> For now I would like to respond to mnr Am de Lange's post on
> Feb 3rd. He said:
>> Where do we find such freedom? The bible has a very
>> definite answer. I personally believe that there is no
>> better answer. However, I will never try to force this
>> answer upon any one. I will rather encourage every one,
>> seeking for an answer, to keep on seeking it. You will
>> know when you have found the right answer the moment when
>> the answer has emerged. For this is the creative way.
> Would it be appropriate for this forum to ask him (her?) to
> expand on that?
Dear organlearners,
Meg, I hesistate to expand on what I have written since it concerns a
complex topic. I can expand on it by simply quoting two verses from the
bible. However, these assertions will fire controversy rather than
learning.
My agenda is open - your request gives me the opportunity to write about
three things which I believe is very important for any learning
organisation.
Topic 1: Oversimplification.
When dealing with a complex topic, we must always be careful not to
simplify it so much that we actually have created a new, simpler topic. We
should rather lay bare the essences of the topic.
Phenomenology (beginning with the work of Husserl) is that discipline by
which we try to categorise (identify) any phenomenon in terms of its
essences. To find these essences, we should apply what is called eidetic
reduction - thinking (cutting) away mental baggage to form an eidetic
image, checking after each reduction if the image still represents the
phenomenon. When an essence is thought away, it will cause a major
divergence between the image and the phenomenon.
Like phenemonologists, we should become very sensitive to the INTERACTION
BETWEEN THE PHENOMENON AND OUR MENTAL IMAGE OF IT. Our mental image of the
phenomenon does not depend on only the phenomenon, but also on the
totality of our mental experiences. Since this totality of experiences
differs from person to person, our mental images of a phenomenon differs
from person to person. However, our eidetic images of a phenomenon is
supposed not to differ. It is these eidetic images which we than can share
as the members of a LO.
I have often been reprimanded (although not so much on this forum) for
saying too much. However, when performing specifically an eidetic
reduction, the worst thing to do is to hide some essences for simplicity's
sake. In such cases a part of the truth opens up part of a lie.
Topic 2 The logical fabric of truth.
Let us now return to your request. The bible says "the truth shall make us
free". The sentence in quotation marks define a statement (declaration).
When dealing with any statement, we have to evaluate whether the statement
is TRUE or FALSE. Our evalutaion can either be empirical or logical. When
it is empirical, we should never forget that empirical determinations have
a phenomenological side to them.
When evaluating a statement logically, we have to employ the laws of
logics. For example, one law in propositional logic is called the Law of
the Excluded Middle. This law entails that if "the truth shall make us
free" is not true, then " the truth does NOT make us free" is the true
statement. There is no other outcome.
However, propositional logic is a simplification of predicate logic. By
relying on merely propositional logic, we may invoke an
oversimplification. Should we now introduce predicate logic, we have to
consider four possibilities: 1 nothing makes us free 2 truth makes us free
3 some things other than truth makes us free 4 everything makes us free.
We then infer which one of the four possibilities is the true statement
AND also why the other three are false. I will not burden you with screens
of argumentations.
Topic 3 The paradigmatic fabric of truth.
Screens of argumentations will not settle the question of knowing what
truth really "is". This is because truth does not only have a logical
dimension, but also a paradigmatical dimension.
For example, I use the quotation marks because even that small word "is"
might be the sign that we have already diverged from the road of eidetic
reduction! In one of my private dialogues with a member on this list, that
person is perplexed with 'becoming-being' as one of the seven
essentialities of creativity. I must confess, I was also perplexed when I
first discovered this essentiality together with the other six. Now, only
after a decade, I am beginning to understand it better. My understanding
enable me not only to think of truth as a being, but also as a becoming.
In other words, I am not only trying to know what truth "is", but also how
truth "becomes".
I have used this paradigmatic dimension of truth with great success in
education. A few years ago I had to teach for a number of years a
Chemistry 1 course to engineering students. I do not know how it is in
other parts of the world, but here the engineering students themselves say
that a final grade of 49% means you were unlucky, 50% means great success,
51% means a distinction and 52% means 'arse creeping'. Therefore, with
such an atitude, after a number of tests and three weeks before the final
exam, approxiamtely 70% of them fail while the average course mark for all
the students is about 35%.
I then tell them that they are free to write a special test by which we
will determine how truth becomes rather than is. This test will be on ALL
the work of the course one week from then - two weeks befor the final
examination. It will be on a high level exactly as the final examination.
The mark obtained in this test, if it is better than a student's present
course mark, will be taken as his actual course mark. I explain this by
saying that I am interested in what they will know in one week from now,
not in what they know now. What then happens is truly remarkable. Most of
them study the next week as they never have studied before. Their
performances are almost a miracle: 70% rather than 30% of them pass and
the average for all students rises from 35% to 70%. Truth as a becoming
made them free to learn creatively!
The bible also says what truth "is". However, how many of us think of
Jesus Christ as a phenomenon while honouring the logical and paradigmatic
fabrique of our thoughts? I am not willing to participate in a dialogue
concerning Jesus Christ if it is done in mostly rhetorical assertions.
Meg, I do hope that I have satisfied your request. If not, please inform
me specifically what you would like me to expand upon. I did not try to
sidestep your request with a clever use of words, although aome will
perceive it as such. I tried to show that when learning a complex topic,
we have to take notice of at least the phenomenological, the logical and
the paradigmatical issues. Anything less will cause the death of learning.
Of the three issues mentioned above, I find the one about paradigms of
special interest. In fact, many of the problems which we are now
experiencing here in South Africa concerns paradigms. Unfortunately, few
here in South Africa have even heard of a paradigm. Thus many
controversies, violence, bloodshed and even death arise because the
paradigmatical fabric is not taken into account. If you are interested, I
will be very happy to tell you more about these paradigmatic problems in
the political life our country.
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/>