How To Think (Democratically)

You can, within limits, change the structure of your mind, your body, and/or the world through the medium of your thought. Indeed, it will happen to some degree even if you are not aware of it. The question, therefore, is not whether but how to proceed--and toward what end?

This essay is written to develop one of the two main approaches to such questions as: How should I think? and What should I do with my life?

The "democratic" style of cognizing and communicating consists largely of thoughts or speech patterns that are respectful, constructive, conditional, open-ended, permissive, suggestive, that promote freedom of affective reactions, and that leave room for freedom of response. Would you consider doing this? Eating that might be a good idea! Could you come over here, please? Excuse me, I can't hear the speaker. How do you feel right now?

Authoritarian styles, on the other hand, are coercive, absolutistic, closed, final, dominating, destructive or demeaning, instill fear or anger, promote compliance or resistance, and do not invite freely expressed opinion. Do this! Eat that! Get over here! Shut up! You're angry!

Because most modern democracies are still rife with authoritarian subsystems, we are exposed to--and often absorb--authoritarian habits of cognition without realizing it. Democratic thinking, however, is healthier, more creative, and more conducive to success in relationships as well as in problem-solving.

Democratic thought processes facilitate personal development. They promote self-respect, self-sufficiency, and ethical autonomy. They encourage "creative self-organization." This is critically important, because in the years ahead governments will probably continue to cope poorly with the increasing costs of health care, joblessness, criminal behavior, and environmental waste unless a new ethic of self-organization combines with social responsibility and authentic democracy to solve such problems.

The Structure of Thought

Thought reflects and imagines parts of the real world. When combined with action, thought creates at least a portion of the real world. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that our thoughts encode and model real or imagined elements in the world, though we don't know precisely how or what a thought is. (Despite advances in neuroimaging, no one has ever seen a thought.)

Thus it is partially a fiction, yet useful, to write and talk about thoughts as if they flow in a linear fashion rather like this sentence or like a series of physical events that might take place in space and time, i.e., as a sequence of elements that can be interrupted and changed. We do this sometimes for brevity when in fact we know that thoughts can also occur in multiple channels with several different types of organizational process interacting simultaneously.

Disorganized or chaotic thinking occurs as a jumble of disconnected or unrelated ideas, images, words, or phrases. Chaotic thought may occur unconsciously and contribute to a simultaneously flowing rationally organized process. Chaotic thought is also prominent in dreaming, daydreaming, or insanity--and is necessary as a part of the creative process. It can't contribute to creativity, however, without a part of it being accepted into an organized process that then sustains it, compares it to alternatives, modifies it, and builds on it.

Thought, therefore, includes both disorganized or primary process, and organized or secondary process. We also have both conscious and unconscious divisions of thought as well as pre-conscious, self-conscious, other-conscious, unfocused, and focused thought processes. Each of these categories admits content that is more or less organized. An "external observer" can classify both the form and content of thought in relation to a hierarchy of organizational types.

One way of doing this is to array thought from the lowest to the highest forms of organization as follows: (1) chaotic, (2) extropic, (3) associative, (4) analogical, (5) schematic, (6) logico-mathematical, (7) dialectical or systemic, and (8) syntropic. For those interested, each of these terms is more precisely defined and explained with examples given in Creating Democracy In Time, Chapter Four, and in Appendix 1 of the same book. For the purposes of this essay it is most important to remember the term "syntropy," or "syntropic," i.e., "purposeful self-organization--bringing all elements, including those that are in contradictory relationship to one another, into self-directed action toward consciously selected goal-states." So far as we know, only humans have the potential for this degree of self-organization. It is the highest form of organization possible, and it lends its name to the type of thinking--and the type of democracy--toward which we consciously or unconsciously strive.

Consciously and intentionally observing or changing a thought-in-progress presupposes a separate process in the mind that is able to "observe" and act on both the content and direction of what we have just called "thought." In fact, this is exactly what we do when we practice some methods of meditation, for example, vipassana--the method said to be discovered and taught by Buddha around 2,500 years ago.

The "idea" that each of us can differentiate or create a distinctly separate part of the mind that can then observe and alter other thoughts must rank as one of the greatest discoveries of all time. We could say that it is equal in value to the discovery--or idea--of democracy--which is also thought to have originated around 2,500 years ago.

These two great ideas, self-directing or self-organizing thought and democracy, a form of self-government, are not unrelated. First, they are processes that, at least in abstract form, are similarly structured or organized--with the difference, of course, that one occurs inside the mind and the other inside a social system. Secondly, they are related because they are interdependent and mutually causal. It is unlikely that democracy can evolve normally unless some percentage of its citizens can develop and maintain relatively high degrees of "self-directing" or "syntropic mind" [literally, a mind that directs itself toward something--syn+tropy=together+toward... (self-organized goal-states)].

Likewise, authentic democracy is as essential for individual progress beyond certain levels of personality development as it is for the progress of democracy toward its own higher stages. This will be especially true in the difficult context of the 21st century when individual self-direction or self-organization on the basis of democratic values will become increasingly critical to the ability of the social democratic process to observe and direct itself toward survival and enhancement of the human species.

Cognitions

As intimated above, our thought processes can be as varied and complex as all the possibilities of Life in the Universe. The magic of thought lies chiefly in the ability it gives us to create a model of, i.e., to imagine, almost any world. This, together with our capacity to observe our thoughts and select among them, to think beyond an immediate space-time context, to communicate our thoughts, and to translate some thoughts into future action, makes thought the most powerful survival advantage in the living world.

Given the ability to think about anything, the following questions naturally arise: What shall I think about? Why should I think about X rather than Y? How should I think about X?

The generic answers to these questions are, firstly, that we must be free to think anything and everything we choose to think, and secondly, that if thought is to be an aid to human survival we must be able to direct our thoughts in order to model solutions to problems related to survival and to the quality of life. We are free, generally, to think anything until a survival situation requires that we either think of a solution to the survival problem or face the prospect that we will stop thinking forever. The greatest danger is that a survival problem or solution may go undetected, or that the temporal relations among thought, survival problem, and the search for solutions may not leave sufficient time to act.

The best cognitive strategy, therefore, is to become aware of serious or dangerous situations as soon as possible, prioritize among all problems, then construct and enact the solutions with appropriate timing. If relaxation and play, or other considerations of quality in life, enhance our chances for coping well, then time must be allocated to those activities.

In our fast-paced, postmodern societies three factors that influence cognitive processes bear special mention: (1) Information overload, (2) the fragmented flow of information from mass media, and (3) drugs (both street drugs and prescribed drugs) have combined to negatively influence our ability to focus and maintain attention. Success in any problem solving endeavor, however, requires focused attention. The more complicated the problem, the longer the focus required. Children must be taught, and must have time to practice, how tovisualize a problem situation, the cause-effect--or when appropriate, logico-mathematical--relations among all elements of a problem, and the relevant problem-solving methods. The best way to do this is to (a) establish a positive rapport that includes caring, then (b), suggest to the student that he or she can learn to solve the problem , (c) began with a problem that is a little too easy but illustrates an important step or principle, (d) model the problem-solving process while thinking aloud about each small step, (e) go through a series of similar problems that are progressively more difficult while asking the student questions, and (f) ask the student to solve some problems while the teacher is there to ask and answer questions.

For both the student and teacher this requires time and an disciplined focus of attention. Computers can aid this process enormously, but human warmth and stimulation are essential ingredients. In the past children learned all these things more or less without conscious design but still haphazardly. Too often in the postmodern world, however, it is taken for granted that a child will learn these things on her or his own while they too often don't.

Every moment of every day each of us makes a choice, not only for ourselves but for others as well, of what, why, and how to think and to act, and each of those choices--based as they are on imperfect constructs of reality--bears an uncertain relationship to democracy and to survival of the community as a whole.

None of us knows precisely how those choices will affect all the levels and dimensions of human existence over time. Into this situation of global uncertainty comes what we could call the syntropic assumption. Suppose that each person established the habit of frequently asking the following question: What can I or we do to make this situation better for myself and for everyone involved? The question is "constructive," because it tends naturally to lead toward thoughts and actions that answer the question by creating an improved situation.

The syntropic assumption is that if millions of people more frequently think constructively the world will become a much better place much faster than it would otherwise, because a higher percentage of our thoughts would lead to individual and collective actions that are constructive, mutually beneficial, and democratic in nature. The further extension of the syntropic assumption is that these constructive thoughts and actions would then eventually lead to action within integrated whole systems moving toward common goals on a larger and larger scale. It is an extension of the strategy of "cooperation for mutual benefit," taken from the Prisoner's Dilemma and applied to the "the Dilemma of the Commons."

