Softening ideologies

Posted by Douglas F. Williamson on August 24, 2014 at 8:53am

Hi class and Craig and Bonnie,

Something that Craig has mentioned in both webinars is the hardening of myths into rigid ideologies and the danger inherent in the then-literal interpretations of the metaphorical myths or narratives whose original intentions were not to be taken literally. I think this aspect of our times, especially within fundamentalist Christianity in the USA, and fundamentalist Islam in parts of the Islamic world, is very relevant to addressing many of our global social and ecological ills. I can see how hard and rigid ideologies may be formed but the more compelling question is how can they be unformed? How can hard ideologies be softened? I certainly have my own ideas, but I'm interested in hearing others' ideas and experiences. Has anyone observed another person abandon an ideology? How did the process occur? My impression is that this transition may be aided through stories, that the emotional aspects of stories can assist people in changing or dropping ideologies much more effectively than by simply providing information. From a sustainability perspective, I see this frequently that people who are attached to ideologies do not change through increased information.

Thoughts and reactions?

Thanks,


Douglas

You need to be a member of Depth Psychology Alliance to add comments!

Join Depth Psychology Alliance

Email me when people reply –
Follow

Replies

  • Douglas F. Williamson August 27, 2014 at 8:51am

    Cool! Thanks for sharing.

  • Cindy Schell August 26, 2014 at 9:32pm

    From what I've observed and experienced personally,  it starts with individual experiences that challenge the existing bias or ideology.   I recently watched the film "Dancing is Jaffa" and found it a inspiring and hopeful model of how consciousness can shift through creative collaboration and personal relationships. http://www.dancinginjaffa.com

  • Douglas F. Williamson August 25, 2014 at 9:36am

    Well, schmooze is a word I know, which means to small talk and socialize.

    How do you pronounce "schmooge"? Is that a hard or a soft "g"?

    • Claire Savage > Douglas F. Williamson August 25, 2014 at 9:51am

      Well, it depends on location. Here on this continent, I imagine its a soft "g." In Germany, a hard one, but with a soft "a" at the end. But it means the same thing.

  • Anna Schappaugh August 25, 2014 at 9:28am
    I'm interested to know what you think about this, Doug ... I agree with what Craig and Claire said about a more gentle "mixing" of ideas to expand cognitive biases, but I have experienced this a little differently. I think during the times when I really was holding on THAT tightly to an idea, being dogmatic about it, the transition into a more open mental space and better-fitting idea felt very scary and difficult. It was like the ground being pulled out from under my feet, or like the structure crumbled before a new one was built.

    But I do feel, too, like there is an emergent quality sometimes to these things ... maybe a natural gravitation towards growth. When I think of the hardened, dry ideology Craig talks about, I get the image of a tree that's outgrown its bark and has to break through as it grows into what it's going to be.

    I wonder how much of individual and cultural growth is "pushed from the inside," naturally moving towards more balance and suppleness and away from fear.
    • Douglas F. Williamson > Anna Schappaugh August 25, 2014 at 9:58am

      I like where this thread is going and thanks Anna for adding your voice and perception from your own experience.

      At the core of my original question and running through this thread is the implied question, "How can we foster individual and cultural openness that does not allow itself to be hardened to ideology?" Is there a way to teach this kind of openness, flexibility, permission for ideas to mingle without having them harden?

      I consider myself to be pretty open, although I probably imagine myself to be more open than I actually am. Nevertheless, I feel that I've taken the time to think through my positions and establish ethical boundaries on most subjects. I am also open to the possibility that these boundaries may change. I feel this is a healthy way to go through life in the world. Which is why I am always a bit upset when I meet people who operate from positions of certitude, even if the opinion may be the same as mine. Anna, you bring up a very interesting point in your description of the scariness and difficulty of the transition process from identifying with one ideology to not identifying with it. This is an identity crisis. Now, I am no psychologist, but I understand the pain of letting a part of one's identity go. This leads to another question, "Is there a way to separate our identities from our ideologies?" This is where I think, perhaps, the process of listening, or consuming, or creating stories may help to loosen this attachment. Craig seems to imply the same above in his comment. Thoughts?

      What a nice thread.

    • Willene Jaqua > Douglas F. Williamson August 27, 2014 at 8:25am

      Here's a link to an article on this topic, that happened in Port Townsend last September. It was such a shock for Wes Cecil, the professor whom Ahmed Akkari credited with softening his ideology. Wes is a friend of mine and his whole mission is teaching his students to resist ideological thinking and how to appreciate difference.

      http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013309...

      Wes was working in his office when he got a call from The Daily Beast asking for his response. He had not heard that Ahmed Akkari had made reference to his YouTube-posted lectures. I think it is so wonderful that Wes's first response was this:

      “Most of the credit has to go to Akkari. He made the leap of deciding to ask questions about his own beliefs,” Cecil said. 

  • Claire Savage August 24, 2014 at 7:35pm

    So when I experience a sense of relevance, or when I feel seen, heard, understood and welcomed, I can relax and allow my protective cognitive shields to soften, perhaps into more of like a palate, something where my old beliefs and new possibilities can mingle, schmooge, cross-fertilize, dissolve and reform. I wouldn't necessarily say I abandoned anything, but rather it feels as if I incorporated it, brought it into my body, gave it a place to hang out and develop so that I could see it in greater detail, thus giving me space/information in which to determine whether I really believed it or not.

    • Douglas F. Williamson > Claire Savage August 24, 2014 at 7:42pm

      Thanks for the replies, Craig and Claire. I like the term "mental flexibility" and Claire's description of the open mental space for the mingling of ideas, beliefs, and possibilities. Something that unifies your responses is a leaning towards mental or cognitive processes, however, my impression is that the emotional aspect of stories is the aspect that opens up that mingling space or flexibility. Agree?

      Also, I don't know exactly what "schmooge" means, but maybe "schmooze? In any case, I like the word schmooge.

    • Claire Savage > Douglas F. Williamson August 25, 2014 at 8:14am

      Ah yes, the emotions . . . and the intangibles, the synchronicities, the dreams, the other forces at play (earth presences) that do also open up that mingling space, that flexibility. I agree.

      With schmooge I was aiming for a hybrid of the concepts of spreading, mixing, crawling into the interstitial spaces, an oozing out of the muddy gloopy isness of being. Perhaps this is schmooze?

This reply was deleted.