Category: Community

When we talk of community, is it of something we want to be part of or something we’re already in? Sometimes, the term seems to be used in a slightly dreamy way about an idealistic place of belonging, rather than referring to whatever grouping of people our lives are already interwoven with. Is it, then, that we’re looking for an idyllic state of personal acceptance? Tired of the troublesome realities of what’s actually around us.

It seems likely we “are” in community – the social structure, geographic location, cultural traditions and expectations we were born in or chose to move into. Most people are probably surrounded, however remotely, by a community that’s working together towards common ends. Each person’s life feeding into and drawing out from that common pool of activity.

Community’s presumably also the place where we’re learning much of what we know about “life”: what things are and which one’s matter; what is acceptable or valuable; which paths to take and ideas to have in mind. Isn’t this where we pick up all the lessons that, together, form our view of life and where we stand within it? Where we establish our sense of identity, meaning and purpose (Notes One).

Maybe, then, this different usage of the word is more a sign that modern community isn’t serving all our needs? Living this way, it perhaps wouldn’t be surprising for us to feel disconnected, unappreciated, invisible. After all, aren’t many of the connections between us now quite hidden and impersonal? It seems we may not be aware of the roles we play within it all and others may not be able to see who we are.

Isn’t community generally a notion of feeling “seen”? Knowing that we belong, that our presence is valued, our unique personality and gifts treasured by those around us. In the past, communities perhaps offered that: each person being known, their contributions noticed and openly acknowledged. Now, it’s almost like we’re strangers to one another with no sense of how our lives are connected.

In that world, it sometimes seems individuals could drift into oblivion and no one would even know who they’d lost. It must be strange, as humans, to live that way? Not knowing who the people around you are or why they should matter to you (Notes Two). Especially if community’s the place we’re supposed to make sense of life and form meaningful relationships within it.

It’s perhaps unsurprising that people would turn to smaller sub-communities for the belonging and acceptance that makes all our lives meaningful. Don’t we all need to be ourselves and be seen as such by our peers? To know that our life, our existence, and who we are is important to the world around us?

What, then, does it mean for community overall if we’re abandoning it as a source of collective belonging? For our broader social space to be devoid of mutual recognition, interest or appreciation seems questionable when you think that “society” is built around us.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Having boundaries
Note 1: Definition, expression & interpretation
Note 1: Culture as a conversation across time
Note 1: Frameworks of how we relate
Note 1: Invisible ties
Note 2: Joining the dots
Note 2: Seeing, knowing and loving
Note 2: Knowing who to trust
Note 2: Places of belonging & acceptance
Note 2: Does anything exist in isolation?

Much as we might talk of six degrees of separation between individuals, we could probably now draw in the ties between any two people on this planet. Whether it’s links of trade or development between governments and businesses or our respective representations in an increasingly globalised culture, there’s perhaps fairly little that separates us in terms of the impacts we’re having and ideas we have in mind about one another.

Isn’t there very little we don’t have some kind of idea about? Whether those thoughts come from education, the media or culture, there’s this sense in which our views on life are formed and we’re carrying these preconceived notions about how things work, who people are and what we should think about them (Notes One).

Then, in terms of trade, aren’t we pretty much all now connected in some shape or form? Don’t our consumer decisions all converge to represent significant economic, social and environmental realities all across the globe? These waves of consumption and production dramatically shifting the power, influence and oppression of different segments of this global society we’re all living within (Notes Two).

It’s fascinating how our relatively separate and limited national societies rapidly expanded into this truly global, interconnected reality. Something that presumably used to be very real, lived, known and understood having become this vast, slightly abstract, hidden sense of community that’s having such considerable consequences on so many levels.

Hasn’t community always been based on relationship? This sense of how people are connected; ways their lives and activities intersect to provide all that society needs; the stories we’re told to ensure we understand and stay committed to that collective reality (Notes Three). Society being formed of distinct individuals, it’s surely important we value the roles we’re all playing within that larger picture.

