Note: OGM Forum is no longer active. This is a static snapshot as of February 2022. You can browse the site to see posts, but the functional features of the site will not work. You can search or download a zip archive of the files from the site at github/OpenGlobalMind/forum.openglobalmind.com.

Not about the future but about who we is here/now

Designing the System The Human Side
#1

…indeed, seems to me the essential place from which to start such a venture…
who am i? …am i even being human? who are you? human? pilgrim? somethin else?..
what to trust here? otherwise so easily bust here…
so yeah…how might i best learn and grow here, by what means? in which streams?
how to find more of myself here, sumtin greater than the usual fare…?
what’s the common ground we buildin? the ground, da place from which we equally stand and then the edges we can agree to push?
…wicked problems here, being human, being true, within a society favoring rational technologies with little thought, space or incentive to discover and express along wandering paths of intuition and maybe wisdom?
all i have is dis little box here, sum letters to try nd communicate with y’all somewhere over there…
is what we doing just gonna end up polishing and makin more efficient some same ol linear ways of communicatin?
or we hopin to push out some edges of the box? to create a whole new experience (and satisfaction) in bein hooman?
to me this could happen beginning with the type of conversations we’re willing to have here…
so, what does dialogue, sense-making, discussion, communication mean to you? how does it satisfy or not? what makes you respond or ignore? what engages curiosity, opens the imagination and what just feels like more trauma (a bad dream) for you? what makes you even ask, motivates you to write…to engage with a bunch of strangers? what do you hope will happen if you do get involved? what’s the dream?
for my part, i do like the idea of collective dreams and dreaming…
can i ask what it seems to be or what it feels like for you? is it a sort of collective intelligence type thingy? or something else a bit more mysterious, maybe even mo betta? more compelling, powerful somehow?
this sort of stuff does makes me curious…
but we also have a social problem that we share, the bad dream (trauma) of ‘civilization’ standing in the way of getting close to a more powerful kind of CI…
Gabor Mate addresses this a bit here (bringing all this back to that ‘human’ question thing again…) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70HNmSsJvVU&feature=youtu.be

ok, enough for now, will also leave it with some words from Marge about favouring efficiency rather than robustness or resilience and being able to deal with uncertainty in this age… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4OPtFCs_fw

cheers, m.

1 Like
#2

Different people pick up on different things and respond based on their ‘internal radar’, world view, interests, what the know already, whether they are action people, reflective, problem solvers, communicators, whether they are prone to specialising or whether they like to pan out, or both. If we can find ways of capturing that we’d be far better at optimising our innovation ecosystems. Taking time to talk to peeps can facilitate how much you see the person as well as how the person sees themselves. I’d love to know how we could supercharge this process.

2 Likes
#3

@Parmjit, nice post! It reminds me of the paper we (in the peeragogy project) recently submitted to Futures. I’ll post a preprint shortly, when the link is ready. For now, here’s the abstract (below).

Something we’ve talked about quite a bit — mostly thanks to Lisa Snow McDonald for thoughtful ways of bringing this to attention — is how often conflict within a group comes to the fore because of differences in the “types” you’ve mentioned. For example, the difference between those who enjoy the process and those who are more focused on getting somewhere. I’ve noticed in OGM that there’s often been considerable talk about finding alignment: something I’m personally less worried about because I’m more interested in small scale action and direct relationships. That said I don’t think that one way is “better” than the other! I think varied ways of thinking are the core strength — the question is whether we have adequate ways to integrate them. “Supercharger” might be just the right metaphor; how to get more oxygen into the system.

Patterns embody repeating phenomena, and, as such, they are partly but not fully
detachable from their context. ‘Design patterns’ and ‘pattern languages’ are established
methods for working with patterns. They have been applied in architecture, software
engineering, and other design fields, but have so far seen little application in the field of
future studies. We reimagine futures discourse and anticipatory practices using pattern
methods. We focus specifically on processes for coordinating distributed projects,
integrating multiple voices, and on play that builds capability to face what’s yet to come.
One of the advantages of the method as a whole is that it deals with local knowledge
and does not subsume everything within one overall ‘global’ strategy, while
nevertheless offering a way to communicate between contexts and disciplines.

1 Like
#4

I’m sure this will have been postulated somewhere already but here it is (again…)

So maybe what we need to do at Cicolab/OGM is to collect the ‘language patterns’ that exist - related to key topics. Eg 1. The sacred cow video that Ken sent round was a good example of how topic of food production integrated ecological and nutritional concepts in a way that both vegans and meat-eaters could relate to). Eg 2. I recently came across a very valuable piece of work that had brought together pattern language of patriarchy. Eg 3. Over to you…

There is a hierarchy so
‘what do we know about… FINANCIAL SYSTEMS; ENERGY; PATRIARCHY; COMMUNITY RESILIENCE; INDIVIDUAL RESILIENCE’
would inform 'FINANCING FELLOWSHIP PROJECTS; DESIGNING A COMMUNITY ENERGY FRAMEWORK; PURPOSE DRIVEN ORGANISATIONS; FOOD PRODUCTION;

Existing community projects are informing the higher level understanding of change, especially in emerging areas where exciting new models of community are emerging around community wealth building principles but a ‘glass ceiling’ will emerge unless the ‘seminal essence’ has been properly understood and integrated at the higher level.

I reiterate Knowledge Management and 'how-we-relate-them-to-us 'questions that we have already postulated:

  • How is the information mapped and structured as a wiki? (A ‘Dewey System’ and a living library)

  • How is the information to be used in living systems like schools, for table top conversations; organisations, academia?

  • How do we establish feedback loops and forums that can adapt and add to it?

So maybe all we need is an idea of where people are at in the vertical axis because if you don’t fully understand the seminal principles of Finance (and classically trained finance people won’t), you may make a difference with your current project, but you won’t be able to innovatein the creative sense of the word.

Very wordy but hopefully helpful in a sense-making capacity.

I’m very happy to be the ‘Finance Co-ordinator’.
:smile:

1 Like