[Oe List ...] archives

[SVESjaime at aol.com]

Jack,
 
You may keep your three categories and call it Herman's the Earth Process  
instead of the Creative Process.  That will work.  You guys are  further 
ahead than some of us who occasionally re-label the wonderful insight  that the 
whole social process triangle is and can be.
 
As indicated in JWM's note located by Marge, we are referring to a single  
but interrelated life process.  We are not quite ready to do the Universe  
Process, I do not think, but Earth process is within the scope of our 
corporate  understanding.
 
Jaime 
Saipan
 
 
In a message dated 11/22/009 6:00:04 A.M. West Pacific Standard Tim,  
icabombay at igc.org writes:

Herman,

I have done some work on this question.  I said to  myself that the  
'foundational process' is what I called The Natural  Process but I  
think Earth Process would work as well.     On the right side I had  
the Social Process, the 'organizing  process' and at the top I had the  
Human Process, the 'meaning  process'.  I call the whole new triangle  
the Creative Process,  but there might be another name that would be  
better.  I have  worked through a couple of levels of the the two new  
triangles but  am not ready to share just yet.  A good "research  
project" for  the Diaspora!

Jack
On Nov 21, 2009, at 12:26 PM, Herman Greene  wrote:

> That's a good statement and worth  archiving!
>
> Occasionally I muse on how to place the social  process into the Earth
> process. I haven't had a brilliant idea about  this yet. One approach  
> is to
> have an Earth process set  of triangles (like the carbon cycle, the
> hydrological cycle, etc.)  parallel to the social process. Another  
> approach
> is to  have the Earth process in the middle triangle of the social  
>  process
> triangles. Another is to redo the social process triangles to  include
> interactions with nature.
>
> I haven't really  done much except muse about this. (One approach I  
> saw  that
> I question is to apply the social process to nature--it's not  entirely
> unfruitful but it seems like an artificial imposition on the  natural
> processes rather than beginning with the natural process  itself.)
>
> I wonder if anyone else has thought about  this.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:  oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net]  
> On  Behalf
> Of Marge Philbrook
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009  10:09 AM
> To: Colleague Dialogue; OE list
> Subject: [Oe List  ...] archives
>
> I'm having fun trying to figure out my plan for  the archives.  I just
> found this note in Joe's  handwriting.
> "1.  The social process is a complex dynamic that  involves the
> inter-relation of the Economic processes (which maintain  basic
> existence); the Political processes (which provides social  existence);
> and the Cultural processes (which enables rational or  intentional
> existence.  Because the social process is dynamical  in nature, none of
> these separate processes exists in itself.   Each is dependent on the
> others.  Society is relationships, when  one part is malfunctioning or
> tyranizing over the others society as a  whole is ill.
> 2."  There was no 2.
>
> So where  should I file this? in B401 Joe's papers, or G1904 the Social
> Process  category which I just added to the list as I have gone over
> material  about researching the social process triangles.
>
>  _______________________________________________
> OE mailing  list
> OE at wedgeblade.net
>  http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> OE mailing  list
> OE at wedgeblade.net
>  http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net


_______________________________________________
OE  mailing  list
OE at wedgeblade.net
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20091122/17f7c2a0/attachment.html>