Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn’t. –Mark Twain
It bucks the tide of years of education, reinforced by decades of expertise-building. Yet, my trying to “get it right” often erodes the end I have in mind: wise insight supporting empowered action. The more I focus on figuring stuff out—especially when I might have to defend it—the less wise and impactful I am.
How Could that Be?
Did you read that subtitle as a challenging question, informed by a disbelieving position: “How could thatbe?” [No way!]
Or did it come to you from a place of wonder and curiosity: “How could that be?” [Wow! I can’t wait to find out!]
It’s not that learning has the aim of dumbing us down. There’s a kind of agenda-free discovery that builds wisdom.
Still, I find that “knowing stuff” often narrows my perspective, perhaps an unintentional result of a system that wants us to learn…but in fact rewards us for being right and embracing what’s widely accepted. Figuring-it-out-based “intelligence” can alienate those who are not already onboard. It defeats my purpose of wanting to “connect and enroll”—a dynamic, instead, of “comply and cajole.”
Or did it come to you from a place of wonder and curiosity: “How could that be?” [Wow! I can’t wait to find out!]
It’s not that learning has the aim of dumbing us down. There’s a kind of agenda-free discovery that builds wisdom.
Still, I find that “knowing stuff” often narrows my perspective, perhaps an unintentional result of a system that wants us to learn…but in fact rewards us for being right and embracing what’s widely accepted. Figuring-it-out-based “intelligence” can alienate those who are not already onboard. It defeats my purpose of wanting to “connect and enroll”—a dynamic, instead, of “comply and cajole.”
The Multiple Possibility Waveform—An Experiment
Consider this alternative to zeroing in on the one best answer. In seeking powerful insight, allow multiple possibilities and keep them open.
Try this experiment: a traditional “right answer” lens, and an alternative “multiple possibility waveform” lens. Apply them to a controversy you are experiencing. My example: a potential client wrote wanting to defer work, so she can do other healing first.
For the “right answer” lens, rest in the mode we normally inhabit. What’s the right answer? How do I figure it out? Is it this one? Is it that one? What happens if I get it wrong? My example: should I say “Whatever supports you?” “Maybe that’s a signal to DO coaching, vs. delaying it?” Or something else? There is energy in trying to figure out what this client should do, and how to support that outcome.
Now: notice what you’re feeling. For me, it’s an easy, comfortable place. My mind gets busy with “figuring it out” energy. (In my example, how does this relate to other clients who’ve deferred?)But there’s also considerable anxiety—since it feels like there’s only one right answer, what happens if I miss it? That anxiety keeps me in my head and defensive. I’m closed to new possibilities.
Try this experiment: a traditional “right answer” lens, and an alternative “multiple possibility waveform” lens. Apply them to a controversy you are experiencing. My example: a potential client wrote wanting to defer work, so she can do other healing first.
For the “right answer” lens, rest in the mode we normally inhabit. What’s the right answer? How do I figure it out? Is it this one? Is it that one? What happens if I get it wrong? My example: should I say “Whatever supports you?” “Maybe that’s a signal to DO coaching, vs. delaying it?” Or something else? There is energy in trying to figure out what this client should do, and how to support that outcome.
Now: notice what you’re feeling. For me, it’s an easy, comfortable place. My mind gets busy with “figuring it out” energy. (In my example, how does this relate to other clients who’ve deferred?)But there’s also considerable anxiety—since it feels like there’s only one right answer, what happens if I miss it? That anxiety keeps me in my head and defensive. I’m closed to new possibilities.
My example: the client emailed, so initially I limited thoughts about my own response to email as well. But, would it be better to call? More anxiety as there’s more right/wrong choices! As I start to go down a path to the right answer, I’ve spent so much time trying to justify my selection, I find I’m rather attached to that choice.The “comfort” is that of a prison cell—familiar, yet limiting and cold.
Yeeesh!
OK, now try the second lens. Here, the power comes not from focusing on the one right answer. Rather, from entertaining multiple good enough answers, and opening up the possibility of more. Here’s a metaphor: if you had a deck of cards, method one is trying to draw the Ace of Spades…method two is holding/seeing many cards at once.
In my example, I realize I’m taking responsibility for a choice that’s not mine. As I relinquish the fear of being wrong, I open to a greater sense of trust in myself and my client, and a relaxed way to communicate, including some pros and cons. A vibration emerges that feels like it’s building relationship, hope, and well-being, whatever the decision. And I feel my heart open, too, as I relax into playful curiosity…maybe even a greater intelligence
In my example, I realize I’m taking responsibility for a choice that’s not mine. As I relinquish the fear of being wrong, I open to a greater sense of trust in myself and my client, and a relaxed way to communicate, including some pros and cons. A vibration emerges that feels like it’s building relationship, hope, and well-being, whatever the decision. And I feel my heart open, too, as I relax into playful curiosity…maybe even a greater intelligence
Let's Play! Where?
Areas that attract skepticism have been fertile ground for me--NDEs (near death experiences), for example. Laurin Bellg, MD in Near Death in the ICU: Stories from Patients Near Death and Why We Should Listen to Them, offers a fresh perspective. Many caregivers, intending to be supportive, dismiss these often profoundly meaningful NDE experiences. How could a patient view themselves outside their body, see past loved ones, etc.? Such denial not only erodes the caregiver’s relationship, but also disturbs the patient and hinders recovery. Why invalidate? Why not allow multiple possibilities that include “maybe it didn’t happen…AND maybe it did?” As she quotes Carl Sagan, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”
Or, consider “traditional” vs. “restorative” justice. Focusing on judging guilt and assigning punishment, the traditional system hasn’t done so well in preventing infractions or reducing recidivism--let alone healing the anguish crime and its punishment create. Restorative justice aims at repair rather than judgment—of the infraction, the circumstances, and healing the wounds to all parties involved. When victims, offenders and community members meet, the results can be transformational. I’m studying it!
Where else? Artificial Intelligence researchers are building smarter systems by leaving room for questions—e.g., self-driving algorithms that slow/signal when alternative views arise.
Or, consider “traditional” vs. “restorative” justice. Focusing on judging guilt and assigning punishment, the traditional system hasn’t done so well in preventing infractions or reducing recidivism--let alone healing the anguish crime and its punishment create. Restorative justice aims at repair rather than judgment—of the infraction, the circumstances, and healing the wounds to all parties involved. When victims, offenders and community members meet, the results can be transformational. I’m studying it!
Where else? Artificial Intelligence researchers are building smarter systems by leaving room for questions—e.g., self-driving algorithms that slow/signal when alternative views arise.
Extra!
I’m finishing this at a Pachamama Alliance gathering, featuring renowned speakers on sustainability, social justice, and spiritual reconnection. I asked Charles Eisenstein (author of The More Beautiful World Our Hearts Know is Possible) about how he’s built his own attunement. He said: “I don’t really have any especially impressive practices…but I will say that one is asking the question of ‘what is it like to be you?’” He explained how that’s an antidote to our habit of finding the problem and killing it, getting instead at the root conditions and uncomfortably broader perspectives. He called for “embracing the not knowing.” “Let’s admit ‘we don’t know what to do….’ That’s a lot better than thinking we know what to do, doing it, and making things worse.”
So, do your own experiments on allowing multiple possibilities and keeping ambiguity open. And share what you discover here!
So, do your own experiments on allowing multiple possibilities and keeping ambiguity open. And share what you discover here!
RSS Feed
