An Overdue Explanation
to an Apparent
Contradiction
Readers who have
followed the ideas explored in the writings on this blog from the beginning may
perhaps feel that I have left them with an unexplained contradiction regarding
the suggested solution to the central problem explored in the writings.
The problem was
identified as arising from the limitations of the constrained information bases
that we are able to acquire during our lifetimes on which we depend for understanding
the world around us (see also “basic argument” in paragraph four of article #17 (2018))
and the resulting damage to humanity in each and every aspect of our existence
and endeavours, and on a global scale.
In the earlier
writings, the (partial) solution suggested was the incorporation of
communication and related social psychology in education curriculums, while in
later writings – beginning from article #13 (2015) – the emphasis was on the
modification of the world’s basic education system along the lines suggested in
that article. Thus while both call
for the modification of educational systems, there seems to be a
contradiction.
But in reality,
there is no contradiction – and the discrepancy is only an apparent one, which arose
from a missing link … an explanation; for both components are essential to the
solution. Thus providing such an
explanation, and elaborations thereof, is the purpose of this piece.
While communication
and social psychology are in fact the essence of the solution, until I had
immersed in the details of related issues in article #13, I had not been
explicitly aware of the enormous psychological
barriers that will block messages from being fully understood, and thus that I
have to first resolve this problem in order to make headway with communication
and social psychology.** This in turn
led to the suggestions of article #13 – although this was within the broader
framework of the world basic education system. Until then, I had dwelt on what could be
called the technical side of the
process arising from the lack of a common language that can bridge the
diversity of the topics of complex dialogue – this aspect of the process has been identified as "technical," given its probabilistic, non-psychological nature .
These two
aspects are intrinsically linked/entwined – one cannot be isolated from the
other in a meaningful way. From here arises
the necessity for eliminating both
these barriers to effective communication and interaction before we could hope messages of complex dialogue to be properly understood.*** (Readers who had difficulty in grasping the
message of these writings will find this last footnote most helpful.)
Central to this
process is to realize that in our efforts to communicate with fellow humans, we
don’t have the awareness of the
existence of these barriers to effective conveyance of thoughts, and also that we
lack the ability to do anything about
it, even if we may have vague “feelings” that things are not working. Modifications to the world’s basic education
system along the lines suggested in the account under “Understanding the Social World …” in article #13 aim at rectifying, primarily,
the awareness side of the problem, particularly by instilling relevant attitudes
to enhance the process – see also the second paragraph of the second part of
article #15. (Effective communication/interaction
calls for a host of the right kind of attitudes & behaviours.) The incorporation of both communication and
related social psychology at relevant levels aims at rectifying, primarily, the
ability side of the problem, by providing the necessary theory and related practice
that will empower us to deal with interactions as effectively as possible.
Taken together, improving
these two aspects will work to smoothen communication/interaction processes –
by enabling participants to become aware of the serious gaps that exist in their
understanding of others, leading to enhancing open-minded and sincere inquiry about
meanings involved rather than shouting matches, in turn leading to gradual
reduction of the gaps in meaning, and so on.
I am not claiming that the process will lead to the creation of a common
language straightaway, but the process of reaching that goal will become very
much smoother. Naturally, the process will
be time-consuming, but we can expect that duration to shrink gradually when
people begin to interact more frequently and trust gains a higher status. And while such a process would be
unimaginable with current attitudes and levels of trust, once the two aspects
of our concern have been addressed, the process will progressively become
common-place and thus second-nature. (It
is towards enhancing this outcome that the creation of an appropriate mindset, and behaviour arising from it, become so critically important – the aim of the suggestions of the account
under “Understanding the Social World” in article #13 – for it is through our
interactions with others with the right attitudes that we can become aware of
our shortcomings, and thus motivate ourselves to improve; the process will become especially taxing when the participants are from diverse backgrounds.) Luckily, we do find such processes among close-knit
groups and also among the members of some groups in the same profession, but sadly
we find them only rarely. The
suggestions proposed will help make such processes common-place rather than rare;
the norm rather than the exception – particularly among groups composed of
members from different specializations, the rarity of the process in which is
most disturbing, given today’s fast pace of change and thus where accord is
most sorely and urgently required. The
process will also spill into interactions of family members and community
groups, and will expand to national and international levels.
It should be
emphasized that the two aspects of our concern are two sides of the same coin
and, as such, that improving one side cannot be effective without improving the
other; neither side can stand alone. It
should also be emphasized, as had been in the section of article #13 referred
to above, that appropriate attitudes do not get instilled spontaneously and on
their own; thinking that they could is akin to requiring humanity to reinvent the
wheel and foregoing all benefits accumulated through work based on the initial
invention – besides, instilling the right attitudes itself is hard work! (Again, refer to the second paragraph of the
second part of article #15 (2017).)
The proposed
measures for improving the education system will help propel the two aspects (our
awareness of the existence of
intangible barriers to effective communication/interaction and our ability to neutralize their destructive
effects) to vastly superior states and thus help improve the quality of our
thinking enormously, in turn helping to achieve unimaginable improvements in the
quality of our communication/interaction.
This will bring about far-reaching advancements in every facet of our
lives, including our wellbeing and happiness. (This is also the end-state that the accounts
of article #15 aim at regarding the elimination of barriers that arise from our
natural disposition, or human nature, and the exacerbation of outcomes of that
disposition arising from the specialization requisite of human advancement – see
the last two paragraphs of that article.)
Apart from the immeasurable
benefits the program will bring to humanity over time, it will also play a vital
role in helping us choose the right path in the uncertain times we are living in
today, when unprecedented and accelerating change is occurring around us and
when our opinions are polarized in virtually every field regarding the policies
we should adopt towards our perplexing and critical problems, many of which
threaten humanity’s long-term survival itself.
And clarity of the choices over such issues will translate into a much
better future with much less conflict, and thus a more peaceful world – even
much less, or no, radicalism/ fanaticism/ fundamentalism, as pointed out in the first
boxed piece at the end of article #1, or “Introduction.”
____________________________________________________________________________________
** This is the essence of the clarity about
the nature of our problem mentioned in the parenthesized last sentence of
article #17, and was in large part an outcome of reflection on the barriers to the
ability of the Maldives government to formulate viable policy. This reflection also reinforced my earlier intuitive
conclusion that the ramifications of the problem explored in these writings are
the culprits (see first paragraph of the piece “About Me” at the end of the
blog) both directly at the decision-making levels and indirectly as relates to hidden
factors underlying the less than desirable attitudes and behaviours of the ranking officers
of the establishment – the impacts and severity of which would vary depending
on the circumstances. But this scenario is
actually not specific to the Maldives – as can be inferred from the first part
of article #15, the US is also in the same boat (one might also want to contemplate
on its current socio-political condition) and by extension/implication, so are all
other nations. Thus if we desire to
improve the human condition, this is the one area the betterment of which would
make the most decisive and profound impact.
