Re: [-empyre-] transforming human culture and the ideosphere through collective intellectuality
With these most recent discussions and Michel's perspective I am now keeping in mind a picture of carpenters refitting the inside decks of a ship. Because of changing priorities and changing organizational structures, substantial repartitioning is taking place. Best wishes, Magnus yes, I agree, the map is definitely not the territory, and we know from neoclassical economics how much reality can be abstracted away from models, whose fictionality then becomes the real basis for atrocious policy-making ... personally, I have found the relational modelling of Alan Page Fiske to be the most clear and usable, see http://p2pfoundation.net/Relational_Model_Typology_-_Fiske ; to understand peer dynamics in particular, the thesis of communal shareholding is much more explanatory than the gift economy analogies usually banded about, Michel On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk wrote: Hi Michel You are right, I find the turquiose diagram closer to my own model. I also agree that the yellow one is quite scary. On a slightly different note, I find it interesting that we find it easier to represent relational models, such as social structures, through images rather than words. An argument for visual forms of knowledge. Nevertheless, such reductive graphics seem to be missing much of the nuanced detail I'd like to see before any of them start to come close to how one can apprehend human relations. I'm not suggesting that the visual cannot present this subtle level of information. It can. Breughel's paintings of crowd scenes do this quite well. It is just that when the image becomes as abstracted as words something is lost. The spaces between words foster our imagination but these spaces do not exist in diagrams like these. best Simon On 30 Jul 2011, at 07:23, Michel Bauwens wrote: ok, I get your point better now! Simon, perhaps you'd be interested in having a look at this, http://www.calresco.org/wp/spiral.htm in particular the graphic, more at the bottom of the article, at the right hand of the subtitle, Connectivity Styles - controlling, ignoring or sharing i.e. http://www.calresco.org/wp/matrix.gif what I like about it, is that we can look at fully p2p networks in a technology sense, only from our specific point of view or form of awareness in my view, a fully p2p form of awareness, is what the author calls 'Turquoise' ( bottom middle) Perhaps Kimura looks at the network from a yellow point of view, and you at a turquoise point of view, as a possible hypothesis ... Please note I just show this as a reference,not that I fully agree, especially as the author assumes the most evolved form to be 'guru-centric', or at least it seems that way from the picture, here is what he writes on that picture: When we look at the 9 vMemes as complex systems, in terms of their connectivity approaches, then we see a number of different styles. At * beige* the people are isolated from each other, they behave independently as do plants in the wild, here there are no social benefits to speak of, meetings between the individuals are rare and likely to be competitive. [image: Connectivity Matrix] At *purple* the leaders cooperate, bringing a consensus rule to the local group and controlling by loyalty, whilst the tribe loosely associate with each other, giving a 'symbiosis' approach for mutual benefit. Yet all groups remain disconnected and local. At *red* we see the first true hierarchy, with a single leader, aided by underlings, ruling by physical force. In this local society power flows down and resources flow up, the rich take from the poor. Justice here is arbitrary, based upon the whim of the leader, it is a style rich in unpredictability. Many societies compete for power. Once we get to *blue* the emphasis changes to a bureaucracy, an inflexible hierarchy based upon the psychologicalhttp://www.calresco.org/lucas/global.htmforces of belief and the strong use of rules or laws to structure justice and order at both local and global levels. At *orange* local two-way transactions between participants comes to the fore, and we gain the benefits of exchange, with a freedom to decide whether or not to accept or make any offer. This is potentially a fully connected and somewhat chaotic matrix with global aspirations. Within the *green* worldview the focus shifts to more intangible ideas and small isolated consensus groups 'doing their own thing' as it were, but each competing to try to impose their * single* value globally upon all. It is a highly modular approach. A change now occurs as *yellow* arrives, and the first stage of 2nd tier 'vision logic' is seen. These people act as facilitators (shown in white), acting locally to bind together the six 1st tier vMemes and to encourage the use of the most appropriate vMeme. At *turquoise* networks of such facilitators coordinate actions
[-empyre-] [Fwd: Re: mindful inquiry]
Michel, Many thanks for these further thoughts: Original Message Subject: Re: mindful inquiry From:Michel Bauwens mic...@p2pfoundation.net Date:Sun, July 31, 2011 4:28 pm To: mag...@ditch.org.uk Cc: s.bi...@eca.ac.uk -- On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 8:32 PM, mag...@ditch.org.uk wrote: http://books.google.com/books/about/Mindful_inquiry_in_social_research.html?id=AF6WWgtNshoC http://adhi301126117.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/mindful-inquiry-and-action-research/ With these I am just wondering in (a very unresolved way) about the ideosphere and the bridging you mention... Magnus asked me what I thought of 'mindful inquiry' ... I was not familiar with this particular tradition, but I'm quite fond of the model of cooperative inquiry by John Heron, really one of my intellectual heroes, (more at http://p2pfoundation.net/P2P_Public_Intellectuals, http://p2pfoundation.net/Commons-Oriented_Economists, and http://p2pfoundation.net/Association_of_Peer_to_Peer_Researchers) who gives an explicitely p2p formulation of research: (more at http://p2pfoundation.net/Cooperative_Inquiry) A radical peer-to-peer research method, also called collaborative inquiry, originated by John Heron between 1968 and 1981, and now regarded as one of the most well-developed of the family of action research approaches. It has been applied in a wide range of contexts: in medical practice, nursing, midwifery, social work, management, organizational development, community development, adult and continuing education, living together, human spirituality, co-counselling, obesity, diabetes, racism, gender, women in mid-life, social justice leadership, and more. In traditional research on people, the roles of researcher and subject are mutually exclusive. The researcher only contributes the thinking that goes into the project, and the subjects only contribute the action to be studied. In co-operative inquiry these exclusive roles are replaced by a co-operative relationship of bilateral initiative and control, so that all those involved work together as co-researchers and as co-subjects. They both design, manage and draw conclusions from the inquiry, and undergo the experience and action that is being explored. This is not research on people, but research with people. My hunch is that a distinct p2p approach would combine a strong dose of object-orientation (http://p2pfoundation.net/Social_Object, i.e. the object, not the discipline determines the research approach), which automatically means transdisciplinarity, http://p2pfoundation.net/Transdisciplinarity, coupled with both individual and collective self-reflexivity). Here is a nice rundown of the 'evolution' towards transdisciplinarity: Of course, I didn't spend nearly enough time in academia to make any strong claims in this field, but this is how I pretty intuitively wrote a small introduction to an association of p2p researchers we would like to create: The idea is to create a research group centering around understanding the 'object' of emerging peer to peer dynamics, and more particularly the emerging forms of peer production, governance and property, and the associated paradigms of openness, participation, and commons-orientation. The idea is to combine academic standards and the best of the academic tradition, but to combine it with a few augmentations: - opening up to the participation of non-academics as long as academic standards can be observed - opening up to more participatory or inclusive forms of peer review - commitment to publishing in open access formats wherever possible - commitment to human emancipation, i.e. the research is combined with a positive charge of achieving a more just society, broadly defined as a society that allows more free interactions between its members - to be independent but also aligned with the p2p knowledge commons of the P2P Foundation - to be a group which aims for the mutual support of p2p researchers, including aiming at the 'sustainability' of such research - to promote the diffusion of knowledge of p2p dynamics, particularly the research from its own members I'm very strong on the intuitive idea that we all shine a partial light on any object, and that we need each other to approach the truth. I do not discount materialist objectivity at all, but don't see how it can be divorced from epistemological self-reflexivity in order to understand what it is we are willing to see, or not. Ken Wilber once made a difference between the eye of the flesh (mind seeing matter, needing objectivity), the eye of the mind (mind's seeing each other, needing some form of hermeneutics) and the eye of the spirit (the no-mind seeing the mind, as it 'witnessing meditation' etc.., needs intersubjective validation of the experience with the numinous). I think a combination
[-empyre-] Fwd: August on -empyre signing off
Yes, thanks Simon! May we all have a joyful and fun filled August. Many thanks to Simon for taking charge this past month for a truly interesting and busy month on empyre. -empyre- soft-skinned space is taking the month of August off-line. Our plans are to return to you in early September for a month long discussion hosted by four of the members of the moderating team: Tim Murray, Patrick Lichty, Simon Biggs and myself. Excitingly, the four of us will be hosting from the 14th of September to the 20th at the ISEA conference in Istanbul, Turkey.We are hoping to see many of you there. More details will follow at the beginning of September. In the meantime best wishes to all of you. Renate Ferro and Tim Murray co-moderators, -empyre soft-ekinned space Renate Ferro Visiting Assistant Professor of Art Cornell University Department of Art, Tjaden Hall Office #420 Ithaca, NY 14853 Email: r...@cornell.edu URL: http://www.renateferro.net http://www.privatesecretspubliclies.net Lab: http://www.tinkerfactory.net Managing Co-moderator of -empyre- soft skinned space http://empyre.library.cornell.edu/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empyre -- Renate Ferro Visiting Assistant Professor of Art Cornell University Department of Art, Tjaden Hall Office #420 Ithaca, NY 14853 Email: r...@cornell.edu URL: http://www.renateferro.net http://www.privatesecretspubliclies.net Lab: http://www.tinkerfactory.net Managing Co-moderator of -empyre- soft skinned space http://empyre.library.cornell.edu/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empyre Art Editor, diacritics http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/dia/ ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
