Non-Linear Thinking: The Glossary

Image: Jonah Cacioppe

I've been asked to provide some definitions for some of the words used in the original post. Again, intuitively, I know what they mean to me, but it's been a great exercise for me to put meanings to them.

These terms came straight out of the conversation between Ken Wilber and Richard Hames. However, I haven't read Richard's book yet. It's sitting in Oakville, Ontario, 12263 kms away, waiting for me. I'll pick it up at the end of March. So these are my definitions or explanations; I'm not putting words into the mouths of either of these fine gentlemen.

For your consideration...

Non-linear thinking:

Uses synthesis rather than analysis as the primary mode of understanding
Don't fight what you're seeing and experiencing! Rather than analyzing and judging, try to incorporate it all. Envision a reality were all the different parts are valid.

It is integrative of differences rather than selective 
More of the same. Try to integrate it all into your thinking, even the seemingly contradictory stuff. As opposed to choosing what you like or are comfortable with and discarding the rest. This is non-dual living.

It seeks to transcend the perception of any evolving situation, rather than just solve the problem as first perceived 
Don't just take a situation or problem at face value, but step back, rise above, and see what is driving it. As I like to say, "What is the question behind the question?"

Looks for systemic language to influence or shape the system
Try to think and speak in terms of the "big picture", of the system as a whole, and not just the individual parts. Non-linear thinking recognizes that the sum is indeed greater than the parts. Just because you understand the components doesn't mean you know what the machine does.

Seeks to question, rather than just solve, a discreet problem 
Again, don't take things at face value. Dig deeper. Not just, "What is the problem?", but also, "Why?", "How?", "What else?", and, "What are the implications?"

Leadership and community in a non-linear environment:

Is collaborative or collective 
Being integrative, not selective, but in community. Non-linear thinking recognizes that the intelligence of the group is greater than the sum of the intelligences of its members.

Requires members of the community to constantly engage in dialogue regarding their purpose and their ethics 
Recognizes that simple linear thinking can very quickly lead us away from our North Star. Constant dialogue is needed to keep us grounded.

Reflective practice replaces specification 
Reflect in broad terms, on all of our experience, rather than assessing, judging, and picking and choosing.

Inspiration replaces information
What is calling out to us for reflection and action, as opposed to simply asking what information is at hand at the moment. Choose the route that appeals to our passions, not the easy route.

Inquiry replaces assertion
Ask questions! "Why...?" "How...?" I'm reminded of how seldom Jesus, when asked a question, actually provided a direct, clear--i.e., linear--answer. The goal of questions are not answers, but better, deeper questions.

Reflecting on these definitions has pounded home for me the concept of non-dualism, and what it may look like in action. 

But in the spirit of integration and consultation, what do you think? What do these terms and ideas say to you?

Comments

[J]

ignoring the linear dilema "where to start?" I'll jump in the mix with related thoughts Unity is a big ideal and very powerful, almost the opposite of uniformity because ultimate unity comes through incredible diversity. 7 billion humans- each with a different perspective on life and the differences have been highlighted for the worse in many cases, and yet we've survived. How to use and leverage the diversity, the wonderfully vast differences in perspective? A physical example I think of to illustrate the value of perspective difference is 2 people viewing a cylinder. The person at the end sees a circle while the person to the side sees a rectangle. Seemingly mutually exclusive views- in 2 dimensions. As soon as the third dimension is introduced to the viewers and they move, ever so slightly to the others view, they immediately realize the truth is more than their own perspective. They actually need other perspectives to arrive at truth. They also should hopefully realize that if there are other dimensions then they still don't have the complete picture. keep that thought. Now- some theories in quantum physics (if that's still a legit term) hold that there are as many as 8, 10, or 11 dimensions in the universe. The implications of that leave one, hopefully, to realize that one desperately needs many others' perspectives to gain clarity on truth and reality. paradox is the state of healthy tension before the next dimension becomes known or available. Of course there are many things working against this idea: fear, stories from lesser dimensions, fear, identity issues, fear, lack of modeling. I'll stop there :)

[Mike]

I love it J. It's interesting what this kind of thinking does to your perspective. We think we see the rectangle. Or the circle. But in a world of 3, 4, 5+ dimensions, a 2 dimensional perspective renders us almost blind.

Another way of looking at it: Maybe we're designed to "see" in community.

It makes it a little easier to understand today's culture wars, faith wars, and probably war wars too.
"It's a circle!"
"You're an idiot. Anyone can see its a rectangle! Heretic!"

They're both right. And they're both wrong. Integrating both perspectives would move them a little closer to a fuller understanding. And if they found a 3rd person, well, that's when things really start to get interesting.

PS. In your list of factors working against this kind of thinking, you forgot to mention fear. : )

[Mike]

Thought of one other thing J...

When you see the circle and the other guys sees the rectangle, what would happen if you committed to intentionally trying to see the rectangle? You can't see it, you're sure the other guy is wrong, but for the next 15 minutes you're going to do your best to find it.

[J]

"maybe we're designed to 'see' in community" - absolutely agree and it definitely does help me understand the various types of conflict - even within myself!
Steven Coveys point of "seek first to understand, then to be understood" really resonates with me and represents trying to see the other perspective like you mentioned. I have practiced this and love it. It increases empathy and encourages the desire for peace even more. What I have found is that I don't care for labels anymore because it tells people that my perspective is fixed or in the same box as someone else. The truth is that my perspective is evolving and I hope it always does. It causes a kind of humility too because I realize that I still see as through a dark glass. The awesome thing is that it's slowing getting clearer but there's so much more to know, see and be aware of. What a journey!