The Polarities of Ambiguity
Ambiguity concerns the ‘haziness’ in which cause-and-effect are assessed. Causes are hard to attribute. Relativity seems to trump established rules. Conditions of ambiguity weigh heavily on our ability to hold contradictory data and still function and make choices. An accompanying Left Column perspective on Ambiguity would focus on Tolerating the Haziness. The primary concern would center on being patient and willing to remain in “limbo” until such time as the haze clears and actions can be taken. The Right Column perspective stands in opposition. This perspective would focus on Engaging the haziness. The primary concern is establishing a viable “truth” and “reality” upon which one can base and guide actions (Bergquist and mura, 2011).
Appropriate coaching and consulting services can be requested to address the ambiguity-based polarity. Those providing these services can introduce multiple templates for assessing the nature of any challenging issue. One of these templates concerns the identification and analysis of both the immediate issue (the figure) and the context within which this issue is situated (the ground). A second template concerns the distance from which a specific issue is being addressed. It should be examined close up (as an intimate portrait) (proximal perspective) and at a distance (as a broad landscape) (distal perspective). The third template involves temporal distance. The issue should be examined as it is currently being experienced (the present time) and as it will probably be (or could be) present at some point ahead of us (the future time). The polarity of engagement and tolerance is managed when each of these three templates is applied to the analysis of an important issue. The convening issue can be viewed from multiple perspectives—which allows for both immediate engagement and tolerance of certain immediate circumstances as well as longer term and “bigger picture” engagement and tolerance.
The Search for Clarity
As we look at the world (from inside the cave or outside the cave) it is important to consider what we are looking at and what we are not looking at (ignoring) or seeing through distorted lens. This means that we look back at our own attention strategies. Michael Polanyi suggests that we attend to that from which we are attending (Polanyi, 1969). The lens we are using greatly impacts on what we are seeing. Most importantly, as I suggested with regard to templates, we can look at objects and events that are distant in time and space, or we can look at objects and events that are close to us in time and space. The distant (distal) objects and events are usually seen more clearly than objects and events that reside very close to us in time and space. Thus, in our search for clarity, we often remain at a distance and view everything from afar. We become historians of the past and might believe that we need only replicate that which we believe worked in the past. As Mark Twain suggested, history might not repeat itself, but it does rhyme—and we can see this past history through lens that we believe are objective and free of present-day emotions and biases.
Download Article 1K Club
