On Fri, 27 May 2005 06:31:09 -0600, Masud Sheikh <mashe...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
>Where another sees the "whole system", I see a "holed system" >Together, we may be able see the simplicity at the other side of >complexity. >Masud > While Doug Germann was kind enough to say that the above words were profound, something I was reading today made me realize that I should explain my cryptic comments a bit more. I view all "systems" as "wholes". Without a "wholeness", a system would not perform its functions i.e. the goals of the system. So, for instance, there are many systems in the body, each "whole" in itself, but to participate in the larger and more complex "whole" which is the human, it has to interact with other systems, and accept the "goals" of the larger system (maintaining healthy life) as super-ordinate goal. So, the only difference between "systems" is how people view them - hence one person's "whole system" is another person's "holed system". The way to bridge these differences is through dialogue, where one is willing to go below the surface, so that the group becomes a larger (and healthy) system. And only in a larger and healthy system can the whole be more than the "sum of the parts". In an unhealthy system, it is less than the sum, when the smaller (sub)system should use its two feet and walk away Put simply, I think "whole system" is an oxymoron. Also I believe that many words should be used more sparingly than they are. One of these words is "whole", another is "transformation/al", to name two of them The above are my views on June 5, 2005 at about 10:54 AM (North American) Eastern Daylight time. Masud * * ========================================================== osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
