| How the World Works |
| A Participatory Discussion |
This is a discussion all of us are having all the time. All of our
actions, all of our interactions, all of our conversations are based
upon our beliefs about how the world works. We try to show others
that we understand their world view by being good students, good
teachers, good citizens. But more than this, we try to convince
others that we have a unique contribution to make - that there is
something we know about how the world works that they do not yet
know.
Unfortunately, many of us have not been consciously aware that this
is what we are doing. Therefore, I will draw your awareness now to
my assertion. Is this what we are doing? Think about it. What do
you think we're doing?
Given my assertion, I propose we do what we are doing anyway,
but do so deliberately and with conscious awareness. So far, I
believe we have been awkward and non-productive in this
discussion. We have dominated others through emotional displays
and social alignments, but we have done nothing but run in circles
when it comes to the problems we perennially seem to face. We
have been competitive, but our competition with one another has
been defensive and alienating. Our primitive and unexamined wishes
have been to maim or annihilate our opposition. No wonder we
have had such a hard time getting along. No wonder we have
become covert in our wishes and in our thinking. If we do not
expose our ideas, they cannot be refuted.
Unfortunately, avoiding open discussion deprives us of checks and
balances. Bad ideas go unchallenged and uncorrected. It is no
wonder we live in a crazy and divided world.
It is my belief that we all have, not only an opportunity, but a
responsibility to participate deliberately and consciously in the
discussion of how the world works. Open competition of ideas need
not be defensive, reactive and alienating but may be initiated in good
faith, responsive and cooperative. For all our aggressive posturings
about the superiority of our own world view, most of us would be
thrown off guard if we were asked, flat out, to tell someone how the
world works.
I believe that the way out of our collective psychosis and folly is to
ask this question regularly. If we ask it of ourselves, we will surely
find that there is much we do not know. If we ask it of others, we
will surely find that others have much to teach. The discussion can
begin to bring us to an increasingly conscious approach to life.
Solutions and possibility may become suddenly more accessible. If
you agree with my assertion that we have already been asking this
question, you may also agree that we have already been answering it.
What then is the answer to the question? How does the world
work?
actions, all of our interactions, all of our conversations are based
upon our beliefs about how the world works. We try to show others
that we understand their world view by being good students, good
teachers, good citizens. But more than this, we try to convince
others that we have a unique contribution to make - that there is
something we know about how the world works that they do not yet
know.
Unfortunately, many of us have not been consciously aware that this
is what we are doing. Therefore, I will draw your awareness now to
my assertion. Is this what we are doing? Think about it. What do
you think we're doing?
Given my assertion, I propose we do what we are doing anyway,
but do so deliberately and with conscious awareness. So far, I
believe we have been awkward and non-productive in this
discussion. We have dominated others through emotional displays
and social alignments, but we have done nothing but run in circles
when it comes to the problems we perennially seem to face. We
have been competitive, but our competition with one another has
been defensive and alienating. Our primitive and unexamined wishes
have been to maim or annihilate our opposition. No wonder we
have had such a hard time getting along. No wonder we have
become covert in our wishes and in our thinking. If we do not
expose our ideas, they cannot be refuted.
Unfortunately, avoiding open discussion deprives us of checks and
balances. Bad ideas go unchallenged and uncorrected. It is no
wonder we live in a crazy and divided world.
It is my belief that we all have, not only an opportunity, but a
responsibility to participate deliberately and consciously in the
discussion of how the world works. Open competition of ideas need
not be defensive, reactive and alienating but may be initiated in good
faith, responsive and cooperative. For all our aggressive posturings
about the superiority of our own world view, most of us would be
thrown off guard if we were asked, flat out, to tell someone how the
world works.
I believe that the way out of our collective psychosis and folly is to
ask this question regularly. If we ask it of ourselves, we will surely
find that there is much we do not know. If we ask it of others, we
will surely find that others have much to teach. The discussion can
begin to bring us to an increasingly conscious approach to life.
Solutions and possibility may become suddenly more accessible. If
you agree with my assertion that we have already been asking this
question, you may also agree that we have already been answering it.
What then is the answer to the question? How does the world
work?
This discussion is the very
essence of this website. I
invite that discussion here
and have created a link by
which I may be e-mailed
directly from this site. I
also encourage you to have
this discussion formally with
friends, associates, and
colleagues. Informally and
spontaneously, I invite you
to have this discussion with
everyone you meet.
essence of this website. I
invite that discussion here
and have created a link by
which I may be e-mailed
directly from this site. I
also encourage you to have
this discussion formally with
friends, associates, and
colleagues. Informally and
spontaneously, I invite you
to have this discussion with
everyone you meet.
Buckminster Fuller and
Margaret Meade each
expressed confidence in
the ability of small groups
of people, thoughtful and
focused, to solve most of
the problems that the
world has known and most
of the problems that the
world is likely to know.
Margaret Meade each
expressed confidence in
the ability of small groups
of people, thoughtful and
focused, to solve most of
the problems that the
world has known and most
of the problems that the
world is likely to know.
| Rules of Engagement |
1. These rules will govern any interaction in which a focused topic is
to be discussed seriously and productively.
2. We will not suffer fools gladly. That is, we do not have the time,
patience, nor the inclination to engage in discussion which deviates
from these rules.
3. Emotion will be examined rationally.
4. Social custom will be examined rationally.
5. Under no circumstance will emotion or social custom trump
articulated reason.
6. Although a person may exit a discussion at any time for any
reason, doing so will not "end" the discussion. It will simply mean
that person is no longer choosing to participate actively.
7. Departures should be accompanied by a statement of
self-awareness. Repeated premature departures will be confronted.
8. Many models will be accepted (models, meaning metaphor).
Comprehensive models will be encouraged.
9. Inconsistencies will be confronted.
10. Negation will be encouraged. Negation can be the generation
of unanticipated inconsistencies (hypothetical exceptions). This will
help a person with a specific theory to move toward a general theory.
11. There will be rules of order. Participants will not talk at the
same time, but will take turns. Those who go on too long will be
confronted. Those who are silent will be encouraged to speak.
to be discussed seriously and productively.
2. We will not suffer fools gladly. That is, we do not have the time,
patience, nor the inclination to engage in discussion which deviates
from these rules.
3. Emotion will be examined rationally.
4. Social custom will be examined rationally.
5. Under no circumstance will emotion or social custom trump
articulated reason.
6. Although a person may exit a discussion at any time for any
reason, doing so will not "end" the discussion. It will simply mean
that person is no longer choosing to participate actively.
7. Departures should be accompanied by a statement of
self-awareness. Repeated premature departures will be confronted.
8. Many models will be accepted (models, meaning metaphor).
Comprehensive models will be encouraged.
9. Inconsistencies will be confronted.
10. Negation will be encouraged. Negation can be the generation
of unanticipated inconsistencies (hypothetical exceptions). This will
help a person with a specific theory to move toward a general theory.
11. There will be rules of order. Participants will not talk at the
same time, but will take turns. Those who go on too long will be
confronted. Those who are silent will be encouraged to speak.
Below is an example of a set of rules which may govern an intentional
and focused discussion with real groups of people interested in
consciously musing on the workings of the world: This is just an
example. You may choose the parameters for your own group.
and focused discussion with real groups of people interested in
consciously musing on the workings of the world: This is just an
example. You may choose the parameters for your own group.
Christian Wolff, MA, Licensed Psychologist Associate
Copyright, 2003
Copyright, 2003
| CHRISTIAN WOLFF, MA Licensed Psychologist Associate/Consultant 820 NW 21st Avenue, Suite B . Portland. Oregon . 97209 . 503-284-4501 . christian@christianwolff.com |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |