16 December 2000
Enhancing the Quality of Knowing
through Integration of East-West metaphors
- / -
Paper prepared for the conference on "Knowledge and East-West Traditions"
(Bangalore, December 2000), sponsored by the National Institute of Advanced
Studies (Bangalore), History of Science Association (Japan), Third World Network
(Penang), Vidyartha Centre for Science and Technology (Colombo), Heinrich-Boell
Foundation (Germany), UNESCO (Jakarta and Korea), Futures journal, World
Future Studies Federation (WFSF), Third World Studies Center (University of the Philippines),
Asian Center (University of the Philippines)
Abstract: The paper briefly contrasts the commodification of knowledge,
with its embodiment, its expression in relationship, or as a worldview. This is
used to raise the possibility of forms of knowledge that may be relatively incomprehensible
or incoherent to western-style science. Some social implications of knowledge
organization are reviewed in the light of "field", as an agricultural
metaphor basic to knowledge work that helps to clarify issues of fragmentation,
monoculture and integration. This metaphor is then used to clarify knowledge issues
further in relation to: intellectual property and its possession; dispossession
and resettlement; movement between fields; and embodiment. This framework introduces
the challenge to science of set organization and comprehension, notably as a vehicle
for identity and provision of coherence. Metaphors for understanding dynamics
within sets are then presented as conceptual scaffolding, with "global"
offered as a cognitive challenge and "crop-rotation" in fields as an
example of a higher level of ordering set elements. Attention is drawn to the
richness of eastern cultures as a source of relevant metaphors, emphasizing the
use of "re-reading" as a metaphorical method. Some fundamental cognitive
challenges are reviewed to which science eastern-style might therefore offer insights:
polarization, territoriality and globality (using the I Ching as an illustrative
metaphor); subjectivity vs objectivity; relationship and community (based on richer
patterns of relationship between knower and known, notably in the light of eastern
sexual metaphors); use of archetypal knowledge objects in computers in support
of such insights; as well as questions of succinctness and comprehensibility in
a period of increasing information overload and underuse. Ultimately the challenge
is to design containers for meaning more appropriate to the challenges of society.
Introduction
This paper proceeds from the assumption that there is something missing in
the current pursuit and articulation of knowledge. It is however far from clear
exactly what is missing. In the light of the conference theme, it might be referred
to as some form of "missing link" between eastern and western approaches
to understanding -- perhaps best held currently by the tensions between them.
It might be that it is qualities from eastern insight that are designed out
of western approaches, reducing the quality of the resulting knowledge. It might
be that the meaning of any form of "integration" or synthesis is elusive from
a western perspective -- or from a purely eastern perspective. It might be that
the purpose of the pursuit of knowledge has itself been eroded of meaning within
a purely western context. As expressed by Susantha Goonatilake (1999): "the
modern agenda has run out of steam" (p.3).
Others have stressed the merits of the western approach or deplored the failure
to acknowledge and integrate insights arising in the East or in indigenous cultures
(Darrell A. Posey, 1999). This paper is therefore an effort to identify some
reference points in terms of which future enhancement of the quality of knowing
might perhaps be considered.
The fundamental assumption questioned is whether the priority for the immediate
future is ever more quantities of western knowledge, or whether there is a need
for the existing knowledge base to be strongly complemented by another kind
of knowledge -- to ensure quality of life in sustainable global development.
Or, as expressed by Goonatilake (1999): "These quantitative changes [in
growth of science] will require qualitative shifts in the nature of science."
(p.4)
A. Beyond the commodification of knowledge
There is a long tradition of treatment of knowledge as a commodity to be sought,
bought and sold, and -- above all -- exclusively possessed. This is most evident
in the case of military intelligence -- as currently epitomized by the Echelon
electronic surveillance system. Increasingly it is evident in the many dimensions
of intellectual property -- especially within the emergent information society.
It is part of development aid negotiations for the acquisition of "know-how".
It is also evident in educational processes through which knowledge is "acquired",
possibly against payment of fees to educational institutions or tutors. And
it is even evident in the acquisition of spiritual knowledge from people of
wisdom.
There is now a strong movement to build the future global economy on knowledge
and its commodification -- as exemplified by the World Bank's Global Knowledge
Partnership (http://www.globalknowledge.org/)
and the ASIS Strategic Alliance for a Sustainable Information Society (http://asis.jrc.es/html/fsummary.html).
