|
That is a typical mistake made by people who don't understand
the holism of competent performance. Competent performance is
holistic AND focused. No one would ever accuse a concert
pianist of being fuzzy or letting his mind wander but it is not linear thinking
but the same type of focus on the whole physical instrument while moving the
mind and hands through time. You do the same thing when you drive a
car or an airplane. Your eyes stay ahead of the body and your
consciousness is involved in the act of prediction but your awareness is
total. No one muses if that means to lose
focus. Soldiers have that same heightened awareness when they
move into a dangerous room or place where the enemy is known to be but is
hidden. Reflection in action is the ability to respond to situations
as they arise without losing your place or dropping your total
attention. It is not like a keyhole but like every cell of
your body is a perceiving mechanism for your awareness. That is what
we mean when we say that aesthetics or the organization of perception into
formal patterning, is the root of all other mental structures.
Studies in stress and attention several years ago found that
the two highest attention activities and the greatest mental stress where
airline pilots and the Berlin Philharmonic musicians playing under Herbert von
Karajan. They do what Donald Schoen termed "reflection in action" or a
non-linear holistic attention while moving in time/space. Is it
possible Arthur that we are just having a problem with words rather than actual
activities?
Ray Evans Harrell
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 9:42
PM
Subject: RE: [Futurework] Re:
[Futurework] Re: [Futurework] Re: [Futurework] [Futurework] FW: "Spiritualität
macht fr ei" ?
I want the pilot to be an
extension of the plane. Not to be musing on the plane, the sky, the
universe, being, etc. Especially when the red alert lights start
flashing.
arthr
Arthur,
If I thought the pilot of the plane I am in had to think
about every move s/he makes as, e.g., when learning to drive, I would never
get on that plane. I much prefer to believe that pilots fly planes the way
people drive cars once driving is so well learned that they can 'go beyond'
the linear thinking involved in the learning process.
I guess Ray's reference to 'knowing' applies here; to
'know' something is to be proficient enough that one does not have to think
about how one is doing it.
As for dentists, doctors, mechanics, plumbers, etc., I
want my health professionals and other crafts people to understand
their craft well enough that they can sense things that go beyond the facts
that can be learned. When I have a doctor that looks at me or my child and
'senses' something that needs to be looked into, I know I have a good
doctor.
Selma
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 9:02
PM
Subject: RE: [Futurework] Re:
[Futurework] Re: [Futurework] Re: [Futurework] [Futurework] FW:
"Spiritualität macht fr ei" ?
I like my airline pilots,
dentists, surgeons, fire fighters, etc. to be linear thinkers.
Compulsive linear thinkers. A job to be done.
arthur
One version of non-Linear thought is four directional
thought which places an observation in four positions or universes or it
could be as many as you wish around the problem being
examined. You could talk again to those old people you spoke
to when you wrote that government report. Or you could read
Warfield's discussion of linearity in relation to systems in his
"Structure Based Science of Complexity" tome.
Linearity seems more an issue of people who are dealing with the issues
of "practical IQ" where problems with more than one thread have to be
solved. Something as simple as the use of Vitamins for
human health have proven to be difficult to double blind test because
the factors are variable and the subjects are systems that are similar
but with enough variables to skew the result. Biochemically
individual. That is the root of all of those four directional
symbols you see out West. There are processes that are meant
to look at a problem from thousands of different viewpoints by using
people in a Council situation over a period of time. That is
what those big wheels on the mountains are about, on one level.
REH
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003
6:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Re:
[Futurework] Re: [Futurework] [Futurework] FW: "Spiritualität macht fr
ei" ?
Was ist das, "linear
thinking"?
I posted something on the list
the other day that suggested that the brain functions in a variety of
ways simultaneously or in rapid succession. Obviously, since no
one commented on it, it was not "right think" in terms of the present
discussion. So, tail between legs, I decided to find out a
little more about linear thinking. One website told me little
about it, but did so in trying to say something about non-linear
thinking - i.e. the following:
The origin and genesis of
Non Linear Thinking lies very obviously within "Lateral Thinking" -
a term coined by Dr. Edward De Bono who called it amongst other
definitions an "insight tool". Today "Lateral Thinking " is a part
of our vocabulary in the Oxford Dictionary and is responsible for
giving tangibility to the thinking process.
To Dr. De Bono -
Dr. De Bono professed the
need for Lateral Thinking in the West in the 1960's for enhancing
the productivity within progressive economies. As a concept , at the
time it was considered closer to Eastern thinking.
Though globally it has been
a buzzword since the 1980's- the creative elite seem to have
hijacked "lateral thinking" and again sought to "classify" it (
totally against its intent ). Many assumed that Lateral thinking was
best suited to right brained thinkers and those who were considered
to be 'creative'. The normal and common person seemed to have been
excluded.
Its usage would be
instinctively easier for most ASIANS because the Eastern thought
process and attitude is inherently "holistic" and able to include
lateral issues.
Having read that, I'm
still not sure of what people are talking about. Non-Linear
thinkers are supposed to be creative, but as Selma suggests, they can
only be that, and perhaps be recognized for being that, after
they have developed a superlative level of skill via a process of
prolonged linear thinking. I don't think that is the way it
works. When I was in my teens, I spent a year at a very good art
school. I was taught by teachers that were recognized or became
that, and are now household words in CanArt. Some of the kids
there, including my girl friend Heather, were innately gifted.
They simply were creative before they were technically skilled.
Technical skill made them better able to convey their creativity, but
they were obviously able to convey it anyhow. My girlfriend was
recognized nationally for her poetry, based on a summer as a
candy-stripper in an asylum for the insane when she was sixteen
("Asylum Poems").
I was creative too,
but I was always fighting with my left brain because of the moral
precepts my father and grandfather had put there. "Learn a
profession! Get a good job! Raise a family! Go to
church! Be a pillar of your community!" No wonder I spent
so much time getting drunk!
I was in the
unfortunate position of having a two sided brain. I could have
been an artist (though not as good as Heather) but I could also have
been an accountant or lawyer, so I choked-off the right side of my
brain and became a mediocre economist. What remained of my
creativity was used in writing government documents and providing spin
to them. Alas, alas, what a waste! Or maybe
not???
Ed
----- Original Message
-----
Sent: Friday,
September 19, 2003 2:57 PM
Subject:
[Futurework] Re: [Futurework] Re: [Futurework] [Futurework] FW:
"Spiritualität macht fr ei" ?
I have a question that may or may not
have some kind of answer but it seems to me very closely related to
this discussion. I think it is a question that Ray could probably
answer better than anyone else because he is so closely involved in
the arts.
It is my impression, both from my own
experience and from what I have heard and read about people in the
arts and in other fields such as sports and science, etc. that
it is true of the very finest artists that when s/he has
been thoroughly trained in the technicalities of her/his art, the
next step is to master those technicalities so thoroughly that they
no longer are the focus of that artists performance because then and
only then the focus can become the artistic components of the art,
i.e., the musicality, the dramatic impact perhaps in the theatre
which goes beyond the words, the passion in a painting, the sense in
a basketbal game of being part of the team to the point that the
team acts a unit, etc.
So the learning of the technical
elements of, e.g., an instrument, or the voice, would you say,
involve linear thinking and, of course, if one cannot do this one
cannot do anything else; the real art is then
something that is not possible within the realm of the linear
because it demands much more, althoug, again, it is not possible to
produce that much more unless the linear has first taken
place.
Selma
As these thoughts have come to me it
occurs now to me that this can be extended to-who knows how many
areas of life.
S.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 1:03
PM
Subject: [Futurework] Re: [Futurework]
[Futurework] FW: "Spiritualität macht fr ei" ?
> In voice we call that focus
and Martin Buber called it speaking the Primary
>
Word. However that doesn't address the complexity of
multiple skills or
> the way that the consciousness
prevaricates to the rest of the brain ala
> Freud and
others. Mechanics does not equal consciousness.
>
> REH
>
>
> ----- Original Message
-----
> From: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
To: "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:52
AM
> Subject: Re: [Futurework] [Futurework] FW: "Spiritualität
macht fr ei" ?
>
>
> > Pete,
>
>
> > Your description below is correct -- in as far as
it goes.
> >
> > However, the brain becomes very
linear indeed when all the processed
> > material from the
rear cortex (whether from separated halves or not) is
> >
gathered by the frontal lobes and ordered in strictly linear
fashion
> > preparatory for action. Were this not so we
could not carry out any
> skilful
> > physical action
in the right sequence, nor derive logical conclusions, nor
>
> make plans for the future, nor be able to utter a sentence with
a
> > meaningful syntax no matter how large our
vocabulary.
> >
> > Benjamin Libet, acknowledged
to be the world's leading researcher into the
> >
consciousness of perception and action, has shown very clearly
that
> > consciousness arises only at the point when the
action potentials of the
> > motor neurons are at their
maxima and are then released in strict sequence
> > as
action is initiated or words spoken.
> >
> > All
the preparatory work for the sensation of consciousness is
indeed
> > carried out in parallel as you say, but the full
realisation of
> > consciousness is strictly a linear
affair.
> >
> > Keith Hudson
> >
>
> At 17:23 18/09/2003 -0700, you wrote:
> >
>Actually, pyschology demonstrates that this notion is an
illusion.
> > >I'll just sketch a couple of examples,
which are probably familiar.
> > >The truth is revealed
by instances of physical brain function
> > >disruption,
which can be generated by strokes, or by radical
> >
>surgical intervention. The surgical instance is most
impressive,
> > >as in this case, the majority of the
brain is fully severed into
> > >left and right halves
to stop massive epileptic attacks. As a
> > >result, the
patients become, at the intellectual, interpretive
> >
>level, two distinct entities which do not share any
information,
> > >despite the fact that because the
lower brain is still (must
> > >still be, for the
patient to survive) intact, the patient percieves
> >
>themselves as a single unitary entity. Probing the behaviour
of
> > >such patients teases out the way the brain
conspires to fool itself
> > >that it is behaving
rationally. As you are probably familiar,
> > >when the
patient's hands are placed in two boxes so they cannot
> >
>be seen, which contain two different objects, then the
patient
> > >is interrogated as to the content of the
box which he can feel,
> > >if the answer is to be
spoken, the response will relate to one
> > >box, but if
it is to be written down, it will relate to the
> >
>other box, as speech is on one side of the brain, and
writing
> > >is on the other, and which ever side is to
provide the answer
> > >conveys only that which it knows
(the sense data from each
> > >hand goes only to one
side of the brain). But if you try to
> > >point out the
discrepancies in the reponses, the patient is
> > >found
to have a surprising resistance to acknowledging the
> >
>disparity. It can be demonstrated that each side of the
brain
> > >uses every trick it can come up with to sneak
access to the
> > >knowledge of the other half,
meanwhile denying that there is
> > >any separation,
flatly refusing to believe that two autonomous
> >
>"thought engines" are operating, even when the evidence
is
> > >indisputable. Why should this be? Because in
reality this sort
> > >of deceit is going on all the
time in normal healthy individuals,
> > >it is just that
with considerable communication between the
> >
>hemispheres, the illusion is much more seamless and easy
to
> > >conceal.
> > >
> > >The
other sort of damage which reveals the same deviousness
> >
>occurs with stroke victims. Again, I'm sure you have
encountered
> > >the stories. When a part of the visual
cortex is damaged, a
> > >patient will draw pictures
with one side of all the objects
> > >missing, but won't
realize that it is gone. Or will be unable
> > >to
acquire some piece of sensory information, but will
aggressively
> > >"eavesdrop" on themselves to acquire
the information by
> > >other means, while refusing to
acknowledge that they are
> > >doing so. The important
point being that in these cases,
> > >while their errors
are glaringly obvious to all other observers,
> > >they
are utterly invisible to themselves.
> > >
> >
>These anecdotes, which I have only briefly indicated,
point
> > >to the systemic misdirection the mind uses to
maintain
> > >an illusion of a unitary self, whose
behaviour is rational
> > >and consistent. In fact, the
reality is that loads and
> > >loads of little
semi-autonomous pieces of the brain are
> > >always
churning away, sensing, filtering, interpreting,
> >
>providing bits of information, and most importantly
coming
> > >to conclusions, outside of the purview of
conscious
> > >attention, which flits from "module" to
"module", pulling
> > >in bits of resultant items to sew
together to provide an
> > >apparent seamless, linear
stream of awareness, with an
> > >apparent logical,
rational narrative justification to
> > >hold it all
together. But knowing what we now know about
> > >how
this mechanism works, it should be clear that this
> >
>narrative is essentially propaganda, a convenient myth
to
> > >keep the individual from collapsing into an
existential
> > >chaos of fractured identity. In truth,
the brain works
> > >massively in parallel, and is not
linear at all.
> > >
> >
> -Pete Vincent
> >
>
> >
>_______________________________________________
> >
>Futurework mailing list
> >
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
>
>
> > Keith Hudson, 6 Upper Camden Place, Bath,
England,
> > <www.evolutionary-economics.org>
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
> >
Futurework mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework>
>
>
_______________________________________________
> Futurework
mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
|
