sadeewhip

A core theme of my work is differentiating between the stories we live in our minds and reality.

Let me state up front that I’m a big fan of reality - so my bias is toward getting out of your head and your stories and into reality.

The problem is that most of us don’t even realize we are in a story.

We walk around with a set of assumptions and an established way of thinking and don’t question it. This allows us to process very quickly and navigate the world - which is great for survival. But just surviving is no longer the task of the modern human. 

We are now in a position where we can focus on the quality of the meaning and fulfillment we experience. We are free to explore spirituality, intimacy, making a difference, what colors look best on us, what wines we like…it’s a very different world.

So why are we still using the same kind of thinking needed for survival? 

It’s really inefficient. It makes getting to meaning and fulfillment arduous. And it is, I believe, the main reason why so many people spend years and years in therapy with comparatively little payoff.

In fact, most of our helping systems are based on unchallenged thinking - on outdated, unmodified assumptions.

So my question to you is this:

In the context of your life, your dreams, and your deepest desires, what kind of thinking - what assumptions and lenses - would be most conducive?

For example:

Someone says something that doesn’t feel good to you. The old, survival thinking processes this internally, rapidly exploring the possibilities - “Did I say or do something to make them mad?” “Why would they say that to me?” “Are they being mean?” “Should I be offended?” And on and on until a conclusion is reached. Then we act on that conclusion.

In this scenario, which happens many, many times each day, we are not in relationship. We are doing everything by ourselves and inventing a story. But we don’t see that we are inventing a story. So we react to the thoughts in our minds, and not to the truth of the other person, as if our thoughts are accurate.

But if you don’t ask the other person what a particular action of theirs means, how can you possibly know? 

Say you are in a grocery store and a woman is standing is the middle of the isle. You can’t get your cart around her so you say “Excuse me…”

She turns around and looks at you with furrowed brows and a strange frown.

In the old thinking you might wonder what the heck her problem is. You might get a little miffed or decide she is a mean person.

But what if she has really bad gas and is extremely uncomfortable and you saw a moment of that discomfort on her face? Would she still be mean?

The point is, you don’t know. None of us knows what another person’s deal is. And using old survival thinking to engage our modern world means we usually make up stories that only allow someone to be friend or foe. This let’s us decide if they are dangerous or not, but that’s about it.

The problem with this is that people aren’t lions or members of competing tribes. Survival thinking just doesn’t serve our modern purposes.

So what is an alternative to survival thinking? What assumptions can we make that enable us to be in the reality of our modern world?

I certainly have my own ideas, but I’d really love to hear yours.

Thanks for reading the extra long post today!