Title of the paper : Enrichment of our society and universes through a better fit of

plurisigns as opposed to reductionist and dualist approaches and understandings-

going beyond goal oriented approaches and complexities.

Name of the author : Wilfred Berendsen, the Netherlands

Copyright : Wilfred Berendsen, the Netherlands
Affiliation : Wilvon Organization & Developments
Adress : Drs.W.T.M. Berendsen
Middachtenstraat 53
7131 GE Lichtenvoorde
The Netherlands
Phone of author : 0031 6 53 91 83 80
E-mail address : info@wilvon.com
ABSTRACT

This paper will build an argument through a methodological and empirical approach. Based
on Phronesis, being practical wisdom. The methodological approach is the one of Phronesis
Antenarrating. The argument being build and explained being the one that Western
Philosophy and social sciences are based on the wrong fundaments, and also that going
beyond dualism and goal oriented systems is NOT enough. I will argue that sole sane
sensemaking is need to go beyond complexity as/and chaos theories and realities, striving to
overcome the misfits of several realities in our society at large produced by reductionist and
insane perspectives. Also I will introduce several notions like my notion of collopoieisis but
also other notions like semiphronesis and semisophy errors to build my arguments and
emphasis on differences instead of perceived similarities.

The empirical arguments for this paper will at least consist of examples on shop floor,
related to Kaizen and so-called 5-s improvements. This are all tool and goal oriented ways
of “improving” work procedures. I will show with some examples that this approach is
reductionist and needs some saner understandings based on Phronesis antenarrating and
sane sensemaking. Adding more completeness and quality based on understandings

REQUESTED TRACK

S18 - Complexity and intuition: What is at stake? M. Barthod (F), C. Breda (F), A-M. Guénette CH)
In the year of 2002, David Boje invented and initiated the notion of Antenarrative and
Antenarrating. This following his tremendous understandings of storytelling and narrating in
organizational and non-organizational settings. At the time he brought forward the notion for
the first time, he most likely already understood a lot of the pluralities and interconnected
understandings of Antenarrative and Antenarrating. Like about all of notions, representamens,
in our society also the notion of Antenarrating is of course part of a much broader context. But
also, it largely depends also on the (understandings of) the person(s) talking about the
representamen what this representamen actually involves or CAN involve. The better the
quality and understandings of the person(s) involved, the higher the chances of a more
excellent and greater understanding of the representamen or object (or more general,
plurisigns).

It is very interesting to get to understand that almost everything in our universes can actually
incorporate A LOT of quality, but that this specific types of qualisigns are often not really truly
to be recognized based on the appearences of the representamens or objects themselves. A
lot of qualisigns, characteristics, of an object or person or representamen can NOT be seen
from the outside. We all by nature know this when someone is applying for being our lover or
another specific person, but somehow seem to forget when dealing with persons in other
settings or with representamens as such. And even the lover or job applicant might and very
often will not be appreciated the way he or she COULD or should be, simply because
although we know there is always a lot more than we can see from the outside, we do not
give someone the chance to tell it to us or show it otherwise for whatever reasons.

Some months ago, I handed in some proposal for a paper to be written for a conference. It
was rejected. Which is good, as I have more than enough I want to write for and about at the
moment. But, what interested me was the question WHY it was rejected. They told they had a
lot of proposals and were rejecting quite some, but apart from that what we all handed in was
some abstract for a paper. And the paper had to follow later on, after the decision of
acceptance or rejection. Thing is, that I was quite general in my abstract. The paper would
have been much more interesting. But, of course, they could not see. Just suppose the same
people judging about letting through a paper or not would receive a paper with sole title of “the
geneology of morals” or “beyond good and evil” or a seemingly weird abstract or title that just
needs some good argumentation not being in the abstract. Well I hope this is interesting as to
me it is.

There is SO MUCH potential or rather actual quality in our society that we do not give a
chance to get notice of or to be shown! For whatever reasons. A lot of this reasons are valid
ones, but a lot of them are actually not. It might be quite interesting to get more
understandings about how this works, also for maybe change our actions and positions
towards each other in certain organizational and/or non-organizational settings. But, in many
cases the communication required for this demands a very different context and acceptance
towards each other and the way we communicate with each other.
One of the aspects that need to change, is both or intentionality but also our usage of our
senses and sensemaking. On the sensemaking part, I will continue later on. Being the ways
our sensemaking NEEDS to be changed to move from reductionist, (potentially) insane
sensemaking to sane sensemaking. This will for sure reduce a lot of seeming complexities
and/or chaos perceptions and realities in our universes at large. As I will argument later on,
this complexities and chaos are for the larger part because of insane understandings, but of
course some part is not. Anyways, a very important part of collective sensemaking is our
attitude towards each other and awareness of the way we use our senses at current times.
Which is FAR too restrictive in many cases. We mostly do not really listen, we mostly do not
really communicate, and we certainly mostly do not really truly think and use all of our senses
to the fullest. Maybe also because a lot of people act like sort of machines in organizational
settings. And, this attitude and way of restrictive sensemaking is actually transferred also to
private life and thinking. The decrease of importance of values is just one, but a very awful
example of this.

So for instance a factory worker might not only be a factory worker but also a great person.
The only way to find out, is to REALLY start communicating and LISTENING. People in
society might actually have A LOT to say and contribute, which can not be decided from out of
a mail or a single request to talk, but only in case of REALLY to start talking and listening.
With an open mind and eagerness to learn from each other and help each other. Most people
in governments do not seem to understand, and at least do not seem to bother. To really
listen to persons they actually do not know, and therefore even do not want to get to know.
People have chances enough to learn by communicating and listening, but mostly do not
want to. Somehow, some people seem to try to stay in their limited ways of thinking and
doing.

Western philosophy has a lot of insanities incorporated into it. One of them is the high trust on
mathematics and facts. Facts are however just dependent a lot on contexts and settings,
meaning that a “fact” is mostly only a fact within a certain setting. If certain characteristics of
this setting change, the fact will disappear. It is a fact that I will drop dead if I jump out of a
plane without a parachute, but it is also a fact most probably that I will get dead if I jump away
from whatever then getting in “touch” with a train at full speed. And also I will not stay alive
long if I will go into space then being left there seemingly flying in the “open”. All facts, with
other contexts. I think that as long as the right contexts or characteristics can be created, a lot
can be transferred into a fact. And some things not. But, for some part of the facts we simply
do and can not know beforehand. But that all is not that interesting. What is interesting, is the
fact that a fact is only relatively and maybe very specifically or a bit less specifically a fact.
Meaning that maybe some but more often quite some characteristics are needed for calling a
fact a fact. And even then, a fact might very well be a perceptual fact.
In organizational life, we can play with this facts. If we know how to change them. If for
instance we know how to alter the contexts, the characteristics, making the fact a fact. Either
immediately or at later moments of time. It is a fact that changeover of a machine lasts so
many seconds. But through lean production methods, it can be reduced to another fact. And
later to another one. Then the fact is that we have gained profit. But, have we????. As long as
we do not understand that a lot of facts in our organizational life are accritically indubitable
beliefs grounded on the wrong fundaments, we will stay believers. Believers of lean
production, believers of the economic system and rules, believers of what psychiaters say,
believers of all criminals really being criminal. Social phenomena being insane or perceptual,
but still being accepted as facts. As hard as any fact can be, till someone discovers that
actually it is a fact that psychologists themselves use insane methodologies transferring most
of sane people to insane ones, or that lawyers use insane methodologies transferring even a
lot of innocent people into jailed criminals getting a criminal record for the rest of their lives for
doing nothing wrong actually.

Goal orientednesses in our society are often based on the wrong fundaments, but actually a
lot of reasonings going beyond goal orientedness also are. This actually are the kind of
reasonings still leading to complexity and chaos theories and even practises while this is not
really needed. Insane sensemaking leads to people living in much more different, damaging
and/or hurting worlds than necessary and desirable.
Most of the (perceptions of) chaos theories are actually about the understandings that we
currently live more and more in different worlds, realities, with a serious misfit. Multiple misfits,
growing more and more because of population growth and therefore growth of quantitative
individual and collective mind (of course surplussed by artificial intelligences having even
other features and outcomes than human minds) but also besides that the growth of human
minds themselves. The main problem is, that most of mind results and therefore inputs but
also a lot of current mind processes themselves are grounded on the WRONG, INSANE
fundaments. Being the fundaments of current mainstream western philosophy, but also the
fundaments of current mainstream social sciences and practises. This leads to a culmination
of insanities, insanities being soaked up in about every aspect of our society at large to less or
bigger extends.

Like I said before, there is a lot of quality in people being neglected. But, this is not always
only to be blamed towards the ones judging on quality of this people. As, of course, there is
always much more to be said about it. Enrichment requires a most optimal fit of plurisigns, not
of uniplural signs and understandings. Mostly also because of some of the last, the uniplural
signs and understandings, a lot of persons will just not show their qualities to a lot of persons
or will not give certain (groups of) persons a chance to really discover some of this qualities.
This can be explained as lack of trust or whatever, but also there the real causes and reasons
mostly involve A LOT more than solely that. A trustsign not only involves A LOT more than
solely trust, but in many cases actually not even IS a trustsign. Just like an insanitysign or a
criminalitysign or a workerssign or a loversign representing a personality, individual, as such
in many cases actually will prove to be NOT. And, in many cases, we will never really
understand by finding that out.
Some while ago, I myself wrote the following message on my facebook account :
Butterfly effects:Tiny little differances perceived as similarities, "Duckrabbits" all way down,
Duckrabbits and reductionisms all way around absorbed in our sensemakiings and therefore
realities. The ones not being recognized by true nature and contents are the most awful ones.
We need recognition tools and to unders..

