Generative and degenerative defined
Generative Having the power or function of generating, originating, producing, or reproducing.
Degenerative Of, relating to, involving, or causing degeneration.
Degeneration A lowering of effective power, vitality, or essential quality to an enfeebled and worsened kind or state.Source: Merriam-Webster
Generative Having the intention or result of generating value. Seeking to create that which improves people’s lives and makes the world a better place. World-enriching.
There are two levels of generative action. Level 1 is concerned with generating value for others (let someone have a go on your bike). Level 2 is concerned with creating that which generates value for others, again and again (let them keep your bike).
Source: The Newcreator’s Glossary
Intent — an expression of the Newcreator’s spiritual self
Our spiritual self manifests as Intent. This is located in the heart, where the horizontal (mind) and vertical (body) planes intersect.
Moment by moment, a person’s intent can be either generative or degenerative.
Lightside — Generative intent
Generative means having the intention or result of generating value; seeking to create that which improves people’s lives and makes the world a better place; world-enriching.
There are two levels of generative action.
Level 1 is concerned with generating value for others (let someone have a go on your bike)..
Level 2 is concerned with creating something that generates value for others (let them keep your bike).
Darkside — Degenerative intent
Degenerative means having the intention or result of generating anti-value, or inhibiting or limiting value generation, or nullifying value. It can also refer to the failure to seize an opportunity to generate value, or to settle for limited value generation when the value generation potential was greater.
Generative and degenerative modes compared
The D/G hypothesis
Two fields envelop our planet. One is the degenerative field (D-field) and the other is the generative field (G-field).
The fields have no intention, in the same way that radio waves have no intention. They just do what they do.
The source of each field is unknown and unknowable.
A person can tune into either field as if the mind were a radio.
Each field gives rise to an associated state of consciousness with accompanying kinds of consequences.
When we are tuned into the G-field and in a generative state of consciousness, our intent is generative (enrich the world or a particular piece of it) and our thoughts and actions have generative consequences.
When we are tuned into the D-field and in a degenerative state, our intent is degenerative and our thoughts and actions have degenerative consequences.
An alternative Bergsonian understanding of the function of the brain is that it acts as a type of “receiver,” somewhat similar to a radio or television set. Drawing upon this second metaphor, Bergson postulates that the neurochemical activity of the brain does not produce consciousness, but rather enables the brain to “tune into” appropriate “frequencies” of preexisting levels of consciousness—that is, the states of consciousness that correspond to waking life, dreaming, deep sleep, trance, as well as, at least potentially, the consciousnesses of other beings. Just as the programs received by a television set are not produced by the electrical activity within the television itself, but rather exist independently of the television set, in the same way, this Bergsonian understanding of the brain/consciousness relationship postulates that consciousness is neither contained within nor produced by the brain.
Source: G. William Barnard in his book Living Consciousness: The Metaphysical Vision of Henri Bergson, p. xxxiii, citing philosopher Henri Bergson.
Some examples of generative–degenerative polarities
Erik Erikson: Generativity vs. Stagnation, the seventh stage of psychosocial development
Erik Erikson was an eminent psychologist and psychoanalyst best-known for his theory on the psychosocial development of human beings.
Illustration by Joshua Seong | © Verywell, 2018
The seventh stage is called Generativity vs. Stagnation. (Erikson is the originator of the term ‘generativity.’)Generativity is about contributing to society by caring for others and creating that which makes the world a better place.
Stagnation is what happens when someone fails to find a way to contribute. People trapped in a state of stagnation tend to feel alienated from their community or from society as a whole.
Read more about Generativity vs. Stagnation, the seventh stage of psychosocial development on the Verywell website
Erik Erikson knew that self-invention takes a lifetime, by M. M. Owen, Ph.D., on Aeon website
View the Wikipedia entry for Erik Erikson
Edward Matchett: Create the new vs. Preserve the old
Edward Matchett (1929–1998) started out as a design engineer at Rolls-Royce—aircraft engines, not automobiles—in Derby, UK, later becoming a teacher of design.From 1966 to 1970, he conducted an investigation into the creative process, sponsored by the Science Research Council of Great Britain. The aim of this research was to identify practical and workable means of injecting a new order of “creativeness, professionalism and achievement” into product design and development.
His findings, some of which can be found in Creative Action, The making of meaning in a complex world (Turnstone Books, 1975), are a much-needed antidote to the mechanical and soulless ‘brainstorm then project manage’ approach to innovation.
View the article Why brainstorming does not form part of Newcreate work
Edward Matchett established his company, Matchett Training and Consultancy Services, in 1970 “to take people to the highest level of professionalism and original thinking”, and to do this in a systematic way. This work was usually done in-house, often in a carefully constructed environment that Matchett called a logosphere of meaning.
Matchett’s concepts and methods are based on 40 years of continuous first-hand experience as a manager, teacher, consultant, coach and counsellor, on many hundreds of practical industrial projects in R&D laboratories and product design offices, and at what is now Cranfield University.
The underlying discipline employed by Matchett was predominantly his Fundamental Design Method (FDM), on which he began work in 1958. Matchett asserted that “the most advanced form of FDM lifts a mind into ‘meta-control’, making it possible to produce the quality and quantity of thoughts and actions that are normally produced only by a person of genius.”
The “two spirits” described by Matchett in the following passages correlate strongly with Napoleon Hill’s creative imagination and synthetic imagination. This is unlikely to be a coincidence.