So maybe it’s only natural we struggle to understand and, therefore, appreciate how we fit into this new picture. It’s a difficult reality to get your head around; particularly when life’s changing for everyone in important, distracting and often painful ways (Notes Four). And isn’t appreciation almost always based on understanding, on truth?

In order to see what’s going on, don’t we need to open our minds beyond our preconceived notions – to suspend our own ideas and put ourselves in another’s shoes to really see where they’re coming from and what life’s asking of them? Yet, these days, the self looms so large on almost everyone’s horizons. The pace and nature of modern life seems to insist we take, develop and hold to our own perspective on things.

Standing in true relationship to one another seems such a beautiful thing: seeing and appreciating who people are, the values they’re living by, what motivates and inspires them beyond any superficial labels placed upon them. But getting to know people takes time and interest; things we don’t actually seem to have.

Rather than dividing ourselves up into mutually incomprehensible groups, couldn’t we somehow extend ourselves to connect meaningfully with the humanity beneath it all?

Notes and References:

Note 1: How ideas find their place in the world
Note 1: Frameworks of how we relate
Note 1: Powerful responsibility of a media voice
Note 1: Culture as what we relate to
Note 1: Seeing, knowing and loving
Note 2: What we create by patterns of behaviour
Note 2: Interdependency
Note 3: Community – what it was, what we lost
Note 3: Culture as a conversation across time
Note 3: Mastering life’s invisible realities
Note 3: Knowing who to trust
Note 4: Does being alone amplify things?
Note 4: Overwhelm and resignation
Note 4: Life’s never been simpler…

Can we trust those currently in charge of things? The premise seems to be that we “can” and should; that society’s been set up so the “best people” for the job end up in these positions of power. Maybe it depends on your definition of best? Or maybe it’s a question of how the mechanisms of power work and whether they bring out the best or worst of human nature.

Western society seems based around some version of meritocracy: that those with the aptitude for it will rise to the top and emerge as leaders of their respective fields. Of course, it’s a way of thinking that raises so many questions around how we’re judging aptitude; the backgrounds those people often come from; and what “we” really “need” to move forward “well” as a society.

What’s our view of life? How do we see “society” and all those living within it? Which of its activities are we prioritising, and which are we leaving to develop as they will? What do our leaders see as justifiable or acceptable in pursuing their aims? How much suffering can be allowed to happen in order to push a community forward in a given direction? What “is” the picture that’s being used to lead with?

So many questions and, as history tells, no easy answers. Modern society emerges out of time-worn debates around how best to structure things; out of conversations based on a specific understanding of what things mean and the fundamental forces at play within and between people (Notes One). At its simplest, perhaps, it’s this division between those who own things and those who don’t.

And it seems the case that those in power generally belong to or act on behalf of that first group – those who inherited the carved-up assets of earlier times. Western ideas of ownership, control, and the freedom or power that come along with it are fascinating to consider if nearly impossible to unpick.

Based on that thinking, though, it seems unclear how best to “lead” such a society. Is it a system built as much on inequality as it is on greed? Can it even “work” if someone isn’t being suppressed or exploited somewhere else? Does it work if the human psyche’s not being kept in a perpetual state of dissatisfaction, longing and uncertainty? (Notes Two)

It’s a system that emerged from taking a specific path in life: decisions made, realities set in motion, the outworking of that over time as incoming generations responded to the opportunities society afforded them. Don’t we all step into society as it surrounds us? Finding a place within that pre-existing world; doing what seems wise, acceptable or beneficial within the parameters offered.

With the realities of “modern life” set in motion – perhaps, in stone – how’s this going to play out? If social and global assets have been carved up and their ownership defended this way, what paths are left for the humanity hoping to find its way forward within it all?

