I would add it is for everyone who wants to participate. Some people may prefer to observe. And that is fine. As long as they keep that preference out in the open. If you are shy and want to protect your ideas you should be careful for they will get used by others here. We are willing to share. That is an aspect of the Culture we have developed here. If you want to be in observer mode that is okay too. But obviously we can’t all be observers all the time. We have to do something once in awhile unless you are extremely privileged.
I can’t wait for bar camp! Going out for a run & will be back with O2 in my blood
KV: one of my absolute favorites. Even wanted to write a novella involving him. Go figure.
It was a simple/complex question: What is “cosmic time”? and out of that erupted a heated exchange and subsequent accusations, denials, and retreats. @madrush has labeled me the “DJ” (and I can’t recall if that was in private or a personal communication); and that in of itself (w/r/t labels) can/would/should lead to other “infinite conversations”.
Cheers, Merry Christmas etc., and so on and so forth …
My question about Cosmic Time has to do simply with how we would conduct our moment to moment, day to day, week to week (would we still have “weeks”?) or other forms and patterns of time, if our ultimate horizons were infinite and divine. How would we consider our days, and our lives, if we were (as we are) living in the 4th (or even 5th) dimension? What would that practically and concretely mean? And then what if a society organized its own cultural and productive activities in accordance with cosmic time (inclusive of bio, mental, subtle, virtual and other time-forms)—beyond money-time? What would our calendars be like? How would we divide things up…or not? When would everything happen, and by what inner logic or rhythm?
I would like Cosmos (the organization) to sponsor some kind of Cosmic time, which is actualized in our systems and rituals. What if we integrated and transcended mental-rational, as well as magic and mythic time, to establish a new temporal order (out of chaos)? What if we come from the future? What will the world be like then?
What I learned today. I can’t chunk down or chunk slow without a frame. So, Mr. Ed, if you want me to chunk down and chunk slow it would be nice to have a frame. With a frame and a clear outcome I can discover when we get off track or when we get on track. I can manage scales and scopes.
And that’s a very good thing for me to have learned. I hope others learned something, too. I am, however, very concerned that the Cafe is getting a bit chaotic. So each of us perhaps has a different threshold for that. Chaos, for me, is not about chunking down or chunking slow. Chaos happens when there is no frame and no outcome. I still feel we are in the midst of that Frame Crisis.
I worked at the Gay Men’s Health Crisis, Inc, for a number of years. Life and Death are very messy. We lived through weekly bomb threats, we had to take sick people out into the winter cold while we went through the building looking for the bomb. Chaos and order. Chaos I have found is almost always destructive. And I am not wanting to go into that kind of chaos again but hey we may not have a choice about that? Where I am coming from our Culture is complex, not simple. We have few good maps for this territory. Others may have a different kind of social arrangement to draw upon. If there are other patterns that others are picking up on that is great,
Cracking those nuts is not easy for a Crow who has no hands. We have a lot to learn from Crow.
I am not looking for much more to happen in the Café this year, 2018.
I think we’ve had a good run, with all the ups and downs, frames and no-frames. Next week we will discuss Gilead, which for me at least, will represent a fitting end to the year.
I think it would be helpful to start envisioning topics and potential guests for 2019 and get them on a calendar. I like being able to prepare in advance; it’s also helpful to have something to read or watch ahead of time, which gives the group a common object of discussion and gets us on the same page (as much as possible; there are limits).
It might be that we can’t sustain a new topic every week, but should aim for every two weeks instead, which would allow more time for development and follow-up, as well as other initiatves to unfold—including workshops, reading groups, and writing. (Did someobody say somebody was working on a novella? What other personal and underground projects can we bring forth in the coming year? How can I/we/Cosmos be of service to creative emergence?)
I think it would be also potentially good to chunk the Café in terms of seasons—i.e., winter, spring, summer, fall—and try to group together topics in terms of an overarching theme for the season. This would also provide for reflection breaks and transition times between seasons.
I am not sure I like the idea of “Second Order Culture”—it reminds me of Integral Theory’s “Second Tier”—but I am interested in learning more about the idea, and how it might be different. Might Second Order Culture operate on Cosmic Time? Maybe we would need Third Order culture for that? The Crow is puzzled. The Cosmic Crow likes puzzles.
Either way, I want continuing to explore “what’s next” for our culture, society, and civilization—and for us as a group and as individuals—whether this is called Second Order or something else—and I think the Café could be a good place not only to explore but directly experiment with and enact these possibilities in 2019.
I have asked @Douggins to more officially and formally help ‘manage’ the Café—tame the chaos!—so that together we can work on better communication and planning. Every Café needs an organizer, I think. Who’s in charge. This doesn’t mean he will direct all the topics, but rather help set the stage, schedule topics that members of the @ccafe crew initiate, coordinate with guests, and post the recordings.
I think we should also step more fully into the public sphere by promoting the live broadcasts and recordings via podcast and YouTube, etc. And I have talked w/ Doug about adding a short segment at the beginning of our sessions which would allow time for announcements regarding what’s going on on the platform as a whole (e.g., in terms of reading groups, new publications, creative work that’s being done)—something like “this week in Cosmos.” I am imagining this would be a fun segment, which could include guests who may be focused on other projects on this platform, and would help with overall communication, transparency, and developing our audience as well.
This is very Promising & Exciting.Looking forward to the moment of 2019 in Cosmic Time,within from Feet & Beyond.Prayers,Dancing,Conversation & Jazz,You have my Vote Marco on “What’s Next”…P.S…from M.C.Richards…Three Wisdoms-“Go slow"said the Snail.” Hop!Hop!said the Hare. “Pace yourself"said the Cheetah,” it’s a long Run.I Feel-Think this poem is a good metaphor?
Yes, there are overlaps and differences. What interest me is that Davor is demonstrating through archaeological finding how technology and mind/hand has evolved in groups. Sharing attention is essential. Creating a frame is established early in our development. Pointing and asking " What’s that?" A frame emerges.
A spear is a technological achievement. How do we reverse engineer this? How do we trace the mental processes involved? What is needed? You need a tool to cut the branch. You need a tool to shape the branch into a spear. You need a tool to shape and sharpen the rock that becomes an arrow. You need an adhesive to secure the arrowhead to the shaft. And you need attention to put all these materials and actions together. You need to know how to ‘make a cut’ in your attention. And this technology emerged before writing. There was no sketch pad. So the cognitive capacity of these early techno-cultural ancestors of ours laid down a process that became elaborated in the bow and the arrow and out of that technology advance emerged the use of a trap. There is a direction in complexity, from spear to bow and arrow to trap. When making a trap there has to careful consideration of the animal behavior that you want to trap. This gets more than complicated. The interplay of technology, mind, and culture is complex and follows a direction. It is inter-subjective from the get go.
A big leap happened when the flute was created. A technology emerged for aesthetic purposes. We are on a trajectory that is very directional, not ad hoc or free floating, accidental. There are desired outcomes and actions performed and shared attentions.
I think Davor is looking at the biological, cultural and technological overlaps and he draws upon the latest archeological evidences. He concludes by pointing out the collapse of a first order single eye view into something he calls second order. A cultural shared capacity to hold differences and learn at meta-levels. No individual can come up with these innovations alone. Preserving the sense of an orderly transmission of knowledge is what Culture actually does. And humans are extremely good at this.
We are, in his view, starting to make this big transition as our attentions are shared in ever wider circles and horizons. And this, he claims, is not arbitrary. So the necessity to re-draw our maps of cognition in tandem with others to support these cross overs and overlaps is crucial. As we are at the beginning of this ( Davor dates the start of this Second Order shift at 2010) There is a crisis in systems theory and in Capitalism. These changes are driven by technology. We are not doing a very good job of this.
He does suggest that we might de-couple from the physical and this may be well underway. This would change radically artistic process and audience participation. I wanted to model this kind of re-structuring as we move through the current chaos to a new kind of order. There is not a romanticizing of this chaos. It is extremely dangerous to keep in place the Neo-liberal agendas that are keeping us stuck in a psychic landscape that our technology is moving us beyond at an accelerated pace.Does any of this remind anyone of the internal processes of the Crow?
I think this is a huge leap forward in my sometimes phobic response to technology. I think we might develop alternate ways of thinking/becoming in our cultural set ups but this is a huge shift that is happening and requires in my view a lot more stability that we currently have.
I quipped about the outbreak of Alzheimer’s. I was not making a comment about individuals. I am stressing that this is a cultural trend. The first thing that goes in the onset of dementia is an ability to recognize a frame. There is a lack of capacity to know where the joints are in a social event, where to make the cut, share attention. This can be a harrowing experience. I suggest that without a frame in our current conditions on line it is very easy to start acting like a person with dementia. Timing is off, no one knows who’s in charge, subtle sensory cues, are missed.
So this is a big topic and one that can’t be done in an ad lib kind of way as I failed to make sense of this research yesterday. I just put out a couple of possibilities and you have done, Marco, and I hope something in our efforts will ‘strike a chord.’
I deplore, however, the lack of good feedback. Perhaps a planning session ahead of time, with Doug or anyone else interested, could give us a chance to rehearse feedback. I think this is an art and may need a little bit of practice before we get up to speed with this technology.
Happy Holidays and I imagine that after the first of the Year we will have a perspective on how each of us could better meta- communicate our intentions to one another. There is a ratio between signal and noise that we have to get better at so that our virtual spaces can make sense. I found yesterdays session has some good moments and also a lot of noise. I have yet to differentiate the noise from the signal. Especially as performance in public space can add shame to our already stressed out physiology. I do not want to be a party in shaming anyone in public space. I find that horrifying.
I would be happy to participate in this. Timing is the question. Could we add this as a potential to the chalk board, then schedule it, after feedback from @Douggins and/or others on timing, and maybe other questions?
I am able to provide access to update the board, as is Doug. It is fairly easy to do, and works pretty well. By referencing the objects on the board, Crow will see traffic patterns, Crow will learn where to drop nut. Other crows will see Crow and sees patterns of traffic and Crow, and pattern the patterns, and drop nuts, and eat…
I think pause is a good idea/response. The Christmas/holiday season is a stressful time. Let us get through this season/time, whatever, and rejoin our effect to discern “what the hell is going on?” come next year.
peace and cheers,
Thank goodness for the ‘barcamp’ and excellent therapists!
It looks good. I am not insisting on Loffler. I have pretty much said everything that I wanted to say about his work in this thread. What I think is new is that he stressed a ‘logic of becoming’ and that it is not arbitrary. There are universal patterns through out human history and we are now in the midst of a techno civilization emerging. This is a very big deal. It is a new kind of humanity that will make this happen.
I am glad we have some topics on the table to choose from and I am open to exploring what others want to develop. Let me know what works for others.
I see it differently, Mark. I think there was more going on than a heated exchange.
And subsequent accusations, denials, and retreats.
I do sense that there are perhaps many reactions that were ‘kept secret.’ I felt people were hiding something. And this is a lot what happens in heated arguments. People freeze and then try to change the subject. Talk about something nice, like the weather.
My question to Ed was about the tone of his voice. Not the question about Cosmic Time. A legitimate question for sure. And he respond with a voice that reminded me of the worst kind of interrogation tactics that the worst kind of prosecutors use.
And I know a lot about how prosecutor work in public spaces.
So he then asked a loaded question ( without curiosity but with contempt in his voice from my perspective), so there was much much more going on than a heated argument.
I also pointed out that I often share dreams in public ( a vulnerable role to play) and that he criticized me in public. He had asked, in the same kind of voice, in a previous video, " What gives you such confidence?"
So I am pointing to a Meta-Pattern. I have seen and heard this kind of voice and this kind of tactic from Ed before. And that is what I was responding to and that is what I made explicit in my communication to him and to the group.
I asked Ed, with genuine curiosity," Do you have a dream? "
He told me in the same voice , ( the Voice of the Critical/Judge)" I have told you before, I never dream." He also made a gesture, his palm facing me, that was at an angle and looked slightly effete, and that reminded me of gestures of people who make fun of gay people. Once again, I may not know that Ed intended to do that, but that is what I was responding to, as I mentioned his voice conveyed contempt rather than curiosity.
I also admitted that I could be wrong about my response. That I was trying to give sensory based feedback( to him and to the group). This is not easy to do when under fire, when the perceived abusive behavior is happening.
I told the group that I doubted that a polarity response with two persons in the group is good for the group? That is my bind here and I try to articulate this as a dilemma I was carrying for the group.
I am driven by the good of the group. I dont think others care about that as much as I do. Maybe it is because I have seen too often how people ignore and sweep under the rug conflicts and rush off to do other things and leave the persons stuck, often with one person dominating and trying to control the group.
I draw upon a lifetime of traumatic episodes where people shame others in public. I dont think that is just my personal experience. I believe you have mentioned, Mark, that you were shunned by a community, too.
So perhaps the fight, flight, freeze. tendency operates in the Cafe as well? You mention denial. I wonder if that is what you meant by denial?
I do not wish to re-open any wounds for this is a very delicate matter and this may not be the right place to deal with this issue. I am getting the feeling that we, at the Cafe, haven’t got the skills yet to deal effectively with this kind of ‘heated argument.’
I don’t think that the US Congress is very skilled at this eighter.
I notice also that Ed made an apology to the group, an apology that he has withdrawn and that will be deleted in 24 hours. I read it before it was deleted.
I had earlier on the call asked," What skills and abilities do we need to develop to make this virtual forum work for everyone?"
I can answer my own question and say that we need to learn how to pay attention to the Critic, the Dreamer.
Can a Dreamer who is active and public respond effectively to a Critic that claims he never dreams?
I certainly respect, Ed, enormously. He is much, much more than his behavior. I want to be very gentle with this topic.
My father, who was the cruelest man who ever lived, said towards the end of his trouble life, something tender… He said," I was very rough with you. You have been very gentle with me."
Maybe, Daddy, wasn’t the worst man in the world. A man who could say that could not have been all bad. He learned something about himself before he died.
I wonder if I have learned something from that experience. I want to disentangle from the binds and double binds and the triple binds and release the twisted energetics into a liberated pattern!
Like Mr, Crow!
It was Ed, Marco, who mentioned the novella in a previous thread. That is why I brought that up when I asked Ed what was his dream.
I think that there are plenty of double messages floating around and they are often conveyed in tones of voice, gesture and tempo-rhythms that happen really fast ( under the radar). It is these kind of double messages that I pay lots of attention to. 99 % of a person’s communication is non verbal.
It is really hard for a person like me to chunk down and chunk slow when there are so many mixed messages clogging up the system and no frame to work with. I share Ed’s frustration.
I imagine, Marco, that we would spend a lot of time examining binds and double binds. We would be hyper aware of these binding patterns in public spaces and be adept at working creatively with these patterns and stop traumatic episodes from happening. If they do happen, then the behavior must be separated from the identity of the person.
Are we there yet? Can we get to another level? Or will we continue to allow this heated arguments to get swept under the rug, get more distorted, and erupt in violent behavior? This is, for me, what people used to call ’ shadow work’. I have never liked that language and I think it keeps people too much in the dark.
I like to use Clean Language simply because it has changed my life, when my life was in great danger of being torn apart as I was attacked at the level of my identity, by my family, by Religion and by State. I learned how to meta-communicate or get killed.
This is a very dangerous world, both in physical spaces and in these virtual spaces.
I hope we grow in maturity and wisdom and can accept our double messages and the occassional dramas as gifts to our emerging cultural capacities. If we dont do this work who will?
This is, in my humble experience, what happens when there is no frame. There has been an attempt to address this, in Marco’s response above, and I welcome this as a good policy change. Open Frames can be creative and can also in public space invite unintended consequences.
Is it possible, Marco, that there will be an algorithm for dealing with binds anytime soon?
It’s like two gunslingers at High Noon. Neither one of them wants to get shot. Neither one of them wants to shoot the other. One of them takes the gun slowly out of the holster and drops it on the ground.
They both smile and decide to go have a drink in the saloon.
A male voice from above, a gruff voice, from a rooftop bellows," Pick up the gun and fight." The man with the gruff voice points his rifle at the man who dropped the gun. He says, " I shoot the man who refuses to fight."
A triple bind. The world is full of them. Do we have the cultural capacity to unravel our weaved up follies?
Very good. I’m glad at least you did, John. I deleted it because I wasn’t satisfied with it. I tried over a good part of the day yesterday to revise it, but I’m still not satisfied which is why it hasn’t reappeared. Still, since you brought it up, I will share it here:
Once again, if my tone was inappropriate, it was certainly not intended as it was received, but I’ll apologize anyway. This apology is sincere, and may be accepted or rejected as any of those present, but especially you, John, see fit. As far as I am concerned, the veil of contempt is perceived but not real, in any substantial sense of the word. It strikes me as being a lot like the one-way mirror that we talked about at the beginning of our get-together.
We have very different views of the café, chaos, and the world. I think that’s a good thing, but I may be wrong. Nevertheless, I feel compelled to work with mine, just as I would expect you will want to work with yours. I’m not convinced these differences are generally ones that make a difference, but some of them no doubt produce results that are different than at least I expected. ¬ I am also beginning to think that I have been long enough in a culture with standards of personal interaction and discussion that are just foreign enough to perhaps qualify.
But, be that as it all may, it is nevertheless my sincere wish that Peace be with you, not just for the holiday season, but always.
It is clear to me that my tone started this, and I can only repeat what I said before: the tone – though inappropriate (I own up to that) – was not intended as you perceived it. I appreciate that you have made clear why you perceived it in the way you did, but none of the implications you associate with me from your reaction apply, but I’m not going to go into them. This is neither the time nor place for that. I can say, however, that I will make an honest effort with my tone and my responses in the future. That’s my take-away from this.
I would agree, John, but one of the reasons we do not have an adequate Streitkultur (lit. “argument culture”) is that it is too easy to take personally things that are not intended as such. My tone … inappropriate as it may have been … was not directed at you personally. That you took it personally is clear, and I’m not criticizing that at all. That is a perfectly normal reaction amongst people who do not know each other well enough, or for whatever reasons perceive others differently than they really are. That’s not an assessment, merely an observation. My interjection had nothing to do with you personally; it was prompted by a statement, not the person stating it. We all know what ensued and what resulted from that, and, as far as I’m concerned that’s all there is to it. I shall work on my tone (among other things) and I will hope that others will start thinking in terms of a healthier Streitkultur.
One thing is certain, for me, however: I once again learned a whole helluva lot.
PS: the above wishes for the holiday and future are still sincerely intended.
Thank you, Ed, and will try to do the same.
My Consent-Intention-Attention(CIA) is To Be For Each Other,Good Friends & Create in the Tension of the Moment a Movement that We All Yearn For in Our Hearts,at least this is my Operating Metaphor.John & Ed have given me Inspiration to Enjoy the Play of Consciousness not just the Details.Thank You Both for your Vulnerability.Michael
And thank you for your vulnerability, Michael, a value we both value. I also value clarity. Vulnerability without clarity can create a lot of unnecessary suffering. If we can have vulnerability and clarity at the same time we can re-organize our communities ( virtual and physical) and re-tune our somatic intelligences. I appreciate your ongoing support.
John,I would like too add to your use of Vulnerability-Clarity Dynamic ( I am on board with),my ongoing learning from my years of recovery from Trauma has a Third element for becoming unstuck from the Hyper-vigilance aspect I was Experiencing. Learning to Move the Body Between the two states, slowly ,something like being in a pool of water & letting my breath out & trusting the water as I unlearned the stuck state from my trauma.This reminds me of those Islanders that traveling between the Islands & beyond in canoes(Our Bodies are canoes in this life,it seems to me)Felt the Movement beneath the canoe…a learned skill I Dare say…one I feel we need to learn on land & in the virtual world space.This is to say John we learn to feel into the Tension of Moment of Vulnerability & Clarity,Learn to Listen Non-Defensively (which is not to say limits & disagreement are not included,). The Empathetic experience of Difference is one of the skill sets I have been working with for 18yrs & I am better at it because of a willingness to do better & ask When at My Best?An example of this is to be able to sit with My Daughter(26) as she brings a Issue she has with me & I Activate Empathy with her while listening without reacting yet not necessarily agreeing with what’s being said,this has been painful for her Father which has suffered Trauma from the time she was 8yrs old & before that.John I also have had to learn about the timing of trusting my Defense Organs within,Clarity is very useful in this regard,sometimes a Big Fuck You is called for.So I want to say again for You & Everyone of the Rascal crew,this has given me a confidence-gentleness of expression I have encountered rarely.