[Dialogue] Change of Belief [darrell walker]

[darrell walker]

    It has been so long that I have been requested to make a provocative proposition that I have forgotten what one looks like.  But "provocative proposition" has the ring of rational about it, and what I am suggesting is "transrational," to use Wilber's term.  That gets me out of having to use rational arguments.
    First, it sounds like I need to plug in Wilber's definition of "holon," to wit, "a holon is a whole that is a part of other wholes.  For example, a whole atom is part of a whole molecule; a whole molecule is part of a whole cell; a whole cell is part of a whole organism.  Or again, a whole letter is part of a whole word, which is part of a whole sentence, which is part of a whole paragraph, and so on.  Reality is composed of neither wholes nor parts, but of whole/parts, or holons.  Reality in all domains is basically composed of holons."
    Second, we need to get the ego under control.  Am I diminished because I am merely a cell and not the organ?  The cell can be well or contaminated by "evil" bacteria.  It may need to be baptized in antibiotic for the salvation of its sinful soul.  Or, the cell can mature to the point of realizing that with clean living it doesn't need antibiotics.  Or looked at another way, can you imagine a world filled only with uncoordinated kidney cells emitting urine all over the place to no good purpose.  The kidney cells avidly believe they are at the top of Creation's ladder and refuse to be manipulated into being "merely" part of a kidney.  Who are we humans to put limits on creation?
    And finally, there is merely the observation of what is transpiring.  It began with Henry Ford announcing that humans were merely part of an assembly line.  No one person on the assembly line had to understand the process.  But without persons on the assembly line, there would be no process.  Without assembly line paychecks, there would be no customers.  Henry never heard Wilber's fancy term, holon, but he understood the concept well.
    For the past thirty years a corporation mentality has been evolving.  The first hint of it that I saw was in 1984 at the annual board meeting of Phillips Petroleum Company.  Carl Icahn appeared at the meeting and announced to the chairman that the purpose of the company had nothing to do with products or customers or employees.  Rather the sole purpose of the company was "shareholder value."  He then proceeded to force the company to go $8 billion into debt and distribute it to shareholders.  He then liquidated TWA and just this week was working his magic on Chlorox.  Corporations are in creative flux--merging, spinning off, suing, monopolizing, off shoring, downsizing--all the while controlling the cultural heat to prevent burning.  Lobbyists and money control Washington while the mythic masses are manipulated to do the corporate bidding.  The creation is in the messy, ugly creative stages and will not mature for hundreds, even thousands, of years.  But we are blessed to have experienced the ovulation and orgasm of the 1950-60s which resulted in the egg being fertilized in the 1980s.  Cell division is now rapidly underway but actual organ formation is yet to be defined.
    Rational?  No, but then creation never is.  Why should it have been sinful to take a bite of apple?
        Darrell Walker  --  Phoenix


  Pondering some more about Darrell's Change of Belief thread which includes
  phrases like:
  -Appropriate function of corporations in culture
  -Ken Wilber's concept of holons
  -Belief that corporations are the next evolving level of spiritual development
  -Our role as holons will be participants in the process but we will not be in control
  -New being having organs labeled as Google, Apple, and Goldman Sachs


  Seems like there are several ways to engage this thread
  -point, counterpoint, file in my never find it again inbox or
  -intensify the action-reaction cycle by sharp-shooting a couple Darrell's more outrageous points or
  -put in some little snarky cheep shot or


  invite an appreciative inquiry and some provocative propositions from Darrell that actually invite dialog


  So, I'm wondering, Darrell, if you might have 3 or 4 propositions that invite dialog and inquiry
  I'm thinking that my read of your points doesn't do justice to your thinking since I'm stuck in a set of
  cynical editorials like
  -lost in Wilbur's abstraction machinery
  -scientific darwinism
  -corporations are evolutionary people
  -apple vs haliburton
  -no social pioneers no freedom no enlightenment just along for the ride in a process process paradigm
  -1000 year timelines do what for the civilizing process again?




  How about some provocative propositions that generate inquiry, Darrell, got any to share?   

  --
  Steve Harrington



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  Dialogue mailing list
  Dialogue at wedgeblade.net
  http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/dialogue_wedgeblade.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20110821/e83084d5/attachment.html>