I wish I could remember who gave me the book by Howard Rheingold: They Have a Word for It: A Lighthearted Lexicon of Untranslatable Words and Phrases.
(Sigh.) If you ever give me a book, please write me a note in the front of it so I don’t sit scratching my head wondering where I got it.
But thank you, friend, it’s an interesting book.
Here’s what I found on page 249:
“Gestalten – (German noun) Little wholes that make up larger wholes.
The methodology of every respectable science is to analyze the subject matter of chemistry, physics, or biology until the 'fundamental particles' of that system are known. The payoff is very high for those who can see the world as a collection of different parts, so those of us who inhabit industrialized, science-based cultures tend to develop acute perceptions for parts, while neglecting the skill of seeing webs of interactions between the parts. However, a subtle shift has recently come to the world of scientific knowledge: The notion of whole systems has become fashionable.”
I agree with Rheingold, especially when it comes to business. The tendency of business has always been to look at the “pieces” separately. As an example, most businesses treat advertising and sales training as separate departments – pieces – when they’re really just the beginning and end of a single effort at persuasion. Do you distribute copies of your ads to your salespeople on the day the ads are released? If not, why not? Do you really want your customers to know more about what’s going on than your sales team?
Compartmentalization is likewise a problem in medicine, causing doctors to treat symptoms instead of the root disease.
In advertising and medicine we need to step back and look at a bigger picture.
But I believe the opposite is true in the realm of Thought.
If you want to craft a message that transfers a thought – whether your thought-carrier be visual, verbal, musical, tactile, olfactory or gustatory – don’t pull back for an overview, but break each element of your message into its constituent components.
EXAMPLE: The science of chemistry is a systematic understanding of all the possible combinations of positively charged protons, negatively charged electrons and neutral neutrons. Only after we had deconstructed matter into its constituent components did we learn to design substances with the specific characteristics we desired.
Likewise, if we want to
1. craft a thought
2. make an accurate statement
3. transfer a feeling
4. capture a mood
5. paint a picture
6. send a signal or
7. persuade a person, we must create a message with specific characteristics.
The lens that revealed the mysteries of chemical composition wasn’t a pull-back, big-picture lens but a zoom-into-the-heart-of-it, detail lens. We had to answer the question, “What is the smallest unit of matter?”
Likewise, the emerging science of Thought Particles is built upon the question, “What is the smallest unit of Thought?”
At present, I’m convinced there are 12 basic languages of the mind and 12 shadow languages.
Think of the first 12 with a plus sign (+) next to them. Think of the second 12 followed by a minus sign (-).
Now think of coming to Austin for the Advanced Thought Particles workshop.
I may be chasing the mirage of a rabbit through an imaginary forest. But if I'm not, artificial intelligence is right around the corner.
Aroooo! Aroo-arooo!
Roy H. Williams