Symbols -- by-passing and focusing lengthy articulations

Engaging with Globality through Cognitive Circlets (Part #3)

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

Narrative: Whatever the scope, there is a tendency to articulate understanding in the form of narrative and text. These modes may indeed rehearse the set of insights indicative of broader, deeper or more subtle understanding. Remembering the narrative may be a valued skill, as with story tellers.

Lists: An alternative to the continuity and integrity offered by any such narrative is a listing of the insights. Religion upholds sets of principles and injunctions in this way. Laws and regulations may be promulgated through such lists. In the form of "bullet points", the preoccupations deemed requisite to any strategy, or to the management of any enterprise, may be listed in Powerpoint style representations (as with this document). It is curious that much social organization is designed and managed through such "bullet point" lists and the appropriateness of doing so is seldom challenged (Enhancing Sustainable Development Strategies through Avoidance of Military Metaphors, 1998).

Network diagrams: More complex still is the representation of the elements as a network or a systems diagram -- even a mind map-- beyond the hierarchical limitations of nested lists; such linkage typically has implications for the reflection of the interconnectivity in organizational or technical operations.

Symbols: The cognitive content of lists may be rendered much more succinct and memorable by the representation of the elements as symbols. The use of sets of such symbols may in fact precede the verbal or textual articulation of the insight, or may be understood as mnemonic catalysts for such articulation. This is the case of the traditional symbols of many cultures, notably sets of gods forming a pantheon. It is however interesting that the content of some lists from early periods -- as with the Ten Commandments -- has not been represented by symbols.

Rosaries: The earlier paper (Designing Cultural Rosaries and Meaning Malas to Sustain Associations within the Pattern that Connects, 2000) noted how principles vital to understanding of the integrity of a pattern of belief were associated in many cultures with beads or symbols on some form of rosary. These provided a set of mnemonic triggers to recollect that pattern. Such devices are then to be understood as succinct carriers or holding frames. They provide a symbolic interface with that which is larger or more complex than can be coherently comprehended. The individual elements on any such necklace might then be understood as a set of cognitive "lenses" through which a larger context can be partially comprehended -- a form of "macroscope" (Joël de Rosnay, The Macroscope, 1979; Luc de Brabandère, Le Latéroscope: systèmes et créativité, 1989)

Identity: Necklaces, bracelets, anklets and belts may of course also be used to signify identification with a set of beliefs or understandings. They may be used to denote acquisition of understanding, notably as a mark of rank. They are a means of tribal identification in many cultures. More commonly they may also take the form of fashion accessories, expressive of other collective affiliations or associations. The distinct functions essential to integrated application of insight are best exemplified by the use by artisans of belts from which hang a set of tools. The use of key rings may also be understood symbolically and practically as holding access to a range of domains relevant to the exercise of an integrated set of functions.

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