Such dematerialization is considered a valuable step away from the focus on
material goods. Countries of the East are being encouraged to rise to the challenge
of staking their place in this highly competitive knowledge economy -- and much
is made of their potential in the software and data processing industries.
There are however some other kinds of challenges built into this logic. The
question is whether this commodification logic is merely replicating at a new
level a logic whose dysfunctionality has been challenged and demonstrated at
a more material level by many authors. It is not changing the game but merely
changing the terrain on which the game has been played -- notably to the disadvantage
of eastern and indigenous modes of thought. This is especially evident in the
prevalence of what might be called "Project Logic", namely a focused
"efficient" mode of strategic thinking in support of economic development
that is inherently economical with any wider truth (Knowledge
gardening through music: eliciting patterns of coherence for African management
as an alternative to Project Logic, 2000).
The concern here is not whether knowledge should be "free" -- as frequently
argued by radical denizens of cyberspace. This perspective is merely another
way of approaching the commodification of knowledge -- specifying some commodities
as free of cost.
The question here is rather whether what is most valuable in knowledge can
in fact be commodified. And if an attempt is made to do so, whether what is
then "possessed" by the individual, or collective, "owner" is capable of retaining
the qualities that renders that knowledge a significant attractor. Clearly commercially
successful attempts can be made to commodify knowledge but the question is the
nature of the distinction between what is possessed and the quality of knowing
associated with it.
Embodiment of knowledge
In the West a stress is typically placed on possession of knowledge -- which
in academic terms can be "professed" by "professors". Examinations are designed
to determine whether students possess knowledge. The logic of possession is
also evident in the major social focus in India, for example, on the civil service
examination as developed from its colonial origins. But this logic also holds
in the case of memorization of sacred texts in religious schools of different
traditions.
However in the East, beyond such possession, and in many cases irrespective
of it, there is much greater recognition of what might be termed embodiment
of knowledge -- the "dynamics of knowing" rather than "knowledge inventory management".
Through such embodiment the person, or the group, is affected by it to a degree
that they are an expression of it through their behaviour. Recognition of this
may be seen at one extreme in the respect for elders as embodying a lifetime
of experience, or, at another extreme, for people of wisdom (gurus, etc), or
for people with charisma. Some dysfunctional dimensions of this may be seen
in the behaviours -- especially in relation to each other -- of those claiming
to possess wisdom or spiritual authority.
In the West such embodiment is primarily carried by the terms "innate ability",
"natural talent" or "experience". Hitherto this was something valued only in
the apprentices to various trades. "Experience" has now become a prime quality
required for the CEOs of major corporations, often irrespective of possession
of knowledge or qualifications. It is interesting that whilst the process of
buying knowledge (through packaged courses) is common, experience cannot be
purchased -- it has to be engendered real-time. Like "maturity" it is achieved
by other means.
This form of knowledge may possibly be exemplified by "tacit knowledge" --
a term that has recently been a focus of increasing attention in the West. It
is most succinctly described as the kind of knowledge required to ride a bicycle
-- something that does not lend itself to successful explication. It has in
a very real sense to be embodied.
The embodiment of knowledge in the light of the chanted hymns of the Rg
Veda has been explored by Antonio de Nicolas (1978), using the non-Boolean
logic of quantum mechanics (Heelan, 1974). The unique feature of the approach
is that it is grounded in tone and the shifting relationships between tone;
it is through the pattern of musical tones that the significance of the Rg
Veda is to be found. As de Nicolas indicates:
"Therefore, from a linguistic and cultural perspective, we have to be
aware that we are dealing with a language where tonal and arithmetical relations
establish the epistemological invariances... Language grounded in music is
grounded thereby on context dependency; any tone can have any possible
relation to other tones, and the shift from one tone to another, which alone
makes melody possible, is a shift in perspective which the singer himself
embodies. Any perspective (tone) must be "sacrificed" for a new
one to come into being; the song is a radical activity which requires innovation
while maintaining continuity, and the "world" is the creation
of the singer, who shares its dimensions with the song." ( p. 57)
This suggested the possibility of using the musical skills of African cultures
to carry, and give coherence to, new styles of policy-making as has been explored
in a separate paper (Judge, 2000: http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs/music.php).
