• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Stop wasting time looking for files and revisions. Connect your Gmail, DriveDropbox, and Slack accounts and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio will automatically organize all your file attachments. Learn more and claim your free account.


Conscious Communication New Paradigm Toolset

Page history last edited by Robyn 10 years, 8 months ago

Conscious Communications for a New Paradigm Session



Conscious communication Toolset.

***please feel free to modify/correct/add to/build on these notes!***


Our intention: to create a global value system for foreign policy.

>Each write down our intention/hope for the exercise.

“Need parts of society to help design itself”

Cards= aspects of society—values.

Choose 2 cards each: a form of “intentional chaos”.

Choosing randomly takes us out of our normal thinking patterns.

Intention and attention (ex: attention= science—“outside group”; intention= cooperation)

>In relation to creating a global value system: what is the relationship between the two, according to you?

>Why is it a value according to you? If stuck, the group can intervene. If the group rejects it, take a new card.


-Science and unity: need to share in  unity to generate new ideas

-History and humility: important for people influenced by the western hemisphere, how the “west” has managed development/history.

*old paradigm and new paradigm words. Ex: history -> “repatterning”

-Economics and caring: economics needs to incorporate more caring. Examples of social entrepreneurship, fair trade, and financial aid that is actually based on improving the situation of those receiving it.

-Spirituality and justice: history of religion’s intervention for and against justice. “Charity provides crumbs from the table; justice offers a place at the table”. –Bill Moyers.  Justice is at the base of all spiritualities? Find spiritual common ground.

-Compassion and justice: approach justice as less “cold”. Example: restitution, incorporate aboriginal conceptions?

-Education and wildness: more credit given to other forms of education to more broadly define success. Experiential learning! Wildness is undervalued.

-Governance and accountability: people could say what they want and government could show us what they’re doing… need a new way to keep “them” accountable? Take responsibility: it is “we” who are doing it. We don’t need more “war”, of people against government—instead build something together.

-Complexity and technology: (distinguish complex from simple and complicated) Complex is not a problem you solve; it is the interventions you take. Technological interventions have implications. Use a complexity lens on technology: the divers implications and ways in which it affects us.

-Politics and clarity: currently, politics is more deliberately obscure! This pair is “radical?” …and add transparency as well.

-Health and cleanliness: a logical connection? Also cleanliness for the health of the world? Ex: the question of nuclear waste. Too clean can be unhealthy! Health of both the body and the mind.

*When we think in terms of values, the spectrum changes. Makes a new reality. Our pairs can make a map: how would we function with these values: different parts represented.

-Biosphere and kindness: think in terms of kindness to all system and organisms. We often forget that it’s the entire earth, not just humans; we don’t talk about being kind to other organisms. For example, when we talk about wars: no one talks about effects on the biosphere (talk about people dying, not animals, etc).

-Noosphere (biosphere as modified by activities of the human mind) and tolerance: can we make what we build more tolerant and be more tolerant of what others have built? “If we get our thinking system in front of us, we can build tolerance”.

-Language and glamour: creating image through language, link to “illusion”.

-Language and authenticity: Shifting responsibility (ex: “terrorist”); policy saying what is genuinely meant? Say one thing with a double meaning; not real intentions.

-Philanthropy and detachment: example of tied aid. Detach ourselves from the need for reciprocity in giving. Approach FP more as philanthropy: we have this, people can come and request it? Find out what the people need.  Ex: CIDA--results based work, impose an impact. Philanthropy can also from us; less reliance on institutions. Problem: “top-down” approach. Can it be more balanced: rather than helping, can we share?

-Community and divinity: subjective definitions, diversity of meanings. Recognize divinity in each of us and so be brought together (legend about the shards of the clay vessel filled with light). Also community is more than the sum of it’s parts: recognize that there is “divinity” as in something amazing/energetic in community.

-Arts and generosity: arts are generous? Share art—gets its meaning through dialogue. Generous recognition of having something to share can be empowering. Also foreign policy should generously support the arts… and be artistic—get artists involved.

-Evolution and cleanliness: see things clearly. Start a new project. Cleanliness to evolve to something new.

-Worldview and privacy (value being free from disturbance or intrusion in private affairs): need to give more privacy? Foreign policy as an intrusion, which negates privacy—imposing a way of doing things. Both individual and global. But also risk of lack of understanding with too much privacy. Interesting in the context of globalization. Privacy as being allowed to preserve and value a particular worldview?

*NEXT: Could have a general discussion about what we could do with this, or about what we learned.

Create a global foreign policy based on these values...

We have a created a map of values, linked and related.


What we learned, how this was useful:

-repatterning idea is useful: struggles around western dominance.

-collaborative: even in disagreement, we found a way to listen and not compromise but understand each other!

-process is agreeable. Diplomatic uses for gaining understanding and connection

-for example, bring this to a conflict situation? Jerusalem?

-takes away the agenda… we could all agree to this value system. (and it was random!!)

-if we had tried to talk about our values without the cards, it could have been more competitive, or overwhelming, much less constructive.

-creates an open structure

-all these values have positive connotations. What about “power” or “prestige”. Where would discussion have gone?

-the whole space was positive.


*Online: could extend the conversation to a global scale.


*other cards: Intention-> Conversational field-> Attention


-what about translations of these words in other languages?


*Also can be applied to an institutional structure. (old paradigm: corporations, new paradigm: shared knowledge communities) The main problem is organizational structure. You can use it at any level, just change the content.


Our intentions:


Justice, relationships and building community


Listen to the least fortunate, less emphasis on corporation


Learning and openness.


Powerful group: synchronicity brought us here…. how did we come together, can we carry it on?!




Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.