Process Thinking

[Corrie van Wijk]

Dear James,

In our previous discussion with Phil on this forum: 'Perceiver - Object - Space of A' you contributed a formula:

'{[Perceiver - Relation - Perceived] Context}'.

Fritjof Capra (The Web of Life, 1996) distinguishes two great strands of systemic thinking: contextual and process thinking. "Every structure is seen as the manifestation of underlying processes."
He quotes Alexander Bogdanov: "The stability and development of all systems can be understood in terms of two basic organizational mechanisms: formation and regulation." (Tektology, 1912-1917)

I think that space questions are excellent (thank you David) to 'figure out' the (perceived) system:
A1. 'Ánd what kind of space is the space around you?' (A)/And what kind of boundaries does that space have?
A2. 'Does it have a shape or a size?'/'How far does that shape go?'/'And how big is that space?'/'And what's outside of that space?'
A2.3 'And is there anything else about that space?'

If you add
B1. "What would you like to have happen?' (B)
to this system of A, it becomes 'purposeful', directed towards a goal/desired outcome/purpose in life.
B2. 'And what kind of statement is that statement that is in that space ... there?'
B2.3. 'And is there anything else about [B]?'

By moving around in C (psychoactive space between A and B), information is 'downloaded' into the system and connected through a network of spaces.
C1. 'And what do you know from that space/direction ... there?'
C2. 'And is there another space/direction that also knows about [...]?'
C2.3 'And is there anything else about [...]?'.

Context is defined as: "Parts that precede or follow a passage & fix its meaning".

Relation is defined as: "What one person or thing has to do with another, way in which one stands or is related to another, kind of connexion or correspondence or contrast or feeling that prevails between persons or things" (both from the Concise Oxford, 1964).

'What would you like to have happen?' implies an (intended) change, expressed in a statement or symbolic object.

Capra quotes Heisenberg: "What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning."

Which clean question(s) would facilitate the dynamic process in the relationship between A and B (as a metaphor for any living system), as explored in C, other than the already dynamic process of connecting the network by asking to move sequentially from space to space or to spin around to view different directions?

"Brains seem to operate on the basis of massive connectivity, storing information distributively and manifesting a self-organizing capacity.

What kind of (perceived) process is going on?
What input/feedback (e.g. information from memory by association) goes into the system?
How does it effect it (creative ideas, emergent knowledge, pattern recognition, B or a change of B, etc.)
Who (A,f) is aware (conscious) of the system as a whole?
(Inspired by Peter Senge: The Dance of Change, 1999)

In short, what kind of interaction (to act reciprocally, to act on each other) is going on? How do we 'construct' our perception (by change of perspective, insight, attitude, etc.)?

Would you (or David, or anybody else) be interested to fit in this dynamic process in the above formula? Could you?

Corrie

[phil]

Which clean question(s) would facilitate the dynamic process in the relationship between A and B (as a metaphor for any living system), as explored in C, other than the already dynamic process of connecting the network by asking to move sequentially from space to space or to spin around to view different directions?


I guess this answer is obvious - and could get overlooked for that reason - so my answer is:"And is there a relationship between [A] and [B]?"

Any location questions (" Where..?", "Whereabouts..?") could be directed to the 'space of C', that is, between A and B. And any clean question that facilitates a client to model what is happening in the space of C would automatically 'facilitate the dynamic process between A and B'.

As we are attending to the space of C, I am also reminded of David saying that the one thing the facilitator can know about a system where a client is at A and has set up an outcome at B, is that the client can't get to B from A. If they could, it would not be a desired outcome - they would already have achieved it.


While it is fascinating to explore the space of C between A and B, maybe there is a risk of getting bogged down with the client in the fatally flawed relationship between A and B. My own aim using Clean Space is to explore other spaces quickly at first to widen the perspective and to avoid investing any one space with more psychoactive 'charge' than another (by dallying too long).Nasrudin was standing on the edge of a ravine, leaning forward at a sharp angle and staring hard at the village on the other side. The bridge that normally spanned the gap was lying in pieces at the foot of the cliff.

Along came his friend Wali. "Nasrudin, what are you doing this time?", he exclaimed. "Don't bother me", replied Nasrudin. "I am concentrating hard to make the ravine close up so that I can get to market."

"Are you crazy?" said the neighbour, "The ravine is 300 feet deep and 50 feet wide!"

"I know," smiled Nasrudin, "but I am concentrating VERY hard..."

with apologies to the Inimitable Mulla Nasrudin

I think part of David's amazing skill is that he seeks to remove us from our obsessive attention towards what we want and helps us approach it from another angle entirely. His question often takes the most unexpected direction or asks about what seems the least relevant piece of a client's response - and it takes them to places they haven't been to before.

When I asked him what he was doing about a year ago, he spoke of going 'adjacent'. Years ago he used to talk about going right around the world to approach something from the other side.

So maybe if, instead of Wali, David had come along to Nasrudin, he might have asked him: "And is there a space that knows else something about ravine?" and perhaps Nasrudin might have clambered down to the bottom of the cliff and found a path that led up to the village. Or maybe not!

[Corrie van Wijk]

The clean question: "And is there a relationship between [A] and [B]?", as well as location questions: "Where ...?", "Whereabouts ...?", if they were asked to me, would trigger a 'being'- instead of a 'doing' answer. So [A] knows about [B] 'being ... there', but [A] can't 'do' [B].

Suppose you'd ask Nasrudin the clean question: "Would the ravine be interested in closing up?" "And can it?" he would have to start thinking about the chance of that to have happen, i.e. the ravine 'doing' him the favour of closing up, which would implie an interaction between [A] and [C].

If you were to ask Nasrudin to find a space that knows something else about ravine and he turned around a saw an enemy coming, or he took one step closer to the edge and remembered his fight the last time he was in the village; and he would answer: "The bridge was destroyed by the people of the village!", then this would refer to an input/feedback from (the people at) [B].

The invitation to find another space is meant to download different information, which often emerges from the memory or a different view and adds to the network.

But how could the question itself direct the attention to the process (the interaction between Nasrudin or the enemy and the people at the village)?

From the view of the enemy or the memory from his last visit, how does he know the bridge was deliberately destroyed?

Corrie

[phil]

The clean question: "And is there a relationship between [A] and [b]?", as well as location questions: "Where ...?", "Whereabouts ...?", if they were asked to me, would trigger a 'being'- instead of a 'doing' answer. So [A] knows about [b] 'being ... there', but [A] can't 'do' [b].


In that case I would assume that your 'dynamic process' in C that is the relationship between A and B is something you call 'being' which is a behaviour just as much as 'doing' is. 'Being' is an active present continuous verb.

My belief-source for this is Maturana and Varela's handy little mind-boggler 'All being is doing and all doing is being' (did I get it the right way round? does it matter?!)

I may be being (doing) thick. It seems to me that if I ask a question to enquire about something specific (a 'dynamic process') that I believe is in C, I will be a) making an assumption that comes from my map, not the client's and b) probably introducing it into their map so not being as clean as I could be.

The cleanest thing I have thought of so far is "And is there a dynamic process there?"

Which I don't think is clean at all.

So for me I'd rather ask about a relationship which, while it introduces a metaphor, at least has the option of being perceived by the person at A as a dynamic process, a being, a metaphor, a nothing or whatever they like.

Nothing... hmm... is 'noth-ing' a process too, as in 'not-be-ing'. I'll look it up.

[Corrie van Wijk]

So Nasrudin decides to ask the ravine if it would be interested in closing up: "He, ravine, could you do me a favour?" "....aaaaaaa...ou..!" the ravine echoes. "Could you close up, so I can get to the other side?" ".... iiiii!" he hears from the ravine. Because of the echo some stones were dislodged and an avalanche is caused which piles up on top of the pieces of the bridge at the foot of the cliff. The water of the little stream is collected behind the barrage. Nasrudin jumps into the lake and swims to the other side to go to the market.

[Corrie van Wijk]

Nasrudin enters the village and notices all the hostile looks from the inhabitants (because of his previous fight). He bows his head and quietly does his shopping. As soon as he can he returns to the canyon and crosses the now dry riverbed to the other side.

"And what do you know from there?" David shouts over the edge.
"That I can't climb these cliffs!" he cries above.
"Is there another space that also knows about 'I can't climb this cliffs'?", David continues.
"My friend Wali up there with you knows that the canyon is 300 feet deep and 50 feet wide!"

So David turns to Wali and asks: "And when the canyon is 300 feet deep and 50 feet wide, that's like what?"
"Like a well", Wali replies, gesturing at the new formed lake.
"And when the canyon is like a well, is there anything else about that well?", David asks, replicating the gesture, ".... there?"
"It mirrors the canyon", Wali says, "which now looks less deep".

Nasrudin overhears that and walks up to the barrage.
"And what do you know from there?" David shouts.
"The cliff is less high, but I still can't climb it!"
"And what does that space know about 'I still can't climb it'?"

Nasrudin decides to sit down on some pieces of wood from the bridge and have a picknick with all the delicious things he bought at the market. In the meantime the lake gets filled up and the water starts to flow across the dam, forming little waterfalls to his left and right. He is so caught up eating his lunch that he doesn't notice the waterfalls getting stronger and stronger.
Suddenly a piece of wood he is sitting on starts to drift and he just manages to hold on to it while the current is taking him downstream. He manages to get ashore, finds a path up high and walks back to his friend Wali.

David is taking a nap, snoring stertorously, so Wali, taking on the role of a co-therapist, invites Nasrudin: "Turn around".
He turns a bit to the right and hears a sound in the distance.
"Keep turning", Wali encourages him.
Now both his ears pick up the sound, which seems to become louder.
"Keep turning", Wali insists.
Now he sees some dust on the horizon and realizes: 'the enemy!'

"Quick", he says to Wali and they wake up David, "let's jump into the lake!" (being a mullah, he learns quickly).
So all three of them jump into the lake. Nasrudin and Wali swim to the opposite shore, but David, a tub like this being his favourite space, treads the water and asks: "What do you know from there?"
"Well, if we can jump into the lake, so can the enemy!"
"Is there another space that also knows about 'so can the enemy jump into the lake', David asks just before he submerges.

Nasrudin and Wali walk up to the barrage.
"What does that space know?", David asks, coming to the surface gasping and spluttering, just to notice that they are removing the rocks from the barrage so the lake empties, which causes him to get drawn into the current and he tumbles down the waterfall. Grumbling about this, David climbs the riverbank a little further downstream and Nasrudin and Wali join him, humbly inquiring if he's allright.

"And what do you know from here", David sighs, shaking off the water like off a duck's back.
Nasrudin watches the enemy, that just arives on top of the cliff: "Sooner or later they as well will figure out how to get here." (probably not as quick as the smart mullah).
"Is there another space that also knows about their figuring out how to get here?", David patiently continues.
"The village probably knows by now. Let's go!"

So they walk up to the village and Wali warns the inhabitants.
"Gee", they say, "we know, that's why we destroyed the bridge in the first place; had it not been for Nasrudin talking to the canyon, we wouldn't have a problem now!"
Nasrudin hang his head in shame.
David, feeling responsible for having asked him that, resumes: "What would you like to have happen?"
"To prevent the enemy from figuring out how to get here: if they really want to, they'll manage!"", the crowd replies in choir.
"And when they really want to, and when they manage, what happens just before they'll manage?", David asks, looking worried.
"They must come up with a smart idea.", the crowd concludes.
"And when they must come up with a smart idea, what happens just before?"
"They must think really hard to close the gap!"
"And when they must think really hard to close the gap, would they be interested ... Can they?"
"That's crazy, it's 300 feet deep and 50 feet wide!", Wali says.

Now Nasrudin lifts his head and shouts: "I managed!"
"Yes, but you're a mullah, you can think harder than anyone else", Wali replies. Nasrudin smirked.

"And when they must think really hard to close the gap", David continues phlegmaticly, "then what happens?"
"We don't know", the crowd mutters under their breath.
"Is there another space that wants you to go to that also doesn't know?"
"That space over there", someone says, pointing at the enemy on the other side of the canyon.

"And what kind of interaction is there between this space here and that space ... there?", David asks, replicating the pointing at the enemy.
"They are interested in taking our property." (The women look worried for yet another reason.)
"And when they're interested in taking your property", David asks while, perceptive as ever, he frowns at the women. "Can they?"
"Sooner or later", the crowd nods.
"And when they can, what would you like to have happen?"
"To be able to stop them."
"And is there an object that symbolizes 'To be able to stop them'?"

They come up with a white flag.
"And where does that flag wants you to put it?"
They all walk up to the cliff.

"Is it a the right height?"
"Is it at the right angle?"
"Are you at the right distance?"
The crowd moves back a little bit.

"And what does the space know that's between you and the white flag?"
"The space knows that we want peace, but won't surrender."
"Is there another space that also knows about 'we want peace, but won't surrender'?"
Looking across the canyon: "That space over there."
"And is there anything else that space over there knows?"
"They're all sitting down, so may-be they give up."
"And when they're all sitting down, so may-be they give up, then what happens?"
"Hopefully they give a signal that they agree."
"And when they give a signal, is there a space that knows about 'they agree'?"

Looking over the edge of the cliff: "The former bridge down there knows."
David, looking down the canyon as well: "And when the bridge down there knows, what would it like to have happen?"
"It wants to be restored."
"And when it wants to be restored, is there another space that knows about it wanting to be restored?"

Looking across the canyon, they notice that now the enemy is looking over the edge of the cliff as well, gesturing to the pieces of the bridge.
"They do", nodding at the other side.
"And when 'they do', then what happens?"
"They also nod!"

The crowd shouts with joy. The sound causes several avalanches and they fill up the gap. They all run across the canyon.

The enemy stares at them with eyes wide open (they too wanted to restore the bridge, but for the purpose of being able to take the village) and then they flee into the woods, never to return again, for fear of this mighty people that bridges canyons.

[phil]

Great story, Corrie! Did you get all DG's current CS questions in? Pretty close I should think.

I suggest a short epilogue:

Their enemies defeated, the crowd returned to the village. They grabbed Nasrudin and David and Wali and, hoisting them on their shoulders, paraded them around the market square, cheering and shouting "Long live Mullah Nasrudin, Mullah David and Mullah Wali!" They repeated the 'Mullah Wali' bit several times.

"Why me?" said Wali, "I haven't really done much."
"We know", roared the crowd. "It's just adjacency at work. Besides, it sounds great. So shut up and enjoy it". So he did.

When their shoulders were tired, the villagers set them down on soft cushions and brought forth food and wine and folk musicians ("Well, you can't have everything", as Nasrudin said quietly to David) and a great shindig was held until the early hours of the morning.

There was one brief, ugly incident. The farmer who had tilled the land below the bridge came up to the three mullahs and started berating them. He blamed them for the landslide that had destroyed his crops.

The mullahs tolerated his ranting for several minutes until finally Nasrudin had had enough. "Look, you!", he said angrily. "Just f...find a space!"

Wali intervened and took the man to one side. He got the villagers to agree to compensate him which calmed him down and he was soon merry-making with the rest.

Early the next day, while the villagers slept off their hangovers, the three mullahs crept out of the village and crossed the newly-filled ravine. It was time to part.

"Well", said Nasrudin "It's been quite a ride!"

"And when ride, is there anything else about that ride?", said David.

"ENOUGH!" laughed the other two. The three embraced warmly but cleanly, as might be expected, then with a cheery wave they went their separate ways.

And the moral of this story? That's for you to decide!

They do say that stories never really end.

But this one does.

THE END