Either knowingly or unwittingly, Edward Matchett is referencing the Trimurti, the trinity of supreme divinity in Hinduism in which the cosmic functions of creation, maintenance, and destruction are personified as a triad of deities, typically Brahma the creator, Vishnu the preserver, and Shiva the destroyer.Matchett’s Credo
The great gulf that divides mankind is not political. It is not the gulf between religions, between religion and science, between science and art. It is not the gulf between rich and poor, between the privileged and the underprivileged. Not the gulf between the practical and the theorist, between those who would work and those who would dream. It is not the gulf between management and those that are managed, between the possessive and the philanthropist, between the saints and the sinners. All of these things are important, yet none so important as men often suppose. They are all streams that flow towards the same sea. All would meet and be reconciled except for one division that is greater by far then these — a division that is far more fundamental. It is the split between those persons who would hang on to old forms and those who wish to see new ones.
Two spirits are at work in the world. It is they who are the cause of the great divide. One would drive the world along at an ever-increasing rate, one would have the world stay precisely where it is. One has its foot hard down on the accelerator, the other is trying hard to apply the brake. One has his eyes fixed firmly on the future, the other has his eyes fixed firmly on the past (he does not realise that the ground that he thinks he is standing on disappeared many years ago).
What is it that has to be preserved? Every form that still equates to needs. What is it that has to be built in addition? New forms that equate to needs that either were not present earlier or that have not been satisfied. What does this have to do with the person who is doing the creating? Everything! At every moment, within himself, the same ceaseless battle must go on. He must destroy every form (ideas, beliefs, visions, attitudes, values etc.) that is no longer needed. He must preserve every form that still equates to needs. He must build new forms within (new ideas, new beliefs, new visions, new attitudes, new values etc.) that equate to needs that either were not present earlier or that have not yet been satisfied. To the extent that he does this within he will be able to do it without. Neither more nor less; it is all very precise.Source: Edward Matchett, Fundamental Design Method
View the Wikipedia entry for Trimurti
The three functions are sometimes presented as:
- Generator (in the graphic below: Create new value),
- Operator (Preserve existing value), and
- Destroyer (Sacrifice value for the good of the whole),
providing the clever but misleading acronym GOD.
Read more about Edward Matchett
Otto Scharmer: Eco-system awareness vs. Ego-system awareness
Dr. C. Otto Scharmer is a senior lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and founding chair of the Presencing Institute. He introduced the concept of “presencing”—learning from the emerging future—in his bestselling books Theory U, and Presence (co-authored with Peter Senge, Joseph Jaworski and Betty Sue Flowers).Read more about Otto Scharmer and his workWhen operating with ego-system awareness, we are driven by the concerns and intentions of our small ego self.
When operating with eco-system awareness, we are driven by the concerns and intentions of our emerging or essential self— that is, by a concern that is informed by the well-being of the whole.
The prefix eco- goes back to the Greek oikos and concerns the “whole house.” The word economy can be traced back to this same root. Transforming our current ego-system economy into an emerging eco-system economy means reconnecting economic thinking with its real root, which is the well-being of the whole house rather than money-making or the wellbeing of just a few of its inhabitants. But while the whole house was for the Greeks something very local, today it also concerns the well-being of our global communities and planetary eco-systems.Source: Leading From the Emerging Future—From Ego-System to Eco-System Economies, by Otto Scharmer and Katrin Kaufer (pdf, 40pp)
The Matrix: Take the red pill vs. Take the blue pill
In the movie The Matrix, Morpheus offers Neo a choice: take the Blue Pill and continue to live in a synthesised, computer-generated world, or take the Red Pill, escape from the Matrix and live in the real—but very hostile—world.
“All I’m offering is the truth. Nothing more.” Runtime: 2:40.
A Course in Miracles: Holy Spirit vs. Ego
A Course in Miracles was channeled by Helen Schucman and published as a book in 1976. It consists of a curriculum claiming to assist its readers in achieving spiritual transformation.View the Wikipedia entry for A Course in MiraclesWe have seen that there are only two parts of your mind. One is ruled by the ego, and is made up of illusions. The other is the home of the Holy Spirit, where truth abides.
Source: A Course in Miracles, Lesson 66 | Download A Course in Miracles in its entirety (free — steer clear of of suspect pdf reader download links)
Christianity: God vs. Satan
Although I sometimes refer to the generative and degenerative fields as G-field and D-field, it would be a mistake to think that G means God and D means Devil. According to my hypothesis, G and D are energies without anything resembling human form or conscious intent. When tempted to speculate about the purpose of G or D, I remind myself of Stafford Beer’s dictum: “The purpose of the system is what it does.”Satan was an anointed cherub. He sat in heaven, a being of the highest rank and exalted position. Created by God as the “seal of perfection”, Satan turned his eyes away from his Creator and began to admire the creation: himself. “You corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor” (Ezekiel 28:17). He became proud and exalted himself; a desire to rule was born in him. He wished to put himself in God’s place. He whispered lies until he had a third of the hosts of heaven on his side.
Source: What does the Bible say about Satan? on ActiveChristianity website
More quotes
Power, however, has both a generative and creative side and a degenerative and destructive one. An individual or group that exercises power to achieve its desires and ambitions, but pays no attention to the desires or ambitions of others, will end up steamrolling the others. This degenerative power shows up disturbingly as greed or arrogance and catastrophically as rapaciousness or violence.
Love and Power—When Are they Generative, Instead of Destructive? by Adam Kahane, a director of Reos Partners, a social enterprise that helps businesses, governments, and civil society organisations address complex social challenges
Continue reading
Creating greatness in the realm beyond systems thinking (pdf; 25pp) An article I contributed to an e-book for participants in European Sharing on Systems Thinking, Prague, Czech Republic, June 2015
How Newcreators use mind, body and spirit to create the new and enrich the world
Intent: the generative impulse infusing mind, body and spirit
Search the site
Just type — not case sensitive — do not hit return