Elevating Simple Things LO26362

From: ACampnona@aol.com
Date: 03/16/01

Dear Jan, At, Sajeela and Hanching,

Please allow me to quote in extensis;-) after these words come to at random,

When the Frames Became Arrows and Love its Target

"The path of a physical motion is an ideal line. In a line that " has
movement," there is ideal motion. In the phenomenon we call life both
continuous change and permanent form really exist; but the form is made
and maintained by complicated disposition of mutual influences among the
physical units (atoms, molecules, then cells, then organs), whereby
changes tend always to occur in certain pre-eminent ways. Instead of a
simple law of transformation such as one finds in inorganic change, living
things exist by a cumulative process; they assimilate elements of their
surroundings to themselves, and these elements fall under the law of
change that is the organic form of "life." (Susan Kellner)

> Dear Organlearners,
> Jan Lelie <janlelie@wxs.nl> writes:
> >So empowering people would mean organizing self-organizing.
> >And this is a nice paradox when one is self-organizing organizing.
> >When one is not self-organized to begin with, how can one
> >become self-organized with an intervention from the outside?
> Greetings dear Jan,

> Your comment above seems to be a paradox, but it is not. We have to bear
> in mind the starnge phenomenon of "irreversible entropy production". A
> system may change its own organisation by producing entropy internally.
> The issue is then for the organisation to change in a favourable
> direction. This is where the surroundings can play a desive role as
> follows. The disturbance by the surroundings must be as small as possible,
> yet guiding as much as possible. Nature's way to accomplish this is by way
> of catalysts (like its enzymes, hormones and pheromones). Trace quntities
> of them are needed and then they particpate only temporaly. Afterwards
> they leave the system just as unobtrusively as they have entered it, not
> used up at all by the system. Leaders who act like nature's catalysts is a
> gift from God Creator.
> Or as you wrote:
> >The important thing is to be there or rather, "not to empower when not
> >needed and to empower when needed". A balancing act.
and Sajeela wrote in a different thread,

Andrew and Freddy Framework,

>your words
>below, my comments follow....

>On Sun, 4 Mar 2001 13:32:18 EST ACampnona@aol.com writes:
>> Dear Learners thinking about the future,
>> My apprehension FWIW is that 'systems theory' beloved of LO is one
>> way to help anticipate, comprehend and maybe even in a limited way
>>correct >some of the future intended and also unintended so unforseen
>>happenings of >'various intensity' that are currently locked
>>semi-invisibly into various extensive >'delay loops' of and within
>>complexifying systemic natures and in the midst of >which and in the
>>eventual 'happening of our praxis' we require increased >intuitive,
>>unconscious backgrounded skills of complexity thinking/acting (aka
>>authentic creativity) aka 'wisdom' to make the 'present' better bearable
>>or even more fitting. In short, we must increasingly become the change
>>experienced we have in the world.

>> Freddy Framework
>> Per pro Andrew Campbell

Sajeela's response:

>Something I haven't shared with you Andrew --- my full spiritual name is Ma
>Gyan Sajeela --- "Gyan" means wisdom --- so I always feel a personal
>tug when I see that word --- if I have understood you correctly then I would
>say your passage (above) approaches what I mean when I talk about
>"Tertiary Wisdom" © (Ramsey 1996,1997). I theorize that TW© allows for more
>accurately gauging the emergent nature of organizations. SNIP Tertiary
>Wisdom occurs long before the moment one is recognizing and absorbing
>meaning; is intuited. Learning in this way may allow for dramatic changes in
>awareness beyond that of double loop or second order knowledge.(©Ramsey,

and Hanching wrote on another thread,

>Dear Andrew,

>I could not remember some words of H. Thoreau well, it runs like ' With
>all your science/Can you tell how and whence/The light into your soul?'

>Yesterday my friend told us a moving 'QC Story' of operators of Japanese
>Komatsu Co. back early '80s in DEN. It reminded me my discussion with some
>part-time MBA students for 'managing' a hundred operators service
>department credit card/Federal Express/ Celluar Phone Co.) We realized
>that most management systems and sophisticated software are not sufficient
>conditions for a good team.

>I thanked Myron and wrote the following, I list here for your reference.

> "In the improvement stories of many Japanese unprofound subjects, we
> might know 'how and whence the light came into the soul of service and
> life.' Myron stressed the AIM. Many Japanese business people like
> Toyota's, they think 'give and take' thinking is the core of business,
> that is
> 'enabling' people to form certain knowledge of improvement and the
> willing to be an 'all-one-team'."

I wrote the following account as a result of an experience with a group of
about fifteen professional and business people on March 10th;-) this year.
It was first written to support a thread on the complex listserve
facilitated by M Lissack. but on account of this mornings posting i
thought it might be interesting to put to these threads since for me
anyway they seem to run into each other in a variety of ways.

" -I am somewhat overly self-conscious that you have connected my work so
fruitfully within the threads you are weaving here. Thank you for describing
it so carefully. By co-incidence I happened to be working for a whole day
last Friday with fourteen people attending a 'transformation' day on a
personal mastery course, to do with 'modelling' as in NLP. Such days are rare
and when it happens it is always a 'rich picture' scenario. To enlarge a
little, I wont presume to enrich this thread, I'll recall as objectively as I
can one of the significant things that happened and that I noticed around and
within the day's activities that might offer another 'angled lens' to see
this kind of working through. I'd appreciate knowing how you interpret the
phenomenon I describe. If it's fuzzy I apologize in advance.
The day began with everyone being given 100 small sheets of paper, one brush
and some black pigment. I ask each person to make one mark or very simple set
of marks ( on each sheet) and also to try to use up all the sheets in a
limited time frame. Of course, not everyone was able to accomplish 100%
coverage of the sheets but all had well over fifty sheets. The idea then was
to stick the images randomly onto boards. Inevitable my focus shifted for a
while to bringing the 'making session' to a close so that they could assemble
the sheets, the boards and themselves for a reflection on what happened.
The co-creators all duly assembled in the one corner. After a few comments
some one noticed that there were a whole set of small sheets pasted to the
vertical window of the barn, making it into a monochrome stained glass window
or a maquette for one; so we asked whose it was? The creator explained he'd
decided to use the window instead of the boards and he didn't want to move
it. Then in the flow of these 'current exchanges' we moved over the hall to
appreciate the glass mounted images closer and then, on the floor, we
suddenly noticed within our new 'sightlines' or perspective, that someone
else had also placed their work discretely in the corner underneath this
work, which it became clear;-) was now a 'landscape' in a 'window' and this
'ground placed' work was a 'stream of sheets' that had all been variously and
uniquely splash painted or dab painted with a very watered down pigment and a
piece of rock of all things;-) and the wetness and slight bashing technique
had consequently caused the papers to curl up, like water waves that were
rippling and running over stones. In fact the paper sheets were sitting on
the uneven 'flag stones' of the mediaeval barn.
Suddenly it became clear that these two hitherto unconnected people had
gravitated toward each other, making a microenvironment at the 'edge' but
staying within the simple context I had laid out for them all. In 'modern
art' terms it would I guess have been called an 'installation'. Three
dimensions from the two intended, maybe four if we count the imagination? If
you'll forgive the closing remark, 'What was inside became outside' to
misquote Dostoevsky. And we found some very neat co-creativity at the margins.


Andrew Campbell"

Driving over there alone through the countryside in the early morning I
was at once filled with enormous apprehension about my capacity to carry
this day through. I had prepared a variety of ways to overcome the inertia
of starting. In the last moment I gave myself to a 'creative collapse' and
just walked up to a set of books, picked up Bateson's 'An Ecology of Mind'
at random and at random I opened the pages to a chapter headed I think I
recall, 'Outlines'. It was a conversation between Bateson and his daughter
about William Blake and how 'angry' he was and about his insistence upon
the primacy of lines. (I am racalling from fast fading memory;-). Enough
lines and you have a field effect. 'nough said?


aka Freddy Framemaker



Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>

"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.