Special Counsel for Decision-Makers: Mar 6, 2008

Thursday, March 6, 2008

When you contend with others about judgments based on facts and reasons, what counterfeit arguments have you run into?

In both professional and personal settings, we all, at one time or another, are faced with having to make judgments, as opposed to choices or to decisions, in the context of contending with others to change our minds, theirs and ours.

We want to make our judgments based on proven evidence of facts as opposed to stories or so-called anecdotal evidence.

We want to make judgments based on the use of reason and not rhetoric, using argument and debate to persuade others of the truth of what we contend in order to establish why we are entitled to our claim and not merely to assert our right to speak our opinion.

By doing this we hope to advance our understanding of knowledge and beliefs, and, when appropriate, our religions.

My hope is that we can get some everyday examples of this sophistication.

I want to discover whether the principle of non-contradiction still forms the basis of communication.

Please consider the following articles in Wikipedia:

When I was an administrative law judge, I had to listen to and shield myself from countless fallacious arguments, tell the cases' stories and hopefully reach the truth.

The only book of any help was FALLACY: THE COUNTERFEIT OF ARGUMENT. See my blog "Are you playing with a full deck when you argue for change?"

I later found Ten Philosophical Mistakes by Mortimer J. Adler very helpful in sorting out some of the deepest problems.

Finally I found Hard Thinking by John D. Mullen and Socratic Logic 2E by Peter Kreeft to be great refresher texts, well-written, and easier to understand than I expected.

Wikipedia's article on fallacies does keep a current list.

Asking Questions

As of today's blog, I have asked the following questions on LinkedIn with a wide variety of responses.

The links shown below will take you to my accompanying comments I made about the question and the answers I received:

Rash Decisions? Is there such a thing?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Sherri,

'Rash decisions' are effectively either choices made without considering other available alternatives or judgments made too quickly to consider the credibility of evidence offered to support factual claims or made too quickly to demonstrate sufficient examination of reasoning.

What this means usually is that the person has not indeed made a decision at all by any recognizable process since most people are not educated directly about what the process of decision-making really looks and feels like.

Rash decisions are thus actions that are usually arbitrary, capricious, and the result of one or more oversights.

Still some will insist that choices, judgments, and decisions being made via the same processes, so I offer some helpful distinctions to clarify my response.

'Choices' deal with present available alternatives. A rash choice is made with an incomplete analysis of available current alternatives.

'Judgments' deal with the application of criteria to evidence of facts that allow a comparison to be made of past actions and established criteria.

'Decisions' deal with insights and oversights discovered through a repeatable, accumulating process concerning the taking of future courses of action. So-called 'rash decisions' are more often like rash choices or rash judgments masquerading as decisions.

How do you justify or what methodology do you use to compare a rash decision to over-analyzing?

Justification and over-analyzing signal forms of choice making or judgment making, not decision-making. Neither look for the tell-tale signs of insight and oversight that sparks a true decision. Justification amounts to arguments from the conclusion back through the premises. It is a form of persuasion that often gets hung up on an examination of assumptions.

Over-analyzing amounts to arguments based on over-reliance on evidence of fact, as if evidence can compell an answer. Evidence of facts never can dictate the answer.

Do you have any rules such as don't make major decisions when you are X,Y,orZ?

Yes. What would those conditions be? For some time now, I have encouraged LinkedIn Q/A participants to focus on the process of their making decisions.

While conditions usually suggest a rational process, I have found such hypothetical reasoning not to result in sufficient answers to constitute true decisions.We have been exchanging thoughts for some time now.

What do you consider to be a major decision? My answer here is perhaps rash and clearly without over-analyzing.

My list of "major decisions" include:

discerning what is most valuable in the world;
what is my mission in my life and work;
what is my purpose in interacting with others;
what is my vision of my life going forward, even to life after this life;
whom to share affection with;
whom to befriend;
whom to marry;
how best to raise children;
whom to worship God with; and
how following my decision-making process assures me of happiness, if not now, at least in the forseeable future."

Thanks for the question.

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

Anecdotal evidence: worthwhile or worthless, when compared with metrics and statistics? Which do you use more in your business?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

"Dear Liviu.

The most important anecdotal evidence is the story of a decision process.

Unlike making choices or making judgments, decision making is not a repeatable process in the same way that repetitive production processes are.

Choice making deals with present alternatives defined by others and the most readily dealt with on a statitical basis.

Judgment making deals with pre-established criteria applied to changing fact situations, like in court room situations where law is deveoped on a case by case basis.

Because decision-making is what leaders are supposed to do to set the course of others, anecdotal evidence of how they came to their decisions is precious indeed and clearly the most effective over the long run.

Thanks for this important question."

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

The Reality: What you know? Who you know? Who they know? Or who knows YOU?!

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Steven,

The Reality?

What do you believe?

Who do you believe?

Who do they believe?

Or who believes YOU?!

At bottom, it is not knowledge that counts most; rather, it is credibility.

It’s not what you know or who you know, it's what you believe based on who's telling you.

And it’s not who you believe, but who they believe.

We have to rely on others.

And it’s not who you believe or who they believe, but who believes YOU when you arrive at your decision.

Believe it or not."

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

What is more important Money or Power?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Vladimir,

Thanks for posing this question as a matter of choice.

For some time I have tried to suggest to others on LinkedIn that making a choice is different from making a judgment, and both of these are different from making a decision.

At first your question seems to hang as a matter of choice, a dilemma where only one of two options make sense.

However, with the introduction of importance as a criteria, what seemed to be a matter of choice becomes a matter of judgment. The criteria of importance then seems to dictate outcome, since we seem to have to weigh money over and against power to answer as the only possible answers.

But with the seemingly timeless, and for that matter space-less, aspects of your question, not "what was" or what "will be" more important, but rather what "is" more important, now you have introduced the problem of absolute value versus relative value.

In an economy where money is created by incurring debt rather than holding gold for example, it is not always the case that a person is in debt or for that matter has any other supply of money.

Thus it seems wise to Do What You Love, the Money Will Follow. Likewise in a polity where power is created by perception, rather than derived by authority from philosophical principle or religious tradition, it is not always the case that a person has power or for that matter any other supply of power.

But perhaps the real source of power comes from your participation in culture and in in the power structure. Leisure then becomes the basis for culture, the more profound force in our society.

This appears to leave us in the position of having to decide what is more important, money or power, for the present with a view to the future.

Unlike choice that only involves the present and unlike judgment that only involves the past and the present, decision-making means the taking of a course of action now with the future in mind.

Thus instead of the two options you posed, there are four options for the future hidden in your question when you make this a matter of decision:

(1) Money;
(2) Power;
(3) Money and Power; or
(4) neither Money nor Power.

Thus when I make a decision about Money or Power as distinct from a choice or a judgment, I may safely pick (4) and realize that both relatively and absolutely, neither Money nor Power are more important than each other when we are not constrained by time and space.

It is at that point that I believe we understand the significance of saying that that time and space (where we're coming from, where we are, and where we want to go) is more important than either Money or Power.

We do not create time. We move around in space. They are both more importance than Money or Power or both.

This conclusion suggests to me that working for more leisure time and better location is one of the most important decisions we can make as and that neither Money nor Power outweighs their importance for me.

For Happiness is more a matter of time and place than of Money or Power.

For example, being with our loved ones usually requires neither Money nor Power. And as my grandmother always told me, love is not real until it is given away.

Not sold for money nor expecting reciprocation and thus making oneself powerless and vulnerable to rejection.

Thanks for the question."

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

Knowledge is power. Information is gold. Giving away either of them too soon is just plain stupid. Why?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Steven,

Do I hold back a little that I know?

I work with my friends starting at their level, not mine.

Over time I find the best results occur when nothing is held back, but rather brought out and examined in the context of an ongoing friendship.

As a result, my clients learn over time that, while knowledge is power, shared knowledge is more powerful.

Similarly they learn that while information is gold, it is fool's gold. Knowing what to do with information is the real gold. They also come to see that giving away knowledge or information too soon is just plain stupid.

