Halifax--who's up for whale watching Tuesday or Wednesday?
Douglas D. Germann, Sr.
76066.515 at compuserve.com
Mon Jul 25 16:22:06 PDT 2005
Kerry and Thomas and everyone--
Sorry to take so long.
Here is what our research turned up:
A. We will be unable to go with Thomas Herrmann's group, since our plane
touches down at the same time your boat leaves the dock.
B. There are 3 places as follows:
1. Peggy's Cove--3 hour tours $45.00. 8/3 at 9 am (too early for our blood
for "vacation time") and 1 pm (might be tight for getting ready for our
informal evening--unless you want to go directly from boat to pub). Evening
meeting starts at 7 pm. Will there be food at that evening meeting? If so,
it would then not be so tight.
2. Four Winds Charters--2 1/2 hour tours $25.00. 8/2 a 2 hour at 6 pm (a
bit late and we might be tired). 8/3 only from 2:30 to 5 (a bit more tight
for evening). 8/6 if we we don't see any whales earlier. No food unless
arranged for in advance.
3. Murphy's on the Water--2 1/2 hour tours $32.95. Times 10:30 to 1:00;
1:30 to 4:00; and 4:30 to 7:00. Canteen for snacks on board.
Our preference is #3: 1st choice would be 8/3 at 10:30 am. (Not too early
in am and not too late to interfere with our meeting in evening.)
We can make reservations if you would like.
We get in at 2:30 and we're at least 45 minutes from our hotel, providing
we get a shuttle immediately and the shuttle does not stop at 17 hotels
before ours. (In other words, we think 8/2 will work for us, at all. We
could still do dinner at Murphy's restaurant on Tuesday after (or even
without) the 4:30 to 7:00 cruise.
Let me know if any of this works for any of you. Ahoy!
:-Doug. Germann
Seeking people making community change.
From between the storms in South Bend,
Indiana
*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
>From Mon Jul 25 22:25:14 2005
Message-Id: <MON.25.JUL.2005.222514.0400.>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 22:25:14 -0400
Reply-To: chris at got2change.com
To: OSLIST <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
From: Chris Kloth <chris at got2change.com>
Organization: ChangeWorks of the Heartland
Subject: New Paradigms, Hebrew, God, a sermon - long (with cuffs, please)
In-Reply-To: <001e01c5912f$6fb46170$1f6c2745 at holaptop>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------010909030804010407060700"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------010909030804010407060700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Harrison Owen wrote:
>
>
> And reading Wilber and Kuhn wouldn't hurt. Both pretty bright guys.
> Kuhn doubtless wrote other stuff, but the seminal work is/was "The
> Structures of Scientific Revolution" -- I think it was published by
> Princeton, or maybe it was Chicago (University Press). Wilber has damn
> near buried the world in paper. All of it is good, but some is better
> than the rest. A good introduction might be something like, "A Brief
> History of Everything." He is a wonderful writer, great storyteller,
> totally outrageous, and a massive intellect. Other than that he is
> pretty run of the mill. And if you are looking for other good stuff to
> read, you might check out the section on www.openspaceworld.com
> <http://www.openspaceworld.com> called "Literature."
"The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" [by Thomas S. Kuhn, University
of Chicago Press, 1962, 1970] had a huge impact on me when I was in
school in the early 70s. It is no surprise that Harrison has done a
fine job of capturing key points from it. I agree with Harrison that,
in Kuhn's role as a philosopher of science and historian at a particular
moment in time, he was more concerned with addressing the barriers to
breakthroughs, not what would come next.
That said, I would like to elaborate on one aspect of Kuhn's work with a
slightly different em-PHA-sis.
In doing so I also want to call your attention to Kuhn's earlier work,
"The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of
Western Thought" [Vintage Book/Random House, 1957, 1959]. While there
is some real astronomy in the book, it is fairly easy to read or skip in
order to get to the social implications. He also wrote a book called
"The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and
Change" [University of Chicago Press 1977]. This one has less "hard
science" in it and you will recognize the how science was anticipating
the social consequences in our lives today.