Notes and References:

Note 1: “Quest for a Moral Compass”
Note 1: Ethics, money & social creativity
Note 1: Entertaining ideas & the matter of truth
Note 1: Plato & “The Republic”
Note 1: Where do ideas of evolution leave us?
Note 2: The insatiable desire for more
Note 2: Attacks on our humanity
Note 2: Do we really need incentives?
Note 2: Overwhelm and resignation

When we think of community, I’d imagine it’s some picture of togetherness, knowing one another and feeling engaged in the same project with similar ideas in mind (Notes One). That seems how the word’s often used: idealistic endeavours aiming to recreate what we feel we’ve lost and bring people together in the wake of tradition’s deconstruction.

This sense of people deliberately, consciously, intentionally coming together around a common cause or interest, getting to know one another along those lines, and collaborating in shared activity. Which, presumably, is how community arose: people realising they had more to gain from cooperation than would be lost in terms of individual liberty.

Now those overarching national and international communities are established, though, it seems we’re dissatisfied and seeking to reintroduce new elements. That mightn’t be quite the right reading of the situation, but something like it: feeling something’s lacking; wanting to connect, know and work together with others.

I’d imagine it’s only natural? Living alongside people you don’t know, have no connection with or way of getting to know must be psychologically stressful in some way. Historically, community seems to have been arranged so people knew where they stood; the scale and structure of it all perhaps making such a thing possible.

Looking around, it must’ve been that people could understand and relate to the people, activities and industry surrounding them. Life must’ve made sense. They could “read it”, even if they didn’t like the story (Notes Two). Because, clearly, the past’s been far from perfect and its disruption may be just the right way to unsettle and deconstruct the faulty thinking and solutions it imposed.

Despite the imperfection of it all, though, people presumably feel safer with what they know? When you look around and know who people are, where they “fit” into the social picture, and the values they’re living by. It’s a risk to trust blindly, to assume that’ll work out. But what are we to do when there’s no real way of getting to know people that way?

Community once had all these activities whereby people came into contact with one another in non-threatening ways: common spaces of interaction or celebration where people rubbed shoulders and took the edge of their isolated, individual lives. These days, it could be said we’re more isolated than humans have ever been; despite the fact we’re also more globally connected than has ever been possible.

It’s a strange predicament: knowing remote strangers better than neighbours. And it’s wonderful, in many ways, that we can unite beyond the boundaries of distance, forming these previously inconceivable bonds and communities. Modern community’s a beautiful thing; if not without its challenges (Notes Three).

Are we heightening personal affinities at the cost of immediate relationships? What does it mean – in the human sense – to not know, understand or care for people around us? And, how safe can we know ourselves to be if we don’t have the time or opportunity for genuine interest in those we share space with?

Notes and References:

Note 1: What inspires collective endeavours
Note 1: Human nature and community life
Note 1: Relating to one another
Note 1: Community as an answer
Note 2: Stories that bind us
Note 2: Where do ideas of evolution leave us?
Note 2: Reading into social realities?
Note 2: Society as an imposition?
Note 3: The insatiable desire for more
Note 3: Social starting points for modern ways
Note 3: Does being alone amplify things?
Note 3: Overwhelm and resignation

Taking this in a different direction, Detaching from the world around us talked of relating ourselves to nature & Seeing, knowing and loving talked of how our inner lives reflect that world more generally.

It’s fascinating to think how change happens. All the ways we’re consciously or subconsciously acting that, over time, become patterns of behaviour we barely even recognise as a choice. We’re so habitual: all that we do or have seen done a certain way drifting, perhaps unexamined, into our own way of being.

Thinking of life as accumulated actions, it’s amazing to imagine the inertia of all we’ve picked up over the years. The way all that comes together into ‘how we do things’ and, often, ‘who we are’. Lessons from youth and those around us becoming this unique conglomeration of disparate actions, beliefs and attitudes.

