280
Subtle Agroecologies
approach, we can become more confdent in our understanding. It then builds a picture of water fow
by showing three distinct ‘movement gestures’ which interplay and can also be seen in life forms.
These gestures can be experienced in a qualitative, artistic way, as with dramatic or sculptural gestures, but can also be defned geometrically and drawn simply but precisely through the interplay
of points and lines. This provides a background to then look at the practice of ‘dynamisation’, the
‘enlivening’ of water by inducing particular movements, as well as other ways of moving water
used in some agricultural practice. It examines the water movements in specifcally designed vessels (Flowforms) as well as those in potentisation. The chapter concludes with a consideration of
possible connections between the researcher and research results when investigating organic life.
PHENOMENOLOGICAL AND EPISTEMOLOGICAL BACKGROUND:
THE UNION OF SENSE EXPERIENCE (PERCEPTS) AND IDEAS
(CONCEPTS) AS THE BASIS OF KNOWLEDGE
If we wish to develop any clear and useful knowledge, we need to fnd appropriate concepts with
which to meet the things we can experience with our senses. We judge our understanding by the
degree to which the concepts make sense of the perceived phenomena, by the degree they create a
satisfying meaning of our experience. Some concepts make meaning for a single occurrence only,
while others, we realise, apply widely. If we can see an active principle to be at work in all instances,
we may call it an archetypal idea. These archetypal ideas give us the greatest meaning, since we see
the instances related to a wholeness, we see the principles of the whole at work in the parts.
Taking a monistic perspective, I see both our ideas and the sense percept as being united within
the world we encounter. It is only in our minds that they are separate. This view comes to light in the
works of J. W. von Goethe and was clarifed by Rudolf Steiner (Seamon and Zajonc, 1998; Steiner,
1988). It has been expressed more recently by Gregory Bateson and Henri Bortoft (Bateson, 2002;
Bortoft, 1996, 2012). Through the practice of science stemming from Goethe (termed Goethean
inquiry, or Goethean phenomenology), we can gain moments of direct understanding, when it is
possible to ‘see’ that the idea is one with the percept, to ‘realise’ an organising principle at work
in the object of study as one perceives it (Colquhoun and Ewald, 1996; Hoffman, 2007; Holdrege,
2013). Once this has happened, the idea is always there, and it can be shared with others who may
take it on intellectually or ‘realise’ the truth of it themselves. It is this quality of understanding
which occurs in ‘A-ha moments’ or ‘Eureka’ experiences, which are the subject of neurological
research (Danek and Salvi, 2020).
With water in fow, however, the organising principles are found to be fexible ideas that we can
grasp but never entirely possess (Holdrege, 2013; Seamon and Zajonc, 1998). The archetypal ideas
at work are manifold; they do provide a sense of reality, of certainty, but they interplay according to
the context. This means that it would be inappropriate to state what is best practice for all situations.
What we can do is build up a conceptual picture in connection with the phenomena we perceive,
which helps to make meaning of one’s own practice.
The following section explores the forms that water takes up in non-turbulent fow, their appearance and their lawfulness. In particular, it explores how water can be sensitive. This will provide us
with some ideas with which to look at the practice of dynamisation.
GEOMETRY AND GESTURES IN FLOW: SPIRAL AND RING VORTICES
Geometry gives us the clarity of precisely defned concepts. In this chapter, I search for some
commonality between these concepts and gestures in the study of fow. In our standard school
Euclidian 1 geometry, concepts are generally fxed as rigid measurements, including distances and
1 Euclid of Alexandria, Greek mathematician and founder of classical geometry, b.300 BC.
Subtle Agroecologies
approach, we can become more confdent in our understanding. It then builds a picture of water fow
by showing three distinct ‘movement gestures’ which interplay and can also be seen in life forms.
These gestures can be experienced in a qualitative, artistic way, as with dramatic or sculptural gestures, but can also be defned geometrically and drawn simply but precisely through the interplay
of points and lines. This provides a background to then look at the practice of ‘dynamisation’, the
‘enlivening’ of water by inducing particular movements, as well as other ways of moving water
used in some agricultural practice. It examines the water movements in specifcally designed vessels (Flowforms) as well as those in potentisation. The chapter concludes with a consideration of
possible connections between the researcher and research results when investigating organic life.
PHENOMENOLOGICAL AND EPISTEMOLOGICAL BACKGROUND:
THE UNION OF SENSE EXPERIENCE (PERCEPTS) AND IDEAS
(CONCEPTS) AS THE BASIS OF KNOWLEDGE
If we wish to develop any clear and useful knowledge, we need to fnd appropriate concepts with
which to meet the things we can experience with our senses. We judge our understanding by the
degree to which the concepts make sense of the perceived phenomena, by the degree they create a
satisfying meaning of our experience. Some concepts make meaning for a single occurrence only,
while others, we realise, apply widely. If we can see an active principle to be at work in all instances,
we may call it an archetypal idea. These archetypal ideas give us the greatest meaning, since we see
the instances related to a wholeness, we see the principles of the whole at work in the parts.
Taking a monistic perspective, I see both our ideas and the sense percept as being united within
the world we encounter. It is only in our minds that they are separate. This view comes to light in the
works of J. W. von Goethe and was clarifed by Rudolf Steiner (Seamon and Zajonc, 1998; Steiner,
1988). It has been expressed more recently by Gregory Bateson and Henri Bortoft (Bateson, 2002;
Bortoft, 1996, 2012). Through the practice of science stemming from Goethe (termed Goethean
inquiry, or Goethean phenomenology), we can gain moments of direct understanding, when it is
possible to ‘see’ that the idea is one with the percept, to ‘realise’ an organising principle at work
in the object of study as one perceives it (Colquhoun and Ewald, 1996; Hoffman, 2007; Holdrege,
2013). Once this has happened, the idea is always there, and it can be shared with others who may
take it on intellectually or ‘realise’ the truth of it themselves. It is this quality of understanding
which occurs in ‘A-ha moments’ or ‘Eureka’ experiences, which are the subject of neurological
research (Danek and Salvi, 2020).
With water in fow, however, the organising principles are found to be fexible ideas that we can
grasp but never entirely possess (Holdrege, 2013; Seamon and Zajonc, 1998). The archetypal ideas
at work are manifold; they do provide a sense of reality, of certainty, but they interplay according to
the context. This means that it would be inappropriate to state what is best practice for all situations.
What we can do is build up a conceptual picture in connection with the phenomena we perceive,
which helps to make meaning of one’s own practice.
The following section explores the forms that water takes up in non-turbulent fow, their appearance and their lawfulness. In particular, it explores how water can be sensitive. This will provide us
with some ideas with which to look at the practice of dynamisation.
GEOMETRY AND GESTURES IN FLOW: SPIRAL AND RING VORTICES
Geometry gives us the clarity of precisely defned concepts. In this chapter, I search for some
commonality between these concepts and gestures in the study of fow. In our standard school
Euclidian 1 geometry, concepts are generally fxed as rigid measurements, including distances and
1 Euclid of Alexandria, Greek mathematician and founder of classical geometry, b.300 BC.