I’m trying to do it in eight pages so that it can make the published proceedings. I’m putting together a power point outline and then linking with the shortest transition sentences possible. Whew.

The abstract has been submitted and the paper and poster presentation accepted. Yes!

Here’s the abstract:

Subjective human experience is explored by psychology, cognitive science, neuroscience, spiritual teachings, evolutionary biology, and more. Consciousness, cognition, and emotion are approached differently by researchers from different disciplines making interpretations of findings and communications among disciplines difficult. Reframing the self or subjective experience as a system of processes provides a model for integrating concepts and findings from various disciplines, for defining and potentially measuring what may be considered abstract and illusive, and for generating new hypotheses and models. This paper adapts Banathy’s three lenses for developing a systems view of any system and applies it to the self. The system-environment lens outlines hierarchical processes of the self and human systems, boundaries and boundary conditions, and the capacity to adapt and coevolve. The function-structure lens describes components, functions, and regulatory processes of the self within human systems. The development lens compares hierarchical levels of development and reframes them as processes and systems types. This model results in simple, functional, and measurable descriptions for  (1) the experience of self as three components: an innate “wisdom” (subconscious capacity to process masses of information), cognition, shifting awareness or consciousness; (2) ethics and emotions as regulatory “guidance systems;” (3) a process definition of mental health; and (4) the self as an developing and coevolving system emergent from neurophysiological systems and embedded in human systems.

Please note:  You can take this course from anywhere. We do it on a free phone conference service called powwownow.com.

An Invitation to Join Dr. Troncale and his CSA Students in
A Comprehensive Introduction to the Emerging New Field of Systems Science
Designed for both professionals and students, this course will:

•    Provide an integrative-eclectic model that synthesizes other systems models
•    Explore the potential for Systems-Integrated Science
•    Compare natural sciences to uncover fundamental processes and similarities
•    Seek a more defined “system of systems”; move toward a “science” of systems
•    Enhance application of principles for improving design, operation, and troubleshooting of human systems

We will study 80 systems processes (or mechanisms) clustered into 9 groupings across a year or more of study. Of these 80, we will study as many as possible each quarter after discussing which are most interesting to participating students. For each of the nine fundamental processes we will:

•    Discuss and elucidate identifying features and functions
•    Review an extensive literature from multiple sources
•    Locate its role in the natural sciences (astronomy, physics, chemistry, geology, biology, computer science, and mathematics)
•    Identify its potential application in human systems
•    Describe how the process influences other processes (linkage propositions)

Class will involve short weekly reports and discussion via conference call distance learning and the use of Blackboard, CSAwiki, and Cal Poly’s online library services.

Participants will contribute
1. Their area of expertise/knowledge to general systems knowledge
2.  The next iteration of detail for CSAwiki and systems science workshops
3.  (optional) Papers and/or poster presentations for conferences and journals

Time:  Wednesdays, 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. PST

CSA 490    September 21-December 8    Seminar in Comparative Systems Analysis
CSA 490    January 2-March 16        Seminar in Comparative Systems Analysis
CSA 490    March 26-June 8        Seminar in Comparative Systems Analysis

Cost:  1 unit/quarter term; $220/unit + participant selection of texts
Enroll from September 20th to October 4th for the Fall Quarter
Contact:  Dr. Len Troncale at lrtroncale@csupomona.edu  (909) 869-2045

Offered as part of the Comparative Systems Analysis Minor offered at California State Polytechnic University; see pp 447-448, www.csupomona.edu/~academic/catalog/

Still ringing in my ears and echoing through my mind are Australian Janet McIntyre’s words. She said repeatedly that nothing matters if it isn’t connected to sustainability, that this planet is going down and that is the only focus worth focusing on.

At the end of October I’m going to be meeting with Gary Metcalf, David Ing, Jennifer Wilby and Pam Buckle Henning in Chicago to discuss systems, next year’s ISSS meeting, and the web site. It’s been rolling around in my head.

Here’s where I’m at this week:
We are self-organizing beings within self-organizing societies. When we feel safe, we open to flows of information and energy/matter. We bond and create networks. We naturally self-organize into greater complexity and integration. When threatened, we close down. Thinking becomes self-referential, circular, and negative. Perspective is narrowed. Closure leads to North Korea and the boys who shot up Columbine High.

We must develop a social technology that reflects these processes. We must develop a new science and a new philosophy/worldview that can integrate the religions and our various perspectives and our cultural differences and the findings of science.

Here’s a start:

First, imagine a new science in the curriculum.

Biology has its taxonomy–its genus, species, etc. Chemistry has its periodic table of elements. Systems science has the 100+ processes found in all complex systems throughout nature.

Next, imagine learning about the world, not from the fragmented views of the various humanities and sciences, but as a network of processes–processes not as dry formulas but as rich deep metaphors–that integrates the humanities and the sciences, where the distinctions blend and disappear.

Imagine a world, where there is no more separate philosophy and religion and science. All is science. Not a cold, mechanical science–not that science has ever been that for scientists–but a living, breathing, and grounded science, one that takes us into the reaches of our imagination, into the processes of our emotions and minds and lives together. One that makes sense, that unites us and guides us in this extremely connected, very populated, very small world.

I’m beginning to glimpse this new kind of science and new kind of thinking. I’m seeing it everywhere in different forms. It’s no accident that the Dalai Lama sees brain science as the path to peace.

When we finally link our emotions, our reasoning, our ethics, and our interactions with each other to a science of systems processes–and it’s beginning to happen–creativity will replace struggle, and our consciousness will expand, and our potential will blossom.

We just have to create this before completely poisoning ourselves and the planet. It’s a race. I’m betting on us.

I showed her this:

Emergence is what happens when the whole forms up from the parts.

A whole is greater than the sum of its parts. You can’t describe water by looking at hydrogen or a forest by looking only at a tree.

A big question in neuroscience is the “binding problem.” We know that different parts of the brain are concerned with depth perception, color, memory about cars, etc. How does the brain put it all together?

Walter Freeman studies whole brain activity using EEG leads on mats on people’s heads. Using nonlinear mathematics, he shows how “attractor basins” of form up (emerge), break down into chaos, and form up again. The entire brain shifts from “frame” to “frame” on the order of tenths of seconds.

While accomplished neuroscientists (including Francis Crick of DNA fame who recently passed away) argue that consciousness can be explained by tracking down the neurons, Freeman says that it’s like trying to describe a hurricane by looking at a molecule (I greatly paraphrased).

Neurons, tissues, and the whole brain are being studied but we are having difficulty with the next level: The level of conscious experience. The emergent level of the self.

We are accustomed to looking at ourselves psychologically, philosophically, spiritually, physiologically, socially, politically, etc. A holistic approach attempts to look at the self from all the directions. It’s still looking at the parts.

I describe the self differently. I look at the self as a system of processes. I ask different questions. I get different answers. The answers make sense. It’s more in sync with who we are. It works.

I’m so excited about it that I have to express it.

More later.

I can’t define love psychologically, philosophically, spiritually, or any other standard way, but I can define it in terms of flows, boundaries, and bonds.

Here’s a stab at it:

Love is the inner feeling and outward expression associated with the flow of information, matter, and energy between people.

Feelings and expressions, when reciprocated, increase feedback. Feedback results in bonds. Bonds result in new human systems. Human systems are required for our survival.

Love is a genetic gift. It’s in our DNA. It’s a built-in incentive, the icing on the cake in the creative formation of human systems—individuals, marriages, friendships, communities, families, countries.

Love is the inner feeling and the outer bodily expression that encourages us, inspires us, and sometimes drives us to bond even more. It hurts when flows between people aren’t reciprocated, when the feedback doesn’t reinforce our feelings, and when we sense it but another doesn’t. We want to love.

I can’t describe love with old industrial thinking and its machine metaphors—more about that some other day. From that worldview, love is the purview of poets.

From a systems view, all is process. From a systems view, love is far from abstract. Love is real.

It’s like Aristotle asking, “What is air?” He just didn’t have the science. We are just beginning to have the science for love.

Meanwhile, it’s clear that there is only one way to get more love: Open to the flow.

Make sense?