Knowledge in relationship
Whilst it may be acknowledged that knowledge can be embodied, the term "embodied"
serves primarily to conceal the significance of such embodiment. The person
may indeed be a significant attractor in a social system, but how insight is
associated with this is quite unclear, notably in the case of charisma. However
it is much clearer when it is recognized that such significance is recognized
through relationship, namely through how in practice the person interrelates
concepts, things or people, or encounters others -- notably in dialogue. This
may be seen as a catalytic or ordering function. A higher form of ordering is
engendered.
Both in East and West, one manifestation of this capacity is acclaimed as leadership.
Much effort is made to focus on the identification and training of leaders.
Leadership training has itself become a commodity -- although little is said
of how the followers of leaders trained in this way rate the knowledge embodied
in their leader. It is perhaps useful to make a radical distinction between
such an ersatz leader and a natural or charismatic leader -- as experienced
in practice by the followers. But perhaps it is more appropriate to recognize
the truth in the often-cited phrase that "people deserve the leaders that they
get" -- with the knowledge they hold, or of which they are an expression.
In the West there is increasing value attributed to "human relations skills".
A wide variety of consultants promote these skills. They may be sought -- as
a commodity -- in weekend workshops. In the East they are typically exemplified
by attitudes to (extended) family relationships, especially in relation to elders.
In the West emphasis is placed on the skills in interpersonal relationships,
notably in marketing or between sexual partners. In all these cases overt behaviour
is understood to reflect a form of knowledge.
But it is especially the way in which those embodying knowledge relate to the
features of their natural environment that is most striking -- whether it be
(following Feyerabend, 1975) the capacity of a musician, the laboratory skills
of an experimental physicist, a gardener, or a chef. But perhaps less evident
and more fundamental is the way they may relate to the landscape as a whole,
as in the case of many indigenous peoples for whom their knowledge is effectively
embedded in their environment. This is notably the case of the Aborigines of
Australia whose spatio-temporal relationship to their landscape tends to be
quite beyond western comprehension and the concepts of the western legal system.
Knowledge in worldview
The case of the Aborigines draws attention to the fact that relationship knowledge
may be far less instrumental and aggressive. It may be embodied in a worldview
that is not necessarily expressed through any proselytizing endeavour. There
may be valued forms of knowledge that are not presented as commodities, or even
purveyed in any way. A person may know the way from A to B, even in knowledge
space, without any need to present this knowledge to "passers by" as a commodity
for sale. Whether the knowledge is offered in response to a question is another
matter.
In this respect the nature of certain knowledge, and whether it lends itself
to commodification, is quite intriguing. What knowledge is there in an attitude?
Is a question knowledge -- or only an answer? Arguably both are forms of information,
but only the second might be considered to be sufficiently organized to be termed
knowledge. However the question implicit in an as yet unsolved mathematical
problem would certainly be considered a form of knowledge by mathematicians.
But there is a challenge here. In an educational mode, a teacher will often
choose not to deliver "knowledge" as a package to be absorbed -- or consumed
as a commodity. Education may be considered more appropriate through a question.
This is especially true of some spiritual teachers -- as exemplified by the
use of the koan in Zen.What does this imply about the nature of knowledge that
can only be elicited through reflection on a question -- or the humour of Sufi
tales? Would the questions fundamental to society 500 years hence, or 500 light
years distant, be valued as knowledge today?
Conversely, what can be said about the nature of the knowledge that is sought
through asking a question of someone who purportedly knows? This is the dilemma
of spiritual tourism through which western tourists pay to meet people of wisdom
(often of the East or in indigenous cultures) and expect knowledge in response
to their questions -- as part of the package for which they have paid serious
money. But the knowledge may not be communicable in the language of the question.
Invasive questioning behaviour may be inimical to comprehension -- and what
is communicated as part of the deal may be packaged in a way that has little
to do with how it is experienced as living knowledge.
This suggests several lines of exploration:
- are there forms of knowledge inherent in non-western cultures (and potentially
valuable to them) that do not lend themselves to communication through western
language?
- are there forms of knowledge capable of sustaining social development that
are relatively incomprehensible to western-style science -- and might they
have a vital, unexplored role in sustaining global development?
- are the responses to queries framed in western terms (such as to web search
engines) to be considered information or knowledge, and if the former, what
alternative forms of response might be envisaged of relevance to queries of
another nature?
