Reflections on Truth, Systems and Reality.

[Michael Herman]

you say this beautifully, julie...

the no opposites i also understand is a state of 'no preference'  and therefore
unable to make blame or judgment...  the state of 'unable' being different from an
effort to eliminate blame and judging.

also, i think the loop back to open space that you were leaning toward and not quite
finding is that the awakened state is already, always, everywhere, now... as in we
live in it, like we say of open space.

m

Julie Smith wrote:

>
> My best understanding of non-duality from the real, awakened point of view
> is that there are no opposities.  No opposite to love, to truth, to life, to
> oneness.  Rather than reconciling opposites, we see there are no opposites.
>
> I think choosing between the illusory world and the real world is an
> either-or proposition (in each moment we choose one or the other), and that
> it is only when we choose the real world that the concept of non-duality is
> meaningful.
>
> I'm not sure how this fits or doesn't fit with your thinking, Meg.  I
> appreciate the opportunity to think about this more deeply and gain clarity
> for myself in the process.  Thank you.
>
> Julie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Meg Salter <meg.salter at SYMPATICO.CA>
> To: <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 12:22 PM
> Subject: Re: Reflections on Truth, Systems and Reality.
>
> > And yet the Buddhist recognition is that, ultimately, the sleeping and
> > awakened state are "non-dual". Not a choice of either-or, but both-and.
> > So in OS, and as a facilitator of OS, our work is to set the conditions,
> > hold the container with full presence to allow individuals to catapult
> back
> > and forth  - to find bridges from the sleeping to the awakened state - and
> > back again.
> > After all, we are embodied (in-a-body) creatures, and our truth/reality is
> > expressed in ourselves, our relationships, our culture and our technical
> > systems. My own experience is that this "back again" piece is very
> > grounding. The more fully I (or a group or organization) can express a new
> > "perception/reality/truth" the more fully real it becomes.
> >
> > :)  :)
> >
> > Meg Salter
> >
> > MegaSpace Consulting
> > 416/486-6660
> > meg.salter at sympatico.ca
> > www.megaspaceconsulting.com
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Julie Smith" <jsmith at MOSQUITONET.COM>
> > To: <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
> > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 1:36 PM
> > Subject: Re: Reflections on Truth, Systems and Reality.
> >
> >
> > > Some people believe we have but two choices for defining reality.  One
> > > choice is to be awake, and the other is to be asleep.
> > >
> > > The sleeping state is the state most of us occupy most of the time.  It
> is
> > > sometimes called the world of illusion.  I believe Buddhists call this
> > maya
> > > (or is it samsara?).  It is from within this state that the Sioux legend
> > > resonates with me.  When we are in our sleeping/dream/illusion state, we
> > > create our own reality, and the knowledge that we are doing so resides
> > > within each of us.  Other ideas also resonate from this state: the idea
> of
> > > relative or contextual truth, of shifting realities, of the relevance of
> > > past and future.  From within this state, there is no identifiable
> > absolute
> > > Truth.
> > >
> > > The awakened state, as I understand it, cannot be described with words.
> > It
> > > can only be experienced.  Yet words can help point the way.  My
> > > understanding is that the awakened state is a state of absolutes and
> > > eternals.  Something on the order of Truth = Love = God = You = Me = All
> =
> > > One.  That doesn't exactly express my understanding, as the equal signs
> do
> > > not adequately express the relationship between God (Creator) and Us
> > > (Created), but it's close.  From this state, which is our only real and
> > > natural state, truth = reality = love.  Time is an irrelevant concept
> > > because the present, the eternal Now, is the only "time" there is.
> > >
> > > I think in some ways our discussion has been confusing because our
> > language
> > > and thoughts weave between these two states.  Whenever someone talks
> about
> > > focusing on being "present," or on spirit or connection or oneness, I
> feel
> > > them searching for the awakened state.  From this state of mind, we're
> > > looking for absolutes, for a way of being in the world we can always
> count
> > > on to elicit the best from ourselves and others.  At the same time,
> we're
> > > all facing the daily "reality" of our dream-state, so we weave in ideas
> > > about contextual truths, shifting realities, and the like.
> > >
> > > For those of us who believe all of that (or something similar) is true,
> > the
> > > only pragmatic activity we can undertake is to seek the awakened state.
> > > That causes all kinds of personal tensions because what is pragmatic to
