9 tweets · December 2020 · 81 likes · 4 retweets · read on Twitter
Wowwww this is so cool to read, because it's paradigmatically profoundly different from how I'm now thinking about things a year later. "not committed" feels like a completely confused frame to me now. now all about bottom-up emergence and treating all behavior as coherent
commitment is weird in the same way choice is weird (thread below) they obviously both describe real phenomena, but I now think that except in very narrow & concrete senses they're mostly left-hemisphere confabulation
I could say that the phrase in the tweet below is something I feel committed to on a really deep level (I recently described it as my best answer to "what am I in service to?")
...but when I'm really in touch with that intention, it feels so fucking obvious that I want to do this that "commitment" feels absurd, like me committing to dancing when the beat drops. I don't need that commitment because wtf else would I do?
As with choice, my general sense with "commitment" is that if you're tempted to commit to something or say "I'm committed to X" then what this actually means if you're reifying an identification with one part of you, in opposition to some other part of you that you don't trust.
Huge value to temporarily trying on new defaults, whether routine or reflex, but when you don't do new thing, don't just recommit! As Kegan & Lahey say, agreements are not to prevent violations but to *create* them 🤯 without agreement, nothing to violate malcolmocean.com/2014/05/routin…
Assume it made complete sense in this situation to do what you did, from some perspective that you don't see. One quip I like to make about that is "otherwise you would have done a DIFFERENT apparently-senseless thing!"
Then try to find that perspective, and bring it in dialogue with your other perspectives. (to be clear, when I say "dialogue" here I mean Bohm's thing - it's orthogonal from using words. most talk is not dialogue, and attuned dancing or sex is dialogue)
Oh, I would caveat though, this perspective doesn't mean that any part of you wanted EXACTLY what happened. It could be the output of multiple conflicted subsystems, none of which are satisfied with the result.