Transitioning the World with Collective Intelligence
Google Search
Random Pages
License
This wiki is licensed under the new
Creative Commons Wiki License (beta), if not noted otherwise.
See Copyleft for more information.
Aperspectivism
|
Using individual perspective to build complex collective objects
|
Definition Collective Intelligence Collective Intelligence > The invisible revolution |
|
Aperspectivism
Definition proposal
Aperspectivism is a concept created by Jean Gebser? in his book called « The Ever Present Origin ».
Sculpture by Maria Teresa Picasso
Let's imagine a circle of people around a complex colorful object. Depending on their position around this object, some people will say it's back with a flower hat. Others will say it has a pair of eyes. Others will mention its blue vaporous aspect, with no precise details, with a had without flowers, etc.
No one can individually grab the object in its plain reality, everyone has an « angled » perception, based upon the angle he/she is looking from. In the classical approach, named « perspectivism », each one would defend his/her point of view by claiming his/her own perception, fully sincere and valid..
No matter which process is used to select the dominant view (from the strongest, the most charismatic, the most agile, the elected representative...), the final version that will emerge will also have an angle.
The only way to apprehend the complex reality of this object is collective. Each one should be able to provide his/her point of view, just like providing a new piece in a giant puzzle. We no longer stick up for a point of view, but we offer it. Thus, while everyone has an individual perception that is absolutely sincere and contradictory, the community becomes able to manipulate a complex object that none of the member can individually grasp..
This approach seems obvious to us for real 3D objects that belong to our perceptible reality. Yet we leave this approach as soon as complex symbolic objects enter in the game. Then we jump into perspectivism, just like if the balance of contradictory forces would give birth to an emerging truth. This is one of the greatest contemporary illusions there is.
Translated into poetry
It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind
The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
“God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!”
The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, “Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me ’tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!”
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a snake!”
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
“What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain,” quoth he;
“ ‘Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!”
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: “E’en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!”
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a rope!”
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
Moral:
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
From American poet John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887) – see original version
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind
The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
“God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!”
The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, “Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me ’tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!”
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a snake!”
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
“What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain,” quoth he;
“ ‘Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!”
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: “E’en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!”
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
“I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant
Is very like a rope!”
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
Moral:
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
From American poet John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887) – see original version
Contributors to this page: Jean-Francois Noubel
.
Page last modified on Tuesday 06 of December, 2005 [21:54:38 UTC] by Jean-Francois Noubel.
TheTransitioner in French
