Replying to LO28237 --
Dear Organlearners,
Fred Nickols <nickols@att.net> writes:
>At then remarks:
>
>>When I read it the first time in LO28186, I thought you
>>had an ax to grind against complexity ;-) That I do not
>>mind because I myself have found that complexity is most
>>intimidating. Should we not be aware of this intimidation
>>and find ways to overcome it, we will become victims
>>rather than masters of complexity.
>
>I'm curious, At. I don't find complexity at all intimidating;
>instead, for reasons I am about to spell out, I find it
>demanding and sometimes tedious but not intimidating.
>Could you say some more about why you see complexity
>as intimidating?
Greetings dear Fred,
At first I wanted to change the subject to "Intimidation by Complexity".
But then I decided against it because, as Ray pointed out, complexity and
mastery are intertwined forever.
I myself, first as a child and later as a student, experienced this
intimidation of complexity as a feeling of powerlessness (flat wheels and
empty fuel tank ;-) to do or to explore some complex task. It dit not
happen on all occassions, but it happen enough to make me dread that
feeling of having no mental power. In those cases I used as an excuse or
escape (call it what you like) wasting my time or shutting my mind (again
call it what you like) by doing or exploring some other task creatively.
So it dawned slowly on me that whenever I began to have that dreadful
feeling of what the complexity in a task does to me, I had to focus my
mind on creating something worthwhile for me in that very task rather than
pursuing another creative venture.
Then I became a teacher and later on a lecturer. Pupils and students
sometimes do not hand in tasks and sometimes hand in tasks so poorly
executed that it cannot be considered worthwhile. I usually asked them to
give reasons for these "aborted" tasks. In some cases I got mad because
the reasons were clearly fabricated. But one of the earliest lessons which
I learned from my mentor, was never to show my annoyance to a learner.
Annoyance prohibits learning in both the teacher and the learner as long
as that annoyance exists. Today I know that this annoyance is merely a
symptom of the judgement which triggered it. Judgement prevents learning.
I began to observe that tasks in certain sections of chemistry, physics
and mathematics led to far more "abortions" than in other sections. I was
also able to recognise self the complexity in those sections, even though
few of them ever intimidated me personally. I began to experiment by
giving tasks of varying complexity in those complex sections. Even simple
tasks in a complex section aborted easily. I also tried to teach learners
how to prevent such an abortion by doing something creative in that task,
but I had not so much success as I expected.
By carefully questioning a learner why a task aborted, trying to avoid
laying words into his/her mouth so that the learner actually tell his/her
own tacit knowing, I began to search for patterns which would explain
rather than reasons which would justify why a task aborted. I did not find
any patterns, but merely a gaping black hole which the learners would call
impotence, lameness, frigidity or something synonymous. (This happened in
our mother tongue Afrikaans which has, perhaps, more descriptive words.
One of them is "slap-gat houding". Translated into English, and please
forgive my words, it would mean literally a "slack-flabby arse attitude".)
For several years I knew the problem exactly, but I could not find any
solution to it, other than my suggestion to become creatively involved
with the task. This did not work well because I was not accompanying the
learner to his/her home where the task had to be completed. I began to
give extra "affirmative" classes where I in person could suggest to each
learner by way of questioning him/her what to do next. This worked well
since I did not make these extra classes compulsory. I merely gave them to
learners feeling themselves impotent in getting the task finished.
Then in the middle eighties I discovered the Digestor. Within the wink of
an eye, compared to the previous forty years of my life, I knew exactly
what was happening. It took me less than forty days to work out the
crucial details of the Digestor. You may find a report of this work at:
The Digestor LO21272
< http://www.learning-org.com/99.04/0167.html >
The Digestor basically explains the interaction between a system SY and
its surroundings SU in temrs of quantities m and qualities M, deliberately
avoiding high entropy production and thus the development of any
bifurcation at the ridge of chaos. It is a kind of predator-prey model
telling which of SY or SU will become the predator. It uses only two
criterions, the "free energy" of the system SY as well as the otherness
("quality-variety") of both SY and SU compared to each other. The model is
based on the physical phenomenon (called Ostwald digestion) that the
crystel seed (kernal) with the least imperfections will in the long run
digest all other crystals with more crystal imperfections, even though
they may initially grow much faster. Fellow learner Leo Minning with his
unique experiences in crystalisation processes in geology as well as De
Bono's work on creativity (which excells in otherness) was about the only
one to respond with understanding to the Digestor. Winfried Dressler, on
the other hand, had a most difficult task to uunderstand how a crystal
"could be fair" to other crystals while predating upon them.
Every task requires a certain amount of "free energy" to become completed.
Think of driving your car from one city to another city far away enough so
that you have to refuel its tank. The engine uses the chemical free energy
in the fuel to keep its pistons pumping and thus its cranc shaft turning.
Now would you make the journey if you had no money to buy additional fuel.
I do not think so, except if you are willing to borrow money or interrupt
the journey to work as a waiter or washer along the route.
But would you make the journey if somebody out of the kindness of his/her
heart give you the money to buy the extra fuel needed? So what is this
"somebody with kindness of heart"? It is the ability to create something
"new and fit" with respect to the journey that it will last for the entire
journey, becoming more rather than less during the journey. With the "new"
I mean novel and with the "fit" I mean of outstanding quality. How I wish
that Dr Demming was still alive and that I could explain to him, given
enough time, what incredible sense all his oberservations on quality made
to the well being of an organisation.
Fred, you write:
>So, when I think of complexity, I think of intricate and
>complicated. I also think of a morass of details and
>difficult to detect elements, connections and relationships.
> As an analyst and diagnostician (which is what I am),
>making your way through that morass can be devilishly
>difficult; it is also extremely time-consuming and, on
>occasion, tedious to the point of being absolutely boring.
I agree with you. But I have to add that for many, including myself in my
younger years, it made us mentally impotent by its overwhelming
(intimidating) effect.
>I think I do what many people do when confronted
>with complexity: I simplify matters. I "go up a notch"
>or I eliminate irrelevancies, or I "cut to the chase" or
>I "drive straight to the heart of the matter." I do not try
>to deal with anything in all its complexity; it's too much,
>it's overwhelming.
I also did it much so that my mental free energy could last for a less
complex rask. I still do it, not to make up for my lack in mental free
energy, but because analysis and synthesis form a complementary pair.
But I wish I could cause you fellow learners enough that there are certain
domains where I cannot do it without expecting failure sooner or later.
Some of those domains have to do with living things like plants and
animals. Furthermore, its not the easy going plants or animals which
merely requires food and water, but the exotic ones which requires all the
wits of their owner to keep them alive. It is not the plants which can be
bought from the local nursery or animals from the local pet shop, but
things you have to search for far and wide, sometimes many years. It is
living organisms which few others can keep alive and even less could put
into propagation.
One wrong step and they are all dead. Two months ago I imported several
rare catfish species from South Anerica. I cannot describe the stress to
you which I had. Did I analise all the things I had to and did I
synthesised all these things into a correct understanding? There is nobody
in South Africa would I could call for advice. I was on my own and the
success of keeping them alive (and happy!) depended on me and me alone. If
I were not aware of the complexity of their requirements, they would have
been all dead by now. The first three weeks I lost some of them because of
shipment injuries as well as a new environment with its own unique
diseases. But I can proudly say that the last month I lost none.
It has been the same for me with succulent plants the last thirty years. I
have one specimen (Adenium oleifolium) which I am keeping alive for the
past twenty two years which others seldom could keep alive for more than
five years. It comes from the Great Kalahari where it can become a
thousand years or older. Its pollination is very intricate, but analising
the structure of its flower, observing what insects pollinate it and
experimenting how to do it self, enabled me to produce hundreds of seeds
over the years. By the way, I pollinate its flowers with a hair coming
from the tail of an orynx to simulate best the probuscus of the moths
which pollinate it.
Whenever a rare plant or animal in my care dies, I feel as if some part of
me self dies. I mean with care not only to keep it alive, but to ensure
that it makes offspring and that offspring leads to later generations. It
the far majority of cases it happened because I did not think complex
enough. Thus complexity is not for me a theory as many now sees it, nor a
state of being complex as it used to be interpreted, but a way of living
which the mind has to trace to keep the living alife.
So if anyone really wants me to define mastery, it is to keep several
kinds of rare plants or animals alive such they can breed for generations
to come, feeling at home at my home as in the place where their original
stock came from.
When a learner stops learning because of my teaching, I feel even worse
than when a rare plant or animal dies as a result of my stupidity. Some
part of my spirit really dies, leaving me with less to go on with. Here I
am not able to define what mastery is, even when someone wants me to
define mastery in teaching. I can only tell what learning is. And that is
for me far more difficult than telling how to keep a rare palnt or animal
alive and producing offspring.
Fred, as for your comment
>Well, your remarks above drove me to my dictionaries
>again (Websters 1861, 1868, 1910 and 1989).
I wish I had the great OED here in my office or at home, perhaps on CD. I
cannot run every time I want to make sure exactly when a word came into
usage as well as its frequency because only the great OED gives that
documentation. That is why the OED volumes stand a rack full as wide as my
two arms can stretch. And once I open the OED, I get caught for many hours
rather than finding out what I wanted to know and get back to my office
;-)
With tongue in the cheek:- Next time, when I suspect that you will get
involved with a topic in which I had to use dictionaries, I will consult
the very great OED. You might then feel impotent, experiencing what the
complexity of the OED does to you ;-)
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.