[OSList] Summer research: 'self organisation'

Skye Hirst via OSList oslist at lists.openspacetech.org
Sat Dec 6 12:05:54 PST 2014


This week of weeks has brought me into searching my own knowing about
differences, love, racism,  perhaps all the isms,  the rules of law (human
made) and where and how to find meaning and right action for myself in the
face of so much violence and fear .   The OS conversations bring me back
over and over again to my own process of inquiry,  what do I believe,
think, feel,  know,  what inquiry am I engaged,  how can I be of help or is
helping others what i need be doing?  It's this inner search that has
brought to me, through conversations here and on the OShotline,  the quote
(below of Biko) and it deeply satisfies - because it expresses a coherence
of many thoughts, experience common throughout history and my personal
history.

"At the heart of true integration is the provision for each man, each group
to rise and attain the envisioned self. Each group must be able to attain
its style of existence without encroaching on or being thwarted by another.
Out of this mutual respect for each other and complete freedom of
self-determination there will obviously arise a genuine fusion of the
life-styles of the various groups. This is true integration. " Steve Biko

Satisfaction/fulfillment comes during a process of inquiry, of integration
of widest possible variables that feels coherent, a connection to the
wholeness.  It feels peaceful,  a resting point, connection with a truth
throughout that connection.   Perhaps that's a feeling of the Ultimaticity
you speak Julie, don't know.


THanks all for the healthy inquiry here.. Thanks for all the questions,
seeking the next question and perhaps together we infuse one another,  know
ourselves more deeply and in the process find what is most effective in our
actions as one living being living  together with other living beings doing
the same.  And thank you Pernilla for this link to Biko.
http://newafricanmen.wordpress.com/2014/12/01/why-i-am-against-so-called-transformation/


On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Julie Smith via OSList <
oslist at lists.openspacetech.org> wrote:

> Dear Harrison ~
>
> Perhaps the crux of this biscuit we’re munching is Ultimaticity.  (The
> word just occurred to me and I just looked it up and it doesn’t appear to
> exist, so a good place to begin, yes?)
>
> Really I’m just borrowing from Ken Wilber again.  Somewhere along the way
> he said we all have a feeling-sense of what is Ultimate.  For some of us,
> what is Ultimate is magical or religious or spiritual.  For others what is
> Ultimate is found in the the natural world, and for others the Ultimate is
> found in the wonders of science.
>
> What has been interesting to me as I’ve bumped in and out of the Open
> Space community over the years is this pervading attraction to to the
> mystery of self-organization, along with this inkling that there is
> something of Ultimaticity about that.
>
> Then a decade or so ago I fell into awareness of Adi Da Samraj, an
> unfolding that has shattered all my previous understandings of
> Ultimaticity.  And then over time there emerged a synchronicity where at
> the same time that I was observing these conversations on the OS list-serve
> about self-organization, I would come across statements about
> self-organization in Adi Da Samraj’s teaching, including statements from *Not-Two
> Is Peace, *which I just now opened randomly to this:
>
> “The self-ordering system of humankind must be free to put itself in
> order.  Humankind will self-organize itself if it is free to do so, and it
> must no longer be prohibited from so doing by the separatist factionalisms
> of the “tribal” mind."
>
> So Harrison, you often speak of self-organization in terms that evoke a
> sense of Ultimaticity.  This community experiences a tacit heart-response
> to what is right and true about that.  When I feel and see all of this
> happening, I am heart-moved to share Adi Da Samraj’s teaching related to
> self-organization with you, because that teaching connects directly with
> what is already happening here.
>
> Love,
>
> Julie
>
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2014, at 8:19 AM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Good old OSLIST suffered something of a glitch, sending/not sending bits
> and pieces. In order to make a semi-intelligible piece I have done a little
> editing and hopefully no deep violence to Julie Smith’s ideas... And Julie,
> sorry it took so long, but this birthday thing sort of got in the way.
> Ho J
>
> ***********************
>
> Julie said: “The more I’ve been thinking about the relationship between
> self-organizing with self-correcting and self-rightening, the more complex
> it all looks.  Take cancer for example, or gangs.  Are these both examples
> of self-organization?  Self-organization that is destructive (not
> self-correcting or self-rightening) rather than constructive?  So maybe
> self-organizing is not inherently good, but is only good if done in a way
> that is self-rightening and self-correcting?”
