Durant wrote:
> >Anyway, while a new system may be
> > emerging dialectically (thru a clash of diametrically-opposed views), it is
> > probably not something we would want to label "capitalism".
> >
>
> <snip>
> It is not views but processes that are diametrically and
> un-balancably (oops) opposed.
<snip>
I guess I slipped into meta-mode, (i.e. "views" refers to how one might perceive or,
perhaps more accurately, conceive of "processes") hence is part of the meta-language
in which one might talk _about_ processes. Yet it may be that how people
_conceive_ processes may be more important than the actual processes in explaining
human behaviour.
This lapse raises another issue pertaining to creativity which is a key requirement
when one attempts to devise new strategies of wealth allocation. It concerns the
virtue of imprecise language.
E. Carpenter in his book "They Became What They Beheld" made the following
observation:
"I recently came across the following rules of communication, posted in a School of
Journalism:
Know your audience and address yourself directly to it.
Know what you want to say and say it clearly and fully.
Reach the maximum audience by utilizing existing channels.
"Whatever sense this may have made in a world of print, it makes no sense today. In
fact, the reverse of each rule applies.
"If you address yourself to an audience, you accept at the outset the basic premlses
that unite the audience ... But artists don't address themselves to audiences; they
create audiences. The artist talks to himself out loud. If what he has to say is
significant, others hear and are affected.
"The trouble with knowing what to say and saying it clearly and fully, is that clear
speaking is generally obsolete thinking. Clear statement is like an art object: it
is the after-life of the process which called it into being. The process itself is
the significant step and, especially at the beginning, is often incomplete and
uncertain. Columbus' maps were vague and sketchy, but showed the right continent.
"The problem with full statement is that it doesn't involve: it leaves no room for
participation; it's addressed to consumer, not co-producer."
--
http://publish.uwo.ca/~mcdaniel/
