Future Guardian,
ONLY a Sith Deals in Absolutes.
So elegant a blunt phrase to so accurately collect humanity's relationship with dogmatism.
A dynamic that is often so snakelike in its appearance, you can't tell when you're attacking someone else's dogmatism with a dogmatic view of your own.
This is the way it is, and YOU are wrong.
It's the same side of the same coin looked at with different lighting. And in those moments both sides are simultaneously good and evil.
If a Jedi can succumb to the sinister simplicity of Dogmatic Orientation, how are we, mere simple mortals, expected to figure this out?
Let's explore.
It can be said that there are two orientations.
It would be ironic to say so. But for the purposes of this discussion, we will consider these two orientations. One tends to fall in one or the other, but not both.
Those two are Dogmatic and Scientific Orientations.
I'll skip some of the definitions as this topic has made its appearance in The Adaptive Dilemma.1
But, I do find on a personal level that many challenges can stem from holding a stark Dogmatic orientation, and on an interpersonal level many relationships can be challenged by holding a Dogmatic orientation.
And perhaps, a deeper understanding of how we get into these orientations, and how they affect us, may help get closer to what we want in life.
Dogmatic Orientation - The One Way To Be Always Right
This is the orientation of the absolute. The orientation of "there's one correct answer." The orientation of validity over usefulness. The orientation of "it needs to be a certain way."
Defined dogmatism is alluring. It's like a comfortable blanket. It makes us feel warm and safe because in a dogmatic viewpoint we KNOW we're right and everyone else is wrong. And in that "knowledge" of our own definitive correctness, we can forget about our worries or our stress.
"This is the way it is" removes the need for our own unique distinctive willful agency to figure shit out.
The correct decision is someone else's responsibility because it's defined by the dogmatic stance. The one correct answer is something that is easy to call a goal and head directly towards, never mind whether it's reasonable or useful to do so. It's a mindset that ignores all else but the end point that is pre-defined by the absolute orientation.
It gives us clear boundaries to define ourselves as the good and right people and our enemy the bad.
The Jedi states "only a sith deals in absolutes" revealing the truth that no one is objectively "good" in that story. Because the Jedi has forgotten who he is, he doesn't realize he's just looking into a mirror when he sees a Sith. In many ways he needs that viewpoint in order to define himself at all.
While Dogmatic orientation is absolute, Scientific orientation is anything but.
This is our preferred orientation not because it's the opposite side of Dogmatism, but because it's the orientation which we find most gets us all the things we want in life.
How much more difficult is it to be existing in a Scientific viewpoint?
When you operate from a Scientific Orientation, there is no one clear right answer. Everything exists in shades of possibility. This is HARD for people to confront. It's hard for people to exist in because it means giving up the idea that you have control over much at all.
It's challenging for Dogmatic people to interact with those in a Scientific Orientation because ... well ... a Dogmatic view is absolute, a Scientific View is the opposite, it's like oil and water.
"It Depends" becomes the answer to most questions a Dogmatic individual may answer with absolutism. This makes sense, as life shows us that in any given situation and scenario, there is no true "right" answer that "should" be taken ... but it requires a Scientific Orientation to see and accept this.
In Moo Doe teachings (Master Key of Wisdom), you can see this talked about as the Moo Doe Moral Compass. Where your choices fit on a triangular spectrum of true, right, and correct.2
The ideal scenario is you find the best balance given the situation being considered between True (what is True for you and the situation you're in) and Right (what may be objectively 'right' all things considered) to come to the Correct answer (the best answer for you in that circumstance).
The Scientific Orientation is open to possibility. It recognizes that though you may want a specific outcome, there is only so much you can control to get that outcome, so defining yourself around it is not useful.
There are MANY outcomes that are possible, and instead of focusing on the one that we want, we focus on where we are now, who we are now, and how best we can get toward the outcome we desire - but without defining our success around getting that outcome or not.
This orientation requires you to have self-awareness, to slow down, to focus not on willing the end result to be what you want it to be, but accepting what happens and constantly living with the change.
This is the orientation of learning to grow trees well as opposed to trying to grow the tallest tree. Where you become the gardener of you and nurture what you discover grows best within your own garden.
The Scientific Orientation can be seen curiously as an internalized orientation.
Your decisions and your focus are on the best decision-making for YOUR next best step. This is about presence of self and acceptance of open-ended possibilities. The Scientific Orientation is the way of The Earned Path Traveler.
By contrast, the Dogmatic Orientation can be seen as externalized.
It isn't about you, your self-awareness, or what is possible. But rather it becomes about your external judgment of what should be. Perhaps also driven by a need to identify or belong externally to a group that aligns with the stark dogmatic orientation. Dogmatism is the way of The Entitled Traveler, who blames other people when things don't go the way he expects.
If a Dogmatic Viewpoint is So Not Useful, Why is it so Prevalent?
Perhaps an entire paper could be written on the prevalence of Dogmatic Viewpoints, likely dipping into Narcissism. But for the sake of making this clear and actionable, let's consider some obvious reasons why Dogmatism is prevalent and easy to fall into.
Already I've talked about the allure of it in its comforts and simplicity. I see two forces feeding into this.
One is buried in our basic human nature. This can be seen in several biases including Confirmation Bias, Authority Bias, Overconfidence Effect, Ingroup Bias, etc. The effect can be summarized to explain that we humans are susceptible to following others, overvaluing ideas which confirm our beliefs or fears (overvaluing our own ideas), and then essentially tailoring our viewpoints and beliefs to belong to communities. You can consider all that a built in survival mechanism.
But like many of our basic human instincts, they do not directly serve us so well in the modern world. Especially as we live in times where it is more possible than ever to confirm our biases and shoehorn ourselves into rigidly defined groups
The other force at play may very well be the nature of our education system and how people grow within our society today.
A concept we talked about in TGA, which I've alluded to in this article, is that of "Valid vs Useful." Validity is technical correctness. Usefulness is ... well, Usefulness.
Oftentimes, and there is perhaps a strong correlation with Dogmatic Viewpoints on this, you can observe someone entering and contributing to a conversation with Validity. This is where they are saying statements which are true. Factually true. Personally true. They may also be statements which are right. But they are not oriented through the lens of Usefulness.
"Well, Technically, if I give you the right information, that is useful." No. No it's not.
Usefulness is about contributing in a way that positively benefits the conversation, the other person, the problem, the situation. Correcting something without contribution to understanding does nothing.
To be useful, you must remove your own ego from the equation and fully consider the other person. You must know yourself. And you must let go of rigid absolute opinions in order to accept the possibility that something can be different than the way you see it.
Validity often presents itself as a way to demonstrate you are right, you fit, you belong.
And in many ways our school systems are built entirely around Validity. Teaching becomes about getting kids to the point where they have the right answer. Ever listen to kids argue? It's often a situation where they are simply slinging valid statements back and forth, correcting each other's technically incorrect words all while clearly demonstrating that they fully understand what each person is saying.
Nothing quite starts an argument between kids as .. "well, technically you're wrong"
And why wouldn't they be oriented to this? Much of their days are spent in institutions which are built around learning what is correct, what is incorrect, and then having them demonstrate their knowledge of that correctness.
For a child though this is perhaps ok. Part of growing is learning how to integrate all of the orientations - to let go and figure out how you as an individual can be useful rather than simply technically correct. The failure to do this does not rest on the child ... but it does perhaps allude to why so many grown adults live their lives like children.
How You Wreck Yourself By Being Dogmatic
At TGA we're all about creating the certainty that we get exactly what we want in life. That requires a certain level of good decision-making capability, and recognition of the things which really matter in getting what we want.
One of the most dangerous positions to be in, if you want to get the life you desire, is the Dogmatic position.
We often talk about getting what we want in life as our Solvable Problem™3. When you figure out your Solvable Problem™ it can be alluring to slip into a Dogmatic Orientation.
"I'm going to have $5 million in 5 years"
The Solvable Problem™ however is not a rote prescription for the outcome of your life. It itself is not a Dogmatic Orientation, but you can take what you establish there and easily get Dogmatic with it.
The problem arises both when you create that narrowly defined field of acceptable outcome AND when it doesn’t happen.
It shouldn't be surprising to hear that most specific outcomes you plan for are NOT going to happen exactly the way you plan. And knowing this, it makes it all the more silly to approach a long term plan and decision making with that specific Dogmatic Viewpoint.
Instead, use your Solvable Problem™ as an initial guiding direction. Yes, we use the Google Maps analogy because it is apt. We want to know where we are now, and where we are going, in order to get started.
But it's not the absolute end point which is the most important, it's the next step that you take_which is the most important.
And each time you take a step, new information is often revealed.
This is the folly of a Dogmatic view, because it will NOT accept new information. It will not be able to adapt to the inevitability of change, both in the world around you, and within yourself.
You might decide you want $5 million in 5 years, but you might discover a year from now that you need a lot less, or a lot more, or that the way you are going about it is not right for you.
A scientific orientation allows you to make those adjustments and, instead of focusing on creating the outcome, focus on the process of getting closer to it.
To echo one more example, from our Adaptive Dilemma article, on weight loss:4
"“I want to lose twenty pounds in twelve weeks - any other outcome is unacceptable”
The expectations are both rigid and arbitrary.
Dogmatic thinking operates in a black-and-white manner; a pass/fail mentality.
Those with a dogmatic orientation are more likely to set themselves in a win or lose situation _that it will likely lose._ This approach transforms life into a win-or-lose scenario, often leading to unfavorable results.""
When your decision making, goals, and actions are based around an absolute goal, you end up bending your will entirely to that goal, critically at the expense of everything else around you.
This is why yo-yo dieting is a thing. This is why extreme diets are a thing.
This is why people completely wreck their metabolism and health through extreme diets, all while failing to get the outcome they actually desire, which is most likely to just be healthy (and probably to look good).