> a
> > > person seeking an awakened state looks like the height of folly to a
> > > "pragmatic" person operating from the rules and expectations of the
> > illusory
> > > world.  There are many very powerful pressures that tempt us to conform
> to
> > > the shifting belief systems of the illusory world.  We therefore
> naturally
> > > tend toward processes and people who are open and who give us space to
> > > explore the possibility of a different meaning for life.  I assume
> people
> > > are drawn to OS because of it's inherent openness, respect, trust and
> > > (borrowing from Carl Rogers) unconditional positive regard.  Those are
> all
> > > attributes, I believe, of the awakened state.
> > >
> > > Julie
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: william becker <fbbecker at earthlink.net>
> > > To: <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
> > > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 7:46 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Reflections on Truth, Systems and Reality.
> > >
> > >
> > > > It's great to hear from a pragmatist.   I think your insights lean
> > heavily
> > > > towards earlier conversations around implementation of results.
> > > >
> > > > it seems to bee looking for meaning/Truth from the OST process is akin
> > to
> > > > looking for the meaning of Life, when Life itself is the meaning.
> > > >
> > > > As I understand OST, there can be no explicit expectations.  It's
> > > construct
> > > > is built on the premis that what is, IS (not to sound like one of our
> > > > citizens)- whoever shows up and whatever happens is what is supposed
> to
> > > > happen.
> > > >
> > > > How can we prepare a context for expectations from such an event?  I
> > know
> > > > this sounds fatalistic, but isn't the process built on the same
> concept?
> > > >
> > > > It is interesting that, including me, how we discover a process that
> is
> > > > different that past practices we have used, and overtime we try to
> deify
> > > it.
> > > > Our yearning to be linked to the Power Spirit may drive this.
> > > >
> > > > Yet when the Spirit "created" us, s/he may have accepted the fact that
> > > > whatever results is what it is supposed to be.  Sure, there are the
> two
> > > > extremes of good and bad, yet maybe that friction, as is the molten
> heat
> > > > within earth, the thing that holds the Spirit's creation together.
> > > >
> > > > I keep saying it, but will again, this dialogue is very stimulating
> and
> > > > gives me pause in my work and personal life.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks to everyone.
> > > >
> > > > Bill Becker
> > > > Strategic Business Resources
> > > > www.stratbussres.com
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "J. Paul Everett" <JPESeeker at aol.com>
> > > > To: <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 11:50 PM
> > > > Subject: Reflections on Truth, Systems and Reality.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Discussion on Truth, OSE’s, Godel, Reality Models
> > > > >
> > > > > What is “Truthâ€* depends largely on one’s model of reality, I think.
> > One
> > > ’s
> > > > > model of reality is generally built on the cultural frame one is
> > raised
> > > in
> > > > as
> > > > > well as one’s personal experiences of what works and what doesn’t
> > work,
> > > or
> > > > > work well enough.  If this is ‘true’, then ‘truth’ is contextual,
> both
> > > as
> > > > > to time and geography (space).  (One need only remember Galileo
> having
> > > to
> > > > > recant his hypothesis that the earth revolved around the sun in
> order
> > to
> > > > save
> > > > > his life to see how powerful organizational ‘truth’ can be in its
> > > ‘current
> > > > > reality’.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Further, I think that reality dictates to me, I do not dictate to
> > > reality.
> > > > > Our task, therefore, is to discover what works, in reality (more on
> > this
> > > > in a
> > > > > moment).
> > > > >
> > > > > Godel’s Theorem states that “For any system of integer arithmetic, a
> > > > > proposition can be put that can be neither proved or disproved
> within
> > > the
> > > > > system.â€*  Godel’s Theorem is based on paradox, which is a statement
> > that
> > > > > makes a statement about itself.  It is itself, it’s own ‘box’.  By
> > > > Godelian
> > > > > reasoning, therefore, every model of reality is necessarily
> > inconsistent
> > > > or
> > > > > incomplete or both.  (I am indebted to an article by Prof. Robert
> Hall
> > > in
> > > > the
> > > > > second quarter 2001 Target magazine of the Association for
> > Manufacturing
> > > > > Excellence for provoking and aiding the discussion in this and part
> of
> > > the
> > > > > following paragraph.)
> > > > >
> > > > > And, since there is no way a human can comprehend the whole
> universe,
> > we
> > > > all
> > > > > live in a box bounded by our observation, learning and
> > > experience---which
> > > > may
