Simply stated!

In a dynamic and thought-provoking discussion about the interactions between the simple and complex inspired by Ali 🐝 Anani, Brand Ambassador @beBee, I offered the following comments.

In, Simple Values Interactions:
Dr. Ali, you highlight the need for a simplicity that, unfortunately, our human nature finds difficult to accept; that is the human way, to complicate the simple. I think it's because we need to break things down to intellectually understand how things work. Yes, it's practical but we lose the trust of our ability to take in the whole and understand the "simple" fact. So, when we identify the multiplicity of interactions that characterizes self-organizing systems, and stop the process there, we lose sight of the fact that such systems are dynamic and require continual interactions. This is where you come in, Dr. Ali, and teach us: "I believe more that it is not only simple rules that lead to the emergence of new structural patterns; equally possible is the interactions of simple values to produce emerging patterns of human behavior. The choice is ours."

In, Our Tendency to Make the Simple Complex:
I have been reading and re-reading your buzz, Dr. Ali, and realize I am in the process of complicating your wonderfully and eloquently expressed simple message that we should move beyond our "tendency to make the simple complicated or complex." So, I thought of Einstein who said, “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Of course, I find this wonderfully complex....so I then remembered Tolstoy's quote, "The sole meaning of life is to serve humanity." This is when I realized that it all comes down to meaning. In his quote, Tolstoy took the complex topic of meaning, in general and the meaning of life specifically, and made it simple, but, extraordinarily, not "simpler". From this I am gleaning that, for me, I shouldn't be afraid of the simple answer, insight, thought or action, as less than. I can still be in the complexity but stay open to perceiving its simple meaning.

In between the two posts, Dr. Ali produced the following bridge, a paradox:

“[I]intellectualism that leads us far from understanding.”
Ali Anani

This paradox opened my eyes to seeing that what should bring us closer to understanding can, at times, distance us from it. The question then is; what prevents us from acquiring understanding in spite of us processing things intellectually? I went back to my comments and found the following answers:

1. We need to break things down to intellectually understand how things work. Yes, it's practical but we lose the trust of our ability to take in the whole. By not being able to take in the whole as a result of reducing things to their parts, and then seeing and knowing only those parts, our intellectual ability to understand the original whole is lost.

2. It all comes down to meaning. In my process of gathering information and knowledge through my intellectual process, I shouldn’t dismiss the simplicity of the nature of the results of that process; I can achieve a simple understanding in the complexity; I can still be in the complexity but stay open to perceiving its simple meaning.

In an exchange, Reena Saxena brought my attention to a link posted by Ajay Singh Pathania. In it Jason Kottke writes:

“Feynman was well known for simple explanations of scientific concepts that result in a deeper understanding of the subject matter…”

And then, the post brought my intellectual journey to a close with the following words:

"What I cannot create, I do not understand."

Simply stated, we tend to lose sight of the fact that, developmentally speaking, we are creative beings first. Later, we learn how to think.