Daer Organlearners,
Leo Minnigh <L.D.Minnigh@library.tudelft.nl> writes:
>Let me first give my comments on these 5 pilars
>(sustainers).
Thank you for your comments. Although I had to snip out most of them,
I value them very much.
>Dialogue
>For a dialogue one needs another person. Although I have
>regularly dialogues with myself (a dialogue within the mind),
>I wonder if everybody realises the fact that such dialogue
>could be put into practice (it is part of the personal mastering).
I am very happy that you have brought this very important facet under our
notice. My vaourite time for doing this, is whille I am driving! I have
dome close to a million kilometers without having any accident. Last week
when I had to rush back home because of my wife's illness, my mind was
doing something different -- designing to get at home as soon as possible
through city trafic. This lead to ,y first accident, fortunately not too
serious.
I hope that one day we will have a dialog on the thread "Inner Dialog"
because it is very important to self-learning (personal mastery) as you
have noted.
>I am sure that At is an advocate of the first way of dialogue,
>but that should be made clear.
I advocate all dialog (internal and external) because in the absence of an
explicate theory and pratice of creativity, it is one of the best innate
arts of creativity.
>Art-expressing
>I like to cite two passages from a very interesting book:
>"Fragile objects - - soft matter, hard science and the thrill
>of discovery" (1996) by the French Nobel laureate
>Pierre-Gilles de Gennes.
>"I was also privilaged to have had the chance to spend some
> time as a summer intern in a marine laboratory. Every student
>should dabble in biology, even if he has no intention of
>ultimately becoming a biologist. To begin with, this science
>has virtue of offering a panoramic view of the living world and
>of its stunning diversity; a firsthand observation of nature's
>richness of imagination.
(snip)
Well said. Nature is not only an object for scientific thinking, but also
for artistic thinking. I will never forget when I took my wife the firs
time to a place in the Namib desert called Namgorab. As we left the Gorab
pass, a panorama of beauty unfolded itself. My wife yelled: "At, stop".
She sat there for about half an hour in the blasing sun, gasing in wonder
at the beauty which no picture or composition can ever describe.
>And knowing At's thinking, we might expect that these
>sustainers in some way are valid for the non-human world
>as well.
Yes, it is definitely the case. I first try to make sure that it is
essential for humans of all ages. Young toddlers and senior people play a
great role in doing this. Unfortunately, the pressures of modern society
cause the immergence of some and sometimes all of them in people subjected
to those pressures. Furthermore, one of the reasons for my last tour to
the central countries of Southern Africa, was to observe how much poverty
and ignorance do the same thing.
>And this difference of inside-outside is probably the main
>theme between creative thinking and systems thinking.
Leo, your sensitivity surprises me. One day we should also have a dialogue
on this "Inside-Outside" complementary dual and how it influences our
creative and systems thinking.
>> Is it the system thinking which caused the delight,
>>or the elementary sustainer used in the comparison?
>At, I noticed the creative potential of the answers I received
>from my examples. I am however not sure about the answer
>on your last question.
I think that it is both. Each of the five sustainers (in your case it was
only one, namely problem-solving) act as substrate to which the Systems
Thinking (ST) could be connected. Once a connection is made between a
sustainer and ST, the emergence in understanding what ST is about, causes
the delight.
Here is an example using ST and Exemplar-Studying (ES). It is a very good
example for me because of my world of experience, but a bad one for all
other fllow learners on the lo list.
ES: Planting a couple of seeds, watering the container, waiting for their
germination, trying to keep the seedlings alive.
ST. Planting seeds of hundreds of different species from several different
families, each requiring its own conditions. Ensuring a reliable supply of
seeds for each species. Ensuring that the germinated seedlings gow up to
mature plants of quaility and marketing them all over the world.
>So concluding, what is the relation between CT and ST?
>Are they the two antagonists (strongly connected, equally
>strong, on the same level), or is one a special case of the
>other (like the branch of a tree)? I think it is the latter, but
>what is the tree, and what is the branch? In my mind CT
>is the tree and ST the branch, although I am not sure of this.
>If this is so, ST is a sustainer of CT and should be added to
>the list of At.
In my systems thinking "entropy production" is the roots, creativity the
trunk and Creative Thinking one of the main branches. ST is one of the
branches growing out of CT.
No, I do not think that ST is a ELEMENTARY (innate) sustainer. I have
hunted hard for signs of it as such, but could not find it. On the other
hand. ST can be a powerful FUNADAMENTAL (explicate) sustainer of
creativity. I think this is what your tacit know;edge is telling you.
However, it can aso be a destroyer of creativity because of its explicate
formalism.
>I think that this is a fundamental question and hope that
>others will give their insights.
I agree.
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 <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>