Tag: humility

Categories
- Consultation - Governance

Consultation and Governance

The practice of consultation has been a theme of multiple posts on this blog.  It is, obviously, a vital concept for governance, for it is the operating expression of justice in a way that empowers.

As the last post pointed out, a conception of governance that is informed by the principles of Oneness, Justice, and Power that were discussed in the last two posts, and that seeks to exercise a collective trusteeship over an interconnected and unified social body is dependent on effective consultation for collective decision-making.  Society’s current models of dispute and debate, of interest group competition, of “us” and “them” mentalities are entirely inadequate to meet humanity’s challenges in an age of social interdependence.

Consultation, in the setting of governance, needs certain prerequisites.  Those members of institutions must be sincere and systematic in seeking truth; they must be frank and loving when putting forth their views; they must be detached from their words, for once put forth, they belong to the whole group – to be altered, critiqued, discarded, or accepted.  Unity is to be valued above opinions, for it is unity that leads unto truth.  And diverse perspectives must be sought from all individuals, for a multi-faceted reality is illumined more by more insights – the minds of many is preferable to the minds of few.  Their goal must be the well-being of all humanity; their means the application of spiritual principles and a spirit of fellowship with the community in which they serve.  Finally, their mode of operation is a humble posture of learning, in which reflection on decisions made helps constantly improve and refine policies and their implementation.  This reflection is not simply a judgement of “good” or “bad”, but rather, “what did we learn?”.

From these thoughts and from previous posts on consultation:

How can these qualities be nurtured in organizations and in the area of governance?

How can these mature approaches to collective decision-making inform relationships between and among individuals, communities, and institutions?

Categories
- Governance - Prevailing Conceptions - Three Protagonists Power

Governance and Discipline

How does the conception of power from the last few posts shape thoughts regarding governance?  Currently, because our society’s structures and relationships are dominated by self-interested expressions of power, governance is viewed as a set of regulations and rules of conduct between competing parties, or an instrument of oppression by those in positions of privilege.  Government, viewed in this manner, disciplines the populous in two ways – through systems of overt reward and punishment to ensure order and the status quo; and through a version of “common sense” indoctrinated through government education and socialization to ensure the easy governability of the people.  What results is a perpetual struggle for power.  Little wonder the lack of trust in authority.

As demonstrated with the analogy of the relationship between the nervous system and the muscular system in the body’s release of power, the role of government instead, is to guide and coordinate collective capacity towards pursuit of collective goals, decided upon through consultation.  The highest purpose of institutions is nurturing human potential – releasing the creative powers of individuals and communities and harmonizing them together.  Discipline also takes on new meaning.  On the individual level, it is responsibly aligning creative capacity and action with collective endeavors, and consulting thoughtfully with institutions.  On the institutional level, it is putting aside their own interest, valuing the welfare of all, and consulting with humility, never considering themselves intrinsically superior.  On both levels, this discipline is not imposed by checks and balances, nor by fear or incentive.  It is ultimately a conscious, spiritual, internal process entailing self-sacrifice and alignment with a higher purpose.  And this process will lead to empowered individuals, empowered communities, and empowered institutions, utilizing power for the betterment of the world.

Do you have any relationships with authority that nurtures and releases your capacities and powers?  What are the dynamics?

.

Categories
Discourse Knowledge

Scouting the Truth

Having explored the nature of knowledge and its generation, thought must now be given to the nature of one who generates knowledge, a seeker of knowledge, a scholar.  How do we view those who have or seek knowledge?

Revelation and Social Reality, by Paul Lample, provides a very insightful analogy to the nature of a scholar – from which the following is taken.

A scholar is not as a gatekeeper or priest, one who is seen to hold the keys to knowledge, one who determines what knowledge is valuable or meaningful, one who sets the directions of inquiry.  Neither is a generator of knowledge like an anthropologist or archeologist, merely identifying truth as what is currently understood, or even as what has been in the past.  Nor is a scholar an artist, simply constructing the meaning of knowledge according to one’s subjective standards, preferences, or inclinations.  Finally, a seeker of knowledge is not an impartial observer, apart from and outside of the community in which one learns.

Instead, the generation of knowledge is a right and responsibility of all human beings, not an elite few; it is a constantly evolving process, where truth is relatively less understood, applied, and embodied now than it will be in the future; it is, however, the process of uncovering objective and foundational truths of reality; and every individual both influences and is influenced by the social reality they seek to study.

With this understanding, one can view a generator of knowledge as a scout – helping to guide an expedition into unexplored territory with the aim of bringing knowledge back to the group, constantly advancing individual and collective understanding, while not possessing any authority on the subject, and actively participating with others and making a humble yet vital contribution towards a collective endeavor.

Categories
- Consultation Knowledge

Consultation and Objectivism / Relativism

Previous posts’ discussion on the concept of consultation shed some initial light on transcending the false dichotomy between objectivisim and relativism. Some knowledge has a foundational basis, that has an existence beyond the human mind, and through consultation, we can become increasingly attuned with these truths. However, our understanding will always be relative and incomplete at any given time and with any given group. The object of human study – reality – is complex and multifaceted, and every individual has a limited comprehension and perspective. Thus, the validity of a truth-claim put forth by one group of individuals is relative to the diverse perspectives from which each views the same foundational truth – and with this understanding, one can claim that all truth-claims have equal validity, for they are all relative.

However, to transcend the dichotomy implies that we must become more and more attuned to the actual truth. This necessitates methods of investigating reality that distinguish more attuned truth-claims from mistaken ones; more holistic truth-claims from non-coherent ones; deeper truth-claims from superficial ones. The goal is the process of validating, deepening, and integrating understandings of our one, interconnected, reality.

One such method is consultation. And one significant prerequisite, already discussed in connection with creating a culture of learning, is a posture of humility.

What are your thoughts? With your friends and co-workers, what methods of knowledge-generation do you see that moves beyond objectivism and relativism?

Categories
- Empowerment Discourse Knowledge Oneness

A Culture of Learning

The choice to adopt assumptions with the intention of operationalizing them does indeed entail challenges – overcoming habits of mind, resisting corrosive social forces, understanding the dynamics of change, etc – however, the journey hardly stops there.  These assumptions need to be applied and tested within reality to assess the fruits they bear.  To this end, a culture of systematic learning must be fostered; one that is motivated by a human being’s two-fold purpose, one that draws insights from science and religion, one that approaches universal participation and regards all as protagonists in the generation and application of knowledge.

There are a number of principles that prove valuable towards creating a culture of learning – three here will be mentioned.  One is integrating study and action together.  When they are carried out concurrently, insights are tested against reality, questions arise through service, and understanding is enhanced in a coherent fashion.  Contrast this with the educational systems of society which heavily fragment theory and practice, to the point where whole fields, irreconcilable with each other, are created to encompass one fragment versus the other.  Operating within this mode of study and action, a posture of humility assumes extreme importance and value – that each individual contributes simply one perspective towards an evolving collective knowledge, which is tested through action, studied and refined by others, and does not belong to one or another person alone.  Rather, all are empowered to own the generation and application of knowledge.  Again, society denotes humility as passivity, weakness, inferiority, submission.  Far be this from the truth!  Rather, true humility comes from an understanding of the oneness of humankind – that we are all cells in the body of humanity, that we all can play a part in the great enterprise of rearing a world civilization, that no one individual is greater in station than another.  Finally, joining study and service with a humble condition compels individuals to not only encourage and accompany others on a path of learning, but also to find delight and happiness in the accomplishment of others.  For – again, drawing from oneness – the knowledge generated by another is collective and beneficial to all.  The service rendered by another is towards the whole community, and benefits all.  Assisting others in learning is just as valuable as learning itself, for all work together in a culture of learning.