Tags: lr


the challenge

Given the choice between using a multispan purely orange closed system or a depthspecific purely orange open system, what you do?

My research will answer this.

(no subject)

There is this part of me that suffers so much, not where it hurts my well being, but more on my own failings to explain clearly why certain emerging creations make my skin crawl.

Technical and social issues are inseparable, you cannot address the technical without it affecting the social. You cannot separate them completely. If you create a technological system and expect or assume certain behaviors, you are naive, and you have failed to accomplish what you set out to do. I have seen this happen over and over and over again. If you create technology at large limitless scales (span), and expect all that intimate small groups will have meaningful collaboration (depth), you are again kidding yourself.

You cannot program social issues.

collective holons

Holons which collect together pull the overall development of all holons within the collective up to where the 'norm' is. The collective aspect of holons seem to be intrinsic to the evolutionary drive, it is a determinant of the directionality of evolution itself. If we say that the dominant (or prevailing) level of development is at blue/orange capacity, we know we can expect more and more young kids to hit worldcentric earlier than ever, given what they are growing up in and surrounded by.

If we create or allow for the emergence of integral in the collective, and let that grow it would eventually become bigger than what is dominant now, and actually 'pull' the world into integral. ['grabs you by the neck and pulls you to that level' KW in KC.] So it is also possible to encourage the growth of holons in levels beyond integral (including non-dual).

The idea that there will always be LESS people at higher stages is not absolutely true because in humans these stages are transitional, in the long term no particular age group is ever stuck at one level for very long. This does not conflict with the tenets either.

But this does mean that both 'movement' (or evolutionary drive) and the development of holons must go hand in hand; they occur simultaneously. So if we desire to see I-I and/or integral succeed, (i.e. we want movement) then the holons collectively need to be given room to grow.

Now these hubs (vs. nodes), they are not higher as I was postulating before but they have something 'extra' that makes them with the cohesiveness of a collection of holons. In our MARKETING, I'd say we must aim to find catalysts of all kinds for the development of a holon in social dimensions (or collective holons), whether they be specific individuals of higher development, tools, processes, artifacts or even systems (such as II as a business). (Is INaked an artifact, and IU a tool?)

found this interesting too:
CI - community approach to defining it