Main menu
You are here
Proposed universes and their conversation potential
Transforming the Art of Conversation (Part #8)
[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]
Global conversation: Curiously use of the phrase "global conversation" has acquired considerable legitimacy. Implicitly it is however highly restrictive in the sense that it is assumed to refer to conversation amongst those who hold a particular worldview and are happy to buy into that conversation. It typically excludes those who do not -- and who effectively design themselves out of the conversation (or are designed out by other participants). It is then more fruitful to consider that such others may have their own "global" conversations -- but each effectively with respect to a different "globe", perhaps best understood as corresponding to a different worldview located elsewhere in the universe of discourse. Or to other universes in a multi-verse.
Global conversation in this sense precludes "translation" between distant worldviews across that universe -- namely the form of "transformation" whereby interaction between alternative worldviews is fruitfully enabled (cf. Future Generation through Global Conversation: in quest of collective well-being through conversation in the present moment, 1997).
Cosmology? More might then be discovered regarding transformative conversation through using the sophisticated considerations of cosmologists regarding the nature of the universe. This approach follows from the argument previously developed that humanity can usefully explore the richer patterns of thinking deployed in one domain in order to articulate their possible relevance to another. The argument was previously developed in terms of "technomimicry" -- as an extension of the current approaches to biomimicry (cf. Engendering a Psychopter through Biomimicry and Technomimicry: insights from the process of helicopter development, 2011). In terms of aerospace exploration, technomimicry could guide exploration of possible understandings of "noonautics" (cf. Towards an Astrophysics of the Knowledge Universe: from astronautics to noonautics? 2003).
Correspondence between universe and converse: Following from the points made above, the assumption is made here that particular understandings of "conversation" are associated with ways of thinking about "universe". In this sense distinct forms of conversation are to be understood as engendering particular universes of discourse -- through some form of "universation", whereby a degree of coherence emerges. Potentially challenging is the sense in which "converse" is the paradoxical, but necessary, complement to "universe" -- the latter evoking the former for humanity (cf. Gregory Bateson, Mind and Nature: a necessary unity, 1979). Is one, in some sense, a paradoxically distorted mirror image of the other?
Whether "universe" or "conversation", a justification could be developed in that in both the physical and psychosocial realms the coherence results from a particular balance between "information", "energy", "matter" and "spacetime", where these may well be understood abstractly, rather than physically, as is the convention. The emphasis here is on the quest for mnemonic clues to fruitful patterns, as separately argued (In Quest of Mnemonic Catalysts -- for comprehension of complex psychosocial dynamics, 2007).
Historical cosmology: It is especially interesting to consider the "past" understandings of universe from which current insights have emerged -- on the assumption that many conversations (and understandings of them) might be better reflected for some by those earlier insights, however these may be deprecated by the informed.
The Wikipedia entry on universe distinguishes the following "historical models":
- creation myths: These have been notably based on narratives of gods acting in various ways. To what extent can this be recognized in the case of conversation -- perhaps as a "conversation" between divinity and humanity? Is this pattern to be recognized in forms of dialogue instigated by facilitators with special skills -- perhaps even including Bohmian Dialogue?
- philosophical models: Philosophers of centuries past reflected extensively on the nature of the universe in ways which might be considered informative of frameworks regarding conversation -- and perhaps more appropriately that offered by David Bohm.
- astronomical models: Philosophical insights into the nature of universe have been refined over the centuries by insights from astronomical observation. This pattern can be recognized to a degree in development of understanding of conversation. An argument could well be developed that more recent attribution of "star" to the "enlightened" (even "brilliant") people informing conference communication, and recognition of the manner in which participants "orbit" around them, reflects assumptions regarding a degree of systemic correspondence between the two domains. This history of astronomy, with its radical and controversial shift from the geocentric to the heliocentric pattern, may point to the extent to which many may find greater meaning in a form of "geocentric conversation" rather than in any "heliocentric conversation" -- as well as ignoring the multitude of "stars" in a hypothetical universe of discourse. It is useful to recall that for many astronomers the sun is still understood as "rising" above the horizon.
