Tag Archives: facilitation

Uncategorized

Who Are You?

In the Work That Reconnects,
we have a dialogue exercise
in which Person A asks Person B
“Who are you?”
several times over a few minutes,
as it feels right to reprime this exploratory pump;
then person B does the same for person A.

The person hosting, facilitating, enabling
this reiterative question’s redundant possibilities
is merely an echo-present listener,
noticing diversity within these multiple responses,
without judging good, bad, ugly, or even indifferent,
quietly hearing rhythms of longing for love
between the crippling cracks of anger and fear,
compelling and compiling self with other hatred,
pathology.

The question,
Do all these diverse self-descriptions truly fit
this same love v. anger-fear polyculturing-multisystemic elephant?
does not usually arise.
Rather,
we accept all these scrabbling voices
and hats
and feelings
and ideas
and beliefs
co-occurring within one bilateral
positive-health v. negative-pathology mindbody ecosystem,
seeking diastatic fullness
richness,
poly-empathic
polymorphic communication,
design, development, investment,
and cooperative-integrative implementation outcomes,
at the end of this elephant’s rhetorical day,
if not sooner.

Why is this not always the case
when we ask our friends and families,
our public sector leaders
and financial sector investors,
“Who do you hope we are becoming?”

What loves are we preparing to invest in
and which past angers and future fears to divest of?

What indicators can I give
that I already invest in cooperatively regenerate health
agendas,
platforms,
designs and intentions,
co-mentoring therapeutic diapraxis
of which I preach so positively to others?

I know you support restoring regenerative health to our soil
and preserving clean water,
as I do.
So does it bother you,
as it does me,
that we still contaminate our water with poo and pee
instead of investing in nutrition-starved soil,
where both could be positive resources
countering past neglect and abuse,
rather than doubly-negative pathology?

We say we support cooperatively vibrant and healthy local economies
and empowering political vitality,
so does it bother you,
as it does me,
to so often hear “either-or” deductive reductivism
and wonder why not first cooperatively consider “both-and?”

I appreciate what you just said
and I wonder if adding X might make your idea
even better.
Do you agree,
or maybe you see concerns for yourself and others
new to me,
of which we might learn together?

Could a cooperative election or social change campaign
begin with compiling interdependent hopes and wishes
and loves of Who Are You?
thereby more smoothly avoiding stuckness-traps
of fear and anger and dissonant pathological outcomes.

Could investing both-and cooperative communication norms
better lead toward co-investing in healthy wealth,
politically strong-embraced policies,
procedural and dialogical transparency,
polyculturally inclusive design and development and discernment
of poli-eco-logical therapy
v. multi-morphic pathology;
co-arise local through global health outcome networks,
diastatic eco-normativity,
embracing each and every sacred Person A and B response
to Who are we?

 

For an interesting response, please also see, “Who I Am”, written by my son, Spencer Cole Dillenbeck

Standard
Uncategorized

Dia-Language as Orthopraxis

What are some differences between casual conversation and more discernment-intended dialogue?

Dialogue may be rooted in diapraxis, in turn regeneratively learned through the primal orthopraxis of verbal patterns and rhythms, forms with functions and “right”-pitched frequencies.

Discussion and discernment seem difficult through merely written language symbols, iconic logos, because these words and their patterns emerged from our more richly “meme” composted praxis, practice, incarnation, being and becoming, both our Right and Left hemispheres are diapraxis progenitive.

Spatial and temporal delivered “story-telling” information contextualizes both the purpose of language as objective-nomial symbol-content but also emerges, evolves our shared context of intuited choice intention as verbal, verbed, active, action-becoming communication and information for us within this specific rhetorical context. Word choice, pitch frequencies, rhythm, pattern and flow, alliterative intention, metaphors of action and verb choice each contribute allegorical, analogical Information to our emergent positivist dynamic of language-stringing within this moment’s eco-logic; eco-logos lying both positively intended and enthymematically within dialogue’s continuing invitational potential.

Orthopraxis, as a regenerative replacement for facilitated discernment, derives from “orthopsychiatry,” prophylactic psychiatry concerned especially with incipient mental and behavioral disorders (Webster’s Collegiate). Diapraxis is an emergent culture of communication and information-gathering skill-sets with roots in multisystemic and integral therapy, skilled Dynamic Facilitators able to reflect and summarize ecological language patterns, Positive Deviance therapists, EcoMinisters and EcoTherapists.

Orthopraxis is an ecological and permacultural frame for fusing Right-hemispheric intuitive temporal orthodoxy with Left-hemispheric deductive, reflective, and octavely-patterned sensory  intent and practice. Diapraxis reiteratively and redundantly informs through what we do and do not do, in dialogue with what we say and do not say; a primal fractal frame for collectively imaging our emergent orthopraxis.

This communication and information-systemic transition from focused dialogue, expanding toward focused and disciplined diapraxis may culturally synergize with older, more religious philosophical paradigms and memes like “compassionate mindfulness” and “love.”

Buckminster Fuller understood and intended the dynamics and geometrics of “love” as analogically and ecologically equivalent to double-bound appositional flow of time-mutual awareness; synergy is dia-ergetic, mutually positively grateful and gravitational. Fuller’s synergy may be to Basic Positive Attendance as his comprehension is to compassionate mindfulness.

Standard
Uncategorized

Facilitating ReGenesis

To facilitate perfect justice,

mutually mentor optimizing sustained life,

environmental and economic,

political and cultural.

 

This synergetic combination of mercy and justice

internalizes the decisive process and rhetorical event

as wise for everyone,

all parties, variables, memes, paradigms, polynomials, persons,

all deviance, dissonance, and insanity,

all irrationality and suffering,

all our difficulties and messes.

 

Replace this commodity of clients

with communal EarthTribe solidarity.

 

Earth is our Teacher, but more holistically, Earth is our just Mentor. As we adjust, align, and learn Her incarnation, learning to live in gratitude through each of Her seasons, we become wise icons, shamans, of Her scripture, Her messages, Her root systems, Her implicated, predicated, predictive, positive information.

The Tao, or Tree, of Life, is iconic of, by, and for our EarthTribe. Her binomiality, her bi-generative development, Yang out and up branch and leaf production, Yin in and down taprooting precessive Implicating Systemic Order, symbiotically perpetuate and define our 4-dimensional (0)-sum economy and ecology of cooperative regeneration.

As we become a species of ambidextrous facilitators, drawing from the full polycultured compost of human experience, content, formation, we emergently understand our Messiah as our Natural System Teachers and Mentors. We actively hope to comprehend messianism as iconic of human naturalism. We are all mutually, equally, subsidiary fractal subsets of Earth’s spacetime comprehension, compassionate mutually gravitationally grabbing toward each Other’s confluent, contenting, heart. We both long for and belong to one diverse but essentially interdependent EarthTribe, learning our way toward designing a fully cooperative ecologic, within which our value transactions participate in a profoundly intentional cooperative economy.

The Great Turning is our reweaving work that connects through cooperative system design facilitation, replacing the hubris of quasi-independent, self-defensive intentions and practice. We are reconvening our global capacity to function as one EarthTribe. These are our Councils of Shamanic Natural Wisdom. Essential to this transitional opportunity is understanding this era as a bridge toward our collective gratitude for winter’s purgative season. Boundaries, margins, poverty, exclusion, silence, gaps, despair, decay, dissonance, pain, sorrow, suffering, decomposition, fermentation, complexity, chaos, bridges, advent are all symbols of winter’s purgative season, weaving our eisegetical string conjectures into one geometric/biometric eternally double-helixed, rhythmically beating, Left to Right to Left again, pumping each vascular step into our harmonic string theorem. What Non-Polynomial Time unravels, Polynomial information reweaves within both memory of evolution’s past and imagination, creation, design, planning of our paradise future.

Cooling Earth’s climate requires deeper collective and cooperative roots of mindful compassion, diversely stretching toward globally active peace and love. The Western empty cross liminally defines our revolving fractally dimensioned dynamic frequencies and creative structures of Eastern Yang and Yin’s primal relationship,(0)-centric balanced, together outlining our Eternal Moment’s Tao of regenerative life. The First Principle of Physics becomes Open Polysystemic Balance.

All information, all content, all natural systems, are binomially defined as Polynomial-Self = Not-Polynomial-Other, so that P = NP, in reversed, or negative, perspective, like the above-ground tree’s functional and formative relationship to the below-ground root system, both predicated fractally within Tao’s Original Intent seed.

Knowing what we don’t want, pain and suffering and suicide, teaches us what we do want. Just as knowing what we do want includes implications, predictions, about what we do not want to continue perpetuating.

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