We present excerpts from the final report that are important for further work and are therefore worth highlighting. Such is the question of representation.
In fact, it doesn’t matter what I represent in life, it can be seen on me, I have made it mine, I have been transformed, they measure me, and after a while, they look at me and become according to that. Through awareness, the question itself is important to me: What do I represent?
All my choices, influences, decisions depend on the totality of my answer to this question. What I built into myself, becomes a picture in me, so I become the one, who wears that picture.
Me, as a person representing myself:
The person who represents himself seems simple, yet difficult to practice in reality. Society has for a long time entered into the seduction of liability-free references and referrals, since it is extremely beneficial in terms of comfort and confidence, or so it seems.
This pattern, which is so deeply rooted in our sample set, is defined by the Biblical image and its adage, “Manus manum lavat!” – “Hand washes hand!” While we personally do not support this or that decision, we are forced to take it by duty (or the crowd). But where is my self in a decision like it? Where does the acting man represent himself? Shouldn’t act someone whose values and decisions are consistent with the task?
In conclusion, the person, who represents himself/herself is aware of the value factors that are important to him or her, his or her effects, and is responsibly positioned in his or her best current knowledge. During the agreement, he/she is open to new knowledge and factors and is willing to incorporate it into his/her decisions and tasks.
Me, as a person representing another person:
We believe that the world is technologically ripe for a collaborative era of self-representation. Yet the question remains: where and when can I represent an another person or an other person represent me? First of all, it is important to know that the person representing the person is already based on an agreement. These agreements may be personal or social.
Social pacts still exist and we do not want to blow them up, but to update them. Along with two questions:
- When does someone count capable to represent himself/herself? (age and aptitude)
- When do we accept another person to represent a person? (Criteria)
Answering the questions is part of the final study and will identify further steps in this matter.
In our human technology, we represent the other person as Mentor. The Mentor, as a person who has been reconciled to me and entered into a deep relationship with me, is the Representative in my I-circle.
Me, as a person representing a community
A community can be represented if the members of the grouping have a cohesive, consensual purpose, as long as their members are able to reach a consensus decision and communicate it clearly to each other. Therefore, a good community is represented by all its members.
In our human technology, due to its importance, we have given special attention to this issue: It is the scope of the Organizer. In the I-circle, this means the focus on my connections, and if I am good at it, I will easily be the Organizer of a Circle.
Please note, that however they have a similar kind of attention there is a difference between Organizer and Representatíve. The scope of the Representative, that is filled by the Mentor in the I-circle and as a role in other circles, monitors ‘inwards’ and does not conclude an agreement, whereas the Organizer focuses ’outwards’ and is responsible for the agreements, and information flow.
Further details of the theory and practice of agreements will be included in the final study.