I consider the domain of Disorder key in Cynefin and sense-making, and understanding its significance was a Heideggerian moment of poiesis for me; the bringing-forth, unconceling something that was concealed, to quote from my polemical essay on Authenticity.
I went through my Twitter history on Disorder, and aggregated some thoughts on Disorder, as they would appear relevant. I’ve expanded some of them from the brevity of Twitter.
The most neglected domain in #Cynefin – disorder, inauthentic – is also probably the most important for understanding the nature of Cynefin.
Inauthentic(ity) (disorder) is a type of an ontological error and a cause for cognitive bias. It’s where we are most of times.
We engage in sense-making to move towards authenticity of agency but it’s a dynamical process, not a one-off categorisation.
Sense-making in Cynefin usually begins from the domain of ‘Inauthentic’ Disorder, from phenomenological apperception.
Inauthenticity is always present as a gradient in every Cynefin domain as fuzzy boundary conditions.
Inauthentic disorder is why we engage in sense-making and why Cynefin is dynamical sense-making framework.
Inauthentic refers to inauthentic ontological awareness. We engage in sense-making to shift agency towards authenticity.
Authentic agency is ontologically advised and epistemically validated motivation.
When our actions are informed and autonomous, not compliant or conformist, when they are consistent, aware and situated, they’re authentic.
Sense-making can advise agency towards authenticity, while true authenticity remains unattainable.