Search results

This paper argues that Kabbalah, the generic term for Jewish mysticism, and structuralism, as articulated in anthropology by Claude Lévi-Strauss, share a number of unexpected theoretical foundations. These include the idea that surface diversity conceals underlying unity, truth is hidden within a layered model of reality, and linguistic and mathematical relationships constitute elementary structures enabling diverse and seemingly unconnected orders to be correlated with each other systematically. Yet if Kabbalah and structuralism are so similar, does this imply that Kabbalah is scientific or, as David Maybury-Lewis suggests, that structuralism is akin to mysticism?

This article describes a research method for developing complex applied models which does not sacrifice the high degree of flexibility that such development requires. The method involves a detailed and concrete description of one's intervention model, followed by a carefully documented and measured application. The model is then evaluated and modified in the light of the data, and reapplied. This cycle is repeated many times. The requirements and problems of this method are discussed, particularly in relation to Campbell and Stanley's factors of external and internal validity.

This article illustrates the need for optimal balance between focus and flexibility, as well as task and process, in a model of conflict resolution. Our model consists of initial stages of defining the conflict, ratings, and gathering information. Thereafter, participants themselves decide among the options of creating new solutions, ratings, redefining the conflict, gathering more information, and influence attempts. Until the conflict is resolved, the model recycles through these options, searching for the cognitive and emotional elements which constitute a mutually satisfactory solution.

This paper describes a structured model of conflict resolution, illustrated with examples from two workshops. The model stresses the task requirements of conflict resolution as contrasted with current process-oriented models. After defining the conflict and gathering information, participants choose among the options: Influence Attempts, Creating New Solutions, Redefinition of the Conflict, and Gathering More Information, returning to information-gathering and renewed choice until the conflict is resolved. The relative success of the initial 2-day workshops engenders optimism regarding further refinement of the model.