Lion's recent activity re: Storycology, ...

6 views

Skip to first unread message

Lion Kimbro

unread,

Jul 18, 2007, 4:04:18 PM7/18/07

to storyfield

I've recently written a "future history" style story
on CommunityWiki:

http://www.communitywiki.org/en/ReportingForOutsiders
(near the bottom)

It starts with:

In 2007, MattisManzel, LionKimbro, and ChristopheDucamp of
CommunityWiki, MeatballWiki, and CraoWiki started "The 4 Communities
Digest." LionKimbro wrote 1-2 paragraphs a month about what people in
CommunityWiki were talking about, and Lion wrote 1-2 paragraphs a
month about what people in MeatballWiki were talking about.
ChristopheDucamp wrote 1-2 paragraphs about what people were talking
about in CraoWiki. MattisManzel wrote up 1-2 paragraphs about what was
going on in S-23. ChristopheDucamp then translated the text to French.
Initially, they just kept the digest on a page in CommunityWiki, and
then migrated it to an OddWiki, as things matured.

...

I've been fleshing out a lot of thoughts about StoryCology &
techniques on 3x5 cards, and been presenting the idea of StoryCology
to everyone who shows a shred of interest, in order to work out the
kinks in my explanations, and figure out what it is that's really
compelling me about the idea and so on.

Larry, I've been reading your papers from 2020 on education and the
online and so on; Lots to say, not enough time to say it.

I'd like to talk with you about my own daughter's schooling, at the
Clearwater School. :)
http://www.clearwaterschool.com/
...and our "Sudbury school for adults,"
http://lion.taoriver.net/?p=83

Take care,
Lion =^_^=

Larry Victor

unread,

Jul 20, 2007, 3:36:14 PM7/20/07

to story...@googlegroups.com, Lion Kimbro

Lion, I WILL NOT LEAVE THIS SEAT UNTIL I HAVE SENT YOU THIS MESSAGE.

I have been blocked for three days in replying. This often happens when I make a contact I really want to share and open up with and become tongue-tied in desiring to say too much in too short a time. I see that you share this problem in "Lots to say, not enough time to say it." However, today this blocks most of my writing; I haven't finished a few sentences when a few other topics appear in mind that must be linked. Hypertext is part of the solution, with the Wiki process. But, then it is difficult to send a web composition. Finally, one must also learn to enjoy reading hypertext - which really requires reading off the monitor. Most people still print off and read long material.

But, the issue is bigger. My mind/world has become networked, but my tiny low broadband consciousness is grossly inadequate. I often become paralyzed in "what to do next" states - which are emotionally disturbing. Friends give me suggestions (all of which I have already tried) and I have so many TODO systems, which DO keep me on track with basic essentials. I use an old PIM called ECCO, where I keep my schedule and update it every day as I do things - I have over 15 years of my life's actions recorded down to the 15 minute interval - even color coded. But I seldom look back, and ECCO does not easily permit a statistical analysis. I used the old outliner program GrandView for this before ECCO. I schedule all the MUST do items of daily living, and even bright red EXERCISE or bright green COMPOSE to appear daily on my schedule.

The big issue is how we might begin to communicate, dialog, and share about our personal minds confronted with the awesome complexity of our situation, the feeling awareness of contemporary suffering and what is to come - along with the realization that there are ways to turn this all around, but we - ALONE - cannot do it, and collaborating effectively requires more personal change than most people are willing to do. My personal case is that I am totally open to give myself full time to collaborative efforts - but find myself psychologically blocked. What about the many others who don't yet see how it might be possible?

In my decades of attempts to share and collaborate I have discovered the vast diversity of human cognitive competencies. This is needed if humanity is to be more complex than a sponge. This diversity goes well beyond those of language, gender, culture, and age. If we can fine tune facilitated learning to this diversity we will have a truly "magical" educational process.

Speaking of education. (the following was pasted from OneNote). How old is your daughter? I would be happy to dialog with you about the school and your daughter's education.

Lion, I surfed about the schools you asked me to look at. I should take a deeper look.

I guess that it would rate in the top 1%, even better of comparable schools.

But that doesn't mean it is what we need; it is quality in what it is attempting, but it's goals may be severely limited. There are a number of basics about education that need to change before any other changes will have any impact. See: http://ourworld.cs.com/larryvictor137/edu_web/paper.htm

for the minimum needed.