The reason I think it is important to add The Copernican Revolution is
that Kuhn suggests that you know you are facing a paradigm shift when
people defending the dominant belief system are prepared to enforce
serious sanctions to maintain the status quo. Both Copernicus and
Galileo(reference in Scientific Revolutions) faced state enforced death
to pursue their new views. They were not "thinking outside of the
box." Their thinking, and that of others Kuhn refers to, were so far
beyond conventional thinking that they were not even acknowledging a box
that one might think outside of. They were laying the conceptual
foundations that were needed for Westerners to reframe what we might now
call consciousness. As much as we criticize the linear mechanical
thinking that spiral dynamics and other models help us escape, their
models seem to me to have been necessary
In my view, Joel Barker's superficial analysis of Kuhn has trivialized
what is at stake for people at the time of a real paradigm shift. In
both these cases the dominant culture perceived threats to its belief in
the existence and power of God, to the power that the church had because
of its connection to god and the power of the rich who filled the
churches with riches. The official punishment for such heresy was death.
I think this is more than just a matter of semantics or an academic
debate. Barker has trivialized the potential depth and force of
resistance change agents (referring to people who see the new reality
and keep the light on it - be they community members or consultants -
AKA, outside agitators) must be alert to in systems at the time of a
real paradigm shift. Not only must change agents anticipate and plan
for the resistance, in my view (which I think is consistent with the
inclusive values of OST), the change agent must understand the fear
resulting from the perception of what is at stake and embrace their
resistance (not their beliefs) help create space to find what will be
required to let go and move on. If you think some people will resist an
"outside of the box" solution to a problem when people have at least
acknowledged there is problem to be solved, wait until you confront
their fundamental view of reality...something that they did not invite
anyone to do! In situations like this I believe OST facilitators need
to be able to create and hold space in a crucible of considerable
strength, and hoping people may think outside the box ain't gonna get it.
In the more modern examples provided by Kuhn the proponents did not face
state enforced death, but they faced potential professional death
through marginalization, loss of livelihood and other community
sanctions. As many of you know very well, there are times in civil
society around the world today where people may face death for
challenging the fundamenatal order of society. My experience is that
the people who propose "thinking outside the box" in such situations are
people who have very little insight into what is at stake and are
probably not going to have to hang around during the implimentation of
or living of the change.
That does not mean I think people should not engage in the risky work of
paradigm shifts. On some level, having discovered the new reality there
is no going back. Just know that if it is really a paradigm shift then
there will be a lot at stake for the people promoting change and those
resisting it. I believe OST can and has helped create a container for
working on such change. It is why I honor the process and do not take
my role in it lightly.
A much newer book I am recommending to everyone doing our kind of work
is "Navigating the Badlands" by a futurist named Mary O'Hare-Devereux.
While she does not use the term paradigm, she was noticing that, in
recent years, her tools were not getting her the kinds of results she
anticipated. She goes back thousands of years to compare times when the
world seemed to be evolving or developing or stagnating (behaving in
predictable ways) and times of transformation...when the whole world
seemed to get turned upside down (for many decades or more) before it
returned to some degree of predictability. For example, the use of
alphabets changed the world....not one alphabet, or the first
alphabet...the worldwide use of alphabets, all kinds of alphabets,
changed everything.
Anyway, she discovered there was a different set of patterns within the
chaos...order emerges from chaos. She then applies this to what she
believes is a change cycle we have all been in for about a decade and
will continue in for about a decade. She also provides insights into
where to look for both the opportunities and resistance.
Finally, an aside. The term paradigm existed before Kuhn and did refer
to patterns - especially in language. It is interesting to me that one
of the examples of how the term was applied prior to Kuhn was the
reading of Hebrew. When Hebrew is printed, like in the Torah, the
letters that represent what we would call vowels in English are not
included. As a result, there are many patterns of Hebrew consonants
that, without vowels, look identical yet have very different meanings
and pronunciations. However, if you are raised in Jewish culture you
"know" the difference. You don't notice anything missing and probably
would not know what someone outside the culture, trained in text book or
dictionary Hebrew, was confused about.
