Reading time about 9 minutes
('Talking Cure includes listening, conveying, holding)
Feeding each other’s minds
In Zeldin’s view, Socrates was a teacher who
wouldn’t teach!
Instead, he was the first known
conversationalist, believing in dialogue because it discounted argument in
favour of politeness, tact, soul-shared learning. “Individuals could not be
intelligent on their own… they needed someone else to stimulate them”. (Zeldin,
T. 1998)
We depend on each other in many ways, feed each other in many ways. An ancient story told by Piero Ferrucci (Ferrucci, p. 2004):
“A
man was given permission to visit Heaven and Hell while he was still alive. He
went first to Hell, and there he saw a great gathering of people seated at long
tables set with rich and abundant food. Yet these people were starving and
weeping.
The
visitor saw the reason: their spoons and forks were longer than their arms, so
that they were unable to bring food to their mouths.
Next
the man went to Heaven, where he saw the same setting: long tables richly
garnished with food of every kind. Here, too, the people had spoons and forks
longer than their arms and were likewise unable to feed themselves. Yet they
were joyful and well fed. But they were not trying to feed themselves.
They
were feeding each other”.
Not just food, but energy, beauty, variety, thoughts ….
In these times we continue to be swamped by information, numerous sources and channels, yet struggle to build a picture of what is truly happening, struggle to unearth truth. Fake news, propaganda, rumour, distortion, lies, conflicting world views, selective censoring and silence practiced by the media don't help the situation! So independent thinking and dialogue rooted in objective moral value, non dualistic thinking and open-mindedness blended with prudence and a well-functioning critical faculty becomes more and more valuable. Hopefully paving a way to meaningful conversation exchanges.
Aspects of Dialogue
David Bohm’s concept of dialogue is rooted in
notion of shared exploration and discovery, and informs much of the dynamics of
circle work (Bohm, D. 1996):
Dialogue in action: Zubin Mehta and Placido Domingo in concert, feeling into each other:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc_24Ya5Y4E
The aspiration of dialogue is a free flow of meaning, a raising of consciousness, building of relationships and enhanced communication in a group that is a microcosm of society. (Bohm’s call for dialogue is wonderful, but his method cumbersome (high group numbers, protracted period of time, frequent meeting, lack of agenda or facilitation) hence our preference for circle work based on the same principles but a different methodology)
ON COMMUNICATION
Because thoughts or ideas are notoriously
difficult to define and largely misrepresented and misunderstood, they may be
maintained and leveraged by a small collective. However, sound dialogue has the
potential to glue together a fragmented humanity by throwing light on an idea. In
dialogue, even assumptions and frictions between conversationalists, and
misperceived intent through poor listening, holds the possibility generating
new insights, greater understanding and new meaning.
The process must not aim at coming to
conclusions, solving problems, taking action, but building better
representations of ideas. And be trusted because thought grows, continuously
develops itself.
The aim is big. Consider that built up over centuries is an independent, unconscious pool of know-how that far exceeds the limitation of individuals - collective representations fed to us from this thought pool are not true reality, but polluted reality. So, it behoves us to deepen our discernment and consider ideas (givens) in a new way. And that we cannot continue to try and solve our internal or relational ‘problems’ in technical problem-solving manner. (Think about the range of misunderstandings, misrepresentations, perceptions that are raised by different people on basic givens or ideas – yet the ideas continue to be non – neutral, accepted once boxed into one’s own definition only, give rise to ‘problems’ to be solved instead of ideas to be changed.
Capitalism. Communism. Democracy. Eugenics. Elitism.
Artificial Intelligence. Abundance. Positive thinking. Scientific expertise.
Black Lives Matter. Gender bias. Social distancing. Collective good…)
Walls block listening. Separate and fragment. Through dialogue, recognising similarities and differences regarding an idea may highlight something new to those engaged – a shared, new creation may emerge, overcoming even unconscious blocking or interference).
ON DIALOGUE
Society lacks coherent shared meaning making
it likely to fall apart in many areas. Dialogue allows for a stream of meaning
that flows among, through and between us. It’s about sharing and grasping
meaning (bridges) – NOT solving, analysing, proving, winning as we defend
beliefs, assumptions, worldviews – and avoid uncomfortable cognitive dissonance
(walls).
By nature, we tend to set up (and cast in
concrete) independent entities – nations, religions, disciplines, ideas – which
are outcomes of our thought process. We tend towards self - interest, believe truth
is as we see it, groupings (because we need connection and validation).