We moved our daughter (now 39) to many experimental schools, searching for the best available. She did well in some and not so well in others. At the time I became well informed about the Montessori process and knew some Montesorri "teachers". Many had open choice for students but inadequate staff and concept to assist young learners to chose. My daughter preferred to be outside with the animals all day - in 5th grade. Where she could have done 2 projects/week she completed only 3 in the whole year. AND, the school forbid us to interfere - they were Adlerians and the school was Futurist oriented. As faculty of a community college and recognizing that my 9th grade daughter was above average of my college freshmen - and that the 9th grade program in public school she was to be forced to take - I facilitated her (with a few friends) taking the 9th grade in college as freshmen. It was not a success; although the girls were in appearance as mature as the college girls, and had the capacity to learn, and prior had exhibited no ageism - they couldn't let themselves emotionally be assertive. My daughter finished 10-12 in the best private day school in Tucson (Greenfields Country Day School - where she had also done grades 2 -4, but the school then eliminated the young program so she had to go elsewhere).

They all had great objectives and philosophies. Each person learns differently and what they learn greatly depends on the nature of the materials and environment. There is much more involved than having a safe and fun setting, with friendly, talented teachers and good learning materials. The tuning of these variables to each learner at every moment can make differences of many orders of magnitude. The primary workforce in such a system can only be the learners (themselves) using the system - not just in doing the best in their own learning, but being full (prepared) participants in the design, implementation and maintenance of the whole system. In 1978 I called this LEARNERS FOR QUALITY EDUCATION or LQE.

My two grandsons, recently turned 17 & 18, did up and down. Honor roll one semester, many failures the next. After experimenting with different options they both dropped out. Before doing so they passed the Arizonia AIMS test - high scores and without studying. This test is being criticized as being far to difficult. They both have completed, again without great study, their GEDs. Both are planning to get more learning. This summer they are remaking the house I own, and learning a lot. But, I am concerned about their future.

I don't feel that computers have yet significantly improved education - but it may have improved the learning of many youth. So long a online education follows the classroom/course paradigm it will fail. In my 23 years at Pima Community College I witnessed it decline in real performance for learners but massively increase in image with the community. Graduation highlighted their successes. But no one wanted to hear of the great many whose future education was damaged by abusive experience at Pima College - due to mechanistic administrative processes and many incompetent instructors. I was quite a thorn in their sides. A few years before leaving I ran for Chancellor, as a means to share my viewpoint. http://ourworld.cs.com/larryvictor137/edu_web/chanapp.htm Not only was I not successful in becoming Chancellor (which I didn't want), but I was unable to budge even the most competent faculty to share my view. The paper linked above, on LQE to The Learning Paradigm conference was ignored at this conference which was populated by the most active educators. THE PROBLEM: we don't know how to create quality education - and our first task is to design an educational system for ourselves, improve it, and invite others to join. This is my Learners for Quality Education (LQE) model. Anyone who claims they know what to do to significantly improve education is in need of significant re-education, themselves. I know some of the questions we need to be asking - I don't have the answers. Yet, the vitality of ALL OTHER movements for change hinge on changing and learning - and ALL employ the same outmoded educational models.

Lion, I have probably written more than one can comfortably read at one sitting, if one thinks about what one reads.

I expect (from experience) that most members of the conference aren't interested in pre-conference dialog. A sad state, but understandable. For decades I have been writing about the need for conferences that only those who interact online can attend the f2f sessions. This is also one model for education. The last one and only one tried was in 1987 at the Baylor Medical Center in Texas for the First International Informatics Conference - where I attended as a session reporter (with a lunchpail computer - early laptop). After each session we ran our disks to a central station where they were put online and printed up for attendess of other sessions. It failed because the planners didn't leave enough time between realtime sessions.

I am now running interference with my big male cat, Tucker, who prefers to lounge on his back between my keyboard and monitor.

I read your Future History on digests. This leads to a whole range of other activities that people need to be open doing if they want a really functional and relevant communication system. We need fine grained feedback from participants, that once learned will be relatively non-intrusive - but a system that at first level processes the feedback into forms useful for humans. This will be backed up by detailed profiles of the cognitive styles of users, some gained via questionnaire type probes, others from feedback and tracked performance - a transparency that we must learn to trust; and that is difficult in this dominator world.

What we need to know re The Story Field Conf is what the other members know about the blogs and the listserv.

I recently discovered that a blog post I thought had taken, but hadn't - why? It is on swarming as a Story Field theme. I see it is still there.

Lion, I am pleased that you have taken the time to read some of my writings. I don't write for the general reader, partly because I lack mental imagery, but also because I believe that we need multiple versions of key presentations for different cognitive styles. Thus, re-writing and mediating must be a major task category for a viable humanity.