I believe that much about true paradigms, like most of what we
experience as culture, operates on this sub-conscious level...invisible
to those who are a part of it. It's not in our head or our heart...it's
in our blood and DNA. Thus, some levels of resistance are not conscious
push back as much as they are confusion, dissonance and fear. Even some
of the conscious, intentional resistance may be in reaction to the
conscious awareness of beliefs rooted in unexamined deeper beliefs
learned at pre-verbal stages of life...when we were forming our senses
of reality, not "knowledge" of reality.
I have rambled on far too long...besides, I feel the urge to watch South
Pacific..."you've got to be carefully taught!" ;-)
Chris Kloth
*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
--------------010909030804010407060700
Content-Type: text/html; charset=KOI8-R
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=KOI8-R" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Harrison Owen wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid001e01c5912f$6fb46170$1f6c2745 at holaptop"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<div>š</div>
<div>š</div>
<div><font face="Arial">And reading Wilber and Kuhn wouldn't hurt.
Both pretty bright guys. Kuhn doubtless wrote other stuff, but the
seminal work is/was "The Structures of Scientific Revolution" -- I
think it was published by Princeton, or maybe it wasšChicago
(University Press). Wilber has damn near buried the world in paper. All
of it is good, but some is better than the rest. A good introduction
might be something like, "A Brief History of Everything." šHe is a
wonderful writer, great storyteller, totally outrageous, and a massive
intellect. Other thanšthat he is pretty run of the mill. And if you are
looking for other good stuff to read, you might check out the section
on <a href="http://www.openspaceworld.com">www.openspaceworld.com</a>
called "Literature."</font></div>
</blockquote>
<font face="Arial"><br>
<br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"><br>
"The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" [by Thomas S. Kuhn,
University of Chicago Press, 1962, 1970] had a huge impact on me when I
was in school in the early 70s.š It is no surprise that Harrison has
done a fine job of capturing key points from it.š I agree with Harrison
that, in Kuhn's role as a philosopher of science and historian at a
particular moment in time, he was more concerned with addressing the
barriers to breakthroughs, not what would come next.<br>
<br>
<br>
That said, I would like to elaborate on one aspect of Kuhn's work with
a slightly different em-PHA-sis.š <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
In doing so I also want to call your attention to Kuhn's earlier work,
"The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of
Western Thought" [Vintage Book/Random House, 1957, 1959]. š </font></font><font
face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">While there is some real
astronomy in the book, it is fairly easy to read or skip in order to
get to the social implications.š </font><font face="Arial"><font
face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">He also wrote a book called "The
Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change"
[University of Chicago Press 1977]. šš This one has less "hard science"
in it and you will recognize the how science was anticipating the
social consequences in our lives today.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
The reason I think it is important to add The Copernican Revolution is
that Kuhn suggests that you know you are facing a paradigm shift when
people defending the dominant belief system are prepared to enforce
serious sanctions to maintain the status quo.š Both Copernicus and
Galileo(reference in Scientific Revolutions) faced state enforced death
to pursue their new views.š They were not "thinking outside of the
box."šš Their thinking, and that of others Kuhn refers to, were so far
beyond conventional thinking that they were not even acknowledging a
box that one might think outside of.š They were laying the conceptual
foundations that were needed for Westerners to reframe what we might
now call consciousness.š As much as we criticize the linear mechanical
thinking that spiral dynamics and other models help us escape, their
models seem to me to have been necessary <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
In my view, Joel Barker's superficial analysis of Kuhn has trivialized
what is at stake for people at the time of a real paradigm shift.š </font></font><font
face="Arial"><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">In both
these cases the dominant culture perceived threats to its belief in the
existence and power of God, to
the power that the church had because of its connection to god and the
power of the rich who filled the churches with riches.</font></font><font
face="Arial"><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">š The official
punishment for such heresy was death.š <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I think this is more than just a matter of semantics or an academic
debate.š Barker has trivialized the potential depth and force of
resistance change agents (referring to people who see the new reality
and keep the light on it - be they community members or consultants -
AKA, outside agitators) must be alert to in systems at the time of a
real paradigm shift.š Not only must change agents anticipate and plan
for the resistance, in my view (which I think is consistent with the
inclusive values of OST), the change agent must understand the fear
