This was a really engaging interview and I liked the flexibility with the timing of the big question. There were several highlights for me. The Venn diagram approach as to how closely someone's ontology maps onto their epistemology is almost a measure of integrity.
The idea of border work was another interesting way of viewing the duality of our separateness and unity. There was, it seemed, an underlying assumption that in sharing different myths about the same thing that there would be a shared understanding about the fundamental meaning behind it. The stories might differ but they would reflect a similar ontology and epistemology.
This in turn assumed a lack of competition between different communities - a reflection of his wonderful description of the way signals travelled through the landscape. It took for granted that the natural order was for communities to provide for each other and provide that basic safety net of food, water and shelter for the body and a sense of connection for the soul. It sounds a bit like UBI but with a more Anarchistic slant that allows for the more personal dimension.
The idea of a shared reality seems quite alien or at least remote in this age of individualism. Neoliberalism seems to have captured that 'market'. It is a hopeful thought, though, that if we all took off our post modern spectacles that only allow us to focus on our own small world we might all see much the same thing and while we might frame it differently we might find much more in common.
I have been reading Tyson’s latest book for a while and I found this conversation even more engaging and inspiring. Thanks for another nourishing experience.
Tyson’ last reflection on ideas and theories not being useful is both funny as it is contradictory –the funny part is that the podcast is built on the premise of ideas and innovative thinking and the latter may just be the guest speaker’s way of introducing a provocative slant in order to make us all think. Hence, it’s a bit of a shame that the interview ends just after that; it would have been great if Tyson could’ve elaborated on his thinking behind that conjecture. His response, in a way, is a mark of an intelligent answer that holds two opposing views simultaneously..on one hand we need ideas, but in cognition-dominant world we live in, it would serve us well to be particularly selective which of those theories and ideas we should keep and which long spent ones to ditch, especially when the current polycrisis is concerned, resulting from our collective clinging to the outdated modes of thinking and acting.
We can all agree that ideas underpin it all; everything that has ever been innovated or invented started with an idea. However, this fact is not only under-appreciated in the modern societies but often conveniently ignored by those who do not understand and do not value the process of thinking up ideas; what it takes in terms of resources to develop ideas and then introduce them into the open. Drawing upon my own experience and applied psychology research, this is one of the biggest barriers to progress with all our contemporary challenges. Such ignorance in treating innovative ideas, that come from outer groups or individuals that are outside of our strongly speciated groups, tends to lead to incorrect and often misguided group-think and behaviours. As these are being replicated again and again, it can eventually lead to a mental and physical impasse.
An interesting point made also regarding - consensus thinking. This is only good to a point when a degree of independent thinking is exercised among the individuals in any given group. Compounded errors can occur with every bad decision made and we end up with collective logic bubbles that can remove common sense from the group, which is what we’re seeing today with action being replaced by endless production of reports (knowledge) in many cases, as part of habitual thinking patterns. Once a good way forward, either expressed as a formula or strategy for action has been established, there is only one thing to do, i.e. to enact what we know.
Speaking of misalignment, as pointed out by T. Yunkaporta with his own take on it, as in to quote him: ‘a misalignment of signals’ is nothing other than a misalignment of our own needs with those of the planet and her diverse peoples, a reality and growing phenomenon that I explored deeply in my joint Regeneration book over two decades ago. The first book on regeneration released in Europe. Today, this notion is quite topical as the signs of such misalignment are clear to pretty much everyone.
How can we de-code the nature’s distress signals, spelling out today an imminent ecological collapse, when most of us live inside our heads in concrete cities, locked in logic bubbles that sustain those outlived beliefs?! Without the right tools that enable us to actively scan and read our landscapes, to envision actionable solutions to correct this in the way the Aboriginal people have done with their entire beings, using ‘songlines’ and ‘dreamtime’. To get us all back on track towards a more feasible earthcentric future. And whilst we cannot all go back to the indigenous way of living, we can certainly bring this indigenous way of thinking back into our communities..if there is a will. This is not a theory, it is an imperative in order to succeed in our efforts to survive and co-exist by regenerating our ways of being in the world, as this conversation so brilliantly highlights.
More innovative thinking and ideas on how to regain our collective cultural and ecological rhythm… can be found here earthvoice.eu.
This was a really engaging interview and I liked the flexibility with the timing of the big question. There were several highlights for me. The Venn diagram approach as to how closely someone's ontology maps onto their epistemology is almost a measure of integrity.
The idea of border work was another interesting way of viewing the duality of our separateness and unity. There was, it seemed, an underlying assumption that in sharing different myths about the same thing that there would be a shared understanding about the fundamental meaning behind it. The stories might differ but they would reflect a similar ontology and epistemology.
This in turn assumed a lack of competition between different communities - a reflection of his wonderful description of the way signals travelled through the landscape. It took for granted that the natural order was for communities to provide for each other and provide that basic safety net of food, water and shelter for the body and a sense of connection for the soul. It sounds a bit like UBI but with a more Anarchistic slant that allows for the more personal dimension.
The idea of a shared reality seems quite alien or at least remote in this age of individualism. Neoliberalism seems to have captured that 'market'. It is a hopeful thought, though, that if we all took off our post modern spectacles that only allow us to focus on our own small world we might all see much the same thing and while we might frame it differently we might find much more in common.
I have been reading Tyson’s latest book for a while and I found this conversation even more engaging and inspiring. Thanks for another nourishing experience.
Tyson’ last reflection on ideas and theories not being useful is both funny as it is contradictory –the funny part is that the podcast is built on the premise of ideas and innovative thinking and the latter may just be the guest speaker’s way of introducing a provocative slant in order to make us all think. Hence, it’s a bit of a shame that the interview ends just after that; it would have been great if Tyson could’ve elaborated on his thinking behind that conjecture. His response, in a way, is a mark of an intelligent answer that holds two opposing views simultaneously..on one hand we need ideas, but in cognition-dominant world we live in, it would serve us well to be particularly selective which of those theories and ideas we should keep and which long spent ones to ditch, especially when the current polycrisis is concerned, resulting from our collective clinging to the outdated modes of thinking and acting.
We can all agree that ideas underpin it all; everything that has ever been innovated or invented started with an idea. However, this fact is not only under-appreciated in the modern societies but often conveniently ignored by those who do not understand and do not value the process of thinking up ideas; what it takes in terms of resources to develop ideas and then introduce them into the open. Drawing upon my own experience and applied psychology research, this is one of the biggest barriers to progress with all our contemporary challenges. Such ignorance in treating innovative ideas, that come from outer groups or individuals that are outside of our strongly speciated groups, tends to lead to incorrect and often misguided group-think and behaviours. As these are being replicated again and again, it can eventually lead to a mental and physical impasse.
An interesting point made also regarding - consensus thinking. This is only good to a point when a degree of independent thinking is exercised among the individuals in any given group. Compounded errors can occur with every bad decision made and we end up with collective logic bubbles that can remove common sense from the group, which is what we’re seeing today with action being replaced by endless production of reports (knowledge) in many cases, as part of habitual thinking patterns. Once a good way forward, either expressed as a formula or strategy for action has been established, there is only one thing to do, i.e. to enact what we know.
Speaking of misalignment, as pointed out by T. Yunkaporta with his own take on it, as in to quote him: ‘a misalignment of signals’ is nothing other than a misalignment of our own needs with those of the planet and her diverse peoples, a reality and growing phenomenon that I explored deeply in my joint Regeneration book over two decades ago. The first book on regeneration released in Europe. Today, this notion is quite topical as the signs of such misalignment are clear to pretty much everyone.
How can we de-code the nature’s distress signals, spelling out today an imminent ecological collapse, when most of us live inside our heads in concrete cities, locked in logic bubbles that sustain those outlived beliefs?! Without the right tools that enable us to actively scan and read our landscapes, to envision actionable solutions to correct this in the way the Aboriginal people have done with their entire beings, using ‘songlines’ and ‘dreamtime’. To get us all back on track towards a more feasible earthcentric future. And whilst we cannot all go back to the indigenous way of living, we can certainly bring this indigenous way of thinking back into our communities..if there is a will. This is not a theory, it is an imperative in order to succeed in our efforts to survive and co-exist by regenerating our ways of being in the world, as this conversation so brilliantly highlights.
More innovative thinking and ideas on how to regain our collective cultural and ecological rhythm… can be found here earthvoice.eu.