Enough for now, Larry

Lion Kimbro

unread,

Jul 20, 2007, 4:29:22 PM7/20/07

to story...@googlegroups.com

I don't have time to reply to everything right now, but I have time now
to respond to a few things.

On 7/20/07, Larry Victor <larry...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Hypertext is
> part of the solution, with the Wiki process. But, then it is difficult to
> send a web composition. Finally, one must also learn to enjoy reading
> hypertext - which really requires reading off the monitor. Most people still
> print off and read long material.

Erh... Well, ...

One thing to do, is just communicate with people in a wiki.

I was working on a project called "Local Names," for a while;
I strongly believe that Wiki-like LinkLanguage needs to be able to be
used pretty much in every medium. People invent words, or find words,
and then use them elsewhere.

Right now, right here, I have to manually link you to:
http://communitywiki.org/en/LinkLanguage
http://communitywiki.org/en/LocalNames

Reading hypertext is more like reading a map,
("What ways can I get from Seattle to Los Angeles?")
...than like reading an essay.

> But, the issue is bigger. My mind/world has become networked, but my tiny
> low broadband consciousness is grossly inadequate. I often become paralyzed
> in "what to do next" states - which are emotionally disturbing. Friends give
> me suggestions (all of which I have already tried) and I have so many TODO
> systems, which DO keep me on track with basic essentials.

On CommunityWiki, our evolving consensus is that visual summarization,
more intelligent display of positions, arguments, ideas, and so on, is what
is necessary to see these networks and make intuitive sense of them.

To-do systems are crazy, though, and I now see them as living things
with micro-lives and deaths of their own.

> I use an old PIM
> called ECCO, where I keep my schedule and update it every day as I do things
> - I have over 15 years of my life's actions recorded down to the 15 minute
> interval - even color coded. But I seldom look back, and ECCO does not
> easily permit a statistical analysis.

Larry Victor

unread,

Jul 20, 2007, 8:21:48 PM7/20/07

to story...@googlegroups.com

I'll get to replying to this very interesting page, today while it is fresh. I have skimmed and read all of your links.
I get the sensation of zooming down into an infinitely nested fractal diagram realizing all the pages that are being missed.
I'm not sure that many from the Story Field Conf would be open to following our dialog; and might be turned off if they come in.

Lion Kimbro wrote:

  I don't have time to reply to everything right now, but I have time now
  to respond to a few things.


On 7/20/07, Larry Victor <larry...@comcast.net> wrote:

Hypertext is
part of the solution, with the Wiki process. But, then it is difficult to
send a web composition. Finally, one must also learn to enjoy reading
hypertext - which really requires reading off the monitor. Most people still
print off and read long material.

  Erh...  Well, ...

  One thing to do, is just communicate with people in a wiki.

  I was working on a project called "Local Names," for a while;
  I strongly believe that Wiki-like LinkLanguage needs to be able to be
  used pretty much in every medium.  People invent words, or find words,
  and then use them elsewhere.

  Right now, right here, I have to manually link you to:
    http://communitywiki.org/en/LinkLanguage
    http://communitywiki.org/en/LocalNames

  Reading hypertext is more like reading a map,
  ("What ways can I get from Seattle to Los Angeles?")
  ...than like reading an essay.

I like the thinking around LinkLanguage and LocalNames, and your later mention of graphics that can help relationships become easier to comprehend.
What concerns me is how ideosyncratic these systems quickly become. I find the cyberspace of relevance a forest of towers of babel - interesting and important dialog within each tower, but the effort to join is enormous. I foresee a need to have systems that encourage unique explorations, explicit systems to mediate between them, and a general system to which everyone is prepared to use, an elaborated version of Wikipedia - but where dialog and decisions can also be made. Elaboration on this would take me deep into my developing ideas of worlds, semiotic structures, and the fundamental reality of text. http://ourworld.cs.com/larryvictor137/RelDocs/isss94af.htm

One feature I would like with Wiki and Hypertext is to have multiple windows, maybe even thumbnails or icons to represent pages. There was an old DOS program, I think called Tornado, that created as many windows as one wanted - but didn't indicate relationships. PersonalBrain.com gives some network structure, as did Trellix.

I would also like a system with multiple types of links. One a glossary link (specific to the text), explications, queries, background, etc. Something about the button, like color could indicate the type. And a simple table (or voice command) could select the type for insert. I want the ability to insert a link at any point in the playing of a video sequence, and to view (on the slider) where other links have been made; with a way to filter what types of links I want to see.

 But, the issue is bigger. My mind/world has become networked, but my tiny
low broadband consciousness is grossly inadequate. I often become paralyzed
in "what to do next" states - which are emotionally disturbing. Friends give
me suggestions (all of which I have already tried) and I have so many TODO
systems, which DO keep me on track with basic essentials.

  On CommunityWiki, our evolving consensus is that visual summarization,
  more intelligent display of positions, arguments, ideas, and so on, is what
  is necessary to see these networks and make intuitive sense of them.

I agree, visualization will help a LOT and we can go a long way with animated visuals.. However, there are complex systems with multiple changing dimensions that 2D or 3D visuals won't help much. It is interesting that the whole mind/brain can sometimes work with such complexity - it just can't get into simple consciousness. Yet, there may be ways we can compensate in collaboration. The newly discovered plasticity of the brain implies that we might be able to set up situations that open the gate to higher level comprehension. An analogy: consider those 2D detailed patterns that if you relax you eyes a 3D image emerges. We might have a similar higher level mental ability to relax with a system of icons for complex ideas and new patterns may emerge - probably only in the unconscious and we would only gets bits and pieces in consciousness, which we would have to work with. But, this is beyond our time.

  To-do systems are crazy, though, and I now see them as living things
  with micro-lives and deaths of their own.

I use an old PIM
called ECCO, where I keep my schedule and update it every day as I do things
- I have over 15 years of my life's actions recorded down to the 15 minute
interval - even color coded. But I seldom look back, and ECCO does not
easily permit a statistical analysis.

  You might be interested in seeing:

  http://lion.taoriver.net/wp-content/Lion1200.png

  I also make / keep tracks for individual years, but below that, and it
  ceases to be referenced / enlightening.

Very interesting - a great way of display. It also tells me a little about you. My computer didn't give me much zoom facility. I've dreamed of a potentially infinite 2D display where icons could be enlarged into system of other icons, eventually leading to text or graphics. Some of the new tools shown on TED indicate the coming of this.

  I'd really like to see an encyclopedia of to-do systems.
  I think "43 folders" is kind of interested in doing this, and
  has sort of started this, but it's not really an organized effort.

I agree. And integrated with Project Management Software. I have followed PMS since Ah!, waiting for a useful online version (some are now available). However they are all geared for corporations and accounting for money flow, etc. The Critial Path adjustments are nice. A decade ago another futurist and I contemplated on using a PMS to start building a StoryField of projects. For years my writing was mostly directed towards this end. The software was either directed towards design or to managment, and few for both. They were not easily adpated for education and research projects. Long ago I went to the library and examined 1000+ page volumes on propority PMS from corporations - where each did their thing on their mainframes. Global Empire would not be where it is if not for PMS, in my opinion. If we can insert links in PMS software that lead to Wiki dialog, we could integrate dialog and planning and implementation and feedback.

For decades I have searched for PMS to use as the basis for my scheduling. If I came up with a project I couldn't do myself, I could design the project on PMS and then seek those wanting to participate in virtual projects. WantAds was a site I desired for projects. One person could take on the project and it would instruct them what to do to involve others and get underway. This was the idea I presented in 1987 and the ENA conf. I think the technology is ripe today. With LQE principles for education, these are the details needed to give The Great Turning concreteness, a CEE, a Creative Emergent Eruption - as rapidly powerful positively as Nuclear Winter negatively. We have the tools to make this transition RAPID - as is needed because Empire will not solve our Earth Change Crises (well beyond Global Heating).

 The big issue is how we might begin to communicate, dialog, and share about
our personal minds confronted with the awesome complexity of our situation,
the feeling awareness of contemporary suffering and what is to come - along
with the realization that there are ways to turn this all around, but we -
ALONE - cannot do it, and collaborating effectively requires more personal
change than most people are willing to do.  My personal case is that I am
totally open to give myself full time to collaborative efforts - but find
myself psychologically blocked. What about the many others who don't yet see
how it might be possible?

  And, everybody has different niches and things available to them.

  The managing of attention-- I don't have answers.  Just pieces.

YES, but to effectively "manage attention" we must get the cooperation of the other. Simple propaganda messages can be imposed from the top, but not the complex issues of relevance. We CANNOT COMPETE on mass media - we must create our own playing field - and empirically explore multiple ways of attracting others to our playing fields and keeping them active. We may find that persons of reknown may be the last to shift attention.

It is scary to study how limited niches each person occupies - myself included. My few niches are broad in scope, but my hours are devoted to only a few types of activities.

 Speaking of education. (the following was pasted from OneNote). How old is
your daughter?  I would be happy to dialog with you about the school and
your daughter's education.

