Introduction and Overview

... to the Good$hare website ...

 

    Goodshare's pages are implicitly about social transformation, community 'architecture' and 'designs for evolution',  ...the inference of implicitly being that these pages aim at sharing ideas on an alternative geometry for perceiving, inquiring, responding, managing and generally navigating in the world, from which greater harmonies may emerge, rather than proposing explicit recipes for 'what should be done'.

The essential ideas are not new; in fact they are very old, ... they emanate from the basic geometry of nature, and they are very simple.   But simplicity can breed complexity very quickly, the aesthetic complexity in nature is an example and it builds through a dialectical evolutionary spiral; "symmetrical growth of constituent ==> antisymmetrical container-limits to growth ==> container-constituent metasymmetrical growth".

Simplicity which starts from the binary abstractions of 'one' and 'zero' can also 'build' complexity, an example of which is the discrete and explicit complexity which underpins all of the computer programs and engineered machineries in the world.  And the simplicity which starts from the binary abstractions of 'good' and 'bad' can build, for example, a theology, a religion and a church with priests and doctrines.

The ancient, nature-geometry-sourced and relativity-validated ideas which permeate the essays and dialogues on these pages, do not seek to 'abolish' the machinery of the western scientific modes of perception, inquiry and response, they seek instead, to raise awareness of the value of extending these modes in an 'inclusionary' way, ... extending the 'one-or-zero' binary base which produces mechanical designs explainable on a flat sheet of paper (logical construction), back out to the 'ternary base' manifest in nature which brings 'the shape of space' or 'geometry of space' back into the picture, the ternary base of our immersed experience which emanates not from the flatspace abstractions of 'one-or-zero' but from the resonating volumetrics of 'outer', 'inner' and the codynamical relationship between the two. 

From the quark to the human being, we are all 'inhabitants' of a 'habitat' and our relationship with our habitat seeks to reconcile the inductive opportunity presented by the containing volume in which we are immersed with our assertive purpose as a constituent, an assertive purpose which does not emerge 'out of the blue', but which takes its contextual meaning from the opportunity presented to it.   'Opportunity' and 'purpose' are two facets of an 'essential opposition' or 'dipolarity' in nature, the 'evolutionary field' or the 'Úlan vitale', if you like, ... the innate quality of dynamically transforming space-time volumes in nature whose form emerges reciprocally with the codynamics of constituent material forms and their assertive kinetics.  This ternary visualization of nature is the visualization of relativity theory as well as that of 'indigenous wisdom' and it 'includes' the binary perspective of the western scientific thought, ... a binary perspective which sees the world solely in terms of 'assertive behaviours of independent causal agents' out of the context of the 'geometry of space'.  While the ternary perspective 'includes' the binary perspective, it is excluded by the binary perspective, ... and therein lies the 'rub'.

The things of nature intuitively 'recognize' that space is an enabling commons, the shape of which is transformed by the codynamics of its constituents.  When we are induced by the opportunities which our containing space presents to us, to assert purposively by moving into and filling a region of space, whether on the scale of establishing a community in an arable valley, or on the scale of physical love where we seek a reciprocating, inductive-assertive 'full-fill-ment', we know that the patterns of assertive purpose and inductive opportunity in the enveloping, unbounded space within which we are immersed players, are simultaneously, reciprocally impacted.   No region of space can be occupied more than once at the same time, but access to the same space may be essential to a multiplicity of systems, thus 'place' is a codynamical space-time process interwoven with its constituents, ... constituents which, therefore, cannot be adequately defined 'in their own right', on the basis of 'their' properties and assertive behaviours, out of the context of space and time.  

Because space does not allow more than one thing to occupy the same location, ... the 'shape of space' and the timing of its use, or more precisely, the shape of space-time, plays an overriding role in determining 'assertive behaviours' and that is the ancient idea that our western scientific culture, with its 'binary base' seems to be overlooking, ... at least in its formal architectures of personal and community management.  To 'forget about' the shape of space-time and the fact that space is a commons is 'unnatural'; i.e. is a tree still a tree when we bring it into a building where it can no longer 'share' with the atmosphere which gives it oxygen and moisture in timely cycles and the sun which gives it warmth and light in timely cycles , and the soil which gives it nutrients in timely cycles?  Is 'knowing what a tree 'is and does'' out of the context of its 'place-based' space-time-sharing relationships a sufficient knowledge of a tree?  Does a tree exist 'in its own right' in 'Euclidian space' out of the context of time?, ... so that by starting from this purely material-kinetic definition, we can then go on to describe what the tree will do as clock-time clicks on?   Does such a definition carry within it the seeds of an understanding of how the tree came to be in the first place? ... or not?

Rational knowledge, the knowledge of our western scientific tradition, as useful as it is, is solely concerned with 'how things assert' and does not 'take care of' the ever-present inductive role of the 'shape of space', the reciprocal to the assertive purpose of the constituencies of space.  We need 'imagination' to take care of that, ... and in this regard, 'imagination is more important [powerful] than knowledge', as Einstein observed.

Thus, simplicity can breed complexity and systems of perception, inquiry and management based on binary simplicity which ignore the 'geometry of space-time', can build a different type of complexity than systems of perception, inquiry and management based on ternary simplicity which includes the 'geometry of space-time'.  This is what our society is discovering 'bigtime' and this is what underlies the discussions on these Goodshare web-pages, whether they speak nominally to issues in management and governance, or to issues in medicine and psychology.

We have a manifest, natural need to exercise our ability to think 'inclusionally', to remember that all things are 'inclusions' which, in a nesting fashion, both 'include' and 'are included' in space-time codynamics, and to remember that all things are 'forms' immersed within a common containing space whose dynamically transforming interstices constitutes the inclusory 'mother form', ... and where the codynamical outer-inner engagement of these containing-and-constituent forms engenders 'coresonance' by whose measure we speak of social and environmental 'harmony' and/or 'dissonance'.

Rationality can take us away from the conscious awareness of the 'coresonance' aspects of the space-time geometry in which we are immersed; i.e. it can have us focus so strongly on the 'assertive aspects of ourselves and our systems' that we forget that space is a shared commons.  More than this, rational knowledge-based architectures, which deal only in the assertive actions of assumed 'independent causal agents' out of the context of the space-time commons, are being 'technology-amplified' up to global proportions.   The rational perspective, which views 'things' as being 'in their own right' in  split-apart Euclidian space and absolute time, a reference framing incapable of space-matter coresonance, is giving us a major exposure to 'dissonance', as is well captured in the words of the German poet and playwright Friedrich Schiller (1759 - 1805);

 

"The world is narrow and the mind is wide.

Thoughts live easily together,

But in space, hard things collide."

(Schiller, Wallenstein, cited by Erich Jantsch in 'Design for Evolution')

 

Physics, the 'queen of the sciences' and the authoritative underpinning for the logical space and time structures of management in our society, while having re-discovered the need to account for the 'shape of space' through relativity and (some aspects of) quantum theory, has been mesmerized by its own inventions, shifting its quest of 'understanding nature' to the quest of 'understanding its theoretical discoveries'.   'The tools have run away with the workman' as Emerson says, and so we persist in managing only the 'assertive behaviours' of things, as if space was 'infinite' (as the mathematical concept of Euclidian space which underpins our 'binary' architectures decrees).  But our biosphere is in no way 'infinite' and our rational architectures, which live easily in our minds, ... are increasingly in collision in the commons of our biosphere.

Evolutionary biology (as visualized by Caldwell, Rayner, Maturana, Kirchner and Weil etc), which is now transcending the rational-mechanical principle of 'Darwinian natural selection', receives special attention on these pages because its reasoning and its experiments look beyond the purely 'assertive behaviours of independent causal agents' worldview, ... and account for the role of the 'shape of space' with its inductive-assertive, opportunity-purpose reciprocity.   For these biologists, 'the organism IS its environment' since its assertive purpose does not develop and evolve 'in a Euclidian void', but co-evolves with the enveloping shape of dynamic opportunity space with which it is presented, and which it, in conjunction with its fellows, simultaneously, reciprocally transforms through its assertive actions.

The world and its constituents, according to eastern ancients and relativity, cannot be understood in the simplistic binary terms of particles and assertive 'forces' where we consider only 'what is done', but must be understood in the broader ternary terms of 'a space-given 'opportunity to do' which is transformed in the 'doing'.  Nature, at its base, is an inductive-assertive essence, where space and matter are not 'split apart' into 'something' and 'nothing' but have an essential quality of space-matter 'complementary opposition' or 'dipolarity', ... wherein all things manifest a tendency to 'full-fill-ment' by means of 'assertive behaviour, ... combining the purposive assertion of the individual constituent and the opportunity configuring capacity of the collective container within a coherent and unified, co-creative dipolar essence.   This ternary 'field' of container-constituent-coresonance and coevolution invokes a natural, experience-validated worldview which transcends yet includes the simplified abstract 'rational' worldview based on the mechanical combination of the monopolar 'one' of existential matter and 'null' of (Euclidian) space 'animated' in globally synchronous time.

 

Tao gave birth to One,

One gave birth to Two,

Two gave birth to Three,

Three gave birth to all the myriad things.

                                      Lao Tsu, Tao Te Ching (c. 500 B.C.)

 

The ternary view of the world, as embraced in the indigenous peoples traditions, and as implicitly or explicitly represented in the discussion within these Goodshare webpages, does not imply the demolishing of the binary world of matter-and-force, the material reality which we perceive, ... it simply opens up and extends the view of the 'architecture' of nature in the manner implied by relativity, replacing 'matter and force' as the elementary architectural units with 'field'.  Shifting our visualization to the notion of 'field', the inductive-assertive tendency for container-constituent-coresonance, brings back into our awareness, the manifest need to account for the 'shape of space' and for the fact that all things are inclusions in the 'commons of space-time' whose opportunity-giving 'shape' is co-created by the codynamics of the constituents.

'Physics', i.e. the mainstream political aspect of the discipline of physics, distracted by the quest of trying to understand its own newly discovered tool, is loathe to validate the need for this 'upgrade' from binary to ternary in the foundational fabric of our social systems.  'Dissenting' physicists such as Erich Jantsch (Design for Evolution, The Self-Organizing Universe), have argued for it with deep conviction but have not been 'heard', as the political hierarchy of the scientific discipline is itself an artifact of the binary model and it controls 'access to microphone' on issues of fundamental concept.  The ternary model suggested by relativity leads not to linear hierarchy but instead to collaborative structures as found in natural ecologies and in the traditions of the indigenous peoples, where leadership does not equate to 'control' via 'power of position' but to 'wise counsel' of people-appointed 'elders' on the basis, not of 'what they do or can do', but on the basis of the coresonance they induce within their enveloping community constituencies.

In sum, the intended message in the discussions on these Goodshare web pages is not 'what's wrong' or 'what's right' or 'what we must do' in the face of rising dysfunction in our society, but is instead to catalyse an awareness that our simplified binary models of nature and our corresponding rational management architectures have been building a particular type of complexity, through technology-amplified capacities and growth in population, which ignores the innate form, finiteness and space-time sharing quality of our 'biospheric commons', ... an awareness that the simplified, complexity-engendering rational models which live easily in our minds are increasingly in collision in our containing space, ... and that a re-vival of our natural faculty for perceiving, inquiring and responding on the basis of the transcendent ternary of 'container-constituent-coresonance', can restore the natural harmonies which we are currently dissipating at an alarming rate.

 * * *

... Return to Welcome Page, ...