I "see" a linkage between the following four statements and am running a
model/analogy in my mind that helps me understand some systems and parts
distinctions.....
Smith-Lewis:
"This statement reminds me of the difference in approach of Western and
Eastern Medicine. The former focuses on the parts, the disease, and on
cure, the latter on the whole system (of the person across time and in
relation to cosmic influences), the relationship of the person to the
imbalance, and on healing. What can we learn from this analogy that
relates to our discussion of systems vs. parts view?"
Carol Sager:
"In the spirit of dialogue- thoughts re: your question are that we are
all in the right and we are all in the wrong (as in the story of the
blind men and the elephant). My question: what synergistic response
could arise from trying to synthesizeand move betond these appearingly
opposite points of view."
Sherri Malouf:
"I am wondering if we have to change the way we "see"."
Marilyn Darling:
"Thanks for reminding us that "for everything there is a season." It is the
very nature of changing paradigms, in Kuhn's sense of the word, that we
rail against what came before as "old" and see our way as "new." In the
process, we throw the baby out with the bath water. The real learning, as
Rick points out, is to know when to apply what tool. The only way to know
that is to know what it is we want to accomplish."
My mental model is that of a forest (it could be a house also, but I
gravitate to the "green beings"). If I were to see the forest as system to
be understood enough to pass through on my journey (goal=what we want to
accomplish), I would enter from where I found myself (approach= starting
point based on my previous history/path) like the different approaches of
Eastern & Western Medicine. As I move (make decisions and act) through
the forest on a path previously created or "bushwacked" (rate of progress
in these two will differ) I will use different tools and skills (know when
to apply what tool). My entry point, my choice of paths and my preparation
will affect how I "see" (interpret: dangerous, scary, adventure, fun,
trust, fear etc.) the forest and how I react to trouble presented by the
forest system. Someone on the other side of the forest or flying above in
a plane would have different viewing point (blind men and elephant= all
partially right and all partially wrong due to incomplete and different
awareness/knowledge/intention) and may have a different "goal" (person in
plane: goal= to see forest in relation to other systems; another person
entering forest: goal=to discover and understand "operations" of the
forest to live there rather than get to other side along a path to
somewhere else).
Cycling from focus on parts to whole to parts (point of view to viewing
point to point of view) may be a natural ongoing cycle (like that of the
seasons) and we may live with some "mystery" (that which cannot be fully
known & understood in this time, space. reality) which could be a result
of different "goals", missed connnectivity/communication with others, or a
"natrual law boundary".
I've had fun reading this Wheatly dialogue and thinking different ways.
Thanks for all of your insights, thoughts.
Peggy Smith-Lewis
J&J Clinical Diagnostics
--MSmithLe@cldx.com (Smith-Lewis, Margaret)
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>