hi doug,
seems to me that your first question assumes halfway state. "if there
is such a thing as self-org" then leaves open the question of whether
or not there is anything else. once we notice that it is, AND is
everywhere, then the need for knowing or creating the conditions seems
to dissolve, maybe into harrison's beer. we need to know more,
perhaps, if we want to make a better beer, but probably not about the
"conditions" for refrigeration, but about refrigeration as the
condition for beer. so the conditions that matter are the conditions
for high performance or productive work. and when we ask that, i
think we can quickly dissolve most of what people say into what
happens in our principles and law and circle and invitation and...
inviting, like marshall rosenberg's 'non-violent communication,
emphasizes choice. invitation is request for attention, not demand.
even in writing an invitation with a leader/sponsor, i'm not ever
trying to make the invitation go a certain way, but i do invite
attention (theirs) to focus on various bits of what i'm
hearing/sensing in them and their situation, exploring the 'rightness"
of these bits to see what dimensions of everything they'd like to
invite others to focus on with them.
my two cents.
m
On 5/24/07, douglas germann <[email protected]> wrote:
Michael, Harrison, Joelle, Andrew, Pat, Raffi, and all--
(Sorry for the previous posting--somehow hit the send key before I was done.)
Would you be interested in entertaining a couple of musing questions?
If (some people in command and control mode might still use the word
"if") there is such a thing as self organizing, what would be its
conditions?
This seems to be to be a fruitful inquiry, and it goes beyond
our usual important, complex, diverse, conflict, immediacy list.
For me it perhaps overlaps but is not precisely the same as
Harrison's list of 8 essentials.
For instance, is invitation necessary for self
organizing? What level of freedom? What order of
equality of the participants? Are there physical
conditions? Or is it just two or more gathering?
Closely related: What is the difference between trying to control what a
group does and inviting? (Harrison, you hinted at this in a post today
when you say "I believe that there is an infinitely better possibility
through which we may discover deep ways to realize our full potential as
human beings, as well as doing something very useful and good in the
world.") Is it simply a matter of degree, or is the difference
qualitative?
For instance, when Birgitt writes of "givens," or I help
someone write the theme for their invitation, we are
consciously directing the attention of the participants
to something we want to examine or change. So for
instance, we are inviting people to make positive change
in the area of X, or to explore the issues and
opportunities of X, and this necessarily takes their
attention off Y, Z, Q and J.
:- Doug.
*
*
==========================================================
[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
--
Michael Herman
Michael Herman Associates
300 West North Ave #1105
Chicago IL 60610 USA
phone: 312-280-7838
email: [email protected]
skype: globalchicago
http://www.michaelherman.com
http://www.openspaceworld.org
http://www.chicagoconservationcorps.org
*
*
==========================================================
[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
