Re: different language games
As for Newtonian physics, I'm not interested. I am, however, very interested in NEWTON's physics and the other matters that informed his thought. Newton wrote literally a barn full of stuff. 1/3 of it dealt with matters of physics, 1/3 dealt with matters of religion and theology, and 1/3 dealt with matters of alchemy. And of course there was much that overlapped all three. Strange how the physics writings are what lingers. Alchemy and the philosophy upon which it is based makes for fascinating reading. His theories in physics were vindicated and used. The others were third rate, not good descriptions of anything - just like Einstein's non- physicist opinions. Interesting historical documents, but not adding anything new to what we already had/have. Ray, have you ever wondered why it seems absurd to talk about progress in art i.e. Michaelangelo through to Picasso; and why it seems natural to talk about progress in science i.e. Galileo through to Einstein? I thought there was progress in art as well as in science. Both in it's function and it's technology. Eva * Brian McAndrews, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: different language games (corrected)
Sorry folks, I reread this post and had to correct the multiple errors. This is the corrected version. REH Brian McAndrews wrote: Hi Ray, I learned a very important lesson from 4 Mohawk women who I was privileged to teach a few years ago. They told me that in their culture, when a person is asked a question, the answer might come hours or weeks later. The answer might also be in the form of a story that might not immediately seem to connect with the question. This made for a very interesting course. Schools tend to want answers within seconds; like the way many on FW fire back responses. I hear it as the difference between the way the arts (perfect project orientation) as opposed to the academics (time clock orientation) are taught. What is the discipline being taught in each case? So I've thought a lot about beginning to respond to your response. Here is my beginning: Thanks! Try reading Wittgenstein's writing as aphorisms. He firmly believed that 'philosophy ought to be written only as a poetic composition.' Wittgenstein used physics and oracles as symbols. Each representing a different way of meaning making. Oracle is the symbol for prophet, mystic, shaman, medicine man, angel, vision quester, mediator, seer, dreamer - Actually, I tend to read everything as "expression" limited by time and space. In this way you have two types of meaning that is layered. The initial type is Denotative (dictionary culturally agreed specific meaning) and is one to three layers deep, the second is Connotative and can be as much as four layers deep. We tend to like sevens. I remember the final paragraph of your News Years message to FW: -- "Being both a pagan and a priest, this might seem strange to some that I would suggest a possible answer within such a thought but nonetheless I am offering the thought. It is said that meditation is the highest form of prayer amongst my people. I would suggest a meditation on the balance of things for this new year. Meditate on your neighbors, not from the standpoint of conversion to your way of thought, but with the idea that a healthy neighbor is less likely to be a destructive one. If you pray for the balance of human societies, the health of their children and the development of their potential as humans, and then you do the same for the rest of life on the earth and the earth itself, then at least within yourself you will grow more aware.And who knows what will happen if we all grow more aware and less anesthetized by both the pace and demands of the world that we have decided to dream into place up until the present? Happy New Year!" --- I would put what you wrote above under the oracle symbol. There are two kinds of compliments here. I acknowledge both of them. Thank you. What I wrote is about a process that is built around the health of a system as a result of awareness processes asserted by the whole person in solving the problems of that system. In some ways it is what the Management people from MIT Sloan school are using and calling "Learning Organizations." The late Donald Schoen called it "Reflective Practice." Amongst our people, for serious issues we examine a problem in a "ritual fashion" with specified steps that include the use of "taboo" or as F.M. Alexander terms "conscious inhibition" in developing focus within a short, intense time frame. A short process can contain as few as seven steps with a longer process involving physical and emotional fasting within a group process that takes many days and can involve literally thousands of "steps" in meditating on the problem. In a group, each person is acknowledged as a universe that is different from all others.That provides, in some cases, tens of thousands of possibilities in examining the answers to problems. Rather than "oracles" most native councils are termed "bureaucratic" by the outside, because they refuse to announce a decision before the processes have been completed. This is why councils chosen by "white" election processes are usually boycotted by traditionals. Their processes are considered expedient, self serving and shallow when compared to the older consensual explorative forms. At the end of each time period, the people discuss the problem from a non-protagonist position. Each person simply reports with the belief that every position reported will eventually form a coherent whole that will allow for a group action that is without conflict.This is the "Democracy" of the American Indian processes that I was taught. The process finishes only when there is a consensus on the action to be taken. As for Newtonian physics, I'm not interested. I am, however, very interested in NEWTON's physics and the other matters that informed his thought. Newton wrote literally a
Re: different language games