Proposed cosmologies and possible conversations: As noted above, much innovative thinking regarding conversation is recognized as having been instigated by David Bohm ("Bohm dialogue"), a quantum physicist who contributed to theoretical physics, philosophy of mind, and neuropsychology (Changing Consciousness: exploring the hidden source of the social, political and environmental crises facing our world, 1991; The Undivided Universe: an ontological interpretation of quantum theory, 1993). How did quantum physics reframe understanding of conversation? Is the question comparable to that with respect to Einstein (Einstein's Implicit Theory of Relativity -- of Cognitive Property? 2007)) and to Wittgenstein (Susan G. Sterrett, Wittgenstein Flies a Kite: a story of models of wings and models of the world, 2005)?
A very helpful framework for exploration of current insights in cosmology is that of the theoretical physicist, and mathematician, John D. Barrow (The Book of Universes, 2012). After reviewing the earlier insights above, he distinguishes current models under the following headings -- each of which may be exploited to suggest a potentially preferred understanding of conversation (as indicated in the right-hand column):
| Using imaginative reflection about "universes" to elicit imaginative reflection about "conversations" | |
| Possible universes Headings of chapters/sections from John D. Barrow (The Book of Universes, 2012). | Possible conversations ? Transformation of chapter/section headings from John D. Barrow (The Book of Universes, 2012). |
Einstein Universes
| Einstein Conversations
|
Unexpected Universes: the Rococo Period
| Unexpected Conversations: the Rococo Period
|
Something completely different
| Something completely different
|
The Steady Statesemen Come and Go with a Bang
| The Steady Statesemen Come and Go with a Bang
|
Universes, Warts and All
| Conversations, Warts and All
|
The Beginning for Beginners
| The Beginning for Beginners
|
Brave New World
| Brave New World
|
Post-modern Universes
| Post-modern Conversations
|
Fringe Universes
| Fringe Conversations
|
The Runaway Universe
| The Runaway Conversation
|
For a classification of universes, see also Ruediger Vaas (Time before Time: classifications of universes in contemporary cosmology, and how to avoid the antinomy of the beginning and eternity of the world. Bild.Wiss., 10, 2004, pp. 32-41).
Universe of discourse: Given the importance of the universe of discourse to the future of humanity's knowledge-based society, the table above raises the question as to where consideration is given to the ways in which the right-hand column might be understood -- corresponding to the quality of imaginative reflection on the nature of the "physical" universe in the left-hand column.
A relevant account is provided of recent research by Stephen Hawking and colleagues (arxiv.org/abs/1205.3807), who have shown that the universe may have the same surreal geometry as some of art's most mind-boggling images (Lisa Grossman, Hawking's 'Escher-verse' could be theory of everything, New Scientist, 9 June 2012). This offers a way of reconciling the geometric demands of string theory, a still-hypothetical "theory of everything", with the universe as observed -- through a negatively-curved Escher-like geometry (essentially a hyperbolic space). Their results rely on a mathematical twist previously considered impossible, namely the use of a negative cosmological constant rather than a positive one. The new approach provides a description of "all the possible universes that could have been -- including ones in which the solar system never formed, or in which life might have evolved quite differently". Making conventional use of a positive cosmological constant, it had proven impossible to describe universes that were "anything more than clunky approximations to reality." A plethora of universes have now been generated from wave functions with negative cosmological constants
To the extent that the geometry of a universe is indicative of a particular conversational modality, similar insights might apply to imagining a plethora of conversations. There is a certain charm to adapting the "string theory" metaphor to a conversational context -- given the extent to which it has been adopted in the form of "thread" in online threaded discourse (J. Hewitt, Beyond Threaded Discourse, International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 2001; Li Wang, et al., Predicting Thread Discourse Structure over Technical Web Forums, 2011). [see also Interweaving Thematic Threads and Learning Pathways, 2010]
Is discourse about conversation as rich as discourse about the universe? If not, why not? The former could be held to be vital to the survival of human civilization in the shorter term, whereas the latter is only of potential significance to its survival in the longer term. How might priorities in the allocation of resources to each then be fruitfully compared?
Conversations of cosmologists: Barrow offers various anecdotal accounts about the conversations amongst cosmologists regarding the competing models of the universe variously proposed. Provocatively it might be asked whether science has envisaged models of the "universe of conversation" of a complexity corresponding to that proposed for the physical universe. Or are the models of conversation implicitly employed by cosmologists typical of the simplistic models of discourse in other domains -- as Barrow's anecdotes suggest? Why might that be the case?
