Replying to LO28197 --
At de Lange writes
>"Sensaru" < Sensaru@aol.com > writes:
>>information is neutral until put in a defined context
>>and then it takes on a particular meaning. It is this
>>meaning that is acted upon and refined further.
>Greetings dear "Sensaru",
>Your use of the word "neutral" made me wonder deeply. This
>word comes from the Latin "neuter"=sexless. Neutral usually
>means belonging to neither of two sides and not interfering with
>them. For example, in chemistry we speak of acidic, basic and
>neutral solutions. In electricity we speak of positively or negatively
>charged bodies or neutral bodies.
>Assuming that you have indeed articulated your tacit knowing
>with exactly the word "neutral", it means that two "mental sides"
>are involved. What would they be?
Greetings dear At and Sensaru,
The two sides I see in the text you quoted from Sensaru are 'information'
and a 'defined context'. Those two combined creates 'a particular
'meaning'. This can all be done in one's head (or, in other words, there
is no need for two "mental sides", one mental 'side' can do the trick).
Questions that arise within me are:
- How does one distinguish between the three categories: information,
context, and meaning?
- Is the defined context also neutral?
[My guess would be; yes]
- Is meaning neutral?
[My guess would be:no, not always something is either positive,
negative, neutral, or still pending a question mark]
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.