This “butterfly effects” but also larger insane faults into our social systems are probably the
main if not the sole explanations for most if not all of perceptions in our realities. And, the
more you understand, the more you should become to “see” that this perceptions are much
more numerous and much more profound throughout our society at large than most people
realize.

Besides the mainstream social sciences, we HAVE the critical management studies, the
critical legal studies, the critical psychiatry studies and the like. Driven mostly by people
belonging to the most excellent contributors to their specific fields. But, what is still missing or
at least till now, is a clear understanding about what is going on. The deficits of mainstream
social sciences and therefore practises, and how to solve these. Critical studies can pinpoint a
lot of the insanities, but still can not really truly offer a solution based on understandings how
to change and what should be changed and why. This missing link is what I can offer and
have already offered to society by means of my discourse on Phronesis antenarrating. I will
try to explain in this paper partly, but people wanting to understand more about it just need to
read my other writings. On phronesis antenarrating and my body of understanding called
practicism or practisism. For a sane society at large, phronesis is needed. By means of
phronesis antenarrating and what I call sound pluriflections, we can move on or at least some
of us should be able to move on already to the greatest, phronesis understandings. And on
higher levels of understandings, some might be able to move on from insane, reductionist
metaphysical understandings towards sane, excellent and promising metaphronitical
understandings. Phronitical being my notion of being critical with backgrounds of phonesis,
practical wisdoms. And metaphronitical being the ultimate levels of understandings any
greater wiser social scientist or practitioner can reach.

This metaphronitical understandings are, for instance, needed to move on from chaos and
complexity theories to just mere understandings. Phronesis is needed to bridge theory and
practise, to unify it into one excellent great body of understanding. I am still working on details
of this body of understanding, which I termed practicism. As opposed to the notion of
pragmatism of CS peirce. Fact is that Peirce’s semiotics and philosophies incorporate quite
some great understandings, but also lack some essential ones. And, most terribly, his
perspective and understandings were based on the wrong, potentially insane fundaments.
Just like western philosophy but also most of social sciences and practises are at current
times. Mainstream social sciences and practises are reductionist and incorporating the wrong
even insane understandings…..and current economic crisis is just a kind of “logic” result of
this. Just like a lot of mistakes in justice and psychology are, many of them not even being
noticed because of the reductionist perspectives.
On peirce, I mentioned some of the wrong understandings he had in my discourse “a
phronesis antenarrative”. But it is a fact that I did not sufficiently elaborate there yet about
Peirce’s notions of possiblities-existences-laws. Like his firstness-seconness-thirdness, these
are typical examples of lineair, inbox kind of thinking being far too reductionist and limiting
possiblities. In other discourse, I said at least the following about possibilities-existences-laws:
1) That actually all of this are “existences” depending on what notion of existence and context
2) That laws like understood in justice but also company laws are actually possibilities.

But apart from that, I now just want to shoot apart even the possibilities but mostly the laws as
understood in 2) in pieces, just like it has to be in the right understandings….not being inbox,
restricted ones. A possibility…is it?? A law…is it??? In many cases, after sound excellent
pluriflections and phronesis antenarrating, you will find out that they are mostly not. Peircean
“acritically indubitable beliefs” (a GREAT notion of CS Peirce) leading to perceptions of
realities leading to damages on insanities of our society at large.

The interesting thing about possibilities and existences and laws is the fact that even laws can
be seen as mere possibilities. And in many cases, they HAVE to be. It matters a lot whether
rules are treated as laws or rules or whether they are actually treated as possibilities,
guidelines. In many cases, laws actually HAVE to be treated as guidelines in practise as just
treating them as accritically indubitable facts will lead to either damage or a non-practical way
of doing. But there is also another way to deal with laws or rules or guidelines. Being the
possibility and maybe even much more optimal situation of just neglecting them completely.

Every act in our society leads to some possible or certain effects. This effects being either
desirable or not. But, even the effects can be altered of course. But also, knowing the effects
and possibilities for alterations, it might be and individual or organization should better decide
on neglecting the laws or guidelines. Instead introducing other ways of doing for either short
or longer periods of time.

