“How wonderful that we have met with a paradox. Now we have some hope of making progress.” Niels Bohr (1885-1962), Danish physicist & philosopher who made foundational contributions to our understanding of atomic structure and quantum theory.
Paradox: noun, par-a-dox
A paradox, at first glance, is a statement that can seem absurd, contradictory, and opposed to common sense. But it holds the possibility of being true. Some familiar examples include ‘less is more’, ‘jumbo shrimp’, ‘I know one thing; that I know nothing’, and ‘This statement is false’. A paradox can also be simple or thought provoking. When I think of ‘jumbo shrimp’, for example, I tend not to linger on the absurdity of the combination of words or how it affects my life. When I think of other not-so-common examples, such as ‘humility in mastery’, ‘universality through specificity’, or ‘fortunate misfortune’, however… these give me pause.
As you’ve probably gathered by now, we’re in a time of change…BIG change. One might even call it a ‘paradigm shift’. When we consider this, including the pace of this shift, a lot of the collective conversation could be summed up as our world trying to find a way (gracefully… or not 😉) to transition from an ‘OR’ state to an ‘AND’ state world.
There’s a saying, “All models are wrong, but some models are useful”. This saying is attributed to George E. P. Box, a British mathematician and professor of statistics. In the context of this statement it appears that, just possibly, the current model we’ve built much of our lives around is in need of an upgrade. Our political and economic systems are breaking down and not sustainable in the long term; our educational system is broken and needs a solid reboot; a lot of our communities are in need of rebuilding trust and hope for the future. It’s no longer an option to think of the world in terms of you OR me (not that I believe that ever worked in the first place), but it’s about finding a way to inclusivity through you AND me.
Just as certain concepts in quantum physics are accepted as ‘true’, even though they seem to defy logic (i.e. a single particle can be in two places at the same time), can we learn to get comfortable with the idea that not everything in life is easily explained by the models that we used to, or maybe still do, hold as true?
For example, when a seeming misfortune befalls us (i.e. we lose our job, our marriage falls apart, we read another challenging news report, a close family member or friend moves away), is it possible that as tough as those situations and the emotions that come up around them can be, that we can also choose to see another side to the situation? Maybe you had to energetically release a job because you needed space to consider a better opportunity that’s more satisfying and offers better benefits or a higher salary; maybe you and your partner were a great fit 10 years ago but have grown as individuals, your connection has changed and isn’t serving the deeper version of yourself that you hold to be true; we can’t always do something about the events happening around the world, but we can always do something to positively affect our local communities, even if it’s just offering a smile to passersby or volunteering at a local event that supports a cause you believe in; and with the technology we have today, it’s relatively simple to stay in touch with our loved ones, and that empty house next door might be the perfect place for another family to move into who has kids the same age as yours. Can we hold – just for a moment, as we consider other possibilities and perspectives – that maybe there’s more to what we once thought to be the whole truth?
This is a time in our history, more than ever, where we need to start to flex and build this muscle…to be able to look at two seemingly disparate truths and, without fully understanding the rationale or logic – assuming there is any that our human brains can understand – hold the possibility that they might both be true. We don’t always see or know the full picture of an event or situation, even if we think that we do.
There’s a theory, or tool, developed by Chris Argyris, called the ‘Ladder of Inference’ (check out www.mindtools.com), also known as the ‘Process of Abstraction’. It describes a process we go through – usually in our subconscious mind so we don’t even realize it’s happening – which takes us from a particular version of reality to some sort of decision or action. It’s a method that breaks down our internal processing, which can help us avoid jumping to conclusions. It goes something like this:
- We have an experience that’s selectively processed based on our beliefs and previous experiences we use to filter our current situation.
- We apply – most times without even realizing it – our assumptions to this experience.
- We interpret the meaning of that experience using a biased filter, including those assumptions.
- We then draw conclusions as to the meaning of this experience based on those interpreted facts and assumptions.
- We develop new, or reinforce existing, beliefs based on the conclusions we’ve drawn.
- We take actions that seem ‘right’ based on what we believe about our experience.
Using this tool, we can see how often there’s more to a story than what we’re processing in our own version of events. Just as a pilot taking off in bad weather has a limited view of his surroundings, once he gets above the cloud line his visibility improves and therefore he gets a clearer view of where he is and where he’s headed. Considering the paradox again, is it possible when we come across these seemingly unresolved coupling of ideas or phrases that maybe it’s just a matter of taking a different perspective on the matter? Taking a step back to consider other possibilities before jumping head first into another assumed and very personal conclusion?
Here’s to us always being inspired to seek or to share a different perspective, to show us what we can’t see and to teach us about the beauty that exists in complexity.