Tag Archives: discussion

Uncategorized

Singing Dance for Public/Private Health

What I care about
and what I am working
and even playing hard with
is better understanding what and how
we and Earth
communicate to and with each other,
regenerating mindbody health sometimes,
and yet degenerating pathological climates and subclimates,
gestalts,
ecopolitical chemistry puzzles and games,
systemic syndromes articulating wu wei
Tipping Points of MultiCultural ReGenerate Enthymemes.

Only up to half of effective human communication,
whether you talk or listen,
write or read,
or sing or dance or draw or sculpt or design or recreate,
or preferably all of the above,
is about word choice and language,
dialectal articulation
and successful transfer of accurately informing verbal messages
from a voice source to one or more ecosystemic receptors,
ears to linguistically and culturally hear
health v pathology of climatic autonomic feelings,
thoughts,
insights,
concerns,
prayers,
hopes and fears,
loves and angry-paranoid hates
and all complexities in-between these dipolarities of thinking/feeling.

The other half, or more, of communication and all that ecopolitical jazz
of dance and song,
is all about non-verbal context,
or/and natural climate,
or/and academic climate,
or/and political climate,
or/and economic climate,
or/and ecologically healthy historic-cultural climate,
or/and environment,
or/and medium of nature’s most regenerate messages
as positive over double-negative
double-binding eco-cosmological
Right-timeless/Left-EternalYangTime.

In communications theory,
we often focus on sight,
on what we can see of speakers speaking
and listeners listening and watching and feeling and caring, or not;
smiles and frowns
ups and downs,
happy-health and pathological down messages,
positives and negatives,
and even humors of oxymoronic double-binding not-nots
within time’s naturally unfolding logic
with analogical ego’s aesthetic mindbody live-function/evil-dysfunction,

Evilive is when light-filled healthy
and dualdark equipoise equivalently balance co-arising Tipping Points
of bicamerally balanced ecoconsciousness
transforming into a deeper, more resonate, climate potential
of and for rich-dense-harmonic-octaved positives,
as physical/metaphysical long-term trending regenerate multicultural health.

Yet communication,
as Thich Nhat Hanh observes,
is a function of nutrition and health,
and/or malnourishment and pathology,
so optimized messages
are not only redundantly heard and seen,
but also sometimes smelled and tasted and remembered
and touched
and felt
ecoconsciously and/or autonomically,
intuitively in reverse-deductive time’s enthymematic reweaving deja vu,
back to matriarchal loving womb’s non-paranoid DNA-inspired compost,
as portentious of good and bad to follow,
especially lensed-framed-calculated-climatized-hypnotized-actively hopeful for future anthro-bicameral
post-millennial
polypathic regenerations of peaceful multiculturing love.

As Earth’s clouds of unknowing
predict rains of water and light’s fertile nurturance,
predict trees with organically networking ecopolitical health-development roots,
predict an anthrocentric world of paper
predicting Earth cloud’s most viral DNA-sympathetic, non-paranoid, messages,
predicting more loving health
and less hating pathologically trending climates of devolving change,
through lack of full-enthymematic octave-optimized timelessly classic communication on our Golden Rule Tribe’s part,
especially as song and tribal 4-step danced
and hopefully as analogical/ecologically balanced nutritional poetry.

I so hope
you can and will write and sing and dance this enlightenment poem
back to me
in any polypathic dialect
we could all ecologically comprehend
as another great rich message out to fellow Earth Tribes,
We know we made this mess,
and feel really really bad about it,
but we sing and dance and ecopoliticize cooperatively
and hope to get better with this Golden Rule
of light’s regenerative fertility
through stronger yet more flexible harmonic co-arising balance.

How do you follow your ecopolitical light,
and learn from our dualdark TippingPoint shadows?

 

 

Standard
Uncategorized

Dear Fellow Facilitators of Healthy Climates

When Einstein was asked, by a journalist, how he came up with the theory of relativity,
he had no audience for talking about his use of Thought Experiments,
more or less what a group discernment facilitator might use to frame a climate of respectful inquiry.
But, on this occasion Einstein said,
“I ignored an axiom.”

Perhaps this is part of what we all do as we approach political and economic anomalies;
anomalies grown so hugely powerful that they already adversely influence the lives of some population
enough to invite us inside to help sift through our mutually-held mess.

Here are four axioms that it might be helpful for us to encourage our mutual explorers of resonant resolutions to temporarily set aside.
You will notice they are all dualistic axioms,
easily ignored by heuristically pretending we live in more of a nondual co-arising ecological climate.

Axiom 1: When I say “spirit,” I mean anything not of nature.
What is natural is what is not spiritual.

Let’s pretend these two refer to one universal ecosystem,
the same planet,
one holistic psychological ecosystem,
so what is spiritually dynamic is also naturally dynamic,
like agape and eros,
but two different lenses, or dialectals,
for juxtapositional purposes only;
not because there is a real world difference within a river
or a tree
or even your mother, or yourself,
or a terrorist, or a fascist, or a….

Axiom 2: When I say “mind,” I mean that of ego identity that is not body. What is organic body is what is not metaphysical mind.

Let’s pretend that where one shows up, so does the other,
just like your ecological spirit and your biological nature.
From this nondual perspective we may find it easier to see economic intent of mindbodies
acting out our political power investment/divestment purposes,
and vice versa.
Politics of embodied power become reassociated with economics of cooperative investments and more competitive divestments of value in Other,
whether people, places, or things,
all of which are now spirit-nature ecosystems
with an increasingly transparent ecological development trajectory.

Axiom 3: When I say “climate health,”
whether internal or external climate,
I mean anything not climatic pathology.
What is pathological, dissonant, chaotic in nature
does not participate in the spirit of cooperative, resonantly complex therapeutic health.

To ignore such a deeply held axiom of DNA-regenerativity itself,
I find it helpful to use an oxymoronic frame,
a climate that assumes we all RealTime live within diverse environments of pathological health,
some significantly more marginal than others.
These two together allow us a grand heuristic spectrum of both opportunity and risk,
to see functional dynamics of monoculturing pathology trends
within dipolar health as integrity,
already explicit issues and already implicit as deviant from healthy potential.

Framing pathologies as harbingers of healthier alternatives
allows us to look simultaneously at current climate risks
as also speaking of future climate opportunities.

Axiom 4: When I say “rhetorical frame” or “dialectal”
I mean to distinguish this time and space from a larger ecopolitical climate that has become painfully pathological.

Why couldn’t a rhetorical climate speak of both how our mindbodies experience health
and how our nature-spirits sweat about internal and external climate pathologies?
Sounds like good compost for a Thought Experiment,
and maybe a cooperative grant proposal,
sent from one set of co-intelligent climate investors
to another, with deeper ecopolitical power pockets.

Standard
Uncategorized

Psychology of Political-Economic Constitutions

Shalom, Aloha, Namaste

Kinship and Ego identity co-arise in socioeconomic health of mutual trust,
beginning in utero
swimming about in embryonic nutrition,
rather than active distrust
or more passive mistrust of the relatively unknown
yet somehow paranoic alien, Other.

The psychological fuel for polypathic political trust
is capacity for empathy,
which grows bicamerally within mutually subsidiary economies
of co-empathic positive intent,
co-arising nondually
in more ecstatic peaks of good beatific as beautifully edgy humor.

Empathy is a teachable,
because learnable,
listening and noticing skill,
stretching to include those aliens of self and other doubt,
occasionally even abusive terrorists within.

Mature co-empathic bicameral skills
are what we might call healthy mindfulness,
ecoconsciousness of Self as holonically syncing with Other,
intent toward mutual integrity,
trust,
love,
regard,
esteemed equivalence,
emerging from comprehension of our Original Intent
as regenerative cycling Earth’s SpaceTime fertile paradise
of Positive Deviance Psychology,
Political ChoiceMaking for Positive Nutrients,
Economically Cooperative WinWin TransActions,
deviant from vacuous dissonance and chaos,
random WinLose irrationality,
endless notnot polynomials of double-binding ambivalence.

Zero-centric mindfulness training
is not only the stuff of sit at home,
chant and drum meditation training and sensory experience
of nutritional sounds and tastes and sights and smells
with concomitant affective feelings
of resonant trust, dissonant mistrust, assonant distrust, hate, fear, anger
trusting things might be better
if I can just cathartically,
purgatively force myself and others to calm back down
from active distrust to at least more passive mistrust
about our continuing future lives together
in more peaceful silence of mutual breathing,
in as out.

While shared centering space and sounds can be useful
especially as household units,
and prior to important political and economic discernment events
processes
systemic networks of positive transitional evolutionary intent,
stretching mindfulness through each active loving moment
of each day and night
is optimally sustained only in a safe-risk environment
of political and economic cooperative nurturance,
where power competitions are normatively agreed to remain subservient
to greater cooperative nurturing,
Both-And powers of consensual discernment
to discover together highest and best political ecotherapy
and economic health optimization outcomes.

We are best within our democratically-inclusive empathic wheelhouse,
rather than the mutual immune fears of unknown
mysterious and unfortunate threats
and other competitive LeftBrain too-reductive dominance
in defining extended families of synergetic confluence,
requires (0)-centric disciplines of mindfulness
but these are more accurately embraced as Tao-disciplines
on behalf of Love as Nature’s KindTrust Expansion,
rather than suboptimizing political/economic goals
of Anger and Fear Management and self repression
of the static/stuck Panic-Terrorist within to feel better
managing damage control,
safety and security,
defensive mutual time out preferences,
restraint procedures
and economic investment boundary policies
to contain our LoseLose worst hunting and ungathering fears.

The Haudenosaunee definition of grace,
gratitude,
thanksgiving,
“the words that come before all else”
under ideal compost incubating circumstances
of mutual-mentoring
creative
Both-And political and economic cooperative discernment
might bilaterally nuance,
grace evolves the words that come before as after all else,
as above,
so below;
as Exterior Landscaped
so Interior Landscaped.

The belief that anthrocentrism is fundamental
to wise political and economic regenerative planning
for future generations,
is the Original Sin of fundamentalist self-idolatry.
Our capacities for healthy mutual co-empathic trust development
far exceed such a limited and limiting sense of our own personal,
familial,
and EarthTribal identity,
history of cooperative enculturation and intelligence.

Radical Revolutionary Earth (0)-Soul Centrism
is bicameral ecoconsciousness
of polypathic highest as healthiest beautiful minds and words
that come both before and after all else.

Our co-empathic democratic multicultural trust
in healthy cooperative futures begins this and each EarthLoving Eternal Day and Rich Composting Night,

Aloha, Shalom. Namaste.

Standard
Uncategorized

Our Not-So-Noisy Nest

We don’t sound right.

Too left-brained I hope

better balance might cool our home

relationships

lives

words

as richly dense Eternal Moment compost

feeds diversely rooted populations.

 

Lake’s surface ripples with

leaf blowers whining

jets roaring overhead

cars exhaustively streaming by

like cheerless tears of toxic bubbles.

 

Beneath

before

this vaporous high pitched system

still lives mountainous resonant joy.

Birds still tweet,

not just people,

rivers trickle and spray white noise

ocean surf still ebbs and flows

within our circulating systems.

 

Our hearts and lungs and minds

remember catholic lotus root systems

recall bisonic natural sync between

nature made commodious spirit lakes

reflecting

revealing

flowering

EarthTribe discovered Orthodox Tao mountain tops

natural tree-lined valleys in

regenerative systemed (0) core Prime Relationship

of left-brained Yang remembering

Yin’s true value as

polynomial is non-polynomial reversed

is binomially balanced

compassionately deep lake reflecting mindful mountain

dynamically harmonious dance of

peaceful twinkling

rippling

lapping

laughing thermonormative warm and slow relationship.

 

Communication,

positive discernment,

our bicameral vocation’s peaceful yeasty nest racing

embracing

evolving

revolving

rhythming

beating

breathing

thinking

choosing

soaring through humanity.

 

But, quietly, please?

Some of us are trying not to sleep.

 

Standard
Uncategorized

Following Revolutionary Dialogue

Back in the day, a “follower” was someone who had faith in the leadership of another person; a leader trusted, in part, due to their adherence to some faith in a solution to dissonance. Mystics and prophets, politicians and mobsters, tycoons and polymathic geniuses, teachers and ministers had a “following.” Since the internet, this Transitional Generation and their allied elders would add to this list: bloggers and on-line journalists.

I have been following the NCDD discernment strings pertaining to the desire for a global political revolution and the more technical desire to facilitate large-scale grassroots  discussions about what we do and what we do not want as a global human species. In several of the senses of being a “follower,” I have also been following Joanna Macy’s peaceful revolutionary strategy as it unfolds internationally.  While I do not have any authority to interpret, or speak for, someone I greatly respect, and would not want to exceed my place as a follower, rather than a mentor, I think the connection between Joanna Macy and the NCDD listserve is that both urgently desire an internationally sustainable Earth ecological economic design system.

That gold-standard “design system” must be resonant and a well-patterned, balanced, theorem. More than a conjecture about what might inspire this peaceful revolution. A conjecture says “isn’t this an interesting pattern, a dynamic analogy?”; while a theorem adds “we have a positive teleological function for that form-pattern.” Conjectures are not yet polynomial memes. Theorems are polynomial, and binomial, patterns.

Faith in “ecological economics” fits more comfortably into Macy’s (0)-Centric Zen Theorem than into the NCDD discussion and culture. However, probably every NCDD member recognizes that the term “faith community” has an internal redundancy just as the term “faithless community” sounds oxymoronic. There is no community, no dialogue, no communication, no ecologic, no probability of cooperative economic intent where there is no faith that we are all in this mess together, whatever it may be, and that the primordial rules of discernment are best attuned to a radically inclusive “Golden Rule” that we must always treat others, regardless of species, and regardless of whether currently living or not yet living, as we wish ourselves to be sustainably and confluently, even therapeutically, treated.

It seems to both the Macy and NCDD Revolutionaries that there not only already is a global consensus in this basic positive teleological faith, but further, this global consensus is quickly learning to find each other across traditional divides of borders, water, special interests, and language–all we need, which we now have, is a global information system. The discussion has well begun, now it is time to move that from a perhaps sometimes too free-wheeling, and polarizing, discussion, to a positive discernment process. In other words, as a species, we are moving from our already shared positive teleological conjecture toward a positive teleological discernment theorem.

Perhaps NCDD culture is evolving this positive discernment theorem. As I have said perhaps too often, if we look at Positive Deviance, Appreciate Inquiry, Nonviolent Communication, and Dynamic Facilitation as each establishing a mutual discernment event culture that is the opposite of Cognitive Dissonance Theory [we tend to not hear well what does not fit with our current learned landscape; on the other hand we tend to learn quickly from what we all agree we don’t want], perhaps this is our Positive Confluence Theorem:

We hear very well, and revolutionarily embrace, what does fit most abundantly with all of our current learned landscapes. When we mutually acknowledge that we each do trust that we live in a positive-trending teleological economy and ecology. when that is our mutual intent and practice, then we not only comprehend, but incarnate and mentor, this Positive Confluence Theorem.

This Positive Teleological Theorem predicts that we will, globally, increase our investment in cooperative economies and pedagogy and design systems as three faces of one cooperative ecology.  As we do so, our current over-reliance on competitive strategies for learning, making a living together, building a polyculture together, will fade away into our collective memory of “back in the pre-millennial day.”

