Dear LO,
I have, during the last seven years been co-developing with some 'natural
systems' an aspect in a theory of evolution termed or 'coined' a 'Bloom'.
Bloom is an aspect of an angled system of quantum-qualia theory (1st and
3rd 'P' Order functions) but it is not yet so well and sufficiently
advanced toward unification that I am in a position to present it to, say,
the Oxford (University) Internet Institute, nor my better qualified
friends at the London School of Economics... (-those who might be
interested in such an abstract paper;-). Even so, and mainly because of so
I sense that I can report that 'birdsong' (a "birdsung")
wasisshallalwaysbe an 'instatiation' of 'suchness'. That it happened
itself at dawnbreak around New Year is not- I séance ;-) entirely
co-incidental and is perhaps emergent -- phenomenologically, -- if one
will presume a first person interiority to a Robin ;-)
Leap
Now, a while back, my dear friend Hanching, in Taipei and I exchanged
letters. If we were ever to publish our exchanges it would be most
'birdlike', I am sure. Then it was a movement if you will, between the ill
disciplined mind of a western artist type (me) and the more Confucian and
Denning like disciplined mind of a Far Eastern (relatively;-) artist
(Hanching). The result was summarised into, 'Three Fat Pigeons' at this
end and 'Trams or Helicopters' at t'other end. Thank you, Hanching.
ThisThat now sits in Vol. 3 pages 89-94. The text still 'sparkles' for me
like so many lights, those lights in Taipei harbour, and the exhibition
you're attending;-) Today I pick up the thread again and we will wait with
a little more Confucian wisdom and patience to see if anyone attending the
harbour walls here will pick up this 'rope' - so I may, in part if not
parcel come ashore to seek relief here in the city called LO.
Carlos Mendez, a fellow Denizen;-) wrote a while back and in another
place, "Dr. Deming, in system's theory, tells us that the components of a
system, left alone, will tend to sub-optimize themselves and that a system
must be managed in order to optimise it. This implies establishing an aim
and co-ordinating the components to contribute to that aim. Managing also
involves expanding the boundaries of a system in order to optimise it. F.
Von Hayek makes a distinction between this type of order, that is human
made systems (like the one Dr. Deming talks about) and those that are not
made by anyone in particular, but are orders that result of specific norms
that the components follow in their individual action. In fact, he
proposes whole new words to distinguish human made systems from
spontaneous orders. The first he calls them "Taxis" (organisations,
systems, conscious orders). This includes government institutions, as
well as private organisations and any other human made organisation. The
second, he calls them "Cosmos" (organisms, unconscious orders).
The "taxis" have an aim, but "cosmos" don't, they just come to exist. It
is the norms through which the taxis interact that generate a particular
cosmos. Change the norms of interaction, and you obtain a different
cosmos. Hayek calls these norms "abstract norms" which have the
characteristic of guiding action, but do not favour or disfavour the
achievement of any individual aim. The interesting thing of all this
comes when Hayek tells us that a particular set of "abstract norms" will
generate a certain use of the resources in that cosmos.
Hayek considers the distinction between cosmos and taxis as a very
important one, because in his view, very complex "cosmos", like USA
economy or any economy, can only be generated by establishing this
"abstract norms" of interaction between the "taxis" (aimed systems)."
All, any of the LO who promote 'mix and matches' between kinds of 'systems
theory' and kinds of 'complexity theory'..., ("Hello Mr Brown, and how is
your brain today?" ;-) may I ask what seems to this mind a real life
question. How does one know in advance, in both your practice and theory
that the organization one is promoting one's particular brand of medicines
to is proportioned to reflect the unique form that each patient ;-)
organization manifests around the time of intervention, since it seems to
me, abstracting from the above, that it would be very possibly 'toxic' to
the health of the entity (entities) concerned if one had not set out ;-)
in advance this special calibration?
Written in 1987'ish. "Models are not just social-economic systems which
can be taken off the shelf, they are expressions of our consciousness, and
of our inner growth (learningfulness).They invite us to evolve ("evolve"
and "entropy-production" are synonyms, is that right At?) along with them.
Without our own growth, they are empty shells that will transform nothing.
We are not simply ;-) changing our social and economic systems, or our
world. We are changing ourselves."
Kierkegaard wrote that, "-when one has fully entered the realm of love,
the world, no matter ;-) how imperfect becomes rich and beautiful, for it
consists solely of opportunities for love."
That is a kind of bloom? This is a kind of bloom? We are a kind of bloom?
Love, and a very Happy New Year.
Andrew Campbell
Angular Meadow
Oxford
--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.