Replying to LO28222 --
Ray Harrell <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes
>For complexity it is a quality of being complex.
>The key is that it is a state of being complex. That
>state of being has various levels. When a person
>has zero virtuosity, they have a ten on the complexity
>scale. When the complexity scale is zero you have
>the reverse for virtuosity.
Greetings dear Ray,
We seem to have our differences on what complexity means.
Nevertheless, I see in your description above what I call the LRC (Law of
Requisite Complexity). One has to master the one level of complexity to
have the virtuosity assoiciated with that level. Only then can one with
success master the next level.
>But for me the difference is that you can say
>something IS complex but you cannot say that
>something IS complexity. It is a noun but it is
>not an object but a process that one does.
For me complexity and evolution are closely related. Complexity is the
whole of all kinds of evolution, including my understanding of them. When
I think of complexity, evolution and creativity, I become very war of
claiming this has to be a "being" (noun, object, etc.) and that has to be
a "becoming" (verb, process, etc.). I had to learn the hard way by many
trials and errors that there are things such "becoming-being" entities.
In my reply to Jan Lelie I wrote, using the 7Es as context, that it seems
to me that for Goethe mastery is first a virtuos manifestation of
spareness ("quantity-limit"). Perhaps liveness ("becoming-being" is not
the first virtuous manifestation of one of the 7Es, but it is definitely a
telling of mastery.
With care and best wishes,
At de Lange <email@example.com> 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.