In holoplural understandings there is no pre-set order for signs. Just the signs, being
assembled and re-assembled all the time. And social processes, the assemblage of signs,
is much more flexible and can move to all kinds of directions all the time. The only thing is
that our realities impose all kinds of limits to plurality, meaning that realities by definition
consist of more reductionist assemblages. But this assemblages have to be as complete
as possible still, to be phronesis representia instead of representamens.
Being phronitical, my notion and understandings of being critical with a background of
practical wisdoms, also sometimes requires a metaphronitical orientation and understandings.
Phronesis antenarrating and this metaphronitical orientation and understandings are
desperately needed in some parts of our society. I say some, as also a lot of our society can
and will function in the most optimal ways just like it functions at current times. But, a lot of the
social parts of our society can be drastically improved by means of phronesis antenarrating
and sane sensemaking, while a huge part just has to. All of social sciences have to be
changed according to my insights and sane sensemaking has to be incorporated in
both these sciences and social practises at large. Asking what is being at stake is indeed
a very good addition there, as most people do not realize to the fullest what is at stake. Which
is A LOT. A lot of harm and (social) injustice already took place and is still taking place just
now, and each of us is responsible to eliminating this as much as possible.

When talking about chaos or complexity, people should understand that actually both chaos
and complexity are about vagueness. Vagueness in a more broad sense than the notion of
vagueness as expressed by CS peirce. In Peircean understandings, vagueness is about not
understanding something to the fullest yet, with the potential of great understandings and
therefore the disappearance of vagueness. In that sense, vagueness is a natural fact
connected with having too less understandings about a certain issue or phenomenon. Even
people using sane sensemaking and having the brightest greatest minds face this kind of
healthy, GREAT awareness and state of vagueness. It’s actually a wonderful great feeling of
Aporia motivating at least me to think even harder and striving even better, for better greater
results both for me and for society at large. The other part, or at least AN other or another part
of vagueness, is the kind of vagueness that is caused by insane ways of acting or doing. Or
sensemaking. The insanities in western philosophy and social sciences and practises lead to
a lot of insanities in our realities, causing a lot of vaguenesses. Complexities. This are the kind
of vaguenesses, complexities and/or insanities that can only be solved by means of adding
something for making the vaguenesses understandable and therefore non-vague anymore.
For sure, some complexities will still prevail, but this kind of complexities are caused by the
fact that also insanities can never be banned completely from our society at large. But, it
should be clear and understood that vagueness caused by insanities should not be the
mainstream. Like it is in current times. At least for those who understand. Most of which are
having trouble to get really listened to, since as I said most people can not really truly listen or
just will not do so.

Darwin was “right” about evolution and evolution theory, but the same “right:” does not apply
to all of his past understandings anymore. Simply because some of the characteristics
changed, and some or maybe all of the assemblages of mostly still uniplural signs did. As I
remark in another antenarrative discourse I wrote about enchantment and disenchantment,
enrichtment ( a for me more broader definition of enchantment and disenchantment and a
more specific type and manifestation of quality) is in the end about most excellent or
entelychistic fits of plurisigns. NOT of uniplurals, but of plurisigns. Which is anotherness way
of saying that OUR individual and collective minds, coupled together with digital information
storage units and facilities like harddisks and the internet in most entelychistic ways, is only
the partial key of enrichment ( growth of entelechy) for our society at large. Some other part of
the keys are transferring ALL of digital and non-digital information into Phronesis
antenarratives but also changing the NATURE of whatever mind process in our universes into
what I call sound sane sensemaking. Consisting of pluriflection and all of contextual and
content plurisigns to support this manifestation of transitive excellence or quality. Then there
are other anothernesses able to support and guide growth of excellence and values in our
societies and universes at large. But, in the end it is all about the most optimal and
entelychistic fit of plurisigns in our universes. Supported by a sound understanding of what I
called the holoplural structure of our universes. Holoplurality is not only an invention and
creation of me, Wilfred Berendsen, but also the SOLE great key for our society at large to not
only grow and prosper, but also for becoming sane again.

The growth of human populations, both quantitatively as qualitatively, has outgrown our
evolutionary path. Or should I say that it actually now falls behind STRONGLY needed and
required evolutionary changes of human individuals and society at large. The reason being
that our sensemaking processes are partly INSANE still. Mainly because part of it probably
always have been, while other parts became insane based on a further misfit with our
contextual surroundings, being other plurisigns ( being understood or perceived as uniplurals)
in our society at large. Perception always has been reality to more or less extends, but it
becomes more and more because of the massiveness of amounts and manifestations of
insane parts of sensemaking and therefore realities in our universes at large. For me, even
our perceived manifestations of realities (for instance physical objects and even parts of
understandings of natural occurrences) are part of the broadest notion and manifestations of
sensemaking as such.

