Author: admin

“The way things should be” as an add-on

How much of life has now been taken apart and put back together in a different format? Almost as if, these last few decades or so, people have simply been analysing and breaking down life’s component parts to rearrange them all in new ways. As if modern life “is” this act of deconstruction as we reimagine what life could be and how things could work differently.

Maybe that’s part of what technology’s given us: the power to reconstruct society. This sense in which we “can” now gather enough data to fairly confidently reconfigure our lives in dramatically altered ways – we have enough insight into “how things are” to design “how they could be” and make sure almost all life’s loose ends get tied up in these neatly designed new systems.

Isn’t it fascinating, that we’re living in a time where a relatively small group of people can develop their vision and put it in place all around and throughout our lives? That “how things have always been done” – the slowly developed, long-held traditions of every corner of the globe – could so easily come up against this strong surge of disruption that can sweep away centuries or millennia of human development. (Notes One)

And disruption seems great in that it’s hard to imagine how the long-established “grip” of tradition could ever have been shaken loose without it (Notes Two), but how much “better” are the solutions being put in their place? How much more harmonious, inclusive or sustainable are the ideas these small groups have for our lives? How accountable or transparent are those people and their visions for our future?

Sometimes it just seems a lot is being trimmed out and cast aside during this reinvention process – a lot of things we might’ve hoped to keep, if given the choice. I mean, might it not turn out that important elements of “our lives” were deemed irrelevant by those at the helm of this “new world” being ushered in around us? That seemingly insignificant, inconvenient values, principles or activities might casually be omitted.

Things like community; empathy; genuine human connection; meaning; honesty; privacy; compassion; freedom; standards; respect; security; infrastructure; the ability to communicate; truthful relationships with reality; or understanding our value in the flow of time. Not to say modern technology’s solely responsible for any such difficulties we might be having, but it doesn’t always seem to be helping (Notes Three).

It just seems that, in this grand project of reimagining “life”, a lot of things that we might take for granted and/or truly rely upon as we attempt to live sustainably, harmoniously and responsibly alongside others don’t necessarily seem to be high priorities in the eyes of those redesigning how our lives are going to be.

If there’s not comprehensive, inclusive wisdom behind how we’re living, how can we hope the systems set in motion around us will lead to a place where we can happily call ourselves human and feel comfortable with how we’re treating all that’s surrounding us?

Notes and References:

Note 1: The self within society
Note 1: The picture data paints of us
Note 1: Pace of change & getting nowhere fast
Note 1: Learning from the past, looking to the future
Note 1: Everything culture used to be
Note 2: How quickly things can change
Note 2: Tools
Note 2: Ideas that tie things together
Note 2: Solving all the problems we’re creating
Note 2: Where’s the reset button & can we press it?
Note 3: Modern challenges to relationship
Note 3: Connecting truthfully with life
Note 3: Humans, tangled in these systems
Note 3: Situations which ask us to trust
Note 3: Value and meaning in our lives

Ways to share this:

Truth, behind art and tradition

With culture, aren’t we worlds apart? Even within our own, some of us living this highbrow life while others face quite a different set of reference points, imagery and aspirations (Notes One). As if we’re all seeing life different ways; having such different values and interpretations of “reality” displayed and played out before us. Are those worlds something that can even “connect” in conversation?

It just seems, in almost every area of life, that there are very different conversations going on. One using the language of aesthetics, colour, form and gesture; speaking of power, tradition and classical education. The other, more pragmatic, raw and rooted in society’s everyday realities. One, perhaps, echoing from the remoteness of ivory towers while the other speaks directly from the streets of daily life.

Maybe that’s just what life is? We speak out of the rarefied world of ideals or the, often much bleaker, realities surrounding us. As if we’re always “somewhere” between idealism and reality as we seek paths between the two. Yet, isn’t there an insurmountable elitism to the first voice? This sense in which it’s a conversation few are privileged enough to have the time and opportunity to partake in.

Almost as if we “are” living in two worlds: that exclusive one with pretentious overtones and this more accessible one of clamouring, potentially less well-informed voices. Don’t we have to be “trained” into that earlier conversation? Fully acquainted with its terms, history, trends and developments if we’re to hope to speak without revealing some degree of ignorance that’ll undermine our words.

By its nature, though, does it “have” to be an exclusive conversation? Something few can have the “luxury” of studying, given how removed it essentially is from the practical realities of “life”. As if that highbrow conversation is simply an elevated reflection on the ideals behind our human condition; something so distantly related to the everyday that few can hope to make a living from it.

In any area of life – cooking, drama, fashion, gardening, art – do we “have” to either go high or low? Talking of plants in terms of form, palette, gesture, associations and effect, or looking more to the “truth” behind nature’s forms and how they relate to both us and the cosmic reality of our planetary existence. Is there more universal truth to be found behind all this? (Notes Two)

It’s just strange to think that culture’s conversations should be so remote, so divisive along the lines of inherited class distinctions. As if, in almost every aspect of life, we’re separated by conditions outside our control into having either idealistic conversations or ones that might just be poorly-executed reflections of those elevated ideals.

Maybe that’s simply life, though? That this one, idealistic world sheered off at some point to have its own self-reflexive conversation while almost everyone else was left dealing with the fractured realities of how well those ideals are working out each day. Is there any chance the two can join in one, meaningful conversation?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Culture as information
Note 1: Visual language and spaces
Note 1: The stories that we hear
Note 1: Observing life & stepping outside of reality
Note 1: Everything culture used to be
Note 2: Appreciating other ways of being
Note 2: Understanding what we’re all part of
Note 2: Learning from the past, looking to the future
Note 2: Can there be beauty in communication?
Note 2: Shaping the buildings that shape us

Somewhere alongside this, there perhaps stands Dystopia as a powerful ideal.

Ways to share this:

How much is in the hands of the market

Is it true that the future we’re walking into is largely in the hands of the market? As if almost every area of our lives has now been entrusted to the tender or forceful grasp of those forces – all subject to the push or pull of demand, availability, and the sense of what people can be persuaded, coerced or tempted into buying. Everything having been placed in the lap of this rather specific form of democratic choice.

And, beyond just the procurance of essential goods and services, aren’t our beliefs and ideas treated similarly? As if “all of life” has been carved up, rethought in terms of market share, and packaged to appeal to certain segments of society. Cultural consumption, appearance and attitudes now separating us into tribes as we express ourselves – or, create our identity – from the options available. (Notes One)

Aren’t there other ways to be thinking about life? Not just in terms of economic power and where it places us with regard to social identity or cultural worth, but – somehow – separating the idea of personal value from any sort of financial analysis (Notes Two). Almost as if “to be human” isn’t simply a question of how much money we’re born into or are likely in the position to make.

Haven’t we, however, placed everything in the market’s hands? Life, increasingly, coming down to this rational assessment of what we can afford and whether we think something’s worthwhile investing in for “where it will get us” in terms of status or opportunity. As if the purpose of life is the accumulation of money; our personal worth so closely tangled up with it.

Isn’t it interesting that we’ve placed “ideas” and “beliefs” in such hands? As if “how we use our minds” is now subject to whatever notions we buy into from all that’s convincingly, persistently or strategically placed before us – all these carrots and sticks, subtle inducements, or promises of social acceptance if we’ll concede to walk certain paths with the precious footsteps of our thinking.

It seems such a powerful thing: for human belief to be determined by market offerings or compelling arguments (Notes Three). Aren’t our minds where we make our choices and maintain our understanding of life? The place we weigh up our options; test them against our grasp of reality’s delicate balances; and decide which things we want to support, sustain and bring into existence. Isn’t it where “our” power lies? (Notes Four)

Yet it’s so often seeming pulled down to the level of calculation: ideas surreptitiously hidden within the subtext of media, culture or advertising to shift our thinking, undermine our worth, lead us step-by-step onto paths that may not be in our best interests. Isn’t thought a slippery slope? One move, combined with other, potentially trapping us in a tangle of contradictory premises we can’t find our way between.

