The Art of Being Useless

The Art of Being Useless, just googled that, and it does not come up! Let me add “George Sweet”… It does come up: here is a reference. I got the manme wrong. The Advantage of Being Useless.

I wanted to write about the art of being useless. (I should write a companion piece for my art blog.)

~

I want to simply reflect (after that prelude) on these words (in no particular order):

Contained

Restrained

Constrained

Receptive

Passive

Silent

Attentive

Absorbed

Engrossed

Reflective

Mindful

Conscious

Alert

Present

Centered

Wait

Watch

Wonder

Patient

Psyberspace

The psyche, like love is not to be defined. We know a few things about it & even that is presumptuous. There is no science of soul, or love.

So poetry is one way to speak about these things.

To see the world in a grain of sand, and to see heaven in a wild flower, hold infinity in the palm of your hands, and eternity in an hour.

This passage from Blake touches on my central experience of psyche. I have often quoted it.

Little Picture <-> Big picture

This is on my mind as I reflect on the parallel process in groups and is supervision in psychotherapy. Patterns repeat within the sessions, and within the psyche. In groups we all learn as one person explores a story in depth. We learn as that story relates to our own srories and we move beyond content to process. Once the process is understood then it is as if we tune in with a law of human nature. (I shle bring in an example but they are hard to describe. I have on in my paper: The Future of Knowing. Also in my Psychodrama thesis The group and the Protagonist.

This phenomena must have been at the heart of astrology. As above so below… yet (for all the value astrology may have) this is not credible to me in the way parallel process is, which is simply experienced, known, self evident.

Plato also saw the connection between the psyche and the larger picture, he related it to our knowledge of social justice.

The Isomorphism Between Social and Psychic Justice
… to construct the definition of psychic justice, he relics on (1) the full definition of social justice he constructed earlier, and the unusual idea that (2) a just city and a just man do not differ at all with respect to justice.

Gerasimos Xenophon Santas Goodness and justice: Plato, Aristotle, and the moderns

Plato makes all sorts of strange arguments based on isoprphy, however the phrase “a just city and a just man do not differ at all with respect to justice.” with respect to process rings true. Almost tautologically. Justice is an abstract idea that know no holon so to speak.

All this is of interest after watching Tom Atlee on a TED talk.
Tom Atlee, the author of “The Tao of Democracy,” gave a TEDx talk in Warwick in England on “Collective Intelligence in a Time of Global Crisis.”

The small group process is seen as a better representation of the peoples will than individual expressions of opinion. This is central to decision making about such things as climate change etc.

It becomes interesting when we see the holons line up:

Individual psyche <-> dialogue <-> Group Process <-> social justice

Understanding & making a shift in any one of these can impact the others. None of it is mystical or automatic. Some ways of working with process are better than others. Facilitation of process is essential.

This image from the N.Y. Times is to the point.

image

My Activity Stream

I am moving around in the social network space like a sleeper tossing & turning in bed trying to get comfy.

Managed to get my Tweets off Facebook so I now have a sense of belonging to Facebook, some dear friends and family are there. Twitter is more remote but I follow a buch of great people, they mediate my news.

But for anyone, me included, who wants to see everything I do online it can be seen here in Friendfeed

It is cool, just searched on Friendfeed: from:walterlogeman librarything and saw a bit of history.

Can I publish all that data somewhere where it belongs to me?

Relations of the means of community

Takeover

Facebook just bought FriendFeed. The ensuing discussions have been fascinating, they raise the question:

Who owns your words?
There has been a fear that our personal writing, intimately connected to us, will be lost, deleted, stolen. It has happened before! E-minds, is one example, and there must be many more. The cry is Backup! OK. I have just set up this blog to make a weekly digest of my Tweets and the @replys. Good idea. Thanks to Twitter Tools. However it is not enough.

Who owns your relationships?

FriendFeed is a community, there is an invasion, a takeover. We can escape with some of our goods, but we have lost our land, and the community. (I am reporting what I hear, and sense though I have only been a member for a few days.)

“A platform is not a community, it is the people.” He tangata, he tangata, he tangata.

Yes and no. People are splitting off from FriendFeed, to identica, to Facebook to streamy.com, some are staying. There is a turmoil and a community is in stress. And the people were alienated from the decision. By joining a proprietary community we know this can happen, but no one involved the community members. The real value of FriendFeed is the people, but they were simply sold as part of the property.  The relations of of the means of community are not reflected in the relations of the community.

If this jargon is not familiar, read the Communist Manifesto on the relations of production (or look here) and the relations on the means of production. Production is social, ownership is private in capitalism.

We are seeing the virtual microcosm playing out the capitalism of the macrocosm.

And of course, the FB / FF takeover has raised these questions and the responses. Dave Winer is particularly warmed up to the issue, leading two important threads.

