So I was just at Bojangles… which by the way is an AWESOME Cajun/Southern fast food restaurant here in the Carolinas… and overheard some guy on the phone talking about money (which also reminded me of Snowden’s blog on that issue)… he was talking about someone who owed him a large amount of money and that the guy just didnt understand that this is “real money” and that “this isn’t monopoly!”.
Well if you have read any of my previous posts… this is a very interesting conversation. Notice how the guy on my side of the phone feels some reason to inform the other guy that money is “real”, and that it isn’t “monopoly” referring to a game, as in not “real”. This is what I think is self-signification at work… a point which I think many people don’t realize that you have to get back to this level of explanation in your language… fallacy arises when one person, especially the researcher starts dictating what is “real”, or heaven forbid “objective”… I won’t even go into the sickening quantitative vs. qualitative discussions.
You see, per my understanding, the real person speaking, through the man on my side of the phone, was in fact the “emergent interpretant” allowing the man to confuse subjective with objective, affording him the concept of “real” to the point where he feels self-righteous enough to inform the other man what “real” really is.
Now don’t get me wrong, because I can imagine that statement might make people think I am skeptical of contractual agreements and such… well yes I am, but they exist in passion, not in reality, and it takes an admission of passion to get past this… but may leave others accusing of nihilism or solipsism… implying to me they still don’t get it.
But furthermore to my point, I am interested in the idea that arises as “this is real” and “this is not real”… in regards to some important things such as money, law and order, reaction to cops, play time and pretending, the reaction to getting fired, etc… which all FEEL so “real”!
So what makes monopoly money fake, but USD bills real? I would say nothing to do with the “things” themselves, but everything to do with what’s in our skulls, in our brains, our minds. And then how someone can NOT even entertain the idea that this is “brainwashed” into our every-day life is beyond me…
What is stopping you and your friends or business stakeholders from using monopoly money in a “real” way?
That question is even so weird and messed up… because I would say it is what we do with things and how we think about things, that this “real”ness emerges out of, because of.
Does anyone else get spooked whenever they see a cop right behind them on the highway, going only 5 miles over the speed limit (or kilometers for the rest of the world)? WHY? It feels so real! Should we try and overcome it, or is this tyranny a good thing… something which keeps people in “check”, keeps things moving “orderly”?
I remember reading a great book called “Train your mind, change you brain” which was by Daniel something, and cant remember right now, but it had a foreword by the Dalai Lama, as well as commentary throughout… specifically it was a book challenging the western notion that our brains can’t react to experience and change it’s physical configuration, and vice versa. The Dalai thought it was common sense, but the neuro scientist was skeptical… but nonetheless it is shown that it isis quite natural, and has profound implications, just like the language we use, on how we think about things.
We love pattern… it gives us security… so BREAK FREE… do something different… it will be incorporated into your makeup!
Now I am an entrepreneur so I struggle with this next idea as well… but what if we started deconstructing all these companies and creating peer-to-peer networks in their place…?! What if we forced people to be free, would they want to be secure more than ever? A lot of times, the more you push people away, the closer they seem to want to get… an interesting idea at the least!
Cognitive Edge Ltd. & Cognitive Edge Pte. trading as The Cynefin Company and The Cynefin Centre.
© COPYRIGHT 2022.
I think Complexity Theory is great and is certainly a more relevant approach than how ...