If the future’s being determined by the quality of choices we’re able to make in these marketplaces, where we’re headed must be questionable.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Markets, and what they might mean
Note 1: Economics & the realm of culture
Note 1: The business of spiritual ideas
Note 1: Making ends meet
Note 2: Worthless, or priceless?
Note 2: Solving all the problems we’re creating
Note 2: Society that doesn’t deal with the soul
Note 3: Who gets to define us
Note 3: The relationship between statistics & reality
Note 3: How quickly things can change
Note 3: Attention as a resource
Note 4: What we create by our presence
Note 4: Being trusted to use our discernment…
Note 4: Freedom, responsibility & choice

With all of this, there’s always the question of Having confidence in complex systems.

Ways to share this:

Is the West carelessly disrespectful?

In a fairly neutral way, is the West quite careless and disrespectful around others’ beliefs and opinions? This sense in which everything’s seen as fair game in our world of thought; nothing’s sacred or off-limits. As if we wander the world – through the lives and ideas of others – casually picking apart, criticising and passing judgement on all we find. As if that’s what the world’s there for. (Notes One)

Aren’t we raised that way? To scrutinise as we send the tendrils of our minds out into the world to return victorious with our conclusions about the value and significance of it all. As if we’re here to cast judgement: life passing before our eyes for us to decide what we think of it. Maybe it’s intrinsic to the nature of thought? That we learn, observe, weigh up, assess, and draw conclusions. It’s what the brain can do.

Yet, isn’t it strangely disrespectful? If all humans have minds, ideas and beliefs, why are we to wander into their world and judge? As if there’s only one possible train of thought to be found in life – one “right answer” everyone should accept. Aren’t we all emerging from different backgrounds, with different belief systems emerging from different cultures? Don’t humans have the right to believe as they choose?

The idea of respecting that right and giving people space to think as they’ve chosen seems important. Isn’t the mind a sort of sacred space? The place each person’s been storing up all the insight and capacity their life has given them. The place each one of us experiences our lives, reflects on things, and determines what we feel, think or believe. Isn’t that delicate space quite uniquely what makes us human?

For some reason, though, the boundaries of “respect” seem to have fallen away in the West. As if we no longer have that concept of separation, individual sanctity and stepping back. Isn’t it an essential principle between the people of any culture? This idea of the estimation in which others, their thoughts and beliefs, are held. That there might be lines we shouldn’t cross in how we approach one another. (Notes Two)

Not suggesting it’s the only reason, but perhaps technology has something to do with it? This anonymising, democratising tool that’s shifted so many of us into a rather “flat” global reality where we don’t know the backgrounds, identities or situations of anyone. Doesn’t it make it so much easier to cast judgements and push our views over those of others? Although, maybe it’s the mindset that created the tool. (Notes Three)

Isn’t it interesting that – as with resources and trade – we seem so happy to trample over the world with our ways of thinking about things? Why would be so confident with our perspectives, conclusions or value systems? Why so withering about the fact others could believe anything other than science? Sometimes it seems we couldn’t care any less – as if, in our hands, thought’s simply a cold and brutal weapon.

Notes and References:

Note 1: The thought surrounding us
Note 1: Belief in what we cannot see
Note 1: The value & cost of our words
Note 1: All that we add to neutrality
Note 2: Mutual awareness and accommodation?
Note 2: Is cultural sensitivity still a thing?
Note 2: True relationship within society?
Note 3: Pace of change & getting nowhere fast
Note 3: Does being alone amplify things?
Note 3: Power and potential
Note 3: The difference humanity makes

As an alternative, Can there be beauty in communication?

Ways to share this:

All we concern ourselves with & encourage

Engaging with something, aren’t we almost casting our vote for the value of its presence in our lives? Our attention on any given thing being, perhaps, an act of validation or approval that’s giving each thing greater power (Notes One). In a similar way to how we show interest in others or choose to ignore them: that, with our minds, we might decide which things we want to reflect, acknowledge or understand.

