Questions, Reductionism and Balance

Once my initial question*  was put aside at the suggestion of my tutor, I returned to a tripolar concept of

From "thebridge" a social network prototype concerning creativity

where 1.Clarity concerned the rationality (originally based on Personal Construct Psychology)

2. Concerned Awareness/Listening and relates to my experiments with  Textured Layered Surfaces

 3. Concerns Random Expressive Flow and Random Journeying

This was considered far too wide 

The difficulty lay in reducing this concept without splitting it destroying its Balance

eg Random journeying can get framed as insensitive and intrusive

Rationality /Method in the form of P.C.P can get framed as Modernist/Structuralist

Awareness can get framed as irrelevant/a waste of time.

How can I keep the issue of balance in my question?

My concern is with understanding and balance between the importance of critical rationalism (as communicative social space**) and  in addressing prejudice and the simplicity of random expressive flow.

* Original question/method


Personal Constructs, Binary Oppositions and 

Deconstruction  

Lupton (1994)  notes that western culture since plato / aristotle has been 

govened by various linguistic oppositions, and has valued one side of the 

them  over the other. One of the tasks of Deconstruction has been to identify 

these oppositions. Identify the dominant terms and redress the balance. 

  

We all have our own biases which can be identified in terms of such 

oppositions 

They can be explored using the methods of  Personal Construct Psychology 

They can be used in a number of ways, in relation to primary secondary, and 

tertiary research data for example: 

Researching and Identifying popular dualities/binary oppositions in regard to 

the constructs Linguistic Flow.    

  

If we take the example of Poetic Culture  

For example a survey or literature search may reveal the following construct : 

<---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> 

FORM                    FLOW 

                   'Poetry'                                      'Slam'       MCing'   'Spitting'  ' 

 If we add other constructs from an individual/cultural group we may discover 

correlations: 

 'Knowledge'              'Intuition' 

'Elitism'                                                                                             'Popularism' 

'Mature'                                   'Immature' 

    

'Normal'               'Abnormal' 

  

To restate, it is possible to explore the definition an individual has of 

"Knowledge" (Form) and "Intuition"(Flow), are these considered opposite?  

Is knowledge a part of intuition , or intuition a part of knowledge?  

Is knowledge a dirty word? (e.g. INTUITION<'squareness'><'shit'>)? Is 

intuition a dirty word? (e.g. KNOWLEDGE <'irrelevance'>]<'madness'>). Here 

is depicted the drift towards logocentrism: where one side of the duality is 

exclusively valued as positive (good) and the other negative(bad), or perhaps 

less fundamentally Normal – Abnormal,  and Boring – Interesting]. Is it 

possible to faciilitate the individual to explore other, perhaps complimentary 

constructs? 

** Communicative social space itself could be argued to have a rational aspect and awareness aspect and a flow aspect. ( perhaps this is where the critical theorists and the post-structuralists  and Deleuzians/General Systems Theorists for example can be reconciled)