#shared understanding

[purposeful-solutions]

GriffUnder - Abstract Empathy by Universal Union | Udio

Listen to Abstract Empathy by Universal Union by GriffUnder on Udio. Discover, create, and share music with the world. Use the latest techn

Abstract Empathy by Universal Union

Lyrics

Abstract, attract, react, Aligned with divine, on the path, Neural mind, refined, designed, Humble and kind, intertwined with math, One of a kind, aligned, Recognize, realize, Unknowns, shown, Grow, know, algorithms, Flow, showin by given Unfathomable livin, mathematical Expandable, understandable, Complexities, perplexities, Mysteries, histories, knowledge of these Fathomless, threads of tapestries seamless, Boundless, timeless, Endless, relentless, Vastness, fastness, like when i sent this, Universe, traverse with a verse Infinite, detailed and intricate, Ethereal connection through spherical, Galaxies, mapping the fantasies, Realities experiencing multiple possibilities, Dimensional transcendental, overcome obstacles Elemental,beyond fundamental, Quantum, stay running, tantrums, Particles, fractals, rhythms like drums Energy, synergy, all part of the one Cosmos, bios, sums having fun Paradoxes, complexities running, Enigmas, synchronicities' spun in, Intuitions, in conditions inscribed, Awareness, fairness, another form of alive, holistic soul that grows, connections flow, tied together like a bow, terrific core compute like a pro Subatomic, erratic vision through static, Particles collide, subdivide into more magic Chaos, entropy new cosmic seeds , Order and disorder, no order successive playing Strings, rings sounds that progressive Vibrations, sensations, understanding creation Frequencies, energies, radiant relations, Wavelengths, strengthen the foundations Resonance, permanence, growing enormous Harmony, balance in a system of eternity, without touching me your feeling me, metamorphosis to what i am and keep learning G

"Abstract Empathy, abstract, abstract, Entropy, chaos, cosmic seeds, On a path of empathy, we connect, Transcendental frequencies, intersect."

[shebulba]

[amjeblog]

Divergent Thinking, SPIMES, IoT and Shared Understanding

Human nature limits us from learning without limits in today’s technology driven world. People always have to follow a set of rules, regulations due to the cultural, social, legal and ethical aspects of everyday professional or personal life.

Divergent thinking (Bernhard, 2013) is a process where you consider as many possible solutions for a creative idea or a concept. In this process many of us may have to go beyond our comfortability zones to participate this collaborative idea. Also each person, human is unique to each other and in a group of people the diversity of talents, knowledge, skills, experiences and thoughts will be extremely broad comparing to a single person. When it comes to a group of thinkers, collaborators, the conflict between each and every person’s ideas can lead to remarkable discoveries. 

Approaches like open space technology (Owen, n.d.)  can lead to more opportunities where everyone can contribute with out any hierarchical orders or levels. Even though with all these techniques, tacit knowledge is the hardest to explain or collect where you need deep conversations and discussions to at least scratch the surface.

 Shared understanding (Baker, 2009) is the concept of converting individual understandings to group perspectives, also known as the big picture to everyone. Divergent thinking, open space technology, tacit knowledge and conflicts of all kind converges to create a shared understanding.

All the above converge together and creates the perfect corporate environment where each and every process is handled by SPIMES in one large IoT. In such organization, every process is handles by software programs and intelligent systems or in other words SPIMES. productivity and efficiency is almost 99%, where consumers needs are predicted even before they arrive to the market. Accuracy of the information can reach almost 99% where suppliers and manufacturing departments can make precise orders quantities and samples. Finally...

divergent thinking + shared understanding + IoT + SPIMS = zero waste

References: 

Baker, J.F. (2009). What is shared understanding?. Retrieved 24 June, 2009, from http://reverbconsulting.blogspot.co.nz/2009/06/what-is-shared-understanding.html

Bernhard, J.D.T. (2013). What Type of Thinker Are You?. Retrieved 28 Feb, 2013, from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/turning-straw-gold/201302/what-type-thinker-are-you

Owen, H. (n.d.). Open Space Technology. Retrieved 16 May, 2016, from http://www.openspaceworld.com/users_guide.htm

[warrantless]

your enemies often know you best

Margaret: I spared her life.

The Doctor: You let one of them go but that's nothing new. Every now and then a little victim's spared because she smiled, 'cause he's got freckles. 'Cause they begged. And that's how you live with yourself. That's how you slaughter millions. Because once in awhile—on a whim, if the wind's in the right direction—you happen to be kind.

Margaret: Only a killer would know that. IS that right? From what I've seen, your funny little happy go-lucky life leaves devastation in its wake. Always moving on because you dare not look back. Playing with so many people's lives you might as well be a god. And you're right, Doctor. You're absolutely right. Sometimes you let one go. Let me go.

[isyeye]

There is an enviable simplicity to many acts in a society which was, in all its daily life, only one gender. And which, perhaps—I don’t know this but it occurred to me then, while I was ashamed of myself—has no shame?

Ursula K. Le Guin / The Matter of Seggri

[joachimvlieghe]

Summary

"The Narrative Construction of Reality" – Jerome Bruner

Observation: “I have a strong hunch, which may at first seem counterintuitive, that it is this very context sensitivity that makes narrative discourse in everyday life such a viable instrument for cultural negotiation. You tell your version, I tell mine, and we rarely need legal confrontation to settle the difference. Principles of charity and presumptions of relevance are balanced against principles of sufficient ignorance and sufficient doubt to a degree one would not expect where criteria of consistency and verification prevailed. We seem to be able to take competing versions of a story with a perspectival grain of salt, much more so than in the case of arguments or proofs. (...) [It is not] surprising that anthropologists have increasingly turned away from positivist descriptions of cultures toward an interpretive one in which not objective categories but ‘meanings’ are sought for, not meanings imposed ex hypothesis by an outsider, the anthropologist, but ones arrived at by indigenous participants immersed in the culture's own processes for negotiating meaning.” (JB, p.17)

Central issues: “If the acquisition of knowledge and of mental powers is indeed domain specific and not automatically transferable, this surely implies that a domain, so called, is a set of principles and procedures, rather like a prosthetic device, that permits intelligence to be used in certain ways, but not in others. (...) These domains, looked at in another way, constitute something like a culture's treasury of tool kits. Few people ever master the whole range of tool kits: we grow clever in certain spheres and remain incompetent in others in which, as it were, we do not become "hitched" to the relevant tool kit. Indeed, one can go even further and argue, as some have, that such cultural tool kits (if I may so designate the principles and procedures involved in domain-specific growth) may in fact have exerted selection pressures on the evolution of human capacities.” (JB, pp.2-3)      >>Conclusions:      “Let me return now to the original premise—that there are specific domains of human knowledge and skill and that they are supported and organized by cultural tool kits. If we accept this view, a first conclusion would be that in understanding the nature and growth of mind in any setting, we cannot take as our unit of analysis the isolated individual operating ‘inside his or her own skin’ in a cultural vacuum. Rather, we must accept the view that the human mind cannot express its nascent powers without the enablement of the symbolic systems of culture. While many of these systems are relatively autonomous in a given culture (...) some relate to domains of skill that must be shared by virtually all members of a culture if the culture is to be effective. The division of labor within a society goes only so far. Everybody within a culture must in some measure, for example, be able to enter into the exchange of the linguistic community, even granted that ,this community may be divided by idiolects and registers. Another domain that must be widely (though roughly) shared for a culture to operate with requisite effectiveness is the domain of social beliefs and procedures—what we think people are like and how they must get on with each other, what elsewhere I have called folk psychology and what Harold Garfinkel has called ethnosociology. These are domains that are, in the main, organized narratively.” (JB, pp.20-21)

Premisses: Situated socio-cultural participation

   “An individual's working intelligence is never ‘solo’. It cannot be understood without taking into account his or her reference books, notes, computer programs and data bases, or most important of all, the network of friends, colleagues, or mentors on whom one leans for help and advice. (...) Once one takes such views as seriously as they deserve, there are some interesting and not so obvious consequences. The first is that there are probably a fair number of important domains supported by cultural tool kits and distributional networks. A second is that the domains are probably differentially integrated in different cultures, as anthropologists have been insisting for some years now. And a third is that many domains are not organized by logical principles or associative connections, particularly those that have to do with man's knowledge of himself, his social world, his culture.” (JB, pp.3-4)      >> Remark: The necessity of contextual data or background information to understand a personas socio-cultural participation and his framing of that participation in a personal narrative is also reflected in the online world, especially in the networked relations represented in social media.

Meaning making and narrativity    “We organize our experience and our memory of human happenings mainly in the form of narrative—stories, excuses, myths, reasons for doing and not doing, and so on. Narrative is a conventional form, transmitted culturally and constrained by each individual's level of mastery and by his conglomerate of prosthetic devices, colleagues, and mentors. Unlike the constructions generated by logical and scientific procedures that can be weeded out by falsification, narrative constructions can only achieve ‘verisimilitude’. Narratives, then, are a version of reality whose acceptability is governed by convention and 'narrative necessity' rather than by empirical verification and logical requiredness, although ironically we have no compunction about calling stories true or false.” (JB, pp.4-5)      > Normativity: the implicit canonical script      “Narratives require such scripts as necessary background, but they do not constitute narrativity itself. For to be worth telling, a tale must be about how an implicit canonical script has been breached, violated, or deviated from in a manner to do violence to what Hayden White calls the ‘legitimacy’ of the canonical script.” (JB, p.11)          > Canonical breach and the Dramatic Pentad           “Take Kenneth Burke's celebrated account of the dramatic ‘pentad’. The pentad consists of an Agent, an Act, a Scene, a Purpose, and an Agency, the appropriate balance among these elements being defined as a ‘ratio’ determined by cultural convention. When this ‘ratio’ becomes unbalanced, when conventional expectation is breached, Trouble ensues. And it is Trouble that provides the engine of drama, Trouble as an imbalance between any and all of the five elements of the pentad. Precipitating events are, as it were, emblems of the imbalance. Burke's principal emphasis is on plight, fabula. It is, as it were, concerned ontologically with the cultural world and its arrangements, with norms as they ‘exist’.” (JB, p.16)              >> “The ‘breach’ component of a narrative can be created by linguistic means as well as by the use of a putatively delegitimizing precipitating event in the plot.” (JB, p.12)                  > Tropes: linguistic breaches becoming part of the canon                  “(...) both scripts and their breaches also provide rich grounds for innovation (...). And this is, perhaps, what makes the innovative storyteller such a powerful figure in a culture. He may go beyond the conventional scripts, leading people to see human happenings in a fresh way, indeed, in a way they had never before ‘noticed’ or even dreamed.” (JB, p.12)                  + “The normativeness of narrative, in a word, is not historically or culturally terminal. Its form changes with the preoccupations of the age and the circumstances surrounding its production. Nor is it required of narrative, by the way, that the Trouble with which it deals be resolved. Narrative, I believe, is designed to contain uncanniness rather than to resolve it. It does not have to come out on the ‘right side’.” (JB, p.16)                             >> Remark: Perhaps this says something about how someone becomes an expert in a domain.