Isn’t human attention a powerful thing? That we would allow certain things – be they words, opinions, inferences, images, conclusions – into the sacred space of our minds, where they’re free to interact as they see fit with whatever else happens to reside there. Once accepted, isn’t it hard to fully erase something? It’s trekked its path through your thoughts, breaking or challenging other ideas in ways we mightn’t notice.

How are we to know the impact of all we’re letting in within modern life? It’s seems we’re fairly constantly assailed with many quite questionable sources of input (Notes Two). Compared to even the most recent past, isn’t it incredible how much information we’re now receiving? Also, how unregulated it all is in terms of production, distribution and consumption – that we’re essentially all free to do as we please, unobserved.

Yet, within it all, aren’t there still many important things at stake? Perhaps the potential repercussions of “all this” are vaster than they’ve ever been; given how quickly ideas can now travel between us and evolve to fantastic proportions. Without the checks and balances of a community’s oversight, concern and expectations, are there many limits to where individuals could go under the power of their minds?

Sometimes it seems we’ve been given quite an incredible amount of freedom: that we’re free to choose exactly how we’ll see the world and all those within it, freely self-selecting which voices we’ll listen to and attitudes we’ll adopt. Everyone free to do as they please, who’s to say where we’ll all wander off to and how easily we’ll be able to relate to one another once we get there?

Theoretically, it seems people in the past generally followed the affairs of their environment quite closely: concerning themselves mainly with events that fairly directly impacted their lives. Things they understood and had power to influence. Focussing on what surrounds you – what you hope to create there – seems such a beautiful notion of grassroots engagement, much as it’s also a recipe for meddling (Notes Three).

Looking at life as this fast-moving global reality of interlocking ideas, activities and repercussions, how are we best to use the power of our attention? If “how we spend our time” and “the things we let into our minds” have powerful consequences in terms of either distraction or of the subtle shifting of underlying values, assumptions or beliefs, isn’t it important we think about all we’re casting our vote for? (Notes Four)

If, as humans, where we place our focus is how we have an effect, where’s all this leading?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Attention as a resource
Note 1: Where do we get our ideas from?
Note 1: Do we know what we’re doing?
Note 1: Frameworks of how we relate
Note 2: Meaning in a world of novelty
Note 2: Do the “lies” blind us to truth?
Note 2: Passing on what’s important
Note 2: Is this the ultimate test?
Note 3: Inspiring people and ideas
Note 3: All that we add to neutrality
Note 3: The idea of think globally, act locally
Note 3: What does community mean?
Note 4: Powerful responsibility of a media voice
Note 4: Effect, if everything’s a drama
Note 4: Understanding & staying informed

Ways to share this:

Seeing where others are coming from

Thinking in part of community and in part of global awareness, isn’t it important to fully understand situations? To see where people are coming from; the influences that’ve formed them; the narratives or voices shaping their inner commentary on life and all that surrounds them. Don’t we hear different things? All seeing reality from different perspectives, in different lights, and interpreting it differently.

How much difference does it make? The stories we’re raised with; assumptions we have around certain characters or actions; and ideas around the weight of consequences or rewards different paths in life will be met with. Doesn’t it all inform how we approach things? Subtly shading our reading of the world around us with the inferences, judgements or hopes of all we’ve ever heard over the years (Notes One).

Almost as if we each have a different world in our heads, individually as much as collectively. The shared – or, conflicting – mindsets of nationality and unique mindsets of personality merging into our own, specific take on “life”. Yet, within and between our various communities, don’t those ideas on life converge? Jutting up against one another as we attempt to have just one conversation; despite all our subtle or dramatic differences.

Sharing space and meaning as we attempt to cooperate with one another seems an interesting challenge. Won’t we have different agendas? All hoping, perhaps, to get something different out of any interchange. Whether it’s economics or culture, isn’t there always give and take going on? All these compatible or diverging intentions, expectations and compromises as we each seek to push forward in our own directions. (Notes Two)

As if the world – as much as our local communities – is this strange convergence of disclosed or undisclosed interests crossing over one another in confusing, impenetrable ways. Each player coming from their own backstory, it’s intriguing to imagine which voices are actually speaking and what they’re ultimately aiming to achieve. Also, how many are fairly innocently being taken along for the ride.