And, really, who’s examined all the things they do? All the words, gestures and assumptions. The implications of a billion unspoken choices. Is there reason behind it all? Was there ever? And, ultimately, does it matter how we’re going about things?

It’s apparently something we just pass on – families handing on habits or traditions; teachers imparting their version of wisdom; society setting its examples through media, culture and everyday life. Life seems to be the human community, in its various guises, showing others the way to be (Notes One). Directly or indirectly, intentionally or inadvertently, wisely or thoughtlessly setting all these standards.

There’s clearly this social side to life: living within a community of peers, we either go along with or stand against things. In so many subtle ways we affirm, judge, praise, criticise, condemn, shame or encourage one another. It’s a powerful social tool for regulating behaviour; many perhaps hesitating to question what they might’ve picked up this way.

This being the case, can we ever just wake up and do differently? There’ll be resistance. In many ways, the world expects something from us; often, that we stay the same. Predictable, reliable people who can be trusted to act a given way. Not to say there’s no value in consistency, but where’s the room for growth?

It’s just interesting. As, really, whose ideas are perfect? Where do all the seemingly insignificant things we’ve picked up during the course of life come from? All these statements and interpretations of life’s meaning essentially become the idea we have of life and how to live it (Notes Two); yet what is this cobbled-together picture and does it make sense as a whole?

And, if we’re to admit that big chunks of this might be poorly thought-out theories or distorted messages from others’ youth, education, thought or experience, where does that leave us? Should we insist upon it? Do we hold others back from questioning or changing, given how pulling at even one thread admits to the notion of more being mistaken? Does the watchful commentary of others hold us back?

Because, truly, anything we do in life has to be navigated socially. Collective habits can serve as powerful deterrents or incentives. And, personally or systemically, if things have to shift then that surely involves some process of reflection, adjustment, and the tolerance of allowing people to change?

Notes and References:

Note 1: What you’re left with
Note 1: Old meets new, sharing insight
Note 1: Able to see what matters?
Note 1: The way to be
Note 2: One thing leads to another
Note 2: Do we need meaning?
Note 2: Culture as what we relate to
Note 2: Making adjustments

Another post that considered progress and the idea of moving forward was Problems & the thought that created them.

Thoughts around age are something I’ve left on the back burner for a while now, mulling over my own reactions to what I see in the world around me (Notes One). It’s also a complex, contentious topic within Western society – strangely, to my mind, given the relationship between generations must be as old as humanity itself.

Can’t we move past preconceived notions of who is wise, responsible, or “able” to understand? Could we meet respectfully, accepting the realities into which we’re each born, rather than facing one another with this fiery indignation of judgement, blame, feeling misunderstood or underappreciated? Can this be more than token interest, and actually become a source of strength for us all?

I suppose what I’m talking about is relationship? This sense of all being born into society: into all its pre-existing and evolving relationships (Notes Two). We’re placed into situations with benefits and challenges, and, generally speaking, it’s considered “natural” for people to make the best of their lot in life – that seems the arc we have in mind.

That being the case, it seems natural that people in the past – those now older – would’ve accepted their social world as it was presented to them, engaging with its realities and setting themselves on the paths society then offered. We surely only think with the ideas, the values, the assumptions and expectations we’re given? (Notes Three)

Knowledge and opportunity having only billowed out in recent decades, we surely can’t expect people in the past to have thought with the modern mindset? But, of course, that’s not to say that paths taken weren’t mistaken, short-sighted, or in need of correction. What I’m trying to grasp, though, is the fact that we can’t expect greater understanding or forethought from the past than it, in reality, had.

“If” the West’s been mistaken in how it carved up local and global assets, placing great power in certain hands while leaving others relatively powerless, then those who trusted that narrative and took their place within it were, perhaps, as blind to it as everyone else. Either way, their psychological and social identity and expectations would’ve been very firmly shaped by the story they were sold.

