Carrier of cultural meaning. ... Re: [Ailist] PsyBlog: Do You
Believe in Free Will?
Lionel Boxer
lionel.boxer at rmit.edu.au
Sat Jan 24 13:41:03 MST 2009
Carrier of cultural meaning. How can I cite this idea Ken - the ailist
posting you made or is there something published?
Everyone develops their own variation of cultural meaning (truth), based
on how they perceive RIGHTS, DUTIES and the MORAL ORDER. The aggregate
of everyone's cultural meaning comprises the UNDERLYING MOOD of a
society. Well aligned cultural meanings = stronger society. If may be
easier to align cultural meanings than to have good cultural meanings.
Hence, the need for:
1st. leaders with a good ethical framework
2nd. strong leadership exercised by leaders
3rd. influence individuals to understand truth in ethical framework of
the leader
I refer yet once again to my framework:
http://intergon.net/tsw/sustainableceos.pdf
Hitler appeared to understand this (not that his ethical framework was
anything to aspire to).
The problem with our society is that the politicians we elect are rarely
able to exercise leadership (so they are not really leaders). Rather,
they identify dominant preferences of society, align themselves with
these existing truths, and go along with the lemmings.
Green is in political agendas around the world because the aggregate
dominant discourse has come around to Green. It is certainly not the
other way around.
So, keep on talking - eventually someone is going to listen to you. It
might take a lifetime.
Carrier of cultural meaning fits well with positioning theory.
Lionel Boxer CD PhD MBA BTech(IndEng) - 0411267256
Associate of RMIT University - lionel.boxer at rmit.edu.au
Graduate School of Business
my "Assessment of Quality Systems with Positioning Theory"
now in a googe book - see link at http://intergon.net
>>> kgergen1 <kgergen1 at swarthmore.edu> 25/01/09 5:19 AM >>>
I, for one, am very pleased that the brain is finally coming under
scrutiny as "the" explanation of human behavior. There has been so
much popularization of brain studies, entirely misleading in most
cases, and as this view becomes dominant, so is the significance of
human meaning, and our capacities to shape our future through
relationship, diminished. I am just completing a draft of a paper that
argues for our viewing the brain not as a determinant of our actions,
but as a carrier of cultural meaning...not our master, but our
servant. If anyone would like a copy, let me know...Ken
On Jan 23, 2009, at 10:43 PM, Stephanie West Allen wrote:
> The way we see the brain seems to be getting some shocks to it
> recently. A couple of clues . . .
>
> Another shock for brain imaging research - the signal isn't always
> linked to neuronal activity
>
>
http://bps-research-digest.blogspot.com/2009/01/another-shock-for-brain-imaging.html
>
> Stephanie
>
> On Jan 23, 2009, at 8:35 PM, kgergen1 wrote:
>
>> From a constructionist standpoint, you can also see that all forms
>> of opposition are what you might call rhetorical or literary
>> devices. The rhetoric of opposites doesn't reflect the world so
>> much as create what we take to be the world. Thus, we are free to
>> jettison the traditional determinism/voluntarism opposition, and to
>> ask if there are other, more useful (given our values) ways to
>> construct the brain, and what we take to be free choice. Whether
>> the construction of a "higher level" serves this purpose seems an
>> open question. Ken
>>
>> On Jan 23, 2009, at 7:21 PM, Stephanie West Allen wrote:
>>
>>> If we are in our reflective mind, we have free will. If we are in
>>> our reactive brain, we likely don't, except that most of us can
>>> choose to move into the reflective mind. The free will/free won't
>>> debate as seen through the neuroscience lens is laid out quite
>>> well in THE MIND AND THE BRAIN by Schwartz and Begley. As you
>>> probably know this is a topic of much disagreement among the
>>> neuroscientists.
>>>
>>> Sounds like a good book, Bruce.
>>>
>>> Stephanie
>>>
>>> On Jan 23, 2009, at 4:39 PM, Bruce Elkin wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.s>>>> Interesting article, Stephanie. I like the “compatabilism”
>>>> approach, toward the end.
>>>>
>>>> But the underlying question poses a false dichotomy, what EF
>>>> Schumacher called a “divergent challenge.”