resulting from the perception of what is at stake and embrace their
resistance (not their beliefs) help create space to find what will be
required to let go and move on.š If you think some people will resist
an "outside of the box" solution to a problem when people have at least
acknowledged there is problem to be solved, wait until you confront
their fundamental view of reality...something that they did not invite
anyone to do!šš In situations like this I believe OST facilitators need
to be able to create and hold space in a crucible of considerable
strength, and hoping people may think outside the box ain't gonna get
it. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
In the more modern examples provided by Kuhn the proponents did not
face state enforced death, but they faced potential professional death
through marginalization, loss of livelihood and other community
sanctions.šš As many of you know very well, there are times in civil
society around the world today where people may face death for
challenging the fundamenatal order of society.šš My experience is that
the people who propose "thinking outside the box" in such situations
are people who have very little insight into what is at stake and are
probably not going to have to hang around during the implimentation of
or living of the change.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
That does not mean I think people should not engage in the risky work
of paradigm shifts.š On some level, having discovered the new reality
there is no going back.šš Just know that if it is really a paradigm
shift then there will be a lot at stake for the people promoting change
and those resisting it.šš I believe OST can and has helped create a
container for working on such change.š It is why I honor the process
and do not take my role in it lightly.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
A much newer book I am recommending to everyone doing our kind of work
is "Navigating the Badlands" by a futurist named Mary O'Hare-Devereux.š
While she does not use the term paradigm, she was noticing that, in
recent years, her tools were not getting her the kinds of results she
anticipated.š She goes back thousands of years to compare times when
the world seemed to be evolving or developing or stagnating (behaving
in predictable ways) and times of transformation...when the whole world
seemed to get turned upside down (for many decades or more) before it
returned to some degree of predictability.š For example, the use of
alphabets changed the world....not one alphabet, or the first
alphabet...the worldwide use of alphabets, all kinds of alphabets,
changed everything.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Anyway, she discovered there was a different set of patterns within the
chaos...order emerges from chaos.š She then applies this to what she
believes is a change cycle we have all been in for about a decade and
will continue in for about a decade.š She also provides insights into
where to look for both the opportunities and resistance.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Finally, an aside.šš The term paradigm existed before Kuhn and did
refer to patterns - especially in language.š It is interesting to me
that one of the examples of how the term was applied prior to Kuhn was
the reading of Hebrew.šš When Hebrew is printed, like in the Torah, the
letters that represent what we would call vowels in English are not
included.š As a result, there are many patterns of Hebrew consonants
that, without vowels, look identical yet have very different meanings
and pronunciations.š However, if you are raised in Jewish culture you
"know" the difference.š You don't notice anything missing and probably
would not know what someone outside the culture, trained in text book
or dictionary Hebrew, was confused about.š <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I believe that much about true paradigms, like most of what we
experience as culture, operates on this sub-conscious level...invisible
to those who are a part of it.š It's not in our head or our
heart...it's in our blood and DNA.š Thus, some levels of resistance are
not conscious push back as much as they are confusion, dissonance and
fear.š Even some of the conscious, intentional resistance may be in
reaction to the conscious awareness of beliefs rooted in unexamined
deeper beliefs learned at pre-verbal stages of life...when we were
forming our senses of reality, not "knowledge" of reality.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I have rambled on far too long...besides, I feel the urge to watch
South Pacific..."you've got to be carefully taught!"š <span
class="moz-smiley-s3"><span> ;-) </span></span><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Chris Kloth<br>
</font></font>
</body>
</html>
*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
--------------010909030804010407060700--
>From Tue Jul 26 10:38:16 2005
Message-Id: <TUE.26.JUL.2005.103816.0400.>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:38:16 -0400
Reply-To: chris at got2change.com
To: OSLIST <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>
From: Chris Kloth <chris at got2change.com>
Organization: ChangeWorks of the Heartland
Subject: Paradigms, Resistence, Science, God,
Hebrew - a bit long (with cuffs please)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------080807070206020804050101"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------080807070206020804050101
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Harrison Owen wrote:
>
>
> And reading Wilber and Kuhn wouldn't hurt. Both pretty bright guys.
> Kuhn doubtless wrote other stuff, but the seminal work is/was "The
> Structures of Scientific Revolution" -- I think it was published by
> Princeton, or maybe it was Chicago (University Press). Wilber has damn
> near buried the world in paper. All of it is good, but some is better
> than the rest. A good introduction might be something like, "A Brief
> History of Everything." He is a wonderful writer, great storyteller,
> totally outrageous, and a massive intellect. Other than that he is
> pretty run of the mill. And if you are looking for other good stuff to
> read, you might check out the section on www.openspaceworld.com
> <http://www.openspaceworld.com> called "Literature."
"The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" [by Thomas S. Kuhn, University
of Chicago Press, 1962, 1970] had a huge impact on me when I was in
school in the early 70s. It is no surprise that Harrison has done a
fine job of capturing key points from it. I agree with Harrison that,
in Kuhn's role as a philosopher of science and historian at a particular
moment in time, he was more concerned with addressing the barriers to
breakthroughs, not what would come next.
That said, I would like to elaborate on one aspect of Kuhn's work with a
slightly different em-PHA-sis.
In doing so I also call your attention to Kuhn's earlier work, "The
Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western
Thought" [Vintage Book/Random House, 1957, 1959]. While there is some
real astronomy in the book, it is fairly easy to read or skip in order
to get to the social implications. He also wrote a book called "The
Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change"
[University of Chicago Press 1977]. This one has less "hard science"
in it and you will recognize the how science was anticipating the social
consequences in our lives today.
The reason I think it is important to add The Copernican Revolution is
that Kuhn suggests that you know you are facing a paradigm shift when
people defending the dominant belief system are prepared to enforce
serious sanctions to maintain the status quo. Both Copernicus and
Galileo(reference in Scientific Revolutions) faced state enforced death
to pursue their new views. They were not "thinking outside of the
box." Their thinking, and that of others Kuhn refers to, was so far
beyond conventional thinking that they were not even acknowledging a box
that one might think outside of. They were laying the conceptual
foundations that were needed for Westerners to reframe what we might now
call consciousness. As much as we may criticize their linear,
mechanistic thinking today, their's was an important step on the way to
spiral dynamics and other mental models that we now explore...and which
others in the future may look back on with amused curiosity.
In my view, Joel Barker's superficial analysis of Kuhn has trivialized
what is at stake for people at the time of a real paradigm shift. In
both these cases the dominant culture perceived threats to its belief in
the existence and power of God, to the power that the church had because
of its connection to god and the power of the rich who filled the
churches with riches. The official punishment for such heresy was
death. As I read Kuhn, that's a paradigm, not a box.
I think this is more than just a matter of semantics or an academic
debate. Barker also has trivialized the potential depth and force of
resistance change agents (referring to people who see the new reality
and keep the light on it - be they members of a community or outside
consultants - AKA, outside agitators) must be alert to in systems at the
time of a real paradigm shift. Not only must change agents anticipate
and plan for the resistance, in my view (which I think is consistent
with the inclusive values of OST) the change agent needs to understand
that the fear rooted in the perception of what is at stake and find a
way to embrace the resistance without embracing the beliefs and help
create space to discover what will be required to let go and move on.
If you think some people will resist an "outside of the box" solution to
a problem when people have at least acknowledged there is problem to be
solved, wait until you confront their fundamental view of
reality...something that they did not invite anyone to do! In
situations like this I believe OST facilitators need to be able to
create and hold space in a crucible of considerable strength. Hoping
people will "think outside the box" ain't gonna get it.