Why? Because of the timing.

But so too is selling knowledge or information for the same reason.

Timing is everything in education. Educating someone about what to do with both information and knowledge is just plain wise.

And wisdom is priceless.

What is the best form of compensation you can give someone when that person has given you something priceless?

I don't know the answer but I believe I can apprehend what to do next.

Do you want to learn more about the difference?

Please let me know."

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

Controversy: Unpredictability vs. Consistency (Yin vs. Yang)

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Wei,

Wonderful question!

Hope this answer surprises you.

We walk on two legs, one foot stepping forward at a time.

Strategy, say, is on the left foot, stepping out first; consistent process is on the right foot, following up with strength; and both moving forward only in alternation.

Most of us couldn't hop long on only one, or even both of the alternatives.

Matching the movements of the legs are the arms: left hand catching what clients want; right hand providing the co-worker and human resources.

While the mind provides sufficient directions with measures, analysis, and knowledge management through common sense necessarily located in the brain, leadership comes. and is taken. from the heart in felt rhythms.

Using the spirited air we breathe in and out, we may presently speak about predictable results derived from consistent processes already past while we must at the same time admit the unpredictable from processes that address the unknown and even unknowable future.

There may be controversy, depending on whether your locomotion is backing into the future or facing it as you go.

But the only true controversy I would be concerned about in what you have described would be if the principle of non-contradiction would be violated in the process. There may be yin (past) and yang (future) at any given time, but we cannot allow yin and not-yin, or for that matter yang and not-yang, to balance each other at the same time without something much worse than controversy happening.

The apparent paradox of desiring unpredictability and consistency at the same time must be resolved or we cannot move forward.

We would be caught in the uncomfortable position of untenable contradiction and standing still, frozen in our tracks.

Thanks for the question."

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

Greatest invention/theory of all time and why?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Scott,

The greatest theory of all time.

It answers the bottom line question for us moderns: HOW DO YOU KNOW?

To explain the process of how we know entities outside of ourselves (persons, things, or other beings), Thomas Aquinas has recourse neither to the transcendental ideas of Platonism, (nor the innate ideas of Descartes in his modern philosophy), nor to illuminations of saints.

He effectively argues for a cognitive faculty in people that is naturally capable of acquiring knowledge of entities in proportion to that cognitive faculty. Knowledge is obtained through two stages of operation, sensitive and intellective, that are intimately related to one another.

The proper object of the sensitive faculty is the particular entity, i.e., the individual. The proper object of the intellect is the universal. But the intellect does not attain any universal unless the material for it is presented to it by the senses.

The two cognitive faculties, sense and intellect, are naturally capable of acquiring knowledge for subsequent understanding of their proper object, since both have such potential -- the senses, toward the individual form; and the intellect, toward the form of the universal.

Obtaining the universal presupposes that the sensible knowledge of the object which lies outside the knower comes through the impression of the form of the object upon the knower's sensitive faculty. This is likened to the impression of the seal upon wax.

The knower's soul reacts according to its nature, that is, psychically, producing knowledge of that particular object whose form had been impressed upon the senses.

Thus the faculty which was in potential is actuated in relation to that object, and knows and expresses within itself knowledge of that particular object.

But how is the passage made within the knower from sensitive cognition to that which is intellective?

To understand Thomas' solution to the problem, it is necessary to recall the theory of Aristotle that Thomas works with: the individual form is universal in potential.

It is the matter which makes the form individual. Hence if the form can be liberated from the individualizing matter, or dematerialized, it assumes the character of universality.

This is just what happens through the action of a special power of the intellect, i.e., the power by which the PHANTASM (sense image) is illuminated.

The phantasm is made by our senses when we see, hear, touch, taste, smell. Under the influence of the phantasm, the form loses its materiality in the knower. It becomes an essence or intelligible species. Thomas calls this faculty the "agent intellect".

(For Thomas the agent intellect is not, as the Averroists erroneously held, a separate intellect which is common to all people. Rather, all people possess the agent intellect, but to varying potentials.)