All of this is already understood at some level by nearly every thinking person. We already live our lives expressing the syntropic assumption to some degree.

Over the next century, however, it will become increasingly necessary for us to think more clearly and more specifically about our cognitive processes in relation to species survival problems. Each individual will be challenged to learn how to think about thinking and actively participating in a movement toward global democracy--while at the same time taking care of oneself and one's loved ones. The greater cognitive challenge during the next century will be to learn and practice this at all levels and in the context of a survival situation that will involve the entire human species in both its limited planetary ecosystem and its extra-terrestrial environments--and with progressivly smaller margins for error.

What is Cognitive Democracy?

At the founding of modern representative democracy, the principle issues debated were life, liberty, property, and the structure of the new government. Only one of the Founders at the 1787 meeting in Philadelphia, James Wilson, approached the issue of purpose from a perspective that is compatible with that taken here. According to McDonald, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, [ed. Max Farrand, 1937] show that:

"James Wilson alone departed entirely from the consensus: rejecting the idea that the protection of property was 'the sole or the primary ' purpose of government, he asserted that ' the cultivation & improvement of the human mind was the most noble object ' of government and society. [McDonald, 1985]

In the two hundred some years since then the "cultivation and improvement of the human mind" has become more than a merely "noble object." It has become an urgent necessity. In this era of increasing drugs, crime, divisions between rich and poor, and environmental destruction, human survival will increasingly depend on modern democracies taking a greater interest in the cognitive development of their citizens and on citizens taking up the goal of cognitive self-development. This does not relieve us of the necessity of political and economic restructuring. They are simply different aspects of the same problem.

It may be useful to list some of the thought processes that are most useful to both individual self-development and the evolution of democracy. Among them are the following:

(1)Thinking simultaneously on (or rapidly alternating among) several system levels,

(2) initially giving equal attention to all related and consciously accessed cognitive elements of a problem situation, especially seeing each human being as a person of value intrinsically equal to that of every other human being,

(3) having the right, and giving oneself full freedom, to think about every possible point of view and every possible outcome or solution,

(4) the ability to modulate the emotions so that they balance out as love for all human and other life forms; to attach this love to constructive thoughts at every stage of thinking and to constructive outcomes [for definitions and discussion of the role of love and other affective states in the democratic process, see Chapter Four and Appendix Two of Creating Democracy In Time],

(5) alternating between flow (or focused attention), on the one hand, and self-and-other-observation (or direction),

(6) balancing a reasonable skepticism with a realistically constructive optimism,

(7) the ability to critically analyze and to freely verbalize the deficiencies of a news article, an argument, or an existing situation; the ability to recognize the confidence game in politics ("Trust me, I'm acting in your best interests!")

(8) the ability to imagine and to articulate clearly a better news report, argument, or situation,

(9) the ability to work cooperatively with others, balancing self and other interests, and to accept criticism while making constructive responses,

(10) the patience, motivation, and determination to construct a realistic series of steps from what is to what can be, and then to carry projects through to completion--utilizing feedback every step of the way,

(11) the ability to recognize and understand the generic system elements in any given situation, for example, the boundaries, the control hierarchies, the energy sources, the resistance forces, intake and output processes, the tangential necessities, waste disposal subsystems, the long and short term directions, the surrounding forces, the paradoxical responses, the democratic values and principles involved, and so forth,

(12) and the ability to perceive the possible short and long term ends of things, especially with regard to the values of living systems--and in a non-egocentric way.

Creativity

Since democracy functions best when everyone is receiving and contributing information and participating in the organized decision-making process, it follows that if everyone is participating creatively the whole system will be more creative. Every good, new idea, every new invention or discovery, and every person's perspective on a problem under consideration carries with it the possibility of enhancing the democratic system's adaptiveness and survivability as well as the quality of life that it can provide for all its citizens.

Can creativity be taught? Yes, generically speaking it can be, and the conditions supporting creativity can be provided by society. We have learned a great deal about creative processes and how to encourage them. We know, for example, that it is never too late to start learning creativity but best to begin learning as early as possible. Group interactions that encourage spontaneous expression without fear of criticism are helpful. Analogical and general system modeling is useful for creative thinking. Anyone can learn a meditative or self-hypnotic practice which asks the unconscious mind a question and then allows it time to search and wonder. Questions and open-ended suggestions to oneself or to others can stimulate creativity. Here is an example of an open-ended suggestion: "You (or I) can think of several new ways to do that." The statement is "open-ended," because with no specific way being suggested, the listener is free to consider many possible new ways. Several other forms of indirect suggestion that are useful in promoting creativity have been identified by Erickson and Rossi. Some quiet time should occur after such suggestions in order to allow the unconscious mind to carry out its search. [Erickson, 1979]

It may be worth noting here that every conscious thought is, among other things, a suggestion to the unconscious nervous system.