- is the question-answer polarity the only way of framing the progressive
evolution of knowing, or are there other ways -- whether extant or that might
be envisaged?
- is every evolution of comprehension to be described in terms of a quantitative
"increase" in knowledge that is thereby "grasped" and "acquired"?
B. Social implications of knowledge organization
A number of observers have pointed to the way in which current investment
in the development of cyberspace makes use of the same mindset as the development
of two-dimensional physical space. Most obvious is the focus on the "information
highway" and the parallels between the development of multinational telecom
operations and that of the "seven sisters" of the oil industry (From
Information Highways to Songlines of the Noosphere: global configuration of
hypertext pathways as a prerequisite for meaningful collective transformation, 1996).
Despite the hype, it is not clear that cyberspace is being developed or organized
with any new insights. This is most obvious in the replication of real estate
thinking in sale of cyberspace "locations" and "sites" -- notably based on
the criteria for advertising. Information is organized through nested menus
which are little different to the organization in bookshops or restaurants
(from which
"menu" derives). Computer hardware is promoted in the same way as automobiles,
and sold by the same kind of people -- who now use a very similar patter; computer
magazines are indistinguishable stylistically from automobile magazines.
On a larger scale the mentality associated with urban planning, with its emphasis
on grid systems, is seen to be replicated in the design of "geocities". It is
really only in the more challenging video games that other forms of dynamic
or multi-dimensional organization have started to become evident.
It could therefore be argued that global knowledge initiatives are presently
designed to replicate and reinforce the very pattern of knowledge organization
that proved inadequate to the challenges of enhancing development insight in
the pre-cyberspace era. With increasing spatial constraints on development of
the automobile, these initiatives are effectively designed to upgrade the existing
pattern of dependency under a banner of "globalization". And just as the problematic
consequences of the automobile era were unrecognizable at the end of the horse-drawn
era, it is probable that the problematic consequences of this approach to cyberspace
knowledge organization are equally elusive.
Social architecture and knowledge architecture
It is easy to argue that culture is exemplified in the design of buildings.
Asia is especially rich in buildings of far greater design complexity than those
typical of the West. To the extent that religious buildings (temples, cathedrals,
mosques) are designed to reflect the organization of a world view as a system
of knowledge, designs favoured in the West may be fruitfully compared with those
of the East. The West has increasingly gone the route of functionality and relative
simplicity (whatever the complexities of the electrical, air conditioning and
plumbing systems). Religious buildings are increasingly difficulty to distinguish
from office buildings. Knowledge organization is equally simplistic -- web menus
being no more complex in structure than the directory of tenants in an office
building.
It has been argued that the "temples" of the future will be those
created in cyberspace based on knowledge complexes. Society is then likely to
have a period of temple construction similar to the cathedral construction of
the Middle Ages. The essential feature of such structures will be they dynamics
into which they entrain people, namely how they are travelled and what knowledge
engagement they evoke.
Asian cultures have the advantage of a rich array of cultural symbols that
are still widely used as referents. Reconciling the dynamics amongst Hindu deities,
for example, calls for a mindset that is capable of working with a far greater
degree of variety than is tolerable in western knowledge systems. Arguably it
facilitates abilities to deal with the array of fundamental particles -- or
with a rich ecosystem -- in ways that are alien to western thinking. Basically
it might be argued that Asian cultures provide a richer training in variety
handling -- as is the case with non-urbanized indigenous cultures. Whereas articulation
and understanding of the complexity of social relationships is relatively limited
in the West (and possibly in process of further dangerous oversimplification),
that embodied in indigenous kinship systems, for example, is of a significantly
higher order.
Whilst the consequences of this may become slowly apparent in science, they
will become much more rapidly apparent in the organization of knowledge on the
web. This may already be seen in the difference in complexity of websites of
western religions compared to those of eastern religions. It will be intriguing
to see the different emphasis in eastern search engine algorithms and the related
efforts at knowledge visualization.
Knowledge organization and its social parallels
It is intriguing that the simplest agricultural metaphor is at the base of
the modern approach to knowledge -- namely the "field". Knowledge workers are
each assumed to work in a field -- people are asked to identity themselves by
their "field". Knowledge is organized into fields. A person may work in several
fields, although this may be considered somewhat suspect. The field may be considered
entirely their own, in the case of a specialist on some out of the way topic.