What is at stake here, is survival of humankind. This survival depending on evolution of our
sensemaking towards a sole sane fit. Requiring a more optimal fit of plurisigns based on
SANE sensemaking as opposed of insane sensemaking processes of current times. If we
wait too long, we will be like the society once having existed on Paaseiland. …………..
This society did not really “see” or understood what was happening, and the moment they
discovered it was too late to take enough actions still for preventing the collapse. Or actually
they did not have enough understandings still for preventing a real collapse., As in the end, I
think there must mostly be a way to prevent problems as long as enough understandings are
there, even in a very late state. What I do is offering understandings, and it is high time to pick
them up. For a lot of social problems it has been too late already, for a very long time already.
Everyone understanding, has the obligation to communicate and take actions on
understandings of sole true underlying structure of our universes and sane sensemaking
relevance and ways to apply and use. Alfred Korzybski already made a strong plea for this,
partly, in his great discourse called “science and sanity”. This plea was however aimed at a
bit narrower understanding and application of what is and was going on, but still his plea was
relevant and also the understandings where and are very relevant. Not only to understand,
but also to spread and foremost to apply.

On goals itself, at least the following can be told and should be understood. A goal is a specific
type of end, and it is only recommendable to go for certain goals in the appropriate playing
fields and accompanying rules of the game.
We are often confusing goals with tools. But, more generally, actually the notion of goal is still
far too much uniplural and unipluraly understood, taking far too less notions of both the
differences instead of the similarities in the understanding of the notion itself but also of the
much more plural connections and dependencies between the plurisigns taken into
considerations and other related plurisigns. Also, a goal is mostly to be considered as a
guideline., a frame of reference, resulting from sane sensemaking. Not from insane
sensemaking as those of current mainstream social sciences and practises, as these will
result in reductionist and therefore (potentially) insane and damaging results.

Complexity and chaos theory is not the answer to improvement of insights, on the contrary.
Although a much broader perspective is taken there than solely a lineair one being even more
narrowed down towards a very specific aspect (the goal oriented perspectives), there still is
the lack of understandings and resulting clashes (misfits) of plurisigns in our realities at large.
Chaos, and therefore also chaos theory, is grounded on critical perspectives and a more
plural understanding of our realities. But, it is also still too reductionist because of the fact that
rather the several instances of the sole underlying structure of our universes (being the
structure of holoplurality) instead of holoplurality itself is taken as fundamental reference and
perspective. Meaning that the steps of going beyond instances of structures and realities
(mere partial plots of possibilities) is not taken, and if so it is taken in wrong ways.
There are however obstacles towards properly going beyond understandings of chaos theory.
It requires a very solid base and a most optimal mind, and besides that the sole sane
sensemaking methodologies. Some of this are already reflected in my writings on Phronesis
Antenarrating and sound pluriflection. Sound pluriflection consisting of several subprocesses. I
developed some new notions for this several aspects of sane sensemaking. For here, this
paper, it is probably most important to grasp and understand that most of “logic” of western
philosophy but also most of sensemaking in our realities lack some essential parts of this sole
way of real true sane sensemaking being termed pluriflection by me.

Chaos theories are just not the right perspectives and understandings. Something might BE
chaos, but in many instances it solely is because of lacks of understandings and therefore
also lack of actions. On actions, it can of course be stated that actions are a very important
aspect of our realities. Withouth actions, critical perspectives and a lot of writings in our society
have much less value. But, there is something more to add. Being the bridge between
sensemaking and actions, which is communication. Communication can be through lots of
various means, writing and talking being only some of them. Even physical objects can be
chosen to communicate, and even everything in our universes can and will be part of
communication. But there is a great development of both tools and insights going on for
effective great changes through communication by storytelling and narrating. The
antenarrative part as initiated by David Boje being a very great and fundamental part of it.
Together with sane sensemaking, the greatest storytelling and (antenarrating) and actions
both being input and results of it, our society can and should change towards a much more
entelychistic and great one. At least, a lot of insanities because of reductionist goal oriented or
reductionist or wrong sensemaking can be solved or decreased this ways.

