Part of my role this summer is to lead our short-term teams through a learning process in respect to culture, faith & mission. One aspect of the day is exploring our assumptions and beliefs. Specifically, we explore the difference between our
espoused beliefs & our
ingrained/enacted beliefs. One graph that I use is particularly helpful (as seen poorly above):
The Ladder of Inference. I came across this concept in
"The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook: Strategies and Tools for Building a Learning Organization". Let me clarify the small print above, starting at bottom of the ladder, with some of my ideas for clarity:
-Observable "data" and experiences (as a videotape recorder might capture it): This is how all of us take in the world around us. Each of us does this differently for many reasons, but generally we take in information through our senses at a massive rate. We are not usually aware of the degree of information we absorb.
-I select "Data" from what I observe: We make note of specific "data" and give it special attention, be it mor thought, emotion, etc. while other "data" is given less attention, ignored, etc. Obviously the "data" we select is the raw material for moving up the ladder further.
-I add Meanings (cultural and personal): This point is critical, because it is here that we attach value and meaning to the specific "data", based upon how we were raised, the context and culture we are in, our socio-economic status, our religion, our gender, our temperament/personality, etc. It must be noted that, for those raised in Christian homes, here is where our religious assumptions shape us. While those assumptions/beliefs may ultimately be true, at this stage we generally attach meaning because that is normative to our context, not because we have genuinely weighed them against other options.
-I make Assumptions based on the meanings: These meanings make up the presuppositions/assumptions about the world around us, therefore we measure other things- be it people, ideas, cultures, etc. from that foundation. Without intentionality, we generally use our assumptions as the standard by which all else is measured.
-I draw Conclusions: Here is where we decide, settle- ultimately, judge the world around us based on our assumptions. It is critical to recognize that most of this is done unconsciously/subconsciously, as natural as any physical impulse. These conclusions are not always articulated or espoused, but still remain deeply held convictions.
-I adopt Beliefs about the world: These conclusions on specific "data" or experiences in the world form the basis of our overall beliefs. It is here that our worldview is shaped and sharpened. Again, often unarticulated or even consciously defined, it makes up the lense through which the world makes sense.
-I take Actions based on my beliefs: Obviously, as we form this overall worldview/belief system, it directs the way we act, speak, relate, spend, etc. Our decisions, even about the seemingly mundane details of life, are guided by these beliefs. As mentioned at the beginning, these beliefs may or may not line up with the beliefs that we articulate and are (generally) a better indicator of our true convictions.
You will note on the diagram that at the "Beliefs" rung, there is a arrow traveling down to the "Data" wrung, creating a loop. The text says:
-The reflexive loop (our beliefs affect what data we select next time): This loop begins very early in our lives, through child rearing, general culture and personal experience (to name a few influences). As critical as it is to see that beliefs impact which "data" we select, it is perhaps more critical to recognize that this also means it affects which "data we ignore. Part of this is intentional and necessary, but much of of it is subjective in value and unintentional.
Let's look at an example that has deep meaning in my context. Growing up, when I was being taught, corrected or addressed by an adult, I was required to look them in the eye. We have all heard "Look at me when I am talking to you, young man!", right? As a result, when was guilty of some infraction, I would be ashamed to look them in the eye, thus hanging my head. Thus, not looking authority in the eyes was a sign of guilt. While not an articulated assumption, it was reinforced by my context and experience.
So when I saw people failing to make eye contact with authority, I unconsciously was prone to assume guilt. In my own life, then, I always tried to respect my elders by looking them in the eye, only lower them when I felt contrite, assuming that others would follow this obviously universal pattern.
My Samoan friends, however, had a different experience. Like many indigenous cultures, they were taught that those in authority are show respect by NOT making direct eye contact. When I lived with a groups of Pacific islanders in a missions community years ago, conflicts kept arising because the Canadian/American/European staff, in trying to reconcile a conflict, would make very intentional eye contact with islanders. To the islanders, this was an arrogant, even aggresive stance, adding fuel to the fire. Conversely, the islanders would approach reconciliation with lower eyes, leading us Westerners assuming their guilt and/or insincerity.
To show how deeply this is held, consider this very issue with First Nations people. Studies have demonstrated that in a court of law, a judge and/or jury is more likely to unconsciously lean towards the assumption of guilt with First Nations defendants regardless of the evidence. While there are many factor involved, more details study showed a connection between this issue of eye contact. Again, most people were not even conscious of the impact of those beliefs, assuming their response was a neutral evaluation of evidence. (for more on this topic, see
"Returning to the Teachings: Exploring Aboriginal Justice" by Rupert Ross. This is a MUST read).
As Christians, we cannot afford to be unaware of this reality. We must intentionally and constantly examine the process of our assumptions. We have to break the reflexive loop of its considerable impact on limiting genuine understanding and learning. Inevitably we will make these kinds of mistakes, but understanding this will help us better understand those different from ourselves, even begin to separate our cultural assumptions from our fundamental beliefs.
Take some time and consider how this process effects deeply held convictions in your life. Consider it in respect to the hot topics of the day: politics, gender, immigration, sexuality. I think we will find that the intensity of our response to certain issues (homosexuality, for example) has more to do with our reflexive loop than the actual beliefs we claim to hold.
What areas do you find yourself stuck in the reflexive loop? How can you be intentional about breaking the cycle?