My point, though, was that awareness of where people are coming from seems so important. Beyond the knowledge of history or current affairs being a simply academic pursuit or tick-box for citizenship, isn’t it vital that we understand who we’re engaging with? While we might all be having this one, increasingly hasty and tense conversation about “life”, there’s still a lot of nuance and history to our words and their meanings.

Grasping the context, the issues at stake, the underlying values or priorities – the firm or bendable lines – must be essential to communicating or interacting “successfully” with anyone on any matter. This sense in which we need to be using comparable terms and seeing life through others’ eyes if we’re to understand what everything means and how best to respond (Notes Three).

Whether it’s global players, local neighbours or digital strangers, don’t we need to know enough to place one another against a relatively thorough sense of where we each stand if we’re to relate well to other people?

Notes and References:

Note 1: The stories that we hear
Note 1: Connecting truthfully with life
Note 2: Reading between the lines
Note 2: Plausible deniability
Note 2: Economy as a battleground
Note 3: Can there be beauty in communication?
Note 3: Understanding & staying informed

Ways to share this:

Situations which ask us to trust

Aren’t a lot of situations in life asking us to trust? Relationships, conversations, activities, commitments, the idea of society itself – in countless ways, we’re repeatedly placing our lives, our hopes, our outcomes into the hands of others (Notes One). It seems this fundamental “step” in the constructs of human society and community: trusting one another and the overarching thought process behind what we’re working within.

At the core, it seems life perhaps comes down to this notion of being “able” to place trust in others and in the structures governing our lives in all these big and little ways. That we “can” rest safe in the knowledge that everyone has their side of things in hand and those at the helm are bearing our lives in mind as they’re making decisions on our behalf. That the whole thing is working for the good of all people.

This basic idea of each person being responsible for all that’s falling to them; a person of character who appreciates the faith placed in them by so many unknown others; someone whose words can be believed, who’ll stand by their commitments and carry them through in ways that resolve problems rather than creating more. An ideal of fully-informed, concerned, actively engaged members of society. (Notes Two)

While that doesn’t seem the most accurate description of what’s often being encouraged by modern culture, education or media, as an ideal it’s a beautiful notion: this dance of each person understanding the world and society in which they live then acting with the clear intention of making everything better and leaving nothing neglected (Notes Three). Everyone working towards these common goals of progress, harmony, love.

Yet, if the people or systems surrounding us aren’t deserving of such trust, what are we to do? As intelligent creatures, turning a blind eye to paths that might prove harmful in the long run doesn’t seem right. Not being sure of the words being spoken or truth of what others really have in mind seems deeply stressful and concerning. After all, don’t we “need” to be able to trust this conversation we’re all part of? (Notes Four)

The situation we’re currently in seems to be calling on that trust more than ever: that we believe what we’re told and act upon it, even if we don’t fully understand the science or the thinking that’s being applied. Just as so many disparate voices are planting seeds of doubt, society’s needing us to trust and act in accordance with the vision of whoever’s at the helm. Almost like this modern act of faith in the unknown.

As with any act of faith, don’t we need to trust? To believe in what’s said and the intentions behind it. How much that basic trust – in others and in systems – might’ve been sorely tried over the years becomes a troubling thought. How much faith do we actually have in our fellow man? How much transparency has there been around all the paths we’ve been placed upon?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Having confidence in complex systems
Note 1: Being trusted to use our discernment…
Note 1: Knowing who to trust
Note 1: Trust in technology?
Note 2: Understanding & staying informed
Note 2: Common sense as a rare & essential quality
Note 2: Problems & the thought that created them
Note 3: Picking up after one another
Note 3: Mutual awareness and accommodation?
Note 3: Knowing the value of what you have
Note 4: Which voice can we trust?
Note 4: Diplomacy and knowing where we stand
Note 4: Treating people like sims?
Note 4: Trust within modern society

Ways to share this:

Treading carefully in the lives of others

How easy is it to judge others? To wander into the realms of their being and cast forth our thoughts about how their life is, what it means and all the obvious improvements they could make. To laugh at mistakes or choices we would never make, somehow imagining “our” way of being and thoughts about life to be the right ones – if only others could see things as we do and do as we say.

Sometimes it seems we’re almost being “trained” in that kind of deconstructive thinking. Don’t all these shows we watch and conversations we have model exactly how we could be picking everything apart; dissecting intentions; evaluating appearances. As if that’s the only way to approach life: critically. As if the world’s just there, waiting for us to cast judgement upon it all. (Notes One)

Yet, aren’t all of our thoughts, beliefs and ways of being deeply tied up with “who we are” as people? Everything standing within the framework of “the human life” and growing out of all we’ve lived through and come to think about it. All the words, gestures or estimations of worth others have cast in our direction. All the conclusions we’ve reached or ideas that we came to believe. (Notes Two)

Don’t we all have different things that speak to our soul? Different interests – be they cultural, literary, visual, or whatever else – that, for us, make life sing in colours that make our own worth living. Who’s the say which “style” is best? Which way we should grow our hair, hold ourselves, speak or act in the world. How we should be presenting our homes, our online presence or our selves to make the best impressions.

If all we hear when we look in the mirror is the judgements others have made – or, might make – of us, how are we to live? Won’t we always be hearing criticism? There’s presumably always “something” we can attack; something that could be done differently or, perhaps, better. In a world full of options, we could spend forever trying to find exactly the right ones or arguing between the relative merits of them all (Notes Three).

Almost as if all we’re doing here is trying to make “them” wrong and “us” right. Anything we do could be done another way. Any position we’re choosing to take could be harnessed into a watertight defence and ridden confidently through all the other opinions. We might pass all our time telling others where they’re mistaken and convincing them to agree with us.

When it comes to others’ lives, though – their choices, wounds, ideas, experiences, struggles – are we ever “right” to wander into their space and cast judgements? If each person’s a house, filled with all their life has furnished them with, what does it “mean” to walk in, pull everything off the shelves, critique it all, then say we’re doing it to help them? Who are we to say what they’re living with, hoping for, or trying to achieve?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Society that doesn’t deal with the soul
Note 1: Thoughts of idealism and intolerance
Note 1: What is it with tone?
Note 2: The stories that we hear
Note 2: Where do we get our ideas from
Note 2: Frameworks of how we relate
Note 2: Personal archaeology
Note 3: Absolute or relative value?
Note 3: Tempting justifications of self
Note 3: Meaning in a world of novelty

Ways to share this:

Everything culture used to be

Thinking, broadly, of “culture”, what is it that it means within our lives? Between the moments of every day and the larger moments of our years, seasons or lifetimes, isn’t it generally weaving rhythms of meaning, purpose or intention into existence? Tending to pull our thoughts in certain directions, remind us what matters, refocus our priorities, and channel our activities down established paths or into new patterns.

As if each culture, place or family creates its own way – its own narratives, traditions, routines or practices that serve to carry forward a specific understanding of life and how to live it (Notes One). This framework that holds our relationships; structures our lives; guides our thinking; reinforces our values; lets us know where we stand. An overlay of organised, meaningful habits we build “life” around and relate ourselves to.

Whether on the personal level or reaching beyond that to family, community or nation, its events or ideas seem to filter through to define so many moments, conversations and thought processes. Almost this “way of thinking” that accompanies us through life, letting us know how to see things while grounding us in the familiarity of routine – helping us interpret reality and respond to it with our feet firmly in place (Notes Two).

Over time, that must build to quite a substantial sense of “meaning” as each person, each day, each year walks the same lines in thought and action, overlaying all that went before with this intentional repetition of fairly timeless practices. The inherited rhythms of culture having been picked up with new hands and carried on in new ways – subtle or dramatic shifts that, hopefully, still have a similar effect.

In a world of slowly-shifting habits, such a thing would presumably impart a reassuring sense of belonging: routines that carry us through our days with the gentle reminder of expectation being met. Seasons rolling round, specific events or culinary traditions passing by one after the other, the rhythms of life letting us know we stand as the latest in a long line of people living their lives in this familiar fashion.

Almost like tides of meaning that hold us in their thrall as the same stories, characters, meals, expressions or ceremony mark each day off in order as we arrange our lives in tune with the overall structure it offers. As we age, that familiarity perhaps helping tether people in the reassuring arms of “how things are” and “what we should do”.

By comparison, “modern” culture can seem divisive and unsettling; this ever-shifting landscape of trends that define and set us apart more than unite us in one, harmonious conversation about “life” (Notes Three). Perhaps the beautiful blending of previously disparate cultures into this new, individually-chosen culture of personal identity was always going to be less unifying? Each choosing their own way.

Doesn’t that choppy divisiveness create new challenges, though, for people still seeking the reassuring threads of a common meaning that’s somehow able to hold us all together throughout our lives?

Notes and References:

Note 1: The stories that we hear
Note 1: Culture as what we relate to
Note 1: Culture as information
Note 2: Visual language and spaces
Note 2: Learning from the past, looking to the future
Note 2: Culture as a conversation across time
Note 2: Navigation, steering & direction
Note 3: Making things up as we go along
Note 3: Definition, expression & interpretation
Note 3: Do we need meaning?

Ways to share this:

Might we lose our social muscles?

Whether it’s through isolation, technology or heightened individualism, might we not risk losing our social muscles through lack of use? Sometimes it seems “getting along with others” is perhaps as unnatural as it is natural: having tended to live within social groups, it must’ve always been part of our makeup; yet happily making room for others and their way of being doesn’t seem to come effortlessly.

For whatever reasons, it also seems “modern living” exacerbates the trend: amplifying our own experiences, perceptions, ideas and struggles to a level where we’ve little spare for showing genuine interest in others or tolerating all our inevitable differences (Notes One). If “our own thoughts” are dialled up to the point of becoming “all we see”, how are we to make room for another equally dialled up individual?

Looking to the notion of technology forming some kind of ideological echo chamber around us, doesn’t it constantly emphasise our own ways of thinking? Isn’t the focus completely on “you”, the user, and your experience as mediated through this highly-tailored portal? Each of us, perhaps, living in our own interactive, self-confirming world of information, communication, and so forth.

Sometimes it’s like we’re all retreating into our own personal version of reality and having it confirmed for us at every turn. As if the walls of personality, constantly reinforced, could potentially become the prison we’re trapped in or barricade we’ll defend to the hilt. Of course, we’re all a world unto ourselves in terms of our experiences and ideas; but setting up permanent camp there seems questionable. (Notes Two)

I mean, isn’t social life generally some form of compromise? Some form of “letting another exist in your presence” without attack: respecting their right to be who they are and express their viewpoints. This strange act of communion, accommodation, acceptance as we make space for another who’s just like us yet, conceivably, completely different in the sense they’ve made of things and concerns they have in life.

If “to be human”, now, is to experience the self dialled up to the point where it might fill our own consciousness and drown out anyone else’s, how are we to live alongside one another? Are we to push our own thinking, our perceptions and conclusions, into their space – projecting our understanding over theirs then relating to them on that basis – or allow their way of being space in our mind to be itself? (Notes Three)

Rather than completely identifying with our own ideas of life and everything in it, might we not be better off realising every single one of us sees life our own way? If we’re expecting others to accommodate us, surely that needs to go both ways if things aren’t to descend into a strangely aggressive, mutually intolerant world of indignant self-insistence.

Maybe living alongside others has never been easy, though? While convention or expectation might’ve guided people more firmly before, it seems we now have this strange encouragement to abandon the challenge and think mainly of ourselves.

Notes and References:

Note 1: All in such a rush
Note 1: Seeing, knowing and loving
Note 1: Joining the dots
Note 1: Life’s never been simpler…
Note 2: Can “how we relate” really change?
Note 2: Does being alone amplify things?
Note 2: Letting people change
Note 3: Modern challenges to relationship
Note 3: Frameworks of how we relate
Note 3: Conversation as revelation
Note 3: Mutual awareness and accommodation?

Ways to share this: