Dear All,
I have just sent the following response to someone called Chris Macrae,
asking me to connect inclusionality with organizational management.
You may find it relevant to recent conversations.
Warmest
Alan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Chris,
I think the poetry and art can contribute to the many ways in which we need
to communicate with and bring a more fluid form of awareness to a prevalent
'concrete mindset', which is fixated upon what I view as the wrong logic,
the wrong arithmetic, the wrong geometry, the wrong scientific method and
mode of explication, the wrong theology, the wrong language, the wrong
systems of governance, education and economic foundations etc. By 'wrong',
here, I mean 'against the flow of natural evolutionary process and to the
exclusion of love - in the deepest sense of agape - from our human
neighbourhood'. There is a need to bring about an awareness both of 'what
is wrong' with current theory and practice, AND how this theory and
practice can be radically transformed by opening up new possibilities for
receptive-responsive understanding.
One of the routes to this awareness is to facilitate connection with our
deep, compassionate sense of 'self' as 'non-locally sourced dynamic
neighbourhood', which lies beyond the superficial definition of individuals
(and organizations) as isolated local entities (discrete 'objects',
'singularities' or 'units') controlled by internal executive centres and
pushed and pulled about by external force.
In my work, I have therefore not only been endeavouring to help open up
avenues to feelings of love, respect and compassion for all nature,
including ourselves, but also to show the sound REASON why these feelings
MAKE SENSE in a human community that has largely come, through flawed
logic, to regard them as sentimental nonsense, a deviation from objective
rationality. Whilst this flawed logic persists at the root of the prevalent
concrete mindset, our culture will remain deep in conflict and unable to
address issues related to our current global environmental, social and
psychological sustainability crisis in a sensitive and realistic way that
can alleviate rather than compound distress.
Coming from my background as a biological scientist and ecologist, I have
come to recognise that the contrast between the flawed logic of the
concrete mindset (widely promulgated through MBA curricula amongst many
other entrainment-not-education systems) and natural dynamics is epitomized
by the contrast between views of evolution in terms of 'Natural Selection'
(a contradiction in terms, implying, as Darwin put it, 'the preservation of
favoured races in the struggle for life') and 'Natural Inclusion' (the
creative, fluid dynamic transformation of all through all in receptive
spatial context). Although I welcome Darwin's popularization of the idea of
the 'relatedness of all life', I think the notion of 'selection', which
effectively eliminates diversity whilst 'perfecting' the competitive
prowess of individuals is diabolical nonsense, which has been incorporated
consciously or unconsciously into all kinds of misdirected human endeavour
(not to mention genocide). Evolution involves the complementary attunement
of all in fluid dynamic attunement with all, 'immaterial space' included,
not the perfection of 'one in isolation' (one all alone). We human beings
cannot in our own executive right 'change' or 'save' the 'world'. But
through a deeper awareness and understanding of how we can attune with
complex dynamic processes, we may be able to help nature 'change' or 'save'
us.
The flawed logic of 'selection theory' is the same flawed logic that
underpins the concrete mindset in general, which fails to take account of
evidence implicit in modern relativity, quantum mechanics and non-linear
theory. It is the logic of space-excluding objective definition, otherwise
known as the 'law of the excluded middle', epitomized in Hamlet's
soliloquy. 'To be OR not to be, that is the question; whether 'tis nobler
in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune OR to
take ARMS AGAINST a SEA OF TROUBLES and by OPPOSING, END them.' It is the
logic of opposition and conflict, which fails to embody immaterial space
and so denies the creative receptivity of natural dynamic geometry. That is
what fixes us in concrete, incapable of addressing our deep human ecology.
To escape its constraints, we need to transform the fixed logic of the
excluded middle (to be OR not to be) into the dynamic logic of the included
middle (to be AND not to be), a logic that includes love, which I and a few
others have called 'inclusionality' (to mark its distinction from objective
rationality).
Anyway, enough long-winded explanation. This incredibly simple
understanding is incredibly difficult to communicate in words to a
community mind set against it. I offer my personal expressions in my
writings and artwork (see http://people.bath.ac.uk/bssadmr) to any who
would like to use and share these as a resource pool. I am happy to
converse (but not debate) with anyone and speak anywhere I feel welcome and
can reach. No amount of technological or governmental 'fixing' can in my
mind hope to work effectively without the support of a transformed mind set.
Warmest
Alan
--On 10 January 2007 16:27 +0000 christopher macrae
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Alan R,M
>
> Alan R In general I wish you to connect on inclusionality where it might
> change mindsets of hard MBA curricula or take us through nature's war
> with man on why climate can never be globally operation alised top down
>
|