With regards to sensemaking, there is the underlying golden rule that also there we need most
optimal fits of plurisigns instead of less optimal and potentially insane fits of uniplural signs or
uniplural signs with plurisigns resulting in serious clashes of signs. Chaos theories can be
result of an incomplete understanding of plurisigns, or a too short or too restrictive use of sane
sensemaking. Or an improper or less sufficient background and understanding. Or any
combinations of these. But whatever the reasons are, as long as there is chaos theory, there
is some understanding or action missing. The logic of vagueness supplemented by sane
sensemaking eventually results in different realities that might be weird in many respects still
for whatever reasons, but it is surely not chaos. On the contrary, it is just kind of complexity
theory but based on understandings of differences. Differences instead of similarities,
requiring a sensemaking perspective and understanding aimed at noticing and understanding
of differences instead of uniplural or restrictive reductionist sensemaking and understandings.
And, of course, enrichment of our society at large requires A LOT more than only
sensemaking. Which is why even sane sensemaking is NOT enough. With regards of
enrichment of individuals AND or societies and universes at large, we probably first need to
move on towards sane sensemaking as much as possible. Then, we need to add the right
blends and assemblages of communicational means and efforts AND actions. If needed, just
as long as we need to reach the required outcomes. Because of clashes of insane
understandings with the much more saner ones, but mainly also because of the enourmous
degree and amount of insanities and insane sensemakings in our society and individual and
collective minds, we will however probably not really given the chances to break through real
soon. Also because sanities are perceived as insanities and vice versa.
Practical, empirical explanations and insights

I will now try to explain the limits and insanities of goal oriented thinking but also of much
broader sensemaking but still insane reductionist ones. By means of lean production
methodologies and tools and notions like Kaizen and 5-s. And some more understandings
based on my mostly metaphronitical perspectives.

Lean production is a current leading management philosophy with a lot of believers, just like
capitalism had a lot of believers before the financial crisis of 2010. It has been based on the
Toyota (lean) model and practises, and sometimes it is even referred to as “the Toyota way”.
At current, Toyota has a lot of problems with it’s cars and resulting problems in the markets.
Now, just rely on my understandings to grasp this. Problems are in most if not all cases the
result of wrong, (potentially) insane processes. Based on what CS Peirce would call
“accritically indubitable beliefs”. And what I would generalize into “accritically indubitable
insanities”. So, this will most probably also the case with the current problems with Toyota.
This problems of Toyota @ current are mainly grounded in production, where the philosophy
of lean production is the leading religion. As with all religions, a lot of laws and rules are
applied without taking enough regards of the contexts. Meaning that a lot of customs of the
religion are accritically indubitable beliefs leading to accritically indubitable actions. When
contexts changes, but also when the beliefs and actions are partly insane or wrongly applied
themselves, this of course also leads to insane bad results. Like the current problems with
Toyota company products.

Fact is, that I can already kind of “see” the same kind of problems or at least some problems
not being understood and seen by most people, connected with the implementation and
usage of lean production methodologies and methods at other companies. Along same lines
that I already could “see” problems arising out of the insane fundaments and understandings
of money and capitalism some years before the start of financial crisis. And also along the
same lines that I can already “see” what is needed to really solve the current financial crisis
and probably a lot of other problems in our society at large. Just like I can “see” that there is
some GREAT underlying mechanism in our society requiring and demanding citizens and
individuals in our society to eventually profit from improvements. But also, that as long as this
is NOT understood and implemented in our societies, that this will probably result in an even
MORE severe and bad financial crisis after the current one. And, a financial crisis of course is
never solely only that, but a crisis and damaging situation to much more in our universes at
large.

For seeing that kind of things, an individual needs to be fluent in phronesis antenarrating and
what I call pluriflection. Starting with kind of shooting to pieces certain notions and
understandings. Based on the fundamental understandings that our universes consist of
holoplural signs instead of uniform or uniplural notions and understandings.
About the underlying problems with lean production, a lot can be said. In general, lean
production of course is a system based on tools being reflected in representamens. A lot of
representamens are used in kaizen and lean production systems. One of if not the most
widely known book about Kaizen is actually the book “Kaizen” by Masaaki Imai. And, this
book is actually full of representamens being tools for applying Kaizen and by that introducing
and using Lean Production philosophy and systems within organizations.

Just like all representamens in our universes, this are representamens and not phronesis
representia. Meaning that right from the start, also the philosophy and systems of Kaizen and
Lean Production are actually based on the WRONG, potentially insane fundaments. This can
be corrected in practise, in the processes and instances of applications, but only if both the
processes guiding the representamens but also the representamens themselves are changed.
The representamens themselves being changed as much as possible into phronesis
representia, and the processes of applications being guided as much as possible by phronesis
antenarrating and sound pluriflections.

For changing representamens into phronesis representia, it is very important to grasp the
notions of internal qualities and external qualities. And also to grasp and understand that
qualities in this sense actually is a notion not solely for quality, but for all kinds of
characteristics of a plurisign. This characteristics actually being plurisigns themselves in
holoplural understandings, but because of the specific nature of them being a “part” of other
plurisigns, this specific relationship justifies the usage of the notion of characteristics or (being
a notion for same here!) qualities. CS Peirce uses the notion of quali but this is not same as it
is not a holoplural notion. The notions of internal and external qualities are, and they should
always be understood that ways. In a holoplural and sane sensemaking perspective, leading
to same greater and saner understandings.

