[Home]History of FoundationsofOST

OpenSpaceWorldNET | RecentChanges | Preferences | Search | HELP | Contribute! | OpenSpaceWorldORG


Revision 13 . . (edit) January 11, 2004 11:09 pm USA Pacific Time by CPE-144-132-108-202.vic.bigpond.net.au
Revision 12 . . August 3, 2003 8:55 am USA Pacific Time by Artsilva
Revision 11 . . August 3, 2003 8:54 am USA Pacific Time by Artsilva
  

Difference (from prior major revision) (minor diff, author diff)

Changed: 7c7
* A THEME that is compelling enough, but also general an open enough to let people dream about and
* A THEME that is compelling enough, but also general and open enough to let people dream about and

Changed: 19c19
5. Some notes. I have not included BREATH, as I think this can only be understood by someone familiar with the American culture; and I have note included the so-called GIVENS, as I think this is not generally accepted and for those who accept it (and if I understood well) it is not a "foundation of OST", but something that some claim that helps. I have not also included "self-organization" that I think is a good explanation of what happens, but not something that everybody accepts can be declared priori as a "foundation".
5. Some notes. I have not included BREATH, as I think this can only be understood by someone familiar with the American culture; and I have not included the so-called GIVENS, as I think this is not generally accepted and for those who accept it (and if I understood well) it is not a "foundation of OST", but something that some claim that helps. I have not also included "self-organization" that I think is a good explanation of what happens, but not something that everybody accepts can be declared priori as a "foundation".

Changed: 23c23
* The event has no pre-defined outcoames or conclusions
* The event has no pre-defined outcomes or conclusions

Changed: 30c30
8. And about "adding" other methods to OST. What are those that you have added (or seen to be added by others) maintaining or even improving the OST event? And what others have created difficulties, as seen by you, or the sponsor, or the participants? (Often facilitators are not the best people to ask about that, as they are normally an interested part).
8. And about "adding" other methods to OST. What are those that you have added (or seen to be added by others) maintaining or even improving the OST event? And what others have created difficulties, as seen by you, or the sponsor, or the participants? (Often facilitators are not the best people to ask about that, as they are normally an interested party).

Changed: 32c32
After you have read and eventually commented on this lists, let me ask you a more complex question: Suppose that you have agreed on some of these (or others) to be the "foundations". Can we begin understanding more about the "spirit of OST"? Are there any other non-written foundations or attitudes that skilled OST facilitator use as they walk their talk and that are not used by others that still don't know the talk, or don't walk it consistantly?
After you have read and eventually commented on this list, let me ask you a more complex question: Suppose that you have agreed on some of these (or others) to be the "foundations". Can we begin understanding more about the "spirit of OST"? Are there any other non-written foundations or attitudes that skilled OST facilitator use as they walk their talk and that are not used by others that still don't know the talk, or don't walk it consistantly?

Removed: 36,37d35




Changed: 52c50
:: '' Very, very interesting question. I understand what you are saying, what this fellow from Switzerland, or maybe the Dalai Lama too, are attempting. But they are in a diferent plan of reality. In our day-to-day activities we have organizational rules that close the space, we have people that try to control and invade the open space and they may be the sponsor, a participant, or even the facilitator - if he/she is a "controling facilitator". The fact that we use the OST aproach, and generally believe in people, dosn't imply that we are so naive as to accept that ALL the people have good intentions in the world. I can think of some that don't!!! So, if we have an worldview that prevents us to see that, we will be unable to hold the space if and when that is necessary - and maybe we shall change our worldview for one a bit more "realistic". My two Euro-cents, anyhow - ArturSilva
:: '' Very, very interesting question. I understand what you are saying, what this fellow from Switzerland, or maybe the Dalai Lama too, are attempting. But they are in a different plan of reality. In our day-to-day activities we have organizational rules that close the space, we have people that try to control and invade the open space and they may be the sponsor, a participant, or even the facilitator - if he/she is a "controlling facilitator". The fact that we use the OST aproach, and generally believe in people, doesn't imply that we are so naive as to accept that ALL the people have good intentions in the world. I can think of some that don't!!! So, if we have an worldview that prevents us to see that, we will be unable to hold the space if and when that is necessary - and maybe we shall change our worldview for one a bit more "realistic". My two Euro-cents, anyhow - ArturSilva

OpenSpaceWorldNET | RecentChanges | Preferences | Search | HELP | Contribute! | OpenSpaceWorldORG
Search:

OpenSpaceWorld.ORG is funded by contributions, maintained by MichaelHerman, and open to ALL friends and practitioners. If you'd like to add to the read-only pages here, email webmaster@openspaceworld.org and say something about who you are and what you'd like to post. Then we'll tell you how!