Complex

complex

c.1652, "composed of parts," from Fr. complexe, from L. complexus "surrounding, encompassing," pp. of complecti "to encircle, embrace," from com- "with" + plectere "to weave, braid, twine." The adj. meaning "not easily analyzed" is first recorded 1715. Psychological sense of "connected group of repressed ideas" was established by C.G. Jung, 1907.

Aha! To encircle ... weave around ... not easily analyzed (rationally constructed and deconstructed) ... a connected group of "repressed" ideas. Funny that Jung was mentioned, as Jean just sent me such an interesting email after I told her that our process in getting this discussion up and running was as fascinating as the ideas that were arising out of it. I had noticed that the small group of people who had picked up the conversation about chaos and connectivism and learning were very much darting in and out of the conversation, like birds bringing ever juicier tidbits to a shared buffet table. New links, new videos, new options for creating an information repository we can all dip into when we want to. The dipping in and out reminded me of my own process as I started figuring out how I was going to tackle the online course I'm working on. More specifically, I said to Jean:

Funny how we go back and forth between content and structure to house it, eh? Plus we shift between individual chats and group chats, and somehow have a sense when the whole discussion is getting TOO divergent. We also seem to go "out from" and "in towards" our key topics of chaos/connectivism etc. This seems very much the route I took when first starting to design the online teacher training course I was doing.

Jean, a Jungian analyst, responded with the following:

Connectivity brings to mind the dynamic nature of Eros - the principle of psychic relatedness that makes us loving, creative and involved whether humanly, aesthetically or spiritually or – my favourite – all together!! Sometimes the connectivity is on the level of physical interdependence, and sometimes the connectivity is in the perception of what Gregory Bateson called “the pattern that connects”. Maybe this brings us back to the idea of resonances. Wild idea (as if these aren’t all a bit wild) – I wonder if empathy emerges from a sense of resonance, perception as gestalt, and a sense of the pattern that connects? This in turn links back (or is it weaves into?) the theme of holistic teaching/learning.

Your talking about going “out from” and “in towards” reminded me of a little video I saw in a university course I took about 15 years ago on Science and Creativity. Lovely course, lovely professor, Luigi Bianchi – unruly white hair, tobacco stained fingers – an astronomer who was erotically charged with the sense of the patterns that connect. I couldn’t help but have a little crush on him… Anyway, the film was called Powers of 10 (1998, Charles and Ray Eames) and the impression it made on me has lasted all these years (so has Luigi’s, apparently). The camera telescopes outward - “out from” - in stages of the power of ten and finally arrives at the limits of the observable universe. Then it zooms back (“in towards”) and the detail viewed progressively decreases in magnitude to eventually arrive at the proton in the nucleus of a carbon. Prompted by our connectivity conversations, I googled the film and watched it again. The screen is a bit small to reveal the full richness of the detail that had originally impressed me but some of the resonances in the patterns across differences in scale can still be perceived. Luigi had us look at the film with the sound turned off so our perceptions would not be disturbed by the narration – something I would recommend for a first viewing if you are interested and haven’t seen it before. I had forgotten this, however, and made the “mistake” of watching it this time with the moderator’s voice over. It was distracting but something new came to light. The moderator draws one’s attention to the fact that in moving through the various levels of magnification, one can observe an alternation between great activity and relative inactivity – a ribbon that continues all the way through. Aha! Here is another resonance - alternation between great activity and relative inactivity – that brings me back to the metaphor of feast and famine I used in describing – apologetically – my own communication rhythms. Could this pulse be part of the deep structure of CAS and connectivity generally?

So, what do I take from this all as I move towards understanding learning more? I am left with a strong impression of movement, of flux, of times of work and rest, of gentle and dynamic creative power. I take from it that, when excited (feeling erotic), we engage fully, and that we then bring and take in equal measure. That there are patterns we seek out (perhaps, just as Chomsky says, our brains are wired for language AND for patterns). That learning is a task of the spirit as much as a task of the brain.

And I want to know more about Gestalt.