Kitabı oku: «The Power of Narrative Intelligence. Enhancing your mind’s potential. The art of understanding, influencing and acting», sayfa 2

Monopoly on Narratives
How societies create a monopoly on meanings and narratives and how people voluntarily choose them.

 
People believe what they believe and see what they believe.
 

In the last century, when films featuring cowboys and Indians were shown in cinemas, there was an increase in injuries caused by arrows shot from DIY bows. A well-made film is an example of a spectacular passive narrative.

A narrative can serve two purposes. Passive – when narratives act as role models to follow. And active – when they influence behaviour through their semantic realisation.

A correctly structured conversation with a parent or spiritual shepherd, after which a person changes his or her life, is an example of an active narrative. We accept any stories in which we find something useful for ourselves, something that we can gain from or avoid. We learn from those who tell us such stories and, in fact, shape our behaviour. But the lesson that can be learned from human history in a broad sense is that humanity does not learn from history. Every hundred years or less it repeats some dramatic episodes of its history. Maybe these are not the right stories… Or maybe not the right lessons…

The vast majority of stories are told to us by amateurs. But professionals have a greater and more targeted influence on us.

For centuries, directly or indirectly, governments have created and disseminated narratives facilitating continuous monitoring of citizens’ behaviour. The system of narratives is a powerful tool through which institutions are able to predict and guide people’s thinking, decisions, and actions. The process maintains consistency and continuity by featuring different groups of narratives for each age. Step by step, starting with the family, parents, kindergarten, with the established order at school and the curriculum at college or university. Then everything is much easier.

People are taught behavioural patterns that carry various meanings and concepts within themselves: about guilt, about punishment for the slightest deviation from the existing system, about rewards, and even about social behaviour scoring systems.

If following the parents’ narrative gives the child an appropriate reward, then he or she will readily accept it. The adult world has its own universal system for controlling and regulating behaviour – money. Its essence lies in the initially created shortage and limited purchasing power. This imbalance becomes the primary mechanism for the functioning of any survival model that a person chooses.

The system should have a tool to measure a person’s position in relation to the imbalance between their needs and capabilities. This form of measurement, which we can call a social convention, is money.

Money allows you to exchange your work, time, and even life for the satisfaction of your most diverse fantasies. To consolidate this dependence, hundreds of different instruments have been invented – loans, obligations, mortgages. Therefore, people cling to work and endure humiliation and pressure. Money is a universal and unique narrative. It is not a natural resource essential for life, like air, sun, flora and fauna. However, it is considered by people as an indispensable means of survival, for which they can sacrifice air, flora, fauna, and the planet itself.

The narratives that dominate a society do not come from the society, although they may convincingly appear to do so. They always, to one extent or another, represent the views of those in power, whether political parties, banks, corporations, the ruling elite or the armed forces. One can observe any combination of the above-mentioned organisations that, by creating temporary alliances, control the public narratives and shape the societal agenda.

Content meanings in narratives regularly create illusory social beliefs. For example, 'War stimulates scientific and creative potential.' There is no real reason for this, other than the fact that increased funding for the defence industry leads to more inventions and technical breakthroughs. Invest in another industry to that extent, and you will see what you get. What you water and care for grows.

Most people tend to exaggerate the fact that free enterprise and competition create motivation. This is only partially true. If the world is based on competition, then what is the competition based on? Is it really based on the desire to become better? After all, it is obvious that at the same time such a system generates what is characteristic of competition – corruption, crime, conflicts. The price of this motivation is so high that it casts doubt on the very meaning of human existence, especially when this meaning is replaced by corporate and national narratives.

And at the everyday level, several governing narratives may exist in parallel, sometimes directly opposite. We strongly believe that money is such a healthy motivation that we rarely trust people whose only goal is financial gain. Moreover, mistrust of these individuals is not the only negative emotion we experience towards them.

People tend to bring narratives of the past into the present and project them into the future. But what kind of past are we referring to when even today the use of computers and the internet challenges the very nature of employment, and when the internet provides the basis for the development of unprecedented social changes in our interaction with the world? The internet accumulates vast amounts of information, shapes public opinion, and as it happens, narratives no longer have customs barriers, borders, or international agreements.

Some countries are trying, and not without success, to introduce restrictions, but they also understand that a person who is forced to perform monotonous repetitive and meaningless actions degrades. The narratives of the countries that the world focuses on will become unsuitable for the majority in the future due to the technical capabilities they create for the accelerated intervention of alternative narratives.

Narratives are part of our physiology, nature, and culture. Even those who think they make their own decisions if they turn off the TV and shield themselves from cultural indoctrination are still influenced by the narratives of people who watch TV and read blogs.

