Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Why Lucidity can be a Liability
(why lucidity can be a liability )
Double-ness (doubt-ness: schizoid duality) characterizes
my real-time experience. I am both internal and external—
and the two realms are NOT the same. I am “idio-pathic”
(unique, personal, original) and socio-pathic (part of groups,
collectives, larger wholes.) I am an Ego-centric center
of the universe. I am merely a part—dust in the wind. Etc.
How can language (representation) do justice to both of these
incommensurate realms which I AM? Consider:
TREE (truth, troth) – from I.E. duru: hard,
You see something LIKE this a lot in language texts:
Consider the nodes in the tree diagrams above.
\ / \ /
(node) 0 (holon)
/ \ / \
“Slave” (to the above) and “Master” (to the below)
A holon is Arthur Koestler's term for an organ,
organization that is“servant” (dependent) to organs
and organizations “above” as well as “boss”
(governor, independent) to organs and
Got to Love the Hierarchy. Or call it holarchy, if you prefer:
it represents how a whole is also a part and a part is also
a whole; and depending on whether one is “looking” UP or
DOWN the organizational chart or social and physical chain
of command, holons and me, too (and you) are dependent
and subservient as well as being both boss and independent. .
Tree-diagrams “map” this aspect of organization, physical,
psychological, mental, political, sociological.structure--reducing
the complexity of live action into a static & radical representation
It is this doubleness in me and all my organs & organizations that
challenges my ability to do linguistic justice without recourse to
contra-diction and paradox and urges me to learn to speak out of
at least 2 sides of my mouth at once, if not—better--all 3.
Because what's “good” & descriptively appropriate in my
ordering of my “subordinate” parts (to which I am “governor”)
is not at all necessarily “good” terms of the organization above
me, under which I am governed--so to speak. .
So: the word “good” on one level is NOT the same as the word
“good” the next level up. (My sense of what's right and effective
in my teaching, for example, may not at all be right & effective in
terms of the whole, the school, the community. How do I talk about
both without invoking contradiction and paradox?
My partiality is an “offense” to the whole.
The “whole” is an “offense” to my partiality.
How do I talk “justice” to both “down” and “up”
without Babelling & sounding like furry? What’s
”good”and “sustainable” for the part and parts
isn’t necessarily at all good and sustainable for
the whole and wholes.
Parts and partialities eclipse if not occlude
the more-than-their- sum we call whole and wholes.
Look—right here is the practical and epistemological
(as opposed to pious) basis of “not my will but thy
will be done.” One might want one's own governance
to be in accord and in tune with the “whole”or larger
aspects of the “system.” At the same time, my own
rationalaims and purposes self-validate and self-fulfill
me and so, by their verylucidity and effectiveness, my
goals can eclipse my sense of dependenceon higher levels
and wholes, powers & thrones so to speak..
You may be an ambassador to England or France,
You may like to gamble, you might like to dance,
You may be the heavyweight champion of the world,
You may be a socialite with a long string of pearls
But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
You're gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody.
Bob Dylan, in manners of speaking.
HOLON: Janus-like it looks 2 ways: up and down,
as slave (up) as master (down