Month: June 2021

Should the future be tribes?

Is it that we have to draw ourselves together in groups? As if, our concept of identity not quite able to stretch to the broadest sense of “human”, we need some interim place to feel we belong. Maybe it’s simply “true” that we need more accessible, manageable groupings within that larger body of humanity; in that we can’t quite imagine our place in life without such dividing lines between us.

Often, it just seems like new forms of nationalism – new interests, concerns, beliefs or practices that bind us toward those “like us”, as distinct from all those who think differently. As if, that old form of belonging breaking up, our psyches seek something to replace it, some new raft to cling to in the churning sea of other people.

Why is it, though, that we only seek to gather together with those like us? As if humanity’s something to be broken apart, sorted by type, arranged, categorised, and related to on that basis. The brain, perhaps, having been trained to see things that way: deconstructing reality into groups of what’s alike and what’s not. This tendency to notice differences and make them definitive.

Maybe, in some way, it’s because it allows “progress”? This notion of bringing together those with similar interests, concerns or experiences so as to work through, understand, dig deep, and develop theories or solutions in any particular area. Identity almost as these focus groups of those drawn toward similar issues; having had them brought to life through individual biography, personality or inclination.

In terms of personal or collective development, there must be value in such focussed conversation: that individually lived, communally felt concern over the value of certain things and the imperfection in how society’s approaching them. Almost as if we’re all grouping together around everything that could conceivably matter to humanity – clarifying problems, drawing them into focus, and demanding they be acknowledged.

To what extent are those distinct areas of interest able to co-exist, though? Are boundaries accommodating or aggressive? If each concern or identity is as a circle, can they overlap or dissolve to somehow merge into the broader, more inclusive area of shared interest? As with nations, it often seems we’re more inclined to fight over points of difference than agree over common ground or principles.

Maybe, in part, it’s that humanity’s challenge is to relate to those we see as different? To use groupings or identities as points of focus, then find ways to compassionately work alongside those drawn to other issues, concerns or experiences. As if what’s always been needed is that larger space or circle within which we can all express ourselves with mutual interest, recognition and respect.

Not to say any of that’s anything like easy, especially with identity dialled up as strongly as today, but where are we without it? If we’re not to fall back on divisions and conflicts similar to those experienced in the past, maybe we’re simply needing new ways to mediate the spaces between us.

Notes and References:

Threads, becoming a united whole
Nothing short of everything
Seeing where others are coming from
Humans, judgement & shutting down
What inspires collective endeavours
Authenticity & writing our own story
Rich complexity of human being
Bringing things into awareness
Do we live in different worlds?
Can each be true to themselves?

Ways to share this:

Trusting in thought, or yourself

What, exactly, should we trust in life? Between all the words, theories and beliefs, how are we to pin down our own sense of what it all means and the choices we’re facing? This sense in which we all, as individuals, must stand within this reality and decide for ourselves which options we’ll make part of our own personal response to existence. As if that’s what human life “is”.

How are we to build such a certainty? Map out a clear enough sense of modern realities – and, the historical or intellectual paths that led to them – within which we can confidently yet compassionately judge whatever might be placed before us. This idea that the mind must somehow reflect the nature, content and limitations of contemporary knowledge while still finding its way forward.

Because who’s to say the process of thought is infallible? Given all the ways flawed assumptions might derail logic and shunt us into versions of reality not quite capable of capturing life’s fullness. Each perhaps tending toward taking thought in service of self to spin events into narratives that shore up our own personal psychology, how are we ever to bring that into a mutually compatible whole?

In many ways, it just seems we occupy an interesting position, as humans: these strangely independent creatures intent on forming our own ideas to make our own decisions based on our own personal sense of reality. As if, within each mind, everything stands reflected in its own distinct constellation of meaning; those contents then being the compass we’re using to guide our path.

Isn’t it all we have in life? This ability to think for ourselves. Not to “need” to rely on others’ judgement because we can create a clear enough understanding to judge for ourselves the rightness of whatever may be suggested. Isn’t that, perhaps, the “ideal” of the human being? Being able to stand alone and trust the contents of our own minds to guide our thinking.

For me, I’m generally wanting life reflected in a way that makes complete sense – without threats or blind trust being required when sheer honesty could perhaps serve better in letting us see where we stand, what’s being asked of us, and what might be at stake. Because, to what extent can we ever really trust others? As opposed to feeling secure in our own understanding of life and the future we’re serving to create.

Within complex modern realities, how can we wield our judgement with such a thorough understanding? Do we have a clear enough overarching sense of life’s divergent, competing or contradictory meanings? Have we truly grasped all the processes of life itself, be they natural, social or individual? What kinds of ripples or unintended consequences might be amassing from varying degrees of ignorance in any given area?

Sometimes it seems we just stand within rapidly shifting realities, battered by tides of opinion, struggling to retain that firm centre from which we need to navigate our way toward a better future.

Notes and References:

Seeing what things mean
If environment shapes us…
Do we need to understand the past?
Acclimatisation to a world of meaning
Can each be true to themselves?
Culture, thought & coexistence
Who can we turn to?
The trauma of ignorance
Intelligence, wisdom & common sense
Any choice but to take a stand?
What’s at the heart of society?
The courage & pain of change

Ways to share this:

Vigilance can take many forms

How are we to approach the complex reality of being alive? All these details that make up our lives; all the ways those activities come together; all the struggles we all have; all the weight and history behind the systems or bodies of thought our lives unfold within. This sense in which we’re all “here”, living lives at different points within the same reality, with our main uniting point perhaps being our humanity.

Increasingly, it seems we’re all drawn into this one conversation: this one body of activities where choices and their consequences ripple out to affect people living different lives in remote places. As if the web of modern capacities has extended to pull the whole world into one fairly immediate discussion around what it is to be human. A conversation in which we all have our part.

Within that picture, how are we to address all that needs to be resolved? If, in almost every aspect, imperfections are causing problems that are being felt by individual or collective people, beings or resources, how are we to draw attention to those causes in ways likely to raise the kind of compassionate awareness that can lead to sustained changes in everyone’s lives?

Isn’t that what’s needed? That we gain a realistic sense of what our lives “are” and the impacts they’re having. That we extend ourselves to the point of caring for beings other than ourselves. That such a comprehensive understanding would lead us to make informed, responsible decisions that rightfully preserve the interests and future of all beings calling this planet home.

After all, if the consequences of our actions are far-reaching, isn’t that the extent of our responsibility? Technologies may have stretched the scope of “community” to the point where few can honestly imagine all our lives now play into, but that can’t absolve us from needing to grasp the significance of our actions.

Given that scope, then, isn’t it perhaps more effective if we’re fighting important battles on all fronts? That, each person tackling whatever life brought most pressingly to their attention, they’ll most likely have the strength to see that battle through to its conclusion. This idea of complex realities “needing” the multi-pronged engagement of numerous committed individuals.

Idealistically, of course, everyone would care rightly for everything; but what if reaching that point takes time? It also seems we’re different in how we see things, how we frame them, how we need to discuss them, and how we feel it best to respond. Despite this being one conversation around one reality, how realistic is the notion of a one-size-fits-all approach to change?

What if, somehow, life needs each person to push forward in whatever areas matter most to them while simultaneously finding ways to listen to the concerns of those equally passionate about other causes? Rather than disparate priorities cancelling one another out, feeling glad that we’re all, in our own ways, on the same side in striving to redress the many imperfections of modern life.

Notes and References:

The battlegrounds of our minds
Appreciating other ways of being
Bringing things into awareness
Times of revelation
Anger, and where we direct it
Can each be true to themselves?
Somewhere between ideals & realities
The courage & pain of change
Ways of being & what’s getting left out
Has everything already been said?
All we’re trying to uphold

Ways to share this:

Gatekeepers in our lives

Who is it that gives approval, letting things happen and changing the lives of the rest of us? Those whose decisions, somehow, carry weight. Who are in those positions and how’s their role exercised? Is it done based on individual perspectives and inclinations, or by applying specific ways of thinking in any particular area? Given we all tend to stand within pre-existing bodies of thought, how free or inclusive is this likely to be?

Maybe we’re all simply gatekeepers, in our own corner of things? Within our personal lives and those groupings – family, workplace, friendships – where our views count. Each of us deciding what we’ll let in, give power, or allow to happen. As if we’re all just passing judgement; accepting or rejecting whatever passes before us; forming our own ideas of what it means and if it matters.

At the level of society, we’ve perhaps always had people or institutions in such roles: those shining their light on things while others listen. This sense of societies having places where voices can be heard; and, ideas as to who should be speaking. Although, at this point in time, it’s all just seeming quite set in its ways with positions established, arguments worked through, and little more to say but agree or disagree.

How are we to become conscious of these power structures and the intentions or awareness of those filling them? Because, who’s to say whose perspective is perfect enough to be considered definitive? Who knows enough of everything to truly judge how things stand and what’s for the best? Whose version of reality gets to win out, between these voices?

Increasingly, it’s seeming hard to say what things mean and how much they matter: whose views are to determine our ideas of the realities around us, into which ours are woven? Given such decisions shape our actions, conveying “our” sense of meaning to all those on the receiving ends of our judgement, it’s interesting to imagine exactly where our thinking – or, confidence – are coming from.

Isn’t reality a strangely interwoven web? So many lives and ideas flowing together. Different personalities, priorities and experiences glancing off one another to reflect, deflect or amplify things in any number of complicated directions. This doesn’t seem a simple, linear situation where one-size-fits-all judgements are likely to work. How are we to accommodate or resolve such complexities?

For some reason, it’s also seeming increasingly easy to pass judgement and assume reality should bend to meet our pre-existing ideas of how it must be. Aren’t we encouraged to think that way? To constantly cast forth definitive statements, carving “life” up with whatever lines we feel inclined to draw. While that way of approaching things may “help” in many areas, isn’t it inherently divisive?

Maybe, though, it’s simply where we stand, as humans: our minds being that threshold for deciding how we’ll see and respond to life. In which case, the burden of examining our thoughts and understanding their context perhaps just falls on us all.

Notes and References:

Life as adjustments in meaning
Pieces of the puzzle
Can each be true to themselves?
Relationships & our place in life
Uniting us through a world of fantasy
Ways of being & what’s getting left out
What’s at the heart of society?
Can you be social when you’re alone?
Seeing what things mean

Ways to share this:

Running before you can walk

Thinking around notions of stability and progress, “He who stands on tiptoe doesn’t stand firm. He who rushes ahead doesn’t go far” comes to mind. This idea that, extending ourselves, we lose the essential balance we all need. Isn’t it true? That, lurching ahead in uncontrolled sprints or teetering on the edge, we stand to run off the rails or lose ourselves through this desire to progress ahead of our time.

Maybe it ties into ideas of risk, mastery and how things are done? Whether we hold to notions of carefully perfecting all the requisite skills needed to achieve any given task or feel that undisciplined victories still count as long as we cross the line first. Although, perhaps life’s always some balance of the two? That elusive moment where established skill spills over into the uncertainty of action and its outcomes.

As the foundation for a civilisation or way of life, it seems interesting. With that thinking from the Tao de Ching, Lao Tzu seems to advocate quite self-effacing notions of progress: a quiet, understated sense of how the individual should operate for the benefit of all. Almost a counter-intuitive picture of moving forward by stepping back to allow space for growth.

By comparison, don’t we operate by quite the opposite way of thinking? Pushing forward with this highly individual sense of daring to do things first then drawing others along in the wake. Not to say there’s not a degree of “perfection” to Western thinking, as we clearly stand on the back of long years of philosophy, specialism and expertise, but how exactly does that knowledge “sit” alongside the direction things are heading?

Perhaps, though, there are no answers? Life emerging from that blend of knowledge and daring as our actions pool together into the direction society is pursuing; ideas or solutions suggested and taken up becoming the paths we all walk. Almost as if we’re choosing this path of intelligent improvisation: seeing what’s possible and what people can be induced to accept, believe or go along with as a way of being.

Sometimes it just seems unclear what the vision is – the uniting picture behind all the disparate phenomena making up our lives. Is there one, or are we just making it up as we go? As if intelligence and action just play out as they will in long chains of potentially unforeseen, interconnecting, self-amplifying consequences. Maybe it’s simply not possible to see where all this is leading?

Taking it that, regardless of our ability to see the bigger picture, it’s still there and something we’re actively serving to bring into being, ideas such as those in the Tao de Ching seem important: “Be wise and help all beings impartially, abandoning none”. Lacking the firm centre of a sense of life’s meaning or worth, might the realities our choices create not be as we hoped?

Behind all the insistent, passing phenomena of modern society, where are we to find that solid substance on which life truly rests?

Notes and References:

24th and 27th verses of the “Tao de Ching”, Lao Tzu (around 6th century BC).

Nature, wisdom & leadership
What we have to fall back on
Belonging & believing
Getting around things
All we’re trying to uphold
Wisdom the world no longer gives?
Holding back, for the sake of others
Is this the riskiest place we’ve lived?
Ways of living in the world

Ways to share this:

Technology and how we are, as humans

At this point, it must simply be true that technology has changed us; that who we are and how we see things has shifted rapidly over the last few decades into something quite different from all that went before. Isn’t there a reflexive relationship between us and reality? The process of what we perceive and what we think it means fundamentally affecting what we’re choosing to do and what our realities then become.

In so many ways, modern technologies must’ve changed how we’re seeing things – literally, in the sense of how information is received, but also in terms of the meanings we’re assigning and framework into which we’ve been placing them. So much having being mediated through this new reality we’ve had evolving around us in recent years, our ideas on life must’ve been evolving along with it in ways we might never imagine.

How long would perception have to be distorted before the change became lasting? How many subtle ways might all those shifts have combined by now, sparking off alongside one another to create further distortions in the fabric of our personal, cultural, economic, political or social lives? This constant stream of perceptible or imperceptible changes altering our world and our selves in all these intangible combinations.

It seems so hard to map it all out: to unravel or separate all the changes and all the ways they’ve shifted the nature of our personal or collective existence. Much as, in a way, technology’s data must “be” the picture of that change, figuring out what it all means and where it might be headed seems an almost impossible task given the pace and fluidity of all the interactions and areas influenced by that new way of being.

Almost as if this tool’s become so woven into our lives – so close to our own perception while also being the means by which we execute our choices – that we’re simply evolving alongside it now. That it’s such a part of our identities and experiences that we don’t even notice its role, having lost sight of the distinction between us, our devices and the systems they’re connecting into.

This sense in which so much is being chosen by technology itself; shaping the information we receive or music we listen to in ways that might amplify our pre-existing tendencies or usher us in new directions without us even realising. All these ways our inner life of thoughts, emotions, decisions or prejudices might be being reinforced or chipped away at over time – incrementally reworking us into quite different people.

The thought of what we might make of technology – or, it might make of us – seems as important as it may be impossible to answer. Isn’t it the defining question of our times? The idea of where this might lead and how we might become, as humans, as we walk these paths before us. If, within and between us, the choices we’re presented with are effectively redefining our lives, how are we using that opportunity?

Notes and References:

The thinking behind technology
Is this the riskiest place we’ve lived?
Responsibility for the bigger picture
Systems, their power, whose hands?
The picture data paints of us
Pace of change & getting nowhere fast
Mastering life’s invisible realities
Technology as a partial reality
How important is real life?
All that’s going on around us
Intrinsic values on the paths for change?
“Response Ability” by Frank Fisher

Ways to share this: