Bringing the systemic (re)generative role of commons to awareness.
Rather than in the vision and values that communities hold and the mission or goal they assign to themselves, such driver may be found in the very existence and generative nature of what brings change agents and communities of practice together. A driver wouldnât for example be the abstract concept or representation of say, the moon. Rather, it would be the tide itself in its dynamic generative capacity.
Communities that endeavor for change gather around social objects, shared object of care that are embodied ubiquitously in the system in different forms as place, people, resource, structure, process, or outcome.
These social objects are generally oriented towards generating access, equity, caring, livelihood, thrivability, replicability or sustainability. The common thread is in the protection and in the nurturing and reproduction of the distributed factors of opportunity and of ongoing health and thrivability of the system that ensure its ongoing regeneration. These are what I call the distributed commons as archetype, the reproduction of which manifests as system goal in multiple forms and languages, through different action logics, understandings and symbolic representations, emerging into the whole commons.
arâącheâątype [ahr-ki-tahyp]
n.
1. the original pattern or model from which all things of the same kind are copied or on which they are based; a model or first form; prototype.
2. (in Jungian psychology) a collectively inherited unconscious idea, pattern of thought, image, etc., universally present in individual psyches.
How can this systemic (re)generative role of the commons as pattern itself be brought to awareness in each of the centers and as a whole? How can it encourage systems driven by generative processes and serve as a vetting system for the âsustainabilityâ of systemic change initiatives? This is another key objective of the PLAST.
On Social Objects:
 | Kurt Laitner 12:18 AM Nov 5 |
|
shared social objects (a reference to the genesis of this concept would be helpful) jyri engstrom had talked about this many moons ago but perhaps not the origin - very powerful concept and also an excellent piece of metadata to locate groups in the field
Talking of business models, here's an excellent article by Simone Cicero (Ouishare) on the dynamics that drive the sharing economy. Typically something that could be 'plasted' too:
http://meedabyte.com/2014/11/03/competitioncollaborationanddesign/On Archetype:
 | Jessie Lydia Henshaw 2:34 PM Yesterday |
|
Archetypes are also natural forms, not just mental forms. So "commons" are then both, the thing in the world that is the natural archetype we use the word to refer to in our experience, and the idea in our minds which is the conceptual archetype, referred to semantically in conversation.
I've found this quite clear feature of how our mental frames relate to the natural frame remarkably difficult for others to deal with, generally, seeming to indicate it appears absolutely essential that we deal with it both carefully and effectively.
Show less
But don't you lose the careful separation of symbols and natural realities if you "break down each plane" into concepts?