Phronesis representia not only consist of the phronetic notions themselves, but actually it is
combination of both the internal and external or what Peirce would call “imputed” qualities.
And, this external qualities are actually mostly a more important part of the Phronesis
representia than the notions themselves. Well actually the notions themselves are very
uniform mostly of course, while holoplurality is about differences and pluralities. And in
holoplural understandings actually the differences between external and internal disappear
mostly, meaning that even the notions of internal and external themselves need to be
understood in anotherness ways and maybe are even not appropriate ones. But for current
mainstream understandings it is good notion to express some further differences and
understandings.

Pluriflection is the process that constantly has to guide whatever decision making process.
And, all of decision making processes or sensemaking processes involve representamens or
phronesis representia. The last being much better already, and therefore mostly resulting in
much better pluriflections and therefore sensemaking processes. But, of cours, that is not
enough. Since sometimes, and for a lot of processes and actions in our society at large, of
course actions are needed. Actions, guided by sane sensemaking. Sane sensemaking without
action taking HAS value, and not only a bit but A LOT of value. It’s about Peircean
possibilities. Or choices. The more possibilities and therefore choices we have to choose from,
the greater the possibilities and potentials for our society at large will be. But, of course,
sane sensemaking is the most important. As sane sensemaking can transfer even the worst
input into at least sane and maybe even great, excellent outputs.

On scientific reflexivity, it can be mentioned that being critical on social science studies and
understandings are also NOT enough. Besides this, it is needed to also understand in better
ways the underlying rules of this specific community being the scientific community, and also
understanding the (potential) insanities being caused by the relative autonomous actions of
specific subgroups/ scientific communities and subcommunities. Science is not only separated
from practise to quite large extends, but also for instance management studies are quite
separated from law studies and psychology studies. At least they are too far too large extends,
since integration of understandings and fields contribute a lot to solving vaguenesses in
theories and practise as opposed to maintaining chaos theories and understandings because
of misfits and clashes of understandings and realities. Reaching phronitical social sciences
through critical science studies requires not only an understanding of the shortfalls of current
social science as such, but it also requires quite a lot more. Like, for instance, a context for
sharing understandings in a very early stage if this is required for society at large.

The shortfalls and damages of chaos and complexity sensemaking being the results of the
insanities of Western Philosophy and current mainstream social sciences and practical
understandings can of course be “seen” throughout the whole of our society at large. For
those who (get to) understand.

With regards to the current financial crisis, the same insane understandings which led to the
crisis are now actually most probably going to lead to a further decrease in economics. And
actually what is going to happen in the next couple of years will most probably be much more
worse and damaging to society at large than what has been happening till current times.
Simply because the current actions are based on mainstream economic understandings being
very limited ones. I myself have written some more specific and practical discourses about
why this economic understandings are wrong already, and will strive at continuing with this
later on. Some bits of it can be found on the internet through googling for my name, but also I
will try to write some more parts about it the next couple of months. Some of them maybe
being published within the line of critical finance studies. Most probably before the discussion
of this specific paper I will already have written some piece on critical finance studies. Aimed
at some better understandings about finance being also accounting and economics but in this
light mainly economics and our economic realities. I have already written some piece on
understanding of money and what I call the money game, but of course this is a broad subject.
It should be understood very well that mainstream economics and understandings are based
on the WRONG, insane fundaments and understandings. By another perspective being the
holoplural one , and accompanying sane sensemaking practises, all of current economic
problems can be solved but even more our social realities at large can become MUCH more
great and nice and MUCH less damaging for individuals in our society.
I myself am questioning still whether there actually was and or is a financial crisis. Simply
because I use sane sensemaking and therefore more and more understand differences
instead of having either a complexity view or a very reductionist perception of understanding
leading to a lot of insanities and damages in our society at large. The last being the kind of
perspective and understandings of most governments and governmental institutions. What
most people do not really understand at current times, is that actually the understandings and
actions of governments and governmental people strongly oppress the growth and
development of plurisigns. Individuals being only a part of this plurisigns, but in the end we all
suffer a lot from this. And mainly the lower incomes do, a lot, in many respects.

