Thinking You Need to Accept It? That’s So Conventional.

Tara,

I will allow myself the liberty of summing things up from my perspective and taking the liberty of writing the bottom line of your post. – “Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive, anyway.”
The formidable power of the listed mental traits is illuminated by a quotation from a biography of the artist Georgia O’Keeffe. The quotation appears in Bolles’s book A Second Way of Knowing: “Georgia was suddenly struck by the realization that her feelings governed the way she saw the scene. It was a momentum of transformation: the entire visual world, she realized was dependent on the emotional world.” Said Bolles:
That day she learned the artist’s secret; what you perceive depends on who you are. Analytical thinkers have generally assumed that we perceive reality as it is; they then use a process of abstract reasoning to interpret the perception. O’Keeffe realized that the perception is the interpretation. It rests on the internal reality that governs the meaning we find in our sensations.

The internal reality Bolles speaks of is, in fact, controlled by the mental traits I and many others have been discussing and talking about. Thus, it is these hidden traits that determine the meaning we find in the information our senses pick up and transmit to the brain. This is an alarming phenomena because we have no direct awareness of, or conscious control over these traits.

When we consider these traits and a host of others we haven’t discussed, acting in combination, is it any wonder that we humans, as Alexander Pope observed over two centuries ago, are prone to err? We view the world through a dense veil of burdensome, though – warping emotions, biases, and mind – sets. Through this veil we sometimes perceive cause –and –effect and other “patterns” where there are none. We are prone to grace
these nonexistent patterns with self – satisfying explanations into rock hard beliefs that we defend in the face of incontrovertible contradictory evidence.
Ladies and gentlemen, sharing the pleasure of your company…….Homo sapiens !
Finally, some great thinking.Differently!
“The major problems in the world are the result of the difference between the way nature works and the way man thinks.” – Gregory Bateson
“We are not what we know but what we are willing to learn.” – Mary Catherine Bateson (Daughter of Gregory)
“All children are born geniuses. 9,999 out of every 10,000 are swiftly, inadvertently, degeniused by grown ups.” – Buckminster Fuller
“It is difficult to get people to understand something when their salary depends upon them not understanding it.” – Upton Sinclair
“It is the supreme art of the teacher to awaken joy in creative expression and knowledge.” – Albert Einstein

Tara,
As usual, a wonderful post. You hit the nail on the head when you introduce the “A” and “B” syndrome. Growing up, I would wonder about everything ie. “Why is the sky blue”,,” Why is blue called blue”, etc. Well, the answers I would be given was always “just because”. Well, that answer was never good enough for me, and remains the same to this day. I mean, why are things the way they are, and why can't they be different. They were created, so why can't they be recreated? It's not just concrete things in life, but it especially relates to the ideas we generate, and the people we are. It is not necessary to close our minds to an alternate theory, no matter how whacked out it may SEEM. Everything was created, and is constantly recreated, making us more well rounded human beings. That is the beauty of living, and the further we expand, the easier it is to accept the not so obvious. So, thanks for posting, and for being real. I would further like to thank “Hero” for that insightful perspective on the way we see things, and how we can learn to grow thorugh the minds of others, not just those who we THINK have all the answers. Sometimes easier said than done, at least for me, but it's a learning process!! LostinTranslation