The intelligible species is then received by the agent intellect, being passive since it receives its proper object, and become intelligible in act. When it does, the knower acquires the knowledge sought.

The form, both intelligible and individual, is not THAT WHICH the mind grasps or understands (this would reduce knowledge to mere phenomenalism), but the form is the means THROUGH WHICH the mind begins to know the object (individual form) so the knower can begin to understand the mysterious essence of the person, thing, or other entity outside of the knower's own self.

The more the knower knows the entity, the more mysterious is the object. This is so because the knower realizes the object (person, thing, or other entity) is not created by the knower, but is only encountered by the knower on physical and metaphysical levels in this process.

If people adopt this starting point in any discussion of HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT, the results become commonsensical and lead to less controversy.

Great question!"

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

What advice would you have for a new president of a nonprofit board of directors?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Gayle,

Congratulations!

Please consider the following two points:

First, as leader, you will want to always know where you are on your journeys in making decisions. Thus, keep track of your changing answers to the following questions (all in the present tense):

* Where are you coming from?

* Where are you wanting to go in answering your issue?

* What are you waiting for?

* Who are you wise ones and what do they essentially advise?

* What are the pros and cons of your issue?

* What are the “Powers That Be” specifically saying?

* What is your own agenda?

* What facts and reasons are you contending with?

* What insights and oversights are emerging in your decision-making process?

* How are you telling the story of your decision?

* What losses are you willing to risk to gain what you can only hope for?

* How are you determining that the answer you have discerned is the right one?

Second, as leader, you will want to aim for the highest level of success that you can define in operational terms, or as I call it “Exemplary Operating Success”.

Here’s how I define it.

Exemplary Operating Success

When your senior leaders determine that the organization presents, on a real-time basis, sufficient exemplary and actionable evidence to show actual or virtual fulfillment of the following nine conditions, then your organization has achieved exemplary success for the fiscal year in question.

Condition 1. Your organization has an effective, systematic approach, responsive to the multiple requirements of Leadership; Strategic Planning; Customer or Market Focus; Measurement, Analysis, and Knowledge Management; Workforce Focus; Process Management; and Results.

Condition 2. Your approaches are fully deployed without significant weaknesses or gaps in any areas or work units.

Condition 3. Your organization has a fact-based, systematic evaluation process in place; improvement and organizational learning are key management tools; there is clear evidence of refinement and innovation backed by organizational-level analysis and sharing.

Condition 4. Your approaches are well integrated with your organization’s needs identified in response to Condition 1.

Condition 5. Your organization reports current performance is excellent in most areas of importance.

Condition 6. Your organization reports excellent improvement trends and/or sustained excellent performance levels in most areas.

Condition 7. Your organization reports demonstrated industry and benchmark leadership in many areas.

Condition 8. Your organization reports results that address most key customer, market, process, and action plan requirements.

Condition 9. Your senior leaders agree at their leadership review meeting to recommend to you that your organization submit to examination and feedback by a team of independent examiners for the purpose of confirming exemplary success.

Obviously, to reach such an exemplary level of operational success, you may have to work on this for several years.

But it can be accomplished.

For example, please consider Heroic Leadership: Best Practices from a 450-Year-Old Company That Changed the World by Chris Lowney. With an eye on best practices, you will be able to jump way ahead of the learning curve. Thanks for the question."

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

How do I find a truly satisfying role for the long(ish) term?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Martin,
Perhaps you are a character without a plot. The "marriage" you are in no longer works. Perhaps it's time to "divorce" yourself. Why not take a look at No Plot? No Problem!: A Low-Stress, High-Velocity Guide to Writing a Novel in 30 Days by Chris Baty.

Take 30 days and produce at least 50,000 words.

Let the new characters you encounter speak to you and simply write down what they say, including in the process what you see when you are encountering them.
My prediction, if you take me up on this dare, is that you will uncover a new part of you that brings you out of your boredom.

Then take a look at The Writers Journey: Mythic Structure for Writers, 3rd Edition by Christopher Vogler. It may help you analyze where you are on your own journey.

There seems to me to be an underlying issue that you resist facing. You may want to take a look at What Men Are Like by John A. Sanford, since this approach is quite common for bright men like yourself.

My observation of your question is that, on the positive side, you are like a wandering hero. A little like Lee Marvin's character Ben in "Paint Your Wagon."
On the flip side, you are like Humphrey Bogart's Rick in "Casablanca" and thus protective of yourself like a turtle who withdraws into his hard shell when sensing a threat. Rick figures it out: giving up his own hurt idealism in favor of real friendship.

On the other hand, Ben's "Pardner" (Clint Eastwood) settles down, finds a home, and lives. That is ultimately the kind of project that will be compelling for you. For then you will experience a new level of purpose. You will find the story of your life.

To do this, you will have to examine your values to learn if you are willing to commit to living with a partner; your personal mission statement to bring in front of you what you were born for; your purpose in relationships allowing you to enjoy and to suffer with others; and your vision to see what home really means to you.

This will not be easy and it may take you 10 years or more, even the rest of your life, but, my friend, if you do it, your life will become so meaningful that the empty boredom you now feel (which is too close to a form of despair for me not to notice it) will transform into a willing receptivity of insights.

Your cup will overflow. May God be with you on your journey.”

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

You Only Get One Choice On This, Just One Please!

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Scott,

If I must pick ONE celebrity to model myself after, who it it would be and why, I would say the late Pope John Paul II.

He is clearly more than a celebrity, but he was a celebrity as well. The quality in him that attracts me is his courage. I wear a wrist ban that tells his most important advice: "Be not afraid! " Those were his first words to the world when he was elected pope. They've stayed with me ever since and helped me get through many a fearsome time.

The part of that found in my own demeanor is my fearlessness. It is in part a physical resemblance, the way I interact with powerful people. It allows me to give them my independent advice with a measure of confidence that does not come from me alone.

In the book Keys of This Blood: Pope John Paul II Versus Russia and the West for Control of the New World Order" by Malachi Martin, I learned more about what attracted me to this extraordinary man.

This link goes to Amazon's listing of books by him and about him.

Thanks for the question."

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

Are you happy?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Kathy,

This is one of the most important questions for each of us to answer, whether on LinkedIn or elsewhere.

I am happy, though not as happy as I hope I will be in the future.

There is a problem, of course, with discussing happiness. Perhaps it is a matter of definition, perhaps not.

For some time I have made similar inquiries in my questions, but never so direct. I've asked:

Each of these questions brought many responses and all of us participants grappled with the underlying issue. We know we want to be happy, but we also understand the reasons for our unhappiness at the same time.

I presented a sort of operational definition of happiness to see how I arrive at my sense of happiness: "Happiness comes each day like small sips of coffee as I make my way to decision’s end where I relax and smile again about:

* Where I come from

* Where I want to go

* What I am waiting for

* What my wise ones advise

* What pros and cons I weigh

* What the “Powers That Be” insist upon

* What my own agenda reveals about me

* What facts and reasons I contend with

* What insights answer my prayers

* How I tell my story

* What losses I risk to gain what I still only hope for

* Why the decision I discern is the right one for me.

Thus my sense of happiness is tied into my realization that becoming happy is the result of a decision to be happy. I've referred people to You-Tube for a real-life example of happiness. The happiness found in response to Paul Pott's performance is inspiring.

I've suggested books:

A practical one that shows how important being happy is to us in our work: What Happy Companies Know: How the New Science of Happiness Can Change Your Company for the Better by Dan Baker;

A philosophical one that deals with all the counterfeit varieties of happiness: Treatise On Happiness by St. Thomas Aquinas;

A spiritual one that addresses the fulfilling happiness of heaven in a very reasonable, but joyous way: A Travel Guide to Heaven by Anthony Destefano;

And even a Wikipedia article.

Bottom line: I am happy because I believe God loves me and all those I love and He has shown me His love in countless ways.

Before you close the question, please clarify your answer by including it. I ask you to do so because that's another feaure of being happy: you want to share it with your friends.

Thanks for asking and Happy New Year! John Darrouzet”

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

Advice for someone embarking on a new career adventure?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Assuming for sake of this discussion that he was approaching me for a job, I would want to know the answers to the following questions which I would want to cover in person-to-person interviews:

1. Where are you coming from in your job search? Please provide at least an up-to-date-profile. Tell me your background story. What is your ordinary world like?

2. Where are you wanting to go? If you don't have at least an "X" to aim at, then you are already there and need to simply wait. It will happen. Be patient. If the "X" is different than where you are now, continue answering the questions.

3. What are you waiting for? You're a talented person, even though you have little experience. Why are you reluctant?

4. What are your wise ones generally advising? Do you have a personal values statement, a personal mission statement, a clear sense of purpose, and a vision? Is there a coach of coaches whom you may want to speak with?

5. What are the pros and cons you're starting with? If you are leaning one way or another at this point, talk to the best lawyer friend you have. He or she will assist you in evening out the list till you are completely confused. Pros and cons analysis is overrated. Weighing your choices is really a mask for lack of imagination.

6. What are the "Powers that Be" saying about your search? First, who are they? I'm talking husband, friends, etc. Those who really count. They may quickly suggest that you limit your search to a geographic area because they are not ready for you to move out of town, for example. On the other hand, this may be the chance they've been looking for to tell you it's time to move on.

7. What is your real agenda in this search? Is money the real problem? Money has no agenda. Dig deeper. What's driving your search? Surely, you don't think it's time to become selfish? Turn turtle, stick your neck out for no one. Become a tyrant and dominate others. Perhaps you want someone else to provide the wall for your vine to cling on. Or maybe you want to be the center of attention for a while?

Flip it. Find some heroes to emulate. At least four. One for your mind. Another for the warrior in you. Another for the martyr you are having trouble with in the sacrifices you seem to be making for others. Then for your fourth, pick one: a magician with words; a sage with philosophies of life; a statesman for the society you want to help turn over to the next generation or a saint. Someone who can connect you with the Power that constitutes you. Read everything you can get your hands on about them.

8. What facts and reasons are you contending with in your search? Write your father or mother a letter (don't send it) that explains your predicament. Remember, they were never supposed to live your life for you. They were there (or not) to help you learn how to live your own life.

9. What insights are emerging in your search? Pay attention to your dreams, the night-time kind, the day-dreams (turn off the music in your car and listen to the Silence and what comes out of it), and the movies that turn you on. The messages received will be symbolic. Learn to read them.

10. How are you telling the story of your search? Keep a journal so you can mark your progress. Discover what story you're living. What's the next turning point in the plot?

11. What are you willing to risk in searching to gain what you want? Plan with the end in mind. Tell us what you want to be remembered for. What are you willing to die for? Okay, not so melodramatic, but you get the idea. It's your spirit that's on the line.

12. How are you knowing that decision you discern is the right one for you? Will the decision engage our minds, hearts, souls, and spirits? Will the enthusiasm of our finding each other as co-workers be enough to carry forward with the necessary and desirable action to see the effort to a happy result?

John”

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

What is your definition of creativity?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Lubna,

What is your definition of creativity? Strictly speaking, creativity is the activity of God whereby he makes something out of nothing. (See especially The Silence of St. Thomas by Josef Pieper.

When we humans "create," we are working with something or someone that already exists. In a previous question I asked, "What, if anything, does encountering beauty have to do with change management?", I suggested based on Etienne Gilson's book, The Arts of the Beautiful, that beauty is involved in a process of making "useless" objects that uplift our minds, hearts, souls and spirits, though not necessarily our pocket books, because of course we are more than just attachments to the machines of industrial production to which we are most often attached to at our jobs.

Now for your questions: a) Do you think that you can be creative even in a conventional job - whether on the job or up taking up a hobby? Yes, if the conventional job permits or encourages you to use your creative talents.

b) Do conventional jobs quash creativity? Most conventional jobs are not meant to be creative. They are meant to be productive and profitable.

c) How are you creative? I write screenplays, novels, questions for LinkedIn participants and answers to their questions, like this one, and my blog.

d) What is your definition of creativity? While some people see creativity is a form of problem solving, I do not.

