What is Emergent Knowledge?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Emergent Knowledge' (EK) is a term David Grove coined for what he had learned from experience to be the crucial phase in therapy and coaching. I remember he said he was very surprised that nobody had claimed the domainname so far, which heritage is now in good care of Carol Wilson.
Origins
David always insisted modestly that he was just a mechanic, especially when he had great results ("You're welcome" he replied timidly, when some client tried to thank him for what he did.). We discussed this during our talk at the harbour in Hamburg on a hot day in August 2003, enjoying the light breeze coming up from the water. David was wearing impeccable off-white shorts and shirt. I had been very surprised to see his big black hat arrive on a bike, but in the company of John that made sense. (James, Maurice: I put in some detail here to give the impression that I am telling the truth and not just being truthful.) I used the metaphor of brain surgery: sometimes to go to the exact right spot requires the patient reporting on what happens, so you won't destroy or harm any vital parts. You need to find the precise right spot and once you do it is another starting point to deal with, but finding it may take a while (from minutes to decades). Similarly, a mechanic who tries to find a failure in an, e.g. electric circuit, may develop some tacid knowledge of where to look first and be more effective than anybody else on the job.
Early in the summer of 2005 at Shaun and Caitlin's in Hull we had been brainstorming over a proper name that would explain 'clean' and distinguish David's way of working with clients, from other therapeutic forms like cognitive psychotherapy or Neurolinguistic Programming (NLP).
David's style wasn't cognitive in the sense that it only dealt with cognitive processes, it wasn't therapy meaning that the therapist 'heals' the patient. It wasn't linguistic because it only dealt with language or symbols, although David was certainly fond of this aspect. And it certainly had nothing to do with programming as an intentional, conscious attempt to re-wire somebody else's brain, although that is usually the result of clean facilitation. So we were left with 'neuro-mechanic'. (Early September 2007, off Gisors, we decided on 'mechemical'.)
We moved to Carol's in Laleham and through 'the multiplicity of the relatively simple interactions' (as Steve Saunders describes the phenomenon of emergence) between David and Steve 'a gradual beginning or coming forth of a complex system and pattern arose'. This metaphor of how emergence is evident in physical structures (Steve's expertise) led to a growing awareness, the 'processes and patterns' of which 'led to revelation and insight' (quote Steve).
Function of clean facilitation
So what does a clean approach actually do?
The facilitator follows the client's process and encourages them to go to the next step. Which clean question enables the client to search among all the information in his, sorry: her brain, and come up with the most relevant? There are cues for that: e.g. a (non)verbal emotional reaction, mentioning some kind of self-reference (pronoun) which labels it as an episodic memory, time-/spatial cues, etc.
Clean doesn't attempt to add any information because it is important to retrieve as much as possible from the brain itself to map what is there. Unfortunately, the mere process of retrieving already may change the previous wiring. Sensory information comes in all the time (among which the facilitator's presence and behaviour) and interacts, which may change the perception. Associations cause other memories to be triggered. Paying attention to what is going on starts thinking processes: a whole cascade of chemical processes occurs. This is not merely a modular bottum-up process, but involves interaction. Even asking a clean question already starts a neurological process as if you take a match and light a candle and suddenly the place looks like Piccadilly Circus: surprise!
But at this stage all we try to do is establish the system: all the possibly relevant information, which forms 'the autopoietic organization of a living system and includes the creation of a boundary that specifies the domain of the network's operations and defines the system as a unit' (quote: probably from Fritjof Capra: The Web of Life, 1996).
Consolidation
The next step is to consolidate this information, most likely in the same way the brain stores experiences into long-term memory: so sleep on it.
Hence repetition or iteration may be relevant: "A feedback loop is a circular arrangement of causally connected elements, in which an initial cause propagates around the links of the loop, so that each element has an effect on the next, until the last 'feeds back' the effect into the first element of the cycle. The consequence of this arrangement is that the first link ('input') is affected by the last (''output'), which results in selfregulation of the entire system, as the initial effect is modified each time it travels around the cycle (recurrence). Feedback means conveying of information about the outcome of any process or activity to its source. Feedback loops are abstract patterns of relationships embedded in physical structures or in the activities of living organisms. An influence, or message, may travel along a cyclical path which may become a feedback loop. The concept of feedback and selfregulation are closely linked to networks. A network goes in all directions." (id.)
In a physical system iteration allows for variation in a cybernetic system. But the brain makes a further selection.
What would you like to have happen?
The brain has evolved to solve problems. So any perception may urge it to start working on one. By pursuing a goal the brain selects relevant information and inhibits irrelevant. The question "What would you like to have happen?" ("WWYLTHH?") makes you aware of the organism's needs. The selfconscious person here and now (A) makes a statement. The question acknowledges that it is not always within somebody's means to reach that goal. It may refect both a personal and/or cultural view of to what extent you think you can manage your world. To 'have happen' is at least something that involves other factors, otherwise 'to do' would have sufficed.
Emergence
If the way the system interacts within its network, changes, another sequence or (sub)pattern of communication may arise. That may mean an adaptation of the same system, but under certain conditions the system either breaks down or reorganises itself into another combination or even up to a hierarchically higher systems level. Just like in physics a catalytic agent (e.g. a symptom) may speed up this process. Given time and energy catalytic cycli may link to form closed loops and combine into complex networks. These hypercycli tend to selforganise and even selfreplicate. They even repair replication-errors, which means that they are able to hold and communicate complex information. Hypercycli can evolve by creating ever higher levels of organisation through instable states. These levels are characterized by an increasing diversity and richness of parts and structures. They can compete and are subject to natural selection. They develop into dissipative structures that are able to maintain their stability far from a state of equilibrium. (Ilya Prigogine: Dissipative structures in chemical systems, 1967)
This will affect the network outside of it through its connected nodes.
Emergent Knowledge
What David was looking for, though, is the moment some answer to the "WWYLTHH?" question emerged from this process. Because that answer wasn't there yet initially. David said if you want to go from A to B and you can't just do it, there is a problem, which can be about A (conscious self), B (statement) or C (the timespace in between). And since in principle no new information has been added, the system must have reorganised itself into a new combination or risen above itself onto a hierarchically higher system. Emerged knowledge enables the organism reset itself. It is often that kind of change that reveals itself through a physical reaction, sometimes to a degree that it becomes visible or conscious. That is how you 'know', but knowledge can be anything that causes the organism to maintain itself and behave accordingly. You (your body) knows a lot of things you (conscious self) don't know.
At a conscious level, the question "What do you know now?" ("WDYKN?") assigns the neocortex to come up with an answer that refers to "WWYLTHH?" (just to make life interesting: which may have changed meanwhile). Dealing with it in working memory allows for conscious thinking to compare the information, weigh its relative importance, narrowing it down to its essential elements (preferably 7 plus or minus two) and allowing them to rearrange themselves. Sometimes it takes a decision of the conscious self between alternative solutions. What would suit me best?
David was good at facilitating this process, which he said is like a midwife helping the mother to give birth. It would have happened anyway, in any way, without help, but it is nice to have someone around who witnessed this before and helps you deal with what is happening to you. "Please make it a little easier for me?"
(Thanks to Steve and Maurice for inspiring me and to that guy down under, at 6:30, six feet deep, whose spirit still roams among us. Copyright CJC 2009)