10th January 2004 | Uncompleted
Encoding emergent and hidden distinctions
reflective representation of polarized thinking
- / -
Introduction
This exploration has been prompted by the unusual importance of polarized thinking in determining international strategic options -- notably in relation to the "war against terrorism". It follows from an exploration of the conceptual gerrymandering associated with definitional game-playing (see, for example, Is God a Terrorist?: Definitional game-playing by the Coalition of the Willing, 2004)
The paper is a further development of work initiated in earlier papers (Discovering richer patterns of comprehension to reframe polarization, 1998; Distinguishing Levels of Declarations of Principles, 1980)
Divisive polarities
The importance of polarities to they dynamics of modern society is evident from the following examples:
| Good vs Evil | Knowledge vs Ignorance |
| Healthy vs Unhealthy | Heart vs Head |
| Love vs Hate | Employment vs Unemployment |
| Law/Order vs Anarchy | Truth vs Falsehood/Disinformation |
| Simplicity vs Complexity | Fun vs Boring |
| Beauty vs Ugliness | Youth vs Age |
| Profit vs Nonprofit | Spiritual vs Materialist |
| "Us" vs "Them" | |
Reframing possibilities
The question here is to explore new ways to handle such polarizations conceptually. The objective includes:
- to give a form of stability to the dynamic of any polarity, which in practice undermines any orderly approach
- to point to potentially richer and more complex ways of exploring any polarity
- to draw attention to hidden implications of any polarity
The approach is partly inspired by the binary coding system that is fundamental to the Chinese I Ching -- and which was the basis of the reflections of Leibniz on such a coding (leading subsequently to the modern digital computer). Although the I Ching is an extensive elaboration of such an exploration, the approach here is on the initial stages through which polarities can be encoded.
Encoding approach
Moving beyond the conventional representation of a polarity by the two ends of one single pole, instead allow each pole of the polarity to be represented by a distinct pole. The two poles would then need to be distinguished. This could be illustrated by taking the first polarity in the above table (Good vs Evil) as an example. One pole (eg representing "Good") might be coloured white. The other (representing "Evil") might then be coloured black.
References
Evoking Authenticity: through polyhedral global configuration of local paradoxes. 2003 (https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs00s/authen.php)
Organization and Lifestyle Design: Characteristics of a nonverbal structural language. 1978 (https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs/lifedesi.php)
Notes
Within us vs Against us -- Blake quote
Mirror with unacknowledged
Progressive complexification / diversity
Diffident acknowledgement
Undermining effort
Unrecognized merits / health (does not count)
Challenge vs O-rings ** Seminarists / Angels
Language to encompass
Tribes of agreement
Shared vision vs Secret stench
Not "I Ching"
- binary coding system
- benefit from I Ching maths
"Good" according to orginal definition embedded in many shades of grey
- little good vs big good (pattern that connects)
- little bad vs big bad (ignorance of pattern that connects)
Wave-particle duality
6 dimensions ; 6 directions (Young)
magic square integrative pathways
stigmatization: demonization / unreasonable / unbeliefer / untermensch
tolerated ignorance
 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.. |