Weyhey! That didn't take as long as I thought!

I set up this website as an experiment a couple of months ago and haven’t really taken it seriously, generating very little content or interest. But nevertheless, a kindred spirit has just been in touch having correctly interpreted the vague existential description of entspace on the home page. Of course that doesn't mean that entspace is correct, but it does mean that the idea has now reached stage two in the pursuit of knowledge, namely relational corroboration. Which proves nothing more than my train of thought isn't completely barking.

So in answer to your fabulous question; yes, entspace is a representation of wholeness as a nested system and I like your language, very Bertalanffy. Now apart from Bob, who asked the question that may not mean much to anyone else? So in true existential style I’d better explain some language about representations. There are broadly five means of representation:

• Firstly, there’s an illustration. This is a picture of something, a snapshot of words or pictures in any medium, that demonstrates nothing more than the existence of the illustration or the illustrated or the illustrator or, in its most authentic sense; all three. Used a lot in Physics!

• Also firstly, there’s a diagram. This is a collection of illustrations with or without connections, demonstrating the differences and relationships of the things being illustrated. This is a pathway, or a strategy, or a map of things in a territory, the most sophisticated of which is more commonly seen as a scaled up or down, replica of the real thing. Used a lot in Chemistry!

• Secondly, there’s a story. In a sort of arse-backwards sense, this is a description or experience of a diagram in real space and time. It can be expressed in words or pictures or mimicry. Most of us struggle with narratives that have no meaning, hence stories often encompass diagrams that are used as a mechanism to structure, or try to explain aspects of the plot in retrospect. In a modern sense this could be a film of real events however; a story is much, much more than a retrospective composition! A story unfolds in fragments of real time more like a live television transmission of events as they happen. Even if you are sat in a chair reading a work of fiction, you are in fact experiencing a real story in your own real time. The illustrations, diagrams and story will emerge in ways that were uncertain in advance, but explainable in hindsight. Unless of course it’s a boring story! Hence, you create your own story in real time, every time you experience something in life, even if you don’t realise it at the time and therefore, you have to be in it to win it. Used a lot in Biology!

• Thirdly, there’s a model. This is notoriously easy to get wrong as the word is used for all sorts of things, but it’s probably most useful to think of a model as an experimental story. A model projects forward the effects of illustrations and diagrams and stories extrapolating, across space and time anything from a weak possibility to a foreseeable probability. Akin to tactics, models are mental constructs and cannot and do not define a future state (that’s a diagram), but may contain a number of alternative stories, related to each other in complementary non-linear or irreversible networks. Most things in modern society labelled model are more accurately described using one of the other words. You’ve only got to critique any ‘strategic leadership document’ or ‘organisational visionary mission’ full of models, to see that the cause and effect relationships are all linear and dependent on stuff that’s ignored. Therefore, the vast majority of socio-political models are no more than convenient ideological illustrations. Modelling is uncomfortable, indeterminate, experimental, innovative, bloody marvellous and extraordinarily satisfying when it works and hence, prone to more than a little reporting bias. Used a lot in Maths!

• Fifthly, there’s art. He stands back and covers his ears as the intellectual buckharck rings out! The word has been classically and popularly kicked to death, but it’s merely a word, it’s the meaning it conveys that is important (got to love the quote Mrs Midgley). This is where the nested nature of entspace comes to life as a representation of wholeness. It is certainly not a hierarchy as the top is not the most important or sophisticated. Think of the nest as essential at the centre and delicate at the edge; without someone to wipe the poorly bottom the most advanced brain surgery would not take place. Art can for example be subtle and small, but still contain the potential for deep interpretive analysis (poncing about), intuitive and empirical experience (telling stories), structural understanding (explaining things) and in the end it exists in its own right (hanging on the wall). In art like in chaos, the future can be completely independent or not, from the past and the present. So, back up the nest, art goes beyond a description of the thing; and the comparison of the thing to other things; and experiences around the thing; and the intellectual interpretations of the thing; to an intrinsic evaluation of its aesthetic meaning, to me. Used a lot in Philosophy!

So what’s all that got to do with entspace? Well the heuristic that is most meaningful to me (or perhaps is the least inaccurate), is that entspace is a gap; within which you can build a picture, or a map, or a narrative, or a projection, or a distillation of all of that. It’s much more important that you choose the words that convey the meaning, than I insist on my favourites.

Existential stuff over, I’ll now do exactly the same explanation with my favourite complex human systems language. There are lots of recognisable cognoscenti in here! Anyway, there are five nested systems each one made up of and producing all of the others, but for shorthand and a touch of irony, I’ll describe them as Orders!

The starting point is zero, the background conditions. Unless you’re at the moment of the big bang there is always background stuff. In fact even at the big bang there had to be a gap, into which it all went boom! Therefore, we start with background stuff which is not in itself a system but has a direct effect on the resulting 1st Order, unless of course the background is conceptually discounted by people who like a bit of Newtonian splendidness:

The 1st Order is a Resilient System: in intellectual terms it is an illustration of order itself, with simple predictable outcomes affected by the existence or physical formation of things. In a social sense it relates to essential (not basic) needs, skills, data and linear predictable work completed by practitioners with a purpose. Decisions are factual do it or don’t do it. In pure change terms it is an invention, the creation of a new idea. Doing stuff = B(R1)

The other 1st Order is a Socient System: the resilient is nested within it and intellectually it is a special case of diagrammatic order. The outcomes are a function of the mechanical properties of a thing and its relationships. In a social sense it is manifest in teleological structures that require expertise, to navigate to, a limited range of predictable outcomes and the tools of the trade are processes, projects and strategies (one in the same). Decisions are optional, picking from a limited range of predetermined choices. In pure change terms it is a revolution, more commonly prescribed as the implementation of a different idea. Organising and doing stuff = B(S1+R1)

The 2nd Order is a Sentient System: it involves 1st order systems but now in an animated or live form. Intellectually an open system in real time with a complex emerging story, that is sensitive to, but not exclusively determined by, the background conditions. Socially this is work in progress where experience is gained through intuition, heuristics and successive limited comparisons. Decisions are situational, so you have to be in it to experience the self-regulating feedback and determine which if any, 1st Order systems to deploy. This represents the meso system, from where an observer can see the micro and the macro, so no matter how clever you happen to be, you cannot do this stuff from a distance. In pure change terms this is evolution, fine tuning the idea you’ve already got. Experiencing and organising and doing stuff = S2+S1+R1

The 3rd Order is a Salient System: again nested in the previous this is the quintessential intellectual system, dependent upon a conscious brain to draw on the 1st and 2nd Order systems in an attempt to predict their effect. Socially the critical requirements for saliency are direct experience of 2nd Order judgement together with understanding the predictable effects of 1st Order process. Decisions are preferential and all about the future, for example, preparing a range of resources as tactics available when approaching a point of preference. Saliency is a function of proximity to favourable conditions, and timing, spotting the important thing and enacting relatively small experiments at the edge of practice. Systems in this Order can be foreseeable but not controlled and therefore, impossible to institutionalise without transforming into 1st Order. This is typically misunderstood by people in hierarchies entrained with a 1st Order mindset. In pure change terms this is innovation, doing something new with an old idea. Understanding and experiencing and organising = S3+S2+S1

The 5th Order is a Sapient System: as the fully nested order it is a form of wholeness and its maturity or wisdom, dependent on the completeness of the nested system. Or, at least never, deliberately ignoring an Order for the convenience of ideology! Socially this is pushing your luck, a crisis where action comes first, directed by a very small number of aesthetically pleasing essential principles, like “save the life”. Rules initially go out the window and depending on the proximity of the social control mechanisms, (eg the boss) resources are unconsciously redirected to solve the problem or create the disturbance. If the same problem fails routinely by surprise, the boss’s principle is often “save me”. Decisions are providential, which is little more than gambling at first; just do something see if it works; if it doesn’t work do something else; but if it worked last time it’s unlikely to work next time. A fantastic impromptu party goes here, but please never try to repeat it, as boredom and embarrassment inevitably ensue. This sort of chaos is not necessarily all bad as it’s a fabulous place to start a shit load of learning very quickly and so, some of the best experiences are here. In human terms this system does have a habit of beating you up and disproportionately wearing you out. In change terms this is exploration, suddenly finding out that you already had the idea. Seeking and understanding and experiencing = S5+S3+S2

Now for the mathematically minded, you will have noticed the annoying numerical sequence, so here’s an existential summary of entspace, pretending to be an equation:

Wholeness ≥ B((+[R1)+{S1)]+{S2]}+S3}}+S5} 

Please feel free to send me the proper mathematical logic that describes the pattern of two steps forward and one step back. Both of these five part explanations are in fact, exactly the same so now hopefully, the representation on the home page will make more sense. But to really cook your noggin, at the point when you make sense of something in the 5th Order, the whole nest can become the background conditions. Ha Ha! To quote Bob, “this is like a sort of tacit general systems theory; it needs more science, but feels uncomfortably right”.

In my own experience, I keep finding this pattern in all sorts of places and it has become incredibly useful in relearning stuff that I do understand and quickly picking up stuff that I don’t. The most interesting bit to me is that the practitioners I work with every day, recognise all five Orders, are exposed to them regularly and readily understand the differing impact on life and work. Meanwhile, their employers are almost inevitably trapped in the 1st Order mechanics.