This week I entered my twitter account and I found this photo with the corresponding tweet:
And I chose to share a question to @POTUS:
Then I started to read the thousands and thousands of different reactions that were generated from the original tweet.
Some completely opposing each other. Some add to conversation, others counter. All of them different.
Why this phenomenon happens? How can it be that before a single “stimulus” there are so many different constructions of reality? How is it that in such a “general” concept as “God” there are so many versions of “God”? How can it be that, even in the same religions, we find distinctions in the construction of God?
But let me move to a less controversial subject.
How can the same person be worshiped and hated at the same time? Depends on the person? It depend on the others?
We go even further, how is it possible that we can live in peace with these “constructions” so different between us humans?
Some possible answers
The process is quite simple to explain, complex to live with consistency in day by day.
And much, much more challenging to do it from the sufficiency (that inner space in which I know that I came to life equipped with everything I require to live).
The tweet that is offered through the account of the United States President is an offer, a “contribution” as we call it in #BlumensteinTheory.
And the contributions, although they are formed with the purpose, the content and the form of the one who offers them, once they leave, they become neutral data.
The reason? We do not have the possibility as human beings to know any of the three previous data of the one that he offered.
And our brain can only build from the data it receives.
So to co-create social system, I need to take the contribution from the other, make it mine, and give meaning to these three data: that is, I interpret purpose, content and form.
And finally I choose to answer or not.
Do we want to build?
So this idea so publicized in social networks of “I am responsible for what I say” and “you are of what you interpret”, in some sense is right. Although I have doubts that many know why, because the basis is pure biology.
The interesting subject, at least for me, does not stay in the way how living organisms called human beings are designing to interact.
The point is when we see it from a social systems perspective, what is important is not what I say, or what you understand or vice versa, what is important, what is really important is: what do we want to build? If we want to build.
And here is where the new President of the US and many other leaders, as my grandmother used to say, this are the hard times, because when we see their contributions we can build some that they do not want to build together. Or at least not from a place that includes a diversity of perspectives.
And in this magnificent biology with which we were designed, whoever does not build does not survive. And I’m not talking about only one side, but both.
Maybe that’s why we put our planet at risk, put our organizations, our teams and even our homes at risk, because we do not ask ourselves what we want to build and if we really want to build.
So the question is: in those social systems in which you contribute: What do you want to build?
What would you like to happen between your boss and you? What would you like to see happen between your teenager and you? What would you like to see happen between your partner and you? What would you like to happen on the team you own or run?
And once you’re clear, a next question might be: Are the contributions I am making increase or decrease my chances of achieving it?
Maybe like Trump, you pray to a God of love and you have hate behaviors. Or maybe just like many others, you are trying every day to consistently contribute to what you would like to build.
The perspective that the BlumensteinTheory® offers is not for individuals, it is to build together from the individuality.
No comment yet, add your voice below!