Notice Bored or Notice Board?

Psychologist Sherry Turkle, in a recent TED talk, summed up the current evolution of the Social Media phenomena as “I share – therefore I am”. 

I found that to be quite a scary observation, the implication being that unless I share I don’t exist!

Turkle claims that Social Media allows people to feel connected to others, but on their own terms.  Just like Goldilocks, not too much and not too little – just the right amount.  It allows people to avoid feeling alone and provides feedback that someone is listening.  It also allows people to present the face that they desire to present rather than to risk the vulnerability inherent in a real conversation. 

Turkle also claims that the core issue, that Social Media offers to hide, is people's fear of intimacy, and their discomfort with solitude.  What a narrow space that seems to be!

While intimacy and solitude are certainly the boundaries of relationship – in an all-or- nothing sense – I know from experience that an average person may fear one extreme or the other, but not usually both.  And a personal relationship between any two partners will, more often than not, display that dynamic.  Furthermore it’s true that a loving relationship over time provides the healing space for either extreme. 

Social Media does technically allow easy avoidance of negative relationships and easy seeking out of what the seeker would consider to be positive ones, but to present Social Media as providing an avoidance of natural relationship therapy is, in my opinion, labelling 700 million people as damaged.

I think there is something entirely different going on… 

The content of Facebook communications, from my studying some 250 postings from a diverse bunch of people, is certainly the minutiae of relationship.  The flavour of any one individual’s content becomes predictable – and that allows the personality of the sharer to shine through.  By sharing what appears to be the shallow trivia of daily experience (our humanness) we can build a deeper relationship with others – the obvious example being mothers and their children.

But here is the point that Turkle missed… Social Media is not about relationship at all – not in the sense of a substitute for the loving space that can only occur in one-on-one daily co-existence. 

Social Media is about relationship in the plural sense, which can only be defined as ‘community’.  If you’re familiar with the work of Ken Wilber, it exists exclusively in the ‘we’ quadrant.  That space is about being part of something, satisfying a need to belong, in a culture, in a family, in a network, in a community.  It’s about our “collective internal experience”, storytelling, shared values and even organised religion.

Suddenly there is a new light on the subject!  The overwhelming popularity of Social Media shows that it is filling a huge need for that sense of community, particularly in the younger generations.  Where was that sense lost?  Probably through evolution, but I suspect it’s been in deficit since around the time that television arrived.

So each ‘tweet’, each ‘share’, each genuine ‘like’ is a contribution freely made towards rebuilding that sense of community, not at the level of the ‘local village’ of 60+ years ago, but at the level the global village.  Evolution will always find a way to bring a balance to consciousness and we are merely the conduit through which she operates!  The ‘local village’ also allowed a ‘not one of us’ or a ‘them and us’ experience in social groups, locations, and religion.  In the ‘global village’ the potential is that there is just ‘us’.  Bring it on I say!

So next time you notice you’re bored – don’t just sit there – post something on the community notice board and help evolution along!

Rock, Paper, Scissors – you’re doing it wrong!

We have all played the game at some time – rock can break scissors – scissors can cut paper – paper can cover rock.  At any show of two hands you can win, lose or draw.

But there is a much deeper level at which that simple game also applies to life. 

Rock can be seen as actions or willpower – strong, dense and unbending – a self-contained, powerful but usually blunt instrument. 

Paper can be seen as concepts or the intellect – theoretical, perhaps fragile, easily revised – an instrument for exploration and shared meaning. 

Scissors can be seen as relationships or emotion – the intersection of two cutting edges, highly creative in the hands of a skilled user – an instrument that can separate nuance into distinctive pieces.

Each one has a different kind of power, each one has a different vulnerability and each one has an innate quality.  A rock can be used as a sharpening stone for scissors, but it's pretty useless in a conflict against paper.  Scissors can be used as a shaping tool for paper, but they are pretty useless in a conflict against rock.  And paper can be used as a map for placing rocks, but it's pretty useless in a conflict against scissors.

Relationships and feelings (scissors) will come off second best in any conflict of physical power (rock).  As an extreme example, the conflict in Syria can be seen as people expressing a common feeling – a desire for freedom through democracy – as scissors attempting to cut through the existing conceptual framework.  The military is obviously the rock determined to mercilessly crush any expression of such common emotional desires.  And Kofi Annan's peace plan is the paper that, at the moment, is unable to cover the rock or to have any sway over the existing, deeply embossed paper.  The Syrian government says whatever it needs to say to the world in order to continue carrying out the actions it is determined to carry out against its own people.

Nevertheless a rock’s vulnerability is in being covered by a stronger paper.  A stronger paper can only be shaped by better scissors – by the common emotion of a much greater set of relationships.  A similar situation in Libya somehow won the support of a mass of people and therefore a number of countries – stronger scissors shaped a new paper that was able to cover the old, oppressive rock.  It is interesting to wonder why there is not the same groundswell of sentiment for Syria, even though the suffering seems at least as bad.

On a more personal example, do you see yourself primarily as rock, paper, or scissors?  Which do you most often throw in conflict situations?

Does your emotional life (relationships) add quality to your actions (work), or is there a conflict that you might call “work–life balance”?

Are your actions performed in the context of a higher plan or purpose in life, or is there a conflict that you might call “survival”?

And is your higher plan or purpose in life grounded in a higher set of relationships (humanity), or is there a conflict that you might call “narcissism”?

The wheel turns only in one direction – scissors to not have power over equivalent rocks, rocks do not have power over equivalent papers, and papers do not have power over equivalent scissors.  But the greater power in each case can either enhance or destroy the lesser one – it can either “dominate” or be “at the service of”.

A healthy society is one where strong common feeling (scissors) serves to shape legislation (paper) which in turn serves to guide actions (rock) which in turn serve to enhance society as a whole. 

An unhealthy society is one where strong common feeling (scissors) attempts to directly determine actions (rock), or where actions (rock) attempt to directly determine legislation (paper), or where legislation (paper) attempts to directly determine common feeling within society (scissors).

Are your actions often directly motivated by your feelings?  

Is your thinking often directly motivated by your actions? 

Are your feelings often directly motivated by your thinking?

 

That's certainly the order in which we developed, but it is unhealthy to function that way as an adult – it keeps us away from the essential growth process of integration.  It foments our own internal “Syrian struggle” and our own personal crises.

Better to let your feelings serve your thinking, and your thinking serve your actions, and your actions serve your relationships – it seems counter intuitive but it's the only way to create a healthy growth cycle, by breaking the habits that keeps us stuck.

Scissors, paper, rock, scissors, paper, rock, scissors, paper, rock – that’s the way to play a much better game.  It’s called “Integrate your life”!

Will someone please tell Bashar al-Assad…

Or you can check out your own combination of scissors, paper and rock with your very own VitallyMe report, right here on this website…