Linear Thinking LO22817

John Zavacki (
Thu, 7 Oct 1999 06:01:03 -0400

Replying to LO22812 --

Was heist du das dinken? What is called thinking? What is thinking? Can
we think about thinking? If a tree falls on a mailing list, does it make a

I have received (and probably given) criticism for the teaching and the
use of tools which "promote linear thinking". If I remember correctly,
the method of choice is the brain is for the recently excited cell to send
out messages to other cells which either accept or reject them. The ones
which accept them most readily bond in a way that produces a "new" idea,
or at least a new holographic representation of something other than what
was there before the new stimulus arrived.

This whole thing about linearity is somewhat absurd. At, who is very far
from what I assume the members of this thread are calling linear, uses
linear visuals to show very non linear meanings. The very medium in which
we communicate is linear. The problem is not linearity, is it? The
problem is nonrecursion. Sentences are linear, syntactically. Meanings
are not. Thinking is far from linear, it occurs in an irregularly shaped
geometry along pathways with constantly changing underpasses, overpasses,
bi and tri and quasi infinite furcations. Who is there among us who can
possibly even explain 'linearity' in thought? Language has multitudinous
recursions: the loop of the personal herneutic, the loop of the
specialist, the loop of the creative genius, the religious loop......

Every word lives on many levels, none of which are connected by linearity.
It is our perceptual limitation and the space/time continuum we have
overlain on ourselves which even gives rise to the notion of linearity.
In the not so humble opinion of this Polak, there ain't no linearity in
the human conscious or un.....

John Zavacki <>


"John Zavacki" <>

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <>