Mindstructures

Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose

Annemieke — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 09:12:17 +0000

This weekend I saw some very interesting videos on Youtube.

One of those videos The surprising truth about what motivates us was so interesting that I wanted to take a closer look.

So I uploaded the video below and took notes of the conclusions. Which were surprising, but at the same time, made very much sense.

What motivates us?

It is a video about our motivations. Why we do things and what makes us good at something?

The general view has always been that money and other forms of reward make us perform better. And in many cases that is indeed the case. Give more money and people perform better.

But this only counts for certain, straight forward, tasks. When a task gets more complicated, when it requires some conceptual, creative thinking, those kind of motivaters don’t work!

So being creative needs something else then rewards from outside.

This was also the conclusion in the book Science, Order and Creativity. In that book it became clear that being creative requires a very different approach to human development. A more individual approach.

So for creativity, money is not the motivator. But according to the video, 3 other things are: autonomy, mastery and purpose.

Autonomy

It all starts with autonomy. More or less the same as in the book on creativity, the most important first step is an individual approach. The individual has to think and act purely from their own inner self.

Autonomy is our desire to be self directed. To direct our own lives. Now in may ways traditional notion of management run a foul of this. Management is great if you want compliance. But if you want engagement, what we want in the work force today is to do more complicated and sophisticated things, self direction is better.

The video shows that innovation is likely to be rewarded. But if you want people to do something more interesting, it is better to get out of their way.

Mastery

The next step is developing skills, becoming a master.

Mastery is the urge to get better at stuff. We like to get better at stuff. This is why people play musical instruments at the weekend. You have all these people that act in ways that are actually seen irrationally economically. They play musical instruments at weekends, why? It is not making them any money, why are they doing it? Because it is fun, because you get better at it and that is satisfying.

The video gives the example of Wikipedia. Why many technically sophisticated, highly skilled people, participate in that. Which is strange economical behavior, because they do not get paid for it. But challenge and mastery are the drive here.

Purpose

The next step brings the individual back into the whole society. Where their creative input is valuable for the greater good.

What you see more and more is the rise of what you might call the purpose motor. More and more organizations want to have some kind of transcendent purpose. Partly because it makes coming to work better, partly because that is the way they get better talent.

The video makes a differentiation between profit and purpose and both are equally important.

Click here to view the embedded video.

One of the most interesting about the video, is the paradox of reward. Give more money, to make people work harder and better. Which works perfect if you want some sort of slaves, that do exactly what you want them to do.

But it does not work, it even works counterproductive, if you value their creative input.

Intuition, Sensing, Thinking and Feeling

Annemieke — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 16:14:40 +0000

In my previous post I tried to find a model that is abstract enough to provide room for several existing models.

Now in this post I want to see if it will fit Jung’s model of the four psychological types: Intuition, Sensing, Thinking and Feeling.

I will not use the Introvert and Extravert part here (and also not the Judging and Perceiving part of the Myers-Briggs model) because it would make things to complicated at this point.

INTUITION

1. Personal Exterior Intuition = IMPULS
5. Personal Interior Intuition = CREATIVE
9. Collective Interior Intuition = VISION

SENSING

2. Personal Exterior Sensing = SENSATION
6. Personal Interior Sensing = ADJUSTMENT
10. Collective Exterior Sensing = CONSTRUCTION

THINKING

3. Personal Exterior Thinking = LEARNING
7. Collective Interior Thinking = DIALOGUE
11. Collective Exterior Thinking = INVENTION

FEELING

4. Personal Interior Feeling = EMOTION
8. Collective Interior Feeling = FASCINATION
12. Collective Exterior Feeling = EMPATHY

Again I am not sure if these are the right words to describe the concepts so they might change when I find better ones.

Energy in Matter, and Concepts from Information

Annemieke — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:22:13 +0000

In this post I want to rename some of the concepts I used so far on this blog.

The reason is that some of the words were not abstract enough to cover the whole phenomenon.

In the core model I used the words ‘psyche’ and ‘language’ because they were originally used by Jean Carteret.

But in order to be used for a model that combines several other models as well, I had to find more abstract words.

So ‘psyche’ became ‘information’ and ‘language’ became ‘concepts’. A concept as structured information, like matter is structured energy.

PERSONAL EXTERIOR

1. Aries: Personal Exterior Energy

Impulse – Sudden – Action.

2. Taurus: Personal Exterior Matter

Concrete – Growth – Concentration.

3. Gemini: Personal Exterior Concepts

Language – Interaction – Rational.

PERSONAL INTERIOR

4. Cancer: Personal Interior Information

Emotion – Bonding – Experience.

5. Leo: Personal Interior Energy

Expression – Pride – Creative.

6. Virgo: Personal Interior Matter

Skills – Improvement – Functional.

COLLECTIVE INTERIOR

7. Libra: Collective Interior Concepts

Dialogue – Art – Harmony.

8. Scorpio: Collective Interior Information

Shadow – Fascination – Passion.

9. Sagittarius: Collective Interior Energy

Expansion – Inspiration – Enthusiastic.

COLLECTIVE EXTERIOR

10. Capricorn: Collective Exterior Matter

Reality – Facts – Accomplishment.

11. Aquarius: Collective Exterior Concepts

Ideas – Innovation – Progressive.

12. Pisces: Collective Exterior Information

Unity – Myths – Receptive.

This model is a combination of the Zodiac, the Integral model of Quadrants and a Mind/Matter model.

I used words (that might change if I find better ones) that are as abstract as possible, to provide space for all three models.

Me, my Self and I

Annemieke — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:27:07 +0000

The ‘self’ is a concept that I know best by the writings of Carl Jung.

I don’t know if my understanding of the concept is right, but I thought I more or less ‘got it’.

But as mentioned in my previous post, David Bohm also talks about the ‘self’. And somehow I got the feeling he gives it a different meaning.

In another post I will go into the meaning I think Jung gives to it, but in this post I want to look into the definition of Bohm.

I versus Me

First he makes a clear distinction between I and me. The ‘I’ is in control, while the ‘me’ is limited. The ‘I’ makes the choices, while everything just happens to ‘me’.

A child must begin regarding himself as the great I am because he sees himself as the center of the universe from which all action flows. Then he learns from society he’s only little me. They say: Who do you think you are?

Reflex system versus creative expression

The next differentiation Bohm makes is between, what he calls, the ‘repetitive reflex system’ and a ‘natural desire of creative expression’. Everyone has this creative desire, but when the repetitive reflex system is more strong, the creativity is most likely not able to develop enough.

People are conditioned to stay in the repetitive reflex system, which has the tendency to defend itself and to keep you in it.

One of the greatest dangers of creativity is producing for a reward.

If the child is rewarded for producing a desired result, this will automatically throw him into the reflex system. It gives a very powerful emotional pressure to continue there.

Creative children do not need a reward, they don’t need to be told they are good, because the creative free play is a reward in itself. It makes them learn to rely on their own inner knowledge.

Self and Ego

I don’t think the definition of Bohm of the ‘self’ is the same as the definition of Jung. I will go into that into another post, but as I see it at this point, the definition of Bohm might be what is called the ‘ego’ by Jung.

What is the Self?

Annemieke — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:09:37 +0000

This week I found another interview with David Bohm.

Somewhere in that interview he talks about why we need the space to develop creativity.

He wrote about that in the book Science, Order and Creativity and I already have several posts about one chapter of that book.

The chapter states that creativity is very important, but it does not always get the chance to come into existence. And that it needs independent growth, which means the opportunity for free play in the early stages of development.

It becomes clear that it is often difficult for people to be creative. And even more difficult to develop their creativity.

And personally I am fascinated by that. Why is that so very hard? I talked about that in several posts already and think that it very much has to do with an essential difference between two types of people.

In the post Inner Drive or Navigation from Outside, I wrote about those who have this overwhelming inner drive, and those who don’t. Or maybe they do, but they manage to suppress it.

That post expressed very much my personal feeling about how that works with people, but in the interview with David Bohm, it became clear to me that he also thinks there is this essential difference between two types of Self.

There are two places in the interview where he elaborates on that. He talks about the difference between the ‘repetitive reflex system’ versus ‘free play’. And the talks about the difference between ‘me’ versus ‘I’.

I think it all has very much to do with the transition from a pre-individual state into becoming an independent and authentic individual, a subject that is coming back on this blog every time because I am fascinated by it. A certain place on the model that I use on this blog.

It is a transition that I think is essential for every human being, but is at the same time a very complicated and, for some, very difficult process.

In my following post I want to quote what Bohm has to say about that and give my own understanding of what he says.

The 7 Links Challenge

Annemieke — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 07:09:20 +0000

Last week on Problogger there was a great challenge.

It was a 7 link challenge, to write a post with links to 7 posts that fit into 7 themes.

I thought that was a perfect way to go over my posts again to see which ones I could bring together in one post.

1. Your first post – The reason for my first post Creating my own webspace, was to write a post that I could use as my about page. In that post I wanted to write about why I blog. But the post got much to long and so I decided to write several posts that I could edit into an about page later. Until now I did not do much editing yet, but just copied those posts in a static page.

2. A post you enjoyed writing the most – The post I enjoyed writing the most was Creative Development. Mainly because of the connection I made with blogging as a certain step in creative development. The rest of the post was relatively easy to write, but I could not think of a good example of the combination of creativity with interaction. I thought about it very long, and suddenly it became clear, it just had to be blogging.

3. A post which had a great discussion – Not so much a discussion on that post itself, but a comment on the post The Meaning of Values was the beginning of a discussion about logic and language that spread out over other posts and pages.

4. A post on someone else’s blog that you wish you’d written – I read that post last week and it reflected very much my thoughts about reciprocity in a relationship. The title is Warning: Compromising in your marriage may ruin it. Although the title seems to says that you should not compromise, I think what he means is a little more subtle, although very important in my opinion.

5. A post with a title that you are proud of – That is the title of the post Patterns of Meaning that Develop over Time. Not that I came up with that line myself, but I distilled it from an interview with the writer David Foster Wallace. When he said those words, I almost felt the excitement, as that was exactly how I see things. The context was the following:

There is something musical about reading because it has to do with the patterns of meaning that develop over time. It isn’t like looking at a piece of art, because there I choose how long I look and what I look at. In a piece of music or in a movie that flow is directed for me. I got no choice but to follow. With books I am trapped in time but I have more mobility within that time, going back and reading again the paragraph I like.

6. A post that you wish more people had read – A post that I think was really good was Critical about Criticism. In that post I often wondered if I meant exactly what I wrote, but when I read it again, I indeed do. The reason why I doubt it every time, is because of the meaning of the words criticism, feedback and judging. I think the meaning of those words is close, but at the same time very different.

7. Your most visited post – The post that gets the most hits from Google search is The difference between Integrity and Honesty. I wrote it after a discussion about that difference on a forum.

The Development of Creativity

Annemieke — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:37:25 +0000

I recently had a guestpost on the blog Thoughtwrestling about the place of creativity in human development as a whole.

In the post I also mentioned how I see the development of creativity itself.

I wrote another post on that before, where I used my model of development to describe creativity in different forms (like dancing, painting, drama, architecture, music, etc) while in my guestpost I used the model to describe the creative development in a more abstract way.

I based this abstract development mainly on a chapter of the book Science, Order and Creativity. In that chapter it became clear to me that certain aspects of creativity are important in a certain follow up.

Concerning your own creativity, it is important to interact with others (3), to have a structure (10), to be critical (6), to ask for feedback (7), to sustain focus (2) and so on. But only in a certain follow up.

Being to critical to early on might easily kill creativity. Being to focused might be focus on something that is not relevant. Asking for feedback should be done after making a good presentation. Interacting with and learning from others, as interesting as it is, might make you change your mind to easy.

So in this post I want to expand a bit on each step in the process. There is a development on three levels: pre-individual (primordial), individual and post-individual (universal), with each the follow up from energy (spirit) to manifestation (body) to interaction with others (mind) to unconscious adjustment (soul).

(The words spirit, body, mind and soul are used here in a certain context and might differ from how others use it.)

The cycle can be used for all development, but here it is specifically used for the development of creativity.

PRE-INDIVIDUAL

1. There has to be space for free play.
This is an essential starting point. Maybe not a problem for some, because they take that space no matter what. But for others it might be a difficult thing to do. Just try things out, just start something and play around with it.

2. It has to be sustained, being focused and concentrated.
There is the danger of going from one to another all the time. Which is no problem in itself, but afterwards there might be a place and time to stay with something that is fascinating enough to explore further. Focus on a certain aspect, let it come into existence. Mix colors, experiment with materials, just stay with one work, without interference.

3. Learning from others, discussions and interaction.
After a certain period of concentration and focus, it is great to see what others are doing. Some might never be interested in that, but others are really curious how other people solve certain problems. Or reading books about the subject of interest. Just learning and interacting with others. Which can be very productive and interesting. But has the danger of distraction and going from one to another without much substance.

4. Using personal emotions and experiences.
In this phase personal experiences and emotions mark a certain path to go. What happens to a person, gives a certain direction to his interest and desire to explore. It is still a phase where things ‘happen’ as opposed to the next phase where the person is using his ‘free will’.

INDIVIDUAL

5. Taking a unique perspective
This is the centre of creativity. Here every personal experience comes together with every information from outside. And the individual has to filter that information and make it into a unique perspective. It is not yet materialized (that comes in the following phase) but here is the source of inner knowing that gives a confidence and perspective, a certain look on things that can not be reached any other way.

6. Develop skills, analyzing, functional and productive.
This is the phase of becoming really good at something. If the previous phases are not developed good enough, it can also be the phase of becoming really good at something that someone else thinks is important. But if it is well developed, you can make your own creative insights manifest and develop them further. Practice skills, doing things over and over again, make it more functional and producing a much as possible.

7. Presentation, feedback and working together.
Here it is time to show your work to others. Instead of producing more or improve skills, now is the time to make it also attractive. Make it look as good as possible. Search for reflection. Or looking for someone who wants to cooperate, who complements your own shortcomings.

8. Defining value and defending against attacks.
This might be the hardest part. It is the area of the psyche, of the shadow. Seeing others as enemies, as opponents. Others who might attack you. You have to defend it, but at the same time learn to see why there are attacks.

POST-INDIVIDUAL

9. See where it fits in society and start promoting.
This is the place to see the greater whole again. Seeing beyond the individual ‘I’. Look at things from a more philosophical and abstract level. Going beyond borders, maybe even literary going to travel, meet other cultures. And at the same time finding a market for your creative products.

10. Being constructive, seeking borders and becoming an authority.
Defining your own rules. Building a business around your own creative ideas. Setting up borders, constructions to build upon further. Being clear in what you can and cannot do. Being an example for others, an authority in your own field of expertise.

11. Dialogue and seeing the essence of other creative individuals.
The end result here might be something like dialogue, but it also might be something like revolution or breaking rules. It is the phase where the individual has to realize there are other individual experiences and views. There is no ultimate truth that is the same in all circumstances. And others have views that might be relevant although they might seem very challenging at first.

12. Sacrifice, selfless sharing with others.
In the end it is important to share without expecting anything in return. But this should not be to soon. Giving away to soon might make you expect something in return, even if it is unconscious. And that is even more dangerous than just expect something in return, while being aware of it. Which in its own right is just as important, but more belonging to another phase.

The Form and Content of Thought

Annemieke — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:04:07 +0000

After I finished my previous post, one line kept buzzing in my head.

‘Mathematics is about thought, not the content of thought, but the form in which we can hold the content of thought.’

And at the same time I was searching for a picture to visualise how that could be. Sort of structures that come into existence from an underlying ‘something’.

See if I can get the essence out of that sentence:

Mathematics = Form

Thoughts = Content

It got me thinking about what exactly the content is. And it also made me wonder if, instead of mathmatics, I also could use ‘language’, or ‘words’.

So something like:

Language is about thought, not the content of thought, but the form in which we can hold the content of thought (which might be the whole psyche, not just thoughts).

And in short:

Language = Form

Psyche = Content

Not the same as the orgininal line, but somehow this seems true as well. Or again getting back to the Core model on this blog:

Language (or conceps, consciousness, symbols, etc) = Structure

Psyche (or thoughts, feelings, subconscious, sensations, etc) = Potential

The psyche as an ongoing process of unfolding. And language that brings the psyche into existence.

Together with the other couple of energy and matter.

Thought is about Becoming, not Being

Annemieke — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 12:10:45 +0000

A few weeks ago I got a book from the library that really fascinated me.

And especially one chapter was so interesting that I wanted to write several blogposts about it.

But while doing that, I found out that this book was an older version. And there was a more recent version that had an extra chapter in it, that was not present in the version I was reading.

The title from that chapter sounded really interesting to me. It was called ‘The Order Between and Beyond’, and that really sounded like a subject related to this blog.

Related to the relationship between mind and matter, but especially about the opposition between potential and structure.

And suddenly the version from the library was not good enough anymore, and I just had to have the newer version. So I ordered it and while waiting for it to be delivered, I read some pages already online.

And there I found the name of a man that also (like David Peat, the co-writer of the book) had been working with David Bohm. His name was Basil Hiley and, of course, I immediately searched for some information about him.

I found a series of 13 videos where he was interviewed on his vision of quantum theory. My attention was most caught with video 11, which is the video I uploaded below.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Here (at about 1:50) Hiley is talking about a man called Grassmann:

He was saying that mathematics is not about material process of unfolding of space in time. He said mathematics is about thought.

Mathematics is about thought, not the content of thought, but the form in which we can hold the content of thought.

Now for a physicist that was mindblowing. Because I always believed that what we were doing was mathematics of the movement. Of material processes.

From those original ideas of Grassmann, mathematics is about thought. What is thought? Thought is about becoming, not being.

And therefore, really, we should be talking about becoming and not being. What we always do with Newtonian physics is talk about being. So being is secondary.

At this point I can’t exactly say what it should mean, but somehow I felt this difference between ‘being’ and ‘becoming’ is essential.

And somehow has to do with the difference between, what Jean Carteret calls, ‘limitation’ and ‘infinity’, and what I translated with ‘structure’ and ‘potential’.

So Grassmann said that mathematics is ‘the form in which we can hold the content of thought’. I have to think a little further if that is about the same as the difference between the map and the territory…

The Danger of Praise and Reward as Fuel for Creativity

Annemieke — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 08:14:49 +0000

This post is going to be centred around several sentences.

A few lines from the book Science, Order and Creativity.

The moment I read those lines, I really felt this was true. By analyzing it here in this post, I hope to emphasise the very important distinctions that I think are essential.

I will let the text intact and just pull it a bit apart and give it headlines. That way I hope the subtle differences become more clear.

No interference

“Thus creativity appears to be incompatible with external and internal rewards or punishments. The reason is clear. In order to do something for a reward, the whole order of the activity, and the energy required for it, are determined by arbitrary requirements that are extraneous to the creative activity itself.”

Passion needs to come from inside

“This activity then turns into something mechanical and repetitious, or else it mechanically seeks change for its own sake. The state of intense passion and vibrant tension that goes with creative perception then dies away.”

Danger of dependence from outside

“The whole thing becomes boring and uninteresting, so that the kind of energy needed for creative perception and action is lacking. As a result, even greater rewards, or punishments, are needed to keep the activity going.”

Adapting outside structures without understanding

“Basically, the setting of goals and patterns of behavior, which are imposed mechanically or externally, and without understanding, produces a rigid structure in consciousness that blocks the free play of thought and the free movement of awareness and attention that are necessary for creativity to act.”

Certain rules are important

“But this does not mean that rules and external orders are incompatible with creativity, or that a truly creative person must live in a arbitrary fashion.”

Some examples

“To write a sonnet or a fugue, to compose an abstract painting, or to discover some new theorem in mathematics requires that creativity should operate within the context of a particular artistic or mathematical form.”

“Cezanne’s particular creativity in art, for example, was directed toward the discovery of new forms and orders of composition within the context of a particular form of freedom that thad been previously established by the Impressionists.”

“Some of Bach’s greatest works are similarly created within the confines of strict counterpoint.”

Insight and understanding

“To live in a creative way requires extreme and sensitive perception of the orders and structures of relationship to individuals, society, and nature. In such cases, creativity may flower.”

No growth on external goals

“It is only when creativity is made subservient to external goals, which are implied by the seeking of rewards, that the whole activity begins to wither and denegrate.”

Fuel has to come from INDIVIDUAL insight and understanding

So creativity has an inherent order. That inherent order grows on insight and understanding. It has to develop and grow according to that. During that development it might need certain rules and boundaries to keep growing in a certain direction. It might need ideas of others to grow even further….

BUT

…all that only after a certain independent growth on its own. Without interference from others. Without criticism. Without punishment. Without imposed rules.

Even, and maybe even most of all, without praise and rewards.

Because praise might be the biggest trap. Praise and rewards from others might be so addicting, that it becomes more important than creative growth. And as a result the fuel comes from outside instead of from the inside. With the risk that, one day, the fuel gets cut off.