Hi Ray, I learned a very important lesson from 4 Mohawk women who I was privileged to teach a few years ago. They told me that in their culture, when a person is asked a question, the answer might come hours or weeks later. The answer might also be in the form of a story that might not immediately seem to connect with the question. This made for a very interesting course. Schools tend to want answers within seconds; like the way many on FW fire back responses. So I've thought a lot about beginning to respond to your response.Here is my beginning: Try reading Wittgenstein's writing as aphorisms.He firmly believed that 'philosophy ought to be written only as a poetic composition.' Wittgenstein used physics and oracles as symbols. Each representing a different way of meaning making. Oracle is the symbol for prophet, mystic, shaman, medicine man, angel, vision quester, meditator, seer, dreamer - I remember the final paragraph of your News Years message to FW: -- "Being both a pagan and a priest, this might seem strange to some that I would suggest a possible answer within such a thought but nonetheless I am offering the thought. It is said that meditation is the highest form of prayer amongst my people. I would suggest a meditation on the balance of things for this new year. Meditate on your neighbors, not from the standpoint of conversion to your way of thought, but with the idea that a healthy neighbor is less likely to be a destructive one. If you pray for the balance of human societies, the health of their children and the development of their potential as humans, and then you do the same for the rest of life on the earth and the earth itself, then at least within yourself you will grow more aware.And who knows what will happen if we all grow more aware and less anesthetized by both the pace and demands of the world that we have decided to dream into place up until the present? Happy New Year!" --- I would put what you wrote above under the oracle symbol. As for Newtonian physics, I'm not interested. I am, however, very interested in NEWTON's physics and the other matters that informed his thought. Newton wrote literally a barn full of stuff. 1/3 of it dealt with matters of physics, 1/3 dealt with matters of religion and theology, and 1/3 dealt with matters of alchemy. And of course there was much that overlapped all three. Strange how the physics writings are what lingers. Alchemy and the philosophy upon which it is based makes for fascinating reading. Ray, have you ever wondered why it seems absurd to talk about progress in art i.e. Michaelangelo through to Picasso; and why it seems natural to talk about progress in science i.e. Galileo through to Einstein? Well that is enough for now. I've briefly touched on a few of your initial comments. More to come after I have thought some more.I want to comment on your A.I. Richards quote. Richards sat in on some of Wittgenstein's classes. Below are the first 2 paragraphs of what Ray wrote back to me last week: Actually Brian, I have no problem nor does my culture or profession with Quantum Physics, it is just the linearity of Newtonian physics without the uncertainity of his metaphysics (action) to balance his linear objectification that I would protest. I don't believe reality is contained in either place but in both. Whether you call it balancing Science with Art, Object with Process, particle with wave or Physics with Metaphysics. As for Oracles, they are not a part of my tradition or knowledge. My guess about the Greeks is that the Oracle was a holistic diagnostician as well as skilled in reading those subtle waves that tend to shape reality in non-ordinary ways in extraordinary circumstances. ** * Brian McAndrews, Practicum Coordinator* * Faculty of Education, Queen's University * * Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 * * FAX:(613) 533-6307 Phone (613) 533-6000x74937* * e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]* * "Ethics and aesthetics are one"* * Wittgenstein * ** ** **
Re: different language games
Brian McAndrews wrote: Hi Ray, I learned a very important lesson from 4 Mohawk women who I was privileged to teach a few years ago. They told me that in their culture, when a person is asked a question, the answer might come hours or weeks later. The answer might also be in the form of a story that might not immediately seem to connect with the question. This made for a very interesting course. Schools tend to want answers within seconds; like the way many on FW fire back responses. The difference between the way the arts (perfect project orientation) asopposed to the academics (time clock orientation) are taught. What is the discipline being taught in each case? So I've thought a lot about beginning to respond to your response.Here is my beginning: Thanks! Try reading Wittgenstein's writing as aphorisms.He firmly believed that 'philosophy ought to be written only as a poetic composition.' Wittgenstein used physics and oracles as symbols. Each representing a different way of meaning making. Oracle is the symbol for prophet, mystic, shaman, medicine man, angel, vision quester, meditator, seer, dreamer - Actually, I tend to read everything as expression limited by time andspace. In this way you have two types of meaning that is layered. The initial type is Denotative (dictionary culturally agreed specific meaning) and is one to three layers deep, the second is connotative and can be as much as four layers deep. We tend to like sevens. I remember the final paragraph of your News Years message to FW: -- "Being both a pagan and a priest, this might seem strange to some that I would suggest a possible answer within such a thought but nonetheless I am offering the thought. It is said that meditation is the highest form of prayer amongst my people. I would suggest a meditation on the balance of things for this new year. Meditate on your neighbors, not from the standpoint of conversion to your way of thought, but with the idea that a healthy neighbor is less likely to be a destructive one. If you pray for the balance of human societies, the health of their children and the development of their potential as humans, and then you do the same for the rest of life on the earth and the earth itself, then at least within yourself you will grow more aware.And who knows what will happen if we all grow more aware and less anesthetized by both the pace and demands of the world that we have decided to dream into place up until the present? Happy New Year!" --- I would put what you wrote above under the oracle symbol. There are two kinds of compliments here. I acknowledge both of them.Thank you. What I wrote is about a process that built around the health of a system as a result of awareness processes asserted by the whole person in solving the problems of that system. In some ways it is like what the Management people from MIT Sloan school are using and calling "Learning Organizations." The late Donald Schoen called it "Reflective Practice." Amongst our people, for serious issues we examine a problem in a ritual fashion with specified steps that