (all negative!) given by the person there
are usually some phrases indicating that the person is immovable. Think of
phrases such as "it is not necessary", "it will cost too much", "higher
authority will not allow it"and "it is not backed by citations". As soon
as I detect such a telling phrase, I ask one additional question based on
the circumstances to make sure it is indeed the case. If it is the case,
then an immense sickening+tiring feeling comes over me. People who have
had a physical heart attack can describe the feeling preceding it much
better than the same feeling preceding a possible spiritual heart attack
in me.
In the past I have had many such spiritual heart attacks, leaving me numb
for many days. But as I grew in my understanding of authentic learning, I
realised how ridiculous it is of me to ask for an authentic decision when
the person is not yet ready to make one. The wise solution is to invite
the person making in sequence the "moonshine", "witblits", "mampoer" and
"tsunami" of knowledge.
Only then the
"Little know makes much no"
will have been transformed into
"Much know makes little no".
Only then an authentic decision can be made, yes or no or even
the decision not to make a decision.
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.
