Convening the Field of CI

Enter your email address and select the appropriate button below to receive email notifications of updates to this site or remove yourself from the list
Subscribe Unsubscribe

September 09, 2005

Not a core group, then what? pollen?

Tom captured in his email of Sept. 4 to us what I think a good summary of the "core group" idea's morphing into something else, as follows:

It seems that we are not actually a core group. We are part of a process that wants to happen, as are Devon and the ESes. We are people who take this inquiry seriously and chose to devote most of two days to exploring it, and have ended up feeling connected to each other and volunteering to do some things along this line. We are not yet sure whether it makes sense to add others to any future meetings we have (we have to talk about it amongst ourselves first), but we are definitely not a core group, in any dedicated exclusive sense of the word.

To stay with the "flowers and meadow" metaphor, are we the bee pollen? Does bee-pollen inform the flowers about that they are the meadow? Do we need another metaphor? Let's try to define who we are with action rather than with words. I think a name, if we need one, will come from what we actually do.

Here's a suggestion for the way forward:

For me, a focused inquiry, as opposed to boundaryless, free-flowing conversations, is not only a form of action but probably the most useful thing we can do, in this stage.

If you agree, what is the focus of our inquiry? Wouldn't the following twin questions emerged from our meeting of last work, serve well as focus? Please approve or improve them this week, so we can communicate them with all those who would want to be part of a rigorous inquiry process that would inform and be informed by the Field. I offer to co-facilitate that inquiry if anyone was interested to work with me on that.

Tom, I think of something similar to your Social Intelligence Dialogue Panel of 1993. I still have a bunch of the materials that we produced and find them amazingly timely! It took only 12 years for some of those ideas to take off...

Here are the suggested focusing questions for our inquiry:

What does the global field of CI need, to augment its CI and translate it capacity for turning our growing crises into a positive evolutionary leap for humankind?

What do we need as a field and individual CI practitioners, to have the field help us evolve ourselves more swiftly?

Let me know whether they hold your interest and would consider to commit to stay in the flow of, AND contribute to, such a dual inquiry, on a more or less regular basis.

Posted by George Por, Fri, Sep 09 2005 11:10 AM
Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
Categories: Core Inquiry | Growing a CI Movement |

I'm happy to participate in these named inquiries. I would drop "ourselves" from the second one, as being either redundant or putting undue focus on individual evolution. The only other way I can see around it is to say "What do we need as a field and individual CI practitioners, to have the field help us evolve ourselves -- individually and collectively -- more swiftly?" So I could go either way -- either dropping the "ourselves" or adding the "individually and collectively." Thanks, George.

Posted by: Tom Atlee at September 10, 2005 06:51 PM

Thank you, Tom. Will change.

Posted by: George at September 10, 2005 07:38 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Recent Entries
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0