Entropy production in the spiritual world LO23278

J.C. Lelie (janlelie@wxs.nl)
Fri, 19 Nov 1999 14:46:19 +0100

Replying to LO23262 --

- Rick: i've send you part one, before my lunch, this is part two, you
may wish to combine these two, or not.

[Host's Note: Well.. I didn't see part two until after I'd distributed
part one. ..Rick]

Dear At and fellow travellers, strangely attracted to this oasis,


> Who was the author of "Holism and Evolution"? Jan Smuts. In 1948 he lost
> the general election in South Africa to a party who formulated apartheid
> as their ideology and policy. He was devastated.

So: i guessed correctly: holism had to evolve from apartheid.

Although my first name is Johan, i'm being called Jan, so i immediately
liked Jan Smuts. I've never read him though, i'm sorry. Strange.

> Firstly, Newton's original discovery, ... , were made from the paradigm
>of simplicity. Perhaps it is possible to make discoveries of spiritual
>laws also from this paradigm, but I do not believe so.

I believe simplicity or complexity has nothing to do with paradigm shifts.
This world has become a complex one from moment 0 (take or leave a few
femtoseconds) - although the simplest possible - i assume that this is
true - . We're simple beings, beings that somehow managed to evolve a
simple kind of self-awareness and in making sense of this world we develop
theories, meanings that are as simple as possible. - the complexity is
created in part because these theories are also used to create double
binds to your native group. Learning seems to be a two sided sword: it can
be used against you, you as an individual, in order to protect the
survival of the species. This places martyrs and heretics in a new light

Every simplification earns you a Noble Prize. I do not have to remind you
that one of the formula for relativity theory (is relativity also banned
in Kansas?) - Lorentz Contraction - had already been developed by the
greatest Dutch Theoretical Physicist, Lorentz. He came up with a rather
complex explanation for the observed (Michelson and Moreley) fact (!) that
light travels at a constant speed irrespective of the motion of an
observer. I cannot imagine how strange this result must have been.

The same was true for the spark that Max Planck brought by suggesting that
the uv-catastrophe wouldn't have happened when (not if, when, i think)
light was not continuos, like waves, but could be described as discrete -
quantified. Again, in my view, a simplification, but leading to the
complex mathematics of quantumchromodynamics.

I do not want to imply that i consider Einstein, Smuts or other people
were no geniuses, they were. Even more so, they are my heros because they
opposed their tribal leaders, shifted paradigms. This requires guts.

> This brings me to my second note. Pasteur knew from several personal
> experiences that novel discoveries are made only by minds sufficiently
> prepared for it. There is no hope for the unprepared mind to make a
> breakthrough discovery by chance.

Hmmmm. It is the other way around: we're prepared not to make a
breakthrough discovery by chance, pre-prepared so to say. The idea of
telling white and not so white lies (yep, foma) to children is to learn
them to conform to the group. For food, shelter and a mate we're asked not
to think. Not too high a price, regarding the circumstances then. But in
order to prevent people for thinking for themselves, even unknowingly,
they must be trained not to spot the faults, NOT TO dis-cover a cover up!

A funny story springs to mind. Here in Holland it soon will be
"Sinterklaas" again. This legendary saint comes to Holland, patron of the
sailors, in a ship from Spain, to celebrate his birthday, rides the roofs
on a white horse, has black servants (sorry) and gives presents to the
children. Now when our children were small, i hesitated to play along. It
didn't seem fair to lie to my children about this uncle with an artificial
beard. I sincerely think that honesty is an important virtue. My wife
found a solution: play along, let the children have fun, and later tell
the children that you told them a lie to show them that an adult, even
your father, not always tells the truth. (By the way: the fact that
"Sinterklaas" is still celebrated all over the world - by the Dutch on
December 5th and by some Americans on December 25th ("Santa Claus"),
proves my point that these ideas were learned to keep the group together,
to create a sense of belonging).

<snip, excuse me Ilse-Marie>

> In other
> words, when a new order does emerge from chaos as a result of "entropy
> production", are we willing to accept any emergence as a new order?

Not any emergence, only The Emergence. And i will accept it and nobody

> I think that one of the features of the paradigm of complexity is that
> some empirical discoveries can only be made by learning organisations and
> not learning individuals. I have stressed the one-to-many-mapping of
> "entropy production" not for deaf ears.

Who ever has ears, listen!

There is a b in both. The paradigm shift has to do with both individual
AND organisational learning. We'll have to organise learning for learning
to become human beings, to develop ourselves as being responsible, persons
who are interdependent social creatures (not independent, for a sheep that
has gone astray will be eaten by wolves (beh beh beh) and not dependent,
for those sheep will only say "beeeeeeh").

> We have to be sensitive to what already long ago Hegel called "dassein"
> (individual) and "mitsein" (organisation). If we think that we can make
> as "dassein" all empirical demonstrations, we are simply shutting our eyes
> for "mitsein" demonstrations.

I think i agree, perhaps.

> As Smuts put it, the evolution of a whole is determined
> by its field which consists of other wholes. The evolution of the
> personality of each person depends on interaction with many other persons.

Now this i'll subscribe to, wholeheartedly.

> So, be not surprised that we have to step down from the claim that an
> individual can learn and discover anything. When I do take up your
> challenge, this issue of the individual

You can surprise me.

With kind regards - met vriendelijke groeten,

Jan Lelie


Drs J.C. Lelie CPIM (Jan) LOGISENS - Sparring Partner in Logistical Development Mind@Work est. 1998 - Group Resolution Process Support Tel.: (+ 31) (0)70 3243475 or car: (+ 31)(0)65 4685114 http://www.mindatwork.nl and/or taoSystems: + 31 (0)30 6377973 - Mindatwork@taoNet.nl

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>