zoom out.. for the zoom dance
perhaps a mech to facil two convos .. could get us back to community.. to us
A community is a small or large social unit (a group of people) who have something in common, such as norms, religion, values, or identity. Communities often share a sense of place that is situated in a given geographical area (e.g. a country, village, town, or neighborhood) or in virtual space trough communication platforms. Durable relations that extend beyond immediate genealogical ties also define a sense of community. People tend to define those social ties as important to their identity, practice, and roles in social institutions like family, home, work, government, society, or humanity, at large. Although communities are usually small relative to personal social ties (micro-level), “community” may also refer to large group affiliations (or macro-level), such as national communities, international communities, and virtual communities.
The word “community” derives from the Old French comuneté, which comes from the Latin communitas “community”, “public spirit” (from Latin communis, “shared in common“).
Human communities may share intent, belief, resources, preferences, needs, and risks in common, affecting the identity of the participants and their degree of cohesiveness
adding page this day
CityLab (@CityLab) tweeted at 4:31 AM – 6 Jul 2017 :
This word’s evolution makes a nice metaphor for American individualism’s rise—and decline of trust in institutions https://t.co/8j5pbhdbZm (http://twitter.com/CityLab/status/882909869241663488?s=17)
As Bishop told a group at the Aspen Ideas Festival, co-sponsored by the Aspen Institute and The Atlantic: “It used to be that people were born as part of a community, and had to find their place as individuals. Now people are born as individuals, and have to find their community.
What’s clear, however, is that the notion of “identity” itself—the word skyrocketed in usage starting in the second half of the 20th century—is changing our understanding of “community.” What is also clear is that identity, as a concept, is becoming solidified in American culture.
identity ness – not us
What will that situation mean for the country, as a collection not just of individuals, but also of communities? There’s reason, in one way, for pessimism. Alain Ehrenberg, in The Weariness of the Self, notes how psychologically exhausting it can be to be so constantly self-reliant. (As Bishop put it, “we’re not capable of doing that kind of self-construction every day.”) So identity construction, Ehrenberg argues, is at the root of things like depression, drug use, and even suicide. Defined that way, “identity” as a concept might, paradoxically, prove a challenge to American individuals.
“Community,” after all, the OED notes, is rooted in the Middle French communité. The word may have come to suggest a “body of people who live in the same place,” but, initially, it meant something much simpler and much more powerful: “joint ownership.”
deeper than ownership as well
via Stephen (who’s taught me tons about community):
Downes (@Downes) tweeted at 7:29 AM – 5 Dec 2018 :
I’ve started on this week’s E-Learning 3.0 #el30 article, ‘Community’ – still is pretty rough form – as usual, anyone is welcome to view, comment and edit – https://t.co/2um4lVnoP4 (http://twitter.com/Downes/status/1070324254481240064?s=17)
When we look at (what I’ll call) natural communities (as opposed to organized communities) they have two major features: lack of trust, and lack of mutual engagement, shared repertoire and joint enterprise.
hmm.. i see opposite.. ie: natural community 100% trust (in my mind redundant as am seeing trust as all or nothing)
Think of your average city. There may be a lot of what we call ‘trust’ (eg. people stopping at stop signs) but in nearly all cases there’s also an enforcement mechanism, because we don’t actually trust people (eg. to actually stop).
seeing that more as a symptom of our not trusting ..ie: by putting up stop signs – thinking naked streets ness..
The challenge (indeed, maybe even the challenge of our times) is how to understand and improve communities were people are *not* engaged in the same enterprise as everyone else
that’s a huge plus in my view.. and the challenge could perhaps be met via ie: cure ios city
Wenger – communities of practice
Community is consensus.
The definition of a community is the means employed to *reach consensus
i’m thinking.. public consensus always oppresses someone(s).. so perhaps.. either we don’t define community as consensus.. or we stick with a consensus only on something deep enough that 7bn people would resonate with today (ie: missing pieces).. not something we *reach .. but something that is already there
The traditional concept of community was built on *sameness, on collections of people from the same family, speaking the same language, living in the same place, believing the same things.
i would suggest *sameness only in the global sense of ie: nationality: human – anything more/less .. i’d see as a coercive environ – rather than a community..
i think more of commonin\ing than speaking same language et al (ie: i see idio-jargon as common language – which is as diverse as all of us)
i don’t think community could ever work if we weren’t all ie: diff parts of same one body
This makes the mechanisms we use to interact and reach consensus particularly important.
still prefer not calling it consensus.. ie: believe the mech begs to be a means to listen to every voice (tech as it could be) .. every day.. no consensus (other than we all agree to ie: 3 and 30 ness of 2 convers as infra).. rather.. augmenting (our currently messed up) interconnectedness
What is required for a community to work is not merely control, but agreement on the part of the members of the community. Underlying this is a respect for law, institutions and processes, and when these break down, and when consensus is lost, it is very difficult to restore.
i think our main problem is that we have convoluted the humanity problem.. ie: rather than focusing on very basic needs.. we went all institution/law/proof/authority/validation.. et al
Fostering an understanding the importance of these processes, and the costs of not being able to establish them, is a fundamental goal of education. This can be accomplished best (and maybe only) through the process of engaging in them and developing community and consensus in the classroom.
wow.. i’d say in the city/world sans consensus/engaging
The critical literacies in a society run deeper than reading, mathematics and science. They include pattern recognition, perspective and context, inference and reasoning, and practical application and communication. They include not just being able to communicate with each other, but to be able to build and create.
let’s just facil daily curiosity ie: cure ios city
Consensus, ultimately, is a question of stigmergy, and we will look not only how it is created, but also how it is undermined (think, for example, of ‘dark patterns’).
?.. i don’t see consensus as a part of stigmergy.. i see stigmergy more as meadows undisturbed ecosystem
community/city as curriculum/school
Dave Cormier – community as curriculum – rhizomatic learning
community – why does community matter
Peter Block‘s community – the structure of belonging