Life Quotes Thoughts

Bill Plotkin on Purpose

The Journey of Soul Initiation by Bill Plotkin is a thorough description of the most essential things Plotkin has learned over the past 40 years about the journey to full maturity as a human being.

Bill Plotkin has the following perspective to share on purpose (my emphasis in italics):

Our Soul purpose is categorically different from our social or vocational purpose. This is one of the most common misunderstandings… Soul purpose is what we’re born to accomplish in our lifetime — the…gift we are here to offer… Although a social or vocational perspective on purpose is necessary, appropriate, and healthy…, it doesn’t derive from the depths of the psyche or go to the depths of the world, and it is not enough to build a full life on. Yet, …it’s very rare to find anything beyond this…perspective on purpose.

—Bill Plotkin, The Journey of Soul Initiation: A Field Guide for Visionaries, Evolutionaries, and Revolutionaries

What am I born to accomplish in my lifetime — the gift I am here to offer? Soul, by the way, is an ecological concept for Bill Plotkin.

Related post:
Bill Plotkin on Soul, Felt-sense, and Metaphor

Life Quotes Thoughts Values

Bill Plotkin on Soul, Felt-sense, and Metaphor

The Journey of Soul Initiation by Bill Plotkin is a thorough description of the most essential things Plotkin has learned over the past 40 years about the journey to full maturity as human beings. Bill Plotkin uses common words in uncommon ways. Soul is, for example, an ecological concept.


Bill Plotkin writes (my emphasis in italics):

Soul, for me, is … a person or thing’s unique ecological niche in the Earth community. …all human creations that evolve organically [have Soul]… Each natural thing…has its own unique position…in the larger web of…life. A niche…consists of a thing’s unique set of relationships with every other thing in its ecosystem. A thing’s eco-niche…is what makes it what it is on the deepest, widest, and most natural level of identity.

—Bill Plotkin, The Journey of Soul Initiation: A Field Guide for Visionaries, Evolutionaries, and Revolutionaries

It’s worth noting that everything that is not fabricated or constructed solely with our strategic minds has Soul. Here I am reminded of Christopher Alexander’s work on living structure.

Felt-sense & Experiencing

We have, according to Bill Plotkin, a felt-sense about our unique ecological niche in the larger web of life. He writes (my emphasis in italics):

We humans possess a special realm…of consciousness…that rides on top of the more extensive consciousness we have in common with all other species. …because each individual Ego…is a child of culture and language, we at first…come to understand our place…in terms of social roles. … But we’re also born with an entirely different kind of knowledge, a felt-sense about our ecological place or niche in the world. This knowledge exists only within the deeper realm of consciousness…, knowledge that is not linguistic but imaginal…

—Bill Plotkin, The Journey of Soul Initiation: A Field Guide for Visionaries, Evolutionaries, and Revolutionaries

Here I see a connection with Eugene Gendlin’s work on experiencing and felt sense. Besides the logical dimension of knowledge, there is also a directly felt, experiential dimension.

Metaphor & Poetry

This means that we can only point to our unique ecological niche indirectly with the language of the intrinsic, i.e., metaphor and poetry.

When it comes to identifying Soul, we can only point…to it using metaphor… We can linguistically understand our Souls only indirectly… We discover (or remember) our innate place, our true home, when the world mirrors it to us by way of nature-based metaphors, human archetypes, or other…poetic images or symbols. We don’t choose these metaphors or figure them out… Rather, we’re shown them in a moment of numinous vision…

—Bill Plotkin, The Journey of Soul Initiation: A Field Guide for Visionaries, Evolutionaries, and Revolutionaries

Here I see a connection with Robert Hartmans work. Finding our unique echological niche, our true home in the larger web of life, constitutes a fulfillment of intrinsic value.

Related post:
Bill Plotkin on Purpose

Life Thinking Thoughts

Craig Holdrege on Living Thinking

I want to show that it is possible to move beyond object thinking and develop what I will call living thinking. Living thinking is a participatory way of knowing that transcends the dichotomies of man-nature, subject-object, or mind-matter, which are so ingrained in the Western mind and form the bedrock of object thinking. One of my main guides in developing a participatory, transformative, and living way of relating to the world has been the work of the scientist and poet J. W. von Goethe.

