``` WEBVTT
00:00:03.000 --> 00:00:11.000 This is the dawn of everything. Chapter one book circle meeting for a Tuesday, Thursday.
00:00:11.000 --> 00:00:15.000 We'll have the the next one or wednesday and Friday for Wendy.
00:00:15.000 --> 00:00:21.000 Welcome all I think you've probably seen the I set up an agenda.
00:00:21.000 --> 00:00:29.000 We don't have to follow it, but we can so let me go grab that your elegant.
00:00:29.000 --> 00:00:39.000 I'll be absolutely honest I haven't re-read chapter one because it started pretty much when the book came out so.
00:00:39.000 --> 00:00:46.000 Oh, it's a bit a bit far i'll be honest, I haven't finished chapter one, but for the first time.
00:00:46.000 --> 00:01:02.000 Oh, my honesty, thing, is i've listened to it but i'm finding, reading it, and you a different experience, because each time I pick up something different, and so usually I listen to something as I walk, which means I process it differently, because i'm
00:01:02.000 --> 00:01:07.000 walking in nature. ken i'm i'm right there with you Wendy.
00:01:07.000 --> 00:01:13.000 I have listened to it, and I don't have a kindle or a physical copy.
00:01:13.000 --> 00:01:20.000 So all I have is audio recall which it's generally fair for me, but because I did listen to it a couple weeks ago.
00:01:20.000 --> 00:01:28.000 It's Not the freshest thing in my mind but but i'm rare to talk about the book, and just you know what's being brought up.
00:01:28.000 --> 00:01:38.000 I'm very excited to be with you all because I love. I have a bit part of a book group for a long time, and I find it really helps me absorb the book way better than if I just read it on my own so thank you all
00:01:38.000 --> 00:01:49.000 for being here. My question let me I I don't want to break our flow here. but but let me screen share the the agenda.
00:01:49.000 --> 00:01:54.000 I've got setup which includes a most important part which is review and adjusted agenda as attendees.
00:01:54.000 --> 00:02:03.000 See if that I want to do we really have to be humans when we check in, we can't you know on our totematical I'm totally cool.
00:02:03.000 --> 00:02:10.000 If it's a ton of animal thing for is forever.
00:02:10.000 --> 00:02:25.000 I prefer to furry's for his rover okay, so relevant totem. I mean i'm no I'm riffing off something I've read from somewhere. else.
00:02:25.000 --> 00:02:30.000 But you know we're going to go this place I think if we're going to make all this stuff. useful.
00:02:30.000 --> 00:02:38.000 We've got to integrate it with on books so when you say, did you say fur is forever pharisee a fever?
00:02:38.000 --> 00:02:53.000 Okay. ferries forever. because don't know i'm deviating to another book. but tossing Yoctober in the first opening chapters of his book say that the kidneys have it and my
00:02:53.000 --> 00:02:57.000 totem has always been the echidna so I thought right i'm up there already.
00:02:57.000 --> 00:03:13.000 It's really good, anyway. tasinia kapoor you have Kapora, who's in a an indigenous academic in a Australia, and I've been reading I read the 2 books together is my
00:03:13.000 --> 00:03:16.000 point. I think i'm influenced by things that come from more than one place.
00:03:16.000 --> 00:03:40.000 That's really important. These conversations. sort of bring up other places that we can integrate our stories with, and because it's a very grand narrative that the David's a telling but I was drawn to listening to a
00:03:40.000 --> 00:04:01.000 sort of current indigenous version the same time because I think the history there is an active one, and while it's not in the record in the way that is in dawn of everything I think it's coherent because
00:04:01.000 --> 00:04:18.000 it's being recorded in other ways. so we can draw on current history, not but as recorded through you know, song lines and other forms of storytelling.
00:04:18.000 --> 00:04:21.000 I also read Braiding Sweet Grass at the same time as well.
00:04:21.000 --> 00:04:27.000 Just make a laugh tricky, and Jack is interested in ministry for the future.
00:04:27.000 --> 00:04:36.000 I don't know that one I forgot everett's, and I've read i'm in the middle of Santalk. i've read the history of the future and I read breeding sweet grass and I
00:04:36.000 --> 00:04:43.000 just want to throw out something. I posted to the Ogm list last week, but Ohio.
00:04:43.000 --> 00:04:51.000 Kamala Fee is from Nigeria, and was taught at Schumacher College.
00:04:51.000 --> 00:04:55.000 Brilliant man, just real lovely listening to him and he's also all about indigenous wisdom.
00:04:55.000 --> 00:05:07.000 So I feel very much like Wendy where these things are coalescing for me, and I've there seemed to be clustering. so I have a hard time sometimes saying, Did I read that in the dawn of everything was that
00:05:07.000 --> 00:05:12.000 part of Santalk, or you know they all sort of mush together, which is just the way my brain is working.
00:05:12.000 --> 00:05:18.000 These days everything feels mushy at there, and after another, which you think that Pete and I are involved in.
00:05:18.000 --> 00:05:31.000 So. not only do I have these narratives that, written in book and different history is that there are different ways that history has been recorded, that the uses, their sources.
00:05:31.000 --> 00:05:50.000 What I also have is 4 yarns that have been created and they're indigenous that Weavings, if you like, between Asia Pacific or mainly Australia, New Zealand papua, New
00:05:50.000 --> 00:05:58.000 guinea as a region and whales and these are spoken discourse.
00:05:58.000 --> 00:06:02.000 I'm not all the way through but we've got the transcripts for all of them, and they're becoming web pages.
00:06:02.000 --> 00:06:09.000 Pete and i'm making them into web pages so these are spoken, they're intersectional.
00:06:09.000 --> 00:06:19.000 Oh dear! that you just say, you know. but you know things like mining, and other bits and pieces come up as rich topics, you know, really contested issues.
00:06:19.000 --> 00:06:23.000 So I think acknowledging who's in the room is really important.
00:06:23.000 --> 00:06:29.000 Not just the 4 of us, but you know these other influences that are influencing our thinking so we can name them.
00:06:29.000 --> 00:06:36.000 Thanks is that you can, or that was me. Thank you, Kim.
00:06:36.000 --> 00:06:41.000 I was gonna ask you how to spell its name.
00:06:41.000 --> 00:07:03.000 Yearning is a indigenous practice in Australia actually so There's a there's a thousands of years of back history between this and and what I'm also revealing because it came up in the first Jam because I had
00:07:03.000 --> 00:07:16.000 to say what yanning is yanning is actually a culture, it's been given the name yanning in Australian, not because in indigenous person picked up that word, but because it reflects a practice in a streaming
00:07:16.000 --> 00:07:23.000 culture around a chat. if that makes sense a sort of informal backwards, banter backwards and forwards.
00:07:23.000 --> 00:07:33.000 So it's also quite weirdly although I don't think that this has been discussed discussed at a national level.
00:07:33.000 --> 00:07:49.000 But I think it soon will be so crossover between what you call a settler, use of a word which is to do with weaving, if you like, and an indigenous practice which is around having a conversation in a
00:07:49.000 --> 00:07:53.000 circle and there's not just one form there's about 7 forms of them.
00:07:53.000 --> 00:07:59.000 So I don't want to I don't want to hijackout conversation.
00:07:59.000 --> 00:08:05.000 I'm just saying that the minute you take a word any word and put it into a culture.
00:08:05.000 --> 00:08:18.000 Any culture, it evokes all these intersectional things So what i'm saying is the word yarn Y-m. did not turn up in aboriginal language, but it's something that has been done in Australia for the
00:08:18.000 --> 00:08:37.000 longest time in many formats, some of which have been more cool, colloquial, and since sort of settler times, you know, 1,780, but is now increasingly, being, I would say, appropriated gathering the momentum
00:08:37.000 --> 00:08:56.000 as a way of signaling important discussion slash conversation slash exchanges dialogue slash whatever you want to use for when words go backwards and forwards between people and A yan doesn't necessarily this is important
00:08:56.000 --> 00:09:05.000 yonder's necessarily have a very specific intention it's a merchant. So I guess that's me finishing for the moment.
00:09:05.000 --> 00:09:11.000 Actually just read this this morning. Yarning is more than just a story or conversation.
00:09:11.000 --> 00:09:24.000 Aboriginal culture is a structure cultural activity that is recognized even in research circles, as valid as a valid and rigorous methodology for knowledge, production, inquiry, and transmission it's a
00:09:24.000 --> 00:09:30.000 ritual that incorporates elements such as story, humor, gesture, and mimicry for consensus, building and innovation.
00:09:30.000 --> 00:09:37.000 It references, places, and relationships, in a highly contextualized local worldviews of those yearning, and it goes on and on.
00:09:37.000 --> 00:09:41.000 But it's what I thought was wrenching is that there's no talking stick.
00:09:41.000 --> 00:09:53.000 Protocol that was appropriate from Western native American culture, and and usually the senior people are the ones who will bring anybody back who tends to wander off, but not always.
00:09:53.000 --> 00:10:03.000 Sometimes they also get get there. so I love tyson's style, because he's he was very very human in terms of the way he writes, there's no i'm above you it's like hey?
00:10:03.000 --> 00:10:07.000 We all screw up, and you know just this is what i'm sharing.
00:10:07.000 --> 00:10:18.000 So it's been sweet to read, Oh, it is good and you know, getting to know him personally like literally personally, because he's sort of in my back yard, so to speak.
00:10:18.000 --> 00:10:23.000 Oh, great! yes, so that's all and end of conversation happened 2 days ago around that.
00:10:23.000 --> 00:10:38.000 So I guess I guess if we were sweeping back to the David's and i'm gonna be really good, and i'm gonna make a really weird suggestion here I reckon that we could get David Greg and when go
00:10:38.000 --> 00:10:43.000 to come visit this group when we sort of tossed around things for a long time.
00:10:43.000 --> 00:10:49.000 Let's have I would like to set that intention because I think that we would.
00:10:49.000 --> 00:11:07.000 You know we were a really interesting and reflective group I think that that would be if I was someone like that who'd written, and with a co-author who's no longer around a book like this intending to change things I think we should
00:11:07.000 --> 00:11:15.000 ask him. maybe not straightaway. I think that we're we've got a lot to offer.
00:11:15.000 --> 00:11:17.000 And a lot of people are not going to sit down and write.
00:11:17.000 --> 00:11:25.000 1010 years worth of a book that calls on however, many decades of a career or several careers.
00:11:25.000 --> 00:11:34.000 Everybody else's has contributed to the book but you know these books are written to change things, and if we're people who want to change things, and we want to learn from this book.
00:11:34.000 --> 00:11:38.000 Then we should be inviting the people who are involved in writing that process.
00:11:38.000 --> 00:11:45.000 And and and ask them questions. Can you please put in the notes?
00:11:45.000 --> 00:11:56.000 Kin that quote where You've got that quite from is it from Yeah, that's that's it's off my kindle. I just was telling Pete. he was looking forward on his I said try yearning is more than just a
00:11:56.000 --> 00:12:04.000 story , it's from santa monica, yeah. it's from santa monica, oh, I
00:12:04.000 --> 00:12:11.000 cut in Then that's me not going reading it a second or third time, or not reading it in print, and i'm trying to resist buying physical.
00:12:11.000 --> 00:12:23.000 Thank you. Yeah. So we will. We will we are setting up something for the middle of this middle of the year with Dave Snowden.
00:12:23.000 --> 00:12:32.000 So Let's not focus on sand talk but i'm saying that books like that are highly relevant, because they're referring to the history that David's writing about.
00:12:32.000 --> 00:12:38.000 But there, that history has been captured in a different way, evoking parts of the land.
00:12:38.000 --> 00:12:45.000 As you know, embodied knowledge. and passing it on through story and oral culture.
00:12:45.000 --> 00:12:54.000 So it's as if the and tecidents of all the stuff that the 2 Davids talk about in.
00:12:54.000 --> 00:12:59.000 And increasingly, I want to be thinking about David Wengro because he is accessible.
00:12:59.000 --> 00:13:07.000 Those stories have actually been captured, and they are live, and they are around, and we can inquire about them.
00:13:07.000 --> 00:13:22.000 And even though they're not stones. that you can pick up and look at, they're not pictures that have been drawn on walls, although sometimes they are, You know that seems to me a really valid point to come back to I don't know that
00:13:22.000 --> 00:13:35.000 that was actually made in the book. Now I think about it, not in the way that I feel now that it could be interesting.
00:13:35.000 --> 00:13:52.000 This has been really cool. I want to look back at the agenda like I messed it up and completely.
00:13:52.000 --> 00:14:05.000 Well, no, not at all. we're an emergent force the the I guess I there are 2 main things I want to make sure that we do.
00:14:05.000 --> 00:14:09.000 One of them is talk about chapter one although if we don't it's totally fine.
00:14:09.000 --> 00:14:17.000 The other one I want to do is make sure that We We do a retro and take notes, and i've I've recommend a plus delta metro, although we could use a different format.
