Through a glass darkly

Some people will immediately recognize the reference in the title; others will have no idea. This is partly true because the quote is from the bible, and partly because the quote is metaphorical.

Whatever your beliefs about the bible, it is worth considering the phrase "Now we see as through a glass darkly. . . " You can imagine looking through the side of a pop bottle if you like. Now we see as though there were a piece of dark, heavy glass between us and the situation we are observing. Whatever we see, we miss the details.

This is a fairly accurate description of what happens when we look at ourselves. Even when we stand under a bright light in front of a mirror, what we see is filtered through how we feel. It's true when you ask "how do I look in this outfit?" and it's true when you ask "how will I succeed in this new job?" Self-reflection is never 20/20. It's more like looking through a glass darkly.

This means that we never really make decisions the way we say we make decisions. Our ability to see our own process is coloured and distorted by what we think we should believe, by our previous experience, by our hopes and fears. We don't know what we are doing while we make the choice, much less how the choice will affect us after it is made. Whether we choose by guessing or by analyzing, we are not good at knowing what to choose because we are not good at knowing ourselves.

How can we get better at choosing if even the people who study our choices are looking through a glass darkly? The routes to a better process begin with recognizing that the one you are using now could be better. The world is full of people who looked through the glass darkly and made a good choice anyway. The question is not how they got better information; it's how they did their best with the information they had.


Comments

Anonymous said…
Smart, nice, the truth.
7:41 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The hypnotic contract

Under what conditions would you allow someone else to tell you what to think?   If you have watched a stage hypnotist, you have seen what looks like one person exercising remarkable control over the thoughts and actions of another. It is fascinating, in part, because we have all seen it happen in real life. Suddenly someone we know seems to be relying on someone else to do the thinking.  Even if the influence is good, it is a little frightening. The secret is that there are no magic words.  In order to lead someone into hypnosis, that person has to be willing to go there. Often the people you see on stage are more than willing. For whatever reasons, they are enthusiastic about giving up self control and allowing someone else to take charge. They know that there are limits to what can happen on stage and they are only agreeing to give up control within those limits. What you see in hypnosis is an agreement between two people. Like all agreements between human beings, it stretches as far...
Read more

Good with people

What do you think of when you hear the phrase "good with people?" When a wine is good with steak, it means that both the steak and the wine taste better when enjoyed together. If you are 'good with people' that could mean that both you and they perform better when you work together. "Good with people" should not be confused with charm or grace. Many famous leaders have, in the absence of any obvious charm or eloquence, managed to get people to produce at high levels. Some introverts fail to be influential; some extraverts fail to be effective. The most useful criteria for "good with people" is the performance that results when an individual is working with others: does the sum exceed the total of the parts? Or would they all have been better working from separate cubicles? We are entering the season of networking: it's a perfect time to observe the difference between the people who are working the room and the people who are making the room w...
Read more

The fine line between observations, suggestions and commands

I have been watching Tony Robbins this week in the documentary called " I Am Not Your Guru ." You can read a nicely ambivalent review in the Financial Times here.   I think the ambivalence is built into the process, which might be surprising given the loud celebration that characterizes the Date with Destiny in the film. For those of us whose work has evolved from NLP, there are lessons to be learned from modelling the most famous and successful practitioner of NLP (Robbins has far surpassed all the founders by all measures of success). Because he does so much so well, Robbins lets us see how fine the line is between observing and suggesting. Let me explain. Robbins frames his "interventions" both with the exercises and performances we do not see in the film and with his invitations. The film opens with an intervention with a young man who says he is suicidal; it is only later that we see Robbins say he is looking for someone who is suicidal to work with. Since...
Read more