―Craig Holdrege, Thinking Like a Plant: A Living Science for Life

Craig Holdrege described Goethe’s approach to living thinking in a talk at Schumacher College:1

Now, what I’d like to do is to bring together the significance of Goethe’s approach. His different facets. So, one the on hand, he was able to see things in relationships and in a dynamism. … How does this relates to that? How does an organism transform? An organism, a living being, lives through transformation. Can I see how it transforms, and yet remain an integrated whole? So, this very dynamic way of looking. When I say looking at the world, it’s really wrong, because the world is not an act. He is participating in the phenomenon of relationship and dynamism in nature. He is participating in that.

So, his approach is a participatory, or … dialogic, approach. … He is giving himself over the the phenomena, perceiving it very direct, gentle – what he calls gentle empiricism – going with the phenomena, but the thinking goes with that. The thinking is in that. The thinking isn’t abstracted at a distance, but participating in, and realizes what’s happening. This is where is says: My perceiving is a thinking, and my thinking is a perceiving. … It’s objective, not by distancing, but by connecting, becoming intimate with the object. The object looses its object character, and it becomes a partner in a dialogue.

So, this approach is different from what we normally think of a science today. Event if many scientists can do this in their own ways, but it doesn’t become part of scientific discipline. Because what this means is that the scientist needs to develop.

I’d like to let Goethe speak again: If we want to behold nature in a ??? way, we must follow her example and becomes mobile and malleable as Nature herself. She has something to teach us. We have to follow her example and change ourselves.

It’s not about us coming with a particular paradigm, or theory, and impressing that upon Nature, but trying to enter into the phenomena to see what they have to tell us, and to try to adapt our sensibilities to the phenomena themselves. … What’s showing itself here in the natural world?

So, he has this sense of the greatness of the world: An organic being is externally so many-sided and internally so manifolded inexhaustible that we can not choose enough points of view to behold it.

We need to go at it from different sides. Look at the plant in different development stages, in different contexts. Looking at the animals in its relations to its environments. … So this gets into this weaving from different points of view to be able to begin to fathom this manifolded inexhaustible nature of organic life.

He continuous: We cannot develop enough organs in ourselves in order to examine it―the organic being―without killing it. … He means…mental organs, in English perhaps. … It is the sensibility, the way of thinking, that we can begin to learn by following the example of nature, and that forms an organ of perception in us, that we begin to see more the living qualities of the world. And that’s what it’s about! … I am speaking from the biological sciences.

So, there is a delicate empiricism: It makes itself utterly identical with its object, thereby becoming true theory―meaning, understanding―but this enhancement of our mental powers belongs to a highly evolved age. It’s clear this is not easy. The intellectual and analytical capacities we have today… This morphodynamic way of thinking, contextual seeing, that’s what he saw we needed to develop. He had a gift, but it was work for Goethe, and it’s certainly work for us who are trying to practice this approach. That you come up against your own limits, and you try to overcome them through continually going back to the phenomena, immersing yourself in the processes, and trying to listen to what the phenomena are telling you. That’s the dialogue part. The plant doesn’t speak with words. The animal doesn’t speak with words. It speaks with its processes, with its forms. The questions is: Can we hear that? Can we understand it?

So, this element of…the metamorphism of the scientist. Science is a process of development of human capacities…to interrogate nature. And I would call it a nature world friendly approach, where one is tries to participate in that which nature has to show, and then to develop one’s ideas, and then, of course, one’s actions in relation to that. That seems to me to be very important!

Today, where the tendency of the fragmentation, what we do in nature is to bring fragmentation. The way we think about the world is often fragmented. We have all sorts of different opinions and theories, and the question of actual conversation, actually trying to hear what the other are sayingit can be a plant, another human being, a landscapethat we integrate ourselves consciously into the organic nature of life. I really think that is what Goethe’s approach is about.

It’s not about having to follow exactly what Goethe did, of course. There was no ‘one’ method,…but there is an intentionality of the way to turn towards the world in a new way. That, I think, is very germinal still, as germinal as lots of potency.

So, I’d like to close by letting Goethe speak: As human beings we know ourselves only insofar as we know the world. We perceive the world only in ourselves, and ourselves only in the world. Every new object clearly seen opens up a new organ of perception in us.

Thank you! I’m done.

1. Goethe and the Evolution of Science with Craig Holdrege, YouTube,, YouTube. Accessed: 2022-11-04. Published: 2021-03-16.

Life Order

Classical physics is a limiting case of the physics of life

Robert Rosen points out in his Essays on Life Itself that one of the striking features of Erwin Schrödinger’s essay What is Life? is his apologies, both for his physics, and for himself personally.1

While repeatedly proclaiming the ‘universality’ of contemporary physics, he equally repeatedly points out (quite rightly) the utter failure of its laws to say anything significant about the biosphere and what is in it.

—Robert Rosen 2

Robert Rosen suggests that Erwin Schrödinger realized that the study of matter not just teach us about organisms, but that organisms teach us about matter.3 All living organisms involve open systems. Open systems are nothing like isolated, closed systems, near equilibrium.

Open systems…constitute in themselves a profound and breathtaking generalization of old physics, based as it is on the assumptions of excessively restrictive closure conditions, conservation laws, and similar nongeneric presumptions that simply do not hold for living things.

—Robert Rosen 4

The essence of an open system is…the necessity to invoke an “outside,” or an environment, in order to understand what is going on “inside.” That is, we must go to a larger system, and not to smaller ones, to account for what an open system is doing. That is why reductionism, or analysis, that only permits us to devolve system behavior upon subsystem behaviiors, fails for open systems.

—Robert Rosen 5

Life is not a marginal phenomenon within classical physics. Classical physics is a limiting case of the physics of life (open systems). Open systems have the (implicate) capacity to generate and maintain (explicate) order that is neither rigid nor fully predictable, and thus never fully computable.6

1. Robert Rosen, Essays on Life Itself, p. 7.
2. Ibid..
3. Ibid., p. 20.
4. Ibid..
5. Ibid..
6. Ibid.. See also Iain McGilchrist, The Matter with Things, p. 1682.

Update 2022-10-23: Citations changed.


We need a new worldview more consistent with life

Christopher Alexander presented propositions about living structure throughout his four books on The Nature of Order.1 They are, most importantly, results of observation. Many are based on felt sense.2

Unless our worldview is changed to one which is more consistent with the felt reality of life, the idea of life, aliveness, or livingness, will not be enought to accomplish change.3

We treat entities in nature as if they are machines, or parts in a larger machine. We define the mechanical elements, the rules of interaction, and everything then follows mechanically.4

Yet, we experience the world. We are conscious. We are aware of ourselves. We have felt experiences. These experiences are deeply connected with the existence of life.5

We cannot help — at least partially — thinking of ourselves as machines unless we change our worldview.6

1. Christopher Alexander, The Nature of Order: An Essay on the Art of Building and the Nature of the Universe, Book 4 – The Luminous Ground, p. 10.
2. Felt sense, as defined by Eugene Gendling. See Gendlin, Focusing and Experiencing and the Creation of Meaning.
3. Christopher Alexander, The Nature of Order: Book 4, p. 10.
4. Ibid., p. 13.
5. Ibid..
6. Ibid..

Life Values

Life brings responsiveness

Iain McGilchrist conveys in The Matter With Things the complexity, responsiveness, and purposiveness of living cells — let alone trillons of them acting together.1

Iain McGilchrist maintains that “life vastly enhances the degree of responsiveness of, to and within the world“.2 What life brings is the capacity for valuing. All living creatures are able to recognize value.

Values are not invented, but discovered and disclosed. Values declare themselves in the responses of living organisms to the world, and the world’s response to them.3

Valuing is depends on relationship. Iain McGilchrist sees value as intrinsic to the universe. One of the reasons for the evolution of life is life’s ability to respond to value, fulfilling its potential.4

Life can be seen as the very process of discovering and furthering the beauty, truth, and goodness of the universe. Both appreciating and (in an indivisible act) bringing them further into being.5

1. Iain McGilchrist, The Matter With Things, p. 1635.
2. Ibid., p. 1722.
3. Ibid., p. 1723.
4. Ibid..
5. Ibid..

Life Order

Life and unfolding wholeness

We need to discover how to sense what is unfolding rather than simply trying to execute a plan…

—John Huss 1

…all our experience…is…a complex flow, a constant unfolding, responsive dance of reciprocal gestures. It exists in process and in relationship…

—Iain McGilchrist 2

It is…a process of unfolding…, in which the whole precedes the parts, and actually gives birth to them…

—Christopher Alexander 3

Christopher Alexander and David Bohm talked about unfolding. For Alexander, it was an unfolding from wholeness, for Bohm from implicate order. Christopher Alexander’s key idea is that what grows and unfolds, literally grows and unfolds out of a structure of symmetries that exist in the way that a given portion of space is differentiated.4 In Bohm’s work, the larger wholeness takes the form of implicate order.

