Reflections on Truth, Systems and Reality.

[Meg Salter]

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 “Truth” 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.”  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 Truth”
.
> > >
> > > 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 successes”.
> > 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 “successful” 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 “work”?
> > >
> > > 2.  What might we define as an OSE that “works”?  (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