7 thoughts on “A Constructivist’s View of POSIWID:”

1. Reblogged this on Systems Community of Inquiry.

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. Pingback: Constructing POSIWID - Slowhorse Ltd ~

3. Thanks,
   A purpose (of anything) is the purpose (or the use) of a purpose (in a community).
   I my view, any purpose is a purpose proposed by a proposer. In fact, the words “purpose” and “propose” have the same roots: to place (pose) in front (pur of pro). In seeing, perceiving, one always notices “purposes” or uses of what one perceives. This is what I call the “metaphor-in-use”. For instance, you perceive the purpose of a chair “instantly”, when you require a seat. When you need to pick up a book from the top shelve, the purpose becomes “chair-as-ladder”. Or when you need to place the book somewhere, the stool maybe used as a table.
   In using language one does the same. One communicates tacitly a second “purpose” of one’s words: the intended uses of the words as proposed by the proposer, also known as meaning. “Every sign is a request for compliance”, about one’s purpose of the sign-used. This is why I call this the metaphor-espoused.

   With using a chair, change in purpose becomes obvious – and explicit. With using words, this requires induction. We experience words as “ambiguous”, because meaning arises from the use, the relationship with the object (Watzlawick) and not from the object (word) it self. We can say “a rose, is a rose, is a rose”, but one’s uses determines its meaning: “I love you”, “happy birthday”, “I’m sorry”, “our house is a very fine house, …”..

   I’m also using the words “in-use” and “espoused” referring to Chris Argyris’ Model I and Model II and Theory-in-use and Theory-espoused. He shows (“Strategy, change and defensive routines”) how in organizations (organized groups of people) we use “defensive reasoning”. The status-quo needs to be maintained. One uses a difference between theory-espoused (“we’re open and honest here”) and theory-in-use (you know, one may be punished for telling the truth about … ), that the difference between these two is covered-up (“no, honestly, you can say what you think”) and that the cover-up is covered-up ( – silence -). So one reduces the differences between the word-in-use and the word-espoused, between the metaphor-in-use and the metaphor-espoused. Especially, when there exist a (perceived or actual) power difference.

   (You can see this everywhere, most strongly how tn the current situation between Ukraine and the Russian federation)

   So in proposing (using, expressing) words, one also proposes a (“one”) correct use – a purpose – of the words, which is derived from the common use of the community. We usually say that the context defines the meaning of words (purpose), however, there is no context outside the community using the words, (“il n’y a pas de hors-texte”). This also induces the third purpose: maintaining the coherence of the community.

   What’s the purpose of the word “system”? 🙂

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. Pingback: What’s the purpose of the proposer | Katalyseer samen veranderingen ~

   • Beautifully written, Jan. I couldn’t see a like button for the post.

     LikeLiked by 1 person

     Reply
5. Pingback: Maturana’s Aesthetic Seduction: | Harish's Notebook - My notes... Lean, Cybernetics, Quality & Data Science. ~
6. Pingback: Speed so Fast it Felt Like I Was Drunk – Systems Soundbites ~