include the use of taboo in developing focus within a short, intense time frame. A short process can contain as few as seven steps with a longer process involving physical and emotional fasting within a group process that takes many days and can involve literally thousands of "steps" in meditating on the problem. In a group, each person becomes a universe that is different from all others.That provides, in some cases, tens of thousands of possibilities in examining an answer to problems. Rather than "oracles" most councils are termed "bureaucratic" because they refuse to announce a decision before the processes have been run. This is why councils chosen by "white" election processes are usually boycotted by traditionals. Their processes are considered expediant, self-serving and shallow when compared to the older consensual explorative forms. At the end of each time period, the people discuss the problem from a non-protagonist position. Each person simply reports with the belief that every position reported will eventually form a coherent whole that will allow for a group action that is without conflict.This is the "Democracy" of the American Indian processes that I was taught. The process finishes only when there is a consensus on the action to be taken. As for Newtonian physics, I'm not interested. I am, however, very interested in NEWTON's physics and the other matters that informed his thought. Newton wrote literally a barn full of stuff. 1/3 of it dealt with matters of physics, 1/3 dealt with matters of religion and theology, and 1/3 dealt with matters of alchemy. And of course there was much that overlapped all three. The physical,
Re: different language games
Actually Brian, I have no problem nor does my culture or profession with Quantum Physics, it is just the linearity of Newtonian physics without the uncertainity of his metaphysics (action) to balance his linear objectification that I would protest. I don't believe reality is contained in either place but in both. Whether you call it balancing Science with Art, Object with Process, particle with wave or Physics with Metaphysics. As for Oracles, they are not a part of my tradition or knowledge. My guess about the Greeks is that the Oracle was a holistic diagnostician as well as skilled in reading those subtle waves that tend to shape reality in non-ordinary ways in extraordinary circumstances. For example this afternoon I had a student read my mind for almost an hour as I worked with her vocalises. When she "slipped" I would say "read my mind" and she would take correction without a word being spoken. But was there a word spoken? Was it micro-movements? Or was my projection of the physicality of the process being transferred to my face and she reversing the process from face to body and then to the activated breath?Almost any discription will be both a success and a failure depending upon the time/ space of the lesson. There have been many examples in which the vocal art has used the science, philosophy, psychology and even economics of the day to organize the vocal pedagogy so that it would be comprehensible in the language of the moment. It is often forgotten that all of these ways are really metaphors to stimulate the whole organism into an action that is comprehensible as artistic singing. They are as untrue as they are true and are discarded as soon as they cease to "work". There is always this hunger for the specificity of the Denotative Dictionary meanings that will make time stop and everyone understand but it doesn't exist. I.A. Richards spoke of the problem of the Dictionary in language which is a kind of parallel to the certainty that Wittgenstein seemed to be finding in physics. You would know better than I and he is dead and we could both be wrong. But this dead poet rhetorician put it this way: The real danger of "dictionary understanding" is that it so easily prevents us from perceiving the limitations of our understanding: a disadvantage inseparable from the advantage it gives us of concealing them from our friends Most of our devices for exhibiting feeling through words are so crude that we easily convince ourselves and others that we have understood more perfectly than is the case. Humanity's pathetic need for sympathy also encourages this illusion. Thus "dictionary understanding" of feeling, though less glib, is as treacherous as with sense. I.A. Richards "Practical Criticism" Pg. 307 The issue for me is one of what Gel-Mann calls "complex adaptive systems." It is the ability to perceive systems with clarity and then to adapt that perception, through the whole being, into some form of expression that involves the whole person with another. i.e. the root of the word Per-form-ance. To make the Form (system) clear to an audience. The quantification of that is science while the expression of it in terms of truth and beauty is art. At this point, even with the computer, art has a better record of working within science than the reverse because beauty, or "the best possible of its kind" is one of the pre-requisites for Art but not necessarily for Science. That is why my daughter's academics classes really teaches her about "completing as much as is possible within an allotted time" while her drama and arts courses teach her that "it must be completed as perfectly as possible no matter how long it takes." I contend that the "academics" create "hired hands" through their use of mass teaching in time bound situations, while the Arts teach "thinking" as a process that contains a system in time that must be completed perfectly within the individual context. This individual context is not out of sync with my understanding of Wittgenstein, so could this parallel he expressed be a result of his need based upon his situation? or maybe I'm wrong about him. You would be the one who would know Brian. REH Brian McAndrews wrote: I've been really enjoying the manic state of FW over the last while. I've barely got time to read half the messages but I would never miss Ray E. Harrell's stuff. He sees things very differently than most. He also has the ability to slow some people down and have them think. Much of what gets discussed on this list could be described as people playing different language games. The words seem familiar and connectable but aren't. The kings in chess and checkers are very different kings. I've posted this quote before on this list but I think it deserves being repeated. Ray, I believe, knows the advice of the physicist but is not persuaded. He prefers the oracle.
