You are here

Avoiding constraining pillar-dependency


Living as an Imaginal Bridge between Worlds (Part #9)


[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]


Shifting levels: In the light of bridge construction, a useful question is then how to avoid the need for "pillars" and the simplistic ("Stone Age") architecture which they encourage. How to enable the transition from pillar-dependency to keystone-dependency? In this light an intermediate pillar is "excluded" by being effectively virtualized to a degree into a keystone. The "excluded middle" of logic achieves a new form of cognitive operacy -- but not at the level of the relationships it regulates. This can be understood in terms of Albert Einstein's much-cited phrase: The significant problems we face can not be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them. Some kind of "keystone functionality" is required at a different level.

Being (up)right: In seeking to support psychosocial arches of greater span, however, at what point is it nevertheless necessary to combine keystones with pillars -- as with the Ponte Vecchio? But are there forms of psychosocial construction which could obviate any need for pillars -- conventionally understood as necessarily "upright" with respect to the orienting constraints of gravity? "Upright" is then readily associated with being "right" by the "righteous" -- despite the unfortunately divisive consequences for a "global" civilization within which people are variously "upright" on a sphere (Geometry of Thinking for Sustainable Global Governance, 2009).

Nevertheless "flat earth" thinking continues to be promoted, as separately discussed (Irresponsible Dependence on a Flat Earth Mentality -- in response to global governance challenges, 2008; Richard Slaughter, Transcending Flatland, In: Knowledge Base of Future Studies. Presence, 1996). More intriguing still is the possibility of forms of psychosocial construction in which any keystone becomes virtual in relation to relatively more tangible pillars.

Tensegrity: These issues have been discussed separately, notably in relation to tensegrity architecture:

Especially relevant to the dynamics of liminality is the extent to which the viability of tensegrity design is dependent on dynamic readjustment of stresses throughout the whole structure. This dynamic offers one way of reflecting on living betwixt and between. Tensegrity dynamics are evident to a degree in the rigging of sailing boats. Its relevance is attested by the title of a book by policy scientist Geoffrey Vickers (Freedom in a Rocking Boat: changing values in an unstable society, 1972).


[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]