Self-Organization is What Consciousness (Spirit) Does

[Harrison Owen]

At 10:03 AM 12/29/2001 -0900, Julie wrote:
>It isn't that Open Space allows for expanded consciousness, perhaps, but
>that it invites us to more fully express our current level of
>consciousness. (And what a gift that is!)  It is unlike many other group
>processes in that it doesn't erect artificial barriers to our full
>expression of our present consciousness.  (I get it, Harrison.... we are
>invited to more fully express our Now, our current state of
>consciousness.... to the extent that we express it and share it, we
>individually and collectively expand.)  The experience might lead us on a
>spiral of expanding consciousness, and it might not.  That part is up to
>each of us to choose.  What Open Space offers is simply the invitation to
>more fully express who we are in the present moment. Is that closer?

I think so. It is all about an invitation to expanding consciousness --
with the emphasis on invitation and expanding. Nobody has to take the trip.
But we can. The choice is ours -- first, last, and always.

>This piece about taking another look at how we think about conflict is
>also important.  There is a growing profession developing around this
>question, of which I am a tiny part.  I don't hear OS practitioners
>talking much about conflict resolution, but I wonder whether there are
>some important lessons for conflict resolution professionals in the work
>you're doing.  I think the answer is yes, but I haven't quite figured out
>what the lessons are.

For me there are indeed lessons here -- and by no means have they all been
figured out. But it could be a very useful and exciting project, given the
state of the world. At the risk of misunderstanding and appearing as a
bomb-throwing revolutionary in the halls of conflict mediators -- maybe the
first thing we need to do is stop trying to resolve conflict? I am by no
means suggesting that we simply stand aside and cheer the combatants
onwards. That tends to get bloody, and if for no other reason than pure
self interest, the thought is not a wise one. After all, the blood could
eventually be our own. But I find certain considerations suggestive of an
alternate approach.

First, conflict, in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. It shows
that people care about something, they have some passion. Approaches that
resolve the conflict by eliminating the passion remove precisely the
ingredient of constructive change. Nothing will be different until people
care to make it different.

Second, when people are in conflict, the issues and inter-relationships are
so incredibly complex that I as an "outsider" don't have a prayer of
understanding the true dimensions of what is going on. Which means for me
that the possibility of developing a rational process to straighten out the
mess is a nice idea, but beyond the realm of possibility. Of course, those
with the necessary knowledge are so close to the "problem" that they often
can't see the forest for the trees.

Thirdly, the critical piece for me (as a potential peace bringer) is not
the conflict or the issues but rather the necessary space in which the
parties can separate long enough to see new options. Presuming that they
care about some meaningful life, and are generally opposed to killing or
being killed (literally or figuratively), the folks will figure it out.
That is, I believe, the experience of Open Space, or at least it has been
my experience -- no matter how high the level of conflict may be. And just
to be clear that this is not the exclusive magic of Open Space, I note that
some of my legal friends who seem particularly skilled at enabling the
resolution of conflict start with a search for what they call "negotiating
room." I guess I would call that open space.

Fourth, when the parties at interest have figured out who they are and
where they are going, there remain a number of important tasks. Primary is
to help them to an awareness of the fact that they did it, combined with a
recognition of how they did it. Not in detail, for the details will never
be repeated, but in general -- because this recognition will enable them to
do it again the next time they find themselves in conflict. And of course
there are doubtless a number of "i's" to be dotted and "t's" to be crossed
which I find are best done by those with the appropriate skills -- usually
the legal eagles. But at the end of the day i think it important to
remember that preparation of the necessary documentation (written or
otherwise) is not to be confused with conflict resolution. It is "only" a
map. And we have had some discussion about maps and territories.

Of course, I guess there are those folks at the far end of the curve who
really don't care about issues or their resolution, they just love conflict
for reasons that seem to have a lot to do with their own personal power
needs. But I find such folks to be in a distinct minority, and they tend to
lose their power and impact when the space is genuinely open -- a fact that
usually terrifies them. Malignant Space Invaders all.


Harrison





Harrison Owen
7808 River Falls Drive
Potomac, MD 20854 USA
phone 301-365-2093
Open Space Training www.openspaceworld.com
Open Space Institute www.openspaceworld.org
Personal website www.mindspring.com/~owenhh

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



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20011230/f6a7e3c2/attachment-0017.htm>