In Christopher Alexander’s conception of matter-space each spatial region, at every scale, has a relative value, and a relative degree of life.5 It is an entirely new kind of space where every region has its own (different) value, regardless of whether the value can be calculated, or whether it is observed empirically.6

Christopher Alexander believed that all physical laws will fall out as natural consequences of unfolding wholeness. He believed that all physical laws will turn out to be special cases of the principle that the next step after a given configuration will be the one which does most to preserve, or extend, the wholeness.7

A qualitative feature of Christopher Alexander’s view of matter-space is that each region not only is associated with value, but also with something more personal or self-like in its nature.8 There is a connection to life, feeling, and our experience of the self. This is a view which includes both contemporary physics and value. It is also a view that might contribute to insights to what life itself is when it arises in nature.9

What Christopher Alexander suggested was that space itself comes to life more and more. Space doesn’t have a fixed nature like a mechanism.10 It is something whose quality evolves. It actually changes in its nature. It is a process in which space locally changes qualitatively. Life is a direct result of a feature of space.11

If I consciously see nature as part of the essence of my own being, then my perception and understanding changes. I perceive nature as part of my self. I begin to see its beauty as something to which I have a deep relationship. It becomes more precious. The character of nature, the character of the world and our relation to it, changes.12 We enter into an entirely new relation to life itself.

1. John Huss, in Michael Jones, Artful Leadership: Awakening the Commons of the Imagination.
2. Iain McGilchrist, The Matter with Things.
3. Christopher Alexander, The Timeless Way of Building.
4. Christopher Alexander, The Nature of Order: An Essay on the Art of Building and the Nature of the Universe, Book 4 – The Luminous Ground, p. 321.
5. Ibid., p. 325.
6. Ibid..
7. Ibid., pp. 325–26.
8. Ibid., p. 326.
9. Ibid., p. 327.
10. Ibid..
11. Ibid., p. 328.
12. Ibid., p. 330.

Life Order

Personal feeling is directly connected to deeper order and life

Personal feeling is directly connected to deeper order and life. It is my vulnerable inner self being connected to the world, participating in all things. It is, for example, the feeling of being part of the ocean.

The personal nature of deeper order appears in nature. The ocean, with its waves, is personal, and has feeling. The beauty of the light is personal too. To understand deeper order, we must understand that it is like this. It is the universe, reaching its deep order in us.

Related post:
Christopher Alexander on the Personal Nature of Deeper Order

Architecture Life Order

Christopher Alexander on the Personal Nature of Deeper Order

Christopher Alexander laid a foundation for order to be understood as living structure.1 Living structure, furthermore, cannot be understood as something separate from ourselves. It is both structure and personal.

It is related to the geometry of space and to how things work. And it is related to the human person, deeply attached to something in ourselves…

Christopher Alexander 2

Deeper order is the foundation of all things. It is rooted in substance and feeling. It unites the objective (cold and hard) and subjective (warm and soft). It opens the door to a world in which we can be truly human.

A thing is truly personal when it touches us in our humanity.

Christopher Alexander 3

From the point of view of Christopher Alexander, personal is an objective quality which refers to something true and fundamental in a thing itself. All works which have deep life in them are personal in this sense. The existence of personal feeling in a thing is fundamental to any given situation.

This deep feeling is indeed a mark of life in things.

Christopher Alexander 4

It is the feeling of life which we experience in ourselves that lets us know something is important. It has deep feeling. It awakens feeling in us. It is the aspect which connects life with our own existence, with what it is to be alive.

…the personal is something inherent in the nature of order and in the universe…

Christopher Alexander 5

We become happy in the presence of deep order. The connection between my quiet joy and the life in a thing goes to the very nature of deeper order itself. Wholeness, which exists out there, also exists in here, in each person’s heart. The wholeness of the world and our feeling of happiness form a single unity.

