I had a dialogue based on an article of mine about Paradoxical Intervention, about three years ago on Steemit, there were the following exchanges between a reader and me:
He:
Paradoxical intervention is the single greatest tool for self development I know. Personally I use a more extreme version of it.
Generally my first reaction to anything is trying to ideologically break it. If it breaks, I've got something better. If it doesn't break, I've found something better.
I:
You mean, dissolving an ideology (because ideologies are difficult or problematic between people): then the viewpoint in the other was not really "true" - and it wasn't dramatic to do that. And if your interlocutor's point of view was authentic, have you received a useful lesson for yourself? Did I get that right?
He:
You did get it right. But my teenage self was thinking more on the lines of diamonds and cybersecurity penetration tests (white hat hacking). Rub some graphite on paper and graphite breaks. Rub a sharp diamond on any other natural substance and the substance breaks.
Defining a problem "creates" a problem system.
Let's talk about a "problem": That of central powers.
It already contains its own solution. I'll come back to that later.
The same problem is recognised here on Hive as out in the world. The problem is called "centralisation of power" and it means for all those who do not sit at the central lever that they have to place themselves under the central rules. Those who don't like the fact that there is central regulation of the blockchain on Hive can of course stay away from it. However, this is far more difficult in the real world when there is no "elsewhere".
Upstream of all this is the question of whether everyone (every individual) also realises that there is a central power? Or better: That power tends to become centralized.
On Hive, this question is probably much easier to answer, it is a relatively manageable system. In reality, as astonishing as it may be, this recognition seems to be much less simple.
On Goolishian's view that a problem creates the system, Tom Andersen says: "As I understand him, this means that the problem attracts people who must inevitably have an opinion - both on how to understand the problem and on how to solve it. The opinions as such do not constitute a problem. The problem arises when the different opinions become too different. So different that the adherents of the respective opinions no longer talk to each other. When that happens, the system comes to an even greater standstill."
Such an understanding has many far-reaching implications. The first: problems are not seen as an expression of a "dysfunctionality" (a pathology) of a social system, but as a concatenation of circumstances.
The difference to the usual description can be illustrated by an abstract example: if three people stand in relation to each other in such a way that together they form a triangle - where "is" the triangle? Does this triangle "exist" or is the triangle formed by a particular way in which these three people stand in relation to each other? When they line up, the triangle has disappeared! From a systemic point of view, problems are seen more as constellations, not as "hardware".
Above it states:
"As I understand him, it means that the problem attracts people ..."
What does this attraction look like? First of all, if we assume that a living system is always self-regulating as well, without the actors in that system being able to control everything by a hair's breadth (which they cannot, although they try and are also temporarily successful in doing so), then "attraction" is a key factor. It is, as the saying goes, "poking someones nose in the matter".
The system, which is currently trying to regulate itself because there is unrest in it, is virtually poking its actors with its nose at a fact that lacked attraction before, though we tried our very best to shift our views towards it (financial crisis, for example).
In other words, what governments up and down the continents are doing at the moment is so "attractive" and, above all, so one-sided that every single person in the world is affected by it!
One must really bear this uniqueness in the history of mankind in mind: There has probably never been anything like this before.
The unity that all governments (almost all) on this planet show in Corona politics is so astonishing because normally such an agreement is difficult or even impossible to achieve! In larger communities, even in family systems, it is true effort to generate agreement - and now all members of all parliaments and congresses are supposed to stand united behind the current measures?
Just try to agree on a restaurant with eight people and you really get into trouble!
But what is the system actually doing at the moment?
From my point of view, the politicians of all countries are behaving in such an obviously illogical way and outside all reason, almost in a ridiculous obviousness, as if, mouths gagged, they were actually asking for help from the people but did not dare to say such things.
For indeed, there may arise the thought that when those whom we believe to be in the centre of power, forbid themselves to speak, and turn towards such desperate actions like a pandemic, it actually should be easy, really easy, to become suspicious, after having become irritated, no?
We all know this movie-scenes, where a human is being held hostage in his own house.
The door bell rings and the perpetrator, gun in his hand, asks his victim to open it but to "remain normal" (!). It now all depends on the victims ability to be a really good actor. Because, you see, in the bed room there is the victims most precious item (let your fantasy do the rest for you).
What shall the victim do? How can he give a sign to the person who he is speaking to at the door? He cannot openly say that he is captivated by a powerful force. He cannot blink with his eyes in an awkward way, he may just silently form his lips (HELP...), while he dreads that the doorbell-person isn't smart enough and may look surprised or will destroy the moment. But the victim needs a hero, doing the right thing. Right?
