I think this is part of the puzzle 🙂
Source: [PDF] Self Management : an Innovative Tool for Enactive Human Design | Semantic Scholar
Self Management : an Innovative Tool for Enactive Human Design
The purpose of this paper is to present an innovative and creative approach to the problemD solution in decision making, based on the understanding of decision makers as human beings, and decision making processes as human networks, in an organizational context. This approach basically consists of the development of a powerful ontological tool for the observation, self-observation, design and innovation of human beings from passive observers towards enactive observers, who have to make decisions and solve problem situations through the interactions in which they participate. This tool named CLEHES© (Body – Language – Emotion – History – Eros – Silence) allows to develop not only all the human potential inside us, but also to bring all organizational resources, such as information technology and communications, into the decision makers bodies, to invent and re-invent new human practices that can create value to our organizations. Several applications of this tool have taken place in different domains and organizational contexts with amazing results, which have been the focus of continuous research projects and managerial education instances
Source: (PDF) Enactive management: A nurturing technology enabling fresh decision making to cope with conflict situations
Enactive management: A nurturing technology enabling fresh decision making to cope with conflict situations
The focus of this paper is observation, self-observation, and enactive management of organizational conflict situations whereby a community, an organization, or a human being has the possibility of recognizing their resources and generating changes in their practices if they so desire, and making fresh decisions, in the sense that different ontological dimensions are involved. We show how considering Body¹- Language- Emotions- History- Eros- Silence can configure a nurturing technology call CLEHES. This tool has been applied for diverse people, groups, communities, and organizations that need and wish to develop their own skills to inquire conflict practice resolutions, in order to learn as a human decision support system. Conflict situations are understood as interactions, a breakdown in-between CLEHES from the individual or social standpoints. This tool allows observing the boundaries of conflict situations and building an observer system with the ability to manage, solve, or attenuate the situation, enabling fresh decision-making attending to the context in which the organization moves. This learning process happens in a constructed place called an Enactive Laboratory where strategies are developed to cope with the domains and context in the perceived individual and human activities systems. We present a case study focusing on a Learning Family Mediators System.
Source: Frontiers | The Enactive Approach to Habits: New Concepts for the Cognitive Science of Bad Habits and Addiction | Psychology
The Enactive Approach to Habits: New Concepts for the Cognitive Science of Bad Habits and Addiction
- 1Philosophy of Science Graduate Program, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico
- 2Institute for Philosophical Research (IIF), National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico
- 3Institute for Applied Mathematics and Systems Research (IIMAS), National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico
- 4Center for the Sciences of Complexity (C3), UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico
Habits are the topic of a venerable history of research that extends back to antiquity, yet they were originally disregarded by the cognitive sciences. They started to become the focus of interdisciplinary research in the 1990s, but since then there has been a stalemate between those who approach habits as a kind of bodily automatism or as a kind of mindful action. This implicit mind-body dualism is ready to be overcome with the rise of interest in embodied, embedded, extended, and enactive (4E) cognition. We review the enactive approach and highlight how it moves beyond the traditional stalemate by integrating both autonomy and sense-making into its theory of agency. It defines a habit as an adaptive, precarious, and self-sustaining network of neural, bodily, and interactive processes that generate dynamical sensorimotor patterns. Habits constitute a central source of normativity for the agent. We identify a potential shortcoming of this enactive account with respect to bad habits, since self-maintenance of a habit would always be intrinsically good. Nevertheless, this is only a problem if, following the mainstream perspective on habits, we treat habits as isolated modules. The enactive approach replaces this atomism with a view of habits as constituting an interdependent whole on whose overall viability the individual habits depend. Accordingly, we propose to define a bad habit as one whose expression, while positive for itself, significantly impairs a person’s well-being by overruling the expression of other situationally relevant habits. We conclude by considering implications of this concept of bad habit for psychological and psychiatric research, particularly with respect to addiction research.