This guest blog has been a great example of self-organizing process for me. At least at my intrapersonal scale, it has set all three of the (necessary and sufficient) conditions for self-organizing in human systems. The space and time established a container that held my attention and focus. My various experiences and parsing of sense-making differences established the potential energy for change. Finally, the conversations I described and reflection coupled with writing completed the conditions for active self-organizing pattern formation. Container, difference, and exchange forming similarities, differences, and relationships that have meaning across space and time.
Given the sensitivity to initial conditions, nonlinear causality, high-dimensionality, and massively entangled boundaries in which we all live, these same patterns will never emerge again in exactly the same way. And still, their emergent process and the patterns they formed will persist. They have been fun and illuminating for me. Hope the same is true for you.
Please do stay in touch. Visit the website. Visit our social networking site. Send your email, and we’ll put you on the HSD Institute mailing list. Keep talking. Keep learning. Keep teaching back in this time of yeasty learning and discovery about complex human systems dynamics.
Thanks, Dave. Thanks, Dawn. Thanks, All
Comments (3)
And thank-you Glenda, for opening a very interesting window into the world of HSD.
Posted by Keith Fortowsky![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/guest/nav-commenters.gif)
|
December 15, 2008 3:55 AM
Posted on December 15, 2008 03:55
Thanks Glenda,
for the refreshing series of questions and reflections, congratulations; blogging has slipped of my schedule over the past couple of days,but i will come back to this conversation in another context if i may.
Your questions on dominance were spot on; the variables involved are many and in a new encounter the outcome of two 'dominants' is unpredictable, but once set it can be very linearly predictable as old filters do thier work.
I doubt if dominance can be confined to history, it could be a healthy process if done transparently or explicitly and regularly as context changes, so the collective 'knows'under which conditions a or b or z should be dominant.
j
Posted by julian still | December 16, 2008 10:20 AM
Posted on December 16, 2008 10:20
Thanks, Julian and Keith. I'm working with a group that is considering how systems thinking can more effectively influence public policy. This is a ripe time for such considerations, but it heightens the importance of the dominance question.
What does systems thinking reveal about the uses, benefits, and risks for dominance? Do different systems approaches tell us different things? If you think about the history of the evolution of systems thought (see Midgley's Systemic Intervention - Philosophy, Methodology and Practice), then one might think that the critique of power is an integral part of systems thinking. On the other hand, many systems modeling approaches assume, invest, and reinforce existing power structures.
I'm still open to the ways that HSD enlighten us--and lighten others--as we think about power and dominance. Thanks for the on-going inquiry. G
Posted by Glenda Eoyang | December 19, 2008 1:39 AM
Posted on December 19, 2008 01:39