LO as paradise lost and liberation LO29760

From: Mark W. McElroy (mmcelroy@vermontel.net)
Date: 01/05/03

Replying to LO29745 --

Dear Don:

On your point that "the distinction should be made clear between the
original intent and the subsequent co-optation," I couldn't agree with you
more. There is a fundamental inconsistency between advocating the
'freedom to learn,' and the 'freedom to learn only certain things.'

Next, what's your take (or others') on the statement Jan makes: "She notes
that The Fifth Discipline contains all or most of the important Christian
values (integrity, freedom, loyality, openness, forgiveness) but lacks a
normative framework"?

I think I agree with this question. In other words, what do the five
disciplines map into, or onto? What is the theory of organizational
behavior that the five-discipline idea of practice relates to? What is
the 'thing' that the act of practicing the five disciplines has impact on,
and why is it five and not six, etc.? How do the five kinds of practices
map into or onto the thing we're trying to have impact on? What is the
vision of the underlying thing, or the view of what a healthy learning
organization looks like that logically leads to Peter's five disciples and
not some other five, six, or a hundred and six? Where is the underlying
normative (or even descriptive) model?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with Peter's theory of practice; I just
don't see a clear description of its target in the literature, much less
linkage between the five disciplines and the missing target.



Don Dwiggins wrote:

>I happened to be browsing some books on Buddhism today. A couple of them
>argue that The Buddha's original dharma doesn't constitute a religion, but
>that it was later interpreted and codified into one (but not by Gautama
>himself, who refused to commit himself to a position on many religious
>Not to identify Senge and Gautama, but I suppose it's possible that
>something similar is going on in some minds.

[... snip by your host ...]

>Can the conscientious practice of the 5Ds lead to the suppression and
>stifling of people? Certainly, the 5Ds, the Buddha dharma, or the 7Es can
>be twisted into a dogmatic form to help one to subjugate others, but the
>distinction should be made clear between the original intent and the
>subsequent co-optation.

[... snip by your host ...]

>I'd be very surprised if Senge were at all comfortable with the mantle of
>As far as we being disciples: I've occasionally found it a bit strange
>that there's not that much discussion (or chanting ;^) of the 5Ds per se
>on this list. (Not that it's bad, just a bit different from my


"Mark W. McElroy" <mmcelroy@vermontel.net>

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.