 

Standard
Uncategorized

Positive Confluence Theorem for Optimizing Community Value Discernment

My work for the past couple of decades has veered away from group facilitation and detoured toward corporate grant and contract proposal writing, but I am struck by parallels between optimized proposal communication and community-building for wise discernment. Whether writing to public officials about policies and budgets, or to private sector philanthropists, the most effective way to open the doors of mutual communication are to show your constituency first that you understand, and share, our optimized outcome framework. If I start off advocating for a program, or a process, or a policy, or for money, then I am another “special interest lobbyist.” Not an effective way to start.
My still emerging theory about this dynamic is drawn from Positive Psychology and from Communication Theory.  Perhaps you are familiar with the Cognitive Dissonance Theorem: we tend to cognitively deflect messages that are dissonant to our salient gestalt. We just don’t build an iterative communication string off from messages that do not integrate with our existing gestalt very often. If we do start off dissonant and it works out, it is probably because of the appositional Positive Confluence Theorem [which doesn’t actually exist, except perhaps in Group Theory of Metric Structure–kind of a theoretical math thing] that we tend to consonantly resonate with messages that are intuitively synergetic with our Whole System value-gestalt. In Game Theory, this would be articulating the optimal and most inclusive Win-Win outcome accessible through compassionate, or appreciative, inquiry.
When the proposer of a choice-making process begins with where we most inclusively desire to Win-Win together, at the end of our rhetorical event [again, Communication Theory], then this establishes a broad, intentionally inclusive of both positive and negative deviance, framework. When the facilitator takes the additional step of proposing a rhetorical culture that values deviant inclusiveness and personal integrity, then this Win-Win Boundary Window begins to fill with the flow of a creative deep listening ecology. Individual monocultures in the room, or in the network, trend toward mutually nutrient-refining polycultures. We might think of this as the Permaculture Design’s Theory of Evolution. This requires design technology for iterative feedback loops that are accessible over time as  inclusively malleable communication strings. Positive-trending communication strings build communities of sustainable and inclusive discernment.
The theoretical limitation on Win-Win positive teleological culture-building, in anticipation of actually having the people in the room, or hooked up to each other on-line, is that procedural and normative values for mutual-flexibility [what Eastern cultures refer to as gratitude, and/or “namaste”] optimize when balanced with the value of personal integrity. We do not have an inclusive Win-Win positive framework for imagining long-term sustainable outcomes if we expect anyone to surrender integrity on behalf of flexibility, or flexibility on behalf of others’ integrity.
That last part, explicitly establishing a discernment culture that, in a sense, norms redemptive flexibility on behalf of others’ integrity typically, in Western cultures, falls prey to Cognitive Dissonance. We immediately get it that valuing mutual flexibility should not compromise personal integrity; we are fuzzier, with the possible exception of a feminist perspective, about the problem of valuing mutual integrity that compromises flexibility. If I yield to the Others’ need for personal integrity to the point that my flexibility is broken, then I have caved, lost. Flexibility will not tolerate the absence of mutual integrity, of establishing a relationship where we believe we have given at least as well as we have taken, and vice versa. The solution to both boundary issues may be to build an explicit discernment culture that holds the values of integrity-passion and flexibility-mindfulness in dynamic (diapraxis?) balance. This balance may be charted (I have not actually tried this), borrowing from Dynamic Facilitation, as a central vertical axis on each of four sheets:
Notice Concerns: how we are v. how we are not [shown appositionally on each side of the binary information axis]
Problems of Hope: what we think about v. what we don’t think about
Faithful ReSolutions: what we coincidentally say/create/design v. what we don’t say/create/design
Regenerative Data Harvest: what we have done v. what we have not done
The left side (bicameral-normative) is the Polynomial side; while the right side is the Non-Polynomial, or Reverse-Polynomial side, again, in information systems theory. The left side also emphasizes our collective integrity, while the right side emphasizes our collective flexibility to imagine what we might be together, but is not yet. In Taoism, the left side is the rhetorical event’s Yang trajectory, and the right side is this rhetorical event’s emergent Yin-balancing trajectory.
This emergent Positive Confluence Theorem predicts that when everyone can find themselves and each other within this holistically inclusive Win-Win Frame, we collectively begin noticing that the (0) Axials predict the most inclusively sustainable balance of both integrity and flexibility.

 

Standard