The realm model #4

<draft to be completed>

Welcome Neo/Luke.

In this continuation of the series you take the red pill while I play Morpheus/Obi Wan with the help of the wonderful Microsoft Surface Hub to reveal just how deep the rabbit hole goes ... a Universal Turing Machine meta-model equivalent for information mediation in a network and an excellent model for human interaction and group dynamics amongst other things ;-) AKA bridging meta methodology

The ream model ROCKS and can be applied to any interaction in any network, social, physical, biological, epistemological etc. This is also why it can be challenging to understand at first. It is also extensible in a fractal manner (multiples actually). Its scope is limited only by our imagination.

Note 1: some of this is quite high concept but also hopefully intuitive. I have a reading list at the end if you want to gen up before hand. The material has also been formulated in a raw inspirational state and then pounded and refined into something more understandable as my thinking develops. This probably means the later article in the series are easier to understand.

Note 2: while I am a water logic thinker, these are not just surreal notions and thought experiments. Since applying the realm model to my interactions, my servant leadership abilities (and even social skills) have improved dramatically - and yours can too. Use of the realm model is a strong influence on the evolution of the #guildcraft movement within my present organisation.

Note 3: I am also a bottom-up thinker, or a middle -out, this means I see things from base principles and then work upward to simple explanations. Like an autistic trying to understand the human world analytically. I uncover a host of shit along the way and am left with the challenge of documenting the evolution of my thinking (bottom-up), and explaining it to people (often better top down). I will attempt to give a simple explanation first followed by the more complex to aid comprehension.

Let's crack on, starting with a diagram, and skip over the italics if you want to avoid going down even more rabbit holes:

a) Realm model of four individuals interacting

Simple explanation:

Personalities, bias and pecking-order play a massive role in group dynamics. If we can model it dynamically we become better actors in the group. When more of us model it in the same way we become empowered.

I have discovered a way of modelling human interaction using the realm model that treats different layers of self-development as layers in a protocol stack, meaning:

1. My fear is connected to/mediated by your fear
2. My logic is connected to/ mediated by your logic
3. My esteem is connected to/mediated by your esteem
4. My knowledge is connected to/mediated by your knowledge
5. My ego is connected to/mediated by your ego etc.

Note: we will park the implications here for scarcity/abundance mindset, game theory etc. but they are profound including turning win-lose into win win or out of the game, eastern vs. western thought on individualism vs collectivism, trickle-down economics etc.

Here is what it looks like in computer terms:

Note: if you re-read realm model #2, particularly with reference to the pictures, you will see this is pretty much what I am describing. One difference is that in the OSI model above the person is on the top and within my particular variation of the realm model aspects of the personality are distributed among the concentric circles.

Realm model analytical explanation:

Each individual in the group is represented as a set of concentric circles corresponding to different states or facets of personality, identity and knowledge. For the purpose of this interpretation I will use Clare Graves' Spiral Dynamics model of value systems evolution.

Note: good link here:

Note: as realm model is a meta model, other models of personality and groups dynamics can be used including but not restricted to:

• Maslow hierarchy of needs
• Frédéric Laloux organisational evolutions (e.g. realms are fractal and can be organisations--park this for the time being as implications are pretty profound e.g. organisations are a type of group psychosis bubble)
• Meyers-Briggs can also be folded-in with a little interpretation

Differentials are things that are different between realms (there are always differences!). In simple terms they are different water levels in a canal system, requiring mediation through a series of locks.

Human differentials:

1. Personality
2. Personal development, ego, beliefs, bias, knowledge of bias, thinking style, topic of conversation etc. which in turn can influence pecking order, share of voice etc.
3. Pecking order, perceived pecking order, interaction style
4. Level of fear/courage
5. Knowledge
6. Trust
7. Emotional arousal
8. Etc.

Networking/signal processing differentials:

1. Signal to noise ratio, latency
2. Traffic volumes, bandwidth
3. Protocols, asynchronous, synchronous, network class and topology
4. Is the traffic benign or adversarial? Getting us into threat traffic, port scanning, Cyber security, cryptography, firewalls etc.
5. Turn-taking and share of bandwidth, QOS

Now let's look at the diagram again and I will put a human interaction interpretation on it:

1. Concentric circles represent layers of the value systems in Spiral Dynamics, dot indicates where that individual is in their journey and thickness of line indicates group dominance potential/ability (work in progress), lines are like signals or tubes connecting in the protocol stacks/concentric circles in other members of the group, and all lines are connected to all other lines/ tubes travel in other tubes due to protocol stacks tunnelling etc. This could also be seen as modulated signals or musical notes (WIP)
2. Blue leader has pecking-order supremacy and is implicitly the leader of the interaction due to assumptions about status aided by Blue follower who shares the same value system. This individual also has residual layers of all the other value systems in the Spiral Dynamics model but these are less prominent. Whether they want it or not, the group will be talking in Blue. Blue leader finds it easy/fast to talk blue with the rest of the group since she has pecking-order supremacy AND support from blue follower.
3. Red has a more egocentric mindset and those signals/vibes get transmitted to all recipients even when the notional conversation is blue. As red is perhaps win/lose this may play out as feelings of competition. jealousy, envy
4. Teal (came out purple) is looking after group dynamics but is not the leader in other regards, they can attempt to mediate the network to an extent but within a hierarchical network are subservient to blue. As with all network participants they can communicate purple concepts within the context of the blue conversation
5. Blue leader's thinking speeds up, it is fast and easy as they are exerting great control over the network, depending on many things including the disposition of the other participants in the exchange and other factors including the domain/landscape within which the communications operate (e.g. closed system parameters like organisational, cultural tenets etc.). Blue bandwidth and blue leader share of voice has increased
6. It may be hard/slow for blue leader to switch frequency to other colours since this journey could be hard/slow due to: relinquishing personal control (ego), breaking of protocol, the need for personal growth e.g. blue not ready to see the world in green
7. Q: what is blue leader's intent?

b) Colour dominance modelled with realms

Simple explanation:

Peer group dominance plays out as the ability to mediate the communications between a group of individuals in terms of: topic, share of voice, positive and negative reinforcement etc. Organisational values and culture and models and climate have an enormous effect on this, as does the nature of the other people in the group.

Realm model analytical explanation:

Type of network affects colour dominance in many ways:

• Peer-to-peer network where everyone has fair share of voice
• Hierarchical network where seniority has fair share of voice
• Chaotic network

Network stability and network equilibrium

• WIP but a stable network is not necessarily a healthy network
• Stable for who?
• What is really going on?

Leadership styles

Observations:

1. Organisational culture can inhibit and excite the human interaction realm. Microsoft values for example make it easier for green leadership to emerge (thinking of others), whereas perhaps Barnes and Noble's values emphasis is on an orange state of mind
2. Traditional hierarchies like a power structure or patriarchy create a perceptual quality of service (share of voice etc) and interrupt psychosis that spreads to all participants based on the network imprint in participants. Until this illusion is dispelled its effects are very powerful. This also relates to different leadership styles in different cultures, Mandela's father remarking: leader speaks last
3. Implies that dominance hierarchies and exclusivity are a reinforced perceptual distortion that can be unlearn/dispelled (bad news for patriarchy, the realm model just provided a playbook for )

Tunnelling

As Susan Hasty stated we cannot spread truth without spreading other information also which distorts the message. This leads to some interesting observations:

1. How we communicate (often driven by intent and filtered through our biases and physiology) can affect the outcome -- this is the basis for e.g. NLP
2. A skilled practitioner can gain some influence in a network they are not obviously dominant in e.g. choice of topic, making a connection, non verbally (e.g. eye contact between non-leaders when someone is not tuned into the group dynamic but trying to dominate)
3. This is analogous to tunnelling where we transmit signals through an untrusted/hostile network to a network on the other side. In realm terms, planting the seed of an idea in someone resistant might make it through to their subconscious mediated by their ego that might reject it. In this case, the ego is a mediating realm into the subconscious. e.g. influencer->influenced (ego)->influenced(subconscious). This also has similarities to injecting a virus -- planting a thought that can spread laterally

Tricks

Experienced reality as cognitive augmentation

...

It looks like leading futurists all agree, and this is predicted by the realm model, if we are aligned we are one mind:

This also leads to the startling extension to the realm model that:

1. All the red in my field of vision is connected to the other red etc.
2. My notion of red is connected to your notion of red

Growth requires trauma and network collapse

New networks emerge rather than form since they were there in the first place. A consciousness/interaction carrier network that is the known universe. This is what disciplines like Agile, Meditation, #guildcraft tap into, children playing in the network entroposphere.

This leads to the perhaps antagonistic notions of:

• Growth of the network (and therefore the network class) cf. Freidmanism, Communism, etc. which leads to confirmation and other biases
• Evolution to a higher-order network
• Networks are models of a more complex reality and are inherently destined to collapse. Avoiding this analogous to refusing the call to adventure--but has beneficual side effects of creating high levels of alignment allowing collaboration between network elements. Unfortunately network bias is part of the story
• This finding suggests people should be in as many classes of network as possible to minimise bias, reinforcing the work of Moshe Feldenkreis with his notion of the movement computer once overwhelmed spontaneously recalibrating ...
• ... indicating that learning is muscle memory
• ...and that networks we speak of in everyday parlance are merely a physical layer upon which higher orders of virtual network multiplexes can operate like the OSI protocol stack
• ...and that VUCA creates the necessary conditions for network collapse and emergence. This will apply at any scale of realm model including considering an individual as a realm leading to a generalised theory of learning and cognition

Capitalism and patriarchy as network distortion effects

ddd

And that pointy and smelly as Hokusai demonstrated are a matter of observational perspective. He was the Heisenberg of woodcut artists

Networks grown on other networks using them as a medium/vector for growth. The infinity of network evolutionary dynamics. This is network entropy.

Consider the communications multiplex between networks colours as coloured threads or vines twisted round each other and connecting to the various network colours. Now consider:

1. Ego-based networks as a distortion that acts as a strangler vine for the other network communications - -predicated on fear, Conway's Law (and my variant) and learnt behaviour (and perhaps a lack of courage). A type of group/system psychosis
2. No surprise that there is a twist here with obvious parallels to the natural world and genetics

Abundance vs. scarcity mindsets, open vs. closed systems analysed with the realm model

Set/field theory anyone?

Imagine realms in a scarcity landscape then the landscape is changed to abundance according to Johnson & Scholes Cultural Web -> this is Agile transformation.

xxx

Network growth ...

Dominance is a crude term I will use for a bit before potentially abandoning. For the pur

mnve) a Teal network once established between individuals is high bandwidth, high signal to noise ratio. Having taken part in many of these over the past year can I jus say they are great.

I postulate that:

1. Group productivity is a function of realm appropriateness and alignment in relation to the objective and landscape/climate

Field effects, harmonics, resonance. feedback, influence, network stability, homeostasis and collapse, emergence

ff

Interrupt synaptic gap multiplex.. latency, tunnelling

Interrupts and the Stroop effect

One of the most interesting elements of my early studies of Cognitive Psychology was the Stroop effect whereby a slow process interrupts a faster one:

Realm focus and field harmonics

Take my colourful realm pictures and put them in a bowl of water. The colours run into each other creating a field. This is also related to the notion of focus. Things are either blurry or in stark relief, sharp lines. Both are true.

Perception of time analysed with the realm model and network theory

I postulate that:

1. Time passing faster is a function of network fragmentation within the individual and their environs as realm
2. This causes latency to bring all elements of the network to a point of harmonisation or stability, necessary for consciousness -- the clock speed of consciousness slows down

This picture shows a peer-to-peer guild network with hooks into the formal hierarchy. This is a good balanced model for orgainisational evolution.

Actually these should be inverted ... ??? hmmm

Combined power of a group of individuals can be related to the balance of alignment and complementarity of their realms.

Cool things the realm model bridges between and evidence that this is now looking like a type of universal theory

1. Servant leadership and Agile can be interpreted in the context of improving network health through mediation effects of servant leadership, short OODA loop cycles and turn-taking
2. Growth as walking towards the pain, chiropracty, yoga and massage
3. Panpsychism and field theory of Kurt Lewin
4. Holonomic theory of mind and computer networking
5. Fractal geometry and non-fractal geometry - e.g. the fractals can be considered to collapse under certain conditions -- based on realm alignment e.g. a copper wire is made up of a long string of realm that are aligned in their nature for the most part. i.e. the physical universe appears to have high levels of realm alignment
6. Different modes of thinking and describing including linked to thinking and personality and communication preferences. Allows a bridge between the worlds of language and reality cf. work of French psychologist Jaques Lacan
7. Theories of group power dynamics e.g. Robert Greene's 48 Laws of Power and empowerment
8. Canonical order defines time in networks and network elements can be described in terms of distance and alignment with larger peckers. Mortality and notions of faith are pretty big in this department, pecking order is canonical order applied to aggression and fear or respect or attraction or level of emotional intelligence etc.
9. People and groups of people and the natural world around them exist in a dualistic networked multiverse. But ... there are different classes of network with different evolutionary characteristics and choices of what networks we are in are not as straightforward as they seem
10. Could probably explain why AI can get so good at playing Go
11. Links to military theory including the work of Sun Tzu
12. Links to theories of industrial evolution including Wardley Mapping
13. Links to notions of the Force in Star Wars
14. Aristotle's model of spontaneous generation
15. etc.

Am still unpacking what this means in terms of bridge building between epistemology and ontology but convinced it can help, particularly given the Lacan lead by Graeme Wallace (thanks), which also links to Tantrism:

My hypothesis is the realm model is a generalised theory of information mediation and therefore reality and symbols are part of reality so should be no problem.

QED (ish)

Reading list:

Realm model #1-3

Spiral dynamics

Frédéric Laloux

Postscript October 2020

There are a number of resonances here with this article from July 2020 on Syscoi about research into emergence and fishes: