3DN foundational metaphor
- In a conversation with Ravi Arapurakal, I had stated that his course in Oneness would help people be more effective in the two dimensional world but would not necessarily produce three dimensional systems. Ravi explained that these systems of production that I propose should not be thought of a Whole System Designs because [that] is something we discover about how the Whole is already designed to operate as a single system.
- Which brings us to the issue of the foundational metaphor of our world view:
- The predominate metaphor is the struggle between good and evil. Which is a two dimensional world view in which there are those allied for good (us) in a struggle with those allied for evil (them) and progress toward a “better” future requires that "we" defeat "them". This is the standard competition between groups for scarce resources on which our basic institutions are based.
- As we become more interconnected, I hear a lot about the body metaphor in which we, and all things, are like cells in an organism. In this metaphor, every cell has its assigned role and when a cell fails to fulfill its role it is said to be diseased. I think the idea that the Whole is already designed to operate as a single system fits with this metaphor.
- In the ecosystem metaphor, species and groups interact in ways that either increase diversity or decrease diversity. Using this metaphor, I am saying that generally the increase will be “good” and the decrease “bad” - so in that respect it is not much different from the first two. The reason that the ecosystem metaphor works best for me is that I cannot conceive of a predetermined end state – as in civilization progressing from infant to adulthood. Rather, the world can develop in an infinite number of ways.
- The question posed by these different metaphors is the question of free will and, perhaps, the ontological commitment – if I have free will then WE have free will. If we adopt the ecosystem metaphor, the world – as it is affected by human choice – is a constantly changing set of bridges and WE choose what it looks like. Therefore, it is up to those of us who understand this power of choice to propose choices most likely to lead to a world that realizes the biological and human potential of the planet. I don't think that is one large planetary experiment – I think it is many community experiments – because, large complex systems need locally stable components . . .
- The issue of predetermination or free will is an old discussion but it has significant ramifications for how we move forward from here. I can imagine the graduates from Ravi's course being very successful in life as they align themselves with the value flows through the system – and perhaps that is what people mean when they talk about self organizing systems. If we are not limited to how the “Whole is already designed” then we need to imagine all the possible ways the bridges could be configured and choose the configuration that best suits us. Until we “discover” the reality, I extend the offer of a bridge in mutual support to both those seeking to discover the latent design and those like me who would test potential design.
For further exploration see 3DN Limiting Assumptions |Three assumptions that prevent us from creating the world we want.
Back to Better Maps
Back to Introduction
Back to Table of Contents
