Re: Learning the earth system LO4000

Tobin Quereau (quereau@austin.cc.tx.us)
Fri, 1 Dec 1995 22:24:34 -0600 (CST)

Replying to LO3991 --

In reading your response to John, Don, I was reminded of some long
forgotten thoughts. I'll place them in the context of the message...

On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, DeGuerre, Don wrote:

> Replying to LO3928 --
>
> John Woods said:
>
> "So let's try to never take too seriously any particular solution or
> conclusion. There in no absolutely right way to do anything. We
> struggle, we learn and then we do that some more. We have the gift of
> being able to realize this about ourselves and maybe even enjoy the
> process sometimes."
>
>
> It is a question today whether or not we live in an objectively ordered
> reality and whether or not there are any natural (social) laws, any
> "truth." While I can agree that social reality is tremendously complex
> with variety approaching infinity, and therefore we cannot model social
> reality accurately with our existing mathematics, unless we make
> tremendous assumptions and create abstractions that reduce the variety;
> and while I can therefore agree that social reality is inter-subjective --
> I want to be very careful that we don't abandon a search for 'the truth.'
> Even if there are no right ways, surely there are ways that we like better
> than others and ways that seem to work better than others (whatever 'work'
> means)?

At this point I was reminded of a friend's comment to me in 1969 as we
were discussing some fairly "heavy" philosophical matters. She said, "We
may not be able to discover the meaning of life, but we _can_ learn what
makes life meaningful...."

> Surely then it is important to disagree, to critique, to dialogue
> -- surely learning in an inter-subjective social reality has to be
> interactive? However if we don't take ourselves, our lives, our work, our
> disagreements seriously, then what are we doing?

My brain is somewhat rusty on this one, but I think it was someone named
Asch who said something to the effect that consensus only has meaning when
each person feels able to hold diligently to his/her own unique
perceptions and perspectives. In other words, what is sought is _not_ some
smoothing out of differences and diverse opinions, but rather the clear
vision of that common ground which permeates and celebrates our
separateness.

> I fear that naive
> notions of 'consensus' and 'human relations' perspectives on
> communication/dialogue and 'postmodernism' could lead towards solipsism
> and the abandonment of reality by the social sciences. This could be
> interpreted as a maladaptive response to turbulence (dissociation) which
> from a pragmatic perspective could be suicidal. Thus I favour
> argumentation and continuing to knock out what it is we think we know
> about the nature of social reality, and what it is that we think will work
> to create a better society.

While I still tend to resonate with what John was saying in the original
post, your response and its effect are excellent evidence of the value of
your "arguement". I don't know of many people who consciously prefer to
"abandon reality" (for very long at any one time, that is), but the
interchange and dialogue that we are engaged in on this list certainly
does help me to check out my "lenses" every so often to find out if they
are still clear enough to be of value when I am heading near a cliff.

--
Tobin Quereau
quereau@austin.cc.tx.us