It may however be a very broad field in which whole teams of people work. Knowledge
workers in a particular field may well be organized into a "profession"
(often to be declared on visa applications).
- In this light the parallel between the development from subsistence level
agriculture to agribusiness may be usefully explored. The question is whether
there are unsuspected carry overs from working in a field, as practiced in
agriculture, to that of knowledge working. Clearly there are similarities
between:
- the isolated knowledge worker at the origins of a new field of science versus
the farmer with his own self-sustaining plot, as compared with
- a large laboratory team of an industrial enterprise versus agribusiness
exploitation of an array of fields.
The metaphor is useful because it helps clarify some of the elusive challenges
of future knowledge work in the light of the more obvious challenges to farming
-- especially in the contrast between East and West:
(a) Fragmentation: In both farming and knowledge work, there
is a major challenge of fragmentation. In the West, farms below a certain size
are considered uneconomical. Intensive farming in the East is typically faced
with the challenge of subdivision of plots amongst inheritors, leading again
to nonviability. In both cases this may be termed unsustainability. Development
of knowledge has also been characterized by rapid fragmentation of every field.
Within any field there is increasing competition amongst knowledge workers,
notably for recognition and funding, and there is a real question as to whether
work in the increasingly smaller fields is sustainable -- in terms of relevance
to any wider context. Within any field, workers quarrel over smaller and smaller
territory. Disciples of aging pioneers form competing schools of thought subject
to further schisms.
(b) Monoculture: In both farming and knowledge work, "monoculture"
is a way of ensuring sustainability according to economic criteria -- concentrating
effort on "cash crops". This is however extremely problematic in both cases.
The radical consequences in the case of farming are well-recognized: destruction
of biodiversity, degradation of soil, dependence on fertilizers, disassociation
of the workforce from the land. The consequences in the case of knowledge work
are similar but less well recognized: groupthink, infertility/uncreativity of
knowledge workers, dubious science is response to sponsor constraints, dependence
on stimulants, disassociation from the knowledge enterprise. These phenomena
are the bane of large research institutions which are increasingly concerned
with sustaining "yield" in order to remain competitive.
(c) Integration: The previous phenomena pose the challenge
of some form of integration. For agriculture this is expressed in terms of sustaining
yield whilst mitigating against destructive effects on the ecosystem and the
lifestyle of farmers. It requires a focus on an integrated distribution of specialized
produce or the need for integrated farming methods (permaculture, etc). In the
case of knowledge work, this is expressed in terms of the various flavours of
interdisciplinarity and the challenge of integrating the perspectives of different
disciplines in response to social issues. At one extreme this takes the form
of "unity of science" and "Theories of Everything", or less ambitiously in "knowledge
organization", more recently defined in terms of "knowledge management".
The parallel between agriculture and knowledge work is valuable because it
shows that the dramatic challenges of agriculture may be implicit in the challenges
to the future of knowledge work. However it also points to the possibility that
new insights into knowledge work, possibly deriving from the East, may suggest
alternative approaches to agriculture and the development of sustainable communities.
C. Fundamental metaphors of knowledge work
The field metaphor may be explored further because of the insight it offers
into prevalent understandings of the psycho-social relationship to work.
(a) Property and possession: Few would deny the degree of possessiveness
associated with the fields in which people work. For a farmer, the field may
be the land of his ancestors, or at least in the family for generations, or
carefully worked for decades. For the specialist, this may be closely guarded
territory forbidden to trespassers -- an area in which he is seeking to make
a name for himself. He or she may have received the "mantle" from the previous
leader in that field and consider it a right to pass it on to a person of choice.
Much of the deniable history of science concerns the drama surrounding defence
of such territory. In recent decades knowledge work has been increasingly protected
by intellectual copyright and non-disclosure agreements. In both cases the relationship
of the person to the field is a matter of identity. The person's identity may
be intimately sustained by the territory in subtle ways that are currently explored
in the literature on "sense
of place".
It is a wonder that the special relationship of indigenous peoples to their
land (eg in Australia) is considered so unusual.
(b) Dispossession and resettlement: Little needs to be said
concerning the drama of dispossession of farmers and the consequences of their
resettlement on ill-chosen land. Communism may be seen as a problematic experiment
in redefining the relation of the farmer to the land, shifting the focus of
personal identity from the land itself to the collectivity working that land.
