A TRULY TRANSFORMATIVE ATTITUDE

“Dichotomizing pathologizes and pathology dichotomize.” Abraham Maslow

If there’s a sneaky attitude that is sure to create all sorts of problems in your life, and an attitude that prevents you from understanding what’s wrong, it is the linear either/or way of thinking. As a thinking pattern, either–or is how small children first begin to think as they categorize their options in the world. Things are either this way or they are that other way. You are strong or weak, smart of dumb, selfish or giving, a friend or an enemy, etc. You are either working or playing, stingy or generous, thinking or feeling, winning or losing, and on and on. This is the first world that we all grow up in—and it is the world that some people never graduate from.

The either–or world is a dichotomized or polarized world. Now for children and for primitive people living in a dangerous jungle, it is a world that works just fine. For everybody else—it is a very limiting world and as a habitual attitude, it is itself dangerous. “Dichotomizing pathologizes and pathology dichotomize” was the mantra of Abraham Maslow. He wrote about that repeatedly over the years and his research demonstrated how toxic it is.

The attitude of seeing and framing things in terms of either–or thinking has one especially toxic and pathological effect—it blinds you to seeing systemic solutions. It locks you out of any and every synergetic solution. Now you cannot see things in-between the polar opposites. Now you are incapable of recognizing both–and variables.

If you suffer an either–or dilemma inside your own psychology such as the conflict between selfish and unselfish, mind or emotion (head or heart), pride or humility, scarcity or abundance, work or play, etc., then your emotions will tend to oscillate back and forth. You will be on one side of things, then flip to the other. And if you have a hidden frame that prohibits one side of the either–or framework, then you will have a complete blind spot to the inner conflict so that you don’t understand what’s going on. I see that frequently in coaching conversations. A manager wants to be effective and task-oriented and struggles with also wanting to be friendly and humane in his decisions. He is on the horns of a dilemma with seemingly no solution.

Organizations are often structured for certain either–or formulations. If structured for the stockholders, it is often at odds with the stakeholders (employees, customers, etc.). If structured for “results this quarter” it is often sacrificing core capacities for long-term well-being. If structure for competition, it cannot get people to cooperate, share information, and work as a team. Again, the very thinking that creates this problem blinds one to solutions.

To identify the subtle and hidden attitude of either–or, you first have to catch it. This means

stepping back and recognizing that you are on the horns of a dilemma. As you flush out your either–or perspective listen for these words— either-or, black-or-white, all-or-nothing. Next, put the two choices on a continuum as the polar ends. You now have a visual image that reveals that there’s a whole world in-between. So ask, “What lies between these polar opposites?” “If one is at 0 and the other at 100, what is at 25, 50 or75 percent?” In this way, you can begin to perceive all of the things which lie between the either–or alternatives.

But we are not done. Not only is there a world of choices in-between the duality of the either–or choices, there is also a world above. So if you draw a diagram, move your pen to a position above the continuum and ask, “What is above these two that might be a synthesis of the two?” Between details and global, you might find meta-detailing. Between lose and win might be “playing a game.”

Ask, “If these two dual options are members of the same class, what is the classification?” “If both are values, they are values within what larger value?” Between competition on one side and collaboration on the other side, both are ways of relating.

What is the higher level attitude that solves the either–or problem? There are several.

First, the attitude of both–and in different dimensions. “I am both strong and weak, strong in some dimensions, weak in others.” Second, is the systemic attitude which takes the whole system into account. “There actually is no ‘mind’ without a ‘body’ and no ‘body’ without a ‘mind,’ they are one thing—the mind-body-emotion system.” Third, is the gestalt attitude that acknowledges the emergence of something that is “more than and different from” the parts. “I have learned how to work at my play, and play at my work. I take a vacation daily when I go to work.”

Thinking more holistically is a higher level or meta-level attitude, one of synergy that brings about a unity to a world that is otherwise torn apart by framing things dualistically. This is what we do in NLP Communication to resolve conflicts. After all, conflicts are by their very nature polarized positions that people have dichotomized. By thinking in terms of both–and, systemically, and synergistically we move up to an unifying frame that integrates the conflicting parts. [Want more? See Chapter 16 Synergizing in the book Unleashed! (2007).]