Yup. I think we are
getting lost in words and definitions.
arthur
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
|