Philip Slater gives Mary Parker Follett credit for first articulating the central importance that creativity has for democracy. [Slater, 1991] Creativity, of course, is discouraged by authoritarian systems. Authorities require conformity, obedience, and faith in the authority, whether religious or secular, and whether it seems to make rational sense or not. Creativity is therefore highly threatening to authoritarian structures. Democracies, on the other hand, thrive on original thinking by and among many people. Creativity, along with rationality, is the sine qua non of democratic problem-solving.

Communication and Consciousness

To promote the development of democracy, of healthy personalities, and of healthy human systems in general, we need the necessary skills and understanding to make democracy work. These skills begin with the translating of biologically based energies into affects, cognitions, and especially into communicative behaviors that are conducive to democratic processes.

If a Bill of Affective or Emotional Rights were to be recognized, it would surely state that everyone has a right to the feelings they experience. Coupled with the widely recognized right of free speech this would imply a right to express one's feelings freely. Unfortunately, while this latter may be appropriate as a legal or cultural right, the free expression of one's feelings without appropriate sensitivity to others--or to the effect of one's speech act on others--would translate directly into individual and social problems. Every right, to paraphrase a law of physics, has an equal and opposite responsibility. Without adding to the already burdensome log of unenforceable laws, however, we can easily incorporate into our cultures the teaching of affective and communicative competence. Furthermore, we can do that in a way that integrates rights and responsibilities in a seamless fashion.

A relationship works best when each party adopts the fiction that each is responsible for, i.e., each creates, both the Self and the Other. This only works, of course, if both parties participate in the not so fictitious assumption, and it is only applicable within a limited range of mutual causal behaviors. When it is necessary to recognize individuality and identify yourselves separately, as occurs naturally in any relationship, the following approach to communication helps to achieve mutual respect and understanding.

The simplest model for communicative action that includes the three elements of self-assertion, social awareness, and democratic structure involves two persons speaking to one another using the following pattern:

"I think (or feel) _______, because I perceive _______, and I'd like to hear your thoughts (or feelings) based on your perceptions."

This three-part statement begins with the democratic right to assert a feeling or thought. This affirms one's right to have the feeling or thought and to speak it aloud.

Secondly, the speaker is showing a democratic self-and-other awareness by stating that this feeling or thought occurs because of a prior perception for which the speaker takes responsibility. In other words the speaker appropriately and sensitively assumes responsibility for her or his own thoughts and feelings rather than imposing that responsibility on someone else as would be the case if the speaker had made an authoritarian statement such as: "You make me angry."

Thirdly, the speaker invites the other to respond in the same way--invoking the right of equal opportunity to participate in a "democratic" exchange of views or a process of nonviolent conflict-resolution.

Fourthly, the suggestion is implicitly present that differences can be resolved, or experiences, feelings, and ideas can be exchanged nonviolently even if different, and that the goal of communicative interaction is mutual education on the basis of some minimal set of shared values. It says that whatever the assertive communication ("assertive," not "aggressive") might be, it will be tolerated. This suggestion can also be made explicitly as part of the exchange in order to ease the other's fear of the possible consequences of speaking out assertively.

Of course, an exchange of views may lead eventually to a common viewpoint, or it may result in continued disagreement--or in some combination of the two. By merely engaging in the above dialogue, the two (or more) parties have implicitly accepted the fundamental premise of the democratic process which is that each person's needs and rights will be considered in a fair process (under rules that apply equally to all participants) that invites mutually respectful participation by all parties, arrives at a decision point, and either resolves the issue in a binding way or achieves a nonviolent acceptance of unresolved differences and keeps the lines of communication open.

Relationship, as Martin Buber pointed out, is as fundamental as each of the persons in a relationship. [Buber, 1958] The content, style, and quality of the relationship is mutually causal with the content, style, and quality of the individuals involved. One aspect of relationship worth emphasizing in the context of this brief discussion is that relationships, like light and like time, are both discrete and continuous. We can conceive of relationship in terms of both continuous streams and discrete or episodic events, as both analogical and digital.

