Optical illusion and our perception of self/environment

“A human being is part of a whole, called by us the Universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separated from the rest a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circles of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.” ~Albert Einstein

If you look at the image above you may see a vase or upon further examination you can also see two faces looking at each other,but it is difficult for our eyes to see both at the same time…this concept led to the important insight that the training of our brain determined what our eyes would see first and also its tendency not to see the whole picture.

According to Gestalt Psychology the diagram of the vase is the figure and the two faces are the ground…this perception is equally true when looking at the interrelationship of our self and environment…they are inseparable,interrelated and interdependent…but we usually learn to focus our attention on the self (ego)and tend to ignore the environment…social conditioning is inclined to stress the importance of the self while encouraging us to ignore and exploit our environment…this has become a source of serious problems not only in our alienation from Nature but we are also finding it is destructive to live in a way inconsistent with the natural intelligence of our environment…it is becoming clear we are dependent on a balanced relationship with our environment or we will not survive.

Our mistaken perception of seeing our self as the primary factor in our relationship to the environment occurred by a false assumption in social learning which can be corrected …we may still find the clarity possibly through science that this assumption is false which can lead to an understading our harmony with the environment is necessary for our well being and survival.


“The true value of a human being is determined by the measure and the sense in which they have obtained liberation from the self”~ Albert Einstein

Reblogged from Right Brain Cafe

Serena

Thought for Copenhagen

Hey, its Jeff here =)

So what is my message for Copenhagen? Do I push for more radical changes than the ones proposed? Do I shout that the leaders were wrong to give up hope of a legally binding protocol to replace Kyoto? Or should I just leave a message of support for what is, to be honest, relatively a big leap forward?

Now I, for one, am not one who wishes to impose thoughts to people; I’m not exemplary at argueing and forcing an opponent to concede. Instead, I prefer to listen and think, to reconcile and negotiate, to question and reason. Diplomacy is my forte and I have to say, I sympathise with the negotiators for actually getting as far as Copenhagen, it already represents a significant shift in collective thinking. ‘Tis an arduous task, one that people have staked a lot on and I believe it is rather unfair for people to clamber and shout for more. No challenge of this magnitude has faced us before, no endevour as harrowing, no leap as daunting. Naturally, this has evoked fear and suspicion, ‘tis but human nature for there to be dissent and questioning; after all if we all thought alike with one mind and no difference in thought, what would that make us?

I respect that there are dissenters of this cry for change; men fear what they do not know. They have the right to question the evidence, to criticise the paucity of facts, to deny the nostrums presented to them. Such vigourous clamour encourages us to really see if we are right, to ponder the vicissitudes in opinions, to wonder if we are chasing but a chimera, ever enticing us and drawing us in. We are all the better for this diversity in thought. Alas, too often this criticism rejected, reconciliation withheld, dissent denied.

Therefore, my message to Copenhagen is simple yet complicated: listen and reconcile, hear and debate, take in and elucidate. Hear out what people have to say, both advocates and detractors of climate change negotiation and use reason and emotion albeit in small quantities for emotion. We are trying to upturn the established order, to uproot the tree of presumed knowledge, to evict the entrenched thought. Too often do environmentalists drown out criticism with utter disregard for the perception of arrogance; to presume that we know better and that society has to change in their mindset is to assume that we are superior and in the right. But are we now? Nothing is ever certain, no knowledge is supreme so how will we know if we are right? This, of course, is rather epistemological and not appropriate here but we should always ponder this.

Finally, we should also be grateful for getting this far in negotiations, Kyoto may not have worked but it was a step. Copenhagen shall be another step on the road to a fairer and more equitable world, a road that will be harrowed by challenges but they will be ones that are of benefit to the world. We have a responsibility to the world and our fellow human; we have to respect the planet and people’s opinions.  An abdication of either responsibility would be woeful indeed.

I wish the best of luck to our delegation and I hope they take onboard my rather long message and hope we all bear it in mind that we should listen.

Stephanie’s Quotes and comments

The draft crouchure looks very good! :)

It includes a diversity of perspectives and a convergence of ideas

I have my own supplements :)

I have two ideas:

(1) I may want to say something about my opinion on the “bridge theory” that I published on tumblr the night before 350 rally. Which is about whether we want personal change in behaviour or a government level top down change?

see: http://tumblr.com/xgc3nlsuf

(2) a simplier perspective in the very systematic and philosopical perspectives of yours. Perhaps I want to start with something smaller, more instrinsic, more genuine thinkings:

“Ever since I was small, there was this touching picture of human living on green land under a boundless blue sky clinging in my mind, full of hope, love and honesty. I began to observe that human had long forgotten the deepest yet simplest truth – we are part of the nature. We are not here to act for the sake of acting. We want to plant our dreams, like picking up the deepest picture in our hearts.”

或许我看得简单单纯一点，脑海里一直都有着这样一幅图画：青草、蓝天、人类。洋溢着希望、爱和真诚。然后我开始看见人类忘记了一个最简单原始的真相：我们也是自然的一部分。我们在这里不是为做而做，我们必须看清楚心中那亩田，那个梦，种出我们想要的未来。

Welcome any discussion :)

we always want to talk, communicate, connect and think about climate change instead of just shout.

-Stephanie-

Love or cosmic imbalance?

“What would be my, how should I call it, spontaneous attitude towards the universe? It’s a very dark one. The first one, the first thesis would have been: a kind of total vanity. There is nothing, basically. I mean it quite literally. Like, ultimately there are just some fragments, some vanishing things, if you look at the universe it’s one big void. But then how do things emerge? Here, I feel a kind of spontaneous affinity with quantum physics. Where, you know, the idea there is that the universe is kind of a void, but a positively charged void. But then particular things appear when the balance of the void is disturbed, and I like this idea spontaneously very much. The fact that it’s not just nothing, things are out there, it means something went terribly wrong. That what we call creation is a kind of a cosmic imbalance, cosmic catastrophe. That things exist by mistake. And I’m even ready to go to the end and to claim that the only way to counteract it is to assume the mistake and go to the end, and we have a name for this; it’s called love. Isn’t love precisely this kind of a cosmic imbalance? I was always amused with this notion of “I love the world”, “universal love”. I don’t like the world, I don’t know how I—uh—I’m basically somewhere in between “I hate the world” and “I’m indifferent towards it”. But the whole of reality, it’s just it, it is stupid, it’s out there, I don’t care about it. Love for me is an extremely violent act. Love is not “I love you all”. Love means, I pick out something and—it’s again this structure of imbalance. Even if this something is just a small detail, a fragile individual person, I say, “I love you more than anything else.” In this quite formal sense, love is evil.”

Slavoj Zizek (Senior researcher, Institute of Sociology, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia and Professor at European Graduate School.)

-werewolf

Conversation of Paradigm Shift VI - Gifts

Part VI of the elements of Conversations of Paradigm Shifts
1-    Invitation
2-    Possibility
3-    Ownership
4-    Dissent
5-    Commitment
6-    Gifts

Brining the gifts of those on the margin into the center is primary task of leadership and citizenship.

It boils down to our willingness to stop telling people about:
a.    What they need to improve
b.    What didn’t go well
c.    How they should do it differently next time.

Instead, confront them with their gifts: Talk to others about:

1. The gift you have received from another in this room (tell the person in specific terms)
2. The unique strength you see in them
3. The capacities they have that bring something unique and needed in the world
4. What they did in the last ten minutes that made a difference.
5. What has someone in your small group done today that has touched you or moved your or been of value to you?

Further questions for oneself:
1-    what is the gift you currently hold in exile?
2-    What is it about you that nobody knows about?
3-    What are you grateful for that has gone unspoken?
4-    What is the positive feedback you receive that still surprises you?
5-    What is the gift you have that you do not fully acknowledge?

Conversation of Paradigm Shift VI - Gifts

Part VI of the elements of Conversations of Paradigm Shifts
1-    Invitation
2-    Possibility
3-    Ownership
4-    Dissent
5-    Commitment
6-    Gifts

Brining the gifts of those on the margin into the center is primary task of leadership and citizenship.

It boils down to our willingness to stop telling people about:
a.    What they need to improve
b.    What didn’t go well
c.    How they should do it differently next time.

Instead, confront them with their gifts: Talk to others about:

1. 1-    the gift you have received from another in this room (tell the person in specific terms)
2. 2-    the unique strength you see in them
3. 3-    the capacities they have that bring something unique and needed in the world
4. 4-    what they did in the last ten minutes that made a difference.
5. 5-    What has someone in your small group done today that has touched you or moved your or been of value to you?

Further questions for oneself:
1-    what is the gift you currently hold in exile?
2-    What is it about you that nobody knows about?
3-    What are you grateful for that has gone unspoken?
4-    What is the positive feedback you receive that still surprises you?
5-    What is the gift you have that you do not fully acknowledge?

Conversation of Paradigm Shift V - Commitment

Part V  of the elements of Conversations of Paradigm Shifts
1-    Invitation
2-    Possibility
3-    Ownership
4-    Dissent
5-    Commitment
6-    Gifts

-    What matters is that it is made to public, peers – not to leaders (act of saying, or people write what they promise by hand, published)

-    commitment and refusal are ways foreword, “try  hard” or maybe is equivalent of “no”

-  OK to say  “I am willing to make no promise at this moment” – an act of integrity and supports community.

Example of Questions:

• a.    What promises am I willing to make?
• b.    What measures have meaning to me?
• c.    What price am I willing to pay?
• d.    What is the cost to others to keep my commitments or to fail in my commitments?
• e.    What is the promise I will to make that constitutes a risk or major shift for me?
• f.    What is the promise I am postponing?
• h. What is the promise or commitment I am unwilling to make?

Conversation of Paradigm Shift IV - Dissent

Key role of leadership is get interested in people’s dissent, doubts and find out why this matters so much to them. Dissent becomes commitment and accountability when we get interested in it without having to fix, explain, or answer it.

Why?

The power in the expression of doubts is that it gives us choice about them. Once expressed, they no longer control us; we control them. Saying “no” is symbolic of people finding their space and role in the future- it is the refusal to live the life someone else has in mind for us – the time we declare “I am not that person”

Examples:

a.    What doubts and reservations do you have?
b.    What is the no, or refusal, that you keep postponing?
c.    What have you said yes to, that you no longer really mean?
d.    What is the commitment or decision that you have changed your mind about?
e.    What forgiveness are you withholding?
f.    What resentment do you hold that no one knows about?

3-    Inauthentic forms of dissent to be aware of :

• Denial – often agrees with the problem and then trivializes its existence or cot. Our denial of the destruction of the environment is a good example. Denial in this case takes the form of wanting more data or holding the belief that technology is god that can surmount any obstacle.  Denial is a defining feature of addiction. In creating the communities we live in , we are addicted to urban centres and rural towns that don’t work for all, to a world of large class differences, to a place where we consider people on the margin to not to be our brothers and sisters. We are addicted to accepting the illusion of safety that we get from allowing large systems to name the game and define the conversation.  (Do not ask people whether they think there is a problem or to define the problem)

• Rebellion – reactive claim to old form of power. i.e. protest. ((Stop trying to sell or control he world. If happened. Recognize it, not argue)

• Resignation – passive form of control.

Part IV  of the elements of Conversations of Paradigm Shifts
1-    Invitation
2-    Possibility
3-    Ownership
4-    Dissent
5-    Commitment
6-    Gifts

Conversation of Paradigm Shift O - Setting up

Conversations which create a community of accountability and belonging:
1-    Intimate and authentic relatedness is experienced
2-   World is shifted through invitation rather than mandate
3-   The focus is on the communal possibility
4-    There is a shift in ownership of this place,
5-.    Diversity of thinking and dissent are given space
6-    Commitments are made without barter
7-    The gifts of each person and our community are acknowledged and valued.

Setting up such conversations (to hold specific context for people to go out of the old habit of relating to each other:

1- name the distinctions
2- giver permission for unpopular answers
3- avoid advice and replace it with curiosity
4- Setting up the physical space

1-    Name Distinction

How valuable an experienced do you PLAN to have in this event? (not “want” or “expect” because the power is in deciding, in owning up to the process of creating the experience, to reclaim one’s place as creator and participate in community”

Every community building question is about creating a powerful distinction and every distinction needs to be named. In every conversation and accountability for the well-being of the whole. In the case of ownership, the distinction is between planning and wanting/predicting. If we are not aware, we shouldn’t use the question.

2-    Giver permission for unpopular answers
Let people now that the answer that they planned for this experience to be poor one is a fine answer by saying:

“if you plan for this meeting to be a waste of time, give it a 1 on a 7 point scale, where 1 is yuck and 7 is wow. It is more important to declare where you are at this moment than for you to demonstrate optimism” All we care is people owe the experience and not that the experience be a good one.

3-    Advice replaced by curiosity

One of the basic elements of the relationship between oppressor and oppressed is prescription. Every prescription represents the imposition of one individual’s choice upon another, transforming the consciousness of the person prescribed to into that conforms with the prescriber’s consciousness.

—Paolo Freire, the Pedagogy of the oppressed

Examples:

Breaking people into groups of three, say that

“Don’t be helpful to each other, don’t decide anything, and don’t give advice.”

“Are you trying to be helpful to that person?” When they say, “Yes, I am,” he says, “I know you are. I appreciate that. Now you’re not following my instructions, and I’m in charge here. Stop being helpful and just get interested.”

If you wish to advice – stop – and Just ask why is that important to you, and ask it again, why is that important to you.

4- Setting up physical space:

4.1-    Connection before content
in 1, then group of 3 then 6 consider the question

a.    what led you to accept the invitation
b.    what would it take for you to be fully present in this room?
c.    What is the price others paid for you to be here?
d.    If you could invite someone you respect to sit beside you and support you in making this meeting successful, who would it be?

4.2-    Acknowledging people coming and leaving, for people leaving:

a.    Ask from beginning for people to give notice of leaving, and to leave in public
b.    Announce leaving to the group, and have three people from the group say:

i.    “Here is what you’ve given us”
ii.    Ask soon-to-be-departed: What are you taking with you? What shifted fro you, became clearer? What value have you received as a result of being here IS there anything else you like to say to the community?”

iii.    Thanks them for coming, remove empty chairs.

Yes, it all take time, but we are choosing depth over speed, treating people today is how we get treated tomorrow.

4. 3-    Food – bring local, healthy food