In a conversation thread in the Collective Evolution group, Bret Warshawsky wrote about the 7 Esses of Cocreation and the experimental 7 Frequencies of Cocreation the Noomap Prototype Technology has been playing with.
Syntony: attunement with the patterns of creation experienced as one’s own inner motivation and intuition.
Synergy: the coming together of separate parts to form a new whole different from, greater than and unpredictable from the sum of its parts.
Synchronicity: the apparent a-causal relationship among events; coincidences that could not be planned by human mind but that appear to flow from a larger and more comprehensive design.
Suprasex: the passion to express unique creativity, stimulated by vocational arousal, comparable to sexuality at the next level; instead of joining genes to procreate, we join genius to co-create – to give birth to our greater Self and to our work in the world.
Syntropy: nature’s tendency to form whole systems of greater complexity, consciousness and freedom; evolution’s tendency to optimize.
Spontaneity: the experience of unpremeditated action and thought that flows naturally without thinking or planning; action that is on the mark, which facilitates and coordinates life.
Self-creativity: the tendency in nature to organize itself; autopoesis; the inherent capacity in nature to self-organize without apparent outside manipulation, springing from the field of Universal Intelligence out of which everything is arising.
The experimental 7 Frequencies of Cocreation the Noomap Prototype Technology has been playing with include:
8th is Values
The experimental 7 Frequencies are also hypernyms pointing to classes of energy i.e. desire, need, want, request — as Flower is hypernym for rose, lilac, etc.
G. - People working within the circle of any group generally develop a greater understanding and group perspective than someone looking at it from outside the circle. I feel much alignment and connection with the Noomap/S7 group, but am new to it and still looking from a perspective that is not fully informed.
My evolving perspective is that the some of the above 7 frequencies or energy classes as named can be detrimental or beneficial depending on whether they originate from the persona or the heart. Or from emotions lower or higher on the spine. The 'other values' listed by Bret below are also heart frequencies.
In the persona, Vision sees outcomes which may not be from a whole system perspective and Intentions most often are not based on unconditional love. Action will be detrimental if it is from the persona, and beneficial from a whole systems perspective if from the heart. But, these are hypernyms pointing to classes of energy and I am still unclear how my observations, if they have any validity, apply.
Our Core Values/OS are the aforementioned 7 Esses. Other values would include but are not limited to:
We Value extreme patience
We Value unconditional love
We Value both timelessness and natural time
We Value trust
We Value freedom
We Value emergence
We Value personal transformation
We Value spiritual inquiry
We Value whole systems perspectives
G. - My random observations:
The heart longs only for the qualities of unconditional love.
Desire has attachments and belongs to the persona.
Language was mystical and powerful once and the words we choose to use today still carry those energetic connections. Certain words attach to certain forces. Desire creates friction and comes with unrest.
Rather than be driven by desire, one can put their wishes into the creation field with faith and trust, and non-attachment.
Are passion and desire of service to life, or do they serve persona?
Only beyond the persona will one experience the constancy of peace and rest.
Unlock your gift in the individuated experience to be of service.
Most never come out of the experience of survival.
Take a risk and drop the persona for the guidance of intuitive feeling.
The free will choice is to stay in persona and the illusion that you control your life — or to express the gift of who you are and experience co-creation with the all.
The all will support you to grow and express your innate gift.
Be open and trust that you can deal with whatever comes, in the moment.
Bret just wrote:
I can totally agree with some of the inquiry around desire/passion... obviously we've had similar inquiries and discussions with others and among ourselves.
G. - The inquiries and discussions continue. As I walked with Aura this morning, I asked myself, 'What are more primal terms for the class of energies called in the experiment 'desire' and 'passion'? What is the urge of the seed to burst from its shell and seek the sun? What are the drives of animal instinct to reproduce and survive as a species?
What are the distinctions between primal urges of nature's design and emotional wantings, which Buddha said are the root of all suffering? Aura just kept sniffing the ground for interesting scents and having her attention drawn to distracting sounds.
I would say that desire and wantings have lower emotional attachments. Lower perhaps in the sense of survival instincts and reproductive urges, rather than higher up the spine to feelings of the heart and intuitions of the higher senses.
No other person has painted a picture of what co-creation means within the context of a fully interconnected network than futurist Barbara Marx Hubbard. Corporate institutions have recently begun to adopt the term to describe “a management initiative, or form of economic strategy, that brings different parties together (for instance, a company and a group of customers), in order to jointly produce a mutually valued outcome” (Wikipedia) but this only partly describes the fullness of what co-creation represents in mind, body and spirit within an imaginal, cellular eco-system.
Barbara Marx Hubbard and her teams of evolutionaries have developed a whole-systems approach to co-creation which describes the socio-personal and universal dimensions of co-creation as well as a range of tools that enable people to practically engage with these principles. Some of Barbara’s headline initiatives and memes include the Wheel of Co-creation, Social Synergy Conventions (Syncons) and Conscious Evolution. Barbara also developed the 7 Ss of Cocreation which Noomap uses as one of its key sets of operating guidelines.
“This term, coined by Eric Jantsch in his book Design for Evolution, described one of the ways of accessing conscious evolution, as mentioned earlier. The relationship between the cosmic design and the individual intensifies through some form of syntony or resonance. Syntony feels like guidance, intuition, or direct knowing. We do not have to figure out what to do. We know. We perform with spontaneous right action. The inner world of subjective experience and the outer world of objective reality blend and become one. We and the world “outside us” are interconnected in one larger field of intelligence. The great flashes of awareness that mystics have experienced throughout history are reinforced and normalized. Each of us becomes more attuned to the deeper patterns; intuition and intellect blend. The mystical state becomes grounded and manifested in spirit-motivated social action.” Page 173 of Conscious Evolution by Barbara Marx Hubbard (copyright 2015)
Adriënne Heijnen from Aarhus University discusses co-creation and its importance for the success of future cities.
Many of us can recall a technology project in a city, in which millions of euros were invested, but which failed to have any real impact on the lives of citizens. In an effort to avoid projects like these and ensure that digital solutions and services not only benefit cities, but also make sense in people’s everyday lives, we’ve seen an increase in the application of co-creation methods. This is also the reason why the subtitle of our OrganiCity project is “co-creating smart cities of the future;” our ambition is to collaboratively develop digital solutions that will make cities a better place to live for us all.
But what do we mean when we say we adopt a ‘co-creation’ approach and ask our experimenters to do so too?
Co-creation is a strategy where multiple stakeholders collaborate to produce a mutually beneficial outcome. There are a few principles that underpin this concept and make it easier to understand what we are looking for:
1. We are all equal; as is the knowledge we possess
Co-creation goes beyond the more commonly applied methods of user testing or end-user engagement in technology and service design. While the involvement of users is already an important step in designing solutions or services that are applicable in people’s everyday life, co-creation methods democratize design processes even further. While user involvement is anchored in an asymmetrical relationship, with the designer on one side and the user on the other, co-creation starts from a symmetrical and collaborative relationship between different stakeholders. Acknowledging that all parties bring different expertise to the process, and that these different forms of expertise are of equal value, is fundamental to this collaboration.
2. From human factor to human actor
In user involvement (also called user experience, user-centered design or end-user engagement), user experiences can become objectified as data repositories from where needs and requirements can just be extracted. Information that users provide is then considered to be rough or unprocessed data that designers and engineers need to analyze. The designer or product developer is in charge of the process and decides when, where and how the user should be involved. This approach is valuable when talking about the utility and performance of tools. However, in OrganiCity, we wish to combine utility studies with co-creation to facilitate the process, because it is open, interactive and can surprise us with new perspectives. Even though co-creation still needs facilitation, all people participating are encouraged to come with contributions throughout the design process – from the very first idea to the realization of a product or service. Our interest, therefore, moves from a focus on utility to the value we can create together.
3. Technology as an enabler in society, versus people (as users) being defined in technological terms
When technology is developed for the sake of technology, we risk ending up with products that no one uses or solutions that are meaningless for many. We can only build sustainable cities with digital technologies when we first discuss what kinds of cities we wish to live and work in, and then assess how technology can enhance these visions. Within this context, co-creation methods can be useful for developing the direction for, or frame of, technology and the large amounts of data generated in cities. OrganiCity adopts this approach by connecting with local organizations of civic participation and by exploring, together with citizens, the challenges that exist in their cities. The main idea is that technology does not define who we are and what we strive for, but that we, as citizens, frame the ways in which technology can and should contribute to our lives.