>>>> The more you frame the question and try to solve it, the more the
>>>> “solutions” diverge from each other. Ultimately you end up with
>>>> polar opposites, such as free will vs. determinism.
>>>>
>>>> Schumacher said that you have to transcend the question by going
>>>> to a higher level value. He gave the example of the French
>>>> revolutionary slogan, “Liberté, Egalité, et Fraternité” as an
>>>> example. If you have unlimited freedom, society won’t be very
>>>> equal. To get it completely equal, you have to regulate freedom
>>>> too much. So the French went to the higher order value of
>>>> compassion (brotherlineness/ fraternite), to help reconcile the
>>>> dichotomy between freedom and equality.
>>>>
>>>> In my new (soon to be finished) ebook Staying Up In Down Times:
>>>> Resilience, Results, and Rewards, I discuss this issue and
>>>> Schumacher’s approach to it. In it, I say:
>>>>
>>>>> Schumacher’s pairs of opposites “cease to be opposites,” he
>>>>> says, “at the higher level, the really human level, where self-
>>>>> awareness plays its proper role.” At the level of the whole
>>>>> person, higher, more senior forces such as love, compassion,
>>>>> truth, understanding, and creativity enable us to embrace and
>>>>> transcend these polar opposites.
>>>>
>>>> As usual, I’m trying to make a case for a shift from a
>>>> predominantly “problem” focused approach to the higher-level
>>>> “creating” approach (which I suggest is very compatible with the
>>>> AI approach). I add:
>>>>
>>>>> Creating is more powerful—and simpler—than problem solving
>>>>> because it mobilizes such forces as caring, and love. Working
>>>>> within creative tension, we can transcend problems, and create
>>>>> what truly matters to us.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Urge to Create
>>>>> The great psychologist Carl Jung recognized the wisdom in
>>>>> transcending divergent challenges when he said that life’s messy
>>>>> problems are not solved, only outgrown. As we saw earlier, they
>>>>> fade away when confronted with a new and stronger life urge such
>>>>> as the urge to create.
>>>>>
>>>>> Creating is driven by the power of love—the desire to bring an
>>>>> envisioned result into being. It is rooted in the truth the
>>>>> current state of the result. It expresses our creative spirit
>>>>> through choices and action. It is the place, where the hands,
>>>>> the head, and the heart come together.
>>>>
>>>> So, to come back to the free will vs. determinism dichotomy, I
>>>> think it, too, can be transcended by creating.
>>>> Our choices are not merely determined, only partially. Much
>>>> choice is freely chosen, in support of higher order values and
>>>> visions. It’s not so much a “both/and” balance, but more a
>>>> hierarchy of choice in which we acknowledge the degree to which
>>>> our past and our biology determine us, and we transcend that
>>>> determinism through higher order choices and actions in support
>>>> of what we want to create.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, unless we understand and master the “creating”
>>>> approach and it’s structure, we’re doomed (determined) to flail
>>>> away at things with our problem solving hammers.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers!
>>>> Bruce
>>>>
*********************************************************************
>>>> BRUCE ELKIN: Helping You Create What Matters Most!
>>>> 20+ Years - Clients on 6 Continents - Author of 3 Books &
>>>> The Forthcoming Simplicity, Success & Sustainability
>>>>
>>>> Tell me, what will you do
>>>> with your one wild and precious life?
>>>> - Mary Oliver
>>>> Get My Fr.ee e-Newsletter at
>>>> >>>> Phone: 250.388.7210 Web: http://www.BruceElkin.com
>>>> Blog: http://createwhatmattersmost.blogspot.com
>>>> *******************************************************************
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> The Appreciative Inquiry Discussion List is hosted by the David
>>> Eccles School of Business at the University of Utah. Jack Brittain
>>> is the list administrator. For subscription information, go to:
>>> http://mailman.business.utah.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/ailist
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Appreciative Inquiry Discussion List is hosted by the David
> Eccles School of Business at the University of Utah. Jack Brittain
> is the list administrator. For subscription information, go to:
> http://mailman.business.utah.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/ailist
_______________________________________________
The Appreciative Inquiry Discussion List is hosted by the David Eccles
School of Business at the University of Utah. Jack Brittain is the list
administrator. For subscription information, go to:
http://mailman.business.utah.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/ailist
More information about the Ailist
mailing list