> > > > > become our truth.  The danger is, of course, if it becomes “The
> Truthâ€*
> > .
> > > > >
> > > > > My perception of Open Space Technology, itself a model of reality,
> is
> > > that
> > > > it
> > > > > is a system/process for helping people express themselves in a
> > > > > self-organizing way and ‘think outside the box’---the box often
> being
> > > > > corporate or organizational rules, regulations, culture, ‘the way we
> > do
> > > > > things around here’---and every organized system has these, even
> OST.
> > > > Godel
> > > > > says we can’t self-reference OST in evaluating OST as a system.  We
> > have
> > > > to
> > > > > begin to think from the outside in----a difficult prospect if we get
> > > > caught
> > > > > up in truth.
> > > > >
> > > > > Further, according to discussions held here, there have been Open
> > Space
> > > > > Events (OSE’s) that were, in military parlance, “limited successesâ€*.
> > > > Maybe
> > > > > even failures.  In essence, they didn’t work well enough to meet the
> > > needs
> > > > of
> > > > > the situation---the reality in which they occurred.  This makes one
> > very
> > > > > tentative in proclaiming a truth about any given system, even OST.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, there are some questions we might choose to ask ourselves
> > that
> > > > may
> > > > > enhance the chances of a “successfulâ€* event.  I say "may", because
> > chaos
> > > > is
> > > > > also part of our reality and we never can be sure we have it in a
> box.
> > > We
> > > > > have already had several valuable contributions from people’s
> > > experiences
> > > > > that speak to elements of these questions.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1.  What are the minimum necessary preconditions and context needed
> to
> > > > enable
> > > > > an OSE to “workâ€*?
> > > > >
> > > > > 2.  What might we define as an OSE that “worksâ€*?  (Is people going
> > away
> > > > > feeling good about the event enough?  Or, is a successful OSE one
> that
> > > has
> > > > > needed outcomes as defined by the client system?)
> > > > >
> > > > > 3.  Is a successful OSE, like truth, contextual?
> > > > >
> > > > > 4.  Should a successful OSE, at a minimum, create meaning?  That is,
> > > make
> > > > a
> > > > > difference in its own context?  Should these differences be
> > observable,
> > > > > concrete, that on which action can be taken?  Or, is an inner change
> > > > > sufficient?  Is there a holy grail of an OSE?
> > > > >
> > > > > Interesting thread of discussion, thank you to all those who are
> > > > contributing
> > > > > from their own reality which has their truths embedded in it. :)
> > > > >
> > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > >
> > > > > J. Paul Everett, Consultant
> > > > > World Class Performance
> > > > > JPESeeker at aol.com
> > > > >
> > > > > *
> > > > > *
> > > > > ==========================================================
> > > > > OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
> > > > > view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
> > > > > Visit:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
> > > >
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > > ==========================================================
> > > > OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
> > > > view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
> > > > Visit:
> > > >
> > > > http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
> > > >
> > >
> > > *
> > > *
> > > ==========================================================
> > > OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> > > ------------------------------
> > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
> > > view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
> > > Visit:
> > >
> > > http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
> >
> > *
> > *
> > ==========================================================
> > OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> > ------------------------------
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
> > view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
> > Visit:
> >
> > http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
> >
>
> *
> *
> ==========================================================
> OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
> ------------------------------
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
> view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
> Visit:
>
> http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html

--

Michael Herman
300 West North Avenue #1105
Chicago IL 60610
312-280-7838 voice
312-280-7837 fax

http://www.michaelherman.com
a personal/professional portal to
consulting, open space, evolution,
invitation resources, michael's
open notebook, and the rest of
GlobalChicago...

mailto:mherman at globalchicago.net

*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:

http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html