Speculation on the nature of the universe by cosmologists is closely related to that on how the shape of the universe is to be envisaged. Participants in dialogue may also have an intuitive sense of the "shape of a conversation" -- possibly bearing some correspondence to geometry attributed to the universe.
Selective cosmology: There is a tantalizing sense in which the left-hand column could be understood to reflect creative "cherry-picking" by cosmologists from an array of essentially geometric possibilities (readily presented metaphorically). This suggests that greater attention should be given to the nature of the array from which models could be variously selected. Might it resemble a periodic table of the kind that has proven elusive to ordering mathematics itself -- as the science of relationships par excellence (Mathematical knowledge management, 2009; Missing "map" of mathematics: a self-reflexive "periodic table"? 2009).
Is there then a sense in which creative selection from that array -- acclaimed "innovative breakthroughs" in cosmology -- is partially determined and reinforced by cognitive preferences, as discussed separately with respect to Systems of Categories Distinguishing Cultural Biases (1993), and most notably the work on cognitive biases of W. T. Jones (1961). In this sense is human engagement with cosmology to some degree a matter of "dancing" around an array of possibilities -- such that it is the patterning of the dance itself that offers insights of a higher order? A meta-pattern of connectivity in the terms of Gregory Bateson..
The issue is then not whether the universe "is" according to how some preferred model would have it. Rather the issue is how human understanding of the universe is constrained by cognitive capacity at its best -- and how whomever is then able to comprehend that articulation in preference to one that is more simplistic and more readily comprehensible. The same would tend to apply to conversation.
Selective conversation: A corresponding argument could then be developed with respect to conversation, with various creative models resulting from cognitive biases relating to selection from an implicit "menu" of possibilities -- with the organization of the "menu", and the nature of the "dance", offering insights of a higher order, as previously discussed (Periodic Pattern of Human Knowing: implication of the Periodic Table as metaphor of elementary order, 2009). Conversation is then firmly recognized as a feature of (collective) learning (Periodic Pattern of Human Life: the Periodic Table as a metaphor of lifelong learning, 2009).
Democratic discourse: It is useful to contrast this possibility with the "conversations" which characterize the forms of political discourse upheld as central to the democratic process to which societies are encouraged to aspire as the fruit of historical development (cf. Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, 1992). Again it could be asked whether the degree of conversational innovation in the political universe should be "challenged" by the conversational possibilities suggested by the table above.
Will the future consider the current simplistic pattern of democratic parliamentary discourse to be laughable -- essentially ensuring the forms of conversation which are non-transformative guarantees of "business as usual", whilst vigorously claiming the contrary? This is especially strange in that opposing parties typically frame their perspectives as incommensurable -- to the point that representatives of each could credibly ask the other what "universe do you come from"?
A variety of forms of parliament (cf. Alan Siaroff, Varieties of Parliamentarianism in the Advanced Industrial Democracies, International Political Science Review, 24, 2003; Michael Coppedge, Varieties of Democracy: rethinking democracy measurement, Kellogg Institute for International Studies, 2012). How many kinds of democratic discourse are open for consideration in those contexts, or recognized as active in global society? As conversations, how complex are those recognized in comparison with the complexity considered necessary for adequate comprehension of the "universe"? Reframing Fukuyama's thesis, is it rather the case that reflection on new possibilities of conversation is defined as having ended -- all necessary "transformation" having been accomplished?
Conversation with alien lifeforms: In a period of considerable investment in the search for alien life on Mars, and elsewhere in the known universe, it is appropriate to consider the possible forms of "conversation" that may become credible (cf. Communicating with Aliens: the psychological dimension of dialogue, 2000; Self-reflective Embodiment of Transdisciplinary Integration (SETI) the universal criterion of species maturity? 2008). There is a profound irony to the possibility of such "contact", given the continuing demonstration of incapacity to communicate with those defined explicitly as "alien" by conversational processes in human society -- according to particular cognitive biases (as with "other" ethnic groups, "other" faiths, "other" sexual orientations, "feral youth", the Taliban, etc).
[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
For further updates on this site, subscribe here