Of course, you have already realized that the role of the victim is represented by the government and that the hero is us, the people. While the government needs us to be strong, fearless and cool headed, what are we doing?
The system is a "clever entity".
Why? Because you cannot catch it as a real entity, it just slips away, because it is not controllable, it cannot be caught in the act, all it does is to give chance to the many to become aware of contradictions and what has to become ordered.
"problems are not seen as an expression of a "dysfunctionality" (a pathology) of a social system, but as a concatenation of circumstances."
So, the government (and the rest of the parliament as well as all sub-entities), as much as one distastes it, hates it, rages about it, is obviously, and for me personally undoubtedly, either being held hostage or blackmailed or mentally washed, needs (our) help.
Have we not tested it out now for about a full year? Have we not asked questions, but received short, strange or no answers at all?
"my reaction to anything is trying to ideologically break it. If it breaks, I've got something better. If it doesn't break, I've found something better."
We tested the ideology and it can be broken. It breaks the moment the other shows signs of inauthenticity. It actually is so easily broken, it's ridiculous.
BUT: You won't necessarily know it when you not have tried it out yourself. Ask an authority detailed questions, ask critical questions and the reaction will be first a copy and pasted answer from the media (or some other authority) and if you continue to ask, you'll receive silence. Is that "normal" behavior? Obviously not. No answer means that you got it right. And "the viewpoint of the other was not really 'true'." (ones truth).
"Rub some graphite on paper and graphite breaks. Rub a sharp diamond on any other natural substance and the substance breaks."
The people, the folks all over the world, can become diamonds, right? The people, they are also a natural substance, if you will. They are actors in the grand system.
The very big theatre that we are now experiencing is happening because the smaller performances have not yet allowed the noses to be really deeply immersed.
The system, as a huge theatre, it wants to regulate itself insofar as it fills the stage with more and more meaningless roles until it becomes a performance that is so monotonous, so stupid, that the audience leaves the hall because they have never seen a worse play.
One actor resembles the other, they differ in nothing and as much as they shout at each other: "No one should have to be left behind" or "may everyone be saved", "We need diversity!", the audience increasingly wonders who is actually directing this absurdly dull play. But the whippersnappers are still going strong and the artificial enthusiasts are playing their lyres. So the screamers and the lyres are still in front of the paralysed people in the rows of seats who are unsure whether they should leave or stay.
Back on the individual parquet of reality, the realisation remains that such fuss will inevitably end at some point.
Either because "everyone" has actually assimilated the abnormality of reality turned upside down and everything will then take its course, or because what has been turned upside down will come to its feet again. We will see.
... The constellations in the system want to see themselves regulated and I admire the human contradictory from a more distanced way, because total unity will never happen. Which is fine, really fine, because that's just the order of things. If it were otherwise and every single person, really everyone, were in agreement, ... we would dissolve in a cloud of logic.
I said the solution is contained in the problem.
The problem of the people (all of us, the many, including the politicians) seems to be that we don't want "it all" any more.
Actually, all governments have become more or less anarchistic and they pass on their sceptre in the hope that the many may take over. No matter how much someone is bought, threatened, blackmailed and humiliated. No matter how much we think recognised directors like to take the sceptres. They don't have them because they are simply a small group who can only play their game if everyone joins in. From that overarching perspective, it's really ridiculous and ridiculously easy, isn't it?
Therefore, we are giving ourselves as humanity the greatest theatre right now, literally, with insane salaries and high tech and all the zip-zap and zampano, but at the same time we see how bad the actual play is. Because we have repeated it to the hilt.
Of course, not waiting for the curtain and walking away, whistling at the directors of the world, hands in the pockets, that is, admittedly, a real art.
Let's be artists, dear people. Let's be artists.
Picture Sources:
Von Honoré Daumier - The Yorck Project (2002) 10.000 Meisterwerke der Malerei (DVD-ROM), distributed by DIRECTMEDIA Publishing GmbH. ISBN: 3936122202., Gemeinfrei, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=149975
By Mr.Manohara Upadhya. Uploaded by Gnanapiti - https://www.flickr.com/photos/yakshagana/320782744/, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3037030
Von Ferdinando Iannone - Renitenztheater Stuttgart e.V., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=10292960
By Carole Raddato from FRANKFURT, Germany (FollowingHadrian); derivative work: Speravir - Mosaic depicting theatrical masks of Tragedy and Comedy, 2nd century AD, from Rome Thermae Decianae (?), Palazzo Nuovo, Capitoline Museums (12830396085).jpg, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=49867373
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theater
Quotes translated from this German site: