WORK IN PROGRESS
THE Personal Effectiveness E-zine August 2004

><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>><<>>
"It's all a matter of perspective"

Have you ever disagreed with someone, perhaps argued, quarreled, or even fought with them because your viewpoints were so different, only to discover that their point of view was valid? To discover, once you stopped and listened, or did some research, that they were not wrong? This is not to say that you were wrong (although you might have been). So often, issues of right and wrong are not a "sum zero" game.

A sum zero game is one in which, if one person wins, then the other losses. There is no "win-win" in a sum zero game.

Sometimes many of us see most situations, and opinions, in sum zero terms. If two people disagree then one of them must be wrong.

Perhaps, I'd like to suggest, it is all a matter of perspective. Perspective can very by direction, or by distance.

I can look at one side of a mountain and see a shallow slope covered with grass and other greenery, a view that is inviting and that shows the mountain as an easy climb even for an amateur. Given that view, I might say that the mountain is an easy climb. From the other side someone else may see steep, forbidding cliffs and a rock face that will challenge even a serious climber. That person may well have a completely different opinion as to the mountain's "climbability". Just as in the story of the blind men who each reported on a different part of the elephant and so disagreed on the conclusions of the others, neither report of the mountain would be wrong, given the perspective from which they were made.

One of my favorite comics (courtesy of Leigh Rubin and the Creators Syndicate, Inc.) shows two frogs on lily pads. One is reading from a book and reports, "It says here that the fourth plague was a huge swarm of flies that descended over the land of Egypt... now how exactly is that a BAD thing?"

Obviously, for people a plague of flies is a fairly gross experience. For a frog, however. it translates to an abundance of food. See what I mean by different perspectives?

A popular web site at
http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/scienceopticsu/powersof10/index.html
(or, if that doesn't work, use
http://tinyurl.com/hck )
starts by showing the view as it would appear 10 million light years from the Milky Way. It then moves in, reducing the magnification by ten each time. We move in through the Milky Way, on into focus on the solar system and the earth, and then on down to the earth and then down to the molecular level and the electrons in the cell of a leaf.

For every level of magnification we perceive something different. If we were making policy based on any one of those views, no doubt our priorities and focus would be very different from if we were basing them on any other. Yet every view is correct and every policy would be legitimate at that level.

We may think that we are not policy makers, because we think of policy as something relating to government. However, if we live our lives in a thinking, planful way, then we have a policy. Merriam-Webster online defines policy as

1 a : prudence or wisdom in the management of affairs b : management or procedure based primarily on material interest
2 a : a definite course or method of action selected from among alternatives and in light of given conditions to guide and determine present and future decisions b : a high-level overall plan embracing the general goals and acceptable procedures especially of a governmental body

It is only the last of the four definitions that applies solely to government. All the rest apply to all of us. If our policy, our decisions in the management of our lives, are based on our perspectives, an

Where I am going on this is that we set the policies of our lives depending upon the view we have of the world, and the view we have of the world depends upon our perspective. I may have mentioned before that many years ago, when I lived in London, a group of us who met regularly in a pub to discuss the state of the world often listened to the most entertaining, passionate, and well-informed disputes between two of our members, one of whom was a true blue Tory (conservative) while the other spoke with deep conviction on behalf of the Labor point of view. Then one day the man with the Labor view inherited a manufacturing business from an uncle. Almost overnight he became a manager. Alas, our evening entertainments were over. As he began to see life from the viewpoint of management rather than of labor, his perspective changed, his opinions changed, and he no longer disputed the opinions of his previous opponent. Had he been wrong previously? Was he wrong in his change of view? No, to both questions. He was right, based on his view of the world at the time.

Equally, when we argue, convinced that we are arguing based on fact, before we start to experience hostility or become convinced that our opponent is an idiot, let us wonder whether perhaps that person's view of the world is every bit as valid as ours, based on the information that is available to his or her.

Then, let us take a deep breath, and seek solutions that are in the best interests of both viewpoints.

One way to try to work on this, if it is not possible, or not wise, or not safe to do it face to face, is by dialog journaling. I have written on dialog journaling before, and it is often a powerful tool for the resolution of old resentments or disputes.

In dialog journaling you literally write a dialog between yourself and the other party, regardless of whether the other is an individual or an organization. First, you write you own accusations and angers. Then you take the place of the opponent, and write AS YOU THINK THEY WOULD RESPOND. Then you flip back to writing as yourself again, and then as the opponent, for as long as you feel is useful.

One might think that this would be a one-sided dialog, with the writer making all the winning points and the "other" floundering weakly. However, I have found that as I proceed with this technique I am often amazed at how well I can see the point of view of the other. I develop an understanding of what was going on that I was unable to see while I was focusing on my own hurt, or anger, or resentment. I develop an understanding of their viewpoint. It is a bit like play-acting. As we write as though we are the other, we are playing that part, and our perceptions change.

Think of someone, or something, with whom you are currently in disagreement. Try dialog journaling your issues. Perhaps it will help.

And perhaps you can then find a way to make the situation a "win-win."

><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>><<>>

TELL A FRIEND

I hope that you enjoy Work in Progress, and that it is useful to you. To pass its benefits on to a friend or colleague, please forward this issue, perhaps with the suggestion that they might like to subscribe.
><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>><<>>
PLEASE! Any re-use of this material should include the words "Copyright Diana Robinson 2004. For more information visit Diana's web site http://ChoiceCoach.com or contact her at Diana@ChoiceCoach.com."

TO SUBSCRIBE to Work in Progress send a blank e-mail to workinprogress-On@lists.webvalence.com.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank e-mail to
workinprogress-Off@lists.webvalence.com
To offer feedback e-mail Diana at Diana@ChoiceCoach.com or visit her
web site at http://ChoiceCoach.com

Copyright 2004 Diana Robinson, PhD., PCC. Work in
Progress may be reproduced in its entirety only,
including this copyright line. Disclaimer -The contents herein are solely the opinions of Work in Progress owner, and should not be considered as a form of therapy nor advice. There is no guarantee of validity or accuracy. If expert assistance or counseling is needed, the services of a competent professional should be sought.