>
> Harrison: “Julie – I rather suspect that self organization covers a much
> larger territory than the more limited range of preferred outcomes we might
> choose. Gangs and Cancer would be cases in point. What you call a gang, I
> might call “brothers.” And were you to interview a cancer cell, I suspect
> it would report that it was doing just what it was supposed to. Both gangs
> and cancer are very much a part of what we call “Life,” even if that Life
> does not proceed exactly as we might wish it to. And it is all self
> organizing, I do believe.”
>
> Julie: “I can see how we could legitimately refer to gangs as “brothers”
> in the very same way that Thich Nhat Hahn wrote about pirates in Call Me By
> My True Names (http://www.quietspaces.com/poemHanh.html), but if we look
> around and see that we are, indeed, careening toward mutual
> self-destruction, we might also see that it is imperative that we find out
> what is happening, and why, and what we might do about it.  And we should
> probably do that before it is too late.”
>
> The conversation continues...
>
> Julie – the points you raise are all critical, and we do indeed seem to be
> making somewhat of a mess of things in many places, to put it mildly. All
> that said, I am not sure than any of this has  directly much to do with
> self organization *per se*, except in a very “arms length,” derivative
> sense. The reason is that self organization, as I have come to experience
> it, is a pre-existing condition, a prior reality, a fundamental matrix out
> of which all the nasty issues you cite, *in addition* to all the
> marvelous wonderments of our lives, do emerge. You might call this
> “neutral,” but I would prefer, “Life affirming”... and that is Life in its
> total rich abundance, including the good, the bad, and the ugly. All of it.
> Without judgment or blame.
>
> “Life Affirming” may seem an odd thought... but if I hear the story
> correctly, It all began when it began, and ever since, through primal
> superheated plasma to the present moment, the force of self organization
> has moved towards life. In the words of Ilya Prigogine (used in a narrower
> context) we... that would be all of Life...emerged out of chaos on our way
> towards, “...new and higher levels of complexity.” Life in its fullness is
> self organization made manifest. That is affirmation, I believe.  Are we
> the end of the line? Who knows...
>
> But of course, there are the nasty parts. Their names are legion, and
> known in every age. Oh were it possible to wipe them all away, and lord
> knows we have tried our damnedest. And in truth it is really easy:
> eliminate life. As the fellow once said, curing cancer is no problem.
> Living through the cure may be another issue.  Obviously this is a sick
> sort of joke, but there may be more than a modicum of truth in it...
>
> When speaking of the “nasty parts,” it seems to me that they come in at
> least two varieties: What I might call Natural Disasters and then there are
> self inflicted wounds. Sandy and Katrina are good representatives of the
> former, and our multiple wars and genocides constitute the latter. Gross
> over simplification for sure, and of course there are combinations where a
> natural disaster becomes a catastrophe because of our blindness, stupidity,
> or worse. Think the Johnstown Flood, for example, or Climate change.
>
> From our (human point of view) the net impact of all of the above is
> pretty much the same: suffering, destruction and death. Definitely nasty,
> but I think it worthwhile to remember that the cosmos was not created for
> our comfort. In fact we are lately arrived, minor players. Doubtless if we
> had been present at the beginning, we might have offered some useful design
> tweaks. But we weren’t there. It is also true that we could never have a
> nice day at the beach were it not for the violent storms that broke the
> rocks to create the sand. It is not my point to disparage our attempts to
> mitigate natural disasters, but for the purposes of this discussion, I
> think we might best concentrate on the other end of the spectrum: Self
> inflicted wounds. What can we do about all that?
>
> In a curious way, it seems to me that the problem is that we may be doing
> too much. Cataloguing the ills that afflict us (or more accurately that we
> inflict upon ourselves) is tedious but possible. And for each problem there
> is presumably a fix – which we work hard to identify, design and implement.
> The fix might be a simple intervention, teaching the principles of Dialogue
> in order to fix conflicted communication, for example. Or it may be a more
> massive effort such as a complex moral code which if followed, is supposed
> to enable lions to lay down with lambs. I think we should award ourselves
> “A” for Effort... but when it comes to impact and results most would agree
> that there seems to be something missing somewhere.
>
> Actually, a deeper look at our efforts and their effect is even more
> troubling. In many (maybe most) cases our “fix” becomes our problem. Take
> the example of Dialogue Principles. Developed over a number of years’
> careful work these principles describe truly elegant conversation. However,
> in every instance I have been witness to, implementing these principles in
> real conversation seems to create precisely the problems they were designed
> to prevent. The natural flow of give and take in conversation is disrupted.
