On How People Are Seeing Things Differently

This post is about:

• Two different ways of thinking and the problems these different ways of thinking are causing
• How the only way to gain understanding to bring about good outcomes is to see things through other relevant parties' eyes?
• How the perspective one gets from being almost exclusively in one country (e.g., the United States) is distorted, and
• How most countries are seeing the choice between peace or war.

I will do this in two short parts.

Part One:?Different Ways of Thinking and Seeing Things through Others' Eyes?

I regularly encounter 1) that there are two distinct ways of thinking about situations and the world and 2) that conflicts between these different ways of thinking can cause problems. Here are the two perspectives I’m thinking of:

1. Looking at things and looking at others' behaviors through their own eyes and assessing them based on whether others give them what they want.?For example, most people like leaders who give them what they want. ?
2. Seeing things through others’ eyes as well as their own eyes and assessing them based on whether they are good for the whole. For example, they like leaders who are good for the whole. ? ??

The first, more self-focused approach, leads to greater polarity and fighting. People align with others who have similar self-interests and together fight for what they want against the others who are fighting for their divergent self-interests. This perspective is, above all else, producing the greatest risk to mankind’s well-being. In contrast, working for the whole brings cooperation, and with cooperation?comes peace and prosperity. ?

Unfortunately, communication between people with these two different perspectives is even more difficult than between people who don’t speak the same language. That makes working things out terribly difficult. ?

In order for the system/machine to work well, people have to think about what everybody wants and what should happen in an inclusive and productive way. That is because, at the end of the day: 1)?you can't make people?do what they don't want to do without having a fight which is destructive while 2) you can incentivize people to work well for themselves by working well with others which will make them productive.?

Personally, I regularly encounter problems communicating with people who think differently than I do, which I regret. At such times, I try to assure the person with the different perspective that I'm not trying to tell them how they should be or what they should do and that I believe that I can’t and shouldn’t make decisions about what’s good or bad for them. There is no reason to get angry at people who have opposing views and see things differently or pursue paths that you would rather they not pursue.?

For me, there?are only decisions that have consequences, so decision-making?is like playing chess. The only thing I wish for people--for their sakes and for our collective sakes--is for them to think hard about what the right decisions are in light of the consequences their decisions will produce. I hope that we can do this well and collectively because that’s the only way to have peace and prosperity, which is better than war and destruction.?That is not a common perspective. ?

Part 2:?How the Perspective One Gets from Being Almost Exclusively in One Country (e.g., the United States) Is Distorted and How Most Countries Are Seeing the Choice between Peace and War

As an observer who travels around the world a lot and gets to see things through others’ eyes, it is very interesting to me?that?I am now finding that?most countries want to have good relations with most other countries so they can do deals that help improve the lives of their people rather than to be on one side of a fight with allies against those on the other side.?

I didn't know this not-choosing-sides-to-fight would happen and I'm relieved that it is. I?knew the?world order was changing in ways that have happened repeatedly in history, and I knew, from my research, that in prior periods of international conflict, nations would line up on two sides to fight. The conflict between the US and China, the war between Russia and Ukraine,?and the war between Israel and Hamas could have prompted this to happen with allies lining up on both sides and joining the fight. However, thus far I'm seeing that most countries are trying to stay out of fights and get on with trying to achieve peace and prosperity for their own people. Of course, like everything, there are cons as well as pros to this – e.g. maybe those who do bad things won't be punished and those who need help won't get it. But the overall picture of tensions not escalating between two sides with each country being forced to pick a side is?reassuring.

I am also observing that the perspective one gets from being in the United States isn't an accurate picture of what's going on in the world. That's because the US is overly?focused on itself, and?a lot of the American media operates in ways that you know i.e., embroiled in the fighting between the left and the right,?interested in sensationalism, and inadequately covering world thinking. As a result,?the perspective one gets in the US is?very different from the perspective one gets from seeing the world from different places.?

Most importantly,?there are exciting, economically well-managed bright spots in the world, most notably, the ASEAN countries (with Singapore as a regional hub), the Gulf countries (with the UAE and Saudi Arabia as hubs),?and India.?

I think it's?very important?and very interesting to see things through the eyes of those in other countries in order to have the accurate understandings that are required to do what should be done about the most important issues facing the world. ?

I hope that these reports of mine are of some help in keeping you posted about how the world order is changing. I value our exchanges and welcome your thoughts.?