And “this” is why talking of age is daunting. Personal lives are woven into political, social, economic history. We live within the flows of time, our places within them shaping who we are and the ways we’re then valued by society itself. It’s this folding together of individuals within society. And the question of what’s “fair” or “right” in that picture has perhaps never been solved.

Is it possible to move beyond that? To embrace a deeper sense of all being the same, even though we experience life at different times and places? Beyond superficial attempts at bridging divides, could we understand youth and age as being part of the one reality? Can we appreciate the insights we all carry out of our challenges? Presumably, solutions will lie in coming together to value one another better.

Notes and References:

Note 1: “Wisdom” by Andrew Zuckerman
Note 1: Attitudes to elder members of society
Note 1: Antisocial behaviour & the young
Note 1: We’re all vulnerable
Note 2: Invisible ties
Note 2: Does anything exist in isolation?
Note 2: Working through mind & society
Note 2: “The Measure of a Man”
Note 3: Respect, rebellion & renovation
Note 3: What would life be if we could trust?

When it comes to society, how is it that we’re grouping ourselves together and relating to one another? European history paints a picture of divisions formed along lines of broad similarity and difference, the simplest number of groups that might provide manageable cohesion. In reality that’s been far from simple, but where are the alternatives?

We’re just so diverse, so different from each another. Especially now we’re increasingly looking to the level of “the individual” with their own, personal identity and experience. The idea of having anything “in common” almost seems a stretch of the imagination as our ideas of who we are, what’s important, and the life we’re hoping to create diverge so greatly (Notes One).

Personal interests that are then spanning the globe, forming communities that seemingly have very little geographical reality. It’s fascinating how identity and belonging have been drawn into this virtual world, often sucking us away from those nearby with whom we nonetheless stand in tangible relationship (Notes Two).

Humans have surely always existed within relationships? Groupings with expectations, standards, ideas on what it means to be both human and a valuable member of that community (Notes Three). Different forms that social groups have taken – and, the thinking behind them – are so interesting to consider. As are the reasons one form might give way to another.

Generally, though, it seems we need some sort of compelling reason or narrative that inspires participation; an idea that grasps our imagination, vision, and sense of what’s collectively desirable.

What is it, then, that’s inspiring us? A personal vision or communal one? Are we thinking of how “our” life might be or everyone else’s? It’s interesting to think how modern life has become so intensely personal yet, simultaneously, so universal and abstract. We might act based on personal interest but consequences are felt the world over. We perhaps can’t really detach from other people.

Then there’s this tendency toward “tribes” – new groupings that span borders to join us together with those “like us”, those we feel most connected to. Like nations without boundaries. It’s clearly natural to seek belonging, recognition and the peace that comes from acceptance by others. But does it risk intolerance?

If we choose, again, to form divisions based on similarity, to create identity out of difference and conflict out of defeating other experiences or perspectives within our one reality, how’s that different from the geographical divisions of nation states? Aren’t we still reinforcing rather than accepting differences? Can we really only be “in community” with those like us?

As elsewhere (Notes Four), maybe it comes down to ideas and realities? We all have beliefs, hopes, experiences, and conclusions – this whole inner world of thought that matters greatly in both personal and absolute ways – yet, naturally, “others” have similarly-held ideas. We certainly need to eradicate mistaken or incomplete understanding, but never the people themselves.

Is there not anything that can unite us beyond personal thinking, bringing us into full community rather than scattered, divisive ones?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Convergence and divergence
Note 1: At what point are we just humans?
Note 1: Would we be right to insist?
Note 2: In the deep end…
Note 2: Trust in technology?
Note 3: Having boundaries
Note 3: Invisible ties
Note 3: Absolute or relative value
Note 4: If society’s straining apart, what do we do?
Note 4: Making adjustments
Note 4: The power of understanding

Very much related to this, And, how much can we care? looked at the place for feeling in how we view the world.

In all of life, there are ties that bind us. All these contracts, commitments or relationships that remind us how we’re connected with other beings or organisations. Any form of agreement, though, is effectively just a legal solidification of intentions; setting out obligations and expectations more clearly for both sides.

There are those relationships we’re born into, such as family, country or generation. Then, the sense of agreement that often runs alongside those things: ideas of duty, respect, responsibility; of forging ties and developing those relationships, simply by way of our existing within them. Society itself can traditionally be seen as such a contract, a set of rights and obligations we benefit from but essentially didn’t ask for or actively agree to.

Every area of life’s conceivably made up of these invisible agreements that sustain, enrich, support or, perhaps, aggravate us. Theoretically, we stand in relationship to everything else (see Notes One). Some things stand ‘below’ us, offering warmth, food, shelter, and other natural resources. Some approach, to stand closer alongside us as companions, friends; or seek to place themselves ahead, as leaders.

We might look at that in terms of nature, with all its systems, interactions, and bi-products so essential to our existence; or, we could look to society and all the ways our lives and activities intersect to build up or strain apart shared realities (Notes Two). It just seems all of life’s comprised of such connections, everything touching in on everything else and sparking these long chains of causality among us all.

What does that mean? Is there value in seeing life as being, in every direction, connected? In taking time to explore how each of our words, attitudes and choices filters out through reality that way, leading to countless repercussions, impacts and related consequences? If we’re these points of understanding, reflection and decision, then surely, in some way, everything passes through us?

It’s something so vast to think about: how each of us is the centre of our own personal ‘web’ of understanding and action. That we all stand within these relationships to others and the world, our choices actively shaping those realities as we let some things go but insist on keeping hold of others (Notes Three). There’s a lot of responsibility there, quite a burden to the idea that that’s where we stand.

Even just looking to human relationships, there’s this sense in which all our communications directly impact those around us. Careless words or attitudes, hasty judgements or reactions all fire off into the lives of others; perhaps becoming their view of themselves, their worth through your eyes, the reflection the world in general offers them as a human being (Notes Four). It’s powerful stuff, when you think about it too deeply.

And it seems like a reality that’s ‘true’ whether or not we’re aware of it: we might create such impacts through ignorance, disregard, or an imperfect understanding of what’s going on. Where we go from that point is an interesting question.

Notes and References:

Note 1: Interdependency
Note 1: Ideas that tie things together
Note 1: Some thoughts about ‘life’
Note 2: If society’s straining apart, what do we do?
Note 2: How important is real life?
Note 3: The philosopher stance
Note 3: What we bring to life
Note 3: The need for discernment
Note 4: The dignity & power of a human life
Note 4: Conversation as revelation

Conversations around responsibility are often interesting: are we talking about looking back and assigning a form of blame; looking forward and saddling people with a sense of foreboding; or placing them in the present with empowering, but realistic, expectations of their capacity?

If we’re looking back, it’s pretty much a given that we’re going to find imperfection. To my eyes, life’s often a path from ignorance to understanding as we learn from mistakes to correct those things we didn’t know (see Notes One). Western thinking apparently wants to look back and see only cause for pride – life as an unbroken chain of our perfect efforts – but realities seem more flawed.

In that light, do we resign ourselves to letting the past dictate our future? Is that past, the things it set in motion, something we cannot alter through admission of error or new perspective? Is the ego too fragile or sense of vengeance too strong to allow anyone to step out from an imperfect past and make something good from lessons learnt the hard way?

As I said, it’s just interesting. Because it applies across the board in life: personally, socially, collectively we’re in all these situations that have a past that’s often somewhat questionable. Decisions were made based on the best understanding of the time; plans might’ve been put in place, hoping to guide things wisely; then, reality played itself out.

Within all that there’s so much scope for error. In big or little ways these things can drift off track through how people came to interact with them, things that might’ve been overlooked, or new realities such solutions are having to contend with. We’re then left in these flawed situations that, arguably, someone’s responsible for.

