Thanks Harrison, I *think* I hear what you're saying. There is a lot of
cultural baggage around the word game. But I'm really not hearing that
you're getting what I'm saying.
As I tried to convey unsuccessfully alas, and maybe this is a dead
letter attempt and I should only speak latin here (being in Rome), but
there is no REAL vs. SIMULATION context at all in what Dan or I are
trying to convey. That's why I quoted Dr. Carse about there being "only
one infinite game". We are addressing a very REAL game. The game of
Life. Not fake or pretend.
The sense of the word game that is being put forward as helpful to this
community is not in any way restricted to the software community. There
certainly are insights coming from the world of game design that have
been referenced earlier - and which even from your own writings in the
use of the term 'play' that feel in alignment with what this community
is trying to accomplish. And this is also an area of growing popular
interest.
Case in point - Jane McGonigal wrote a best seller "Reality is Broken"
which includes much relevant modern psychology as well as ideas from
game design which is driving real and palpable investments in an
extremely broad community, including for example social justice. Her
basic thesis is that we can bring insights from what she speaks of as a
huge abandonment and immigration away from "Reality" into the "Pretend"
world of flickering images and twitching fingers on gaming console
buttons, to fix reality to make it more fun and engaging so more people
can work on real problems but with the benefits of the insights from
good game design.
The realm of the word "game" is rich with opportunity and actual
investments that will not just help engage the software community, but
everyone.
Harold
On 10/9/13 9:10 AM, Harrison Owen wrote:
Harold -- Conversation surely continues! Never fear!! And I surely
hear what you are saying, but as I commented to Dan in a private note
-- "Never fear Dan. I think I do understand. As an old gamer, having
used both the theory and practice extensively in the '70's for the
development of health care policy and programs, I am profoundly aware
of the power and the possibilities. As I used to say in those ancient
days -- Gaming allows us to do in pretend time what is impossible or
illegal to do in real time. Covers a lot of bases and gets a lot done.
That said, I would never use gaming when I could play for real. I just
went for it. I think that may be the source of my discomfort when
"game" is attached to OS. As far as I am concerned -- when in Open
Space, we are "going for it for real." It ain't a game.
Your use of the words and concepts certainly make sense given the
context and the community you are addressing (Agile, Scrum, etc.) But
I am just not sure that they translate well into a broader and
different community. I have and certainly can be very wrong, but I've
always found that when in Rome a little Latin will do J"
My real point is that when seeking to help us understand what Dan is
all about (and it is a marvelous project), his phrasing may not be the
most felicitous. Then again my difficulty may well be an advanced case
of hardening of the neuronal pathways. Happens JJ
Harrison
Harrison Owen
7808 River Falls Dr.
Potomac, MD 20854
USA
189 Beaucaire Ave. (summer)
Camden, Maine 04843
Phone 301-365-2093
(summer) 207-763-3261
www.openspaceworld.com <www.openspaceworld.com%20>
www.ho-image.com <www.ho-image.com%20> (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:*Harold Shinsato [mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 09, 2013 9:29 AM
*To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
*Cc:* Harrison Owen
*Subject:* Re: [OSList] The OST Game
Harrison,
Ok, I'll take your word from previous posts that I won't be in trouble
if I risk going up against you again - or maybe it's just a hope that
this thread won't be shut down due to misunderstandings.
The statement "OST is a game" actually doesn't work for me so much
because it uncomfortably reduces all the ideas and philosophy (and
practice) of OST into a word that unfortunately has for many negative
connotations. But perhaps I'll invite thinking about OST *as* a game
instead. Perhaps that can help prevent cognitive dissonance and allow
for this conversation to continue.
My understanding of the word game as used by Daniel Mezick and others
comes from game theory - and could open up many benefits.
The briefest way I think to hope to keep this particular door open for
those in this community who might find the word game unpleasant would
be to suggest the book "Finite and Infinite Games: A Vision of Life as
Play and Possibility" by James P. Carse. Mr. Carse actually is a
professor of history and literature of religion - and his thinking in
that book is very poetic and beautiful. And it reminds me much of Open
Space thinking - and I won't even attempt to dive into his thesis any
more than to look at what I think sums up the thinking being the final
sentence in the book. "There is only one infinite game."
The bigger game of Open Space is the game of life - the unending story
- the "one infinite game". And an OST meeting or conference is a
finite game which seems to open up an experience of the infinite game
in a beautiful way. And yet, there's still value in seeing the finite
game aspects of OST in that context.
Alas, perhaps this attempt will be futile. But I hold out hope that
others won't be discouraged from this perspective on OST as a game and
it's benefits.
Harold
On 10/7/13 1:25 PM, Harrison Owen wrote:
Dan -- Using the word, "game" as you do, I guess it sort of works
with OS, but I do confess a certain feeling of cognitive
dissonance, which I suspect may be shared by some of my
colleagues. In any event, it certainly would not be a word I would
use. But that doesn't mean a great deal. However, when you say,
"Leaders choose to play OST. Or not," I do feel called upon to say
something like... Oh Yes?
Some people refer to the "Game of Life," but it is scarcely a game
you choose to play (or not). Not playing is called suicide, I
think, and while some people do make that choice it is not a
choice that most folks would considered good, useful, or positive.
It is more like canceling all choices. Out of the Game, so to speak.
I feel rather the same way about OS, and for all the same reasons.
OS for me is not a process we choose to do or not do -- quite
simply it is what we are -- Self organizing, and OS is only an
invitation to be ourselves fully and purposefully. We can chose to
be ourselves with distinction, despair, or something in between --
but so long as we remain on the planet in some viable form, we
got no choice. We are what we are, what we are. Put a little
differently, OS is not something new and different, it is just a
small name change for what has been around for quite a while:
life. I guess you can call it a game, but somehow that seems to
miss some of the nuances.
Harrison
--
Harold Shinsato
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://shinsato.com
twitter: @hajush <http://twitter.com/hajush>
--
Harold Shinsato
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://shinsato.com
twitter: @hajush <http://twitter.com/hajush>
