Wednesday, March 26, 2008

The Connection Between Assumptions 1 and 2

Before going on to Assumption 3, it can be useful to consider how the first two assumptions are sometimes connected. When we are in an environment of stable growth there is a sense of predictability and security. In that kind of context, we tend to use our intellect more easily. And the measured, considered exploration we typically exhibit under these conditions tends to support stability, and controlled growth.

This is the paradigm of philosophical inquiry and scientific experimentation. People in this environment tend to take it for granted, and expect it to continue. They assume stability and continuity.

In different circumstances, a disruptive event takes people by surprise, and generates newly focused attention; but the stress often engages the ancient physiological mechanisms for fighting or fleeing. Adrenaline and cortisol flood the body and the brain, and plentiful glucose becomes available to muscles and tissues. Responses are quicker, but more instinctual, reacting to each threatening event. The mind is much less reflective and discerning, responding to the immediate present much more than the possible future. Often these responses tend to add energy to the crisis, and make matter worse.

So this is the paradigm of emotional reactivity. We are seeing a lot more of this in news broadcasts, for example, partly because our world is becoming more tumultuous, and also because media executives have discovered that crisis commands much more attention from viewers than does thoughtful, reflective news analysis.

Major disasters are tragic, but they increase viewer ratings. So does reporting of war events, sports contests, and election campaigning by candidates. Reporters' questions tend to elicit adversarial and controversial views much more than reflective exploration of issues, policies, and plans. And viewers cooperate by letting themselves be drawn to such reporting, and forming increasingly polarized though superficial views and commitments. We are addicted to adrenaline, and it is rotting our brains and our society, at a time when pressing social and environmental issues require thoughtful, well-considered planning and social policy.

As our world moves toward the possibility of serious, even catastrophic crises in climate change, energy depletion, and water and food shortages, the tendency to experience the adrenaline madness of crisis response and polarization may increase, instead of what we'll need the most--calm focused analysis, shared reflection and dialogue on a large scale, leading to enlightened social policy, government leadership, and civic engagement at all levels.

By the time lemmings realize they are running toward a cliff edge, the crowd behind them is pushing them inexorably forward, enthusiastically, madly, driven by the shared passion for progress toward something important in front of them, just out of sight, and hoping to get there before the others while there is some of that left. Are there any lemmings near the back, wondering what the fuss is all about, and considering other options?

1 comment:

Saul Eisen, Ph.D. said...

This exploration of assumptions in our lives can be enriched and made more tangible by concrete illustrations and short stories. Can you describe a situation in your own experience where people under stress were behaving reactively and inadvertently making things worse? Or any situations where a mindful, wise response helped to defuse the crisis?