  She's 6.  {:)}=

  She's awesome.  {:)}=

  And she's collecting Pokemon, right now.

My daughter, Stephanie, came into my life at age 2.5 - I have no biological children. They are wonders at finding their own ways, psyching out their parents and other adults, and creating secret lives. Much of the time this is to a good end, interdependence. We did the best we could, with good will and intelligence; but, the environment was too powerful. She has been clean for over 5 years and struggling with the brain damage her drug use caused. My life is totally different than it would have been had my daughter not gone off the deep end. The young (humans and animals) are so "perfect", and their natural developement so wonderful to behold. But, our sick world had tenticles that penetrate families - and the laws enable the children to destroy themselves.

But that doesn't mean it is what we need; it is quality in what it is
attempting, but it's goals may be severely limited.  There are a number of
basics about education that need to change before any other changes will
have any impact.  See:
http://ourworld.cs.com/larryvictor137/edu_web/paper.htm

for the minimum needed.

  I think of the Sudbury "freedom rules" as ground zero for education.

Yes, they are basic. But, we must keep in mind that children are NOT little adults - although they can surprize us with very adult behavior at times. Total freedom for children is very dangerous. We MUST manipulate the new born, so manipulation is not, by itself, bad. A 5, 10, 17 year old does not yet have a fully functional brain for complex "adult" decisions. We need a balance. The -- I can't remember its name -- school in the UK that first experimented with total freedom and democracy for the children had more detailed rules than teacher oriented schools and was rather repressive to those who violated the rules (that the children created).

In a Mayan tribe that was never touched by Europeans, those selected to be leaders are separated from their mothers at birth (except for feeding) and for nine years are kept in a hut monitored and "educated" constantly by other leaders. They are healthy and competent leaders. In another Mayan tribe, after birth the newborn is suckled by all the women in the village giving milk to their own children.

  But now, supposing we want to learn something, how do we most
  optimally do it?

  I'll read your paper.

 I don't feel that computers have yet significantly improved education - but
it may have improved the learning of many youth.

  I, ... I, ...  I know for a fact, that Wikipedia has vastly improved
my education..?

  Perhaps we're talking about different things?

Wikipedia is a tool that definitely facilitates learning. As does some tv. What I mean is that in the formal educational systems, public and private, the use of educatonal technology is severely constrained by the paradigms of curricula/courses/classrooms/students/grades. I was able to use the computer to facilitate individualization of student performance and evaluation, but was never successful in using the computer at a tool for student learning. Many of my students had computers and used them, but I couldn't successfully integrate them into my courses. Most online education I have reviewed is just a classroom without students. YET, there is GREAT potential for intelligent tools in education.

 THE PROBLEM: we don't know how to create quality education - and our first
task is to design an educational system for ourselves, improve it, and
invite others to join.  This is my Learners for Quality Education (LQE)
model.  Anyone who claims they know what to do to significantly improve
education is in need of significant re-education, themselves.  I know some
of the questions we need to be asking - I don't have the answers.  Yet, the
vitality of ALL OTHER movements for change hinge on changing and learning -
and ALL employ the same outmoded educational models.

  Sometimes, reading this, I get the feeling of Le Corbusier,
  who said:

    "The house is a machine for living in."

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Corbusier

I wasn't able to make the connection with le Corbusier. In new educational terminology, SCAFFOLDING is the mesh within which self directed, self organizing can manifest. Without scaffolding we get only tangles. The design and improvement of scaffolding is critical.


  What is education, and what is it for?
  We can talk about projects accomplished, curriculum learned, and so on, ...
  But, -- what for?

Yes, WHAT FOR? Why do we persist? Which brings me back to my initial paralysis. If we are going to manifest The Great Turning (have you read it yet, I have only 2 chapters left - I learned more about David Korten but feel his book, and many others, are addressed to the choir; those who need the message won't read him) we need to begin sharing our deepest mentations - for which we have only poor language for sharing.

  
  I'm not sure how to put this together.

It will be put together, and we will be part of it, but it may be beyond our conscious comprehension.

