Conversation as means to collectively make sense of the world
Why I want to talk to you
I want to do more than just talk to you. I want to let go of who I am and immerse myself in understanding who you are and how you see the world. I want to understand you. I want you to know that I understand you. And then I want to share some of my own perspectives, my vulnerabilities, my thoughts and my fears. I want us to be able to disagree gracefully, without hating each other, but with love and curiosity. Do you think this is possible? Are you curious and want to know why this is one of my greatest wishes?
Okay, so let’s be frank. I may be a little selfish. I want to understand the world better. I want to determine the best way to devote my time to serve Life, Sentient Beings, Humanity and help as much as possible to alleviate present and future suffering. I am a wishing child. I am also an observant, watchful child, and I see that the world is complex (read the story of the Cosmic Fig Tree). The kinds of problems that interest me are more than complicated, they are complex.
When I think about climate change and the collapse of ecosystems, the possibility of a new pandemic, the risk of nuclear war, or the question of artificial intelligence perhaps taking over and creating a better or worse place on this little blue globe we call home, I am overwhelmed and drowning in a sea of certainties and uncertainties. I realize that there is probably not a single person in the Universe who can know the answer by themselves, and that most importantly, even if that person exists, they are not me!
To tackle such problems, I think we need collaboration, a coherent collective intelligence, as it emerges from conversations in which different perspectives are discussed honestly and genuinely, with listening and understanding granted. I need your help to understand these problems, I need your help to grow so I can serve more effectively, and who knows, maybe we could work together to solve some?
Let’s go into a bit more detail below.
Different models of reality, different perspectives, better common sense or conflict?
Enough listening to me, let’s start by listening to Tom Atlee. Why? He appears to me to be someone who has dedicated a lot of his life to democracy and self organizing systems, which makes him an expert in my eyes.
His early co-intelligence research in the late 1980s focused on the relationship between group dynamics and collective intelligence. Beginning in the mid-1990s through the mid-2000s, his focus shifted to developing society's capacity to function as a wise democracy. From 2005-2010 he explored possibilities for the conscious evolution of social systems, grounded in a sacred science-based understanding of evolutionary dynamics. During 2011-2015 he focused on public wisdom, co-intelligent economics and participatory sustainability. Seeking more practice-based ways to engage people around the idea of wise democracy, he is now doing courses and developing a community of practice around the wise democracy pattern language.
I find in this discussion a very interesting way to model reality. I’ve had some thoughts about models of reality before, so it’s particularly interesting for me.
As I understand it, reality is defined here as everything that exists, whether we believe in it or not. For example, to quote Richard Dawkins, airplanes will fly whether we believe it or not.
My model of reality overlaps somewhat with this reality. This is what constitutes my understanding and experience. We can call this signal. It also contains something that is not real, certain prejudices, assumptions, illusions, and so on. We can call this noise.
You also have a model of reality similar to mine. Our models intersect. We know intuitively when they cross, because that’s what we have in common. We like to talk about that because we are social animals and we like to have things in common with each other. There are also parts that don’t cross. We don’t like to talk about that. If you question my model of reality with different beliefs, I might feel threatened and I might try to persuade you that my reality is more real than yours. Disagreement doesn’t feel good, so sometimes we come to an impasse. We agree that there is no reality, and that my perspective cannot be more real than yours, nor yours more real than mine. And yet, planes continue to fly, even if we agree that this is not the case.
Worse yet, if my reality model doesn’t correspond to yours at all, you probably think I’m crazy or stupid. And yet, how beautiful it can be when we are open and curious, when we are genuinely interested in one another, when we connect, and how amazing it is sometimes when we change our perspective and change our respective models of reality. I wonder, in those brief moments of connection, if this is not what universal love is like and appreciate when for a fraction of a second we forget that we are separated, and think that we are one.
But why are these moments so rare? Why do some conversations feel like war with words? What happened to the first agreement from Don Miguel Ruiz, “Be Impeccable With Your Word”?
Seek first to understand, and then to me understood
O divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek... To be consoled as to console, To be understood as to understand, To be loved as to love; For it is in giving that we receive;
Again, why believe me, let’s listen to Forest Landry.
Forrest Landry is a philosopher, founder, writer, researcher, scientist, engineer, and craftsman. He has a unique set of skills in large scale systems design and worked on many software projects in the business and government sectors. His most original and insightful work is in the area of metaphysics – the study of what is, what is the nature of being, what is the nature of knowing, and by what means we make good choices. His foundational work “The Immanent Metaphysics” reflects a decades long effort to restore legitimacy to the practice of metaphysics and construct a rigorous, coherent and precise statement of Ethics.
This video begins like this article, explaining why conversation is important for collaboration, and why collaboration is important if we are trying to make sense and solve problems that cannot be solved by any one of us.
For me, the most beautiful part of the conversation was when Forest described an idea he had, three rights that a participant in a conversation can grant to other participants in order to have a meaningful and enjoyable collaborative conversation in which coherence can be achieved.
- the right to speak
- the right to be understood
- the right to know that they have been understood.
It is not the first time I heard this insight. In the highly acclaimed book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen Covey tells us about the importance of empathetic listening to genuinely understand a person the same in habit 6 of interdependence, “Seek first to understand, then to be understood”.
Easier said than done if you ask me! If it were easy, St. Francis would not have included it in his prayer.
Less inclined to judge, more inclined to seek out more perspectives with which we agree the least
Never criticize a person until you've walked a mile in his moccasins.
Listening is important, and the ability to disagree gracefully is something I feel I need to practice. I have found some useful tips in the following clip from Daniel Schmachtenberger.
Growing up home-schooled, Daniel had early exposure to design science (Buckminster Fuller, Jacques Fresco, Permaculture, etc.), systems science and complexity (Fritjof Capra, Stuart Kauffman, etc.), philosophy and psychology (eastern and western approaches), and activism (animal rights, environmental issues, social justice, etc.) His passion has always been at the intersection of these topics – specifically, facilitating the emergence into a mature civilization – that can prevent otherwise impending catastrophes, remediate existing damage, make possible a radically higher quality of life for all sustainably, and support greater realization of our individual and collective potential.
Daniel is slowly emerging as one of the world’s greatest thinkers when it comes to complex systems, sense making and catastrophic risks. I go to Facebook mostly for one reason lately, to see what he shares on his page. His personal website is full of some of the most useful information I ran across, including an amazing list of resources, which must not be overlooked.
In this video, Daniel takes another step in the direction of the seeking to understand. He tells us that if there are whole sections of the population for whom we cannot understand why they believe what they believe, and for whom we think they are all bad or wicked, we should be doubtful about our own model of reality. He advises us to change our hats, or put on their shoes, and begin to assimilate the news and information that they assimilate, however difficult that may be for us.
Daniel explains that in every position there is a little bit of signal and a little bit of noise. He tells us that only by being able to tell where the signal and the noise are can we synthesize and become good at making sense. He also advises us that if all we feel is a sense of outrage or fear, chances are we have been captured by a narrative war, which we now take for our own reason. I feel like this has happened to me, and not just once.
One for All and All for One
Divide et Impera
A Captain should endeavor with every art to divide the forces of the enemy
Each group…considers its own standards ultimate and indisputable, and tends to dismiss all contrary or different standards as indefensible.
As an activist for social change, I have felt first-hand what happens when our movements are not united – failure. I have written extensively about my belief in the need for unity here. I feel that we live in a very polarized and divided society. Cognitive science professor George Lakoff explains this by telling us that the left is too focused on getting things done and not enough on the process. I tend to agree, we don’t have enough think tanks. His reflections on metaphors and framing are very important in any discussion about understanding and dialogue. The video below is one of the best summaries I have heard so far
The validity of different perspectives is super important. Seeking to understand the other’s point of view before explaining ours is super important. Seeking many other perspectives that are different from the ones we already have is super important. This is the basis for healthy dialogue. Perspectives emerge from both their context and our brains, so it is useful to be able to approximate some of the metaphors that influence our most common perspectives, as well as to understand how to frame our own perspectives so that they can be easily grasped.
This video introduces the idea of metaphors in thought, and framing in ideologies. It also addresses the morality of conservatives and liberals with a useful metaphor. Although it is an oversimplification, I find it a useful model of reality.
"We have a metaphor that the nation is a family. We have Founding Fathers, we send our sons and daughters to war, we have homeland security, we don't want missiles in our backyard and so on and so on. And the idea that occurred to me is that if that's the case, if you have two different views of the nation, you may have two different views of the family. So I worked backwards. I took the two different views of the nation, worked backwards through the metaphor and out popped two different views of the family."
Strict father / Conservative Model
- the father knows best
- the father knows right from wrong
- the job of the father to support and protect the family
- with respect to children, the job of the father is to teach them right from wrong so they have the right moral views
- once the child learns right from wrong he is on his own, dependence is bad for the child
- free market is good
- pull yourself up from the bootstraps
Nurturant Parent / Progressive Model
- feel their job is to empathize with their child
- know what their child needs
- have open two-way discussions with their child
- humans are rational and can tell right from wrong
- equality is important
The truth is that reality is much more nuanced. Both models are right, or at least partially right, with some signal and some noise. But without communication, or communion, there is no union, there is only division. Lakoff also shows not only the division between right and left, but also that the progressive side is more divided than the left. The conservatives understood that they had to unite their voices. An important step for this right-wing union was the 1971 memo written by Collin Powell, calling on all businessmen and corporations (U.S. Chamber of Commerce) to unite to avoid attacks from the left, especially those made by the “perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians”. It is worth listening to the video to understand this better.
The Culture War of 2020
When we talk about perspectives and models of reality, in 2020 we no longer have simple left/right models like those described above by Lakoff. Partly due to the rise of social networks and the decline of media, a new “culture war” with many perspectives has taken shape. It is described in the article “MEMETIC TRIBES AND CULTURE WAR 2.0” and in the following video. I believe it is important to understand these metaphors and memetic tribes, even if they are an oversimplification of reality, in order to understand how we can fall prey to group thinking and be more forgiving and less critical of those who belong to different groups.
The power of compassion and empathy
Ayishat Akanbi is a cultural commentator, stylist and artist. Through her work and wide online audience, she addresses complex issues about life in today’s society. I find her views incredibly moving and powerful. I chose to end this opinion piece on dialogue and perspectives with her incredible video. In it she analyzes what she describes as the problem of wakefulness. “To be wake”, according to her definition, is to be conscious of many injustices in the world. As a vegan activist, as an environmental activist, I feel concerned about this problem. I think it’s very important to listen to this video, to be aware that sometimes, in trying to alleviate suffering, we forget compassion in favor of moral superiority, although I’m sure it’s unintentional, and that it can cause unintentional damage, even if it’s not by choosing the most effective method of communication.
I ended with her speech because I believe that her words and attitude embody the practice of many of the concepts discussed in this article. I wish to make sense of the world, I wish not to judge others without understanding them, and I wish not to be judged without being understood. Dialogue and active listening to others can change us, change our models of reality, and as we find common ground, I hope that we will realize that our personal and collective interests are not so far apart. In doing so, we can grow together and transform the world, from a place where there is a “win-lose” mentality to one where we seek individual and collective victory, for our generation and the next, for our species and all others, because our fates are interconnected and bound together. Of course, it is important to take care of ourselves and those we love, but love and compassion are not limited, they can be universal, and if we treat everyone with love, we will be treated with love.
Unity starts with you and me. World healing starts with you and me. Would you like to talk?
More Sense Making Advice from Daniel Schmachtenberger
Dear reader. Thank you for going this far. I don’t expect you to take the time to go through all these resources, I understand that you are busy and that time is our most valuable resource.
On the other hand, I need a place to store these amazing videos, so that I can come back and watch them again and again (as I said in this article, I quit my job, so now I can spend my time doing things that are less urgent, yet more valuable to me).
Please forgive me if I have stored them here.