> To my eyes/ears, the issue is that the Principles, while abstractly
> appealing can never fully capture the rhythm and cadence of natural
> conversation which is always unique. The Principles are “average best
> practices.” Unfortunately the “average” never shows up in life, and forcing
> Life to fit the average is a good way to suffocate it. Our thoughtful “fix”
> has become a new problem.
>
> On a grander scale, the multiple moral codes created by human kind produce
> similar results. The intent and the effort is certainly to be applauded,
> but when it comes to implementation it seems, once again, we have something
> of a miss. I would never suggest that such codes, whether religious or
> secular in origin, are useless – for if nothing else they have provided
> “best practice scenarios” for  meaningful human life. Yet when observed in
> their minutia the Life they seek to preserve is usually squashed. And it
> becomes worse when my code clashes with your code, as both conflict with
> their code. People can and have been killed for all of this on a regular
> basis. If this is a fix, I think we need a fix for the fix... or something.
>
> Or something... Suppose we were just to stop for a moment, take a deep
> breath and see what might happen all by itself, naturally so to speak.
> Finding a quiet space in which to savor this pause that might refresh will
> appear difficult if only because every where we turn our clashing moral
> codes continue their cacophony overlaid by the dissonant noise of our
> multiple interventions and fixes...but we do have such a time/space
> whenever we choose to go there.
>
> Speaking just for myself, but with agreement from many of you, I suspect –
> I call it Open Space. The single gift that Good Old OST has granted me,
> that shines above all others, is that awesome silence in which the full
> richness of Life makes manifest. We don’t do a thing, and the less we do
> the deeper and richer the silence. To be sure there are some “principles
> and a Law” – which turn out to be unlike any others. They are not
> prescriptions for our behavior. They are descriptions of what will happen
> anyway without special effort or intent on our part. All by themselves. Yes
> of course, there are conversations and movements, arguments, hugs, and
> celebrations – but if you just take a moment in an out of the way corner to
> expectantly watch and listen, you will find yourself immersed in the flow
> of Life, which is at once affirmative and renewing.
>
> It is tempting to see such moments as once done, never to be repeated, but
> in spite of our (or certainly my) normal skepticism, the “moment” has
> occurred over and over with millions of people in thousands of places –
> people with every sort of religious tradition, moral code, economic
> background, educational level, ethnicity, professional status, age or
> character – It makes no difference at all! And it happens all by itself!
>
> A story might help. A few years ago, Michael Pannwitz and I worked with
> some 250 Rabbis and Imams seeking Peace. It was a three day gathering and
> on the first day, in deference to the traditional nature of the
> participants, the sponsors determined that we should start in a traditional
> way. That meant rows of chairs facing a dais with multiple speeches by the
> appropriate people, such as The Chief Rabbi from Jerusalem  and Imams of
> similar rank. They had come from all over the world. Not too long into the
> speech making, the crowd grew more than a little restless, and by the end
> of the morning  they were standing on the tables, screaming at each other.
> Not quite peaceful.
>
> I wasn’t present for all of that, but I could hear the noise... and
> suddenly I found myself faced by a most distraught sponsor. He had a single
> question: How quickly could we open some space? Since it was almost lunch
> time, we opted for a long one and in the middle of the afternoon, the 250,
> now seated in a circle did what we’ve always done: Raise the issues of
> passionate concern and post them on the wall. Surprisingly this was done in
> an orderly respectful fashion, and after several hours the action stopped
> and the walls were filled with every issue you could possible imagine and
> many you never heard of. Since the day had  been a long one it seemed well
> to head for dinner with space to be opened on the morrow. Though truth to
> tell, the space had already transformed and powerful, flowing conversations
> were well under way.
>
> On the morning, a few more issues were posted, and the normal ambience of
> Open Space took over. Groups formed and reformed in the giant atrium of our
> hotel, conversations serious and raucous, quiet and judicial blended in
> what I can only describe as a symphony of sound – which paradoxically
> struck me as a profound and rich silence. Words fail, but something like
> “pregnant silence,” might be close to what I experienced.
>
> As usual I did nothing. I sat in a little alcove totally enthralled by the
> majesty of the moment. After a while my eyes were drawn to a most unlikely
> pair in the very center of the atrium, sitting all alone. Facing each other
> in simple straight backed chairs was an old Rabbi who I knew to be Rabbi
> Pappenheim, the  Chief Ultra Orthodox Rabbi from Jerusalem. His partner was
> a young lady, a Moslem from Jakarta. They spoke for hours and never moved,
> acting as if the world had simply disappeared. Or then again, perhaps they
> were the world in that moment. And it happened all by itself.
>
> So Julie... Could this be the answer to your “cri de Coeur?”  Probably
> not, but it might be a start.
> “but if we look around and see that we are, indeed, careening toward
> mutual self-destruction, we might also see that it is imperative that we
> find out what is happening, and why, and what we might do about it.  And we
> should probably do that before it is too late (Julie).”
>
>
> The mess we are in is massive and complex – 8 billion people going in at
> least 8 billion directions. The tools at our disposal (interventions,
> political systems, new programs) are simply overwhelmed by the immensity of
> the challenge. Just to take one example – Group work of various sorts.
> Granted it can be very effective in a limited situation, but the fact of
> the matter is that we have neither the facilitators or the physical spaces
> to transform the minds and behaviors of 8 billion, and counting. It just
> doesn’t scale and a severe state of depression would be warranted unless...
>
>
> ...unless we do have a secret weapon, an ally whose aim and goal is to
> affirm what we want: Life. If so we would do well to learn all we can about
> it, and even more importantly, learn to cooperate even when it seems
> counter intuitive or wrong to do. Might just work.
>
> Harrison
>
>
>
> Winter Address
> 7808 River Falls Drive
> Potomac, MD 20854
> 301-365-2093
>
> Summer Address
> 189 Beaucaire Ave.
> Camden, ME 04843
> 207-763-3261
>
> Websites
> www.openspaceworld.com
> www.ho-image.com
> OSLIST To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives
> of OSLIST Go to:
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
>
> *From:* OSList [mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
> <oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org>] *On Behalf Of *Julie Smith via
> OSList
> *Sent:* Monday, December 01, 2014 5:13 PM
> *To:* World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* [OSList] Fwd: Summer research project idea: 'self organisation'
>
> Harrison kindly pointed out to me that I sent the following message only
> to him, and not all, so here it is again..... :)
>
> Julie
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Julie Smith* <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> Date: Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 6:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [OSList] Summer research project idea: 'self organisation'
> To: Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net>
>
> Dear Harrison ~
>
> I can see how we could legitimately refer to gangs as “brothers” in the
> very same way that Thich Nhat Hahn wrote about pirates in Call Me By My
> True Names (http://www.quietspaces.com/poemHanh.html), but if we look
> around and see that we are, indeed, careening toward mutual
> self-destruction, we might also see that it is imperative that we find out
> what is happening, and why, and what we might do about it.  And we should
> probably do that before it is too late.
>
> Ken Wilber raised awareness of many useful ideas, among them research
> related to adult human development.  Wilber was reluctant to talk about
> “higher” and “lower” development because people resist those kinds of
> ideas.  We are in a time when egalitarian points of views hold much sway.
> But he defined “higher” and “lower” in a way that may be useful to this
> discussion.  Wilber said any of us can easily recognize “higher” human
> development because “higher” development always reflects an embrace of
> more: more humanity, more beings, more of all.  So a person who cares about
> himself is at one level, at a higher level she cares about family, then
> community, then nation, then world, then planet.  Something like that.  So
> call a gang “brothers” if you like, but those “brothers” are killing others
> of our brothers and sisters and children.  This is not neutral.  It is
> wrong.  Wrong for those who are being killed, and wrong for those doing the
> killing.  It is a sickness.  The sickness is rooted in other sickness that
> permeates our world, and all of it needs to be addressed.  The only being
> that can address it is us, understanding and acting as
> everybody-all-at-once.
>
> Julie
>
>
>
> On Dec 1, 2014, at 5:54 AM, Harrison Owen <hhowen at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Julie – I rather suspect that self organization covers a much larger
> territory than the more limited range of preferred outcomes we might
> choose. Gangs and Cancer would be cases in point. What you call a gang, I
> might call “brothers.” And were you to interview a cancer cell, I suspect
> it would report that it was doing just what it was supposed to. Both gangs
> and cancer are very much a part of what we call “Life,” even if that Life
> does not proceed exactly as we might wish it to. And it is all self
> organizing, I do believe.
>
> Harrison
>
> Winter Address
> 7808 River Falls Drive
> Potomac, MD 20854
> 301-365-2093
>
> Summer Address
> 189 Beaucaire Ave.