WOW, another spurt of writing. Don't know the relevance. Larry

  

Lion Kimbro

unread,

Jul 20, 2007, 9:03:28 PM7/20/07

to story...@googlegroups.com

On 7/20/07, Larry Victor <larry...@comcast.net> wrote:
> WOW, another spurt of writing. Don't know the relevance. Larry

The relevance is clear to me:

* Computers - part of the story of the future, and how people relate stories
* Education - communicating patterns of life and thinking (ie, stories)

Therefore, relevance. :)

Lion Kimbro

unread,

Jul 20, 2007, 10:41:13 PM7/20/07

to story...@googlegroups.com

On 7/20/07, Larry Victor <larry...@comcast.net> wrote:
> I find the cyberspace of relevance a forest of towers of babel - interesting and
> important dialog within each tower, but the effort to join is enormous. I
> foresee a need to have systems that encourage unique explorations, explicit
> systems to mediate between them, and a general system to which everyone is
> prepared to use, an elaborated version of Wikipedia - but where dialog and
> decisions can also be made. Elaboration on this would take me deep into my
> developing ideas of worlds, semiotic structures, and the fundamental reality
> of text.

Do you have some imagery or imagination that you can share?

I'm not so concerned with clarity, as with raw imagery here;
Sometimes it has more communicative power.

> http://ourworld.cs.com/larryvictor137/RelDocs/isss94af.htm

First, I had a hard time reading this.

But then, when I changed "text" to "external symbolic thought,"
it became a lot easier!

So,
"DEMOCRACY AS PARTICIPATORY COLLABORATIVE TEXT CREATION"
transformed into:
"Democracy as participatory collaborative external symbolic thought creation."

It works!

A little clunky, but it works!

What would you do if you were not psychologically blocked?

> I think of the Sudbury "freedom rules" as ground zero for education.
>
> Yes, they are basic. But, we must keep in mind that children are NOT little
> adults - although they can surprize us with very adult behavior at times.
> Total freedom for children is very dangerous. We MUST manipulate the new
> born, so manipulation is not, by itself, bad. A 5, 10, 17 year old does not
> yet have a fully functional brain for complex "adult" decisions. We need a
> balance. The -- I can't remember its name -- school in the UK that first
> experimented with total freedom and democracy for the children had more
> detailed rules than teacher oriented schools and was rather repressive to
> those who violated the rules (that the children created).

I wonder, ...
The kids at Sakura's school seem fine, smart, friendly, and so on.

Studies of the original Sudbury Valley schools show that the
graduates are doing well, too, and were grateful for their school.

Maybe there was something funny about that one school you were talking about?

It's true that the kids at Clearwater (my daughter's school) have lots of
rules, and it's also true that the kids take them very seriously.
But, "repressive?" And the kids seem so friendly, well adjusted, capable,
intelligent, and kind. I'm skeptical of the label, "very dangerous," here.

Regardless, I'm happy about any model of education that people
love and thrive in, whether it is Sudbury, or military school,
self-directed and entirely alone, conventional public schooling,
tutoring in the hut out back for 9 years, and so on.

I do think that there's something "Beyond Sudbury," but that it's something
that applies equally well to adults, as to children, and I think that when it
appears, that youth and adults alike will make use of it.

When I'm taking in an educational endeavor *for myself,* that's
where I start cursing the textbook authors, and thinking about the
art & science of learning.

I think that, basically, it's not economical, even though it is economical,
because: people would rather pay only $100 on a textbook, and then study
it for 3 months, rather than pay $1,000 for a book/simulation/tool that could
teach them everything within 2 days..! Since the economy of scale is not
reached, it simply doesn't happen.

This frustrates me, to no end. I estimate that two years of college chemistry
could be taught in a couple of months, or even less, if properly done.

> Sometimes, reading this, I get the feeling of Le Corbusier,
> who said:
>
> "The house is a machine for living in."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Corbusier
>
> I wasn't able to make the connection with le Corbusier. In new educational
> terminology, SCAFFOLDING is the mesh within which self directed, self
> organizing can manifest. Without scaffolding we get only tangles. The design
> and improvement of scaffolding is critical.

Well, what I mean is, the fundamental language of education
here is in terms of "components," and "parts," and "systems,"
and so on, much like it was the description of a machine.

Most people don't want to live in le Corbusier's houses. So the
metaphor used to think about architecture or process can matter.

I would ask myself, "What biases come from the fundamental
metaphor of education as a machine?" If different fundamental
metaphors are used, what different kinds of thoughts do they
lead to?

I once heard someone say, "Communities aren't built, they're
grown." This signified something, ... Well, regardless, it's just
something to consider.

> If we are going to manifest The Great Turning (have you read it
> yet, I have only 2 chapters left - I learned more about David Korten but
> feel his book, and many others, are addressed to the choir; those who need
> the message won't read him) we need to begin sharing our deepest mentations
> - for which we have only poor language for sharing.

Well, I haven't read it, and I know only a little bit about it, second hand.
But I've read the front page of http://www.thegreatturning.net/.