Maybe tomorrow supercomputers will not start a war, as in The Terminator, but will simply create and spread narratives that will help humanity itself bring civilisation to ruin. Can you imagine what people who are convinced of something are ready to do? It is about them that it is said: 'One person with a belief is equal to ninety-nine who have only interests.' And if there are millions of them? Humanity was safer when people sat around a campfire and looked at the stars, telling each other legends and making up myths.

We do not know much about ourselves. People know less about their own behaviour than they do about what is sold in the nearby supermarket. But those who form the system of narratives know us better. Big data technologies make this knowledge incredibly effective. It is clear that a system can be discreetly changed by adjusting the culture and education. People should learn more about themselves and the world, understand how their system of narratives makes the world the way it is, and how it can be changed.

What exactly forces us to make certain 'conscious’ decisions or guides us? Only narratives: what we believe, what we are made up of, and what we choose from. Our behaviour is a choice of the possibilities presented to our brain, what is already recorded in it. It cannot be chosen if something does not already exist. But it can be created.

And even if the state has a monopoly on narratives, and if it shapes the agenda, we still are engaged in an odd relationship with our narratives. We own a small monopoly on narratives.

A Parable Is a Form of Narrative
Special learning space.

Humans are not ideally set up to understand logic; they

are ideally set up to understand stories. ― Roger Shank

A person always needs a specific space where they can reflect, learn, understand and accept their place in this world and the place that they have yet to find. This is not a home, work, or social media, which has become a part of today’s world. This is where it all started, intelligence and its narratives.

One of the forms of narratives that help us understand the world and our place in it is a parable. A parable is a brief, didactic story presented in an allegorical form. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary defines a parable as an 'example… that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle.' Parables allow us to give knowledge a live and dynamic image, to imprint it deeply in memory and present it as a complete idea that has meaning. Any parable captivates the listener not only with its plot. The parables are imaginative and concise, they are full of metaphors, they are emotional.

In real life, we often encounter parables that relate to our daily problems. Such parables are widely known and often quoted, for instance, King Solomon’s proverbs. And even today, thousands of years later, they are able to make a strong impression on listeners. The works of art based on them are among those known to many. Other well-known parables are no less meaningful.

For example, the Parable of the Sower:

'Behold, a sower went forth to sow; and when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up. Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth. And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them. But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold'.

What is this parable about? It is about many things, including the process of becoming a person and the role of conditions and environment in this process. Much of our life really depends on how deep the seeds of knowledge fall into us. And how much we are affected by external factors – birds pecking at grain, weeds that grow near us. If we do not focus, if the knowledge and experience we gain are not taken into account in such a way that they are transformed into competencies, if they are not connected with our values and life principles, they will eventually wither and become worthless. The eighty-nine words of the Parable of the Sower provide a clear and concise SWOT analysis of the possible forms of this process.

There are many similar parables or stories, but they are probably not as scalable, profound and artistically flawless as the classics. We wonder how they manage to very delicately connect so many simple events, captivate us and focus on the essence of the presentation. An entire science, narratology, is devoted to this phenomenon.

Managing the Paradoxical and Unpredictable
Management is the formation of purposeful behaviour and, as classical experiments show, how much this is possible.

There are two great days in a person’s life: the day you

are born and the day you find out why. ― Anonymous

What does a person really want besides traditional happiness, health and prosperity? Most of all, they want certainty in life and destiny. But this is impossible without control over yourself and your surroundings. Self-control in the view of a person means understanding how they think, what they decide and how they act. The ultimate goal of controlling the surroundings is to make sure that the latter contributes to the achievement of a person’s life goals.

There are various components to managing your surroundings. In addition to constant and active communication and a thoughtful strategy for building relationships, these are specific targeted actions that lead to the fact that an individual’s personal needs become the personal desires of the surroundings.

Ultimately, the essence of any self-management and management of the surroundings lies in the formation of stable, purposeful behaviour. In this simple formula, both of its components – purposes and especially behaviour – can be broadly defined, which makes this formula not as unambiguous as it looks at first glance.

As for human behaviour itself, sometimes it seems completely unpredictable and incredibly paradoxical. Let us look at some of the most famous experiments, the discourses around which do not subside even today. One way or another, they show the extent of this unpredictability and paradox.

In 1971, Philip Zimbardo and three colleagues from Stanford University investigated the nature of violence and cruelty that arises in a person under the conditions of a social role imposed on them. Final year college students were recruited to play the roles of guards and convicts in a simulated prison environment.

The experimenters were surprised to find that after a short time, the relationship between the 'guards’ and the 'prisoners’ quickly developed features typical to this scenario. At the same time, the 'guards’ noticed the rapid growth of sadistic manifestations in themselves and just a few days later, the 'prisoners’ staged an actual uprising in the 'prison’.

The study demonstrated how compliant and submissive people become when an ideology that justifies their actions is endorsed by the state or society. Simply put, when we are designated specific roles, and if those around us behave similarly, we follow suit.

The next experiment was conducted by Stanley Milgram of Yale University. The 'teachers’, whose reaction was tested, were told to increase the voltage in the electrodes attached to the 'learner’, who was actually a professional actor. The 'teachers’ did not know that, and the 'learner’ imitated the suffering caused by the electric shock in a highly believable manner. If the 'learner’ answered the questions incorrectly, the 'teacher’ was ordered to increase the voltage. At the same time, the 'teachers’ knew that a voltage of more than 300 volts was life-threatening. The experimenters, when asked about it, insisted that the experiment was not really as violent as it looked and that the 'teachers’ should continue.

Before the experiment, it was assumed that 2—3 per cent of 'teachers’ would administer 450 volts, which is lethal for humans. This corresponds to the statistics of people in the population with sadistic tendencies. But in the course of the experiment, this turned out to be 65 per cent! Only 12.5 per cent stopped on 300 volts, and the rest of the participants – in the range from 300 to 330 volts.

The experiment showed that people are inclined to do many things when provided with valid reasons or when they obey the instructions of an authority.

In 1977, another well-known experiment, called the Good Samaritan experiment, was conducted at Princeton University. But first, it is significant to understand the concept of human values. Values represent a person’s beliefs about what is important to them, what they adhere to, and what they are guided by in life. These beliefs shape who a person is and influence their actions.

About the experiment. The biblical story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30—37) tells how a certain Samaritan stopped to help a wounded man, while two clergymen, a priest and a Levite, had just passed by. A simple story with a lot of meaning. Psychologists John Darley and Daniel Batson decided to test whether religion has any significant influence on empathy and providing help to others. The participants of the experiment were students at the University’s Theological Seminary. They were divided into two groups: one was asked to deliver a speech on the Good Samaritan, and the other – a speech on the possibility of employment in the seminary. The speech was to be delivered in another building, and to get there, participants had to go through an alley. An elderly actor was lying on the side of the alley, faking a heart attack. Different participants were given different times to reach the audience. Therefore, some were in a hurry when passing through the alley, while others were not.

The results showed that students who had prepared a speech on the Good Samaritan stopped to help no more often than those who had prepared a speech on job opportunities. The only factor that influenced the decision of the students to help the man was the time they had at their disposal. Those who were in less of a hurry stopped more readily. And, regardless of the topic of their speech, only 10 per cent of those who had little time tried to help the 'sufferer’. It turned out that morality is time-dependent, which can significantly distort a person’s system of values.

The more time people have at their disposal, the kinder they are and the more inclined to empathise and help. And, therefore, the other way round: if people are in a hurry, they become unkind and indifferent. So, in a megalopolis, the probability of getting help in the street is much less than in the country. In other words, it sounds like, ‘We are kind, but we don’t have time for this’, or ‘We are ill-natured because there are traffic jams everywhere.’

And yet another experiment, although not as well-known as the previous ones. Scientists from the Institute of Zoology, which is part of the Zoological Society of London, together with the Max Planck Institute for Human Development and the Universities of Cambridge and Oxford, led by Dr Andrew King, showed how leaders can emerge in human society.

Imagine 200 people who are asked to move in a circle. The only rule that applies is that they should not approach each other closer than one metre. One metre in this case could be interpreted as some kind of safe personal space. Suddenly a group of five people appears in the crowd who begin to move not in a circle, but in a certain direction, towards some goal known only to them. After a while, the others do the same. Two hundred people start marching in one direction, without asking where or why.

If one gets the impression that in all these experiments we are talking about a kind of game, then it is worth noting that the boundary between any game and real life is very relative. They transform into each other interchangeably. The case study and phenomenology show that life sometimes acts as a game and a game – as life.

A celebrated English bard once famously said: 'All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players.' And if that is the case, the actors do not just play their roles – there is a script, there are prepared monologues and actions.

Everyone has always been interested in the question: who writes this script and how? And, as we will see later, we are the authors of only a small and insignificant part of it.

The Hierarchy of Goals
The hierarchy of goals and communities. How the upper levels seek to subdue the lower ones, and how they manage to do so.

If your working day isn’t perfect, then you work

for someone else, not yourself. ― Anonymous

A person’s life can be viewed as a process of constantly setting goals and achieving them. A person’s daily activity, their thinking, decisions and, accordingly, actions that shape their behaviour, all this is directed and subordinated to the goals that they have. Or the goals that were set before them or that seduced them.

