17 four maps of engagement

Every day, we use dozens, maybe even hundreds of maps.

Most of these are mental rather than physical maps, but without them we wouldn’t be able to get to where we want or need to be.

Yesterday, I mentioned the ritual I use each day to get me to where I need to be, like using a map, which I follow with another, and another.

These are the maps we make.

Most maps have a lot of blank space on them: by design (so we can focus on particular details) or through a lack of knowledge.

Blank space allows for exploration within our routines, but I know I can’t get to everywhere I want to using the same old maps.

I’ll have to create new ones.

What goes for my personal maps holds true for the maps we create together.

We can’t debate what is and isn’t by using a downloading map (closed to new input and data), we can’t arrive at a dialogue by using a debating map, and we can’t arrive at a new future of being present to one another, the world, and to our future Self, by using a dialogue map.*

It doesn’t matter if we haven’t got the maps we need.

We are Humans and Humans are mapmakers.

(*These are Otto Scharmer’s four levels of attention: presence is deeper than dialogue which is deeper than debate which is deeper than downloading.  In The Different Drum, Scott Peck names similar maps for relationships: shallowness, conflict, submitting, and glory; Brian McLaren too in Naked Spirituality: simplicity, complexity, perplexity, and harmony.)

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.