Making Sure We’re Making Sure

9224879

For the last 100,000 years people have been in the information era. Since we began to converse and share information with each other we have been assessing or making sure of  the information’s integrity. Making sure of its accuracy, consistency and that we are ultimately understanding it.

If this is true and we agree with this axiom then it changes everything,  I believe, as we become conscious of it. As we become aware of making sure and we are continuously making sure that we are making sure we are forming a singularity or an incidence of exponential growth that might explain where we are today and where we are heading.

Of course, as with anything some people are making sure more than others. Some have already made sure, their own, usually, what we call dogma or tradition or are making very little, more sure. Whereas others can be making sure on a daily basis, creating or discovering new ideas, concepts, systems and inventions during the process of making sure.
How does one, by making sure, make us also more creative?
Maybe it doesn’t, maybe it just leads us into a greater truth of discovery.

Some things become much clearer with this idea of Making Sure, in my view such as the opposite of making sure. Prejudice or prejudging is not helpful when making sure. Anger is not helpful either when we are making sure. Lying and ignoring also hinders the making of sure. And finally laziness is probably the number one enemy of making sure.

So if you want to be more creative, and who doesn’t these days, why not start making sure you are making sure..

 

Singular Distinctions

 

MSocStud

Just finished reading The Certainty of Uncertainty by Bernhard Poerksen and it was a very good read on Constructivism, ie. the only thing that seems certain is uncertainty as the title implies.

In the first chapter, Poerksen interviews Heinz von Foerster  who’s opinion I probably like the most. Anyway worth a read in my view and a great find for me as I have been re-constructing for the last 33 years and only learned by reading this book that I could be called a constructivist.

So, Von Foerster suggests that the observer views the world through the lenses of distinctions such as right/wrong, good/bad, calm/angry, logic/illogical, reason/unreason or agree/disagree, etc etc. These are usually called dichotomies.

It seems to me that a way around this issue of polar views or distinctions and the conflict they can cause through dogma and absolute thinking, is by constructing a singular view.

We can do this by using right/not right, good/not good, calm/not calm, logic/non logic, reason/non reason or agree/not agree.This is just a slight tweak of the use of our language and thinking. With right, good, calm, logic, reason and agree being the object or absolutes or objective, that we presume or assume may exist, however are unknown to us as the subject or observer or subjective.

So, we are all in the state of not good, not right, not calm, non logic, non reason and not agree, but to different levels obviously, and we can use conversation for continually making sure where those level lie and letting our “non logic” stand to “non reason” for now…..maybe.