Frequently we cannot resolve a conflict or a problem in one discrete episode. A mutually causal, positive feedback cycle of deconstructive criticism, i.e., a vicious circle of "other-correction without self-correction," often associated with--or constrained by--an intensely negative affect, may sometimes be too difficult to transform into a mutually constructive process. Communication may then be stopped--giving each party time to move to another position or frame of reference. Resumption of communication may then occur within a new frame of reference--and hopefully, in association with a more positive affect--or by returning to the previous conflict but this time without the intensely negative affect. Relationship is thus complex, and we should not require the resolution of every conflict. We should, however, strive for--as described by Sylvan Tomkins--the maximization of positive affect, minimization of negative affect, and the minimization of affect inhibition. "Power to maximize positive affect, to minimize negative affect, to minimize affect inhibition should be maximized." [Tomkins, 1962]

The three-part communication model, which can be used for the communication of all types of affectively laden messages, should be taught and practiced throughout our educational system and throughout our lives as individuals. It is a simple art form which requires much practice and repetition, and it is part of the art of everyday living. More elaborate and sophisticated methods of communication designed especially for negotiating are also available. [Fisher, 1981]

We should also bear in mind that there are some individuals and some human systems that simply will not participate in such a model of communicative action or will not participate honestly. They are nondemocratic or antidemocratic, and we must be prepared to cope with these personalities and with those larger political entities who refuse to sincerely engage on the basis of this communicative model. They are angry, have a different value system, a private agenda, a "higher calling," or an authoritarian reference point, and they simply remain closed to other points of view, to real communication and negotiation, or to the principle of nonviolent conflict resolution. Such systems, if aggressive, may have to be countered with force in order to prevent the destruction of democratic systems or of life itself. In the long process of human evolution, however, violent political systems will for the most part be replaced by the syntropic response to the (Prisoner's) Dilemma of the Commons.

In summary, the full development of the individual is important to all democratic systems both as an end in itself and as a means to better democracies, and ultimately, to better ecosystems and a better world system. While we could not explore all of the rich complexity of this subject here, we can and must support (1) a re-orientation of thinking about the structure of the individual personality in relation to democracy, (2) a better balance between individual rights and individual responsibilities in democracies, and (3) ongoing research on the subject of the education and development of individual skills in democratic societies.

In this context it is worth remembering these words from Albert Einstein:

"A hundred times every day I remind myself that my inner and outer life are based on the labors of other men, living and dead, and that I must exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received and am still receiving." [Einstein, 1954]

Emotions, Cognitions, and Communications

The subset of individual behaviors, affects, and cognitions as well as social roles that are specific to democratic processes must be learned and put into practice by a sufficient number of individuals, or democracy will not exist. Pre-democratic systems also required subsets of human behavior patterns specific to each of them. If a "post-democratic" world order comes into being there will also be a set of individual behaviors and cognitions specific to that stage of political process. And that stage, if the theory of history presented in Chapters Two and Three of Creating Democracy In Time is correct, will retain and extend democratic processes within a broader and deeper context such that a democratic global system dynamics will become the principle organizing paradigm. Democratically inspired individualism, and democratic decision-making, will be even more essential to the political structure of that era than it is to the present and near future.

The democratic subset of individual behaviors must be seen as integral to the whole person, the family, and the small group. By "group" I mean social entities of all types and sizes but especially the smaller, informal groups--such as circles of friends, clubs, and other associative groups--with which we all directly participate and which play important roles in our lives.

We can list some of the affects, cognitions, and behaviors in the democratic subset of all human behavior: cognitive autonomy (the ability to think things through and form one's own opinion independently), respect for others, egalitarian attitudes, a willingness to share with others, flexibility, affectionate disposition, tolerance toward others; openness to new ideas, to new immigrants, and to different races and cultures; desire to help others as well as oneself, kindness, a sense of fairness and of the importance of equal opportunity, negotiation skills, ability to compromise, conflict resolution skills, self-assertion--especially in the face of injustice, the ability to speak and participate as an equal in group discussions, a capacity for understanding the flow charts of democratic decision-making in relation to time and contingency, knowledge of parliamentary rules and skills in applying them, respect for rules and laws that safeguard one's own rights and the rights of others, respect for the natural environment, habits of thrift and conservation; rational, analytic, synthetic, and especially creative thought processes; understanding and interpreting news about the world, detecting bias and deception in the media and among those who govern, searching for truth within as well without, understanding and respecting the "law of the commons," an interest in learning more about democracy, its history, challenges, and possible futures--and perhaps most important, a desire for better, more perfect democracies. Generally, states, traits, and attitudes opposite to those above are more characteristic of the authoritarian personality. [Adorno, 1950]

