Francisco Miraval
I recently met a person who, after asking me if he could ask me a question, almost immediately shared his question. He asked, “What do you think is the best way to end poverty in the world?
There is, of course, no chance in this universe (and probably none in any other parallel universe) that I can provide a proper answer to that great question. I don’t possess any remotely intelligent answer. Otherwise, I will gladly share it. That, of course, should be obvious.
What is not so obvious in telling about this conversation is the tone used by this person in asking the question, a tone that included a mix of intellectual hubris, ignorance, and expectations. In other words, it was a very important questions being asked by somebody with little or no awareness of what he was asking.
The question was presented in such a way that I expected the next question to be, “What is in your opinion the best way to accommodate the chairs on the Titanic’s deck? or “What is the best diet for Buddha to lose weight or for Gandhi to gain weight? (Gandhi, by the way, thought poverty was an expression of violence.)
My suspicions about the insincerity and ignorance of the other person were confirmed just a few moments later when, before I could say anything, the other person began to talk about poverty and people experiencing poverty in such a way that his ignorance of the topic was clear.
It should be said that knowing statistics about a topic, interviewing “experts”, reading books and publications, or having “some ideas” doesn’t mean you know anything about that topic.
It was clear, then, that in spite of his good intentions and high academic level, the real goal this person had in mind, but still unknown to him, was to accommodate the world to himself instead of opening himself to the world and, becoming fully aware of his vulnerability, allow the world to speak to him.
In other words, his efforts were focused on helping people to properly function in a highly dysfunctional society. Or, to put it differently, he was trying to connect people to become successful precisely inside the same system marginalizing those people.
I heard some time ago (I think it was Dr. Paul Master who said it) that helping somebody to become functional in a dysfunctional society is not helping that person at all. If you belong to a dysfunctional society, you will accept that dysfunctionality as normal and, therefore, you will feel the “need” to “help” those who may not follow what is “normal”.
One of my professors used to say years ago that order is just the chaos we are used to see every day. In other words, what we assume to be normal is in fact just the daily repetition of the same abnormality.
I understood then that I was guilty of precisely what I was criticizing, because I too ask senseless questions based on unexamined presuppositions.
Francisco Miraval
I recently met a person who, after asking me if he could ask me a question, almost immediately shared his question. He asked, “What do you think is the best way to end poverty in the world?
There is, of course, no chance in this universe (and probably none in any other parallel universe) that I can provide a proper answer to that great question. I don’t possess any remotely intelligent answer. Otherwise, I will gladly share it. That, of course, should be obvious.
What is not so obvious in telling about this conversation is the tone used by this person in asking the question, a tone that included a mix of intellectual hubris, ignorance, and expectations. In other words, it was a very important questions being asked by somebody with little or no awareness of what he was asking.
The question was presented in such a way that I expected the next question to be, “What is in your opinion the best way to accommodate the chairs on the Titanic’s deck? or “What is the best diet for Buddha to lose weight or for Gandhi to gain weight? (Gandhi, by the way, thought poverty was an expression of violence.)
My suspicions about the insincerity and ignorance of the other person were confirmed just a few moments later when, before I could say anything, the other person began to talk about poverty and people experiencing poverty in such a way that his ignorance of the topic was clear.
It should be said that knowing statistics about a topic, interviewing “experts”, reading books and publications, or having “some ideas” doesn’t mean you know anything about that topic.
It was clear, then, that in spite of his good intentions and high academic level, the real goal this person had in mind, but still unknown to him, was to accommodate the world to himself instead of opening himself to the world and, becoming fully aware of his vulnerability, allow the world to speak to him.
In other words, his efforts were focused on helping people to properly function in a highly dysfunctional society. Or, to put it differently, he was trying to connect people to become successful precisely inside the same system marginalizing those people.
I heard some time ago (I think it was Dr. Paul Master who said it) that helping somebody to become functional in a dysfunctional society is not helping that person at all. If you belong to a dysfunctional society, you will accept that dysfunctionality as normal and, therefore, you will feel the “need” to “help” those who may not follow what is “normal”.
One of my professors used to say years ago that order is just the chaos we are used to see every day. In other words, what we assume to be normal is in fact just the daily repetition of the same abnormality.
I understood then that I was guilty of precisely what I was criticizing, because I too ask senseless questions based on unexamined presuppositions.