Contextual Versus Centrated Thinking
August 7
More Lines and Circles: Centrated versus Contextual Thinking
Obvously, I am not ready to let this topic go yet. I have thought of more contrasts between linear and non-linear thought since the previous post.
One characteristic of young children's thought is that of centration. That means, a child has a single-minded focus on one aspect of his/her environment, at any given time, and cannot simultaneously take into account other aspects of the environment. The thinking of young children also tends to be egocentric, not being able to understand others' points of view. Linear thinking seems an outgrowth of this type of thinking. It is relatively simplistic and narrow-minded. Monotheistic religions show linear thinking in the notion that one's disposition for all of eternity is determined by what happens in this one life on earth, for instance. Also, each monotheisitic religion has a single-minded insistance that it represents the only way to achieve a heavenly outcome for the rest of eternity. Thus, thinking promoted by the religion is very centered on the idea of saving one's soul from eternal damnation. This fear-based message (a la Republican Party and fascists) is used as a recruiting tool by such religions. In contrast to the monotheistic religions, Eastern religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism employ non-linear, contextual thinking. Things go in cycles, but have a progression over time. Souls are recycled, going through a series of reincarnations, both human and nonhuman, in seeking spiritual perfection. A little more wisdom is gained with each reincarnation, according to Buddhist thinking. Every experience is affected by its context, and there are infinitely many ways to reach heaven, nirvana in Buddhist thinking, which represents oneness with the spiritual reality of the universe. Contextual thinking, represented by circles, is more complex than centrated thinking, which is represented by lines. Circles represent changes in direction, recycling, caring for the entire circle of life, and contextual thinking. Lines represent a single direction, no looking back, no need to recycle, and looking out for oneself.
Why is centrated, linear thought so common? The answer is relatively "simple," so to speak. According to Social Psychologist Shelley Taylor, people tend to be "cognitive misers." That means people prefer to use as little thought as possible. Thinking is hard. It takes effort. It is so much easier to make broad assumptions, and think simplistically, than to think in complex, nuanced ways. In fact, anyone who has read much of this blog's content, probably realizes that one of the principle purposes of this blog is to get people to think more, and more contextually, and to help people to overcome the tendency to be "cognitive misers" who take the easy way out when it comes to thought. We live in a complex world, with complex issues which may be impossible for any of us to fully understand. However, I assert that we, as human beings with a mind, are morally and spiritually obligated to do what we can to understand life, the world and universe around us, and to use our knowledge for the common good. Linear thought has a place, as when humans contemplate travel to the stars, with a single-minded focus on how to accomplish this. But ultimately, our success as a species requires non-linear, contextual thinking, and so does one's success as an individual thinker, for that matter. This is evidenced by the fact that there is a profusion of contextual theories in psychology in recent years, theories which take into account various aspects of one's environment (parents, family, work, school, culture, personal experience), as well as various aspects of the self (personality, intelligence, creativity, wisdom, appearance, talents, intererests, and limitations). Our society does have quite a bit of contextual thinking, in our laws and our science, for example, but not as much as it needs. Contextual thinking is thought of as the realm of "experts" and thus, beyond the ken of the average citizen. We need to make contextual thinking the norm, not the realm of intellectuals only. Psychology is catching on to that fact. It is time for the rest of society to catch onto the reality that we need more complex, contextual, non-linear thought in order to prevent disaster, frankly, and advance as a society. In other words, instead of thinking of lines, we need to think more in terms of circles, and everything contained within these circles.
August 4
Lines and Circles
Keep this in mind: We live on a circle. Well, actually, it's a sphere. In any case, it bears no resemblance to a line. Why is this relevant? The "cancer model" I wrote about yesterday is essentially a linear model -- the model which also describes capitalism and monotheistic religions. Infinite lines are basically a human conception. In nature, spheres predominate. Stars and planets are spherical, atoms are conceived as being spherical -- even space itself is curved, so that anything which travels through space eventually curves in response to the force of gravity. Time itself is not a spatial dimension, so it cannot be said to be linear. Even if time were a spatial dimension, it would not be linear, since it depends on space and movement as well. In fact, the universe in which we live is thought by astrophysicists to be basically spherical. For that matter, our bodies have more of a spherical and circular (or cylindrical ) nature than a linear one, although some people are more spherical than others, and we do have inear components such as arms and legs, depending on how one looks at our body plan.
Thus, applying a linear model to processes which are nonlinear is a mistake which leads to distortions. Yet we find this dichotomy between lines and circles even in religion and philosophy. For example, the sign of Christianity is two crossed lines -- a cross. The Nazi symbol is a mixture of crossed and parallel lines; meanwhile, an Eastern philosophical symbol of the relation between masculinity and femininity is the Yin-Yang symbol, a circle with a curved line dividing the circle into two equal parts, Yin (female) and Yang (male). Lines, the "Western" way of thinking, imply limitlessness, "to infinity and beyond." Circles, the "Eastern" way of thinking, denote close relationship and interdependency. The fact is, although future possibilities are in many ways wide open, it is the "Eastern," circular philosophy which correctly describes our condition as human beings, not the "Western" linear philosophy. We live on a finite sphere. Despite our ability to temporarily send a few people a realtively short distance beyond the earth's atmosphere, we are basically stuck on this sphere, and will continue to be until far more efficient means of space travel are invented. We are part of an ecosystem, a "cycle of life." Our individual lives, at least as physical, biological beings, are finite, having a beginning, a middle and an end. Everything goes in cycles, including, economists point out, the economy. Thus, we need to take our limitations into account more in our thinking, and at the same time, see the unlimited possibilities of life in a more spherical way. We need to think of our relationship to each other, and to the environment, and our interpedency first and foremost, so that we can take care of each other and our environment, before going off on some linear tangent. We need to maintain a fair balance. Once we do so, we will build something which can last. Then we can start thinking in linear terms, but only in ways which do not destroy our balanced circle of life.
Remember, circles can go on forever as well. Just ask a hamster running on its little wheel. For that matter, wheels are circular, and they are what get us (not the hamster) places. I just thought I should add this "food for thought" to yesterday's post.