Koos, For me, the law of two feet speaks more of following what has heart and meaning for me. I do not think of it in terms of "leaving" a situation but more in terms of moving toward something for which passion has arisen.
With this in mind, I think that if I am neither contributing nor receiving (even when I am "having a good time") my mind will begin to wander, and I will no longer be able to be fully present . . . most often when my mind wanders, my body follows right along . . . and I end up being somewhere contributing and receiving. This occurs without conscious choice-making - it simply happens. I do not believe that I "force" myself to leave a situation in which I am not having fun (or am not contributing or receiving - or as an excuse to get away from an uncomfortable situation) because I know that there is a reason for me to stay if my mind has not yet departed . . . This, for me, is the essence of the law of two feet - when my mind wanders, my body follows right along. Good day to all, b Barry Owen The Owen Group 5518 Kendall Drive Nashville, TN 37209 Phone 615-356-2888 Simply living the FourFold Way in Open Space My Worldwide Open Space Web-site: "http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/9215/"; ----- Original Message ----- From: koos de heer <koos...@auryn.nl> To: <osl...@listserv.boisestate.edu> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 1999 3:43 AM Subject: Musings on the Law of Two Feet > Hi All, > > I have been thinking about the Law of Two Feet. > In the book it says that "When you feel that you > are neither learning nor contributing, you go > elsewhere." Maybe it has to do with my Dutch > Reformed upbringing that I like to examine rules > and laws closely. In this case, it made me think > that the Law might benefit from a small addition. > > I know that Open Space generally benefits from > less rather than more - I will get to that too. > > It occured to me that it is rather serious - as > long as I am learning and contributing, or even > if I am doing only one of those two, it is OK. > Strictly taken, this would mean that there are > two valid excuses to bash the ego of the speaker > or the convener: I am not learning and I am not > contributing. But how about: I don't think it is > fun here? Even though I may be learning a very > important lesson here, or I may have a great > contribution to make to the group, if I don't > want to learn that lesson or if I am sick of > discussing the topic that I have been teaching > about all my life - I can also be very miserable > and the best thing for me to do could be to go. > > And of course, in the spirit of Open Space, I > would encourage anybody in that situation to > go elsewhere. I have seen people exercise the > Law of Two Feet in situations where I had the > strong impression there was a lessen for them > to learn, but if the person would rather not > be there, learning will hardly be effective. > > On the other hand, I can be in a situation > where I am not learning and not contributing > but having a great time. Does that mean that > I should leave and make myself useful? This > certainly appeals to my Calvinist upbringing > mentioned earlier! > Of course, in my vision of OS, there is nothing > wrong with having a good time and I will stay. > > So that made me think of making an addition to > the Law: if you are neither learning nor > contributing or if you are not having a good time, > go somewhere else. This could work for me: I can > be contributing and even though there maybe things > that I'd rather do, making this contribution here > and now is important so I stay. Same for learning. > In the ideal situation I will be doing all three, > but if not, two out of three ain't bad and I could > even do with one. > > But this led me to another question. Do I have to > have a reason for leaving? I think this is not the > idea of the Law of Two Feet. The idea is that I > could be in a situation where I find myself > starting to feel miserable and really not wanting > to be there. The Law is there to remind me of the > fact that I have a choice. Not the reasons why are > important, but the fact that I have a choice and > that I am the only one responsible for the > situation that I am in. Even staying and feeling > miserable is perfectly OK. The only thing that is > not OK is blaming someone else for it. > > So now back to the Less is More thing. Maybe we > need not an addition to the Law, but simply a more > general version: whenever I find myself in a > situation I don't want to be in, I can go. And if > I am explaining it to someone, I can use all sorts > of examples about learning, contributing, having a > good time, being too lazy to get up (or too afraid), > or whatever, to stay or not to stay. > > When I started writing this, I did not think > it would turn out this long... Anyway, I am very > interested in your thoughts on this. > > Cheers, > Koos > > ------------ > koos de heer > auryn management advies > utrecht, netherlands > mailto:koos...@auryn.nl > http://www.auryn.nl/
