A good day to Julian and all dialogue colleagues,
There are certain subjects which, as complexity increases,
become more and more significant. Conversely, the more these
subjects are fragmented from the whole, the less significant
they become. As you might have guessed, spontaneity is one of
them. Others are, for example: entropy, creativity and learning.
There is something even more peculiar about these subjects. Each
of them does not have a simple meaning. The meaning of each
becomes more complex by the day! This means that these subjects
cannot be delineated by fixed definitions. However, the meaning
of each has to begin with what we may call an operational
definition.
The operational definition of spontaneity was clearly formulated
by J W Gibbs in terms of work. A spontaneous CHANGE can be
harnessed as a source of work. For example: water flowing
downwards (spontaneous) may be used as a source for electrical
work. Another example: a person motivated (spontaneous) towards
an ideal will be able to work towards that ideal. On the other
hand, a nonspontaneous CHANGE will not happen on its own accord
unless forced by the environment through work done ON the
changing system. For example: heat will not flow out of a
refrigerator unless forced to do so by electrical work. Another
example: a person not motivated (nonspontaneous) towards mental
growth, will not learn unless forced to do so.
Spontaneity only have sense when it refers to a particular,
specified change or transformation. In other words, to speak of
spontaneity without specifying the change is meaningless.
Scrutinise the examples given above to check this truth.
Obviously, a very important change to consider is to recognise
change as an essentiality of life itself. I prefer to call it
as the "essentiality of becoming-being".
In terms of the terminology introduced above, we may say that
many contributions to this digest pondered on the problem
"How to become spontaneous towards becoming".
To solve this problem, we have to understand that
the recognition of becoming-being as an essentiality of life,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
is a mental change with its corresponding spontaneity.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
We also have to be aware of the fact that a person who has
fallen victim to the problem is nonspontaneous towards
recognising and employing this essentiality objectively.
The operational definition of spontaneity points to two
possible solutions. The obvious solution is for the environment
(society, management) to force through work and control the
person to accept the essentiality. It is also the solution
common to the industrial era. However, because of the work
involved, it becomes a very costly solution. Furthermore, in the
new information era, this solution is not stable enough. Remove
the external work + control and the person will eventually
stop accepting this essentiality. There is no rejuvenation
which had to happen internally! Thus all information with
respect to becoming can perish.
The other solution is to realise that some mysterious changes
have to happen within the person so that the person will
recognise and employ the essentiality by own accord. In other
words, recognition of this essentiality has to emerge within the
person. One thing we do know, is that the person's spontaneity
towards accepting the becoming-being essentiality cannot be
employed because of its nonspontaneous value! So we have to rely
on these mysterous changes. What are they?
Should I describe these mysterious changes, my description of
them can be imported into a person's solution rather than the
recognition and understanding of them emerging within that
person. This will impair rather than promote that person's
spontaneity! This is so because
to become more spontaneous requires more emergences.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is even true of mental emergences. They are exhilarating
and rejuvinating experiences. We are very motivated for any
change when it concerns a thought which has emerged within us.
This is also the reason why we should avoid rote learning
(memorisation and regurgitation) as much as possible. Rote
learning is an ailment of the industrial era. Remember that the
indutrial era has the "machine and engineer" as its paradigm.
The "machine" has to be controlled externally because it cannot
control itself. The engineer uses external work to accomplish
nonspontaneous changes like the erection of a bridge or the
construction of a computer. These changes will not happen on
their own accord. In rote learning the "external" again figure
heavily. External based information has to be imported and
memorised. This has to be regurgitated to external controlling
bodies. In conclusion, rote learning destroys spontaneous
learning.
It seems as if the "mysterious changes" have now been
identified. They are mental emergences. They arise far from
equilbrium when chaos bifucates into order. However, there is
one general property of emergences which is seldomly, if ever,
mentioned. Emergences are transitive rather than reflexive. From
a pollinated flower emerges a fruit rather than another
pollinated flower. From a pupa emerges a butterfly rather than
another pupa. In other words, when the "recognition of becoming-
being as an essentiality" has to emerge, it cannot emerge by
requiring the person to accept becoming-being as an
essentiality! The fact is that becoming-being is an
essentiality. It should be experienced by that person as such
until it is recognised and employed as an essentiality. This
happens when the person is encouraged to make all sorts of mental
emergences and then guided (not forced by work and control) when
experiencing these emergences.
Insecurity enters the picture when neither the organisation nor
its member is able to handle the creativity involved. How can a
far from equilbrium situation be created? What is sufficient to
have the bifurcation evlove into a constructive emergence? How
should side effects such as Onsager cross inductions be handled?
What will happen if the organisation or the member maintains the
far from equilbrium conditions indefinitely? We can be sure of
one thing: ignorance is the source of insecurity.
To summarise. A person will become motivated in recognising and
employing change when that person is allowed and encouraged to
create self emergently. This can only happen in changes for which
the person is already motivated (spontaneous). Allow such
emerging changes as much as possible within the mission of the
organisation. Remember the transitivity of emergences. Ensure
that the organisation will be able to handle the far from
equilibrium situations which will arise. Guide the person
through such changes to recognise and employ change itself as an
essentiality. Be prepared to keep up with the pace once the
person is spontaneous to this essentiality.
Best wishes
At de Lange
Gold Fields Computer Centre for Education
University of Pretoria
Pretoria, South Africa
email: amdelange@gold.up.ac.za
--"Mnr AM de Lange" <AMDELANGE@gold.up.ac.za>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>