The levels of goals correspond to the forms of people’s associations. The level of goals in this hierarchy determines the category of self-identification of a person in which a person is aware of himself and which contributes to the achievement of his personal goals. The hierarchy is as follows: humanity, state, nation, corporation, group, family, and finally the individual itself. The goals of the upper levels tend to take over the goals of the lower levels. But they do not always succeed.

The highest level of goals is mega goals on a planetary scale, the goals of all mankind and civilisation. The most popular of them are environmental issues. Humanity does not stop trying to somehow solve them, but with varying degrees of success. One well-known example is the Kyoto Protocol on limiting greenhouse gas emissions.

Or such a hypothetical goal that would become real when aliens with clearly unfriendly intentions appeared. If there really is a threat of intervention on Earth, then there is no doubt that countries and governments will unite, and all current conflicts, wars and disagreements will immediately lose their relevance. The unification in this case will happen within the category of human identity as a species.

The next sublevel of goals in the hierarchy are initially tribal goals, which later became national and state goals. The categories of a person’s identity are language, passport, lifestyle, and borders of residence. Combining goals at this level allows you sometimes to neglect mega goals. For example, this enables actively cutting down trees in the Amazon rainforest and justifying why signing the Kyoto Protocol is not worthwhile.

Below the national level are corporate goals. These are the goals of companies and entire industries grouped into categories of employment and workplaces. The implementation of goals of this level becomes a dominant feature, which occasionally allows industries to dump toxic waste into the environment, neglect business norms, and ignore state nature conservation programmes.

The goals of families, groups, clans, and gangs are even lower. Conflicts, wars and confrontations between generations may occur at this level despite corporate culture, traditions and unspoken laws.

And finally, the level of personal goals. These are the most sensitive and most important goals for a person, goals that shape most of a person’s daily behaviour, goals that people are not ready to give up, which they are not ready to neglect, sometimes even in the most extreme circumstances.

The challenge of managing people has always been how to subordinate the goals of the lower levels to the upper ones, whether they are family, corporate or state. The complexity of this task increases with the elevation of the goals. One of the reasons is that at lower levels, a person’s behaviour is formed on deep and stable narratives, and at higher levels the meanings of narratives often become less clear or appear unconvincing.

It is believed that the quality of a person’s life depends on the effectiveness and satisfaction from the process of achieving goals. In pursuit of this desired quality, people are ready to unite and adjust. They are ready to change their place of residence, family, profession, place of work, and sometimes even country and nationality. People are willing to redefine their identity to attain the lowest-level goals. This, as it will be discussed in the next chapter, is a natural function of the human brain and is integral to its operation.

Other cases of interest are rare but popular, when individuals prioritise higher-level goals over more immediate ones. And here, striving to achieve these 'elevated’ (in all senses) goals, a person encounters illusions.

The first of these illusions arises when people think that they are pursuing their own goals. But in reality, the goal may have been subtly replaced with tasks imposed by their surroundings. Why is that? At least because for a long time it was believed that people with goals of their own are dangerous, especially if their goals do not align with those of their leaders. Wouldn’t it be better to give these individuals assignments? Substantial, ambitious, life-long assignments.

For example, some nations have introduced a continuous task – a social credit system for evaluating citizens’ behaviour. Score is calculated based on their compliance with the society’s requirements and rules. Quite a goal, isn’t it? History shows that the desire 'to be right’ within the state or nation is gradually and necessarily transformed into an even more ambiguous one – 'to be always right’.

Smaller-scale goals are reserved for environments such as supermarkets, vanity fairs, multi-currency accounting systems, and similar areas to materialise self-identification. To maintain a comfortable existence within these consumer spaces, people are ready to engage in strenuous work, the effectiveness of which is judged by the authorities and society in goals achieved per unit of time, ultimately leading to a dubious system of evaluating these accomplishments.

However, what motivates a person to willingly prioritise the goals of a company, nation, or country over their own? It is the pursuit of meaning that can peacefully lead the mind to compromise with its goal to survive. This is likely the primary factor distinguishing people from the rest of the living world.

In the long run, at every hierarchical level, individuals employ a similar strategy to subdue those beneath them, which involves selling various concepts of happiness. These concepts are replicated, appealing, and straightforward to the same extent as they are unreachable. Perhaps because they aim to blur the distinction between 'I want’ and 'I need’, rendering it negligible and obscure.

How many unnecessary worries from 'I want’ arise due to the fact that what you really need is not always what you want! Therefore, if you imagine that you want exactly what you need, then this already acquires some commercial and political interest. The only task is to convince yourself of this construction. To show that in addition to goals, actions and plans, your 'desires’ also contain the essence of your life.

By the way, if an individual is not persuaded by this semantic framework, then an undesirable situation for the upper levels may occur – when a person wants what he or she already possesses. And it can be regarded as happiness – to want what you have. Yet, this is a different story and a different concept.