> Camden, ME 04843
> 207-763-3261
>
> Websites
> www.openspaceworld.com
> www.ho-image.com
> OSLIST To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options, view the archives
> of OSLIST Go to:
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
>
> *From:* OSList [mailto:oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org
> <oslist-bounces at lists.openspacetech.org>] *On Behalf Of *Julie Smith via
> OSList
> *Sent:* Monday, December 01, 2014 2:35 AM
> *To:* John Baxter; World wide Open Space Technology email list
> *Subject:* Re: [OSList] Summer research project idea: 'self organisation'
>
> Hi John ~
> The more I’ve been thinking about the relationship between self-organizing
> with self-correcting and self-rightening, the more complex it all looks.
> Take cancer for example, or gangs.  Are these both examples of
> self-organization?  Self-organization that is destructive (not
> self-correcting or self-rightening) rather than constructive?  So maybe
> self-organizing is not inherently good, but is only good if done in a way
> that is self-rightening and self-correcting?
> As for Adi Da’s use of the term “system”, note that he talks about bits of
> the system in 6.2 and then references the system as a totality in 6.6.
> This essay is about the bits interfering with the totality.  Exactly like
> cancer, or gangs.  This fragmentation of bits in opposition to the totality
> is a key aspect of what there is to understand.  In another part of the
> book, Adi Da says “fragmentation leaves people open to being controlled and
> manipulated…. fragmentation is what power-seekers exploit….”
>
> The totality of humankind has not yet recognized itself (ourselves) as a
> single system.  We, everybody-all-at-once, do not yet see ourselves as a
> single totality, a single system.  Because we are not acting as a single
> system, we have not yet identified the rules and accountability that would
> enable our continued co-existence.  *Not-Two Is Peace* was written to
> help us see humanity as a single system that has the power and the
> responsibility to act for the common good.  If we don’t participate in this
> expanding awareness and responsibility, we will continue careening downhill
> with a stave in the wheels, headed toward destruction.
>
> My comments are my best understanding in this moment, but they fall far
> short of the teaching in *Not-Two Is Peace,* which is profound.  I typed
> in just that one brief essay.  The book contains a great deal more.
>
> Julie
>
>
>
> On Nov 30, 2014, at 9:16 PM, John Baxter <john at jsbaxter.com.au> wrote:
>
> Hi Julie
>
> An interesting and very engaging essay.  I could imagine a substantial
> discussion from ruminating on it.
>
> I am inclined to analytically 'umbrella' self righting and self correcting
> as examples of self organisation... but I would be pleased for this to
> prove simplistic.  They both look like 'self organisation towards a
> particular end' (righting / correcting).
>
> I have some reservation with the quote you pull out... the message is
> solid, but it confuses 'the system'... 'the system' cannot be bypassed, as
> it encompasses every effort to bypass it... by intersecting with the
> system, an intervention becomes part of it.  What is bypassed is the
> *formal* system, the rules and structures.
>
> Still the messages are solid and that's going straight into the bookmarks
> re consideration of global self organisation.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> *John Baxter*
> *Cocreation Consultant & **​**Co**​**Create Adelaide Facilitator*
> jsbaxter.com.au <http://www.jsbaxter.com.au/> | CoCreateADL.com
> <http://cocreateadl.com/>
> 0405 447 829
> ​ | ​
> @jsbaxter <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>
>
> _ <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>
>   <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>
> *Thank you to everyone who came, helped or spread the good word about City
> Grill! <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>*
> *Summary and links: cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/
> <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>*
>   <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>
>   <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>
> On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 4:47 AM, Julie Smith <*jsmith at mosquitonet.com*>
> wrote: <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>
> Dear all ~ <http://twitter.com/jsbaxter_>
>   <http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/>
> In *Not-Two **Is Peace* Adi Da sometimes lists self-organizing with
> self-rightening and self-correcting in a way that infers these are
> complementary concepts.  I wonder if in some ways these terms are
> interchangeable.  I’m thinking about this question because I recently
> noticed this statement about the relationship between systems and
> self-correction: <http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/>
>   <http://cocreateadl.com/localgov/grill-summary/>
> “Systems self-correct, but when you bypass the system, as is now the case
> globally, then the system cannot correct itself anymore.  It is just
> careening downhill with a stave shoved in the wheels.  It is inevitable
> that it is going to self-destruct.” <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> The context for this comment is an essay on rightening the current global
> instability, but perhaps there is something in the essay that may move the
> more general conversation about self-organization forward.  This is a brief
> essay, so I’ll share it in its entirety here for anyone who might be
> interested: <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> *On Establishing Rules of Participation For A Global Cooperative Order
> <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>*
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.1  Presently, the international community has no effective way of
> dealing with geopolitical issues, because it is fundamentally about
> “tribes” in competition with one another.  There is no force that embodies
> everybody and that, therefore, can effectively deal with the system as a
