To continue with this month's theme of giving and taking, let's take it to the collective level. Democrats and Republicans. Two opposing views of how to form rules that govern giving and taking within our social structures. Moving our awareness outward to the collective level, how do we recognize giving and taking in our public life?
Social and political structures have something in common, both strive to find ways for everyone to get along. To order our interactions, they form rules that guide our thinking and behaviors. What is considered an acceptable amount of giving and taking is always the question as these rules are created. The two main opposing views on this topic serve to reinforce the two-dimensional instinct response. Our policy-making system effectively squashes multidimensional approaches. So what do we do?
Boiling things down to their most simple terms clarifies decision making. Our ego/instinct shows this to be true. When in survival mode, simple and fast decisions are necessary. That is why the ego/instinct functions in this two-dimensional thinking. This way or that way. When problems seem complicated, we begin finding workable solutions by boiling them down to the most basic elements. In this case, policies are set by those who want to give more, and those who want to take more. That is the boiled down simple way of viewing our political structure. But choosing left or right will not suffice for a global population of almost 8 billion. There are finite resources and the current distribution of those resources is not a sustainable system.
Two dimensions is a good starting point, but not a long-term working model. We can start with the most simple perspective (two options) and build out layers from there. Our morals will dictate how that happens. And it is the intersection of morals where the two opposing views are discordant. Is it moral to create an economic system that allows a handful of people to own and control the vast majority of resources? Is it moral to allow “lazy” people to mooch off of others? (To clarify, I don’t believe people are lazy. People are afraid of their own greatness, or they feel too oppressed to succeed, in my view). These are the points of argument that drive our policies.
Where is the middle ground of giving and taking? Clearly with the population as it is, and growing, the old ways of “winner take all” will not work. Collectively, we are moving into a new paradigm of problem-solving. Relying on the perceptions of ego/instinct and its two-dimensional thinking will no longer suffice either. Moving into a multidimensional process is necessary to create new policies that govern appropriate use of all resources for all people, animals and the planet. Giving and taking can be regulated in a fair and moral way, but we must change to make that happen.
It’s do or die time. The planet cannot sustain us at current levels of consumption and waste. Solving problems will require a perception shift for individuals because it is the individuals that make up the collective. All of us can begin by understanding how the ego/instinct dominates our thinking, and how to stop letting it do that. The ego/instinct is not a bad thing. This isn’t about good or bad. This is about knowledge of what drives us so that we can become better problem-solvers. It is time.
The Archedomi™ model can show you exactly how your ego/instinct functions to create problems when you don’t need them, and it will show you exactly what you need to do to move into a multidimensional perspective. Why do you need that? Because without that knowledge, your ego/instinct will continue to try to solve problems with the very limited view through a two-dimensional lens. You don't have to be in that trap. At HumanADifferentWay, we teach how to recognize and change this instinctual attribute.
Tell us what you think about this topic in the comments below.
Comments