1. Christopher Alexander, The Nature of Order: An Essay on the Art of Building and the Nature of the Universe, Book 1 – The Phenomenon of Life, Part 1, Chapters 1–6, pp. 25–296.
2. Ibid., p. 298.
3. Ibid., p. 300.
4. Ibid., p. 308.
5. Ibid., p. 309.

Related post:
Personal feeling is directly connected to deeper order and life

Life Order

Christopher Alexander on the Nature of Deeper Order

The Real Nature of Human Feeling

There is a way of understanding order which is general. It is a view of order which helps us understand natural beauty and the life in buildings. It is a view which changes our cosmology.

Christopher Alexander assumed the real nature of human feeling

that human feeling is mostly the same, mostly the same from person to person, mostly same in every person.

Christopher Alexander 1

We do feel that there are different degrees of aliveness in things. This feeling is shared by almost everyone. Christopher Alexander tried to honor and respect the reality of this shared human feeling.

The Mechanistic World-Picture

How can we improve a situation when the causes of destruction are so deeply rooted in society?

Christopher Alexander came to believe that we are struggling with a conception of the world that essentially makes it impossible to make buildings well. Our effort is affected by the picture we have of things, the picture we have of the world. We have in us a world-picture that is essentially mechanical in nature, a mechanist-rationalist world-picture. It has entered us like an infection. It affects the way we think. It affects our values, our seeing, and our actions. The nature of order that lies at the root of the problem.

Everything in the world is governed by orderliness. Nature all of it is orderly. But we do not have a language for the presence of order we so clearly feel. How do we create order? What nature of order do we put in? Our assumptions about order enters explicitly in what we create.

What is the order itself? The harmonious coherence which fills and touches us cannot be represented by a mechanism.

Yet it is this harmony, this aspect of order, which impresses us and moves us when we see it in the world.

Christopher Alexander 2

The mechanistic view of order always makes us miss the essential thing. The beauty and order we see cannot be expressed mechanically.

The mechanistic idea of order can be traced to Descartes. His idea was that if you want to know how something works, pretend that it is a machine. It is a convenient way of thinking, something we do to reality in order to understand it. It is not how reality is. A world built only out of mental machines has no feeling of value in it. Value has become a matter of opinion, not intrinsic to the nature of the world.

The mechanistic idea tells us very little about the deep order we feel intuitively to be in the world.

Christopher Alexander 3

The Nature of Deep Order

The real nature of deep order depends on what we recognize as being able to be true or false. In the world-view of Descartes only statements about mechanisms are factual. In the world-view Christopher Alexander is presenting, statements about the relative degree of life, degree of harmony, or degree of wholeness statements about value are also factual. They play a more fundamental role than statements about mechanisms. This is why the view of order which Christopher Alexander presents involves a change of world-view.

Within a world-view in which statements about value are not allowed to be considered as potentially true or false, statements of value are only statements of arbitrary and private opinion. The main philosophical assumption which underlies Christopher Alexander’s arguments is that statements about value can be true. This extended idea of truth is not only objective, but is also directly linked to people’s feelings.

What we need is a sharable point of view…so that we can work together not by confrontation and argument but because we share a single holistic view of the unitary goal of life.

Christopher Alexander 4

Christopher Alexander believed that we need a new view of the world which intentionally sees things in their wholeness, not as parts, and which recognizes life as something real. The relative degree of harmony, or life, or wholeness are basic aspects of order.

The Broad Conception of Life

Christopher Alexander looked for a broad conception of life in which each thing has some degree of life. What he meant, in general, was that every single part of the matter-space continuum has life to some degree.

…we experience degree of life as an essential concept which goes to the heart of our feelings about the natural world, and which nourishes us fundamentally, as a fact about the world.

Christopher Alexander 5

Life exists as a quality. What we feel as life happens just as much in a building as it happens i a biologically living system. Life is a quality of space itself. Life, which we experience as the sun in the face and the wind in the hair, is something which has been removed from our picture of the world.

The quality of life includes us, as human beings. A place which has the deepest life is one in which I reach a deeper level of life inside my self…

Christopher Alexander 6

The quality of life is a pervasive one. The difference in degree of life that we discern is not subjective, but objective. In order to understand life as a phenomenon, Christopher Alexander defined something he called wholeness and centers, the building blocks of wholeness.

…the wholeness is made of parts; the parts are created by the wholeness.

Christopher Alexander 7

After many years of thinking, Christopher Alexander believed that he was able to define the wholeness of a given situation in mathematical language. The general idea is that wholeness in any part of space is defined by the coherent entities that exist in that part of space, and the way these entities are nested in and overlap each other.

The entities are features of the space itself. They are physically and mathematically real. We may think of these entities as parts, or as local wholes, or sub-wholes. They are often created by the wholeness. Each one of these entities exist as a local center within a larger whole. We experience it as a center. It is a phenomenon of centeredness.

There is a mathematical reason for thinking of the coherent entities as centers. The centers always become centers as a result of the configuration as a whole. They are focal points in a larger unbroken whole. The wholeness in any part of space is highly fluid. It changes continuously through time. The centers are formed within the wholeness. The whole is not created out of them. They are modified and adapted by their position within the whole. They are similar, but different.

Wholeness always exists, whether the place is good or bad, lifeless or alive. But the degree of life which exists at that place also comes from the wholeness. Life comes from it. The unfolding wholeness might one day be understood as underlying the entirety of everything we know as nature. Centers exist throughout the natural world. It is real physical organization. The strength of any center is a measure of its organization. The stronger the center, the more powerful its impact on other centers.

The Fifteen Fundamental Properties

Christopher Alexander began to notice that buildings and objects which have life have certain characteristics. He identified those examples which had greater life or wholeness judged by the degree of wholeness they induced in him, assuming what he felt was real, reliable, and shared with others.

Christopher Alexander identified fifteen fundamental properties. They occur repeatedly in those artifacts which have life. They also occur repeatedly throughout all of nature. The fifteen properties are interdependent. This interdependence seems to contain a hint of something else, which somehow lies behind the properties.

The fifteen properties are rough approximations of some deeper structure, some deeper order. This deeper order is something which allows the fifteen properties to emerge from it. This something is some kind of field in which centers create wholeness and wholeness intensifies centers. Wholeness occurs in space as an attribute of space itself.9

Update 2022-10-01: Text below added.

Christopher Alexander’s fifteen properties appear again and again, at every scale, in nature. The specific centers can often be explained as a result of mechanical processes. However, these mechanical explanations do not explain why the properties appear over a wide range of scales. They appear at both microscopic and macroscopic scales. The fifteen properties are the ways in which centers sustain each other’s coherence.

The appearance of these properties is linked to the stability and robustness, of the world.

Christopher Alexander 10

The fifteen properties represent fundamental ways in which space can create structure that is capable of having interactions with other structures. The properties are responsible for the robust and practical character of nature. They arise because of the character of living structure. The properties come from an evolving morphology which works.

The repeated appearance of the fifteen properties and their role in creating life in space suggest a view of all of nature as living structure. These structures appear in all natural structures.

…nature as a whole all of it is made of living structure.

Christopher Alexander 11

The living character of living structures is what Christopher Alexander calls the living character of nature. Each wholeness which comes into being in nature preserves the structure of the previous wholeness. All of nature is unfolded wholeness-preserving structure. Unfolding wholeness creates living structure.

Update 2022-09-28: Text below added.

A New View of Nature

The concept of wholeness depends on the idea that different centers have different degrees of life. Every part of nature has its wholeness and degrees of life. The relative degree of life in different parts of matter is a fundamental feature of reality. Different centers have more or less life. Material structures in which centers have more life are inherently more valuable. The harmony of life is something to rejoice in and to protect.

Value, emerging as a deeper life in the wholeness of the world, turns out to be a fundamental aspect of nature itself.

Christopher Alexander 12

Often our actions are att odds with the wholeness of the world, and our own wholeness. Our actions may reach deeper of value by increasing wholeness, or they may break down value by destroying wholeness. Life will increase, or decrease, according to the degree of wholeness that is upheld, or not. Actions which contribute to the wholeness in the world are of vital importance.

1. Christopher Alexander, The Nature of Order: An Essay on the Art of Building and the Nature of the Universe, Book 1 – The Phenomenon of Life, p. 3.
2. Ibid., p. 15.
3. Ibid., p. 16.
4. Ibid., p. 21.
5. Ibid., p. 35.
6. Ibid., p. 61.
7. Ibid., p. 84.
8. Ibid., pp. 239–41.
9. Ibid., p. 238.
10. Ibid., p. 292.
11. Ibid..
12. Ibid., p. 294.

Related post:
We nurture order into being
We can only see deeper order with the heart