Month: August 2013

Trispectivism going free! ebook handout

Posted on Updated on

After some thoughts about goals and my approach and ideals in life I have decided to give the book for free. In this new and exciting world of unlimited possibilities on the web and beyond, the non commercial, sharing and interchanging should be the motto for many of the things we do. A few years ago, during my travels, I came across a book in Savannah, GA. I adore books so I was curious. I looked around to see who it might belong to and saw no one. Gently, I lifted it and open the hard cover. To my complete surprise and awe in the first page was described, in nice handwriting, that the book is a free traveling book, meaning, you can take it, read it and be kind enough to put it somewhere for the next person to enjoy. I was so excited to be a part of that trust and share that this experience marked me for life. The book turn out to be excellent and a week later I left it on a park bench in Marin county, CA.

Even though the self publication did cost me some money and I am really far from being rich (academic in Humanities and material reward are far from being best friends), I realized that giving the book is much more rewarding. That being said, if you like the book and you and your friends can afford it, please feel free to contribute by making a purchase (paperback or kindle). The ebook presented here can be downloaded in the kindle version (you can download free kindle reader for pc) or in pdf.

Moreover, if you enjoyed reading the whole or parts of it and you think it might be helpful and interesting to others, please feel free to write something about it. You can also use any part of the book and the posts in this blog for what ever purpose you like. This book is a conversation, if you like, one that I cannot have with all who wants to read it, thus, it is up to you to continue it. Thus, if you wish to add whatever creation of your own, please feel free to do so, in a book of you own, in your blog and if you contact me, right here. Beyond doubt, it is interaction that connects the unreachable universal and the open and friendly individuals we are. Enjoy!!!

Trispectivism in kindle

Trispectivism in pdf 

.

Take it away, it´s yours…

case

Traditionalism vs modernity, constant fight for harmony

Posted on Updated on

I believe that there is a long-lasting conflict in our lives that started probably with the first conscious, perhaps civilized yet not necessarily, man. I´ll try to resume it in one question: What weight has the tradition on our life and how much of it should we sacrifice in order to be modern and have more control and awareness? First of all, I have to say that there is a problem with this kind of question, which is that the definition for what tradition is and how far it reflects on our life can vary from one person to another. Yet, let us try to present a rough common idea suggesting that tradition is the older frame of thought, actions and codes that the different generations follow from their past (referring mainly and commonly to the sense of family honor, valor, moral, the role of a woman, kind of nutrition, clothes, social behavior and such). Modernity on the other hand can be understood as any thought or action that does not follow the established set of implicit and sometimes explicit rules of conduct (Normally I would have like to give an example like western society set of laws but we know that we’re not quite there yet when it comes to equality of gender, race and freedom of choice).

Probably the most common thought of the hard-core traditionalist is that there is no need of thought. It might sound a little harsh but I guarantee that it is not my argument, but what I’ve repeatedly heard as an argument for many daily actions. That is to say, as a curious person, a large majority of the time that I ask a traditional person why he does what he does, the answer is “I don´t know” and after briefly insisting, the usual reply is “you think too much”. This, of course, can be very difficult for their younger and liberated environment that does not necessarily share this repetition of archaic set of codes (as romantic as we would like to think of them).

It seems to me that what will eventually bring us closer to happiness is change and not stubbornness in beliefs. Let´s take a difficult example. Imagine two poor people, one traditionalist and the other modern. The first will save his money to buy a nice holiday dinner/something to donate in his temple/to be able to afford his daughter’s wedding. All reasons are valid and honorable, that is certain. Now, think about the poor modernist, the kind that sees the world and possibilities beyond tradition and custom. He will save his money to be able to go from time to time on a cultural experience, almost one can say adventure. Yes, he might not have a big dinner party with all his family around him, taking out one bottle of expensive poor alcohol and trying to show off as much as he can the little he has all while complaining about the poor economy and bad business. However, he might simply eat with his family a symbolic holiday dinner and later, him and all his family will be able to go to a cheap vacation to different country/buy better equipment for their biannual mountain travel/afford a diving course for his second son. It probably wouldn´t even matter if it will be a poor adventurous holiday (actually the poor travel is always the more imaginative one). And I’ll even risk saying that every vacation of that sort will be much more memorable for her and her family. The possibilities are as great as the imagination and while the traditionalist rest at home to rejoice the holiday closer to how they did for centuries, the latter invent and create her own path. Needless to say, both families receive values and mores.

Another small example is something I experienced recently. A friend of mine confronted what he saw as unjust behavior of a superior (taking credit for his hard work), the superior’s argument was that this is how it was always done, telling my friend how he had to live even worst experience when he was in that situation. I was a little surprised at first because the experience was in the new technology field and both my friend and his superior were supposed to be kind just people. However, after remembering that this superior always was traditional in his views, my friend tried a different approach, he said that precisely for this reason, that it was always like that and even the superior himself doesn’t like this way of working, it is time to change it. This is perhaps what is most frightening, the change. While it seems that the traditionalist is about the security and comfort of how things were always done, the modernist tries to change (even if it doesn´t succeed for humans, modernist of traditionalist will always stay humans). It didn´t work.

La corrida de toros, Pamplona
La corrida de toros, Pamplona

Why do I think change is better? Aside of the obvious reasons of innovation, improvement etc. there is also opportunity, growth and equality. Somehow I´m having difficulties to imagine a traditionalist caveman stepping out to build a city under the open sky, or to sit on small piece of wood attached to round iron circles in front and back leaving your feet in the air and riding/driving/flying.

So what are some positive points for tradition?

–          Maintaining a structural society that provides security extracted from the known and familiar (very important for the children/sense of family value/keeping voters happy).

–          Bring to life warm memories that by imitation are coming back to life and make us feel happy.

What are the negative points traditionalists usually have?

–          They are strict, usually thinking that the way they grew up is the only one and every other way of doing things is a danger for the known structure.

–          Unable to adapt and learn. Crucial for the younger generation that is exposed to new ideas and function from the outside but cannot break free from the older traditions.

As for the negative and positive of modernity I will leave it up to you for the perspectives are endless (even sometime with false accusation as I write about in my book). No doubt, to unite and live in awareness and peace between the two is not an easy task, and certainly is not meant for everyone. I admire the people who are capable of doing it right and dichotomize important aspects in relation to that (as the imperative separation of religion from tradition). So far I only know very few families who can manage and I will be more than happy to hear about others and how they succeed in the continuous battle for harmonizing tradition with the modern life.

So why is it this hard to find a constructive middle ground? One strong argument is as a friend of mine recently debated about education or control. Trying to establish a form of new age educational system that question constantly repeated, what is education and what is control over those fresh absorbing minds of our youngsters. What for some is education for other is control and vice versa. The same goes for those two universal terms: tradition and modernity. When coming down to practical day to day individual life each one chooses her path and what is black and white in the grand scheme of things, very quickly becomes gray. This is where I tend to use Trispectivism, an exterior view on the constant interaction in my mind between my use of those big words as modern and tradition and my day to day actions.

Thus, if I need to resume all that view in a post, I tend to conclude that tradition is how things are and modernity is the approach for a change, improving (though not always successfully, I admit) the existing. It is the movement forward as opposed to stagnation in the known and familiar (“because that’s how we always did it”). Ever since I deconstruct that aspect in me, I began to rebuilt my perception in my own way, according to many different live’s perspectives I saw and learned around me. This sensation of power over who we are and how we think is, in my humble opinion, overwhelming.

Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle as a paradigm to Trispectivism

Posted on Updated on

Yesterday I shared a link of a TED talk I especially liked and found useful. The talk is about vision, perspective, marketing strategy, social psychology and ideology. It is about how to address your public whether you are a large enterprise, a small innovator or a politician with strong ideals. Now, I decided to go ahead and to write something a little more elaborated about it because I began to think it is yet another good example to a method created by what the essence of Trispectivism really is. Thus, if you have read Trispectivism, you will probably recognize how it takes place in his method, if not, click here and then pay close attention to the elements that consist his strategy, for they a perfect derivative of what Trispectivism is.

Sinek talks about why all the innovators, the achievers and the outstanding manage to be on top of their competitors in spite of the fact they are practically doing the same work. With examples such as the Apple, Martin Luther King and the Wright brothers he demonstrates what he calls the Golden Circle:

He says: “Why? How? What? This little idea explains why some organizations and some leaders are able to inspire where others aren’t. Let me define the terms really quickly. Every single person, every single organization on the planet knows what they do, 100 percent. Some know how they do it, whether you call it your differentiated value proposition or your proprietary process or your USP. But very, very few people or organizations know why they do what they do. And by “why” I don’t mean “to make a profit.” That’s a result. It’s always a result. By “why,” I mean: What’s your purpose? What’s your cause? What’s your belief? Why does your organization exist? Why do you get out of bed in the morning? And why should anyone care? Well, as a result, the way we think, the way we act, the way we communicate is from the outside in. It’s obvious. We go from the clearest thing to the fuzziest thing. But the inspired leaders and the inspired organizations — regardless of their size, regardless of their industry — all think, act and communicate from the inside out.”

The Golden Circle
The Golden Circle

This wonderful idea which can be transformed in a successful marketing message and is a powerful way to demonstrate Trispectivism in this area:

The “Why” is, according to Sinek, the feeling, the essence, the ideology. It is the global vision, meaning, the universal All. The “What” is the details, the specific, or the individual All. Thus we are left with the third part or his Golden Circle, the “How”, which of course is the action, the movement, the connection, meaning, the interaction between the two.

Sinek’s inspiring idea is that instead of explaining what you offer to people, then how you make it and finish by why, you should reverse the reasoning and begin with the emotions, with the universal belief (i.e. create a better world, a cause, a purpose), then how you do it, the interaction and finish with the details, with the final product: the what (i.e. computers, iphones, equality, freedom, airplanes etc.).

Listening to Sinek’s method with the understanding of Trispectivism acquire a clearer, more comprehensive approach to his idea. I strongly believe that with Trispectivism we are not only left with an open door to similar innovative views but a more profound, lucid vision of day to day aspects, in this case, a meaningful marketing strategy.

Watch the conference:
‎‎