Larry Victor

unread,

Jul 22, 2007, 10:44:27 PM7/22/07

to story...@googlegroups.com

Lion, My delay this time is not a block. I am repairing ductwork on the cooler system. Storms shut down my active computer so I couldn't get online remote. So I made a temp trip to reset it. Will be commenting on your responses soon, and looking for a confirmation of the phone conf at end of week with Tom and Peggy. More later, Larry.

Larry Victor

unread,

Jul 29, 2007, 1:01:23 AM7/29/07

to story...@googlegroups.com

Lion Kimbro wrote:

On 7/20/07, Larry Victor <larry...@comcast.net> wrote:

I find the cyberspace of relevance a forest of towers of babel - interesting and
important dialog within each tower, but the effort to join is enormous. I
foresee a need to have systems that encourage unique explorations, explicit
systems to mediate between them, and a general system to which everyone is
prepared to use, an elaborated version of Wikipedia - but where dialog and
decisions can also be made. Elaboration on this would take me deep into my
developing ideas of worlds, semiotic structures, and the fundamental reality
of text.

  Do you have some imagery or imagination that you can share?

  I'm not so concerned with clarity, as with raw imagery here;
  Sometimes it has more communicative power.

Larry: I will reply to this long email in separate pieces. I wish I had sensory imagery to share; but in a way, my lack of sensory imagery enables me to explore where the concreteness of imagery is limiting. For example, many people are unable to explore negative scenarios (so as to avoid them) because the accompanying imagery is to horrible. What I imply in the spontaneous expression above is that we are in over our heads, as states the title of a book by Robert Kegan. We cannot go back to the garden of eden of hunter-gatherers, although we must accept that our inherited dispositions come from those days. But, we are more than a product of a deterministic past; we have a developable potential for self-creation with no known limit. We can learn to swim (organize and learn - galdee: grow, adapt, learn, develop, evolve, and emerge - a crude 6D vector for "change") in the new cognitive oceans of our own creativity.

I view humankind as still embryonic, possibly birthing. The singularity ahead is but one of many transition phases of galdee. But, our self consciousness has "gone to our heads", with many viewing humankind as a finished product, ready to rapture or to live forever in a nanotech utopia. We are technological beings, along with our emergent languaging competencies. Aboriginal tribes were masters of technology for their needs and the resources of their environment. Wonder at the technology of making blowguns, darts, and poison for hunting of Amazon peoples. Imagine the innovation of mechanical musical reproduction that was killed dead with the innovation of electronic recordings - visit those museums and wonder.

We have recently discovered that the circuits of the brain used to imagine long term consequences of actions matures only in the late teens. This reinforces my wonder about young children not being concerned about "growing up". Toddlers have no concept of failure; they tumble, get up, and try again. We would probably not have survived if futures forecasting came early. And it appears that it isn't developed in the vast majority of the population, at any age. Too much futuring paralyzes here & now action; yet too little has led us to our contemporary "Crisis of Crises" (from my mentor John R. Platt).

"Self-organizing" has become a cult concept. But, entrepreneurs organize themselves and others to succeed in the simple game of economic dominance. This is the default play when population density demands order. Dominator order is the default self organizing process IF more foresightful and energetic efforts at developing alternatives are not attempted. Throughout history opponents of dominator order never have had sufficient imagination or stamina or systems of support for sustainable, viable life. BUT, we NOW have the potential for all - but NOT to confront the dominator system, but to transcend and replace it. We must resist the natural temptation to fix and heal what should be abandoned; and this is hard because fixing and healing are deep natural tools for tribal survival/thrival.

I just re-read the initial statement I was to explicate with imagery, and I seem to be constructing context for the explication rather than getting to it - if that is possible.

"Advanced" humans are dependent on "reesee seafing" for further advancement, and for reesee collaboration with other advancing humans.

In the continuing galdee of languaging we need "vector" terms, as wall as "scalar" terms.
I propose "reesee" as a vector term of 6 dimensions: Relevant, Effective, Efficient, Sufficient, Enjoyable, Elegant. Each action should be evaluated on all six dimensions.
I propose "seaf" as a vector term of 4 dimensions: Support, Enable, Augment, Facilitate. Nu humans will both live in a sea of seafing, and be active seafers.

Infants and young children require considerable seafing, as to persons in transition (such as puberty). Young adults require less seafing, although much of their continued learning should be as seafers of others, both younger and older. Elders require extensive seafing, as infants - not only because of their declining ability, but mostly because of their highly developed worlds that require seafing to be shared.

I have yet to comment on "ideas of worlds, semiotic structures, and the fundamental reality of text". The last is presented in the following url, from a presentation at a 1994 General Systems conference. I will continue these comments in response to Lion's queries on "text"

http://ourworld.cs.com/larryvictor137/RelDocs/isss94af.htm

  First, I had a hard time reading this.

  But then, when I changed "text" to "external symbolic thought,"
  it became a lot easier!

  So,
  "DEMOCRACY AS PARTICIPATORY COLLABORATIVE TEXT CREATION"
  transformed into:
  "Democracy as participatory collaborative external symbolic thought creation."

  It works!

  A little clunky, but it works!

Lion, you have done what I have done. I now use the term "semiotic structures" (abbreviated as "sems") for your "external symbolic thought". I continue to believe in the utility of a 3M reality (Matter, Mind, Media) or (Material, Mental, Marks). Our societal world (external but never directly accessible) is composed of nested systems of sems. Sems are perceived (a constructed process in our constructed world) and contribute to "WorldMaking" (Nelson Goodman) or WorldWeaving (which I prefer), which is consistent with Maturana and Varela's Autopoetic Model for Living/Cognitive Systems (which do NOT exchange information, but "Structurally Couple"). Using George Spencer Brown's "Laws of Form" http://www.enolagaia.com/GSB.html , Varela ( in Principles of Biological Autonomy) demonstrates the logical equivalence of information exchange and structural coupling.

These are highly complex ideas, of which I am more ignorant of (knowing OF what I don't yet know or comprehend, or can't yet do or appreciate) than having knowledge of (although I have attempted to read these books). Yet their ideas, at the budding edge of new life, are important.

Today, as every day, I walk in the raw desert behind my retreat with my two feline companions. We are in monsoon, with needed rains, causing many plants to plump from prior shriveled form. I could almost feel the molecular excitement fueled by new water. I attend specifically to new growth, the budding frontiers of plant galdee. Yesterday, while walking with Tucker and LittleLady (Tucker's mother) I suddenly heard a thundering sound. A large deer passed to my left and Tucker was moving along under the hoves; together they disappeared around a tree. My first reaction was to call to Tucker, thinking he was chasing the deer. But I realized that both were running from each other, yet staying together. Later, Tucker was safe, but it took a while before LittleLady came out of hiding.

 The big issue is how we might begin to communicate, dialog, and share about
our personal minds confronted with the awesome complexity of our situation,
the feeling awareness of contemporary suffering and what is to come - along
with the realization that there are ways to turn this all around, but we -
ALONE - cannot do it, and collaborating effectively requires more personal
change than most people are willing to do. My personal case is that I am
totally open to give myself full time to collaborative efforts - but find
myself psychologically blocked. What about the many others who don't yet see
how it might be possible?

  What would you do if you were not psychologically blocked?

The simple answer is I would submit myself as a subject to seafing teams. My archives and my brain are raw ores, containing many nu memes, ripe for harvesting. As "nuet", an extra-temporal, I am unable to "lecture" to such a diverse audience. I open myself to interrogation. "Profit" could be made from appropriate exploitation of many of my memes. I would need to approve of projects, but would submit to long work days for the rest of my functional life. Years ago a friend commented that my future role would be as a Queen Bee, doing nothing but producing viable memes. This is not an ego seeking recognition; I don't care if my name goes down in history. What I have to share is more the result of the synchronicity of my unique genetics and nurturing. I would accept my views as delusional if persons I respected would reject my ideas after due consideration. Many have explored parts and found them valuable. No one has explored my world to any depth - although some support me by intuition, but find my writings difficult to process. I have applied for a grant from the NEH (Digital Humanities Start-Up Grants) to create a pilot COLAB STUDIO, where (among other things) nuet's interrogation could be performed.

Many others could use such seafing, and the results would benefit humankind. In Googling for Spencer-Brown I discovered that some of his writing has been lost. We would have greatly benefited had he had access to a seafing team. What is the gap between what advanced mind/brains have published and what remains within when they die?

My initial doc on seafing was in response to Zuboff's The Support Economy: http://home.comcast.net/~nucoms/THE_SEAF_Society.htm . I need seafing to prepare this meme for sharing. I view a seafing network as the circulatory system of global humanity as a viable organism, where everyone participates and benefits.

I REALIZE THAT THE ABOVE IS FAR, FAR FROM THE QUALITY OF SEMS NEEDED TO REESEE SHARE THE IDEAS.

Larry (nuet) -- there are other parts of Lion's emails that I have yet to respond to. I don't feel I have adequately responded to Lion's request for imagery.

Reply all

Reply to author

Forward

0 new messages