“We do not think and talk about what we see; we see what we are able to think and talk about” – Edgar Schein
In the last two posts, we explored how our assumptions create division and conflict, and how this prevents us from seeing, understanding, and solving functional problems. We observed that conflict is intertwined with functional problems and that this distracts our effort towards managing the conflict rather than solving the functional problem. We have an endless portfolio of conflicts, and it is rather pointless to manage specific conflicts and expect anything transformative. As soon as we take our eye off the ball, the conflict will flare again, and we are always predisposed to creating more conflict. If we want to go beyond managing specific causes of conflict, we have to understand the nature of conflict. To get to the root of conflict, we must understand the system of thought.
Prior Posts In Review
Beware of Assumptions: Key Takeaways
- Assumptions are based on ideas, not facts
- They originate from our mental models, conditioning, and experiences
- They shape our reality, adding interpretation and imagery to what we think is happening, and what we think should be.
- Assumptions are tightly linked to expectations, opinions, hypotheses, and conclusions
- They limit our ability to openly inquire and observe anything new
- What is actually happening remains largely overshadowed and invisible.
- Assumptions create division and conflict
- When what we think is happening contradicts what we think should be, we are in conflict.
- The uncertainty, fear, and anger associated with conflict become powerful reactive drivers and impediments to functional change.
- Assumptions prevent us from seeing, understanding, and solving functional problems
- Assumptions envelop functional problems in a conflict cocoon and misdirect our focus to resolving the conflict rather than solving the problem
- Conflict management becomes our problem-solving surrogate, and we end up with misdirected problem workarounds.
The Conflicted Problem: Key Takeaways
- Problems and conflict are distinct
- Problems are objective challenges based on fact
- Conflicts are subjective contradictions and divisions based on interpretation, comparison, assumptions, and opinions
- Our innate tendency to entangle subjective interpretation into objective problems precludes us from seeing the latter clearly
- We become Conflict Managers rather than Problem Solvers
- Conflicts and problems can be distinguished when we become aware of our subjective approach to what we perceive
- Becoming aware of conflict opens the door to exploring and understanding the factual nature or root of conflict
- Understanding the nature of conflict creates empowers us to see the functional problem clearly
In a nutshell, here’s what we’ve learned:
- Assumptions Invite Comparison
- Comparison Creates Division
- Division Creates Conflict
- Conflict Obscures the Functional Problem
- We Become Conflict Managers Rather Than Problem Solvers
To Understand Conflict, We Must Understand Thought
Thought is a Fragmented Material Process Based on Memory that Innately Creates Division and Conflict
Thought functions as a material process based on our worldview
- Knowledge (what is known or believed to be true)
- Experiences (personal or collective encounters)
- Traditions (inherited cultural practices)
- Beliefs (held convictions)
- Ideals (aspirational values)
Thought is retrospective and incomplete
- Our worldview is:
- An accumulation of past references
- Applied to the present
- Modified toward the future
- Incomplete
- Limited data and understanding
- Incomplete translation and retention
- Compartmentalized
- Contradictory
- An accumulation of past references
Thought divides us using our accumulated worldview to create self images
Thought Functions as a Continuous Time Cycle
- Thought always functions from the past (memory), applied to the present, and modified as the future
- Thought attempts to create permanence and stability based on past knowledge in a current environment that is always changing and uncertain
Thought Inevitably Divides and Creates Conflict
We can observe how thought functions in ourselves. We see something in our environment and immediately seek to identify and name it based on our accumulated knowledge stored as memory. We instantaneously interpret what we have identified, using our worldview of knowledge, experiences, traditions, beliefs, and ideals to assign a subjective value. Our interpretation creates the image of what we think is, which we compare to our worldview for alignment. Particularly when there is misalignment, we then project an image of what should be, which is an idea, and it is this division between what we think is and what we think should be that creates conflict. Our response is reactive and directed towards resolving the conflict we’ve created. All of this has very little do with what is actually happening, and we’re caught in a misguided subjective thought cycle that continues to reinforce itself.
Notice how thought uses our worldview to create and function in a subjective domain of ideas, which is our reality, rather than operating with objective facts in actuality. Conflict is the result of subjective comparison and division, whereas functional problems are objective and factual.
- Thought functions in the subjective domain of ideas (our reality) rather than objective facts (actuality)
- Conflict is subjective and exists in reality
- Functional problems are factual and exist in actuality
Here’s a simplified version of this diagram that may be a helpful reference as you observe your own thought process
We Can Now Put All Of This Together
Using our understanding of assumptions, the conflicted problem, and the nature of conflict, we can now observe and explain why problems become conflicts and how we typically respond.
- We look at the external problem as the source of conflict
- We often personify the source of conflict and blame others
- We want to resolve our conflict and feel better
- We jump to an ideal solution because we don’t understand what’s actually happening
- Our ideal solution doesn’t align with the actual problem or source of conflict
- We create an increasingly complex progression of unintended consequences, which makes the actual problem invisible
Creating and Reacting to Conflict – Vignette 1: Teenage Fender Bender
My seventeen-year-old daughter has had her driver’s license for six months and has just been involved in a second rear-end collision in as many months. She pleads that it wasn’t her fault, and that she was unable to stop the car in time. I often hear the thumping beat from her audio playlist blasting from the car before she’s even in the driveway and assume that the music distraction is what really caused the crash. I’m irritated and decide that she shouldn’t be listening to music if she can’t be responsible and take away her Bluetooth access to the car as a consequence. She’s of course unhappy with my reaction and complains that I am treating her like a child and ruining her life. The minor damage to the car is repaired, and as I’m driving the car home, I almost end up rear ending the car in front of me! Hmm. I take the car for a maintenance check and the service technician informs me that the front brake pads are completely worn down and require immediate replacement. Looks like I was the one distracted…
Creating and Reacting to Conflict – Vignette 2: Anesthesia Delay
It’s another busy day in Procedural Radiology with several anesthesia cases scheduled throughout the day. The radiologist is eager to get started with the CT-guided biopsy scheduled for 8am and everything is set up for the case, except for the anesthesiologist. Dr. van Pelt is assigned to cover anesthesia services for the day, and as usual, he is late. The radiologist is frustrated by Dr. van Pelt’s laziness and lack of accountability and asks the radiology tech to call down to the OR front desk to find out where Dr. van Pelt is. Dr. van Pelt shows up at 8:20 and apologizes for the delay, explaining that he didn’t know there was an anesthesia case scheduled. The radiologist dismisses the excuse as irresponsibility and requests that Dr. van Pelt be removed from covering Procedural Radiology henceforth. Dr. Smith replaces Dr. van Pelt the following week and sure enough, Dr. Smith is also delayed for the 8am anesthesia case start. The continued delay challenge triggers a process review, and it becomes evident that the Radiology Procedure scheduling is made using a legacy IT system that does not interface with the main anesthesia scheduling platform. Anesthesiologists assigned to cover the busy non-OR anesthesia (NORA) areas prioritize scheduled cases and assume that any others are add-ons to be covered as availability permits.
Thought Has Its Place
We have seen that thought is a powerful and influential system that builds and leverages our subjective worldviews, trying to make sense of our environment and creating conditions for endless division and conflict in the process. One might conclude that thought is nothing but trouble, however, that is not so. We need thought to communicate, learn and apply technical skills, build infrastructure, develop technologies, engage in scientific exploration, and the arts. Simply put, thought gets us into trouble when it gets caught in our subjective worldview as its source of truth. If and when we become aware of our fundamental thought process and the influence our relative worldviews have in generating contradiction, division, and conflict, we can recognize the limitations of thought and the value it can bring to functional problem solving when applied objectively using facts.
Understanding The Nature of Conflict and System of Thought: Summary
Understanding The Function of Thought
- Material neurologic process
- Memory based
- Accumulated information stored in the brain
- Accumulated knowledge is always fragmented and incomplete
- Time: Operates from the past, applied to the present, and modified as the future
- Uses words, symbols, and images to process and express
- Always analyzing and responding through identification, interpretation, and imagination
Understanding The Limits of Thought (Subjective Use)
- Worldview referenced as a source of truth
- Analytic process distorts and disguises fact with idea
- Core division between what we think is and what we think should be creates conflict
- Response is reactive to conflict
Understanding The Value of Thought (Objective Use)
- Language and communication
- Technical training and skills development
- Infrastructure development
- Scientific exploration and innovation
- Artistic expression
Question to Ponder
Share a conflict that you experienced and describe how your story aligns with the function of subjective thought
Where to Next?
Now that we have an understanding of the nature of conflict and the central role that thought plays in its ubiquitous presence, our natural next question to ask is how to correct subjective thought and eliminate conflict. Here’s the trap: We will innately frame the solution to objective thinking in our conventional subjective context of what we think is and what we think should be. We have seen that this produces comparison, division, and conflict. We can’t solve a problem with the same process that created it, so we need a new approach to our “How to” mindset. Perhaps the new approach is in becoming aware, attentive, and having a deep understanding of the nature of conflict and the function of thought. In other words, rather than focusing on tools and methodologies to become more objective, what should be, maybe it is more important to observe what is, and through that understanding the functional solution emerges. We will look at this in our next set of posts.
Our next question to investigate: Is the approach to understanding a problem more important than the problem itself?
To set the stage, consider the following quote:
“A new kind of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move toward higher levels” – Albert Einstein
See you next time!
Leave a Reply