On the other hand, the positive side of resistance is that, in my view,
it represents and act of "passion and responsibility." It suggests
that the person cares about whatever the situation is. I would much
rather work with people who are resisting than docile people who will
not resist. I wonder whether they will act with passion and
responsibility to support the new reality.
In the more modern examples provided by Kuhn the proponents did not face
state enforced death, but they faced potential professional death
through marginalization, loss of livelihood and other community
sanctions. As many of you know very well, there are times in civil
society around the world today where people may face death for
challenging the fundamental order of society. My experience is that
the people who propose "thinking outside the box" in such situations are
people who have very little insight into what is at stake and are
probably not going to have to hang around during the implementation of
or living of the change.
That does not mean I think people should not engage in the risky work of
paradigm shifts. On some level, having discovered the new reality there
is no going back. Just know that if it is really a paradigm shift then
there will be a lot at stake for the people promoting change and those
resisting it. I believe OST can and has helped create a container for
working on such change. It is why I honor the process and do not take
my role in it lightly.
Aside 1
A much newer book I am recommending to everyone doing our kind of work
is "Navigating the Badlands" by a futurist named Mary O'Hare-Devereux.
While she does not use the term paradigm, she was noticing that, in
recent years, her tools were not getting her the kinds of results she
anticipated. She goes back thousands of years to compare times when the
world seemed to be evolving or developing or stagnating (behaving in
predictable ways) and times of transformation...when the whole world
seemed to get turned upside down (for many decades or more) before it
returned to some degree of predictability. For example, when humans
started using alphabets changed the world....not one alphabet or the
first alphabet...the worldwide use of alphabets, all kinds of alphabets,
changed everything.
Anyway, she discovered there was a different set of patterns within the
chaos...order emerges from chaos. She then applies this to what she
believes is a dramatic change cycle...maybe a paradigm shift...we have
all been in for about a decade and will continue in for about a decade.
She also provides insights into where to look for both the opportunities
and resistance as we try to get through the Badlands...a space where
things that look very familiar turn out to be something very different.
She suggests we can (did) enter the Badlands of change alone, but we
cannot get out of the Badlands alone.
Final Aside
The term paradigm existed before Kuhn and it did refer to deeply
embedded patterns - especially in language. It is interesting to me
that one of the examples of how the term was applied prior to Kuhn was
the reading of Hebrew. When Hebrew is printed, like in the Torah, the
letters that represent what we would call vowels in English are not
included. As a result, there are many patterns of Hebrew consonants
that, without vowels, look identical yet have very different meanings
and pronunciations. However, if you are raised in Jewish culture you
"know" the difference. You don't notice anything missing and probably
would not know what someone outside the culture, trained in text book or
dictionary Hebrew, was confused about.
I believe that much about Kuhn described as paradigms, like most of what
we experience as culture, operates on this sub-conscious
level...invisible to those who are a part of it. It's not in our head
or our heart...it's in our blood and DNA. Thus, some levels of
resistance are not conscious push back as much as they are confusion,
dissonance and fear. Even some of the conscious, intentional resistance
may be in reaction to the conscious awareness of beliefs rooted in
unexamined deeper beliefs learned at pre-verbal stages of life...when we
were forming our senses of reality, not "knowledge" of reality. No
wonder they are so hard to let go of!
I have rambled on far too long...besides, I feel the urge to watch South
Pacific..."you've got to be carefully taught!" ;-)
Shalom,
Chris Kloth
ChangeWorks of the Heartland
250 South Virginialee Road
Columbus, OH 43209-2052
USA
Phone: 614.239.1336
Fax: 614.237.2347
E-mail: chris at got2change.com
URL: www.got2change.com
Think Globally, Act locally
*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
--------------080807070206020804050101
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
<div class="moz-text-html" lang="x-cyrillic"> Harrison Owen wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid001e01c5912f$6fb46170$1f6c2745 at holaptop"
type="cite">
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial">And reading Wilber and Kuhn wouldn't hurt.
