This is the start of a new series: Squares of Quotations. Every posting will focus on the balance between two good things and on their respective exaggerations (see info box below).
Today's topic: Destiny or Self-Determination?
Lots of attitudes we find annoying (in others as well as in ourselves) are maybe just exaggerations of an element of truth. When we give such an attitude a closer look, we feel that there is simply a need for a counterbalancing attitude.
As soon as we feel annoyed by how another person behaves, we might as well look for the element of truth in it and show our appreciation for it. That will make it easier to suggest a counterbalancing behavior, in order to highlight a path of improvement.
Of course one can also exaggerate the counterbalancing element of truth, possibly in an attempt to compensate for what was found to be too extreme, in the first place. Obviously, such an overcompensation isn't helpful either.
Two elements of truth plus their respective exaggerations form a square of values, describing paths of positive development. The concept of a Square of Values was first described by Paul Helwig (unfortunately, link in German only). Later, Friedemann Schulz von Thun extended it to include paths of positive developments, too. Only the form of a Square of Quotations is my own invention.
Self-Determination versus Destiny
| «If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right.»
Henry Ford |
 |
«God, give us grace to accept with serenity the things that cannot be changed, courage to change the things that should be changed, and the wisdom to distinguish the one from the other.»
Reinhold Niebuhr |
 |
 |
 |
|
«What the mind of man can conceive and believe, It can achieve.» Napoleon Hill |
 |
«Fate rules the affairs of mankind with no recognizable order.» Seneca |
What are your thoughts on this? Please leave a comment!
Comments
This is brilliant, love the
This is brilliant, love the diagram. I’ve talked a lot about balance recently over at Organize IT and you’ve given me some stuff to think about here.
Enlightening. I’ve heard
Enlightening.
I’ve heard all these phrases before - but never thought about their inter-relationships.
The diagram is superb in making those relationships clear and provides another level of wisdom.
However, it’s possible that words such as ‘exaggeration’ or ‘overcompensation’ could be seen to reflect a set of judgements over which quote is the ‘right’ place to be.
I think each is a valid place we might occupy at different times in our life. I’ve sometimes found myself adopting Seneca’s view of life!
Your diagram, for me, provides a map of subjectivity/preception and might be a real help to 1) highlight where your perception is at present 2) show there are other ways of looking at things (equally valid) 3) give hints on how one might transition perspective.
Of course, this might sound too close to Jamesian pragmatism for your tastes. I would view it as a map of perception - similar to deBono’s Flowcapes (which never really caught on).
Hope to see more.
"Exaggeration"
@Naveen Thakur:
Thanks for your feedback! You’re pointing us to an important issue: when we call something an “exaggeration” or “overcompensation” (whether that perception is true or not) we’re likely to produce resistance instead of the improvement we desire; plus, we may be just plain wrong.
That’s why Friedemann Schulz von Thun emphasizes we must expressly acknowledge the good intention *behind* what we consider to be an exaggeration, instead of applying EXAGGERATION! like a stigmatic label. I’ve found this thought very helpful, because it helps a lot to reduce the feeling of being annoyed by somebody’s behavior.
And, of course, we might discover that a specific behavior was no exaggeration or overcompensation at all - and that it’s rather *our* turn to improve ourselves or at least change our perspective.
Yet another way of applying this thought tool - thanks for sharing your insight!
You’re a step ahead
You’re a step ahead of me!
I saw the diagram only as a tool for self-analysis. Stuck in first perspective I failed to notice, as you hint, that it’s applicable to interactions with others.
It would be a great map to guide our interaction with, for example, people we find ‘difficult’.
May I provide a half-formed example!
I work in a company where people typically adopt a critical stance towards new ideas. Or they rely on their position of authority to win an argument. I always like to facilitate a more reasoned approach. However, I lack a map to structure my perception of the ‘other’ that could guide my behaviour. I rely on automatic habit.
Your diagram would provide new options - in an easy to consume manner - that would help a facilitator not to feel stuck (i.e. lacking options).
Hope you continue to pursue your idea further!
Thanks.
Great Food For Thought!
Rolf, it’s interesting how you bridge the 2 concepts seamlessly in this diagram. Nice!
Post new comment