00:14:17.000 --> 00:14:28.000 And then, if we want to talk about chapter one, it would be nice to to figure out how to talk about chapter one.
00:14:28.000 --> 00:14:33.000 So first of all, does this this seem silly that we should just talk about chapter one?
00:14:33.000 --> 00:14:37.000 Or is that a good goal? And in a meeting like this?
00:14:37.000 --> 00:14:51.000 And and I can frame it a little bit more chapter one it's it's pretty introductory and this I you know it's kind of I don't know if it's but on the other hand, we're just getting used to being together.
00:14:51.000 --> 00:15:00.000 We're getting used to doing this in 2 meetings which is another trick that we're learning together with the other team.
00:15:00.000 --> 00:15:12.000 I expect to be there this week so I felt like it wasn't actually a bad thing to to talk about chapter one meet with some reasonable intention of actually talking about it.
00:15:12.000 --> 00:15:16.000 And then you being better at doing chapter 2, chapter, 3 chapter 4.
00:15:16.000 --> 00:15:25.000 So for better, for worse. The way that we've kind of structured the book club or the way I suggested we structure the book club, and nobody disagree.
00:15:25.000 --> 00:15:34.000 Was go through chapters and to do it at a fairly deliberate pace.
00:15:34.000 --> 00:15:39.000 I know a few of us. I think maybe most of us thought a deliberate pace was kind of a good thing.
00:15:39.000 --> 00:15:46.000 So you know the weird thing is we've got 2 weeks to kind of digest.
00:15:46.000 --> 00:15:57.000 Maybe a little bit before maybe a little bit after this meeting I don't know but we've kind of got 2 weeks that I just talk chapter one part of that. I think we should just do some practice getting used to how we talk
00:15:57.000 --> 00:16:05.000 about practice. one right chapter one How we do retros how we you know whether we're good or not about taking notes.
00:16:05.000 --> 00:16:15.000 So that's my my pitch now even that pitch 45 min seems like too long for them. Well, I do, from a process point of view.
00:16:15.000 --> 00:16:24.000 I think it's really important to reflect on you know audio recall. I mean, I just bought this morning 15 min before this meeting.
00:16:24.000 --> 00:16:39.000 The kindle version, so they could go back and Mac some quotes. So to me, the process that we use you know the the artifact that we're using to work from and this is just how I think it's been my whole
00:16:39.000 --> 00:16:47.000 career really is the physical artist. Artifacts actually shape how you can work with other people, and how you work with yourself.
00:16:47.000 --> 00:16:49.000 How you stuck to your knowledge, and such because you could.
00:16:49.000 --> 00:16:54.000 I can actually now look at the exact quote without having to look at the skin.
00:16:54.000 --> 00:16:59.000 I could think right. I had that thought, you know. I put that note in
00:16:59.000 --> 00:17:08.000 So at the moment. i'm just i'm i'm just going through chapter one, and i'm looking at where other people have noticed things.
00:17:08.000 --> 00:17:13.000 So you know, idyllic state of equality that's a quote.
00:17:13.000 --> 00:17:22.000 So you know, really, was that the way it was I haven't I haven't experienced that throughout my life generally.
00:17:22.000 --> 00:17:26.000 But you know some from time to time you experience it so i'm just wondering.
00:17:26.000 --> 00:17:40.000 Was it so different before? you know it. idyllic state of equality is much of a it's provocation almost as a phrase really isn't it.
00:17:40.000 --> 00:17:56.000 It's any is that from chapter one yeah it's in chapter one. it says, you know what if instead of telling a story about how our species fell from some idyllic state of equality, we ask how we came to be trapped in such type
00:17:56.000 --> 00:18:02.000 conceptual shackles that we can no longer imagine the possibility of reinventing ourselves.
00:18:02.000 --> 00:18:12.000 The whole. just before we we we we jump into the sentence but but I do think we should.
00:18:12.000 --> 00:18:19.000 What you're saying be is it's the chapter one is very introductory.
00:18:19.000 --> 00:18:27.000 I did Speed read while we were talking, just remind myself what was in chapter one as opposed to subsequent chapters.
00:18:27.000 --> 00:18:47.000 Since it's been a while and yeah it's very much setting the stage for the whole book, and will be very hard for me to speak about chapter one without speaking about the whole book. most spoilers for the real can or no no i'm just joking you
00:18:47.000 --> 00:18:50.000 can. i've read different outtakes different interviews and stuff.
00:18:50.000 --> 00:18:58.000 So I have little patches here, and there i'm just for some books. you would want to say no flowers, but it was a novel, you know.
00:18:58.000 --> 00:19:11.000 Rosebud was his sled. Right? Oh, sorry there and I I almost feel drawn to share it.
00:19:11.000 --> 00:19:17.000 It's about the words and the meaning of words and we could I don't know about that story.
00:19:17.000 --> 00:19:30.000 Wendy. What was that? and you know with it now, we don't know we don't in this meeting. But I'm just saying, be be where the meaning of a word is my point and if and you guys should all laugh but
00:19:30.000 --> 00:19:37.000 I use this as an example. Then I Then I understand why it's so vexing an example of the meaning of word.
00:19:37.000 --> 00:19:41.000 It was like a game within a game so anyway.
00:19:41.000 --> 00:19:54.000 Let's assume you know the writing style I loved at the beginning, partly because I know Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and the person who was reading it had that sort of British voice, and the
00:19:54.000 --> 00:19:58.000 phrasing, and everything is along that sort of rice style of you know.
00:19:58.000 --> 00:20:08.000 It's got a lot of style. of the hitchhiker's guard to the galaxy, and I would love to understand why that was adopted. but there's a lot of similarity.
00:20:08.000 --> 00:20:21.000 I do not recognize this influence. my reading of the hitchhiker is also dates, I guess. but there is certainly the basic rye. it's very rye that's very right.
00:20:21.000 --> 00:20:25.000 Yeah, yeah, that was the word I was gonna use yeah It's there.
00:20:25.000 --> 00:20:36.000 It's the the the right humor the kind of vaguely sardonic stance is there.
00:20:36.000 --> 00:20:42.000 I agree totally I don't know which like hers is 2 my prime example of that.
00:20:42.000 --> 00:20:52.000 But I see it. Did you think, though, that that indicates I don't know David Grayber.
00:20:52.000 --> 00:21:11.000 You know I know he lived in different places. but you know in my mind when someone reads a book on audible, or whatever I start to in infer things about where they come from in their own histories, and I didn't even notice say
00:21:11.000 --> 00:21:24.000 that thing now. but there's something about the format that i'm reading it in which is actually influencing how I think about the book, What I infer about the person and what their history, is which I think is actually
00:21:24.000 --> 00:21:36.000 naughty, but also relevant at the same time. whereas it could be because I, sir, I read it on kindles, so that means I don't have the voice that you had reading.
00:21:36.000 --> 00:21:50.000 Yes, so there's a certainly a level of britishness. that I didn't impart text with back and humor, I think, is really important, because I think you really think it's there.
00:21:50.000 --> 00:21:58.000 Yeah, I could see it in text. Yeah, and I think there's something here about us making fun of ourselves.
00:21:58.000 --> 00:22:04.000 You know What were we thinking, that you could actually dig up some stones and tell all these stories with all the missing parts?
00:22:04.000 --> 00:22:15.000 And he raises this later on in the book, you know the idea. And this is where women often come in because he's talking about soft technologies and things that that decay, and you have to infer that they exist.
00:22:15.000 --> 00:22:21.000 But the stones still exist, and therefore you can read the stones, but not the soft things that decay.
00:22:21.000 --> 00:22:28.000 And it's it just shows you about the architecture of knowledge you know what's permanent what isn't permanent.
00:22:28.000 --> 00:22:38.000 What can you believe you can work from so i'd love to understand more about the dialogue that happened between the Davids?
00:22:38.000 --> 00:22:47.000 It makes me deeply curious, and i'm just reading I read again the prologue to the book, because that's where you start when you get the words.
00:22:47.000 --> 00:22:55.000 I guess, and it was David Wingro, writing about the writing process, and he said, and know that i'm also reading the book dialogue at the same time.
00:22:55.000 --> 00:23:05.000 So i'm saying more than one thing it was something about the exchange over time, and he was saying how they're thinking actually became thinking of one person.
00:23:05.000 --> 00:23:23.000 It was David squared over time, because they did exchanges over a whole decade, and that's a lot of exchange, especially, you know, if towards the end you are having 3 or 4 conversations a day quite often you complete each other's thoughts
00:23:23.000 --> 00:23:36.000 if You're that entwined can i'm curious about what you think, because you've always got very insightful thought, What about this?
00:23:36.000 --> 00:23:45.000 I Don't know much about they did when grow I can I've been reading, rereading no reading another of David's books.
00:23:45.000 --> 00:23:50.000 David grabber's books and so i'm looking at the difference in tone.
00:23:50.000 --> 00:23:59.000 But the other book is more a pamphlet well This one also has a bit of a pamphlet quality, but it's a pamphlet very much balanced by your addition.
00:23:59.000 --> 00:24:05.000 The other wins which Web Market wanted the Utopia of rules.
00:24:05.000 --> 00:24:12.000 Not read that but i'm just driven to doing it it's it's absolutely delightful.
00:24:12.000 --> 00:24:29.000 No no It's it's grabber is wonderful right. But Utopia have rules is a huge Well, this is the one where David Boville is said that you know he's being and it's a it's a bit it's a bit sad that
00:24:29.000 --> 00:24:37.000 the social scientists didn't do more with computers which I understand where he's coming from, and I don't want to discuss that.
00:24:37.000 --> 00:24:45.000 But I think it's a bit unfair in some ways but fair in others, for sure, but certainly there's the same humor.
00:24:45.000 --> 00:24:55.000 David Grayber had a lot of humor I read another book of his, the Democracy Project that's what I read of him.
00:24:55.000 --> 00:25:09.000 And there's always this theme of possibility and that's the overarching team right throughout this book, and I would see his old.
00:25:09.000 --> 00:25:15.000 The notion that we have choice. we can create things. We can imagine things.
00:25:15.000 --> 00:25:23.000 The team of of active social imagination is also very present in the Ethiopia of Rules.
00:25:23.000 --> 00:25:31.000 And we can imagine things to be out otherwise. And this is what human agency is.
00:25:31.000 --> 00:25:46.000 And the here, I mean don of everything is very much taking issue with a particularly reducting tale of humanity's growth.
00:25:46.000 --> 00:25:51.000 The basic theme is it's partly reducting because reductive.
00:25:51.000 --> 00:25:57.000 I guess. well, in reducting also because there's so much more that's possible.
00:25:57.000 --> 00:26:06.000 That has been possible that has happened that and and and what I do like Sorry i'll talk a bit about the content 2 min 3.
00:26:06.000 --> 00:26:17.000 What I do like about this book is it's not it's not Utopian in the sense that it's not saying here was the perfect society.
00:26:17.000 --> 00:26:34.000 Let's simulate it. there's but it's very much about describing all those societies with their pros and cons, but saying, you know these were people who said you know this doesn't work for us let's
00:26:34.000 --> 00:26:41.000 do something else. and that's the recurring message in the book.
00:26:41.000 --> 00:26:57.000 All these things exist that's the and you know an example of this, an example of that, an example of this, and forget that the pattern here's a counter example, and but also seeing there was human agency involved in including what is
00:26:57.000 --> 00:27:03.000 fascinating in societies that lasted for millennia.
00:27:03.000 --> 00:27:20.000 So agency is a huge huge theme so I don't know what's when, what when grows voice is in there because there's theme is very many themes are recognized between many of his books at least this team of human
00:27:20.000 --> 00:27:30.000 agency, and the the right humor is also. nice it and your addition is there in the other books by the way, I don't want to imply that they don't have it.
00:27:30.000 --> 00:27:37.000 But it's less. The other like therapy of rules and Democracy Project are more pamphlets and less.
00:27:37.000 --> 00:27:51.000 You know studies, and that way, I will i'm very curious to readept because depth making an argument like none of everything is, and i'm curious to see, and i'm sure there's the same kind of impicable
00:27:51.000 --> 00:28:08.000 scholarship because scholarship is there but this is a very interesting book in that it's it's drawing the line between expanding the possible and making us imagine but also saying, well concrete example reference it's
00:28:08.000 --> 00:28:13.000 very solid like I made sure I didn't skip a footnote.
00:28:13.000 --> 00:28:20.000 There's a wealth in the footnotes I don't know how that comes out in the audiobook.
00:28:20.000 --> 00:28:24.000 They're probably not there and my goodness there's stuff there.
00:28:24.000 --> 00:28:41.000 Wow! there's so much in what you were saying i'm drawn to 2 things, Pete can you just make a note about a book called the Sociological Imagination, and i'm going to go back to that book mainly because it was very
00:28:41.000 --> 00:28:59.000 useful in my doctorate, but I think this idea of firstly realizing that people were experimenting is that the basic thesis. Is this active agency in searching the Ing So you're interesting.
00:28:59.000 --> 00:29:06.000 It was really interesting here. you hearing you marc antoine talk about reductive and reducting.
00:29:06.000 --> 00:29:11.000 Think that it's still a process that we're trying to do not so much in this in this conversation.
00:29:11.000 --> 00:29:27.000 I think we're still in an open space but this idea of this permission, this declaration in some ways that it's by keeping things in verbs, keeping this exchange going that we learn together and it's really
00:29:27.000 --> 00:29:47.000 essential to acknowledge the fact. And I think ribbon makes this point really really clear clearly that all of all of humanities you know that all of time has been experimenting with nature and experimenting between people around how you
00:29:47.000 --> 00:29:54.000 live in a place in it at the time, and with other people, and that worked out well or badly.
00:29:54.000 --> 00:30:15.000 So if you look at it, look at it that way it's trying to understand what experience were rum, and are they still running, you know, in certain civilizations, and how they, being renegotiated so this imagination going forwards about
00:30:15.000 --> 00:30:19.000 what you could learn from what has gone before, and what are your possibilities now?
00:30:19.000 --> 00:30:24.000 And I know in an Australian culture really fragmented.
00:30:24.000 --> 00:30:31.000 You know this co-ownership of land is something that I hopefully turn up when I It is actually there in the book, in multiple places.
00:30:31.000 --> 00:30:41.000 It's not introduced at the beginning, but this idea of the Commons of land, not just the commons of it, if you think about it.
00:30:41.000 --> 00:30:51.000 But the Collins of Land that existed before enclosure, and this has come up in the Yans is a hugely divisive thing that you know.
00:30:51.000 --> 00:31:05.000 This person owns this this bit of land and that person doesn't know this bit of land that's a topic i'd love us to take further, because it's it's rooted in how we live Now this iron this you
00:31:05.000 --> 00:31:22.000 don't own this and James, carce I think we probably need to somehow weave in somewhere here, because he's got a very big piece around property, and it's turning up a lot in the yarns and mining and
00:31:22.000 --> 00:31:37.000 all these other, you know, if you say extractive processes and but should we circle back to things that we can notice from the first chapter, just to be honoring the moment because we're sort of setting the same in some ways through other rocks
00:31:37.000 --> 00:31:43.000 in the pond. It wasn't an odd odd thing to say about chapter one.
00:31:43.000 --> 00:31:53.000 Well, so now, having not read the whole book I don't know I have a question about the whole book which I it's i'm happy to have it resolved over time.
00:31:53.000 --> 00:32:08.000 The I like that. The The david's said You know there was a lot of variety throughout history.
00:32:08.000 --> 00:32:23.000 And hobbes and russo you know kind of, and I think they make the point that rousseau Wasn't was actually saying, you know i'm just in a thought experiment here don't take this as gospel and then we kind of
00:32:23.000 --> 00:32:29.000 narrowed down into making a gospel. But anyway, they they did this reductive thing.
00:32:29.000 --> 00:32:36.000 You know that that sometimes we do and made all of history very reductive?
00:32:36.000 --> 00:32:44.000 You know there's a hierarchy of evolution to human history, and this is outworks, even though they didn't have any.
00:32:44.000 --> 00:32:48.000 They didn't do a statistical analysis they didn't have you know the the data to show that or anything.
00:32:48.000 --> 00:33:05.000 And if you look at the data there's a much different story, so I get all that I appreciate all that the thing that that I was left hanging and wanting was for them to say and it could have just been a short
00:33:05.000 --> 00:33:09.000 sentence, even we could have end up in a different future.
00:33:09.000 --> 00:33:14.000 The The future that we have now is one of many that could have happened.
00:33:14.000 --> 00:33:29.000 So when I was reading that and reading about Rousseau and Jared Diamond and Steven Pinker and and Hobb, and what they end up, thinking i'm like you know the reason those those man end up thinking
00:33:29.000 --> 00:33:36.000 that is because they ended up in one cul-de-sac of all the futures that we had.
00:33:36.000 --> 00:33:48.000 And of course, that's the the backstory from where they are Now the backstory is you know there's good guys and bad guys, and we fight wars and you know and it's all about men and whatever you know whatever the
00:33:48.000 --> 00:34:06.000 story is they're coming from a particular place. at the end of what should have been a multi-branch tree, and they they didn't capture that they didn't say I I wish they would have said one sentence we could have had a
00:34:06.000 --> 00:34:12.000 matriarch society, or we could have had an egalitarian society, and we don't.
00:34:12.000 --> 00:34:18.000 They do say they do very much. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. yeah, yeah, No, no spoiler.
00:34:18.000 --> 00:34:31.000 Alert. but i'm out of here they're very much saying, and and we can keep deciding like they keeps out 250.
00:34:31.000 --> 00:34:38.000 What we have is what we ended up with and it's up to us to decide otherwise.
00:34:38.000 --> 00:34:44.000 I mean this is this is grabber's theme throughout I mean he's a an artist for price sake.
00:34:44.000 --> 00:34:49.000 He believes another world is possible. I mean, this is the ultimate anti-tina.
00:34:49.000 --> 00:35:14.000 Right. Yeah, alternatives there's plenty alternatives what's the acronym of that i'll have Well, as a futurist it was the starting point, and that's why I was talking about the sociological imagination and
00:35:14.000 --> 00:35:25.000 dialogue, because this is sort of a collective dreaming, and I guess the irony of this in in Australia having, you know the dreaming in the dream time is to be able to have these artifacts.
00:35:25.000 --> 00:35:35.000 That you can reimagine currently and to get value from that don't determine exactly how the past happened, although there's there's a game around that.
00:35:35.000 --> 00:35:41.000 It is a story that you can use to feed forwards and it's not prescriptive.
00:35:41.000 --> 00:35:55.000 It's not saying it will end up as its but there's learning in them. and there's something about not saying it happened exactly this way in the past, because you can't know and you can't say it's going to happen this way.
00:35:55.000 --> 00:36:01.000 In the future, because you can't know but the current time has got the ingredients that you can weave from.
00:36:01.000 --> 00:36:14.000 If you can recognize them. So there's something about imagining together in in recognizing the ingredients that you have now to work with, which are a subset of all the ones that you might have had you know based on what was
00:36:14.000 --> 00:36:20.000 possible in a period of time in the past you know we're still at the moment.
00:36:20.000 --> 00:36:34.000 And this is, I think this is the thing I feel sad and angry about is that you know we're destroying so much of the nature that would be really useful to have you. You know, available to us to rewave what we want to
00:36:34.000 --> 00:36:43.000 do that. I look at places like the United kingdom where and I can't remember where I read this i'm having that same problem.
00:36:43.000 --> 00:37:01.000 You know you Look at the united kingdom and you could say it's possible that no part of that is remains unchanged like that is possible that no part of that is as it was originally over, time and time and you
00:37:01.000 --> 00:37:12.000 can't say that about Australia but rapidly we're moving that direction, and Brazil is moving that direction, and some of these places are, and so we've not got the the ingredients that nature gave us to work with as
00:37:12.000 --> 00:37:22.000 ingredients we're sort of expending them now, and and you run out of runway in terms of the things that were called upon in the past.
00:37:22.000 --> 00:37:31.000 To create, you know. natural remedies and shelter and all those things.
00:37:31.000 --> 00:37:38.000 They're not around so much in the way they were some countries They're more available.
00:37:38.000 --> 00:37:53.000 Some countries are not available at all and here's the story we had a student in our household who the week before last said to me, i'm in a town in my country in China, and I only live in tall buildings I
00:37:53.000 --> 00:37:57.000 don't see trees and she's in rural china she doesn't see trees.
00:37:57.000 --> 00:38:02.000 She doesn't have grass in her city it's not something that's part of her life.
00:38:02.000 --> 00:38:10.000 That's a big difference in terms of what we've got to work with. compared you know, historically, we don't have the materiality.
00:38:10.000 --> 00:38:17.000 That was the source of a lot of the wisdom and the the strength, the set of possibilities.
00:38:17.000 --> 00:38:25.000 We have other forms of material that don't actually come a lot of them come from, you know, natural materials.
00:38:25.000 --> 00:38:32.000 You know the braiding seek sweet grass is all about braining sweet grass, and it's also telling a story.
00:38:32.000 --> 00:38:37.000 No, I was in Shanghai in Oh, 7!
00:38:37.000 --> 00:38:44.000 And I had previously seen this wonderful documentary called Shanghai Ghetto, which is about the Jews who escape the Nazis, and ended up in Shanghai.
00:38:44.000 --> 00:38:56.000 And so there was plenty of historical footage. What Shang I looked like in the 1,900 thirtys and fortys, and I got to Shanghai in 2,007 just in time to see the last dozen blocks of that
00:38:56.000 --> 00:39:11.000 being raised. you could see the old city there, and all around it were towering skyscrapers, and I thought to myself how traumatic for people who had been born and raised in that city to see their entire city in the space of
00:39:11.000 --> 00:39:23.000 20 years go from a beautiful low skyline, maybe 3 4 story buildings, or the Max. to this towering, I want to say, towering Inferno, a towering infertile of concrete.
00:39:23.000 --> 00:39:28.000 And no green space anywhere, and their entire everything they knew everything had been changed.
00:39:28.000 --> 00:39:44.000 They was all wiped out and gone. There was no more natural space around, and I recently encountered an I think it was from Santo, the ass post apocalyptic stress traumatic since stressed in Drama when people under when
00:39:44.000 --> 00:39:57.000 a whole people undergo a huge trauma like that whether it's the holocaust or Armageddon in terms of indigenous peoples, or you know people having their entire city wiped out the space of a
00:39:57.000 --> 00:40:06.000 generation that leaves a very deep 3 deep. pass, I think, is what it is called Pete.
00:40:06.000 --> 00:40:11.000 So what do you? Just you just stirred that for me?
00:40:11.000 --> 00:40:26.000 And and yeah, I very much agree. the the land base. I also from Sant Talk, the first, the primal, the the original sin for aboriginal people is putting yourself above the land or other people.
00:40:26.000 --> 00:40:31.000 And we have an entire worldview that's built on we're separate from the world.
00:40:31.000 --> 00:40:33.000 And now and lots called it the the porcelain model.
00:40:33.000 --> 00:40:44.000 God made this earth. and then he placed man on and said have dominion to go out there. and you know, do whatever you want, and you And now we're learning from our modern most modern science is catching up with our most ancient wisdom the world
00:40:44.000 --> 00:40:57.000 is alive, and we need to be treating it as a alive, and we've killed off enormous parts of it that are not you currently to regenerate our lifestyle our systems of living and that's a very
00:40:57.000 --> 00:41:00.000 narrowing set of walls, like the trash Compactor and Star wars.
00:41:00.000 --> 00:41:17.000 You know it's getting really tight in here folks yeah I don't want to get too much into spoiler surgery where he goes about states taking all the plates, but something that is very much.
00:41:17.000 --> 00:41:23.000 This the fact that there's no space outside the current paradigm right?
00:41:23.000 --> 00:41:38.000 There's no there. used to be you know mountain ranges and i'm looking for a word right now because there's there's some leftist essays who wrote something about you know these mountain ranges where
00:41:38.000 --> 00:41:43.000 you'd have these people living outside of quota-unquote civilization, Zuma.
00:41:43.000 --> 00:41:53.000 Something like that I wish I remember that word. but there's this notion that there's always these kind of no-man's land where people can try something else.
00:41:53.000 --> 00:42:14.000 And now the there's no space that is not owned by a country, and enough right, and it was to be so important to be able to just precisely move around and try something else, and that that is difficult. and you know you said earlier where is that space
00:42:14.000 --> 00:42:27.000 of experimentation, and I put a note in the text that I think it's now happening outside of state structures, because it has to, and usually the outside used to mean physically outside state boundaries, But now that there's no outside we
00:42:27.000 --> 00:42:36.000 have something else. I have a lot of objections to what's happening in the dow space.
00:42:36.000 --> 00:42:40.000 But it's still people experimenting with other forms of organization in another space.
00:42:40.000 --> 00:42:47.000 Altogether. there's the comments people are experimenting you know there's all these communities that trying to think.
00:42:47.000 --> 00:42:54.000 Okay, what is human regulation outside of this one paradigm?
00:42:54.000 --> 00:43:08.000 Yeah, it's really interesting that the fact that i've got these 4 yarns to call on because a lot of what is discussed in those is very much feeling for
00:43:08.000 --> 00:43:20.000 I guess the intersections between a lot of the things we're talking about, and it's only just hinted on and and there, you know, they they're bound their 90 min talks.
00:43:20.000 --> 00:43:27.000 So but the third space is a phrase and I think that it's something that we should introduce in here.
00:43:27.000 --> 00:43:32.000 So third spaces are intersectional they're sort of stolen or reclaimed.
00:43:32.000 --> 00:43:36.000 If that makes sense from a conversation that's connected to a particular shape.