If that’s the case, what’s the right response? The past effectively put us here; through our fault or someone else’s. If it’s ours, do we write ourselves off as incapable? If theirs, do we leave it in their hands and suffer through the imperfection? The one who does something generally risks being made responsible so, logically, we might be better off doing nothing. At least then we can’t be blamed.

But where does that lead? Fears of being mistaken or held accountable seem to risk dependency or passivity, where we might claim it’s not our problem. Leaving things to others, to ‘professionals’ or the protection of consumer relationships, we can avoid that risk of responsibility and rest ‘safely’ behind inaction. Life itself then incapacitates us: initiative becomes strangled by fear if we don’t attempt anything new.

Life’s surely a set of systems we all play our part in (Notes Two). And thought’s funny in that it doesn’t always help us find the right paths (Notes Three). But while we mightn’t have caused the situations we find ourselves in, not taking ownership of them seems to tap on the door of human agency and responsibility. Remaining passive, we might avoid accountability; but, as a link in the chain, does that help make anything better?

Notes and References:

Note 1: Starting over in life
Note 1: Making adjustments
Note 1: The dignity & power of a human life
Note 1: Dealing with imperfection
Note 2: Interdependency
Note 2: Having boundaries
Note 2: Finding flaws
Note 3: The philosopher stance
Note 3: Strange arrogance of thought
Note 3: Codes of behaviour

Conceivably, we could relate ourselves to any other person in life. We might attempt to do so genetically or historically through delving into a family tree; socially or economically through some sort of comparison of our relative status, power or security; or maybe more personally through exploring common interests or social ties.

It’s one way of looking at what we’re doing ‘all the time’: relating to people, finding meaning, establishing a sense of what we can offer each other, maybe forming partnerships or contracts. All the ways we might forge connections for personal, emotional, social, professional or economic advantage. Life could be viewed as those webs of relationship, overlaying and intersecting in various ways.

Presumably it’s quite a ‘valuable’ way of looking at life, as otherwise industries wouldn’t invest such resources into mapping how it’s all playing out online: how social connections influence choices; who has most power and how they might use it to affect the decisions of others; what all this says about us or human nature more generally.

Life ‘is’ relationship, in a way. It’s where we express ourselves, find recognition and hopefully belonging; shaping the lives we lead and paths we take. In so many ways we’re giving life social meaning through what we engage with, the priorities we act upon, and how we’re rubbing shoulders with one another each day.

Maybe that idea of human relationships has ‘always’ come down to notions of status, power and influence? It’s certainly one way of seeing people: focusing on specific measures of social, personal or economic potential, and evaluating where we stand in relation to that. Viewing others strategically in terms of your own ends or expectations has never sat comfortably with my views on life, but I see it’s a reality in many ways.

Beyond that though, it is of course true that we all stand in relationship to one another. We might tug at the threads in different ways to understand ‘how’ exactly, but in almost any avenue of life we’d likely be able to establish some sense of our relative positions. In terms of politics, consumer choices, cultural preferences, personal priorities, lifestyle, we could map out where any two people stand.

It’s interesting, as clearly people can be ‘evaluated’ in terms of interests and patterns of behaviour. It’s the stuff of data profiling, workplace personality assessments, online dating algorithms, and so on. It’s one way of approaching self-development: to chart how your life looks right now and where you’d ideally like to make changes. We ‘can’ be mapped, to a fairly large extent.

As is probably clear from my writing, it’s not how I choose to look at life (see Notes One); but I acknowledge it might offer a certain level of insight. From my perspective, I see it as more insightful to think in terms of agency: that we might take hold of ourselves in new ways to creatively embody the values that matter most to us within those social, ecological or economic relationships.

Notes and References:

Note 1: What we bring to life
Note 1: Worthless, or priceless?
Note 1: How we feel about society
Note 1: Having boundaries
Note 1: The creativity of living