I believe you are touching on a core paradox of being human.
If people were ‘things’ in the way that machines are, then I believe that are a multitude of psychological and ontological frameworks from which we can form a near-complete ‘understanding’.
But perhaps people are not objects (things), but energy configurations in constant flux. And so any understanding belongs to the past, however recent. And so our understanding of our selves are also from the past, and so we struggle to build for a future, now.
Our very understanding of ourselves as ‘things’, also perhaps motivate us to behave in mechanical (machine-like) ways, that reinforce a ‘false’ understanding of our nature. But indeed if this were true, it is also true that we are in some ways a machine, ipso facto.
And so the paradox of ‘understanding people’.
To reference the double slit experiment: we are both particles (things) and waves (energy). It *appears* that which one we occur to be depends on who is looking.
If you know of this experiment, I’d love your thoughts on it! And if you don’t, I believe it would be a rabbit hole of interest for you.
I really enjoyed your perspectives, especially suggestions for understanding through diversity. Organizations & societies that genuinely promote & support diversity indeed are more innovative, collaborative & productive with happier people.
Thanks for this!
I believe you are touching on a core paradox of being human.
If people were ‘things’ in the way that machines are, then I believe that are a multitude of psychological and ontological frameworks from which we can form a near-complete ‘understanding’.
But perhaps people are not objects (things), but energy configurations in constant flux. And so any understanding belongs to the past, however recent. And so our understanding of our selves are also from the past, and so we struggle to build for a future, now.
Our very understanding of ourselves as ‘things’, also perhaps motivate us to behave in mechanical (machine-like) ways, that reinforce a ‘false’ understanding of our nature. But indeed if this were true, it is also true that we are in some ways a machine, ipso facto.
And so the paradox of ‘understanding people’.
To reference the double slit experiment: we are both particles (things) and waves (energy). It *appears* that which one we occur to be depends on who is looking.
If you know of this experiment, I’d love your thoughts on it! And if you don’t, I believe it would be a rabbit hole of interest for you.
I really enjoyed your perspectives, especially suggestions for understanding through diversity. Organizations & societies that genuinely promote & support diversity indeed are more innovative, collaborative & productive with happier people.
this piece was a joy to read, expanded my thinking on what I am curating; beautifully written!