Re: [-empyre-] Free Cooperation

>It is one model that resonated with my experiences of inter-human
dynamic.  Although I find that other models more fully circumscribe
the phenomena of human presence and interaction -- phenomena that,
once stripped of soul (or whatever you want to call it), IMHO are
empty of most everything...

In this context Buber's idea of religious socialism could be useful. For Buber "religious socialism means that man in the concreteness of his personal life takes seriously the fundamentals of this life..." And he underlines that the goals of socialism need to be mirrored in devoted everyday action.

a collectively determined pathway for the1-to1 human exchange such as "religious socialism" is exactly NOT what is needed, though, assuming the awareness that you suggest below. A collectively applied pathway IS a hierarchy of power! It is the very definition of collectively defined inter-human flow pathways that is the building block of hierarchic social structures.

Presence and energy are aspects of collaboration but the danger of this
focus is to leave out the social context in which the collaboration is
situated. Talking of flows of energies is vague and dissipates the political
as it assumes equality of the people engaged in the dialogue. It does not
acknowledge hierarchies of power and economic inequalities.

that concept is not left out of my personal model at all. The framework I outline above, though, preceeds those social constraints to the effect that without an awareness of the dynamic of inter-personal energy exchange, modeling the effects of socially prescribed filtration and re-direction of those flows is difficult or impossible. Another words, the social context operates on what is potentially a free-cooperation, making it something less. I also make a fundamental distinction between language (itself a constructed model or socially/collectively determined re-creation of the world) and the actual carriers of energy (from a physics point-of-view)... For example, when I am speaking with someone, what carries the real energy is the ability of my body system to convert food energy into sonic energy which crosses space to enter the Other's head, literally (all the way from my body to theirs as) electromagnetic energy. The particular language carries no measurable physic(al) energy in the exchange. It is merely an abstraction constructed by the social context (or IS the social context). All that I am saying is that without a clear understanding of the REAL quanitfiable energy dynamics of human relation, one cannot effectively model more complex inter-human systems. Nor extract the pseudo-exchanges that occur via meta-structures like language and monetary systems.

I don't find that an internal awareness of inter-human energy exchanges that happen all the time in momentary existence to be dangerous at all. It is the denial of that awareness by social systems, dominant social models, that threaten sustainable human presence.

In your long list of examples, you are constantly shifting perspective between these pseudo-exchanges and real exchanges. It is the energized human connection (two jazz musicians engaged in an open and reciprocated improvisation) where the singular energy of each individual added together ends up ain a phenomenal surplus that literally in-spires the audience around them. The phenomena is primary. When someone in the audience 'hates jazz,' that is an example of a learned or applied social construct that comples that person to deny the entry of that in-spired energy into their body system. That is a secondary condition.


uni-bremen, dept. of informatik
email: <>

This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.