Replying to LO28165 --
Dear Organlearners,
Don Dwiggins <d.l.dwiggins@computer.org> writes:
>I use "*" here to indicate that there's a new whole,
>with the "back action" (your term) of the FK on the
>TK acting as umlomo.
and later on
>Also, the "construction" of the FK in itself can throw
>a new light on the TK, suggesting ways to enrich the
>TK itself.
where TK = Tacit Knowledge and FK = Formal Knowledge
Greetings dear Dwig,
The term "back action" may be used in many different ways. I use it in the
sense of how David Boehm used it in quantum physics, but I do not restrict
it to quantum physics. I use it whenever anything which has emerged has an
influence on that from which it emerged.
One of the horrific consequences of rote learning, apart from thinking
that knowledge and information is the same thing, is thinking that
knowledge is as flat as information printed on a sheet of paper. Knowledge
is for me very much like the vertical profile of a soil. Most soils have
the A-B-C-D profile in which each of the layers A, B, C and D may have
further subdivisions. When any of you fellow learners come again to a deep
hole or trench dug into virgin ground, observe the following. (I had to
inspect 34 years ago almost a thousand such holes and took many samples
from each ;-)
The A horizon is on top and usually the thinnest, up to 10 cm thick. It is
rich in organic material and living organisms (bugs and worms). Take a
sample of it and smell it. The B horizon follows and usually has a
"warmer" colour than the C horizon below it. B is sometimes up to 2 metres
thick while C can range from less than a metre to several metres thick.
Plants derive all the trace elements they need from B. It may also be rich
in plant roots like A, but C self has few roots, if any. The difference is
that B (like A above it) is in contact with oxygen coming from the
atmosphere while the C horizon is oxygen deficient. Take a sample of each
horizon and smell them. You will be surprised at the differences! The D
horizon is the solid bedrock underneath -- the object of Leo Minnigh's
studies!
In my exploration of the Amazon rain forest I saw how unique its soil(s)
is. The A horizon is about half a metre thick with almost zero inorganic
material in it. The B horizon is usually less than half a metre thick. It
consist of fine, white sand incapable of supplying any nutrients. The C
horizon is several metres thick. It consists of an impermeable clay. I
have seen several places where the forest had been cut down and then the
dried vegetation burnt to create grazing lands. That thick A horizon
supplied much nutrients to the lifeless sand underneath. But after about
four years these nutrients have all been leached away into some river.
What remains is a white, sandy stretch of land, a pocket of desert in
forest.
What a horrific back action does humankind not has on nature from which it
emerged!
Allow me now to explain this back action once again to fellow learners.
Let us use the OED definition of holism -- the whole is more than the sum
of the parts. Why is the whole more than the sum of the parts? Something
must have emerged (got born) which is not among any one of the parts.
For example, think of a man and a woman as the two parts of a sum. They
have sex and eventually a baby is born. The whole now (the family) is more
than the sum (the couple). As another example, think of people together in
one cabin, each with his/her own purpose so that they do not have a
leader. Then suddenly something happens to which they all have to react
swiftly as their common purpose. Among these people one person begins to
act as their leader while the others accept it without questioning. Here
the emerged leadership makes the whole more than the sum of the parts.
Did the leadership in the last example not had an influence on all the
people in the cabin? It is this effect which I call the back action. I
think with a broad smile (see the smiley) the back action which a new born
baby has on his/her father and mother ;----)
Back action has provided chemistry with one of its most powerful
analytical instruments called the NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance)
spectrometer. A positively charged proton in a hydrogen atom spins around
its own axis to set up a tiny magnetic field within that atom. When this
hydrogen atom is put into a powerful magnetic field, the strong external
field and weak internal field interact. The hydrogen atom is now exposed
to an electromagnetic wave as the third member (umlomo) of the set up. The
frequency of the electromagnetic wave is increased. At a certain
frequency, the proton suddenly begins to spin in the opposite direction,
then back again, then again in the opposite direction, etc. This spin
switching draws extra energy from the magnetic field which can be
measured. At higher frequencies the proton stops this spin switching.
Now consider the hydrogen atom H bonded with other atoms
A, B, C, ... in a molecule HABC... The parts are H, A, B, C, ...,
and the whole is HABC... The whole is more than the sum
because in the molecule there are bonds which the atoms on
their own do not have. Put this molecule in the NMR
spectrometer. The tiny proton in the hydrogen atom will now
switch in spining at a different frequency than the unique
frequency in the free state. In fact, it will switch in spinning at a
certain frequency for atom A, another frequency for atom B
and yet another frequency for atom C ... The particular values
of different frequencies allows the chemist to identify A, B, C ...
Now let us get back to knowledge again. For me personally
(it can be different for you fellow learners) I am aware of four
levels in my knowing. They are:-
(sensations) => EK => TK => FK => SK =>(higher faculty)
where
EK = Experiential Knowing
TK = Tacit Knowing
FK = Formal Knowing
SP = Sapient Knowing (wisdom)
The sign "=>" is used to indicate an emergence into a higher order.
The next higher faculty to emerge from the faculty of knowledge
is for me my character.
Let us symbolise back action by "<=". The back action in my
knowing is then:-
(sensations) <= EK <= TK <= FK <= SK =>(higher faculty)
Let me illustrate how it works. But first I must tell the following.
Michael Polanyi warned sternly that we should not analyse the
pattern
(sensations) => EK => TK
too much by giving its parts and relative structuring fixed names.
He said that it leads to serious mental paralysis. I cannot agree
with him any less. When things get complex, we have to allow for
the LPC (Law of Pliability of Complexity). That is why I stress
that it can be for you different and that you can even use your
own names.
About two years ago I observed an organisation who wanted to become
"tacitly" a LO. By "tacitly" I mean that they knew technically nothing of
Senge's monumental work. But they expressed their desire for having each
of the five disciplines in action. They did not use dedicated LO language,
but their own words expressing their own feelings. A consultant offered
them several organisational models to chose from, shortly describing each
model with its own dedicated language. The effect on that organisation was
like a "Babelonic" confusion. They wanted tacitly to become a LO, but
hearing the technicalities of a LO made them choose against it as with all
other models. Nothing became of their attempted transformation.
I am now more than 30 years aware of the wisdom in
"deeds speak stronger than words".
It had emerged within me and only afterwards I began to note
how other books also make mention of it. For example St James
wrote:-
"Show me your faith through words and I will show you my faith
through deeds".
Only yesterday I read the following of Confucius (thank you dear
Andrew for the invaluable gift - a book on his sayings as well as
that of his successors):-
"The Master said, at first my way with others was to listen to their
words and trust their actions. Now my way with others is to listen
to their words and watch their actions. It was after my dealings
with Yw that I made this change."
I am sure that "deeds speak stronger than words" belongs to SK (Sapient
Knowledge). So I decided two years ago that whenever again I will be
involved with a OO (Ordinary Organisation) wanting tacitly to become a LO,
I would do all in my power to help it by deeds and not by words. I am now
involved, as part of a team, in transforming an OO into a LO. The rest of
the team knows nothing about Senge's work. We began about six months ago
preparing for this transformation. Yesterday evening we entered the first
stage of that transformation. What an absolutely delightful event was it
not. Twenty three members of that (much larger) OO came together to talk
on what they want for the OO. No one knew anything about Senge's work,
except me. I kept my mouth shut. Slowly the five disciplines unfolded
themselves right before my eyes.
In the back action pattern
(sensations) <= EK <= TK <= FK <= SK
the wise saying "deeds speak stronger than words" belongs to SK.
So I refrained from articulating anything about a LO, the back
action on FK. The "keep your mouth shut" in the FK helped me
to focus on my TK as it emerges from my EK. I further, once
again, became vividly aware how my EK emerges from the
sensations caused by my sense organs. I saw on their faces and
in their body language what the other 22 were experiencing. I
heard how they tried to articulate their wants and concerns. I
could not feel them because I was standing away from them,
writing their thoughts on a bullitin board. But I could see how a
few of them slapped and pushed others in a jovial manner. To be
aware of all this and stay with them by writing on the board took
much out of me, but it was all the effort worth.
Twice I had to warn the chairman "you talk too much". On such
occasions he was afraid that the meeting will lose its course. He
could not see that he was the cause. Such talking was too much
input on the FK level of
(sensations) => EK => TK => FK => SK
I could clearly observe how the sensations of the other 21
members became numb and how their EK became paralysed.
Actually, it was shocking to observe it happening. I used to call it
the "Greek look" on the faces of students in a lecture hall. As soon
as I see this "Greek look", I change my teaching drastically by
asking a provocative question.
The cherry on the pie was the following. All 22 persons knew that they
will have to arrange themselves in learning teams, i.e., organise
themselves into a cellular structure. They have given the beautiful name
"care groups" for it. But they all decided spontaneously to have at least
one next meeting similar to last night's meeting before arranging
themselves into "care groups". As theme for the meeting they selected
"spiritual gowth". They were tacitly very much aware of the metanoia last
night.
Dwig, I decided yesterday to reply to the "back action" on its own. The
rest of the afternoon I thought how I would reply to it this morning
rather than preparing for that most important meeting last evening. It was
good thing, perhaps the best preparation possible for that meeting. It
sharpened my mind like a knife's edge for what was to happen that evening
during the meeting. Thank you my dear friend for questioning how we know.
I have not discussed how the FK of one person may influence the TK of
another person. I think I have to stop now because enough is enough.
Perhaps you or any other fellow learner may tell us about your own
thoughts on it.
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.