When we ground ourselves transparently in the power that constitutes us (God for me and others), then the creative moment comes in the form of an insight into the then present situation that allows the individual the opporunity to assent to the insight provided (as an actual grace from God). See MOMENTS OF INSIGHT: THE EMERGENCE OF GREAT IDEAS IN THE LIVES OF CREATIVE MEN. (Paperback) by Maria Shrady. The author has in turn based her reports on Bernard Lonergan's Insight: A Study of Human Understanding.

Good question. John”

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet

If you really believe in YOUR god how can you live with people who don't share your views?

The question was asked first on LinkedIn where other answers can be found. My answer was:

“Dear Martin,

You have posed a most important question in today's world.

In the space provided there is little I can respond that will do your question justice, but perhaps I can offer some starting points for further consideration.

Please allow me to recommend first a book entitled How to Think About God: A Guide for the 20th-Century Pagan by Mortimer J. Adler. Adler provides a philosophical analysis of the concept of God, in western culture at the least.

In a second book, Truth in Religion, Adler provides the results of his comparative studies of various predominant religions around the world.

Thus with the guidance of these two books you may sort out a consistent philosophical perspective and a sense of truth as a criteria for judgment.

However, may I suggest that you would do well to look outside of studies of God alone to see some of the sources of the problems you observe.

Modern approaches to Power and Knowledge have placed these two at the level of idols, if not gods, for many modern people. Here I would recommend two books by Peter Kreeft. In Socrates Meets Machiavelli: The Father of Philosophy Cross-Examines the Author of The Prince, Kreeft presents a lively dialogue with the thought leader of many of the players in our world of power politics. With astounding results, I would add. In Socrates Meets Descartes: The Father of Philosophy Analyzes the Father of Modern Philosophy's Discourse on Method, Kreeft takes on Knowledge, again with very revealing results.

Contrast these modern philosophies with those found in the Old Testament and you'll see an amazing difference of opinion. In Three Philosophies of Life: Ecclesiastes, Life As Vanity Job, Life As Suffering Song of Songs, Life As Love, Kreeft reminds us of some of the ancient sources of wisdom as opposed to modern claims of knowledge and power that we may want to consider before we tear each other apart.

Then in Ecumenical Jihad: Ecumenism and the Culture War, Kreeft argues that the real culture war is not so much between people of faith but between people of faith and secular humanists.

Another view is the psychological foundations for all of this. Here I would recommend The Strange Trial of Mr. Hyde: A New Look at the Nature of Human Evil by John Sanford. Using the well known Jekyll/Hyde story, Sanford presents some plausible arguments that the monster involved in evil is not Mr. Hyde, but the doctor who generated him in the lab. Very interesting arguments about the sources of evil. God may allow evil to happen, but he is not the source. We are.

And if we are the source of the evil you complain of, why is that? You may find the following book telling in this regard: Kierkegaard's Philosophy: Self Deception and Cowardice in the Present Age by John Mullen. In an era of self-centeredness, deception may be the knowledge or power-oriented modus operandi, but self-deception and cowardice are the likely causes. Fear of truth is the deepest fear.

Finally, I would recommend reading Pensees (Penguin Classics) by Blaise Pascal and Common Sense 101: Lessons from G.K. Chesterton by Dale Ahlquist.

Pascal, most famous for Pascal's Wager about taking a gamble that God exists. His thoughts about your God and mine come from a very unexpected angle.

Chesterton's commonsensical approach brings us all back to earth about such matters. The common sense answer is that most of us already do live with others who don't share our views of God.

The reason for this I believe is quite commonsensical and stated most succinctly by Thomas Aquinas:

"It is better to know a stone than to love a stone, but better to love God than to know God, because love conforms the lover to the beloved, while knowledge conforms the known object to the way-of-knowing of the knower."

We can live with each other best when we try to be more God-like about it: by loving each other for who we are not what we are.”

What do you think?

Please include your comment here or contact me to discuss.

Thanks.

John Darrouzet