Replying to LO28419 --
Greetings Dear Jan,
> Making progress seems to be at hand. The issue seems to pivot around
> self-management, self-empowerment, self-control, self-responsibility,
> self-learning, self-subordination, self-cooperation. I thought the
> core-issue of the paradigm-shift was splitting two concepts, but it might
> be that it is the fusion of two.
... and I tend to agree. I agree that 'self' has a central role in the
paradigm shift that awaits us ... Self-containment ... Self-acceptance ...
the list can become infinite (due to the high rate in Names-production).
If I were to choose, I'd put Self-compassion on target.
The only thing that confuses me, is that after writing what I cited above,
you open the next paragraph with the word 'We'. see ...
> We need others to learn about ourselves. We learn through experimentation:
> we ake some of our behaviour and project it on others and see what
> happens. Or we take in something we etc etc ... [snip]
For myself :-) I think that the paradigm Few Decide for Many (FDM :-))))
has been worn-out. In the language used by 'Few', the word 'I' appeared
frequently (densly distributed). Does it imply that we should change 'I'
to 'We'? I seriously doubt it - 'We' is amorphic to my ear. I'd rather try
and re-define 'I'. ('i' has been defined already by us - and when I come
to think of it, the Cartesian presentation of complex numbers can provide
a good starting-point in this paradigm shift).
Hope it helped,
Judy Tal <firstname.lastname@example.org>
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.