Perfect! John
On Sep 19, 2011, at 12:57 PM, Harrison Owen wrote: > Of course, John! Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that the only truly > useful pre-work for OST is good yoga. Might not be a bad idea J > > Harrison > > Harrison Owen > 7808 River Falls Dr. > Potomac, MD 20854 > USA > > 189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer) > Camden, Maine 20854 > > Phone 301-365-2093 > (summer) 207-763-3261 > > www.openspaceworld.com > www.ho-image.com (Personal Website) > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of OSLIST > Go to:http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Watkins > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 3:38 PM > To: World wide Open Space Technology email list > Subject: Re: [OSList] Designing an OS way > > Harrison, > > I've been listening and learning. Then all at once, I felt an urge to > contribute! Emergence in action. > One of my favorite ways to think about what you say below about equilibrium > being "but a momentary pause on the way to something else..." comes from > twelfth century (CE) Kashmir Shaivism, in the writing of Abhinavagupta and > more succinctly in that of Kshemaraja, one of his students. Talking about > how we enact at our own level of consciousness the "five acts of siva" > (creation, maintenance, dissolution, cloaking or forgetfulness, and revealing > or grace), they refer to the tendency we have to see reality in terms of a > whole bunch of dichotomies (a form of forgetfulness or cloaking), mostly > having to do with seeing objects and subjects as somehow separate from each > other, including ourselves, and as fixed "things." They remind us of what we > in the west have only recently begun to realize, that everything in this > universe is just a flow of energy, and it's all connected. When we hold onto > the idea of that thing out there (or the "I am that" in our inner universe), > we exaggerate the "maintenance" part of the cycle and become attached to or > averse to those "things" as something permanent. They ask us to use our > "yoga" to understand this deep sense of reality, and "reabsorb" or "dissolve" > those "objects" back into the flow of consciousness, of energy, and thus move > beyond the suffering or misery that we experience when we are attached to the > "thingness" of reality. We can then participate with more blissfulness in > the play of reality, and even enjoy the pleasure of experiencing the > "cloakedness" of our material level of experience, so long as we understand > it is just one form of experience. > One of my own very personal experiences with things being "but a momentary > pause on the way to something else..." comes from my backpacking in high > mountains, where there are lots of imposing boulderfields to negotiate. I > must place my boot squarely on each rock I pass over, carefully, > deliberately, and trust it 100% to hold my weight, and yet, each boulder has > the potential to roll under my feet and take me for a very unpleasant ride, > if I am attached to it staying put, or fearful of it rolling. If I commit > 100% to being on it when I am, and yet am already moving on to the next, a > happy dynamic flow ensues that turns a field of death into a golden brick > road. > A little poetic, but very real. > BTW, the tantrikas say that breath is the flow of universal energy, of the > goddess into your being, and back into the goddess. And "she will breathe > you until she is done." > > John > > > On Sep 19, 2011, at 12:16 PM, Harrison Owen wrote: > > > John – where have you been hiding? It is fun to have you here! A thought > about equilibrium – that it is but a momentary pause on the way to something > else. We do like stasis – standing still. Gives us a sense of permanence, > regularity, control. But unfortunately, as I experience it, life is a > process, a flow, a becoming. And the stasis we experience is but a momentary > snapshot along the way. Part of our problem, I think is that we become > prisoners of our language. It is very difficult to talk about “flow” – we can > only speak of “moments of flow” – and those moments then become (in our > language) things in themselves. Shift the language to music/sound or > visuals/video and the situation becomes more manageable – but then many feel > that we have lost precision. Oh well – choices. > > And where does Open Space fit in all of this? I think one of the wonderful > things that happens is that the people become aware of the flow which moves > beyond (and around) their experience of the static things…the rules, > regulations, formal structure, etc. A little poetic perhaps – but I watch > organizations learning to breathe again, instead of gasping for breath which > is what usually happens when you are told when and how to breathe. > > Harrison > > Harrison Owen > 7808 River Falls Dr. > Potomac, MD 20854 > USA > > 189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer) > Camden, Maine 20854 > > Phone 301-365-2093 > (summer) 207-763-3261 > > www.openspaceworld.com > www.ho-image.com (Personal Website) > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of OSLIST > Go to:http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Watkins > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 1:46 PM > To: World wide Open Space Technology email list > Subject: Re: [OSList] Designing an OS way > > Great questions, Michael! > > I think when I am feeling optimistic (most of the time) I see OST as creating > one of those "far from equilibrium states" that Prigogine and Stengers talk > about as enabling new orders to emerge; however, in less sanguine times, I > could also imagine OST as just a "subsystem fluctuation" enabling larger > system stability. But I think that most of our larger systems these days are > exhibiting something like either disequilibrium or bifurcation points, so > maybe OST is able to restructure the system architecture so fundamentally > that a new order could emerge. Weick talks about that restructuring of the > system architecture