What do you think?
Rate this book
Small Arcs of Larger Circles: Framing through Other Patterns
Building on Gregory Bateson’s famous book Towards an Ecology of Mind and her own film on the subject, Nora Bateson here updates our thinking on systems and ecosystems, applying her own insights and those of her team at IBI to education, organisations, complexity, academia, and the way that society organizes itself. She also introduces two • ‘symmathesy’ to describe the contextual mutual learning through interaction that takes place in living entities at larger or smaller scales • ‘transcontextuality’ to describe the multiple, interlayered spatial, social, temporal, cultural, ecological, economic contexts in which symmathesy takes place. While she retains her father’s rigorous attention to definition, observation and academic precision, she also moves well beyond that frame of reference to incorporate more embodied ways of knowing and understanding. These are reflected in her essays and poems on food, Christmas, love, honesty, environmentalism and leadership. The book offers important advice and new thinking on issues like immigration, systems thinking, new economic and financial models, future thinking and strategic planning, sustainability and governmental ethics, agency in organizational leadership, the education system and organizational governance.
277 pages, Kindle Edition
Published October 22, 2016
96 people are currently reading
665 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
May 20, 2019
BATESON 3.0
It has been a while, but I really had a wow!-experience with this book. Hence this extensive review, with my apologies for the length.
Nora Bateson is the daughter of the British anthropologist-psychologist-philosopher-systems thinker (etc.) Gregory Bateson (1904-1980), a rather elusive figure who combined many disciplines and focussed very fundamentally on the essence of reality. He is best known for his Mind and Nature, 1979, in which he suggests that there is a global spirit that permeates and connects both living and non-living things (I know that with that description I undervalue Bateson, because his thinking is much more complex than that). Essential concepts for him are 'uncertainty' and 'complexity', which means that he connects directly with systems thinking and complexity theories. I read a biography of him, some loose texts, followed a seminar about him (thanks Philippe!), and even read a novel based on his views (Tim Parks. Dreams Of Rivers And Seas). But nevertheless his thinking remained fairly hermetic to me.
His daughter Nora (° 1968) initially took a completely different path in life and became a film maker. But she has struggled all her life with the intellectual legacy of her father. In recent years in particular, she has made re-evaluating and re-interpreting Gregory's views into her main activity, for example through a film about her father ("An Ecology of Mind", 2010) and her chairmanship of the International Bateson Institute in Stockholm (° 2014) .
This book bundles various articles she has written in recent years, readings, essays, but also poetry, drawings and loose musings. The great thing about this book is that it builds directly on the thinking of Gregory Bateson (which has now become much clearer to me) and also of her grandfather William Bateson (1861-1926, a famous biologist). Of course, she offers her own, albeit privileged, interpretation of their views, and alignes them with the problems we are confronted with at the beginning of the 21st century, hence my title "Bateson 3.0". For obvious reasons her emphasis is more on ecological thinking: looking at reality as a complex ecological system, which is interconnected in various dimensions and scales, and itself consists of a jumble of ecological systems that relate to each other in a particularly complex way. Nora Bateson's own contribution is to add contextual thinking: not only the interrelationships, but especially the different contexts of those relationships are important to her. She herself speaks of trans-contextuality. “Transcontextual description as a starting place opens the possibilities of better understanding the interdependency that characterizes living (and arguably many non-living) systems. With a transcontextual lens I find interfaces of mutual learning. This lens opens up entirely new dimensions of information where the data has otherwise been flattened into a single plane or a single context. I also find that the multiplicity of the descriptive process demands that I never lose sight of the many perspectives that are integrating.”
She immediately adds that the key to reading trans-contextuality is above all the process of "mutual learning": various contexts are constantly learning from each other, so that an even more complex dynamic whole is created, which is constantly adapting and constantly interacting. I particularly like that dynamic aspect; as Nora Bateson herself indicates, it takes into account the time factor, a factor that is overlooked by most other analyses, making reality rather static, as represented in a model, a chart or a map. Of course, as a historian, I like her take on this.
That shift in Nora’s view, compared to her father’s, stems from a discontent with the path that systems thinking and complexity theories have taken: although they are fundamentally anti-reductionist and anti-deterministic, they have become, according to her, more and more mechanistic, ending up in an engineer's approach that cannot really solve the fundamental problems of our time: “the linearity and the mechanistic principles of reductionism in western culture have wormed their way into the systems vocabulary. The result is that we get strategic methodologies and defined models for fixing isolated issues within complex living interactions that have a living context.”
She is also critical about the recent tendency to connect systems thinking with holistic approaches and to constantly speak in terms of parts and wholes: “The very idea of interconnectedness has allowed lines to be drawn lazily between nodes or parts of the whole system. The world may be able to use the terms of systems thinking, but some of the thinking has lost its real value and become muddled into something more akin to ‘oneness’.”
Hence her emphasis on trans-contextuality. And also - instead of engineering methods - a more aesthetic approach (and this is in line with her father's thinking): the artistic is a way of dealing with reality that is more transparent and above all shows more respect, in contrast to the control obsession of mechanistic thinking. “In all forms, art can offer an experience of integration that calls upon our cultural language of symbols, our imagination, our history, our intellect, and our emotions. (…) As I see it, art allows us to perceive from multiple perspectives simultaneously. In order for science to really work with complexity, we need art to help give scientists a more developed capacity to perceive context, one that includes all the disciplines, emotions, cultural symbols, and personal memories. As Blake said in ‘The Grey Monk’: “A tear is an intellectual thing.””
That may all sound abstract, and Nora Bateson admits that her discourse does indeed remains fairly theoretical. But for her that other way of looking at reality is the only way out of stalled scientistic thinking, of which many well-meaning approaches (such as holism, systems thinking, etc.) still are permeated. On top of that, for Nora, this new approach is really needed if we are to tackle the enormous challenges facing humanity, - the apocalyptic perspective of climate change and the decline of biodiversity -, in a much more appropriate way. With a typical Batesonian twist, she goes one step further in that thought process: why not start from the worst case? Can we make an exercise that takes the apocalypse as given, and think back from that perspective?: “Using this kind of ‘pre-hindsight,’ different directions for our actions may become imperative, and for very different reasons than we might expect. Looking backward from the rubble of our mistakes we may see our current priorities from another angle. While this thought exercise may appear to embody a loss of hope, it is also likely that leapfrogging on the timeline of consequences may provoke a kind of thinking we do not otherwise have access to.” That sounds problematic, but it is at least a challenging proposal.
The multiformity of this booklet in itself testifies to the pluriform nature of Nora Bateson's thinking and how it is based on uncertainty and complexity, all in line with her father and grandfather. She remains modest, because she is well aware that her approach remains very abstract and theoretical, but it is at least a good, practical starting point: “In defense of a world that is characterized by mutual learning between variables in a given context—a world that does not stay the same, a world that won’t be mechanized or modeled—in defense of that world, I maintain that nothing could be more practical than to become more familiar with the patterns of movement that life requires. The goal is not to crack the code, but rather to catch the rhythm.”
In one of her essays she makes an attempt to put her approach into practice in a more systematic, theoretical framework, with the central notion of the "symmathesy" instead of the term "system". I’m not sure this approach is the way to go, because it remains very abstract. Time will tell, but it is at least worth the effort to walk the path. She herself is rather optimistic: “I maintain, at the risk of being called abstract, that the possibility of an increase in our ability to receive nuanced information about the interactions in a complex system exists. This is my optimism. This is where I place hope for the coming eras. We need that sensitivity to live better lives. This is the sensitivity that will allow us to understand our spouses better, to raise our children better, to grow food better, study life better, and organize our world better. It will also make us into artists. I maintain that nothing could be more practical”.
It has been a while, but I really had a wow!-experience with this book. Hence this extensive review, with my apologies for the length.
Nora Bateson is the daughter of the British anthropologist-psychologist-philosopher-systems thinker (etc.) Gregory Bateson (1904-1980), a rather elusive figure who combined many disciplines and focussed very fundamentally on the essence of reality. He is best known for his Mind and Nature, 1979, in which he suggests that there is a global spirit that permeates and connects both living and non-living things (I know that with that description I undervalue Bateson, because his thinking is much more complex than that). Essential concepts for him are 'uncertainty' and 'complexity', which means that he connects directly with systems thinking and complexity theories. I read a biography of him, some loose texts, followed a seminar about him (thanks Philippe!), and even read a novel based on his views (Tim Parks. Dreams Of Rivers And Seas). But nevertheless his thinking remained fairly hermetic to me.
