Raffi Wrote: " Might offering just the self-org theory as the *only* likely story of os close the space a wee bit for other likely stories?"
Raffi -- I supose you could be right if I had said in some fashion that Self-organization theory was the official dogma -- none other allowed. But such a statement would be 180 degrees from my intention and and totally contrary to everything that I think, believe, and (hopefully) live. The first thing to understand is that it (SOT) is a theory, a likely story of how things work. As the theory has emerged under various names (chaos theory, complexity theory, complex adaptive theory) in the past several decades it has grown infinitely deeper and richer -- which is to say that it has been in constant change, but it does seem to be headed more or less in one direction. My statement was that FOR ME self-organization theory represented the best theoretical structure in which I could make sense out of what happens in OS. Could there be others? Of course. Will there be others? Absolutely. And all of that will emerge over time as part of an ongoing conversation amongst those who care -- which includes lots of people who have never heard of OS. But I think we have some unique contributions to make to the conversation, because we have been part of what I can only call the Open Space Experiment, in which (as I would see it)we have consciously and intentionally lived and worked in a self-organizing mode. So my real intent was invitation -- invitation to the conversation about what we are doing, what it means, how it works, and why. As with all good conversations, I think it should be pursued with intencity -- which on occasion may be perceived as certainty. But that certainty/intencity, so far as I am concerned, is only part of the story telling / theory building process. Wimpy story telling does not go very far -- but every good story teller always knows that the story can be told differently, and the best story tellers are constantly searching for better ways to tell it. We are all pretty new at this both in terms of Open Space as well as the theory of self-organizations, so it is sometimes instructive to see what happens in other areas, for example Physics. Physicists tell their stories with great intencity and much passion. And if you listen to any moment of the conversation, it may sound like pure dogma -- but it is actually an ongoing invitation to make the stories better. At the moment it seems like we have three stories (at least): Newtonian, Quantum, and String Theory. To ask which one is true is miss the point. Theories are never true or false, in some absolute sense -- they are always just ways of talking about things. They become "good theories" when they are descriptive and predictive -- they accurately describe what is going on, and help us to understand what might happen in the future. But it is all part of a conversation. About this time you might be wondering whether we really have to go through all this stuff. Why not just "do" Open Space? That works too, in the same way that cold beer and the refrigerator works. To get a cold beer, I simply have to open the door and pop the top. Viola -- Cold Beer! Do I really have to understand (talk about) all of the intricacies of refrigeration mechanics, fluid dynamics, the botany of beer making? No! Unless I want to make better beer. . . Harrison Harrison Owen 7808 River Falls Drive Potomac, Maryland 20854 Phone 301-365-2093 Skype hhowen Open Space Training www.openspaceworld.com Open Space Institute www.openspaceworld.org Personal website www.ho-image.com OSLIST: To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives Visit: www.listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html -----Original Message----- From: OSLIST [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Raffi Aftandelian Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 7:32 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: doing self-organization Harrison, When Michael writes he isn't a fan of the self-org story, I think about keeping the creative potential in keeping space open for our understanding of open space. Self-org is a very convincing story. And our as our world is changing very quickly so will our understanding of open space. Might offering just the self-org theory as the *only* likely story of os close the space a wee bit for other likely stories? Who knows what those other likely stories might be, but I'd bet that in the next 10-20 years we're going to hear some other pretty compelling ones. Guess we'll have to stay tuned...to the bass note <silly grin> ? [Hi to all in Kiev/Kyiv! I guess if you're nervous, Jo, that must be a good sign!] Warmly, Raffi * * ========================================================== [email protected] ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist * * ========================================================== [email protected] ------------------------------ To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives of [email protected]: http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs: http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