If we pended our assumptions, beliefs then through dialogue we can allow them to dissolve, grow towards new perceptions and sensitivity, and participatory consciousness can happen.
THE NATURE OF COLLECTIVE THOUGHT
In a troubled, conflicted world, new thought
creeps in and prevails over us all because most of our thought is collective,
shaped by influences and what we experience. We “see the world according to
the general collective representations circulating around or society and
culture …”
(One can here sense why rumour,
propaganda, misinformation on a grand scale, menticide programmes can be so
powerful and effective. Our challenge is of course to change collective
(mis)representations in the right way)
THE PROBLEM AND THE PARADOX
We face a multitude of new, big, complex
‘problems’ today and feel that they require ‘discussion’ and the “putting
forward” of ‘solutions’ (the Greek meaning of solution is “put forward”).
Into our endeavours and without questioning the ideas we discuss, we bring our
presuppositions, assumption, understandings, definitions of parts and
relationships.
Relational (individual, group, international),
psychological, societal problems can’t be treated as problems. They are
paradoxical and our own individual paradoxes are a deeply rooted, inherent
aspect of ourselves. Vices are unsolvable paradoxes.
THE OBSERVER AND THE OBSERVED
“Normally we don’t see that our assumptions
are affecting the nature of our observations”. They are a lens. A sort of
‘observer’. And all of our ‘ideas’ are pre-wrapped for us by the wider
collective. (Here alone is a good justification for Bohm’s notion of dialogue)
SUSPENSION, THE BODY, AND PROPRIOCEPTION
Suspending judgment and suspension before
acting is suppressing thoughts or feelings until a right response can be made –
for example awareness of one’s aggression allows unfiltered observation, an
ability to lighten and balance a potentially wrong response. (Think mindful
awareness as a brake to support anger management).
Like the body, thought has movement, is a
process, an element in an interconnected system, a set of reflexes which may be
liable to warning/ alert, insight and change.
Proprioception is a sense or self-perception
of movement, force, body position mediated by neurons located in our muscles,
tendons, joints – an extension of our mind.
Clearly in dialogue suspension, the body and
proprioception can play a positive role.
PARTICIPATORY THOUGHT AND THE UNLIMITED
Thoughts are always a work in progress. Ideas
under construction. And dialogue fits under the heading of participatory
conversation towards collective meaning making.
Indigenous cultures have long adopted such a
way of communicating and being.
This has enhanced their bond to nature, their
deep understanding of our connectivity.
Simple Principles of dialogue
Dialogue is then an inquiry into the process of
collective thinking. Bohm believed that such a form of exchanging ideas about
ideas was of absolutely crucial relevance to transforming culture and setting
it free from misinformation and misrepresentation.
· Every participant listens, suspends judgment, does not attack ideas. Suspends assumptions. Doesn’t impede the flow of the dialogue.
· Every participant is transparent, honest, open as possible and does not hold back in order to be ‘politically correct’
· Ideas become shared and built-upon by all. Synergy becomes a regular dynamic.
Dialogue moves us from being hate-based to being heart-based.
In dialoguing we see each other through, don’t see
through each other. There is a sense that in the process of true dialogue we
lose self to the collective.
Dynamics of Circle Work
Circles are NOT places for holding meetings
and debates.
They have been around in many cultures
(historical, modern and indigenous) and many applications for many years in
many forms. In our process we include as many Dialogue aspects and thinking as
is feasible. https://culturescan.biz/the-magic-of-perspective-the-culturescan-process/
Tasks are carried out (outperforming all other
setups in our view) by a small group of people. But the power of circles lies
in the building of relationships, being a crucible for shared leadership, a
space where people take on responsibility in a new way.
(Peter Block answered the question “In one
sentence, what are the essential underlying factors or dynamics that give rise
to the spirit and power of these circles?” in this way: “A fully functioning
circle welcomes strangers. The members refrain from offering help and advice.
Participants are heard for who they are. They receive affirmation that there is
nothing wrong with them. This makes leadership as we know it, obsolete. Members
are present for each other”) (Block, P. 2020).
We characterise circles as a:
·
Container. A
unique social construct, a safe and confidential space
·
Incubator. A cultivation
and nurturing of the whole person (physical, intellectual, emotional, social,
spiritual), deeper mindfulness, deeper relating, and thinking with a bigger,
more beautiful mind. And of a shared emergent future
·
Relationship
builder. Where people can be. And be together. Belong. Experience presence and
compassion. Circle participation equips individuals to connect across all
diversities with love, compassion, commitment, respect and honesty. Without
deception of self nor of others).
·
Conversation facilitator.