In the case of knowledge work, analogous processes are seen in the practices
to which workers are driven to ensure funding and jobs. They are called upon
to switch from areas of interest to areas for which their skills are needed
and for which funds are available. Their work may be "repossessed" by superiors
or by the institutions for which they work. They may be required to "retrain"
themselves in response to new opportunities in a turbulent job market and may
be encouraged (possibly by some with hidden agendas) to believe that doing so
will always be vital to their economic viability in the future. These processes
are a major challenge to job satisfaction and to any sense of personal identity,
self-esteem and psychological security.
(c) From field to journey: The consequence of the previous
process has been the development of a variety of forms of migratory worker.
Landless agricultural workers seek work where they can find it, possibly following
a regular seasonal pattern. This is increasingly seen in the case of knowledge
workers. But for those still closely identified with a particular field, people
not associated with that field, or with any particular field, remain a real
challenge. For this reason this process is less evident in cross-disciplinary
movement within the academic environment and much more evident in the dynamics
associated with consultants. They feel free to move between many fields. Their
skills are carried with them and no longer associated with a particular set
of fields. Clearly their job satisfaction, personal identity, self-esteem and
psychological security are quite differently sustained. Cultural exemplars include
the western troubadour of the Middle Ages and the Japanese ronin.
(d) From possession to embodiment: Journeying with skills, identity
may only be associated with possession of those skills and their transferability.
In practice this is sustained by ensuring equivalence between countries of
the academic or technical qualifications possessed -- although there is no
corresponding equivalence between fields. Identifying with the knowledge possessed
is to be contrasted with embodiment of the knowledge independent of qualifications
or the fields in which it is used. This is partly recognized through the term
"independent scholar" or "jack of all trades". Such people embody
their skills in an integrative manner relatively unconstrained by their original
disciplinary training or any professional association. Cultural exemplars
include the Hindu sanyasin.
D. Sets and their comprehension
In the shift from information to knowledge the key is in the organization or
ordering of the information. The emphasis in the West is placed on "lists" as
most typically seen in menus on websites. These have the advantage of avoiding
the challenges of introducing coherence, other than through hierarchical nesting.
Much more interesting is the transition to coherent sets of elements of knowledge
-- as exemplified by the periodic table of chemical elements. Here there are
a variety of relationships along the various dimensions of the table -- there
is a notion of complementarity. The set structure provides a scaffolding that
protects elements that might otherwise be neglected or marginalized because
they are little known or otherwise considered insignificant. Coherent sets might
be considered as conserving conceptual diversity.
A list structure challenges through raising the question whether additional
elements of knowledge should simply be added -- but there is little sense of
"completeness", only of whether the list is "too long" (and therefore requires
some form of nesting). The challenge of set structure emphasizes to a greater
extent where additional items should be added within that structure --
consistent with patterns of relationship across the set. It is the reinforcement
of these patterns that increases the integrative significance of the resultant
knowledge complex. It is through these structures that knowledge is "packaged"
and subject to "packing". This is increasingly recognized through major investments
in unusual forms of information visualization (see http://www.cybergeography.org/atlas/atlas.html)
Science, western style, has tended to be less interested in the emergence of
larger knowledge complexes -- other than within specific domains, such
as chemistry (the periodic table) or fundamental physics (relationships between
fundamental particles). The exception might be the pursuit of a Theory of Everything
-- which however treats as derivative everything not directly related to the
fundamentals of matter and energy. In particular science has been unable to
provide meaningful bridges between the disciplines to ensure the emergence of
any inherently interdisciplinary insight. In part this is due to the special
challenges to comprehension of integrating what are effectively incommensurables.
In particular western scientific methodology has provided little knowledge integration
between the hard and soft sciences, or between the more objectively oriented
sciences and the more subjectively oriented sciences.
The pursuit of knowledge in eastern and indigenous cultures has tended to emphasize
the coherence that encompasses incommensurables between domains -- even
if it is a challenge to comprehension and characterized by uncertainties.
Western-style science has tended to sideline the significance of its cultural
heritage for the organization of knowledge. In fact western-style science might
even see its emergence as a victory over inappropriate forms of coherence characteristic
of the pre-scientific period -- notably in the form of Greek and Roman pantheons,
or the angelic hierarchies of the monotheistic religions that succeeded them,
or the "correspondences" of the late Renaissance. The kind of "unity"
that has now resulted may prove to be narrower and more simplistic than is appropriate
for the future.
The issue for the future may well be how coherence is meaningfully carried
in a turbulent information society in which everyone suffers from information
overload -- and in which much relevant insight is underused. This is already
especially problematic for young people in determining what to learn and where
to find frameworks of meaning capable of sustaining individual or collective
identity.
Vehicles for identity
The development of fundamental metaphors of knowledge work results in the elaboration
of sets that are a challenge to comprehension. Underlying these are the following
fundamentals in terms of which a locus of identity may be variously understood.
"Identity" may take a variety of forms: natural phenomena (and whether
and how they are bounded in a systems or legal sense); emotions (being in love,
etc); abstract concepts generated by the sciences (a plant phylum, entropy,
etc); or values (peace, justice, etc) -- but especially the sense of embodied
identity, or invariance, in terms of which a person experiences him- or herself.
Identity is therefore closely related to the adequacy of any explanation and
to how knowledge is then held.
The following approaches to identity may be considered:
(a) Stasis: Whether in relation to the physical or social environment,
individuals may seek explanations in terms of state or static structure -- however
this is reflected in preferred conceptual frameworks, whether global ethical
frameworks or theoretical structures. Preferred explanations are then articulated
in terms of states and snapshots, minimizing any dynamics between states. Governance
may focus on reports on the "State of the World" or the "State of the Environment".
The case of stasis is clear and encourages simple clear-cut responses
to issues of identity and boundaries. It is the classic western understanding
of the separate, bounded individual relating to a community. Hence the emphasis
on property and possession and a form of siege mentality that has its transcendent
form in the search for Theories of Everything and ultimate absolute explanations.
For the "state", any "citizen" is defined for administrative,
legal and other purposes as a bounded, labelled entity -- which may however
raise issues of false identity, multiple identities, or of non-persons without
any legitimate identity.
(b) Dynamic: In contrast to a state focus, emphasis may be placed
on change, movement and trends, whether in physical terms (travelling), social
terms (career development, increasing status), cultural terms (learning),
or developmental terms (individuation, spiritual quests). This may also be
stressed with regard to development of knowledge (advance of science, etc).
This is partly captured by the general notion of reports on "progress". The
dynamic dimension is typified by work on emergent systems and chaos theory;
statistically the focus is on trend analysis.
This is best understood in terms of identity with a career -- "do
not assess me for what I am but for where I am going and how I am getting
there". Convicted criminals, after release, may see themselves as innocent
again -- having expunged any obligation to society for past crimes. The locus
is not with a particular state but the dynamic of movement between states
-- boundaries are either a matter of indifference or are systematically transcended.
Groups and organizations may reject any assessment of them at a particular
time, arguing that they have "moved on". Conceptually there is then an identification
with the learning process, with the developing history of science and with
the phenomena in that process. It raises the question of what is the carrier
of identity in process logic? Identity can then be in some way associated
with a "carrier wave" (possibly a "standing wave") in
contrast with the particular static focus.
(c) Pattern of connectedness: A third emphasis is on patterns of relationship,
whether amongst individuals in a community or peer group, as "networking",
or in patterns of trade relationships. This perception is fundamental to understanding
of ecosystems. It is less well-recognized with respect to knowledge development,
other than in the confused recognition of the importance of interdisciplinarity,
inter-sectoral, inter-paradigmatic and inter-faith insights. But, as well
stated by Gregory Bateson: "Destroying the pattern that connects detroys all
quality" (**).
This might be exemplified by the eastern understanding of the individual
in community and defined by a pattern of community or kinship relationships,
in contrast with the isolated bounded western individual. Conceptually the
focus is on networks, exemplified by telecommunications networks. The understanding
is carried confusedly by insights relating to globalization or the complexity
of an ecosystem.
This 3-fold division cannot presume to be the only such division. a variety
of other approaches are reviewed elsewhere (Systems
of Categories Distinguishing Cultural Biases, 1993),
notably that of Magoroh Maruyama. As noted earlier, the possibility of using
music as a vehicle for identity in African cultures has also been explored
(Knowledge Gardening
through Music: patterns of coherence for future African management as an alternative
to Project Logic, 2000)
F. Metaphors as conceptual scaffolding
The question is what metaphors inherent in eastern cultures will provide scaffolding
for what forms of science that may be surprising, unrecognizable, or even incomprehensible
in the West?
For example, in the sections above, two sets were presented:
- 3-fold: stasis; dynamic; and pattern of connectedness
- 4-fold: property and possession; dispossession and resettlement;
from field to journey; from possession to embodiment
Does the pattern of relationship between the trinity of gods of Hindu culture,
for example, provide more clues to ways of understanding the relationships
between stasis, dynamism and connectedness? Or if not, is this pattern understood
differently in ways that give greater weight and credibility to such relationships
than emerge from equivalent cultural archetypes in western cultures? For science,
is the way in which threeness is typically understood in the West (see the
triadic paradigm of Paris Arnopoulos, 1993) constraining the development of
insight into the structure of the atom (electron, proton, neutron), for example?
Are there other qualities to threeness that are better understood and more
credible to eastern cultures? The same question may be asked of sets with larger
numbers of elements (see Patterns of Conceptual Integration, 1984).
The question for science grounded in eastern cultures is in what way their
pantheons, or pluralistic frameworks for complex dynamics, will enable the emergence
of patterns of insight in which diversity is held more appropriately than within
frameworks in which western style unity is emphasized.
Irrespective of the degree of credence attached to pantheons, or to other "non-scientific"
patterns of organizing understanding, it is useful to recognize that as metaphors
they provide a form of scaffolding (or matrix) for the organization of insight.
In so doing, they may enable the emergence of "scientific" understanding. They
have been widely recognized as vital to scientific creativity. The comprehensible
is used to provide scaffolding for the incomprehensible or the not-yet-known.
Especially intriguing is that by shifting the focus of insight from individual
set members to the set as a whole, the issue of whether identity is carried
by a static, a dynamic, or a relationship of connectedness (using that example)
may now be addressed in terms of all three together. Namely, when is any particular
perception appropriate and how are the transformations between one perception
and another achieved within a coherent framework? The focus is now on the complementarity
between the explanatory emphasis associated with each member of the set.
In this light the adaptation by the developer of the Bell helicopter, Arthur
Young (Geometry of Meaning, 1978) of the 12 measure formulae of physics
into a 3x4-fold set -- that he also matched with the traditional zodiacal signs
common to East and West -- is an example of the manipulation of sets in ways
that merit further exploration (see adaptation of these results to sustainable
strategies and dialogue Characteristics
of phases in 12-phase learning-action cycle, 1998).
|
|
Property
Possession
|
Dispossession
Resettlement
|
Movement between
fields
|
Embodiment
|
| Stasis |
|
|
|
|
| Dynamic |
|
|
|
|
| Connectedness |
|
|
|
|
"Global" as an example of a cognitive challenge
Western-style sciences have been relatively limited in their ability to deal
with any challenges of integration between incommensurables. Ironically this
becomes most obvious in the current enthusiasm for things "global"
and the process of "globalization" -- especially in terms of its dramatic
implications for the livelihoods of those in developing countries. As many have
remarked, "global" becomes a disguise for homogeneity, notably as
built into "systems"..
The fashionable use of "global" focuses simplistically on the geographical
dimension: the planet as a whole. This emphasis is the culmination of a century
of successful effort towards international understanding -- of "thinking globally
and acting locally", of "global villages", of "global action plans", of "global
ethics", of "global consciousness" and of "globalization".
What has been largely lost in this process is the other sense of global, namely
some kind of comprehensible, integrative whole -- of which a geographically
bounded planet is but one particular instance. "Global" is too readily taken
to mean planet-wide and no more -- a recognition by certain regions that there
are others on the planet. "Interdisciplinarity", "transdisciplinarity" and "integrative"
have themselves evolved into holistic buzz words because of the essential failure
of the initiatives they represented in responding to the fragmentation of knowledge.
"Holistic" could even be considered as content-free -- providing the cozy, existentially
unchallenging, explanations typical of New Age books. "Global understanding"
in this integrative sense has become almost a myth in pursuit of which some
heroes occasionally continue to quest (cf. "unity of science", etc).
Science western-style ignores how higher orders of unity are to be comprehended.
Perhaps it is only in mathematics that the clearest, and most general, distinction
is maintained between "global" and "local". Unfortunately that discipline is
incapable of taking into account the essential psychological |