00:43:36.000 --> 00:43:45.000 But they're you know they're the charities so this and other, you know, not for profits other organizations that have the basic structures.
00:43:45.000 --> 00:43:53.000 They require to be able to trade in one world in in order to allow other another world to trade.
00:43:53.000 --> 00:44:03.000 And then there's also a sort of not a full economy but this movements, like permaculture, which are deeply useful.
00:44:03.000 --> 00:44:19.000 In in that everyone has to eat, so you can use them as sort of like a basis, or on which to build other things. and it can't be owned by someone, although permaculture actually has a strong Australian has strong Australian
00:44:19.000 --> 00:44:27.000 roots. I know who are people who are deeply involved in this, who are also deeply involved in the space type.
00:44:27.000 --> 00:44:47.000 More traditional businesses and such. The thing I really wanted to talk about is something that turned up for me in a job Interview was actually part of a job interview over the last fortnight, which is the idea of second order cybernetics, and
00:44:47.000 --> 00:44:57.000 everything is objects, and and the person who was championing that was a guy called Reynolds, Grant, Glendale, R. A. Null, Ph.
00:44:57.000 --> 00:45:07.000 Glenville, and he was one of the sort of second staging, if you like, of cybernetics which started in the 1,900 fortys.
00:45:07.000 --> 00:45:13.000 But here's the point it's really difficult to be able to rewave things.
00:45:13.000 --> 00:45:27.000 If humans have you know primacy it, just can't work very well, because if i'm more important than I rock, or that's sort of like I could live with that, But if i'm more important than the plot that feeds
00:45:27.000 --> 00:45:33.000 me. we have a problem if I get rid of all the plants because it's easy for me to get rid of all the plants.
00:45:33.000 --> 00:45:41.000 I've got nothing to eat. so the the idea of second order cyclinetics, and I actually had to use an example to do to teach this.
00:45:41.000 --> 00:45:50.000 So I used yoko onos and exhibition in 1,966 sealing painting, and I don't know if you know it.
00:45:50.000 --> 00:45:57.000 But she puts a letter up. Then she writes a word on a canvas on the ceiling and tiny writing.
00:45:57.000 --> 00:46:01.000 The letter actually turned up later. funnily enough. It was a stolen ladder she painted wide.
00:46:01.000 --> 00:46:09.000 She took it from a neighbor, but that's another story and then she invites John Lennon, who doesn't know her at that point to the exhibition.
00:46:09.000 --> 00:46:23.000 He's a an influential, random, it's an exhibition that happened a pre exhibition exhibition in a gallery in London, and she wrote the word Yes, because she wanted to have more positive more positivity in her life
00:46:23.000 --> 00:46:27.000 but the person who was sensitive does not know what is written at the top.
00:46:27.000 --> 00:46:30.000 So John Lennon goes up. He says the word.
00:46:30.000 --> 00:46:41.000 Yes, and you know we know history. We know where John and Yaka went, and the word imagined came out of that meeting, and there's a lot of powerful things in the song. Imagine came out of that meeting.
00:46:41.000 --> 00:46:52.000 But it was just one person evoking one word on a certain ceiling. But anyway, the point i'm making is that the minute you walk into that space with the latter you are part of that system, and I use that to get the
00:46:52.000 --> 00:46:59.000 second order cybernetics idea across We are actually objects in observing systems. And this is the point that glamor makes.
00:46:59.000 --> 00:47:14.000 And if you turn yourself into an object in an observing system, you don't play the game of being outside, and being out to look at it as having higher order knowledge, you then match, have a landscape that can move because I can look at myself and
00:47:14.000 --> 00:47:20.000 say, what can the rock tell me about what's going on what can the plant tell me about what's going on?
00:47:20.000 --> 00:47:26.000 So all of a sudden, you have a system that can move because I'm not more important than the rock in my asking.
00:47:26.000 --> 00:47:30.000 I'm saying, Rock you know what's try and be a rock.
00:47:30.000 --> 00:47:33.000 This is a really diggly, indigenous thing.
00:47:33.000 --> 00:47:43.000 You can be the rock you can be. The plant is really hard for me to turn myself into rock, but I can sort of look at things from a rock like perspective.
00:47:43.000 --> 00:47:58.000 Anyway, my point is that this object in being an observing being actually inside the machine, and not unique as an observer, but more in as an observer who's observing themselves it's a really funny thing to be in once
00:47:58.000 --> 00:48:02.000 you're on the ladder and part of that system and everything else is part of that system.
00:48:02.000 --> 00:48:08.000 Then you have a way of reweaving the perspectives because You're not boss.
00:48:08.000 --> 00:48:14.000 You're not boss anymore. you're not the most important thing in that system.
00:48:14.000 --> 00:48:28.000 The really important. My My first encounter with a critique of objectivity was Evelyn Fox Killers Reflections and Gender and science.
00:48:28.000 --> 00:48:48.000 Wow! absolutely fascinating analysis of objectivity as a defining myth of a certain vision of Science, and she spent a lot of her life trying to say what is a Science that is not as objective detached Dd and and she
00:48:48.000 --> 00:48:57.000 even puts it in relation to a certain psychological theory of psychic development.
00:48:57.000 --> 00:49:19.000 And I remember reading another feminist theorist, saying that when you they did this big survey of how people describe knowledge and their experience of no, They noticed that men were systematically using site metaphors and women were systematically using hearing
00:49:19.000 --> 00:49:39.000 metaphors. I heard this it's it was very fascinating. and now this is not exactly quoted by killer, but still there is a lot about objectivity as a psychic construct of certain family, structure and so on and
00:49:39.000 --> 00:49:49.000 the origins, the toxic origins of that in in this power over nature totally another book.
00:49:49.000 --> 00:50:07.000 Yes, that one it's it's interesting that how how much we It's it's interesting how much context we place this book in.
00:50:07.000 --> 00:50:13.000 You said so. Pricing is a statement, though? just think about it.
00:50:13.000 --> 00:50:18.000 I mean what's taking us this group to this place it's not surprising to me.
00:50:18.000 --> 00:50:23.000 I mean it was sense making. it was conversation, it was story.
00:50:23.000 --> 00:50:39.000 It was a doctorate in a whole journey of things and my Antoine and an Eve, and you know Ken and and Pete, You know we've got 5 or 6 decades of experience that have taken us to this point just
00:50:39.000 --> 00:50:45.000 like the David's had to you know similar amounts of experience that took them to the same time.
00:50:45.000 --> 00:50:51.000 And place that's a lot of conversation i'm not surprised.
00:50:51.000 --> 00:51:00.000 But but but when I you know, when i've talked to people around me and I say, oh, I we're starting a book club.
00:51:00.000 --> 00:51:10.000 It's like, Oh, okay, and they they think of a book club maybe a little bit differently than we're experiencing a book club, and they think of their book.
00:51:10.000 --> 00:51:18.000 Actually the book that They're reading and and that's the the interesting thing for me, you know it's like, Oh, yeah, we ran that book.
00:51:18.000 --> 00:51:29.000 It was great. but we're reading a book and exploring a whole conceptual space, or like a very rich, you know, multic conceptual space.
00:51:29.000 --> 00:51:35.000 This is like a Ogm Colin steroids, where you know.
00:51:35.000 --> 00:51:43.000 Look how much, how many pages are on this this document already of all these different links and ways of looking.
00:51:43.000 --> 00:51:50.000 And we really haven't even talked about the book we're just talking about the way the book fits into our existing models and paradigms.
00:51:50.000 --> 00:51:56.000 You know. And and this is why I love being part of a book group.
00:51:56.000 --> 00:52:01.000 Because and you're not just looking at the book you again. What does it mean to this person and that person?
00:52:01.000 --> 00:52:04.000 And you get all these difference like the facets of a jewel each.
00:52:04.000 --> 00:52:09.000 It just keeps lighting up again and again, and I find it so enriching.
00:52:09.000 --> 00:52:12.000 And and I I want to see. I realized we skipped over.
00:52:12.000 --> 00:52:17.000 I made a joke. We skipped over the check-in part as humans, and I actually missed that.
00:52:17.000 --> 00:52:24.000 So I don't know if we want to go back to that nothing says we have to do beginning middle and end in order. we can.
00:52:24.000 --> 00:52:28.000 We can stick the middle into the beginning or the beginning in my mind.
00:52:28.000 --> 00:52:39.000 We did the check, and as humans for 5 or 10 min at the beginning, and it was on not on the recording and right, and it's about the headphones.
00:52:39.000 --> 00:52:42.000 Yeah, yeah, it's about headphones and stuff but you know we got into that.
00:52:42.000 --> 00:52:50.000 We situated ourselves kind of, and I actually reflecting on it, I was thinking forward into the agenda and the checkout.
00:52:50.000 --> 00:53:07.000 I can imagine the checkout being off recording again, I also think that there's something here, and i'm also drawn, I guess, to the experience of decoding these yarns if you like, or presenting these yarns which
00:53:07.000 --> 00:53:16.000 are not books and They're very are and they're calling on you know, deep intersections between people who are literally on opposite sides of the globe.
00:53:16.000 --> 00:53:30.000 There's something about the listener, the person who wasn't there trying to understand a little bit about where those people come from, and whether whether we have to do that, or not because if you you know if you do a checking as human
00:53:30.000 --> 00:53:43.000 you've got 25 people on the call that's actually the call, and, in fact, probably most of the time we're taking in as humans all the time it's like i'm reading this book and I bumped
00:53:43.000 --> 00:53:46.000 into so and so so all the time we're bringing in things that represent us.
00:53:46.000 --> 00:53:56.000 But we're not necessarily getting people much of a chance to know who we are and why we see this book in this way, or why we're interacting with it.
00:53:56.000 --> 00:54:01.000 You know, somebody said, Why would you read more than one book at once? and i'm the Wanderer.
00:54:01.000 --> 00:54:06.000 I go between different communities, and it makes a huge difference that I do to myself.
00:54:06.000 --> 00:54:19.000 It makes me sort of more peaceful but you wouldn't know that unless I said that about myself, and even then you know, I need to stick to my needing sometimes.
00:54:19.000 --> 00:54:36.000 Sure to know from people. if maybe this is sort of a middle of the the call check-in question of what creator to read this book, I mean for me, I've always been fascinated by the fact that you know according to
00:54:36.000 --> 00:54:45.000 biology. Humans in modern homo sapiens, sapiens, farmer, been around for about 200 5,000 300,000 years.
00:54:45.000 --> 00:54:58.000 Something like that. and as the genus homo we've been around for 3, read to 5,000,000 years, and yet we know maybe if we're lucky and educated about 5,000 years with our history, so you know I was drawn to this book,
00:54:58.000 --> 00:55:04.000 because they're talking about 30,000 years history like wow i'm gonna I get 6 times the amount of history.
00:55:04.000 --> 00:55:10.000 I already have you know and that's that was a really big draw for me, as i'm really fascinated.
00:55:10.000 --> 00:55:14.000 I keep, and I use Austrian aboriginal culture a lot in that.
00:55:14.000 --> 00:55:19.000 My reading is that anthropologists have studied their stories and identified.
00:55:19.000 --> 00:55:22.000 They still tell stories about animals when extinct 40,000 years ago.
00:55:22.000 --> 00:55:27.000 So they have an intact culture for at least 40,000 years, probably longer than that.
00:55:27.000 --> 00:55:33.000 And I look around the world, and I go how many people have 40,000 years worth of cultural history to draw upon. and it's not very many.
00:55:33.000 --> 00:55:44.000 And what could we learn? How could we improve our memory? How can we go back and harvest What might be dormant in there?
00:55:44.000 --> 00:56:05.000 I did this amazing process that Joanna Macy, about 25 years ago, outside in a in a field where she had us with our eyes close walking backwards, and she read back from time, You know, when you arrived here or this morning, breakfast last night, and just until we were actually standing we were emerging from the forest
00:56:05.000 --> 00:56:12.000 to stand on savannas of Africa and Then we move forward, and she said, Any time time you're moving forward, and you find a gift, pick it up and carry it with you.
00:56:12.000 --> 00:56:15.000 This is harvesting the gifts of the ancestors.
00:56:15.000 --> 00:56:24.000 And that was certainly cool. We powerful imaginal experience of actually feeling like Wow!
00:56:24.000 --> 00:56:37.000 I've and something very interesting happened to me right around 1,500, where this huge burden lifted off of my Psyche, and it was so freeing like I felt a whole different way of being and then to go back to being
00:56:37.000 --> 00:56:53.000 you know, aboriginal on the planes and and you know wherever just having that experience was was very mind expanding for me, and I wish more people had the opportunity to get out of last week's news and next next quarter's
00:56:53.000 --> 00:57:00.000 profits and really get into what's going on here you know We're part of this grand sweep of humanity that has been going on for 3,000,000 years.
00:57:00.000 --> 00:57:07.000 What's our part in this where it's really interesting I took my many, my many sins.
00:57:07.000 --> 00:57:18.000 I ran in nightclub in Melbourne with a guy who does a sort of shamanic drumming, and a group of people, and including a Futurist and some of my friends.
00:57:18.000 --> 00:57:30.000 A process where we walk people through their immediate sort of past to their immediate future, and we actually filmed it three-dimensional with a guy who is a very talented videographer.
00:57:30.000 --> 00:57:40.000 So we have. I still have footage jumped this particular experience, and I said it up because I was the person who ran it, and it was advertised in Melbourne across Melbourne.
00:57:40.000 --> 00:57:51.000 So it was known as an event, and it was amazingly moving just to work through the small segment of your life that was immediately behind you and in front.
00:57:51.000 --> 00:57:59.000 Just to put that emotion as a spatial experience was life-changing, let alone doing it over. You know.
00:57:59.000 --> 00:58:09.000 The parts of that are not accessible to me. This is me and my life, and actually moving through it as a physical being with sound of drumming, and such which my friend uses.
00:58:09.000 --> 00:58:15.000 But his first job was being a negotiating with Somalian warlords out of Union That's what he did.
00:58:15.000 --> 00:58:22.000 The the un. you go to you. You got a union. you finish a job and you get a job with you in, and you negotiate with smiling warlords.
00:58:22.000 --> 00:58:33.000 So this is a deeply experienced person who has spent lots of his life in Brazil and knows a lot about you know Brazil.
00:58:33.000 --> 00:58:38.000 And the cultures in Brazil and these fluid and multiple languages, and he's a deeply useful person.
00:58:38.000 --> 00:58:41.000 So he used the drumming a way of helping us access.
00:58:41.000 --> 00:58:47.000 The rhythm of our lives. If you like going back a little bit and going forward to little people.
00:58:47.000 --> 00:58:51.000 Most people don't get experiences like we gave people in that nightclub.
00:58:51.000 --> 00:59:07.000 Most people wouldn't even think remotely of doing something like that that it was a it was a privilege, and you know, to do that as a group of people I would so love to do that with a 1,000 people in football field Yeah,
00:59:07.000 --> 00:59:27.000 I would, and that's where I was going with this and to use tools like sense maker, and that to help people access some of the the imagination that you could actually walk forwards together, doing something different if you just decided you were going to do it
00:59:27.000 --> 00:59:30.000 which was that that was the message in the room it's like here it is.
00:59:30.000 --> 00:59:33.000 It's a future cone it's a structure using futures work.
00:59:33.000 --> 00:59:39.000 Here's the way you can structure your sort of close-up opportunities.
00:59:39.000 --> 00:59:44.000 You could imagine what's just behind you because it was yesterday or a week ago, or whatever.
00:59:44.000 --> 00:59:58.000 And here's, what it's opening up to this is a choice that we are making together, and I am also making as an individual, it is not set, but to make that a spatial play with people in a sort of flow state because of
00:59:58.000 --> 01:00:02.000 the drumming and other things to say it's not actually preordained.
01:00:02.000 --> 01:00:08.000 You do have choices. You walk to the left you go up high. You go low.
01:00:08.000 --> 01:00:11.000 It's a game that you play with yourself and with other people.
01:00:11.000 --> 01:00:20.000 It was really interesting to see how people wove in between like They started to make little games like we go down low or high, or you go between someone's legs.
01:00:20.000 --> 01:00:23.000 So you put a hand out somewhere and you just freeze because you didn't know what to do.
01:00:23.000 --> 01:00:37.000 So it was So this book you know dawn of everything, is making the premise that people have been doing experiments like where they move through space, and how they remember things which is often spatially.
01:00:37.000 --> 01:00:56.000 Because you didn't have necessarily the way of writing things down. So I aboriginal people use you know a rock to remember something a story which is evoked by a rock to remember something and this long a song line is like it's
01:00:56.000 --> 01:00:58.000 like a story that you use to get from A to B.
01:00:58.000 --> 01:01:10.000 You know this story. when you get to this point in the story you will see these objects in your environment and orientate. And then the next part of the story is how you get to the next series of objects.
01:01:10.000 --> 01:01:13.000 So they're actually like books a song line is like a book.
01:01:13.000 --> 01:01:26.000 So. Anyway, if you can turn your life into something like that that's more spatial and accessible, and got this freedom, it takes you out of the bind, and the jam I only have X in front of me and judges joined
01:01:26.000 --> 01:01:33.000 us, hey? Judy? Apologies for having a cluttered calendar.
01:01:33.000 --> 01:01:41.000 No quality necessary. Thanks, Thanks for being here. Good to see you, Judy.
01:01:41.000 --> 01:01:51.000 Nice to see you too, today. I'll put the link in the to this document in the chat but you can just watch the screen, if you want.
01:01:51.000 --> 01:01:59.000 That's perfect. Thank you the ken was asking us why did we read that?
01:01:59.000 --> 01:02:03.000 Choose to read that book. I don't know if you want to Go Yeah, I'd love to hear your answers.
01:02:03.000 --> 01:02:14.000 Hmm. I used to want to be an archaeologist when I was little.
01:02:14.000 --> 01:02:30.000 Then, David, I skipped decades and decades and decades of stuff, but I did a lot of things in it. And then the only reason I knew about this book was Mark Andoan, and you and David Bovel was saying, you should read this book
01:02:30.000 --> 01:02:33.000 this book is really good. So so I got the book and know walk in nature, and I read.
01:02:33.000 --> 01:02:39.000 I listened to the book. Other things are happening so now i'm drawn into the book.
01:02:39.000 --> 01:02:59.000 But I used to want to be an archaeologist when I was to remember what got me into It But, Judith, I was curious to have your take on this first of all i'm a book fiend my house will collapse under
01:02:59.000 --> 01:03:11.000 the weight of In fact, there's a funny story about that some other time i'll share But what dram drew me to the book.
01:03:11.000 --> 01:03:29.000 Really was the dual perspective of the 2 authors, the sort of scientific foundation of artifacts, and what the artifacts mean in the context of time and the social aspect of an anthropologist looking at how species
01:03:29.000 --> 01:03:52.000 interact, and many anthropologists are broader than just the human species. So I was intrigued by the notion that of sort of the ascent of species from the horizon of early time, and then where I like to go with those
01:03:52.000 --> 01:03:58.000 things is, what does that? What are the implications of that perspective, or that understanding?
01:03:58.000 --> 01:04:08.000 2 on how I view my life right now, and what are the things that I can and can't influencer change will want to preserve.
01:04:08.000 --> 01:04:30.000 And how might I do that it's not a fast read however, because I find that I may need to do the audio as well as the book, because when I read a book, I stop all the time, and think about the last 2 sentences
01:04:30.000 --> 01:04:46.000 and it's that kind of a book I mean to have a wiki page called Big Questions and that that's a good one, which is so.
01:04:46.000 --> 01:04:59.000 That's why I read this here I I started. reading the book, partly because I've heard heard about it over and over and over, and Ogm. and at some point you go.
01:04:59.000 --> 01:05:02.000 Okay? Well, I guess I guess this is the book I need to read.
01:05:02.000 --> 01:05:15.000 The other thing is and it's it's funny I ended up being a little bit embarrassed by the by, the by, the chapter one Russo hobbes thing at at some point in the past 2 3 4
01:05:15.000 --> 01:05:26.000 years. something like that. Enough things clicked. It was probably it was probably debt the first 5,000 years.
01:05:26.000 --> 01:05:40.000 And Jerry talking about the grain book, which which one is, that wheat grain, something waving, weaving, weavings, the sweet grass no, but different one.
01:05:40.000 --> 01:05:46.000 I'll have to think about it for a second anyway.
01:05:46.000 --> 01:05:50.000 Something kind of clicked, and that I saw I through line.
01:05:50.000 --> 01:06:02.000 So I I for a long time after reading a book called Global Blaine by Howard Bloom, and then also Lucille Lucy's Legacy, by Allison Jolly.
01:06:02.000 --> 01:06:12.000 Jolly's book says that humans are just my mates, if she was a primatologist. and if you study primates enough, you go.
01:06:12.000 --> 01:06:29.000 Yep, humans are no different than any other primates, so that that kind of like poked a poked a hole for me in the in the bubble of humanity being, you know, super special or anything anything like that she she ends the book she kind,
01:06:29.000 --> 01:06:34.000 of starts off with maybe i've it's been a long time since I've read it.
01:06:34.000 --> 01:06:42.000 I I know she ends the book looking towards the future, and kind of it led me into kind of where the global Brain book picked up.
01:06:42.000 --> 01:06:49.000 Howard Bloom, who wrote global Brain is he's kind of a pseudo scientific author.
01:06:49.000 --> 01:06:57.000 He writes sciencey kinds of books, but I think he's more of more of a lay person. So he gets kind of a bad rap.
01:06:57.000 --> 01:07:01.000 But global brain also was a real big kick in the rear.
01:07:01.000 --> 01:07:09.000 And what he argues is that everything is a brain. The universe is a brain, a bacteria is a brain.
01:07:09.000 --> 01:07:17.000 Humans humans are individual. Humans have a brain. And then, you know, humans together in society act as a brain.
01:07:17.000 --> 01:07:23.000 And one of the things that really struck me out of that book was he.
01:07:23.000 --> 01:07:29.000 He emphasized group selection as an important thing for social animals, not just individual selection.
01:07:29.000 --> 01:07:38.000 So when I grew up and learned about Darwinian selection, it was like, Well, the zebras are more efficient and blah blah blah a a zebra is more efficient.
01:07:38.000 --> 01:07:43.000 Than what other kind of animal came before it. you know on this, in this context, he said.
01:07:43.000 --> 01:07:58.000 You know, especially with social animals you end up with. And And this was striking and and hard for people to hear at the time he wrote the book, you end up with the Society of Zebras being the thing that Natural Selection
01:07:58.000 --> 01:08:08.000 acts on any one particular Zebra isn't important to the the survival of the whole.
01:08:08.000 --> 01:08:16.000 And actually you end up with situations where you suboptimize individual survival and enhance group selection.
01:08:16.000 --> 01:08:28.000 So kind of all of that another another touch point for me was John Perry Barlow's essay it's called it's a poor workman who blames his tools.
01:08:28.000 --> 01:08:40.000 He coins a thing called humanity itself and he says I look at. I look at our life today, and I look at my mom's life, or maybe my grandma's life back on the planes.
01:08:40.000 --> 01:08:58.000 Or something like that. We are live in completely different worlds. and somehow we got from there to thinking of humanity itself as composed of individual humans, the way that way that a human body has a lot of mitochondria in it
01:08:58.000 --> 01:09:05.000 like, you know, from the the human point of view, where this, or from a from a human individual.
01:09:05.000 --> 01:09:16.000 We think of ourselves as one cohesive whole but when you take the system apart, you know there's a whole microbiome of bacteria, and there's a whole set of mitochondria that got
01:09:16.000 --> 01:09:26.000 swept in the cells. So some millions of years ago so he's like individual humans, kind of I think they're kind of like mitochondria mitochondria don't know anything about Oh, they live in
01:09:26.000 --> 01:09:28.000 a dog, or they live in a cow, or they live in a human.
01:09:28.000 --> 01:09:38.000 They just go about their mitochondrial life you know, doing stuff. and he's like, I think individual humans are kind of like that as related to this humanity itself.
01:09:38.000 --> 01:09:42.000 Thing. So for all of that, i'm interested in where we go from here?
01:09:42.000 --> 01:09:44.000 How do we make the world a better place? How do we be?
01:09:44.000 --> 01:09:54.000 Make people more equitable and stuff like that. And so, you know, I somehow got that kind of shared history.
01:09:54.000 --> 01:10:02.000 Now, after reading chapter one that we see started off as the pastoralists kind of we invented agriculture.
01:10:02.000 --> 01:10:18.000 We invented surplus grains. we have to have administrative stuff and different classes to administer surpluses, and then you end up with taxes and cities and religions and and fieldism and capitalism and stuff like that
01:10:18.000 --> 01:10:27.000 that's the debunks exactly Yes, exactly yeah However, and this is why i'm embarrassed like.
01:10:27.000 --> 01:10:33.000 You know I I have subscribed to the debunked history.
01:10:33.000 --> 01:10:54.000 However, I think it's a little bit different than that because and forgive me for getting it wrong. I haven't read all the book yet, but we we have ended up in one fork one path of the of the branch right
01:10:54.000 --> 01:10:59.000 we've ended up at a place and if you work backwards.
01:10:59.000 --> 01:11:10.000 I I don't have the feeling I never had the feeling that it was one thing building on another thing inevitably towards you know our beautiful current future.
01:11:10.000 --> 01:11:22.000 What I was thinking is our our future has been a series of natural selection events amongst bigger and bigger social structures.
01:11:22.000 --> 01:11:32.000 So social structure that's a city city-state is more powerful, essentially than the pastoralist living around it.
01:11:32.000 --> 01:11:44.000 And it's I don't think it's inevitable. I don't think it's an advancement or a hierarchical thing, but I also think it's true that natural selection of ended up natural
01:11:44.000 --> 01:12:00.000 selection on social structures and then larger, and larger scale social structures until we got things like capital feudalism and capitalism, massive social structures, massive, emergent, hyper, complex social structures that we think we understand when we
01:12:00.000 --> 01:12:07.000 don't and I think that's how we end up where we are.
01:12:07.000 --> 01:12:17.000 Not that one is better than the other, and especially I think of, I think of the winners that we are now the hypoena post capitalism.
01:12:17.000 --> 01:12:35.000 At this point. it's the people who are the most warlike who were able to kill all the other kinds of cultures and actually leave us literally, physically, biologically evolving into a people that you know that write books like
01:12:35.000 --> 01:12:44.000 Stephen Picker writes and write books like Jared Diamond writes: They have a hard time even imagining a different kind of culture right? and it's a biological thing.
01:12:44.000 --> 01:12:53.000 Actually we've gotten to the point where we where's survivors of where the survivors of the wars were not the you know, the people who got wiped out.
01:12:53.000 --> 01:12:58.000 And so I was always sad thinking i'll bet there was an amazing variety.
01:12:58.000 --> 01:13:16.000 So the the happy thing you know that I I hope to read into the rest of the book with I'm. sure there was an amazing variety of different kinds of societies, and systematically the winning super scale social structure has essentially wiped
01:13:16.000 --> 01:13:24.000 out a lot of those things and now. you know we're in some kind of post thing where we're trying to recover that and trying to regenerate that.
01:13:24.000 --> 01:13:27.000 So that's why I wanted to read the book to see how it turned out.
01:13:27.000 --> 01:13:49.000 In the end that's not the end though yet exactly and There's a lot of themes I that resonate with me, but i'd like to pick up on a few of those I agree one big question i've kept
01:13:49.000 --> 01:14:01.000 asking myself, is the question of cooperation versus competition and adaptation has been towards more cooperation as well as competition.
01:14:01.000 --> 01:14:11.000 Both forces are part of the adaptive forces. and the other one is, you know, that you say?
01:14:11.000 --> 01:14:26.000 Oh, we ended up in this way, and how much of that was unavoidable! How much of that was predetermined by human nature, and how much was just an accident of history right? and I don't feel I have an answer to
01:14:26.000 --> 01:14:34.000 that I Don't think the book has an answer to that I I think a lot of that kind of stuff a lot of emergencies is accidental.
01:14:34.000 --> 01:14:44.000 It, you know I I I believe so as well. I do think that when you say, is it because we were the ones who out competed?
01:14:44.000 --> 01:14:48.000 Yeah. and and and Diamond gets a lot of knuckle wraps in this book.
01:14:48.000 --> 01:15:06.000 But the basic idea of you know what the question of we had more germs, because we had more. we shared our lives with more animals because it was possible to do it because of the east-west access of the continent I don't think
01:15:06.000 --> 01:15:20.000 that got debunked I still buy that story personally the environment has a lot to do with it, though, and that comes out quite clearly in Graver's book. and you know I know I come from a background of environmental design but you
01:15:20.000 --> 01:15:31.000 know cold has an impact. If you have to hibernate for X amount of time a year, you know you're going to think differently because you've got to have social structures that support you not killing each other when
01:15:31.000 --> 01:15:44.000 you're living indoors for that amount of time. you you have to have social structures that allow you when it's summer to go out and be brave and not kill each other that Go and kill the element and instead that you can Bring back
01:15:44.000 --> 01:15:57.000 and cure together, which also requires some cooperation so that when you're locked indoors again, So these power structures and graver really makes this point and i've heard this in lots of different places dave Snowden says
01:15:57.000 --> 01:16:02.000 the same thing that you need to be able to decompose and recompose the ingredients.
01:16:02.000 --> 01:16:15.000 And one of my beacons. Yeah, one of my big concerns is that we are rapidly reducing the number of items that we have to work with from the environment to root weave and rewave So when you get a student who
01:16:15.000 --> 01:16:27.000 never knows what a tree is because they don't see trees that don't live trees that don't put their feet on grass, and a tree is not a thing in your brain it's not a word that you have you can't braid with
01:16:27.000 --> 01:16:36.000 those ingredients. If those words are not there you can't respect those things, and you live in the the pattern that you were boxing to.
01:16:36.000 --> 01:16:39.000 You know it's a bit like that compactness where the sides come in.
01:16:39.000 --> 01:16:47.000 So in theory you can have this richness of thought. But the thought actually comes from experiencing the environment.
01:16:47.000 --> 01:17:00.000 You know the idea, of all yeah I wasn't done i'm sorry, but I agree totally with what you're saying the question of what your working with, of course, limits your imagination.
01:17:00.000 --> 01:17:11.000 But the whole question of how much is of competition is ingrained in the human brain, and how much is something we learned, and how much is it?
01:17:11.000 --> 01:17:16.000 You know destiny, and how much of it is freedom, and how much of a this!
01:17:16.000 --> 01:17:21.000 This is what this is the big question. We have right Now that we're in a bad to sell destruction.
01:17:21.000 --> 01:17:26.000 We We want to know this, and and right now the link between scarcity and aggression is there.
01:17:26.000 --> 01:17:35.000 But there's many factors of aggression. I keep coding cane field in other contexts.
01:17:35.000 --> 01:17:44.000 I think. keen Field is very much quoting this other person that that was the last free Jerry's brain.
01:17:44.000 --> 01:17:57.000 Sorry trying to remember the name of the other author saying you know there's 30% give or take. people who are more attracted by authoritarian government.
01:17:57.000 --> 01:18:02.000 Then the hard work of negotiating with other human beings they want.
01:18:02.000 --> 01:18:08.000 They prefer being told what to do is that 30% innate or acquired.
01:18:08.000 --> 01:18:12.000 I don't believe it's like why it's it's an 8 myself.
01:18:12.000 --> 01:18:30.000 Is it? But I may be wrong, I but what I What I do feel is the time of evolution of Ge.
01:18:30.000 --> 01:18:41.000 When genes change very slow like, it takes a lot of time to gene drift for gene, drift, to accumulate into a permanent modification.
01:18:41.000 --> 01:18:49.000 Even the population rate modification it takes many generations so i'm always being suspicious of the sociobiology.
01:18:49.000 --> 01:19:11.000 Claim that you can explain like you can correlate social orders, or with behavioral propensities, because there's actually a huge amount of genetic mix in human populations sleep around a lot and we exchange genes for
01:19:11.000 --> 01:19:20.000 faster than we change society so social orders, or at least at the rate that offsets the rate of change of social orders, I think maybe wrong.
01:19:20.000 --> 01:19:34.000 I agree with that kind of in the steady state but I also think that we've when when the big social structures commit genocide that changes the the rate of change of evolution.
01:19:34.000 --> 01:19:42.000 It's possibly. true, but that's about that the 2 populations were terribly different to start with which is what i'm not sure about.
01:19:42.000 --> 01:19:51.000 But hey? i'm not sure it's complicated it and it's it's it's what i'm sure about is we need to bloody understand those dynamics.
01:19:51.000 --> 01:19:55.000 Yes, what about the genetics? If epigenetics does change things? You're absolutely right.
01:19:55.000 --> 01:20:01.000 Wendy. and yes, absolutely true, the genocide of yes, totally with you.
01:20:01.000 --> 01:20:13.000 There. we need to understand those dynamics We need to understand what's possible, how things become possible. how to make things possible.
01:20:13.000 --> 01:20:27.000 But but especially the field of the possible. given the humans, we are now, and I dare hope it's not just the authoritarian future and the collapse future.
01:20:27.000 --> 01:20:29.000 And I. At this point I see a collapses inevitable.
01:20:29.000 --> 01:20:44.000 But how much of a collapse and How much space for you know something else to happen in the margins With that i'm going to interrupt this with my moderator hat on?
01:20:44.000 --> 01:20:48.000 Yeah, we've got 5 min left in our 90 min.
01:20:48.000 --> 01:20:56.000 I I would like to propose that we try to keep the 90 min these calls and train ourselves to to do that.
01:20:56.000 --> 01:21:00.000 Even though I would love to keep talking for another 20.
01:21:00.000 --> 01:21:08.000 Does that sound? okay? would also like to make a practice of doing retros, at least.
01:21:08.000 --> 01:21:25.000 And so maybe we can do 5, 4 min of retro then maybe hang out for 5 or 10 min and do our human checkout off off recording and get a little bit more a little bit more time that way without having account against our meeting
01:21:25.000 --> 01:21:33.000 so. So this call let's talk about how this call went what went well, and i'm going to try to take notes.
01:21:33.000 --> 01:21:43.000 Everything. I got no complaints. I I I just to me.
01:21:43.000 --> 01:21:52.000 This is. This is the kind of you know, emergent, chaotic, lovely, meandering, yarning conversation that I I really enjoy.
01:21:52.000 --> 01:21:58.000 So you know i'm not looking so much for structure. I just feel really good about everything that's been said here.
01:21:58.000 --> 01:22:04.000 Can I? can I can I tellelescope everything into the people?
01:22:04.000 --> 01:22:15.000 No. Okay, The Intel: Well, yeah, you can say the the content, the process, the the people.
01:22:15.000 --> 01:22:23.000 The unfolding the emergent there's a slightly chaotic element.
01:22:23.000 --> 01:22:28.000 To it. There was interruptions and tangents, and so it just felt to me, very, very human like, you know.
01:22:28.000 --> 01:22:58.000 This is how people will actually sit around and talk, And and I really appreciate the thoughtfulness and the intelligence of every one of us here, because it just it really nurses me to be in this type of conversation do we do want to
01:23:00.000 --> 01:23:05.000 add more about what went Well, i'm going to add taking notes.
01:23:05.000 --> 01:23:13.000 I guess Pete always always goes well in these conversations It's phenomenal record keeper and Scribe.
01:23:13.000 --> 01:23:16.000 I always appreciate that about you, Pete. thank you.
01:23:16.000 --> 01:23:21.000 I think we did a good job of working together too. as a team.
01:23:21.000 --> 01:23:31.000 So i'm really happy with that and we also slowed down a little bit to look books up, or you know capture things. well.
01:23:31.000 --> 01:23:36.000 So i'm happy. We got to talk at least a little bit about the book.
01:23:36.000 --> 01:23:46.000 We did mention the title a couple times I feel like It's like about it a fair bit.
01:23:46.000 --> 01:23:49.000 I went into grand overview mode rather in the chapter.
01:23:49.000 --> 01:24:05.000 We also managed to mention the chapter of few times I think one of the other things is that it would actually change the nature of this of the book is, you know, that the width of the context that we're providing is I
01:24:05.000 --> 01:24:13.000 guess what every human, if integrated into the david's writing might It could have been a bigger book.
01:24:13.000 --> 01:24:30.000 It's already a big book but there's something about the richness that of all the bits and pieces that we've save our relevant that we're evoking And now when he froze I think yeah, rose for me
01:24:30.000 --> 01:24:37.000 too. start start the other section. Meanwhile, what did I capture?
01:24:37.000 --> 01:24:50.000 One more talking about thought of everything in context of other books and materials.
01:24:50.000 --> 01:24:56.000 Wendy. if you can hear us you're frozen, maybe try turning your video off and see if that brings you back for audio.
01:24:56.000 --> 01:25:02.000 Okay, now, Delta, what do we do differently next time?
01:25:02.000 --> 01:25:07.000 Can I pop in for just a second before we go to?
01:25:07.000 --> 01:25:31.000 And and that would be that the scope of the context from infinite to minut the being able to travel across that scope to dig in into minutia to what some people would call artifacts. and then for me the other piece that's,
01:25:31.000 --> 01:25:49.000 important, and to feel very sad that I missed part of the conversation is is just the the ability of different people, and I think i'd expand that to different species and social organizations, because I don't think we understand the sophisticated
01:25:49.000 --> 01:25:52.000 communication that goes on in non-human social organizations.
01:25:52.000 --> 01:26:12.000 The The ability to go over that wide continuum and then home in and dive paradoxically perpendicular to the continuum into a specific zone of death, a really intriguing ability and I don't know how
01:26:12.000 --> 01:26:18.000 much of it is obtained, and how much of it is constructive, formative ways.
01:26:18.000 --> 01:26:29.000 I wonder if you could make that into a bullet I can't even remember what I said.
01:26:29.000 --> 01:26:41.000 The the there's a the intersection of a lot of them broad perspective, with high levels of detail at specific points would be one bullet.
01:26:41.000 --> 01:27:02.000 The internalization and externalization of observations and actions would be another. And i'd like to explore why we think it's just humans who do that because I think part of our evolution as humans is to
01:27:02.000 --> 01:27:10.000 realize that there might be other of identities that are not human from whom we could learn.
01:27:10.000 --> 01:27:40.000 Thanks, Judy. i'm always a little conscious of sharing the screen and taking away, you know, making faces small instead of the screen.
01:27:45.000 --> 01:27:57.000 I feel like we know each other well enough. that even a thumbnails is helpful, and I think sharing a screen helped a lot in keeping the What do we think about that?
01:27:57.000 --> 01:28:02.000 That's actually why I asked you to bump up the cnn 225%.
01:28:02.000 --> 01:28:06.000 So I could broaden out the thumbnail so I could get a pretty good sense.
01:28:06.000 --> 01:28:10.000 They were not quite as small, so that's that worked for me in terms of the screen.
01:28:10.000 --> 01:28:14.000 But that would not work so well if we had more than 5 people would, because then it would just, you know.
01:28:14.000 --> 01:28:29.000 Anyway. that's I do like having a live note-taking. going on, I find that very useful, and at the same time.
01:28:29.000 --> 01:28:35.000 It is sometimes distracting. because i'm trying to listen to somebody, and look at a note, and i'll go damn I lost what you were saying.
01:28:35.000 --> 01:28:40.000 So that's just my own , brainwaves you know, interfering with each other.
01:28:40.000 --> 01:28:47.000 For for what it's worth and maybe this worth with your not neurology or not.
01:28:47.000 --> 01:28:53.000 I've got the you've seen me copying pasting from the live transcript.
01:28:53.000 --> 01:29:05.000 So I actually there were times when I missed you know 30 s of something, and I could read it back on the transcript. but that means that I've got a web browser and this browser and the transcript and
01:29:05.000 --> 01:29:13.000 the chat and processing of all of that which yeah, your mileage may vary. hey?
01:29:13.000 --> 01:29:23.000 What about win peace and i've made a little attempt it's I tried to do it when pete's talking. He's obviously thinking about talking is not typing at the same time.
01:29:23.000 --> 01:29:32.000 So There's something about pete thoughts that need to be explicitly captured because he does such a great job of capturing everybody else's stuff, and you offer some really great thoughts.
01:29:32.000 --> 01:29:39.000 And i'd want some agreement between us that what pete says also captured, even if it's just roughly.
01:29:39.000 --> 01:29:46.000 Maybe that's just an explicit agreement because you're part of the conversation team.
01:29:46.000 --> 01:30:04.000 Not just to a person who's recording it the beauty of the live transcript is, he can go back and grab what he said, but pasted in It's the point Yeah, it's a lot of work, though Hmm folks
01:30:04.000 --> 01:30:10.000 like I do have to live sorry but that'll be nice to see you.
01:30:10.000 --> 01:30:16.000 It's been a while, thank you thank you take care see you soon.
01:30:16.000 --> 01:30:46.000 Why I would I would Also we went a little over time i'd like to sort of reflect on I guess the notes that you've taken Pete, and then this book on dialogue, and thinking together, because I know this waving
01:30:53.000 --> 01:31:04.000 together in Wikis is important and I notice the opportunity because we're making this web pages much too slightly for my making.
01:31:04.000 --> 01:31:11.000 But just know that the fact that you're taking these notes if if we were to make this conversation into a web page or something.
01:31:11.000 --> 01:31:15.000 I'm not saying we would, but we had David wingro here.
01:31:15.000 --> 01:31:33.000 We probably would, and a more structured conversation so there's something here about the value of having that a greater depth, and I think I've always lost where i've gone here.
01:31:33.000 --> 01:31:53.000 Yeah, I think of loss of my thread there's something about the weaving, turning up with the names and such and the quotes and other bits and pieces that make it the whole conversation more accessible and it would almost be
01:31:53.000 --> 01:32:00.000 important, I think maybe if we wanted to take that into the conversation oh, that's right.
01:32:00.000 --> 01:32:12.000 Dialogue in the book so there's something about looking at the pattern of this conversation that we've just had a prompt which is a very specific prompt, which is a book, and very specific part of it where that conversation, went and
01:32:12.000 --> 01:32:15.000 actually looking at the structure. You know where we handed the baton.
01:32:15.000 --> 01:32:19.000 I know I spoke too much, or I feel like I did.
01:32:19.000 --> 01:32:26.000 Can you know you weren't as dominant in the conversation, but very valued, and Pete, likewise.
01:32:26.000 --> 01:32:41.000 Judy was a late joiner there's something about the structure of the conversation, and noticing the pattern of that, and understanding how we could improve on it, or just appreciating the pattern that we could then bring into our next
01:32:41.000 --> 01:32:54.000 structure make sure that it wasn't too squishy because I think the fact that we brought in these very disparate external things, and some stories and bits and pieces you know yoko I know wasn't going to be
01:32:54.000 --> 01:32:57.000 there, you know she was in my week and it's a very valid point.
01:32:57.000 --> 01:33:03.000 This objective thing. The object thing is really really important in trying to do what's happening.
01:33:03.000 --> 01:33:13.000 So. to have those things represented is quite important, and that for some people would be irreverent.
01:33:13.000 --> 01:33:26.000 Me, bringing in that story. Irreverent in this conversation, I felt like I was brave doing it, but what I was trying to do was to teach and creep a group of people who were trying to change the course of artificial
01:33:26.000 --> 01:33:36.000 intelligence in the world, including Silicon Valley will be been trained by one of Silicon Valley's dialings, Australian darlings, Genevieve Bell, to do just that.
01:33:36.000 --> 01:33:45.000 And I was talking to those people in service of that working Well, so it's it's not an interruption.
01:33:45.000 --> 01:33:48.000 It's right at the core of what we're trying to achieve together.
01:33:48.000 --> 01:33:55.000 But it felt like an interruption. It felt like I was telling the story, and maybe nobody got that story.
01:33:55.000 --> 01:34:06.000 Maybe that's a better question, Maybe I needed to have that as a piece that I could bring in and say here's a little
01:34:06.000 --> 01:34:19.000 He's a story that was done in service of a very large objective, which is to change the future of artificial intelligence across the planet, which is arguably a very important exhibition of dawn.
01:34:19.000 --> 01:34:26.000 Of everything literally. but it happened in my world within the last week.
01:34:26.000 --> 01:34:33.000 And how do we bring things like that in in a way that's reverent to the group?
01:34:33.000 --> 01:34:38.000 Do we turn that into a separate conversation? Do I import my Powerpoint slide?
01:34:38.000 --> 01:34:43.000 That says how I did it Do I just ignore it because I feel like it.
01:34:43.000 --> 01:34:56.000 Doesn't fish. I really like your responses the so bill and I at least have an intent to we've got a Wiki website already.
01:34:56.000 --> 01:35:12.000 This this notes page and the machine transcript will go up on that. I've already been putting double square brackets in for at least books and things like, that yeah, I think wendy that the thing to do is maybe
01:35:12.000 --> 01:35:23.000 maybe we'll see this happen. maybe we won't but we have at least a few people have an intent to grow this into a Wiki website.
01:35:23.000 --> 01:35:28.000 And then a perfect way to weave in. the you know.
01:35:28.000 --> 01:35:43.000 Kind of the footnote thoughts that are kind of important you know they're maybe in some ways they're not fit notes would be afterwards. I add that bill's already got stuff in in the website.
01:35:43.000 --> 01:35:48.000 He started adding a few things. not a lot of things.
01:35:48.000 --> 01:36:00.000 But I think the way to do it is is funny. He captured this, which is something that I said.
01:36:00.000 --> 01:36:11.000 But it's in bounds I think and and and important and proper to to continue this conversation into the wiki.
01:36:11.000 --> 01:36:19.000 And so that's where I would go about thank you But yeah, and then I guess just to have it for the record.
01:36:19.000 --> 01:36:36.000 You know this whole whole body of work? which may not even be referenced in this conversation, whether I feel confident or not; and if now that I know that it could be a vote as a footnote, or in the wiki we might need some sort
01:36:36.000 --> 01:36:42.000 of shorthand to say you know i'd love to tell the story of, and maybe this is one for the Wiki.
01:36:42.000 --> 01:36:49.000 There's a lot of the way to do that i've kind of done that, you know, throughout. here.
01:36:49.000 --> 01:36:58.000 I don't know that I actually annotated anything, but this is this is a place where you know this is going to be a wiki page.
01:36:58.000 --> 01:37:11.000 This thing. yeah And you know it's it's perfect to say to to either tell the note taker or or just type yourself.
01:37:11.000 --> 01:37:15.000 You know, wendy's story about you know something like that Yeah.
01:37:15.000 --> 01:37:18.000 And then that would turn to a link about you know.
01:37:18.000 --> 01:37:28.000 So side the society, the school of cybernetics at A, and and how they're wanting to change the path of artificial intelligence into the planet which is a dawn ending thing.
01:37:28.000 --> 01:37:33.000 If you want to caught dawn of everything it's a it's a sunset thing, really, if you think about it.
01:37:33.000 --> 01:37:38.000 So it's really important. But and it was really important to me my will.
01:37:38.000 --> 01:37:47.000 But maybe other people don't have to appreciate that and to me that would make me feel extremely sad, and i'd say, what are we bothering?
01:37:47.000 --> 01:37:55.000 Why we? Why are we having these conversations if we can't involve these big conversations in which could be extraordinarily useful.
01:37:55.000 --> 01:38:04.000 But if they don't have a little entry point somewhere anyway, Yoko, I know, and yes, giving ourselves permission to do things.
01:38:04.000 --> 01:38:19.000 So I gave myself permission and I told a story that probably didn't make sense to the people gathered except for people knew about it, and a couple of you helped me prepare that activity, and it went very well it involved a letter
01:38:19.000 --> 01:38:34.000 thanks wendy. It is this had a question and I don't know how to express this, so what I apologize for the fumbling there's a sense of almost unlimited multi-dimensionality.
01:38:34.000 --> 01:38:45.000 So what we're talking about and when you think about any particular point of conversation you can think about how you got there, where you go from there.
01:38:45.000 --> 01:39:00.000 What the next 2? What are the implications, this this sort of unlimited dimensionality, every aspect of life, of every aspect of life's sense of those dimensionalities?
01:39:00.000 --> 01:39:04.000 What are intrinsic, What are genetic butter, ideological?
01:39:04.000 --> 01:39:08.000 What are behavioral, which is the sort of anthropological look at it.
01:39:08.000 --> 01:39:24.000 I mean, I guess i'm just trying to tease apart all of the different dimensions of behavior and adoption that occur as systems grow.
01:39:24.000 --> 01:39:30.000 Think it's really important you've just said that because you know How do you do?
01:39:30.000 --> 01:39:41.000 The weaving, because the waving is just a selection of all of those dimensions at any point in time, as represented in. If we put another 3 people into this conversation, it's a different conversation.
01:39:41.000 --> 01:39:46.000 If they speak, what they don't speak we're limiting options.
01:39:46.000 --> 01:39:56.000 But sometimes someone not speaking is actually a good move. and sometimes asking a person to dominate the conversation is actually a useful move.
01:39:56.000 --> 01:40:06.000 But then, you miss it's all choices you know who speaks up, and I guess that's what I was actually saying about you know society of the school of cybernetics.
01:40:06.000 --> 01:40:10.000 The it's like that is the explicit intention of that thing.
01:40:10.000 --> 01:40:16.000 It's a large dimension, it's not a small dimension You you know that's the impacted space.
01:40:16.000 --> 01:40:22.000 It's only one university into you know and intel and Microsoft and a few other little players around the place.
01:40:22.000 --> 01:40:29.000 So it's it's a small entry point to a large thing.
01:40:29.000 --> 01:40:45.000 But if you look at that, so's the idea of being a rock, a person as a rock, and thinking of myself as equal as a rock, that's a small item in a large thing, and one was representing the other, so at some point, these are almost like
01:40:45.000 --> 01:40:58.000 a zeitgeist. that you've got to say and you you named Zeitgeist, which is it's an universal truth in knowledge that it's all to do with the safer and that moment in time of
01:40:58.000 --> 01:41:03.000 perception, and 2 s earlier, and 2 s later it's actually a different thing.
01:41:03.000 --> 01:41:12.000 So we can't nail this and I think it's always important to know that it's environmental and it's it's evoked by that person in that moment.
01:41:12.000 --> 01:41:32.000 And those senses in. But there's something about at the moment. everyone's agreeing that there's something to account for, and something to move towards, and maybe something to move away from that is helpful I think this notion of,
01:41:32.000 --> 01:41:43.000 multi-dimensionality that's situational is important, because that any at any instant you can go broad you can go deep.
01:41:43.000 --> 01:41:56.000 You can do combining. you can do sorting 200 there's an infinite number of options that sort of in Sci-fi would say, Well, then, you hop to the alternate universe of X Yeah.
01:41:56.000 --> 01:42:12.000 And that's the the question that that i'm intrigued to try to explore in order to personally, selfishly be able to look wisely at a moment in time yeah and discern how I
01:42:12.000 --> 01:42:19.000 might elect to deal with that moment in time. so I would commend to people the book that I'm.
01:42:19.000 --> 01:42:23.000 Reading at the moment, which is called dialogue I mean in parallel.
01:42:23.000 --> 01:42:31.000 I'll give you the name of the book because I think it helps us discern where the energy is at a moment in time, and physics comes into a lot of this stuff.
01:42:31.000 --> 01:42:42.000 Because there's something about staying with this tension between ourselves, about what we would like to pay attention to.
01:42:42.000 --> 01:42:56.000 So it's called Isaac, when yet dialogue the out of thinking together, Pete. I think there's something here about massive Wiki and and getting People's attention and this comes back to cybernetics
01:42:56.000 --> 01:43:07.000 and ran off Glenville it's it's not a deep focus, but it's a where is our attention landing at the moment.
01:43:07.000 --> 01:43:14.000 And can we give that attention enough attention to make something of it so that we've got something to work from.
01:43:14.000 --> 01:43:21.000 So it's not about saying that we have to talk about objects as objects.
01:43:21.000 --> 01:43:26.000 But I do think that there is absolutely an important point to discuss through.
01:43:26.000 --> 01:43:38.000 You know, a observer object is a really important thing for us to lightly pay attention to to decide whether can be a subject in conversation, or is taking the eye out of the conversation.
01:43:38.000 --> 01:43:47.000 A really important step. I argued that it was I can't imagine taking myself out of a conversation.
01:43:47.000 --> 01:43:51.000 I imagine the activity of trying to do it, the difficulty in doing that.
01:43:51.000 --> 01:43:59.000 But you know that's if you're going to use some of these whole realms of knowledge, like indigenous knowledge.
01:43:59.000 --> 01:44:10.000 My point was that you actually have to turn yourself you have to try and turn yourself into a rock or a tree, If you can't do that. that only allows certain options in front of you It's like a gate to a certain
01:44:10.000 --> 01:44:24.000 extent. don't have 70,000 years behind me of trying to be a tree, or being a river, or being a rock, I find that very hard to do. but I sort of feel like I need to do it and I think i'm.
01:44:24.000 --> 01:44:32.000 Rash on this. if I can't do that that means that I have to be, you know, powerful in the situation.
01:44:32.000 --> 01:44:38.000 That means only certain things can happen for me I don't want the outcome of those things.
01:44:38.000 --> 01:44:44.000 So so there's something about reaching deep into myself i'm let me jump in.
01:44:44.000 --> 01:44:59.000 I think I did a decent job at capturing need to work on how to include a big, important story that doesn't fit into the meeting format, and I think I humbly believe i'm on the right track with the
01:44:59.000 --> 01:45:09.000 wiki So then, maybe the the meeting format is an interesting thing.
01:45:09.000 --> 01:45:24.000 So a part that's unspecified there is the meeting format. and I think it's like I think the topic of the meeting is kind of the chapter of the book, and maybe a little bit broader than that the book, and maybe a little bit
01:45:24.000 --> 01:45:35.000 better than that stuff right around the book and wendy I think it's awesome that there are big ideas to connect to that, and they should be talked about.
01:45:35.000 --> 01:45:49.000 So the way to connect it to the meeting and to the book club is to, you know, make a link, make a wiki page, make a couple wiki pages, and then another thing to do I think is not to try to
01:45:49.000 --> 01:46:01.000 shoehorn those footnote that turned into like whole conversations not to try to shoehorn that into the meeting format that we've got for the book club, but rather you convene.
01:46:01.000 --> 01:46:10.000 Another call right. let's talk about the future of artificial intelligence as relates to done of everything and some people will will go.
01:46:10.000 --> 01:46:16.000 Oh, my God, that's why, i'm reading the book and some people will go. i'm sorry that's not me.
01:46:16.000 --> 01:46:20.000 I'm you know all about conversations that I don't care about artificial intelligence.
01:46:20.000 --> 01:46:39.000 So I think I think so. there's 2 things here one of them is. it's really important when other conversations bubble out to like, make a little mark and capture the intention to do more of that, and also to Let go
01:46:39.000 --> 01:46:50.000 of the fact that we don't need to talk about it here. We need to talk about it in another call, and I think I hope we we end up generating more calls out of out of these conversations.
01:46:50.000 --> 01:46:59.000 Yeah. And I also think, with my experience with water choices which was a website that was created at a conversation.
01:46:59.000 --> 01:47:05.000 There's a pattern around where that goes it's like little star bursts.
01:47:05.000 --> 01:47:13.000 So the original conversation is like, you know, when nor Bates and Dave Snowden and these other 2 people at this particular time.
01:47:13.000 --> 01:47:26.000 And then you keep on coming back to that conversation and its implications, and you're rich in and deepen that one conversation you don't try and spawn 50 other conversations back on you keep on circling back and and really
01:47:26.000 --> 01:47:35.000 really tracing that as an impact, and for the people who watch it and then look at it.
01:47:35.000 --> 01:47:43.000 And really develop a community around that particular thing. So you create an artifact of value which I think we could.
01:47:43.000 --> 01:47:54.000 Now, do you know, David wingro meets person x y okay, and it could be Elon Musk and Genevieve Bell, or whatever I don't know, and then deepen that.
01:47:54.000 --> 01:48:00.000 But keep on coming back to that conversation and its value rather than leaping away.
01:48:00.000 --> 01:48:09.000 Yes, yes, and I would observe that some people will be interested in that new conversation. that is, but it.
01:48:09.000 --> 01:48:13.000 But it off, Yeah. should continue to revolve around it.
01:48:13.000 --> 01:48:25.000 And other people in our group will go it's not my conversation. i've got a different one that i'm involved in, and that's the one I'm going to revolve around. yeah we're we're all together around
01:48:25.000 --> 01:48:35.000 the book, and then we're gonna have to allow you know other conversations to subset of people, and maybe other additional people the bud out of them.
01:48:35.000 --> 01:48:52.000 I wonder if there's a common that that i've found useful before, of a analysis in terms of breath and depth, because at any point in a conversation you can choose to go very deep and explore that point or you can say well, that
01:48:52.000 --> 01:49:07.000 point is like these other 7 points and very different arenas that that spatial representation as an intellectual approach would allow us to help define their dimensions to explore. Yeah.
01:49:07.000 --> 01:49:18.000 And there's something about conversation analysis allah Oh, and Conklin Jeff Conklin to say that yes, we've brought that general issue up.
01:49:18.000 --> 01:49:25.000 So if you say mining and landownership, for example.
01:49:25.000 --> 01:49:34.000 At some point we can say, I think we could come back to this, and there will be some people who will do that for us.
01:49:34.000 --> 01:49:42.000 We now need to recognize that that's another point underneath this item, while that could diverge further at the moment.
01:49:42.000 --> 01:49:52.000 We'll just recognize that you know land entitlement is to do with what has these at least these dimensions?
01:49:52.000 --> 01:49:58.000 And now we want to focus on this other part of the tapestry and work more deeply with that and see where that goes.
01:49:58.000 --> 01:50:05.000 So you get this more and Jeff conklin's got some structure around that he's got 7 different question types.
01:50:05.000 --> 01:50:21.000 It's a really good book to listen to it's talking about decisions in some ways, or making sure you've got a landscape in which a decision could be made, and a way of reverently saying your idea is up on
01:50:21.000 --> 01:50:30.000 the wall. and therefore is it another point that you're making to this idea, which changes it to what's called a left hand move?
01:50:30.000 --> 01:50:35.000 Is it another question we're addressing I love the way you did that, Judy?
01:50:35.000 --> 01:50:43.000 Because I felt when I talked about you know yoko I know, and such a and I didn't feel like it was self-serving.
01:50:43.000 --> 01:50:55.000 There was something behind it which was actually deeply important but I didn't have a clean way of introducing it, cause it felt too modern for our conversation.
01:50:55.000 --> 01:51:02.000 It wasn't part of david's the David squared's book but intuitively I knew it was important.
01:51:02.000 --> 01:51:12.000 So having other people's view maybe me saying something you know i've got to show it stereotypes so story to share about cybernetics.
01:51:12.000 --> 01:51:19.000 A modern version of cybernetics, and changing the powerful human history with Ai.
01:51:19.000 --> 01:51:22.000 How do you want me to deal with that? You can say no.
01:51:22.000 --> 01:51:35.000 We want to hear your story or can we put that as a tab to explore later, because that's a really important conversation. and then I would feel acknowledged, and that's what Jeff Conklin stuff does I
01:51:35.000 --> 01:51:45.000 would feel like like that doesn't have to be pushed in and I think so. so.
01:51:45.000 --> 01:51:50.000 I think to do is to ask that question right. Wendy needs, you know.
01:51:50.000 --> 01:51:53.000 I want to tell a story. and is it okay? if I tell a story?
01:51:53.000 --> 01:52:00.000 Another thing that you could do, even is is either?
01:52:00.000 --> 01:52:06.000 Asked the notetaker, hey? could you make a note about this story that's going to remind me of the story.
01:52:06.000 --> 01:52:11.000 Maybe nobody else. Yeah. so that I can bring that story to the group asynchronously.
01:52:11.000 --> 01:52:16.000 Right. you could. You could also type that into the notes.
01:52:16.000 --> 01:52:22.000 So you actually kind of had been ingredients but I just didn't act that way.
01:52:22.000 --> 01:52:30.000 Well, I I know don't be sorry there's nothing to be sorry for.
01:52:30.000 --> 01:52:41.000 But but you can actually there's there's a nice nice thing of acknowledging being heard right.
01:52:41.000 --> 01:52:46.000 I have an important thing this, and I want to I want to say it, and having people.
01:52:46.000 --> 01:52:52.000 But then there's also if it's a big enough thing it's not going to fit into the conversation.
01:52:52.000 --> 01:53:04.000 You can The cool thing about the way that we're doing the asynchronous notes, and ultimately, hopefully, the wiki is that you can put a fingerprint in it, and you know you can make the fingerprint bigger
01:53:04.000 --> 01:53:10.000 and bigger, and so you own this you in this document as much as anybody else.
01:53:10.000 --> 01:53:16.000 And you've got the capability to make a dent in it.
01:53:16.000 --> 01:53:29.000 So do we want to take this as instance One have a look at the shape of the conversation, you know, just just lightly, you know I like this conversation between dialogue and and William Mysex.
01:53:29.000 --> 01:53:44.000 Poked. I like the out of thinking together and Jeff Conklin, because this they seen Jeff conklin's once more around a dialogue that that heads towards a conversation and mapping that conversation I have a funny answer
01:53:44.000 --> 01:54:08.000 for you the answer I think is that it doesn't fit in the the meeting format that we've got for the book circle, and I am passionately interested in you, asking that question as a question in the madman's channel
01:54:08.000 --> 01:54:18.000 right. I think it's really important to talk about dialogue mapping and conversational analysis, and and I have to say i'm not sure that you would get any pickup on it.
01:54:18.000 --> 01:54:21.000 I think right much pick up on it I think we're all like packed already.
01:54:21.000 --> 01:54:30.000 I think I would love to dive into that that topic, and I don't feel like I have time in my life for now.
01:54:30.000 --> 01:54:39.000 But again that's that's something that maybe what I would do is I wouldn't say I so one of the things I would do is I would say, hey?
01:54:39.000 --> 01:54:50.000 I'm having a meeting next week here's the one to meet. I want to talk about dialogue mapping and conversational analysis and the shape of the conversations that we've already accorded that's one thing I would
01:54:50.000 --> 01:54:57.000 do. Another thing I would do is essentially take a note to myself and to other people.
01:54:57.000 --> 01:55:09.000 I wrote up a wiki page that's all about you know what we could be doing, or what we should be doing, or you know a way that you write up that wiki Page, You get it linked into the rest of the wiki
01:55:09.000 --> 01:55:14.000 and you post the link to 2 chat so that's a pattern.
01:55:14.000 --> 01:55:27.000 I do emergent events sense making is kind of that pattern right where I had a great idea, and I got to do a little bit of work on it, and it's still kind of lying out there as work to do in the
01:55:27.000 --> 01:55:41.000 future and you know what happens as it comes around in a month. or 6 months, or whenever we might say Oh, my gosh, we've got to start already on this dialogue mapping stuff.
01:55:41.000 --> 01:55:54.000 Let's let's dig in so on that note I do need to step into my day and thank you for having that thought, and maybe you and I can make sure that I follow through on that because I feel it answers part of
01:55:54.000 --> 01:56:01.000 judy's requirement is that we need to understand what the nature of the pattern that has in that particular conversation.
01:56:01.000 --> 01:56:11.000 Why we're having that particular version of it and whether we should be trying to make it focus more or come out, or just reference bits of it that we can come back to later.
01:56:11.000 --> 01:56:17.000 But right now I have to disappear. thank you very much i've really enjoyed this.
01:56:17.000 --> 01:56:37.000 I think it's important and thank you everyone for their contributions because they're extraordinary by wendy take care of. be excited to listen to the hour.
```