Deep conversations happen. Presence is choosing to be fully in the present
moment in terms of one’s sensory, relational, intuitive and interconnectivity
realities, and to be attuned to others, be open, vulnerable and be there for
them. Dan Siegel: “Presence is the portal for integration, and integration
is the basis of health and well-being… But is also fully relational, honouring
the personal self of me and the interconnected self of we ...” (Siegel, D.
2018) Stories – the currency of meaning – is exchanged.
·
Learning space.
The learning space provided by circle methodology (and reinforcing work
conducted outside of circle activities) stimulates both learning and new ways
of learning and allows for a bridging of the individuals and group’s past and
the future. This often leads to the letting go of ‘baggage’ that has been
limiting growth, and an embracing of an expanding of every aspect of their
personhood – intellectual, social, emotional and spiritual.
·
Enlarger. The
experience of circle work, over time, leads to the emergence of people who have
‘enlarged’. For different people this may be in terms of physical embodiment,
bigger and more beautiful thinking, emotional and social intelligence, or even
a transcendent state – appreciating connectivity, understanding capacities,
possessing character virtues, and developing maturities (cognitive, social,
emotional, ethical and spiritual). The Antony Gormley sculpture hints at this
emergence.
(Williams, G. 2022)
We must never diminish the power and meaning of circle work.
The world in which we live is characterised by social isolation and uprooted values – causes of widespread anxiety, depression and trauma. Circles offer a way out of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MB5IX-np5fE Johann Hari
In Native American Indigenous culture, circles themselves were considered sacred and imbued with divine presence. Now that’s a non-Western, non-egoic way of thinking! (Except that as Jung has said, “The most powerful religious symbol is the circle. The circle is one of the great primordial images of mankind, that in considering the symbol of the circle we are analysing the self”. (Campbell, J. 2022) Each participant when given the power to speak or listen becomes part of that sacredness
Circles are much, much more than solving
problems or completing tasks. They are places where:
·
people attend to
each other in a deeply spiritual, transformative way
·
a shared
thought-pool emerges, as does real community
·
a raising of consciousness
happens through the sharing our stories
Closing Thoughts
There is little doubt that the times in which we live are hostile, divisive and fragmenting at all levels (individuals, relationships, communities, organisations, nations) - which trend is fuelled by propaganda and lies. The good news is that we have the minds, characteristics, capacities and technologies/ methods to develop true dialogue and bring healing and new life to our society.
Those wrestling with spiritual dilemmas do not need
answers but presence - permission to confront the dilemma and struggle with it
aloud”. (Kurtz, E and Ketcham, K. 1994)
“It’s coming from the circle that we are each other’s medicine” – Professor Ruby Mendenhall, University of Illinois
REFLECTION QUESTIONS
1. How important is deep conversation, true dialogue and the building of connections and relationships, of esteem and belonging, in the world that we inhabit today?
2. In your situation is your leadership ready to let go and allow employees (or community members or circle participants) to freely participate in confidential circles and assume responsibility for implementing suggestions/ recommendations?
3. In your view how does circle work differ from more “left-brain” approaches to problems or ideas (for example systems thinking, agile) and what do you believe are the advantages or disadvantages of these differences?
REFERENCES
Block, Peter (2020) Leadership and
the Small Group Common Good Collective
https://commongood.cc/reader/leadership-and-the-small-group-by-peter-block/
Bohm,
David (1996) On Dialogue (edited by Lee Nichol) Routledge, London and
New York
Campbell, Joseph (2022) Interviewed
by Bill Moyers: Joseph Campbell and the Power of Myth. Episode 6 ‘Masks of
Eternity’ 23 August 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5g9RVCPePDk
Ferrucci,
Piero (2004) What We May Be: techniques for psychological and spiritual
growth through psychosynthesis Jeremy P. Tarcher/ Penguin
Hari,
Johann (2019) This Could Be Why You Are Depressed or Anxious 11 October, 2019
Youtube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MB5IX-np5fE
Kurtz,
Ernest and Ketcham, Katherine (1994) The Spirituality of Imperfection:
storytelling and the journey to wholeness Bantam Books
Siegel, Daniel J. MD (2018) Aware:
the science and practice of presence (The ground-breaking meditation practice)
Perigee www.drdansiegel.com/resources/wheel_of_awareness/
Zeldin, Theodore (1998) An Intimate History
of Humanity Vintage
Williams, Graham (2022) The Use of Circle
Work by Modern - Day Leaders Handout for Storify Your Culture Conference,
2022
No comments:
Post a Comment