His daughter Nora (° 1968) initially took a completely different path in life and became a film maker. But she has struggled all her life with the intellectual legacy of her father. In recent years in particular, she has made re-evaluating and re-interpreting Gregory's views into her main activity, for example through a film about her father ("An Ecology of Mind", 2010) and her chairmanship of the International Bateson Institute in Stockholm (° 2014) .
This book bundles various articles she has written in recent years, readings, essays, but also poetry, drawings and loose musings. The great thing about this book is that it builds directly on the thinking of Gregory Bateson (which has now become much clearer to me) and also of her grandfather William Bateson (1861-1926, a famous biologist). Of course, she offers her own, albeit privileged, interpretation of their views, and alignes them with the problems we are confronted with at the beginning of the 21st century, hence my title "Bateson 3.0". For obvious reasons her emphasis is more on ecological thinking: looking at reality as a complex ecological system, which is interconnected in various dimensions and scales, and itself consists of a jumble of ecological systems that relate to each other in a particularly complex way. Nora Bateson's own contribution is to add contextual thinking: not only the interrelationships, but especially the different contexts of those relationships are important to her. She herself speaks of trans-contextuality. “Transcontextual description as a starting place opens the possibilities of better understanding the interdependency that characterizes living (and arguably many non-living) systems. With a transcontextual lens I find interfaces of mutual learning. This lens opens up entirely new dimensions of information where the data has otherwise been flattened into a single plane or a single context. I also find that the multiplicity of the descriptive process demands that I never lose sight of the many perspectives that are integrating.”
She immediately adds that the key to reading trans-contextuality is above all the process of "mutual learning": various contexts are constantly learning from each other, so that an even more complex dynamic whole is created, which is constantly adapting and constantly interacting. I particularly like that dynamic aspect; as Nora Bateson herself indicates, it takes into account the time factor, a factor that is overlooked by most other analyses, making reality rather static, as represented in a model, a chart or a map. Of course, as a historian, I like her take on this.
That shift in Nora’s view, compared to her father’s, stems from a discontent with the path that systems thinking and complexity theories have taken: although they are fundamentally anti-reductionist and anti-deterministic, they have become, according to her, more and more mechanistic, ending up in an engineer's approach that cannot really solve the fundamental problems of our time: “the linearity and the mechanistic principles of reductionism in western culture have wormed their way into the systems vocabulary. The result is that we get strategic methodologies and defined models for fixing isolated issues within complex living interactions that have a living context.”
She is also critical about the recent tendency to connect systems thinking with holistic approaches and to constantly speak in terms of parts and wholes: “The very idea of interconnectedness has allowed lines to be drawn lazily between nodes or parts of the whole system. The world may be able to use the terms of systems thinking, but some of the thinking has lost its real value and become muddled into something more akin to ‘oneness’.”
Hence her emphasis on trans-contextuality. And also - instead of engineering methods - a more aesthetic approach (and this is in line with her father's thinking): the artistic is a way of dealing with reality that is more transparent and above all shows more respect, in contrast to the control obsession of mechanistic thinking. “In all forms, art can offer an experience of integration that calls upon our cultural language of symbols, our imagination, our history, our intellect, and our emotions. (…) As I see it, art allows us to perceive from multiple perspectives simultaneously. In order for science to really work with complexity, we need art to help give scientists a more developed capacity to perceive context, one that includes all the disciplines, emotions, cultural symbols, and personal memories. As Blake said in ‘The Grey Monk’: “A tear is an intellectual thing.””
That may all sound abstract, and Nora Bateson admits that her discourse does indeed remains fairly theoretical. But for her that other way of looking at reality is the only way out of stalled scientistic thinking, of which many well-meaning approaches (such as holism, systems thinking, etc.) still are permeated. On top of that, for Nora, this new approach is really needed if we are to tackle the enormous challenges facing humanity, - the apocalyptic perspective of climate change and the decline of biodiversity -, in a much more appropriate way. With a typical Batesonian twist, she goes one step further in that thought process: why not start from the worst case? Can we make an exercise that takes the apocalypse as given, and think back from that perspective?: “Using this kind of ‘pre-hindsight,’ different directions for our actions may become imperative, and for very different reasons than we might expect. Looking backward from the rubble of our mistakes we may see our current priorities from another angle. While this thought exercise may appear to embody a loss of hope, it is also likely that leapfrogging on the timeline of consequences may provoke a kind of thinking we do not otherwise have access to.” That sounds problematic, but it is at least a challenging proposal.
The multiformity of this booklet in itself testifies to the pluriform nature of Nora Bateson's thinking and how it is based on uncertainty and complexity, all in line with her father and grandfather. She remains modest, because she is well aware that her approach remains very abstract and theoretical, but it is at least a good, practical starting point: “In defense of a world that is characterized by mutual learning between variables in a given context—a world that does not stay the same, a world that won’t be mechanized or modeled—in defense of that world, I maintain that nothing could be more practical than to become more familiar with the patterns of movement that life requires. The goal is not to crack the code, but rather to catch the rhythm.”
In one of her essays she makes an attempt to put her approach into practice in a more systematic, theoretical framework, with the central notion of the "symmathesy" instead of the term "system". I’m not sure this approach is the way to go, because it remains very abstract. Time will tell, but it is at least worth the effort to walk the path. She herself is rather optimistic: “I maintain, at the risk of being called abstract, that the possibility of an increase in our ability to receive nuanced information about the interactions in a complex system exists. This is my optimism. This is where I place hope for the coming eras. We need that sensitivity to live better lives. This is the sensitivity that will allow us to understand our spouses better, to raise our children better, to grow food better, study life better, and organize our world better. It will also make us into artists. I maintain that nothing could be more practical”.
October 10, 2017
Disclaimer: I edited this book.
Of all the many, many books I have worked on, this is the one I am most excited by, most delighted by, most privileged to have worked on, most happy to have on my bookshelves and most eager to give to friends. I would recommend it to absolutely anybody, to a wise (wo)man or a fool, to a cynic or an incurable optimist. I know that some readers find it hard to accept that a 'proper' book can have poetry, talks, stories, autobiography, science, politics, essays, power and love all mixed up together in its pages. But this book can and does. Please read it.
If you can't afford a copy, write to me at Triarchy Press and I'll send you one.
Of all the many, many books I have worked on, this is the one I am most excited by, most delighted by, most privileged to have worked on, most happy to have on my bookshelves and most eager to give to friends. I would recommend it to absolutely anybody, to a wise (wo)man or a fool, to a cynic or an incurable optimist. I know that some readers find it hard to accept that a 'proper' book can have poetry, talks, stories, autobiography, science, politics, essays, power and love all mixed up together in its pages. But this book can and does. Please read it.
If you can't afford a copy, write to me at Triarchy Press and I'll send you one.
June 5, 2017
The most inspiring and nourishing book I have read in a long time. Her depth, warmth, intellect and heart shine through. A worthy addition to the Bateson clan legacy.
September 1, 2019
Cathartic.
It keeps me questions many of my fundamental ways of thinking about the world and the processes changing it.
It keeps me questions many of my fundamental ways of thinking about the world and the processes changing it.
June 24, 2019
If I could give this book six stars, or more, I would. This is one of the most important books I have ever read. It exists on many levels and in many registers - it is poetry, it is essays, meditations, (auto)biography, science with a special focus on ecology, but also on communications, as you would expect from a disciple of Gregory Bateson, her father. The book never settles into one mode of speaking, and yet all the modes resonatewith each other and tell the same overall story. I read this as part of a group effort, (re)reading her father’s book Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology andreading this book in tandem. This was a wonderful way to read the book, since Nora’s ideas dance in two-step with her father’s ideas. The book seeks to provide insight into the way forward, out of the impasse into which humanity has arrived and which her father warned about, half a century ago. It portrays the challenges realistically, and yet offers hope, and vision, for a way forward.
December 17, 2020
Wisdom, obliquely shared.
A book which I circle back to, in all my patterns.
A book which I circle back to, in all my patterns.
December 9, 2023
Grappling how to navigate life seen as a complex dynamic system, the author (daughter of the renowned anthropologist/philosopher Gregory Bateson) points out the interrelatedness and interdependency of variables within such a system (transcontextualism), the pitfalls of the concept of individuation and agency, and the drawbacks of the historically dominant reductionist and deterministic, linear concept of causality. Nothing new as far as epistemological musings go, but very well put; will read more by Bateson (father and daughter!).
"There is no language to define the spiraling processes of the vast context we are participants in. We do not have names for the patterns of interdependency. To lock down the delicate filigree of life in explanation is to lose it, but not to see it is disastrous. Words are what we have. The why, of why we do anything at all, matters."
"An institution is made of people, each with their own biographies, and it exists within community, culture and, ultimately, the natural world. Margaret Mead noted the African proverb, “It takes a village to raise a child.” Indeed, the responsibility for the world the child grows to understand lies in the collective impressions that the village provides. In the same way, the behavior of institutions lies in the contextual expectations and valuations of each organization’s relationships within the larger community, as well as at the level of each employee. This is a tricky set of boundaries to draw, influenced at meta levels by lurking habits of thinking that tend to individuate. The responsibility is in the village, and the way the village interacts with its institutions. In the same way, the institutions interact with each other to form the linking zone where the blending of culture, economy and education happens. In our dissatisfaction with the behavior of our institutional or corporate organizations, we, the village, with our wish for ‘change,’ may feel impotent. Politics, business, law, education, medicine, and media are all substantiating each other. Politics needs business to thrive, education is the link to employment and scientific importance, medicine and law try to support both the political and personal codes of health and justice in respect to business and governmental policy. We cannot after all vote on the board or rewrite corporate policy from the sidelines. We cannot impose transformation on the institutions. But we can change our relationship to them. In doing so we alter relationships between institutions. Collectively, growing systemic transformation is always relational; the ecology is what changes, not the individual bits."
"The notion of the individual entity having agency is confused by a paradox. The confusion lies with the idea of individuation. The entity (organism, person, or organization) is bound to its unique perspective or epistemology, and in that sense is identifiable as a separate source of responsibility. But, there is no aspect of that entity that is uninfluenced, uninformed, or unbound to the larger contextual interactions. On closer examination we begin to see that agency is diffused into the larger contextual processes that are shared by the entire community. Agency is a paradoxical product of mutual learning within and between people, nature, and culture."
"The deepening is not finding the answer, not looking for a final truth, but becoming increasingly familiar with the many complexities that surround all that we study. We will never understand it completely, but we can continue (endlessly) to increase our comprehension of the variables at play."
"So, the point, the deliverable, the practicality of my work is not to offer concrete solutions, or stepped improvement plans. It is to offer an invitation in to a world that does not sit still, and encourage an increase in sensitivity to the complexity in all of its glory and gore. My work is premised on the idea of mutual learning between and within living contexts. This learning does not stop. It is not always progressive, or good: sometimes learning to be in a context includes addiction, pathology, and so on. We cannot control mutual learning; we cannot solve it. But, we can become more able to take in and consider the complexity we are faced with if we approach it from this stance."
"There is no language to define the spiraling processes of the vast context we are participants in. We do not have names for the patterns of interdependency. To lock down the delicate filigree of life in explanation is to lose it, but not to see it is disastrous. Words are what we have. The why, of why we do anything at all, matters."
"An institution is made of people, each with their own biographies, and it exists within community, culture and, ultimately, the natural world. Margaret Mead noted the African proverb, “It takes a village to raise a child.” Indeed, the responsibility for the world the child grows to understand lies in the collective impressions that the village provides. In the same way, the behavior of institutions lies in the contextual expectations and valuations of each organization’s relationships within the larger community, as well as at the level of each employee. This is a tricky set of boundaries to draw, influenced at meta levels by lurking habits of thinking that tend to individuate. The responsibility is in the village, and the way the village interacts with its institutions. In the same way, the institutions interact with each other to form the linking zone where the blending of culture, economy and education happens. In our dissatisfaction with the behavior of our institutional or corporate organizations, we, the village, with our wish for ‘change,’ may feel impotent. Politics, business, law, education, medicine, and media are all substantiating each other. Politics needs business to thrive, education is the link to employment and scientific importance, medicine and law try to support both the political and personal codes of health and justice in respect to business and governmental policy. We cannot after all vote on the board or rewrite corporate policy from the sidelines. We cannot impose transformation on the institutions. But we can change our relationship to them. In doing so we alter relationships between institutions. Collectively, growing systemic transformation is always relational; the ecology is what changes, not the individual bits."
"The notion of the individual entity having agency is confused by a paradox. The confusion lies with the idea of individuation. The entity (organism, person, or organization) is bound to its unique perspective or epistemology, and in that sense is identifiable as a separate source of responsibility. But, there is no aspect of that entity that is uninfluenced, uninformed, or unbound to the larger contextual interactions. On closer examination we begin to see that agency is diffused into the larger contextual processes that are shared by the entire community. Agency is a paradoxical product of mutual learning within and between people, nature, and culture."
"The deepening is not finding the answer, not looking for a final truth, but becoming increasingly familiar with the many complexities that surround all that we study. We will never understand it completely, but we can continue (endlessly) to increase our comprehension of the variables at play."
"So, the point, the deliverable, the practicality of my work is not to offer concrete solutions, or stepped improvement plans. It is to offer an invitation in to a world that does not sit still, and encourage an increase in sensitivity to the complexity in all of its glory and gore. My work is premised on the idea of mutual learning between and within living contexts. This learning does not stop. It is not always progressive, or good: sometimes learning to be in a context includes addiction, pathology, and so on. We cannot control mutual learning; we cannot solve it. But, we can become more able to take in and consider the complexity we are faced with if we approach it from this stance."
May 6, 2021
the book in one word: interbeing
this was part three of my little bateson series, and oh what a perfect closing - or opening? this was RAW. complex yet beautifully simple. modern and timeless. poetically scientific, and scientifically poetic. nothing and everything. so relevant. this is so needed.
two more lovely quotes:
"we are in danger of believing what we see as though it were absolute. no one is innocent in this communication crisis: it is becoming a vicious circle of right and left, right and wrong, yay or nay, we and they. the confusion is in the need for clarity. a clarity without ambiguity is one in which we are all asking the wrong questions."
"if an entity exists within a continual process of communication with the many influences of its contextual settings, the individuality of purpose of that entity is inextricable from the interaction. it still has a bias or epistemological perspective that is unique but, at the same time, not individuated. (...) that does not mean we are not responsible for our actions, it means our responsibility extends to larger contexts than our own skin."
this was part three of my little bateson series, and oh what a perfect closing - or opening? this was RAW. complex yet beautifully simple. modern and timeless. poetically scientific, and scientifically poetic. nothing and everything. so relevant. this is so needed.
two more lovely quotes:
"we are in danger of believing what we see as though it were absolute. no one is innocent in this communication crisis: it is becoming a vicious circle of right and left, right and wrong, yay or nay, we and they. the confusion is in the need for clarity. a clarity without ambiguity is one in which we are all asking the wrong questions."
"if an entity exists within a continual process of communication with the many influences of its contextual settings, the individuality of purpose of that entity is inextricable from the interaction. it still has a bias or epistemological perspective that is unique but, at the same time, not individuated. (...) that does not mean we are not responsible for our actions, it means our responsibility extends to larger contexts than our own skin."
July 12, 2018
I tried really hard to like this, I really did. I found out about symmathesy on Nora's blog and it inspired me to buy her book, hoping to find more pristine inspiring material. Instead I found muddled language on such an abstract level that it's just too hard for me to even like it a little bit. Here and there, in a few rare moments, Small Arcs shines in it's insight on complexity theory but it simply falls flat in trying to transfer it's thoughts to the reader. I'm sure it's a subjective thing, but I can't bring myself to rate it higher. The poems are a nice diversion but don't really help in trying to clear things up. In fact, they frustrated me even more after a confusing chapter of lots-of-nothing. I guess this level of "symmethic thinking" is just not for me.
December 26, 2016
Nora Bateson picks up where Gregory left us. Sysmathesy
Nora Bateson picks up where Gregory left us. Sysmathesy and Vita. Excellent book. As in steps to an ecology of mind, it requires reading in solitude
Nora Bateson picks up where Gregory left us. Sysmathesy and Vita. Excellent book. As in steps to an ecology of mind, it requires reading in solitude
January 29, 2020
Read this book. Read it slowly, pause to reflect, return to it. Read this book with love and curiosity. It is as far as I can tell the nearest thing to a living breathing creature ever set in seeming static form in ink upon page.
December 1, 2024
Quite abstracted stuff. Certainly full of original insights, but dense… I advise the reader to digest it chapter by chapter, and not read the whole book at once.
The whole book contains a topical system critique that is cleverly conceptualized in line with systems thinking, but, because of its level of abstraction, I'm afraid it is not very potent. Well, it is probably, for the believer. Of for the nerd. But it wouldn’t (yet) convince any of the deciders in economy or politics, and it remains therefore in the limbo of vanguard theory. The way of reasoning is here simply too complex for those who are not familiar with it. That said, every vanguard might become influential in the course of events, and this thinking might also unfold itself in the public discussion. I hope it will, because it is genuine thinking, out-of-the-box thinking, idealistic and stimulating.
Systems theory should be taken into account by policy makers as well as ordinary citizens, which means that it really should be taught in education. For that, this book is not suitable, an introductory book in systems thinking would be better.
The chapter ‘The Fortune Talker’ is quite mind-blowing. The chapter on possible abuse of systems thinking by fascist thinkers and the way to defend it is important. And I found the chapter about identity (starting on p.25) interesting, it triggered my following observation:
We can say "we" for the group we feel belong to, such as our family, the football club, or our nation. That does not mean that we will lose our 'I' or that our 'I' is doomed because the 'we' takes precedence. So is ecological thinking: if I feel one with nature around me, with everything around me, that doesn't mean that I have to accept the loss of my ‘I’ (and to accept death, as many seem to suggest when you favor ecological thinking) because I would apparently subordinate myself to nature. 'I' can still continue to exist when I say 'we' for nature and all the beings around me. Just as 'I' also continues to exist in the experience of most people when they say 'we' for the group they feel part of.
The whole book contains a topical system critique that is cleverly conceptualized in line with systems thinking, but, because of its level of abstraction, I'm afraid it is not very potent. Well, it is probably, for the believer. Of for the nerd. But it wouldn’t (yet) convince any of the deciders in economy or politics, and it remains therefore in the limbo of vanguard theory. The way of reasoning is here simply too complex for those who are not familiar with it. That said, every vanguard might become influential in the course of events, and this thinking might also unfold itself in the public discussion. I hope it will, because it is genuine thinking, out-of-the-box thinking, idealistic and stimulating.
Systems theory should be taken into account by policy makers as well as ordinary citizens, which means that it really should be taught in education. For that, this book is not suitable, an introductory book in systems thinking would be better.
The chapter ‘The Fortune Talker’ is quite mind-blowing. The chapter on possible abuse of systems thinking by fascist thinkers and the way to defend it is important. And I found the chapter about identity (starting on p.25) interesting, it triggered my following observation:
We can say "we" for the group we feel belong to, such as our family, the football club, or our nation. That does not mean that we will lose our 'I' or that our 'I' is doomed because the 'we' takes precedence. So is ecological thinking: if I feel one with nature around me, with everything around me, that doesn't mean that I have to accept the loss of my ‘I’ (and to accept death, as many seem to suggest when you favor ecological thinking) because I would apparently subordinate myself to nature. 'I' can still continue to exist when I say 'we' for nature and all the beings around me. Just as 'I' also continues to exist in the experience of most people when they say 'we' for the group they feel part of.
December 17, 2022
A great collection of insightful essays poems and reflections on interrelatedness, complexity and learning. It feels like I will be dipping into this as i contemplate how to destabilise homeostasis in organisations - even as I state that I wonder if ‘homeostasis’ is a helpful term (I think it probably is?)
Lots of what Nora writes resonates with differential ontology from a Deleuze/Delanda assemblage perspective (and I think a Bergsonian view of time - less clear in my own head about that!!) and therefore fits with how I am exploring ‘change’ (I even find myself second guessing the term ‘change’)
I am sure I will dip into this over time and contemplate the change of language from systems/whole/parts to symmathesy/vitae - language is our tool for making sense of the world after all.
Lots of what Nora writes resonates with differential ontology from a Deleuze/Delanda assemblage perspective (and I think a Bergsonian view of time - less clear in my own head about that!!) and therefore fits with how I am exploring ‘change’ (I even find myself second guessing the term ‘change’)
I am sure I will dip into this over time and contemplate the change of language from systems/whole/parts to symmathesy/vitae - language is our tool for making sense of the world after all.
August 12, 2019
some very good essays, some not very good essays, and the worst poetry I've ever read
August 11, 2020
Sorry but this does not give me very much. To many muddy thoughts, sometimes expressed in a very cliche and plattitude kind of a way. Maybe it was not a good idea to read this right after reading Steven Pinkers excellent "Enlightenment now", the contrast just becomes too big. When it comes to complexity in human systems, complex adaptive systems etc I get a lot more out from texts by Dave Snowden, Jennifer Garvey Berger and others.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews