Comments on “The Cofounders”

Comments

Happy to give feedback on your "fluidity workbook!"

Hey David!

Love your work on Kegan’s stages (and think it’s quite important, actually). I’d be happy to help with your “fluidity workbook”. Also, I live in Boston and occasionally chat with Robert Kegan himself, so we might be able to loop him in.

Thanks again!

I’d be also very much

Balazs's picture

I’d be also very much interested in beta testing the fluidity workbook. Your writings have shaped my thinking in a great deal.

Would love to help with testing the fluidity workbook

Hi David,

Great post as always - I got a lot out of this and it strongly resonates both with my work and personally.

I am eager to help with testing the fluidity workbook you mentioned. As you mention, developing these skills more broadly is crucial to the future for all of us.

Thanks for everything you have shared on this topic over the years!

user testing & shareability

I would very much be interested beta testing a fluidity workbook. No matter how preliminary. :)

Really enjoyed the post. wonderfully grounding example.
I’m anticipating the ease of sharing this page with friends, as the cofounder relationship is down to earth and “sticks” in a way that other pages I’ve tried to share haven’t.

In the past I’ve used “why you may be miserable”:https://meaningness.com/misunderstanding-meaningness-makes-many-miserable. But I’d settled on “this is you”:https://meaningness.com/self also because the self page had me laughing at how well it compressed all these different self confusions.

fluid space v. process

jamie's picture

I can tell you put a lot of time into this and I really respect how perfect the write-up is. I want to read it again and I’m sure I’ll appreciate it even more.

One of the truly great things you pointed out was how people can confuse (or simply hope) that the by creating an “open space” for dialog/interaction they are in a fluid mode. But one thing I’ve noticed is that these people are actually holding on to a process-orientation, using/maintaining the open space as a thing that “is inherently the answer”. Basically fetishizing the space aspect of the dynamic. Type 5 people can often regress into mode as well.

One of the biggest hints that the pathological version is in play is the lack of action. True type 5 has a feeling of rhythm, never completely in open process and never completely lost in goal-oriented action, but a kind of vibrating space and action, a kind of self-adapting context that moves things along. Pathological process and pathological type 5 doesn’t have enough “rubber hitting the road” instead it’s all “where the rubber hits the clouds”.

Anyway, just my pet peeve.

Spam filter (now disabled)

Sorry about the trouble some people have had posting comments! (I appreciate all who persisted.)

I installed a new spam filter recently and it was rejecting many valid comments as spam. I have disabled it for now, and am following up with the service (CleanTalk). I hope they can figure out why it was going wrong.

Add new comment

Navigation

This page is in the section ⚒ Fluid self in relationship,
      which is in ⚒ Sailing the seas of meaningness,
      which is in Meaningness and Time: past, present, future.

The next page in book-reading order is ⚒ Fluid society.

This page’s topics are Fluidity, Self, and Systems.

General explanation: Meaningness is a hypertext book (in progress), plus a “metablog” that comments on it. The book begins with an appetizer. Alternatively, you might like to look at its table of contents, or some other starting points. Classification of pages by topics supplements the book and metablog structures. Terms with dotted underlining (example: meaningness) show a definition if you click on them. Pages marked with ⚒ are still under construction. Copyright ©2010–2019 David Chapman.