Governance as an ongoing process of puzzle resolution

Interplay of Sustainable Development Goals through Rubik Cube Variations (Part #8)

Cyclic dynamic: Use of the term "goal" in both the MDGs and the SDGs reinforces the implication that the relevant strategic processes involve a linear progression towards such a goal -- possibly to be understood as a form of singularity characterized by "sustainability".

This assumption is questionable from a variety of perspectives which could fruitfully inform comprehension of the requisite forms of governance. Obvious examples have been articulated in terms of the adaptive cycle (with its associated resilience). Also of relevance are emerging insights regarding the desirability of a circular economy. The possibility of sustainability is also challenged by widely evident tendencies towards collapse -- as the antithesis of sustainability (Convergence of 30 Disabling Global Trends: mapping the social climate change engendering a perfect storm, 2012). A valuable perspective with respect to the nature and allure of the elusive state of sustainability is offered by David Kahn:

To benefit from a Rubik's Cube, we must first understand the idea of flow. According to psychology professor Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, flow is a "state of intense focus and crisp sense of clarity where you forget yourself, lose track of time, and feel like you're part of something larger". It is at these moments of flow state when we're experiencing our greatest engagement, fulfillment, and creativity. (Rubik's Cubes, Flow State, and Continuous Challenges, leadersayswhat, 5 August 2015)

Patterns of flow: With respect to innovation, related insights are offered by Paul Hobcraft (A Rubik Cube Approach for Innovation, Innovation Excellence, 23 April 2012):

We need to see innovation as an entire structure where we constantly need to move the parts. We always want to seek alignment, perfect alignment. That dream of achieving all, within that specific aspect of innovation we are attempting, is fully lined up and then we are content. Impossible! What we fail to realize is that the total structure within innovation is always turning; it is always altering its 'face' to adapt to the changes to which we need to adapt. We can never achieve perfect alignment, the makeup of innovation is constantly changing, so what we must do is keep moving the different 'faces' around to meet at best, a temporary alignment. That is the best we can really do....Attempting to align anything needs movement, a sequence of moves. Well if you think about it to achieve a certain innovation 'state' you need to bring a number of aspects or faces to closer alignment but these do need a planned sequence of moves in most cases. Relying alone on serendipity just may not work.

Yes the Rubik Cube feels often like innovation, you change one part and it has its consequences on another. When you reflect on all the permutations required in innovation you recognise it is a constant, evolving, ever-changing puzzle. For me the enjoyment of the Rubik Cube is to keep thinking and moving around the different parts.

Learning metaphors: Other insights into governance are evident from the well-explored metaphor of yachting -- given the probability of crises and the need to be able to adapt to them. Yachting and similar challenging contexts frame the need for continuing learning (and lifelong education) -- a theme cultivated by UNESCO, but not applied to the UN system as a whole.

Use of Rubik-style cubes embodies the challenges of learning in a variety of ways. As such cube usage can be fruitfully explored as a metaphor in its own right. This merits consideration in the light of the arguments cited above by George Lakoff and Rafael Nuñez (Where Mathematics Comes From: how the embodied mind brings mathematics into being, 2001). These notably focus on fundamental cognitive metaphors -- of which those of the directionality characteristic of politics merit careful attention: left-right, up-down, front-back 9as noted above).

There is a curious irony to the manner in which Rubik's Cube constitutes a remarkable form of "container" for the specific arguments of cognitive psychology regarding the so-called "container metaphor" and related cognitive operators (George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, Metaphors We Live By, 1980). The irony is especially evident in the manner in which people have "in their hands" a mnemonic learning device with implications for psychosocial development beyond its recognized function as a "brain game".

Psychosocial implications of cubing algorithms? Such directions are fundamental to consideration of a Rubik-style cube and the possibilities of its fruitful manipulation towards a desirable solution. As is evident from the many explanations of how to solve such a cube, it is in such terms that a cube is apprehended for that purpose. The particular gestures, and their sequence, are therefore highly suggestive of a sequence of operations of relevance to achievement of sustainability through appropriate governance. Especially intriguing is the manner in which there is a need to alternate between the various directions. The cube cannot be solved by repeatedly performing a particular operation -- turning to the right, for example. All six directions figure in any process of solution -- involving a twisting motion recalling the arguments for a paradoxical "cognitive twist" and its potential relation to navigation of the adpative cycle.

Potentially relevant is also unexamined cultural bias favouring particular styles of directionality, as separately explored (Unquestioned Bias in Governance from Direction of Reading? Political implications of reading from left-to-right, right-to-left, or top-down, 2016).

Also of interest is the sense in which there is not one single solution process but a multiplicity. Extensive documentation is available on each of them (Marc Anderson Beginner's Guide to the Rubik'sCube: solution reminder; How to Solve a Rubik's Cube (Easy Move Notation, WikiHow; How to Solve the Rubik's Cube WikiBooks). These may be distinguished by their difficulty (as with ascending a mountain) and interest. In some cases the explanations may themselves be less than readily comprehensible -- except to the few. This helps to frame the question as to how readly comprehensible is assumed to be the process of progression towards sustainability.

Metaphorical "translation" of cubing operations -- towards sustainable solutions? Given the arguments of cognitive psychology regarding the embodied mind, it would be intriguing -- if only as a mnemonic exercise -- to interpret the nature and directionality of the "moves" required for the most direct solution of Rubik's Cube, with the nature of those moves recognized in metaphorical terms as having sociopolitical implications. The provocative implication in democratic terms is the alternation in direction required for resolution -- understood in terms of progressive achievement of sustainability.

There are many presentations of sequences of moves which lend themselves to creative decoding or reinterpretation. A preliminary exercise would clearly be relevant to the pattern of 8 Millennium Development Goals on a Rubik's Cube. The principles could also be applied to the 16 Sustainable Development Goals on a Rubik's Revenge (Rubik's Revenge Solution Guide, 1997; Rubik's Revenge Solution Moves List). Detailed argument and illustrations lend themselves to interpretation from that perspective, as provided by Jared Weed (Sub-Optimal Multi-Phase Path Planning: a method for solving Rubik's Revenge, 2016). Also of relevance is the detailed argument of Csaba Fogarassy (The Interpretation of Sustainability Criteria using Game Theory Models: sustainable project development with Rubik's Cube solution, 2014).

The argument is especially relevant given the role foreseen for artificial intelligence and its potentially implications for decision-making and governance. Clearly the potential patterns of moves have already been decoded or encoded for the solution of Rubik's Cube by such applications (Trevor Mogg, Robot enters record books for lightning quick Rubik's Cube solution, Digital Trends, 6 March 2017; Robot claims fastest Rubik's Cube solving time, BBC News, 9 November 2016). The question is whether the thinking involved can be translated meaningfully into insights into the stages in solving the challenges of governance towards sustainability. Especially interesting is the sense in which the solution of a Rubik's Cube is a multi-stage process in which many steps may well be counter-intuitive -- contrasting with the unfruitful obvious steps which are typically "on the table".

Given the stages in the process of any solution in which the preliminary challenge is to achieve a particular mix of face colours on a face, it would be especially interesting to note the potential significance of such patterns in psychosocial terms.