[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index

RR'sl autobiographical reminiscences



Dear Judith,
I red your father's A-R and found it fascinatingm, mainly because it sounds real, honest and sincere in appreciating the works of others close or around his 'Imperative'. He also provides in a remarkably condense form the bottom line of system theory and huge distance between quantum theory and quantum mechanics, by also indicating implicitely who is on the side of the theory, citing for that matter Hamiltoniantheory, another imperative, and Bertananffy's approach to systems thinking which has shaped our thinking process (within GST and ISSS). The change of  the name of the society moved the weight away from social/humane to scientific and somehow pushed the Society's activity from theory to practice, favoring tangible results and moving the theories to underground. I personally witnessed this shift, but at that time I could not imagine its potential detrimental effects to the systems approach as against the reductionist one where the science feels comfortable. Later I understand what was happening. I am still a member to the ISSS with some resentment, though, especially because of its disintegration in the name of operating through special integration groups. In the process many people with a vision pushed to backgound and even forgotten, survived only for ceremonial activities, such as organizing an ISSS Conference etc.or writing a book.
 
Your father is one of the great men of our time and in our false world. He and people like him surely attract so much envy, tacitly expressed as jealousy and greed in their small world, where deep questions are not asked and sharp people are beaten up or lowered. To my mind no one can  claim an idea expressed by one person, however important it could be during his life time. Ideas are built-up based on the strength of their essences. RR has also done this during his life-time by giving the credit to whom concerned, as deserved. Now his time has come as I understand from the ongoing discussion -within your list, also in that of John Kineman- on selling RR, rather his vision, to a university .The comments by people are flying with such a great speed that I can not catch them up to make a sensible contribution to the evolution of ideas. 
 
In the mean time J. Kineman is seeking ideas on how best his line can be more productive and well-directed, I say, rather self-directed, within a framework with an upward arrow. As soon as I can, I shall humbly give him my ideas in that connection. I can already guess that RR's vision may provide a good base, not as selling RR or rather RR's vision,  to a university but to the humanity at large. In the meantime formal education systems may pick it up and help further evolve. 
Here I would like to refer to one of RR's para. in his A-R which supports also my way of handling such a subtle matter of a great importance for the humanity, in particular, in our time. He reflects his vision in the garb of Bertalanffy.  RR says: "I got to understand Bertalanffy's view of System Theory , not only as a scientific, but also as a social instrument. Until then, I had always found the term ' General System Movement' uncomfortable; but that is exactly how von Bertalanffy perceived it. Wheras I viewed the reductionisms and materialims rampant in biology merely as scientifically inadequate, von Bertalanffy saw them as evil and dehumanizing; in the deepest sense immoral. Animated by his profound love of both science and humanity, he was inspired to project his view of systems, governed by ways of relating things rather than stressing differences, into an alternate world view; a paradigm, as he called it, which would offer both science and mankind something better. He viewed his vision, then, not merely as something to be reported, but as Gospel to be preached."
 
Now it seems that we can bring a new light coming from the underground to the Society's activities and beyond, perhaps finding new ways of disseminating the healthy seeds. In this context, it may already be useful, if operationally possible) to bring the three lists  (I am following) under one as Tom Mandel, John Kineman and youself/Tim Gwinn are transmitting in the same wave-length.
Thank you again by bringing to me some enlightenment.
My best,
Aydin
 
 
 
 
 
My best