in order to change the "flows" of energy in the system. > I think Bateson referred to one kind of larger system disequilibrium as an > "uptight system," where at least one of the "variables" is "pinned" at its > upper or lower limits of its range of flexibility, resulting in that rigidity > rippling through the whole system. Rigid systems change more easily, but > not usually in a very pretty way: chaotic bursts, turbulence, tumbling into > chaos, new orders emerging spontaneously... > > John > > On Sep 19, 2011, at 10:24 AM, Michael Herman wrote: > > > > yes, thanks, john. and... where does os practice drop into either of these? > in bateson terms, it seems open space meetings would be an alternative state > that organizations are unconsciously working to prevent? how does something > like working in an open space way become part of the equilbrium state that is > then automatically preserved by continually returning from anything that's > alternative to that way of being in organization? in lemke terms, there > seems a place for operating in open space, but will it always require what > sounds like a crisis, choice-point to be helpful? how does working in an > open space way become normal in systems that are storied in this way? m > > > > -- > > Michael Herman > Michael Herman Associates > 312-280-7838 (mobile) > > http://MichaelHerman.com > http://ManorNeighbors.com > http://OpenSpaceWorld.org > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:06 PM, John Watkins <[email protected]> wrote: > Michael, > > I think Gregory Bateson addressed the question of equilibrium most eloquently > a long time ago in his great book, Steps to an Ecology of Mind! And I've > seen some great analysis of it in Jay Lemke's book, Textual Politics. Let's > see if I can find the relevant quotes... > > Bateson: Systems “…maintain a dynamic equilibrium or steady state… [through] > maximiz[ing] the chances against the maximization of any single simple > variable” (124). “The steady state is maintained by continual nonprogressive > change” (125). What Bateson noticed was that allowable levels of > fluctuations in some subset of a larger system were used to create relative > stability in the larger system, but that those fluctuations never led to > fundamental shifts in the architecture of the system, as they continually > shifted out of and then returned to a kind of dynamic equilibrium. It is a > “corrective action… brought about by [the awareness of] difference” (Bateson, > 1972:381). A social system “…does not elect the steady state; it prevents > itself from staying in any alternative state” (381). Or, “[T]he constancy and > survival of some larger system is maintained by changes in the constituent > subsystem” (Bateson, 1972:339). > > Lemke calls that a “meta-stable non-equilibrium” (Lemke, 1995:11). He goes > on to argue that as social systems develop, they become more ordered and > differentiated, increasingly complex, and as such, demonstrate > irreversibility. At some point, in various layers of their hierarchy > (hierarchy in systems theory is not the same as hierarchy of authority or > knowledge, e.g., bureaucracy; it is a concept of scale, in scope, time, or > space), open, complex systems begin to demonstrate non-symmetry, or the > possibility of bifurcation (branching, “choice” points), due to the > amplified, interacting oscillations of various sub-systems. Bifurcation in > larger systems can enable larger out-of-equilibrium fluctuations in, or > unpredictable interactions between, sub-systems to result in evolutionary, or > adaptive, change in the larger system... > > Does this help? > > John > > > > On Sep 19, 2011, at 9:36 AM, Michael Herman wrote: > > > > i want to echo florian's appreciation for your story, john, thank you. and i > have a question about "equilibrium." > > in financial markets, gene fama won a nobel prize for his theory of > "efficient" markets, suggesting that markets always reflected all current > information, immediately returning to "equilbrium" after every news release, > so that above-normal returns were not possible. many now question or dismiss > this. > > so, in a world that is always moving, what does the theory you described so > nicely have to say about equilibrium? does it then lead into questions about > locality and "self" ...the department might be in equilibrium but the company > is falling apart, or vice versa... so the boundaries of the "self" that is > being invited to organize or re-organize really matter. > > mostly i'm just wondering if you can say more to map the open systems, > thermodynamics, and esp equilibrium story to what we have all seen happening > in organizations and open spaces. is "equilibrium" the same as "normal?" > > m > > > > -- > > Michael Herman > Michael Herman Associates > 312-280-7838 (mobile) > > http://MichaelHerman.com > http://ManorNeighbors.com > http://OpenSpaceWorld.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OSList mailing list > To post send emails to [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: > http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org > > > _______________________________________________ > OSList mailing list > To post send emails to [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: > http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org > > _______________________________________________ > OSList mailing list > To post send emails to [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: > http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org > > _______________________________________________ > OSList mailing list > To post send emails to [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: > http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
_______________________________________________ OSList mailing list To post send emails to [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] To subscribe or manage your subscription click below: http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