Both pretty bright guys. Kuhn doubtless wrote other stuff, but the
seminal work is/was "The Structures of Scientific Revolution" -- I
think it was published by Princeton, or maybe it was Chicago
(University Press). Wilber has damn near buried the world in paper. All
of it is good, but some is better than the rest. A good introduction
might be something like, "A Brief History of Everything." He is a
wonderful writer, great storyteller, totally outrageous, and a massive
intellect. Other than that he is pretty run of the mill. And if you are
looking for other good stuff to read, you might check out the section
on <a href="http://www.openspaceworld.com">www.openspaceworld.com</a>
called "Literature."</font></div>
</blockquote>
<font face="Arial"><br>
<br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"><br>
"The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" [by Thomas S. Kuhn,
University of Chicago Press, 1962, 1970] had a huge impact on me when I
was in school in the early 70s. It is no surprise that Harrison has
done a fine job of capturing key points from it. I agree with Harrison
that, in Kuhn's role as a philosopher of science and historian at a
particular moment in time, he was more concerned with addressing the
barriers to breakthroughs, not what would come next.<br>
<br>
<br>
That said, I would like to elaborate on one aspect of Kuhn's work with
a slightly different em-PHA-sis. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
In doing so I also call your attention to Kuhn's earlier work,
"The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of
Western Thought" [Vintage Book/Random House, 1957, 1959]. </font></font><font
face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">While there is some real
astronomy in the book, it is fairly easy to read or skip in order to
get to the social implications. </font><font face="Arial"><font
face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">He also wrote a book called "The
Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change"
[University of Chicago Press 1977]. This one has less "hard science"
in it and you will recognize the how science was anticipating the
social consequences in our lives today.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
The reason I think it is important to add The Copernican Revolution is
that Kuhn suggests that you know you are facing a paradigm shift when
people defending the dominant belief system are prepared to enforce
serious sanctions to maintain the status quo. Both Copernicus and
Galileo(reference in Scientific Revolutions) faced state enforced death
to pursue their new views. They were not "thinking outside of the
box." Their thinking, and that of others Kuhn refers to, was so far
beyond conventional thinking that they were not even acknowledging a
box that one might think outside of. They were laying the conceptual
foundations that were needed for Westerners to reframe what we might
now call consciousness. As much as we may criticize their linear,
mechanistic
thinking today, their's was an important step on the way to spiral
dynamics and other mental models that we now explore...and which others
in the future may look back on with amused curiosity.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
In my view, Joel Barker's superficial analysis of Kuhn has trivialized
what is at stake for people at the time of a real paradigm shift. </font></font><font
face="Arial"><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">In both
these cases the dominant culture perceived threats to its belief in the
existence and power of God, to
the power that the church had because of its connection to god and the
power of the rich who filled the churches with riches.</font></font><font
face="Arial"><font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"> The official
punishment for such heresy was death. As I read Kuhn, that's a
paradigm, not a box.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I think this is more than just a matter of semantics or an academic
debate. Barker also has trivialized the potential depth and force of
resistance change agents (referring to people who see the new reality
and keep the light on it - be they members of a community or outside
consultants -
AKA, outside agitators) must be alert to in systems at the time of a
real paradigm shift. Not only must change agents anticipate and plan
for the resistance, in my view (which I think is consistent with the
inclusive values of OST) the change agent needs to understand that the
fear
rooted in the perception of what is at stake and find a way to embrace
the
resistance without embracing the beliefs and help create space to
discover what will be
required to let go and move on. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
If you think some people will resist
an "outside of the box" solution to a problem when people have at least
acknowledged there is problem to be solved, wait until you confront
their fundamental view of reality...something that they did not invite
anyone to do! In situations like this I believe OST facilitators need
to be able to create and hold space in a crucible of considerable
strength. Hoping people will "think outside the box" ain't gonna get
it. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On the other hand, the positive side of resistance is that, in my view,
it represents and act of "passion and responsibility." It suggests
that the person cares about whatever the situation is. I would much
rather work with people who are resisting than docile people who will
not resist. I wonder whether they will act with passion and
responsibility to support the new reality.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
In the more modern examples provided by Kuhn the proponents did not
face state enforced death, but they faced potential professional death
through marginalization, loss of livelihood and other community
sanctions. As many of you know very well, there are times in civil
society around the world today where people may face death for
challenging the fundamental order of society. My experience is that
the people who propose "thinking outside the box" in such situations
are people who have very little insight into what is at stake and are
probably not going to have to hang around during the implementation of
or living of the change.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
That does not mean I think people should not engage in the risky work
of paradigm shifts. On some level, having discovered the new reality
there is no going back. Just know that if it is really a paradigm
shift then there will be a lot at stake for the people promoting change
and those resisting it. I believe OST can and has helped create a
container for working on such change. It is why I honor the process
and do not take my role in it lightly.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Aside 1<br>
<br>
<br>
A much newer book I am recommending to everyone doing our kind of work
is "Navigating the Badlands" by a futurist named Mary O'Hare-Devereux.