> whole. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.2  Bits of the system are always confronting one another.  Therefore,
> those who hold out or want to “play it hard” wind up controlling the whole
> system. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.3  In general, the so-called “big powers” are bypassing rules and
> playing for dominance.  But everybody is playing their part in the “tribal”
> struggle-game, which is not in the interest of humankind, and it is not
> survivable. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.4  Rules and accountability are essential for any system.  Any notion
> that you can bypass such accountability is a lie in the name of serving
> some kind of “self”-interest.  And this disposition is creating every
> crisis. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.5  Systems self-correct, but when you bypass the system, as is now the
> case globally, then the system cannot correct itself anymore.  It is just
> careening downhill with a stave shoved in the wheels.  It is inevitable
> that it is going to self-destruct. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.6  Therefore, the international power-struggles have to be replaced by a
> systems-based order with rules and limits established.  It is only when the
> system can represent itself as a totality and keep its rules in front of
> everyone that the system can correct itself. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.7  A rational and positive global situation requires rules for
> participation, based on global interdependence and prior unity—rather than
> being based on nation-states or other groups engaging in reactive measures
> in the face of being provoked or (otherwise) acting aggressively to extend
> their influence. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.8  The process for dealing with global realities should not be merely
> punitive.  Rules for participation should be established—and then doors
> would be either opened or closed, based on whether any given nation-state
> or other entity abides by those rules. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.9  Participation should be the one thing everybody values—not
> competition, not dominance and victory over all, but participation in a
> global system that allows every nation-state, every human domain, to
> survive and enjoy essential well-being and the growth potential and
> benefits of participation in the whole. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.10  The rules of participation in the global community should not be
> arbitrary, or set up to favor certain parties over others.  The rules of
> participation should establish positive and equal participation for
> everyone, with no double standards that require some to obey the rules
> while others do not. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.11  The Global Cooperative Forum is the system of everybody-all-at-once
> reasserting itself and establishing rules of participation that put all
> matters of global business equitably on the table—including matters of
> severe chronic conflict, competition for resources, degradation of the
> environment and disruption of weather-patterns, poverty, disease, and so
> forth. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> 6.12  Right rules of participation will establish an entirely different
> principle than nation-state competitiveness.  It will allow humankind as a
> whole to become a functioning system—a system to which all parties get
> access by fulfilling certain obligations and responsibilities, which apply
> everywhere. <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> The full text of *Not-Two **Is Peace *is available through bookstores,
> via Kindle download, or at *http://www.da-peace.org*.
> <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> All best wishes ~ <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>   <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
> Julie <jsmith at mosquitonet.com>
>
>   <http://www.da-peace.org/>
>
> On Nov 29, 2014, at 6:46 AM, Harrison Owen via OSList <
> *oslist at lists.openspacetech.org*> wrote: <http://www.da-peace.org/>
>   <http://www.da-peace.org/>
> John – the literature on self organization is massive, and to be honest a
> number of years have passed since I felt myself to be marginally informed.
> That said, there are three books that I found to be most helpful, and all –
> to the best of my knowledge – are still in print. In historical order they
> are: “Order out of Chaos,” Ilya Prigogine, “Chaos,”  James Gleick, and “At
> home in the Universe” Stuart Kauffmann. I would suggest starting with
> “Chaos” – which is the best written and pulls together lots of wonderful
> strands.  <http://www.da-peace.org/>
>   <http://www.da-peace.org/>
> Harrison <http://www.da-peace.org/>
>   <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
> Winter Address <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
> 7808 River Falls Drive <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
> Potomac, MD 20854 <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
> *301-365-2093* <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
>   <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
> Summer Address <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
> 189 Beaucaire Ave. <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
> Camden, ME 04843 <oslist at lists.openspacetech.org>
> *207-763-3261* <301-365-2093>
> <301-365-2093>
>
> ...
>
> [Message clipped]
> _______________________________________________
> OSList mailing list
> To post send emails to OSList at lists.openspacetech.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to OSList-leave at lists.openspacetech.org
> To subscribe or manage your subscription click below:
> http://lists.openspacetech.org/listinfo.cgi/oslist-openspacetech.org
>
>


-- 
*Skye Hirst, PhD*
President - The Autognomics Institute
*Conversations in Radical Self-Knowing*
www.autognomics.org
@autognomics

New Phone Number:
207-593-8074
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20141206/75f22882/attachment-0003.htm>


More information about the OSList mailing list