One is Your Blog Loves You. We can trust a blog because we own it, and not only that, it can’t be sold, so I can trust your blog as well. (well mostly), I can certainly trust the blogosphere as a whole to persist.

 

Is this a retreat into individualism & denial of community? Not really. The communal space is then the larger blogosphere, with its clustering, and overlapping communities. Bazaars not a cathederal.

The other Dave Winer initiative is: we’ll build one we own!
Permalink
Align the interests of: 1. Users and 2. Investors.
How to do that?
Well, they need to be the same people.

Align the interests of: 1. Users and 2. Investors. How to do that?  Well they need to be the same people.

I like the idea, but have misgivings! I’d like to follow up research on online community and the relations of ownership. I will have a look again at Virtual Communities on my bookshelf. Or maybe the current discussion, if you move among the bazaars will do the trick. (See Doc Searls response for example.)

Tom Atlee has just written an excellent item on Town Hall Meetings, notice how important the framework is and how it determines the outcome. Even the simple idea of breaking up into Topic Tables would have a huge impact.

It might pay to start with Engles and his book on Utopias, here is the chapter on Utopian Socialism. I say this because I read it in 1974, after investing 5 years of my life creating and participating in a physical community that was owned by its members. I wish id read it before I embarked on the project!

In conclusion…

Where I am at? The container for dialogue, for community, matters. No one structure or method is best. What suits the purpose.

Uncle Ho



Uncle Ho, originally uploaded by Waltzzz.

Brian got this for me in Vietnam.

Hand written caption came with it

Great Uncle Ho – The person found and training the party, long live in our career.

I get it & it makes sense!

On the evolution of science.

I have just listened to a spectacular podcast. From 2006 – I missed it till I changed my system of managing podcasts – giving in to the iTunes default way.

Kevin Kelly – The Next 100 Years of Science: Long-term Trends in the Scientific Method.

Download: iTunesDirect download

The textual summary is here:

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/kelly06/kelly06_index.html

I continue to discuss the podcast and relate themes to my own writing.

Continue reading “On the evolution of science.”

The Call to Play

I have been assisting some people to connect online, and to participate in online groups. blog. This is a post for people who are computer shy. “Not technical”. Hate computers. Feel stupid around computers. Wish we were back with no email, and vinyl disks.

Perhaps one of the reasons kids can do this more easily than older people is that they play. If you want to paint you need to finger paint, mix colours, try texture, play with what you have. One pencil and some paper is enough.

I was older but got into computers through play on a ZX81 (my father’s gift to his grandson). Later when the phone got involved the main play was a game of connect. Like having two tin cans and string.
Before you can use this medium in a creative way… play. Play till you know what ctrl a and ctrl b and ctrl c, v, x, z, n, u, can do! (Are there any more of those?)

Who reads manuals? Occasionally maybe, but mostly I play. I might try every item on the menu to see what it does. I look for a buddy who likes to play and send tests, I fire a question into Google rather than look at a manual, then there is a chance of some serendipity, a conversation.

One step leads to the next, but too often people want to miss the play step, and go straight to the work step. Then it becomes painful.

Even if you are scared of it… hate it, you can play. Think of a child hiding behind their mother’s skirts when there is something scary… they still peep out, they look. Then they might take a step. And children play together.

A computer course might help… but it is often that something will work when you are taught on another computer & then at home you can download the right software. Pain! Passwords don’t work! Pain. How much of that sort of pain do you need before you quit?

It is all about levels. Like levels in a computer game. Level 1. Switch it on. Level 2. Get connected. Level 3, do something you want to do. Those levels might involve quite a bit of play! Phone call play. Finding a buddy play. Trial & error play. Playing with the crap that comes up on a new laptop. Deleting it. Where are things stored? Installing Google Desktop so you can find things, setting up the virus checker. If all that stuff is tedious… boring scary… how can you play? If it is a series of levels to get through… maybe it is fun.

It is fun for me, and for many people I know, and almost the opposite for others. Is it a gene?

I had the extra incentive that there was a spell checker on my Commodore64, it liberated me from dyslexia. That was a strong incentive to play. Another thing is that I find the net, the cyberworld, where ideas live, alluring. Before the net I was a reader, and I am still. A hyper-reader, I learn about the next book from the one I am currently reading, links. Always hungry for the next book. A craving to be on the edge of the known & the unknown.

Here is one idea… don’t try to achieve anything at all. Look at this thing in front of you; not this post, not your computer, but this window into worlds unchartered. What is alluring? Nothing… Ok, try again, don’t pay attention to the fears, the doubts the, critique… focus on what is alluring… can you hear the call at all?

P.S. the image above was the result of five minutes play in ArtRage 2. I am called to that!