While she does not use the term paradigm, she was noticing that, in
recent years, her tools were not getting her the kinds of results she
anticipated. She goes back thousands of years to compare times when
the world seemed to be evolving or developing or stagnating (behaving
in predictable ways) and times of transformation...when the whole world
seemed to get turned upside down (for many decades or more) before it
returned to some degree of predictability. For example, when humans
started using alphabets changed the world....not one alphabet or the
first
alphabet...the worldwide use of alphabets, all kinds of alphabets,
changed everything.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Anyway, she discovered there was a different set of patterns within the
chaos...order emerges from chaos. She then applies this to what she
believes is a dramatic change cycle...maybe a paradigm shift...we have
all been in for about a decade and
will continue in for about a decade. She also provides insights into
where to look for both the opportunities and resistance as we try to
get through the Badlands...a space where things that look very familiar
turn out to be something very different. She suggests we can (did)
enter the Badlands of change alone, but we cannot get out of the
Badlands alone.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Final Aside<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
The term paradigm existed before Kuhn and it did
refer to deeply embedded patterns - especially in language. It is
interesting to me
that one of the examples of how the term was applied prior to Kuhn was
the reading of Hebrew. When Hebrew is printed, like in the Torah, the
letters that represent what we would call vowels in English are not
included. As a result, there are many patterns of Hebrew consonants
that, without vowels, look identical yet have very different meanings
and pronunciations. However, if you are raised in Jewish culture you
"know" the difference. You don't notice anything missing and probably
would not know what someone outside the culture, trained in text book
or dictionary Hebrew, was confused about. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I believe that much about Kuhn described as paradigms, like most of
what we
experience as culture, operates on this sub-conscious level...invisible
to those who are a part of it. It's not in our head or our
heart...it's in our blood and DNA. Thus, some levels of resistance are
not conscious push back as much as they are confusion, dissonance and
fear. Even some of the conscious, intentional resistance may be in
reaction to the conscious awareness of beliefs rooted in unexamined
deeper beliefs learned at pre-verbal stages of life...when we were
forming our senses of reality, not "knowledge" of reality. No wonder
they are so hard to let go of!<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I have rambled on far too long...besides, I feel the urge to watch
South Pacific..."you've got to be carefully taught!" <span
class="moz-smiley-s3"><span> ;-) </span></span><br>
<br>
</font></font></div>
<br>
Shalom,<br>
<br>
<br>
Chris Kloth<br>
ChangeWorks of the Heartland<br>
250 South Virginialee Road<br>
Columbus, OH 43209-2052<br>
USA<br>
Phone: 614.239.1336<br>
Fax: 614.237.2347<br>
E-mail: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:chris at got2change.com">chris at got2change.com</a><br>
URL: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.got2change.com">www.got2change.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
Think Globally, Act locally<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu:
http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
To learn about OpenSpaceEmailLists and OSLIST FAQs:
http://www.openspaceworld.org/oslist
--------------080807070206020804050101--
More information about the OSList
mailing list