So, what is at stake? What is at stake if for instance the current ideas of Dutch government to
“save” more money based on their reductionist understandings will be actualized into
practise? What if they seriously want to “save” money in general. And what if they seriously
will reduce or even abolish allowances to students (as a result of it) by that encouraging a lot
of students not to study anymore? Of course it may lead to more people being pressed to
work instead of studying, thereby even stimulating our economies the financial part of it. And
of course it is a good way, maybe, to keep people more into control. And maybe some of
actions although seemingly weird and damaging might be the correct ones in the end for
short terms. But, the essential and key fact here is, that we will never know for sure in case of
reductionist sensemaking or goal orientedness. At least goal orientedness as sole objective
will be damaging for sure, so also this idea of saving money by ending student allowances will
probably be in that respects. But, the major specific understandings here should be that
because of reductionist understandings, the most elementary parts of society and life as such
are not taken into considerations. IF they would, it would lead to completely other results. WE
NEED MORE MONEY, MORE MORE MORE. NOT LESS. And current ideas of measures to
be taken are reductionist and therefore they will damage individuals in MANY ways. For
understanding that, we NEED also to start valuating A LOT more than what is being valued at
current times.

What I am talking about there, is quality. Quality of life. And quality of persons in general. Even
products we produce as individuals and within organizations consist of a lot of quality, and this
quality is probably even more important than the internal characteristics of production systems
and raw materials and the like themselves. But, in most organizations, only quantitative
measures are used. And this measures are only used for a very restrictive reductionist part of
everything needed to produce products or services. The most elementary part being the
human qualities and inputs, is mostly not really valuated. Maybe also because we mostly do
not have any real good valuation measurements for qualitative inputs and qualities of
individuals and their actions. This qualities NEED to be valuated and taken into regards for
arriving at a sane way of doing. Which is probably completely different from the current
understandings and resulting actions of most governments and governmental bodies and
organizations. Just like most actions of production plants and companies are mostly based on
too much reductionist and therefore damaging understandings and actions. Not only for
economics, but even more for individuals in our society at large.
To take this qualities into regards, another perspective is needed. Being the perspective of
sane individual and collective minds being interconnected, and concentrating on differences
instead of similarities there. I already remarked in some other writings of mine that each
organization and also our society at large should be managed based on sane sensemaking,
and that a human/humanist perspective is the most important one. Connected with my remark
of quality of people, this also requires a preference of people above machines and
procedures. This by the way also implies that our societies should be GOVERNED by
governments also putting the well being and way of living of the citizens first, which has HUGE
large implications and requirements for future government(s). Government is a specific type of
management, although government and governments do not yet understand this to the fullest.
Just like they but also most organizations and managers do not understand that quality of
people based on sane sensemaking is both the most important guide and issue for
organizations, organizing and management. Instead of talking and understanding machines
and representamens like procedures and tools, managers and governmental people have to
UNDERSTAND sane sensemaking and PEOPLE to MUCH greater extends than at present
times. Then also actually only persons having the ATTITUDE of putting people first above
anything else should have both entrance and even allowance to practice real management.
Real management being management guided by SANE sensemaking and understanding the
quality and needs of people.People are, of course, not machines. By concentrating on
procedures, machines and other representamens and not allowing sane sensemaking and
storytelling based on it, A LOT of quality disappears or will not appear. We loose A LOT of
quality each day and each moment in time because of this, which is actually having effects on
quality of products, people, nature, society and just our whole universes at large

Our society at large needs enchantment. Phronesis antenarrating, and especially the Lazarus
parts of it (Lazarus being derived from some understandings of David Boje, expressed in my
chapter on Phronesis Antenarrating to be published in the 2010 Boje book on Antenarrating)
is aimed at this enchantment.
REFERENCES

Boje, D.M. (2008), Storytelling organizations.

Boje, D. M. (2001a). Narrative methods for organizational and communication research.

London: Sage.

Boje, D.M. (2010, forthcoming). Storytelling and antenarrative in organizations. Routledge,

Taylor and Francis Group.

Berendsen, W.T.M (forthcoming). A phronesis antenarrative. Towards new ecosocial

systems through the logic of vagueness”. A draft of this forthcoming publication is to be
downloaded here http://wilvon.com/download_center/index.php?phronesis_complex1.pdf

Berendsen, W.T.M., Antenarrating our economy, to be downloaded here

http://wilvon.com/download_center/index.php?Antenarrating_economy1.pdf

Berendsen, W.T.M, Holoplurality, to be downloaded here

http://wilvon.com/download_center/index.php?Holoplurality1.pdf

Berendsen, W.T.M, A phronesis antenarrative about the understanding of money and usage
of money in more phronetic ways, to be downloaded here
http://wilvon.com/download_center/index.php?TheMoneyGame1.pdf

Berendsen, W.T.M, Towards a reenchanted society through storytelling and phronesis

antenarrating, to be downloaded here
http://wilvon.com/download_center/index.php?Rechantingsociety1.pdf

Imaai ( 1986), Kaizen, McGraw-Hill, New York

Imaai (1997), Gemba Kaizen : A commonsense, low-cost approach to management,

McGraw-Hill, New York.

Nietzsche (1886), Beyond good and evil

Nietzsche (1887), On the genealogy of morals