Lostintranslation, – is right. “After everything was said and done; Much was said and very little done.”
The central question that remains open for discussion is how after assuming correctly that our greatest tool to
change the world is our ability to give it a try and challenge and change our way of thinking in spite that even a toxic working environment objectively can exist to our utmost surprise. So what do we do next? Pave the way
“from toxic to brainy workplace!?” Is it worth trying? Yes if we try to utilize the following tactics:
Try 10 tactics to eliminate toxins with the brain in mind:
1. Tone toxins tend to surface at work when some people expect what others fail to deliver. Brain based tactic – Have you noticed though how people who build goodwill with others tend to divert disagreements? In so doing, they lift morale and spread serotonin at work.
2. Financial Toxins come from leaders who make poor money decisions that impact workers with downsizing or pay cuts. Recent research shows that brain circuits raise few objections when apparent experts make poor financial decisions. Have you seen it? Brain based tactic – take one small step in the direction of profit – to rewire your brain for financial intelligence.
3. Multi-task toxins work against human brains and thwart productivity. Research shows how a central bottleneck exists in the brain, and this prevents people from doing two things well at once. Yet, while inability to process two tasks at the same time, exists in the frontal cortex, demands for multi-tasking comes with many jobs. Brain based tactic – create realistic lists with tasks you expect to complete and check these off one at a time, so they are not lost if interrupted.
4. Pressure toxins prevent goals from being reached at work, since people operate more from cortisol which stirs up conflicts and creates friction. Brain based tactic – target to gain back calm, by listing key goals in the morning and checking these off when completed. Watch the synergy in your brain narrow gaps between pressured position where you stand and calmer places you’d like to achieve.
5. Sleep-deprived toxins come from overwhelming schedules where people tend to blow it from sheer exhaustion. Perhaps some employees were let go, while others gained double the workload. Brain based tactic – take another look when overloaded to find brain benefits even from mistakes, whenever you simply build stepping stones forward with lessons learned. That forward action should improve your sleep and goods new from research is that you can repay sleep debts.
6. Cynicism toxins come from chronically negative people who express disdain for innovative ideas, rail against others’ efforts, and distrust motives of most workers in your department. Brain based tactic – if you find yourself over on the darker side of life, with cynics where you work, consider ways to turn off that molecular switch in favor of healthier habits that positive people practice.
7. Perfectionism toxins hamper progress as projects pile up and people fall behind and often feel trapped. Research shows perfectionism is bad for the brain, but what about the demands of a perfectionist manager? Brain based tactic – reboot your brain past perfectionism that stalls progress and leads to job dissatisfaction, by chasing excellence instead as Einstein did.
8. Tedious toxins can lower your levels of dopamine. Brain based tactic -observe people who produce more natural brain chemicals, to override ruts and become highly enthused by what they do. Then emulate a person who inspires you and your brain will do the rest. Novelty stokes memory and great questions tend to create neuron pathways to innovations and inventions.
9. Bureaucracy toxins can steal satisfaction, and cause regrets for hidden, and undervalued intelligences. How so? Bureaucratic demands and routine can block simple pleasures from any ordinary day at work, and can cause stress that shrinks the human brain and shuts it down. Brain based tactic -seek out people who work with their brain’s plasticity to change, tend to take back control of that out-of-sorts feeling that comes from languishing under rigid routines.
10. Bullying toxins find fellow workers blaming clients, you or other workers for poor productivity. Brain based tactic – try tactics to tame your amygdala with goals of reaching new finish lines, and leap forward to improve your own performance and enjoy new adventures with others at work.
Why not replace toxins where you work with plans for a brainpower boom? Next time fellow workers stir up stress that delivers dangerous pollutants, toss one or all of these tactics into the ring and enjoy the win that you and fellow workers deserve. Stressed brain rely on habit, yet caring communities go from better to best.

WOW! Aren't we great? We almost did it!

I love this. I'm up for breaking rules and creating new avenues for creativity. So your post really spoke to me.

Michael,

Wow. I have to requote you for the proof is in your pudding:

“That day she learned the artist’s secret; what you perceive depends
on who you are. Analytical thinkers have generally assumed that we
perceive reality as it is; they then use a process of abstract
reasoning to interpret the perception. O’Keeffe realized that the
perception is the interpretation. It rests on the internal reality
that governs the meaning we find in our sensations.

The internal reality Bolles speaks of is, in fact, controlled by the
mental traits I and many others have been discussing and talking
about. Thus, it is these hidden traits that determine the meaning we
find in the information our senses pick up and transmit to the brain.
This is an alarming phenomena because we have no direct awareness of,
or conscious control over these traits.”

My question to you is this — if we are seeking balance in thought, as
systems thinking requires, is the truth of perception and reality
somewhere in between the creative thinker and the analytical thinker
views? For example, it is important to know what you perceive depends
on who you are but it is also important to develop your ability to
interpret your perception (perhaps develop your awareness of the
traits you hold that dictate your meaning) and understand that they do
not dictate the world in a larger sense? Does that make any sense?

Thank you, Lostintranslation. I've always been wary of those who honestly think they have all the answers… it is almost as soon as I hear someone call them self an expert in something, I lose trust in their abilities. What I have found to be true is the more you learn, the more you realize you know nothing and the more open you become to the not-so-obvious. Humility is a great tool to aid in learning and growth, I think.

Thank you for that, Mike. There is so much helpful information in your comment. I was especially taking note of the perfectionism toxins as I often like to poison my Self with perfectionist thoughts.

Thanks, Shell. It's always great to meet a fellow shit disturber;)

Awesome, Hilary. I am so glad I could be of help in inspiring you to
make the decision that is “right” for you, and you alone.

Tara, – I will try to answer your question.In the next beefy stuff you may well find an answer to your endless curiosity!?
It struck me that it was all about types of problems we tend to run into and problem treatments in particular. In my modest opinion there is no such thing as a marketing, production, financial, personnel, or distribution problem. Such modifiers in front of the world “problem” tell us absolutely nothing about its nature, but they do tell us something –Just be the Hero and things will sort themselves out. Browsing through the table summaries does not seem to tell us what kind of problem was this – medical, economic, emotional, or architectural? Actually maybe none of these. It was just a problem.
The adjectives are indicative only of the point of view, the mind-set, of the person looking at the problem. Wherever problems appear they should be looked at from as many different points of view as possible before a way of attacking them is selected. The best place to solve a problem is not necessary where it appears.
There are four ways of treating problems: Absolution, resolution, solution, and dissolution. To absolve a problem is to ignore it and hope it will go away or solve itself.
To resolve a problem is to do something that yields an outcome that is good enough, that satisfies. Problem resolvers take a clinical approach to problems; they rely heavily on experience, trial and error, qualitative judgments, and common sense. They try to identify the cause of a problem, remove or suppress it, and thereby return to a previous state. To solve a problem is to do something that yields the best possible outcome, that optimizes. Problem solvers take a research approach to problems. They rely heavily on experimentation and quantitative analysis. To dissolve a problem is to eliminate by redesigning the system that has it. Problem dissolvers try to idealize, to approximate an ideal system and thereby do better in the future than the best that can be done now. To problem dissolvers problems are opportunities, not threats. By redesigning the systems with problems, a better performance than the best currently possible can be obtained. This involves creativity also. Everyone would like to be creative, but what is creativity? It is my belief and the school of thought that I represent that it is the ability to identify self-imposed constraints, remove them, and explore the consequences. Unfortunately, knowing what creativity is does not help much in any effort to capture it. The principal difficulty lies in identifying self- imposed constraints; we are generally unaware of them. There are many ways of raising them to consciousness or avoiding them even without raising them to copiousness. Among them are lateral thinking, brain storming, synectics, conceptual block-bursting, and idealized design, the last of which, I believe is the most effective.
An idealized redesign is one prepared on the assumption that the system was destroyed last night but its environment remains intact. It is this assumption that removes most self-imposed constraints. The product of idealized redesign is a design of a system with which the designers would now replace the system assumed to have been destroyed; that is, if they were completely free to do so. The only constraints placed on the design are (1) that it be technologically feasible, to preclude science fiction, and (2) that it be operationally viable, capable of surviving the current environment ‘If’ it were brought into existence. However, the design need not be capable of being brought into existence. Nevertheless, the designers are always surprised at how closely their design can be approximated. The reason is that the idealized design process clearly reveals that that many constraints thought to be externally imposed are actually self – imposed. The above reasoning can be easily backed up with many practical examples.
To idealize is to think without constraints. To think without constraints is to think creatively.
Not all ideas presented to management are good. Defenses against the bad are necessary, but they tend to be applied to the good ones as well. This makes it difficult to innovate in many organizations. I will very briefly identify some of the most commonly used defenses:
- Has this idea ever been applied successfully?
-The idea is a good one but it doesn’t apply to our kind of business or in our kind of environment.
-Have any applications of your idea failed?
-This is nothing but…
-We tried it a long time ago and it didn’t work then, why should it now?
- (Such and such a ) company tried this idea and it didn’t work there. Why should it here?
Lastly I would like to cover problematic proclivities. There are too many of these traits to start treating here , so I’ll focus on the seven (covered in detail in the Hunt and Gilovich books and in other scientific literature) that I believe have the greatest adverse effects on our ability to analyze problems:
-There is an emotional dimension to almost every thought we have and every decision we make.
-Mental shortcuts our unconscious minds take influence our conscious thinking.
-We are driven to view the world around us in terms of patterns.
-We instinctively rely on, and are susceptible to, biases and assumptions.
-We feel the need to find explanations for everything, regardless of whether the explanations are accurate.
- humans have a penchant to seek out and put stock in evidence that supports their beliefs and judgments while eschewing and d evaluating evidence that does not.
- We tend to cling to untrue beliefs in the face of contradictory evidence.

“The only constraints placed on the design are (1) that it be
technologically feasible, to preclude science fiction, and (2) that it
be operationally viable, capable of surviving the current environment
‘If’ it were brought into existence.”

I like that description of why something isn't possible. Everything
else, in my mind, is fair game.

The either/or thinking reminds me of the “Glass is half-empty/half-full” example. Recognize both sides of the coin and you can better choose to top up the glass or enjoy every last drop. To requote you, It’s about what can be, not what is.

Ernest, that's another great example — glass half-empty/half-full —
it's an either/or statement wrapped around a optimism/pessimism
analogy. It's flawed as you can see things both ways, optimistic and
pessimistic, and areas in-between. We are not set in stone. We have a
choice.