Although any personal skill that involves interaction with other human beings is complex and could be separated into simpler elements that are learned at earlier stages, the simplest element of the democratic interaction is a mutually respectful exchange of thoughts and feelings, followed by a decision which is based on rules that are known in advance and fair to each party. While some may argue that democracy makes room for nonviolent confrontations of almost any kind, it is clearly more consistent with the soul or spirit of democracy, and more effective politically, if we practice the Gandhian strategy of treating even our enemies with respect.

Syntropic Living Skills

Society and the human personality co-evolve. Good social decision-making requires a population of informed individuals. As individuals, we need more than economic and political information, however, if we are to participate effectively in the democratic process. We need a variety of skills that are not typically learned in our present societies. We need to be able to speak before groups, to resolve conflicts nonviolently, to independently modulate our emotional and mental states, to be able to maintain relationships, or achieve and keep a good focus of attention when these are desired.

In a series of planned books On Democracy In Time, therefore, we will devote one whole text to what we will call "syntropic living skills" for individuals. The following paragraphs represent just a few of the skills which will be included in that more complete format:

Learning to Love

The following method is simple and effective:

1. Assume a comfortable position in a quiet place for 20 minutes twice a day.

2. Remember or imagine yourself being loved in a nonsexual way. Note carefully the feeling that you are loved and the secure feeling of personal value which accompanies the acceptance of that love.

3. At the end of each breath out silently verbalize the thought: "May I feel loved." Repeat five times. In between those words remember or imagine the face of the other who is loving you, and notice the feeling you have of being loved. Remember that feeling as you imagine yourself accomplishing some purpose which is of value to yourself and others.

4. Now remember or imagine someone whom you already love. At the end of each breath out silently verbalize the thought: "May you feel loved." Imagine that person feeling your love as she or he accomplishes something of value to her or him and to others.

5. Now imagine a community of people before you that includes males and females of every age, race, and culture. Know that each of them has all of the feelings that you yourself experience: fear, hurt, anger, loneliness, a desire to be loved and to love others, and so on. At the end of each breath out silently verbalize the thought: "May we all love each other." Imagine several of their faces as they feel your love and each others' love. Allow yourself to feel their love for you. Imagine them feeling that love as they realize their dreams and do those things which are of value to themselves and others.

6. Imagine yourself with them discussing matters of importance to everyone, agreeing and disagreeing in a sensitive, honest, and mutually respectful way. Imagine all participating in decisions that are fair and respectful to all concerned. Silently verbalize these words: "May we decide democratically and with love for all."

7. Conclude the meditation by silently repeating these words at the end of a breath: "We can love, live in peace, and we can learn." Rest for awhile, then silently verbalize this last sentence to yourself: "In a few moments, when I'm ready, I'll open my eyes, stretch and feel comfortable and alert."

While doing this meditation, if any other thoughts or feelings come to mind-- including thoughts about the meditation, note their origins and silently say to yourself: "I'll think about that later if I wish. Right now I am going to complete my meditation on love." Focus your attention back on the meditation. Do not criticize yourself no matter how many or what type of interfering thoughts occur. Simply return your focus to the meditation until you complete it. Later you may wish to think about or talk about those other thoughts and feelings with someone. It is important to realize, however, that with practice you can learn to put any thoughts or feelings out of your mind and replace them with something else that you want to think or feel.

Because of the way meditation works it is necessary to use exactly the same silently verbalized words each time you meditate. It isn't necessary to use the same words that are used above, but the words chosen should have the same meanings as above and the same progression from being loved, to loving someone specific, to loving more people, then to sharing love in a community of discourse that includes strangers and eventually--when you can--those toward whom you may feel fear or anger.

This meditation can be done in groups of any size with a teacher or group leader who is trained in the careful selection and use of words to evoke constructive imagery.

Learning to "Flow"

The following is partly based on the concept of syntropic systems:

1. Select a community or group whose purposes you can comfortably support.

2. Select your own life theme or purpose.

3. Select a personal goal at work. This goal should be sufficiently difficult to achieve that it challenges you. It should also be consistent, insofar as possible, with the above two sets of goals. It may also be necessary to select a series of subgoals.

4. While at work, and for gradually increasing lengths of time, focus every bit of your attention on achieving your goal. This focus of attention must be achieved while taking action as well as while thinking about taking action.

5. If any interfering thoughts occur, simply say to yourself: "I'll think about that later if I need to. Right now I'm going to focus on the task at hand."

6. If any distractions from your environment occur, say to yourself: "I'll take care of that if or when I need to. Right now I'm going to focus on the task at hand." Be sure to give yourself appropriate periods of rest and relaxation.

7. Assess your progress periodically, and keep a personal record. Give yourself encouraging and constructive feedback. Encourage others in your community to do the same.

8. Teach someone else how to develop flow. It helps to reinforce one's own skills. You can also practice autogenics--either during rest breaks at work or twice a day for 20-30 minutes at home.

Remember: there is no failure in this process. The goal itself is both a personal and a common good, but as a means to achieve flow, the goal is primarily a private device that assists one's personal development. Every little increment of improvement in skill, personal satisfaction, or progress toward the goal is a success.

Learning Autogenics

Autogenics [auto=self-, genics=formation] may be practiced in an abbreviated form as follows:

First Exercise

1. Find a quiet place where you won't be interrupted and set aside 20-30 minutes.

2. Assume a comfortable position, either sitting or lying, with hands and feet apart from one another.

3. Focus your attention on your right [on the dominant] hand. Imagine or remember a situation during which your right hand felt heavy. Silently verbalize to yourself these words: "My right hand is heavy." Repeat five times, alternating attention between imagined or remembered feelings and the quoted statement. When silently verbalizing the words in the statement, always use exactly the same words.

4. Repeat #3 for the left hand, right foot, left foot.

5. Silently verbalize these words: "I am relaxed. I am at peace." Repeat once.

6. And finally, these words: "When I'm ready I'll open my eyes, stretch, and feel comfortable and alert."

7. During the exercise, if any interfering thoughts come into the mind, silently verbalize to yourself the following words: "I'll think about that later if I wish. Right now I'm going to complete my autogenic exercise." Then turn your attention back to the exercise and proceed. Do not criticize or blame yourself if many interfering thoughts occur. Just notice the interference or wandering thoughts as soon as you can, patiently repeat the above sentences, and return to the exercise.

Second Exercise

1. Repeat the first exercise using the word "warm" instead of heavy and feelings or memories of warmth instead of heaviness.

Each exercise must be fully mastered before moving to the next one. This mastery, which consists of a full experience of the sensations described in each exercise plus few interfering thoughts, may take from a few days to several weeks. The subjective sensations of heaviness and warmth, incidentally, correlate well with objectively measurable changes in muscle relaxation, temperature, and blood flow to the hands and feet.

The Third through Sixth basic autogenic exercises should not be practiced without a more detailed description than can be provided here. There are more advanced autogenic exercises available, too. The autogenic exercises represent a progression from the simple to more complex mental training. The first two exercises provide a good but elementary support for the cognitive skills that are needed for learning, for achieving flow, and for peak performances or optimal experiences of many kinds.

The regular practice of autogenics twice a day for about twenty minutes enables a person to relax in any appropriate circumstances, including social situations, within a time span of about seven seconds--by silently verbalizing the initial words: "My right hand is heavy."

Summary

The reader may have already observed that each of the syntropic living skills mentioned above are steps toward greater self-organization. Just adding the above living skills to a school's curriculum, or to one's list of personal goals, could make a major contribution to any community's efforts to lower the rates of crime, drug abuse, rape, and assault. There are other skills, including those related to a healthy pursuit of happiness, modulation of emotional states, imaginative cognition, and wisdom skills that will be presented in the previously mentioned, forthcoming book on Syntropic Living Skills.

The most important task we face, however, is the challenge of combining the skills learned at the level of individual personalities with the restructuring of our political and economic systems. We turn in the next chapter to ten obstacles in the path of evolution toward a world in which thinking democratically will be a moreuniversal concern.

[Sources cited above can be found in the Bibliography for Creating Democracy In Time, Books Online module, listed on CED's Index Page]