At exactly 0513, the 18th of April, 1906, a cow was standing at 123 degrees 20' West longitude, 37° 20' North latitude -- somewhere between the main barn and the milking shed on the old Shafter Ranch in California, minding her own business. Suddenly, the earth shook, the skies trembled, and when it was all over, there was nothing showing of the cow above ground but a bit of her tail sticking up** For the student of change, the Shafter cow is sort of symbol of our times. She stood quietly enough, thinking such gentle thoughts as cows are likely to have, while huge forces outside her ken built up all around her and­within a minute -- discharged it all at once in a great movement that changed the configuration of the earth, and destroyed a city, and swallowed her up. And that's what we are going to talk about now; how, if we do not learn to understand and guide the great forces of change at work on our world today, we may find ourselves like the Shafter cow, swallowed up by vast unheavals in our way of life -- quite early some morning. -- "Dynamics of change" Kaiser Aluminum News

C O N T E N T S

Preface 1

I. INTENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS 2

PURPOSE

II. PRESUPPOSITIOINS 3

Axiomatic

Methodological

III. DYNAMICS OF NSV 4

Model 5

Explication 6

Prologue 6

Introduction 6

Context­Setting 7

Sustaining 8

Interfacing 9

Conclusion 11

IV. ESSENTIAL CIVIL QUALITIES

MODEL

4 x 4 Model 13

Explication 14

Economic 14

Cultural 19

Politica1 24

V. SODALITY RFCOMMENDATIONS 29

AND CONSTRUCT

The following are a gestalt of the axiomatic and methodo1ogical presuppositions that grew out of the work of the New Social Vehicle Problem Solving Unit.

Axiomatic Presuppositions

1. The Social Vehicle is the social expression of the religious Mode, holds it

in being, and is in turn itself sustained by it. The Religious Mode is

never seen apart from a Socia1 Vehicle, and no Social Vehicle exists without a Religious Mode. A change in a Religious Mode wil1 inevitably change the social vehicle, and a NSVU will always be reflected in a NRM. The NSV then structurally allows everyman to experierce the NRM.

2. The reality pointed to with the category NSV is a sociological dynamic, which cannot itself be synonymous with any structures

3. As there already existent manifestations of the NSV, it is a practical reflection of an ever present reality, the dynamics of which are present in every social unit. Three kinds of power always present in the NSV are those of stabilizing, implementing, and change formulation.

4. The creation of the NSV is a radical shifting in the global mindset. It involves a new common image of society for all men. The NSV is one global-wide network of relatively autonomous local structures in which every man self­consciously participates, understanding the global implications of that participation.

5. Any adequate NSV maintains tension between ontological obedience and existential freedom.

Methodological Presuppositions

1. Formal and phenomenological categories are mutually interrelated. Sodalities should workshop them together,

2. Phenomenology is primarily a method, secondarily, a set of categories which derive from the method itself. Under this method any feature of the social vehicle may he defined formally (horizontal) or described impressionistically (vertical).

3. To construct the formal and phenomenological sets, questions should be directed to each category under examination from ontological, historical, mythical, psychological and existential (or functional) perspectives.

4. Phenomenologica1 discussion employs both objective and valuational implications in its language, so that either implication can be emphasized at particular levels in the chart. Furthermore, when taken as a whole, the NSV chart honors both historical values and current situation of norms however, that may he rationally structured in the chart dynamics.

5. NSV and NRM categories functionally mirror and mutually correct one another.

	The NSV is a social dynamic interrelated with the NRM which enables a human social ordering. It is totally comprehensive yet radically particular in it's relationship to every man. Where the NRM describes the internal ordering of humanness, the NSV formulates the external ordering of humanity. Where the Corporates describe what it means to be a man­in­society, the Civil structures of the NSV are the structural delineations of social corporateness. Where the Solitaries define the elements of man's depth as a solitary human being, the Religious structures of the NSV lay out the practical ways in which a man develops his own individual thrust in history, The Journeys of the NSV, are man's continua1 process of becoming. The Movemental dynamic of the NSV is man's practical means of creating society's continual becoming. Thus, the NSV is not a static model of an "ideal" society, but a structure of continual civilization on a global level in which every man self­consciously participates. INTRODUCTION The following report is the explication of the accompanying triangular model which describes in its totality the functioning dynamic of the social reality. As the broad, theoretical basis for the envisioning and construction of the NSV, it outlines the social functions which must be embodied in order to create and maintain the human social order. In its broadest sense, this functional social dynamic is composed of the three dynamics of Context Setting, Sustaining, and Interfacing.
CONTEXT SETTING	The Context Setting function provides the most expansive categories for all human social experience, As it provides the broadest possible context for all social drama and interaction, it is the comprehensive, visionary pole. It is the globalis function, the cultural function, the intensely symbolic function.
SUSTAINING	The sustaining function provides the most experientially local categories for all human social experience as it provides the intimate, nitty­gritty grounding for all social drama and interaction, it is the particular, participatory pole. It is the localis function, the economic function, the intensely engaging function.
INTERFACING	The Interfacing function provides the most discontinuous categories of human social experience. As it provides the coordination and interpretation for all social drama and interaction, it is the decisional, catalytic pole. It is the regionalis function, the political function, the intensely creative function.
RELATIONS	The fundamental relation between these three dynamics is described as the basic human polarity between the universal function of context setting and the particular function of sustaining as it is regulated and mediated by the discontinuous function of interfacing. Hence: It is at the point of Interfacing, on any level, that the new is called forth out of the dynamic tension between universal and particular ­ that style is created. This pattern of a polarity mediated by an "Interfacing" function is present, in its various manifestations, at every level of the model and forms the basic dynamic for each part.

CONTEXT SETTING

	The Context Setting function provides the broad common vision, presuppositions of humanness, and the symbols out of which all men act out their understanding of social life. The dynamic within the Context Betting function is the tension between being impacted by new visions of society and being rooted in a particular culture and mindset, resulting in the forging of a new myth of humanness. The­three dynamics of Society Envisioning, culture Rooting, and Myth 8ynthesizing describe that constant process of appropriating new data and images which calls into question the particular cultura1 context and forces a new understanding of humanness to be articulated.
Society Envisioning	The Society Envisioning function observes the continual, universal ongoingness (data streaming), identifies elements that address the social context (datum impacting), and holds the datum impacted by being forced to name it. The dynamic of Society Envisioning is that of taking the universal ongoingness, the continual data stream, and pulling out particular data that impact society with their relevance and context expansion, and giving that datum a name or symbol which will hold the image of it. The relationships within Society Envisioning are data streaming which is the universal ongoingness, the raw events going by, datum impacting which pulls out particular data that address society by forcing changes in context, and self­conscious relating to the datum by naming it.
Culture Rooting	The Culture Rooting function, providing the environment of consciousness that we swim in without ever being aware that it is our own creation, grounds in each particular culture the global context, thus giving it authenticity. At the same time, the Culture Rooting pole feeds into the total context new data on its own myths and other cultural gifts, giving rise to new myths to be created. The dynamic of Culture Rooting is that every man, from birth onward, is totally submerged in and brainwashed by the particularities of his own situational gifts honoring, tradition enacting, and story interpreting. The relationships within Culture Rooting are that of gift honoring pointing to each contribution of a culture, tradition enacting rehearsing each particular cultural origin, and story interpreting always demanding each particular context be obedient to the total context.
Myth Synthesizing	The Myth Synthesizing function articulates new visions, new definitions of humanness; and new stories out of the insights which have value in appropriating social particularity within the comprehensive social context. The dynamic of Myth Synthesizing is the tension that every social process experiences in articulating the manifest visions of society by relating particular insights and determining their value. The relationships of Myth Synthesizing are vision articulating which brings the new social vision into consciousness, insight relating which provides out of the present social context the particular grist for the new creation' and value predicting which is the constantly changing moral map or grid which undergird all shifts in the total context.
Relations	The relation of Context Setting to Sustaining is giving to society its Relations ultimate values' orders' principles, and visions, which Sustaining carries out as the everyday operation ­ care and enablement of society. The relation of Context Setting to Interfacing is providing the inclusive context for the regulation and translation of the principles into structures that enable the vision to become reality. When Context Setting collapses, society loses its common context and begins the journey into ingrown, isolated, static bureaucracy, having no way to articulate the comprehensive vision and symbology so crucial in a lucid world.

SUSTAINING

	The Sustaining function of the NSV materializes universal human benefits in a particular social form, honoring the inclusive human context and demanding contextual sensitivity to the particular. The Sustaining function of the NSV is comprised of three crucial, interdependent dynamics: Myth Imaging, which is the context setting dynamic of the Sustaining function; Care Implementing, which is the most radically engaging dynamic of the Sustaining function and of the whole NSV; and Roles Regulating, which is the priorities and values directing dynamic of the Sustaining function. The basic relation of these three dynamics is that of Myth Imaging holding the Sustaining function accountable to the broadest social vision' over against the radical particularity of participation in Care Implementing, mediated by Roles Regulating necessary to carry out the sustenance myth.
Myth Imaging	The Myth Imaging dynamic objectifies the Sustaining function by providing a common myth which is a reflection of the inclusive human context. The three dynamics of this function of Myth Imaging are: principles symbolizing, which is the most visionary dynamic of the Myth Imaging function and of the entire Sustaining dynamic; identity celebrating, which is the particularized, engaged dynamic of the Myth Imaging function; and mythology creating, which is the interpreting dynamic of the Myth Imaging function. The basic relation of these three dynamics is that of principles symbolizing in which the higher order of contextual social principles are symbolized for appropriation by the particular, over against identity celebrating, which is the radical identification with the particular engagement in the Sustaining function, and the resultant rendering up of the new mythology.
Care Implementing	The Care Implementing function sustains the intellectual, moral, and physical existence of every social unit, and is the point of unavoidable participation in the Sustaining dynamic of the social reality. The three dynamics of this Care Implementing function are: relations educating, which is the expansive dynamic of the Care Implementing function, structures providing, which is the most concretizing dynamic of the Care Implementing function and of the whole NSV; and rules humanizing, which is the catalytical dynamic of the Care Implementing function. The basic relation of these three dynamics is that of relations educating which illuminates the inclusive context for the implementation of care, over against structures providing which extend comprehensive care to a limited particularity, and humanizing rules which demand contextual comprehensiveness within the particular context, holding the structures of society to the task of being human.
Roles Regulating	The Roles Regulating function provides the immediate levels of decision­making and coordination in the dynamical functioning of Sustaining as part of the total social reality. The three dynamics of this function of Roles Regulating are: method articulating, which is the context setting dynamic of the Roles Regulating function; task assigning, which is the particularizing, participatory dynamic of the Roles Regulating function; and model building, which is the most creative, decisional dynamic of the Roles Regulating function and of the entire Sustaining function. The basic relation of these three dynamics is that of method articulating which provides the primary means whereby every social unit can participate in the symbolic articulation of the inclusive social context, over against task assigning which determines and orders the priorities and execution of the particular forms of Sustaining, regulated by model building which provides the means whereby participatory priorities may be enacted within the comprehensive human vision.
Relations	The relationship of the Sustaining dynamic to the Context Setting dynamic is that of providing the arena in which the total vision of human society and relations is acted out in the midst of the particular functions of structuring care. The relationship of the Sustaining dyr'1mic to the Interfacing dynamic. is that of providing the concrete source of demand on contextual stability, which is the primary regulating and mediating function of interfacing. The collapse of the Sustaining dynamic should be evidenced on one hand by the absence of concrete structures of human care, on the other hand by the ascendancy of a total context for sociality which is ungrounded in the locus of particular engagement, and finally by the failure of the coordinating and catalytic dynamic of society as the creative, stylistic response to the fundamental polarity of human social existence.

INTERFACING

	The Interfacing dynamic of the NSV maintains self­consciousness of the creative tension between the Sustaining dynamic and the Context Setting dynamic. It serves as the dynamical boundary between the two in which interpretation and coordination necessary for change within either takes place, and where the decisions on values and priorities are made in order to keep the changes comprehensive, futuric, and responsible. The Interfacing function involves both the traditions of society and the forces of change This process can be described in terms of the triple dynamic of honoring or guardianing symbols, of seducing and directing (or imploding) consensus, and of creating or defining responsibility ever anew. While the global symbolic system5 itself, resists change, the current consensus, impacted by ever­changing particulars, constantly demands changes in the social vehicle. The Interfacing function, then, defines in this context the responsible decision, thus shifting both the consensus and the symbol system.
Symbols Guardianing	The Symbols Guardianing dynamic of the Interfacing function has the dual task of guarding the symbolic dimension of society from unnecessary change while at the same time demanding that the context of the society remain concretely related to and grounded in the particular social reality which it serves. The internal dynamics of Symbol Guardianing are those of providing the context by wisdom translating into every language, being responsive to the contemporary scene through relevance demanding, and deciding `hen a change in context is needed through shift authenticating. Wisdom translating involves articulating the comprehensive context to each particular situation. Relevance demanding is the process of insisting that the comprehensive context be concretely grounded and life­sustaining for each particular situation. Shift authenticating mediates these two processes and self­consciously legitimizes from this dynamic tension the changes which are needed in the symbology. These changes then become part of the comprehensive context and must be articulated by the wisdom translating dynamic.
Consensus Imploding	The Consensus Imploding dynamic allows the grassroots to participate in setting the context. At the same time it holds the structures of the grass­roots accountable for their participation in the creation of that ever­changing context. It does both of these by demanding that all elements of the social vehicle participate fully in the consensus making process and then by demanding that they all operate within the consensus thus made. Consensus Imploding involves the three dynamics of exploding the arena which resets the context, evoking insights which help form a new consensus, and finally by clarifying the trends which make up the new consensus. Arena exploding constantly forces all to be present to the broadest context. At the point of evoking insights, the grass­roots elements in the social vehicle participate directly in the decision­making process. From these insights, various new trends still begin to emerge in the overall consensus. These trends, as they are discerned and clarified, create an explosion or expansion in every man's context such that every insight is held and at the same time the new consensus is discontinuous from all individual insights. This three­way dynamic is the process of consensus exploding.
Responsibility Defining	The Responsibility Defining function of the NSV brings into selfconsciousness the existing ethical system as well as bringing rationality and intentionality to the changes in that system. This demands sensitivity to current trends and future possibilities as well as an understanding of the past wisdom. The dynamics of the Responsibility Defining function include contextualizing all priorities so that no value is seen in and of itself, evaluating the changes which arise either from a new consensus or a new human myth, and creating the dynamic relations to provide the basis of new ethical values and priorities. These dynamics work together to restructure the framework out of which every man makes his decisions. Priority contextualizing allows particular changes to be evaluated. New consensuses always necessitate changes which must be change evaluated relative to the existing value system and in the context which has been set. However, while being held before the contextual framework (priority contextualizing), this framework is itself altered and demands the relations creating of a new model which will aid in contextualizing new priorities and evaluating new changes. This is the most dynamic of the functions in the NSV and provides the basic guidelines for all moral or responsible decisions. It is therefore the key to the NSV.
Relations	The impact Interfacing has on Context Setting is three­fold. Interfacing demands the context remain relevant to human life by constantly interrelating it to all and by remaining sensitive to changes in the values of society's consensus. Interfacing, at the same time, gives permission for the context to shift, having weighed up the existing criteria and "created" the new. In this sense, the Interfacing function sets the context for the moral boundaries for the Context Setting function. And lastly, the Interfacing function then legitimizes the new context, translating it into all dialects and using it to explode the general arenas of concern as they arise. The impact Interfacing has on Sustaining is also three­fold. It both allows and demands all men to participate in the global consensus. It creates the moral fabric out of which is woven the interior structures of all men. And it constantly translates into every tongue the dynamic context which holds societn1 structures accountable to the oneness of the global mission. If the Interfacing function of the MSV were collapsed, then either civilization becomes compartmentalized or static, or chaotic upheaval ensues. There would be no way for all men to participate in the same ever­changing context or the same ethical system and therefore communication would stop and coordination be impossible. Finally, there would be no way to order the available technology and brain power to care for men's needs.

The foregoing model is the concretization of our formal knowledge on the functions and dynamical relations operating in our vision of the NSV, as as pulled through our informal and non­verbal insights arising from our work with Duncan and in Sodality this past quarter. It will serve as the theoretical basis, firstly, for our continued pushing at the functional and dynamical nature of the NSV, and secondly for the initiation of the practical task of structural envisioning of the N5V which will embody these functions and dynamics.

This model describes the dynamics that must go on in the human social order. These dynamics become reality through new social structures. The question we now must face is what events, processes, or institutions would maintain such a dynamic. We must define the functions of the Civil, Religious, and Movemental structures in relation to the dynamics of Context Setting, Sustaining, and Interfacing.