Although I initiated the issue of 'Fast vs slow learning' my activity in
the following discussion is minor. Perhaps I am a slow contributor. Is my
reaction speed already hampered by the increasing 'oldhood'??
So much things were mentioned by Winfried and At, that their words were
caught by the feed back loops of my mind as if they spin in a whirlpool,
maelstrom or tornado. And loops within loops, worse than some of those
caroussels on an open air fair. It makes me at the moment a bit dizzy.
Looking at the same time to the world inside my head and the world outside
my head makes me giddy or squint. I hope that the vortices in my brains
will result in something constructive, that my thoughts will escape from
this dazzling world of wheels within wheels. But knowing that even At is
meandering on the highway gives me some hope for the future. But there is
also the joy of the open air fair in my mind. Please forgive me, but I
like to look in near silence to collect the fruits of this oligocarpic
tree (the number of fruits is unknown to me).
However, I will say some words on one of the wheels. It is the question of
Terry Priebe (LO22734).
>>"So maybe I can try to compose the following historical steps
>>(starting with Eve and Adam):
>>1. collection of data through RL
>>2. this gives rise (inside Eve and/or Adam) to knowledge by means of AL
>>3. this knowledge escapes from Eve and/or Adam as information
>>4. this information together with old and newly collected data is
>>collected by the next generation through RL
>>5. return to 2), but change Eve and/or Adam by 'next generation'.
>(RL referred to Rote Learning and AL to Authentic Learning).
>Leo, would you please expand on point #3, where you say knowledge escapes
>from the first generation as information. Do you mean through the
>observation of 'knowledge into action' by others (potentially he second
>generation)? Or something else? This seems to be a most crucial stage of
Thank you Terry for putting your finger on step 3. I must confess that
during the writing of my contribution, my words were quicker than the
thoughts of you and me.
In modern words, step 3 describes 'knowledge transfer', a flow of
information from A (first generation) to B (next generation), or from
System to Surroundings.
The force behind this flow could be:
a) pushing from A, which means output in the form of books, papers, words,
etc. If done by purpose, we may define this output as 'teaching';
b) pulling by B, which means input by reading, listening, data collection;
sometimes called 'learning';
c) a combination of a) and b)
But as you may realise, in all the five steps a movement from one place to
the other is involved. For all these steps we may think of pushing,
pulling or a combination of both. Panta Rhei in all steps. And if you
think further, there must be
1) something to flow
2) a willingness and ableness to release
3) a willingness and ableness to receive
4) a balancing mechanism to avoid overflow
And some other conditions as well. A complete list of conditions is find
in the 7 essentialities of At de Lange.
I realise that my answer is very limited. 'Fruitful' flowing is such a
complicated, but also such crucial issue, that I am glad that Terry
pointed to this matter. I hope that with my limited answer, the coplex
world behind this step 3 comes in sight.
dr. Leo D. Minnigh
Library Technical University Delft
PO BOX 98, 2600 MG Delft, The Netherlands
Tel.: 31 15 2782226
Let your thoughts meander towards a sea of ideas.
Leo Minnigh <email@example.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <firstname.lastname@example.org> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>