In both the above situations, one of the most important things a Scientifically Oriented person will do is to recognize and accept when the goal they think they want, in the timeline they desire, is NOT going to ultimately get them where they want to go or be healthy.
Example for Weight Loss. It may be possible to lose 20 pounds in a month, but that may require something of you that you really don't want to do, AND it may put you in a position where you're highly likely to either regain that weight back and more, or possibly damage your health with the extreme approach.
The Dogmatic person seeks the solution they believe will get them that 20 pounds in a month. The Scientific Person recognizes the folly, slows down, and changes their goals.
Going back to the “$5 million in 5 years” goal. It may be that the only way you can get $5 million in 5 years from where you are now is to have a 200% APY on your investments. A dogmatic individual may look at the scenario, see that "if I can get 200% APY over the next 5 years, I'll have everything I want!" And then they'll continually ape into very high risk investments and most likely lose everything, never getting what they want.
A scientifically oriented person may look at that scenario, realize that 200% APY is far too risky or even deem it altogether completely unreasonable. Then they have to make a choice. If they want $5m in 5 years, they are going to have to explore other avenues. They may also decide to change their goal. Perhaps $5m in 10 years is more reasonable, because then maybe they only need 70% APY (which they determine is a reasonable risk assessment over the time period).
Dogmatic Orientation in Business
There are innumerable ways that a Dogmatic Orientation appears in business, as business is as varied as the humans involved.
I'll speak to my perspective as a freelancer and copywriter.
In my earlier years working for myself, when I published a magazine about coffee and when I started consulting with businesses on their email marketing, I was quite Dogmatic. I believed there were correct and specific ways things should be done. If you wanted to get results with email, you HAD to do it the way I did it. Every other way was less effective.
When I got into freelancing and client work, I still held these Dogmatic points of view, and looking back on those times, I can say with a tinge of regret that those rigid perspectives really screwed myself and my clients over.
If I approach my work with other business owners with a Dogmatic viewpoint, that means ...
I'm not respecting or honoring their perspective on their business. I'm not being cognizant of their actual goals. I'm not being clear on all the different ways that the business owner I'm working with can attain those goals.
In many ways it means I'm putting myself and my ego before the useful impact and results of my clients.
I use myself as an example because if I'm going to put anyone on the chopping block here, it's going to be me. That being said, I see this all the time.
"You need a funnel."
"You need an email series."
"You need a lead magnet."
"Lead magnets are worthless."
"Funnels are terrible, you have to use my inverted pineapple squeeze if you really want results."
"My special social media technique is the only way to get 100k followers in 3 months."
“If you want to be successful, you have to do it this way.”
Do I need to go on?
Through the years as I've worked with more and more clients, I've gradually drifted towards a perspective and understanding of my work such that I'm always useful. And the way this outwardly presents itself is, now, every time someone asks me "how do I get this result" or "what should I do" the answer is inevitably "It Depends."
The way to that outcome is NOT Dogmatism.
Because, as it turns out, there is no one way to do anything. There is no one marketing strategy that everyone needs to do. There is no one tactic that has to be done to grow your business. Everything works and nothing works, because what really ultimately matters is who you are, what you desire, and what you currently have that might get you there.
It. All. Depends.
But it can only depend for you if you have that Scientific Orientation.
Dogmatic Orientation in Relationships
Here's an interesting dynamic.
Dogmatic and Scientific Orientations do not mix well. In fact, differing Dogmatic Orientations don't mix well either.
When we're in a Dogmatic Orientation, we draw hard lines. We declare right and wrong. We lean into validity and not usefulness. We concern ourselves with ourself, and what we "know" and decide is true and right.
However relationships by nature are anything but absolute.
When we draw hard lines, we draw a line between ourselves and other people. We create distance. We demand others we have relationships with to abide by our dogmatic viewpoint or they can't be in the relationship with us (a Dogmatic orientation does this whether you realize it or not).
In a relationship, where it is important to meet the other person in their space, their needs, their desires, their emotions, coming to that with a Dogmatic orientation is a selfish approach to a relationship. It's about what you want, what you think and feel, the way you think things should be. It becomes impossible to meet someone in their space when you have an absolute perspective.
To make things more complicated, someone with a Scientific Orientation trying to relate with someone in a Dogmatic Orientation can create a feedback loop of doom for the Scientifically Oriented individual, if they lack the awareness and clarity of the other's Dogmatic Orientation.
What the heck does that even mean?
Take this fictitious example:
===
Dogmatic: This is how we should raise our children.
-
Scientific: Perhaps, but there are a lot of personal nuances to consider with who the children are and who they are growing into, their needs and interests.
-
Dogmatic: Sure, but we have to do it this way. XYZ is bad. They can't have that or do that.
-
Scientific: Well, maybe but ...
-
Dogmatic: Here's a study that proves XYZ is bad. We aren't going to raise our kids that way.
-
Scientific: I see that study is compelling. Ok, well I suppose that makes sense to do things that way.
===
A pretty straightforward example of where a purely Dogmatic Orientation can overwhelm the Scientific Orientation with "evidence" to support their Dogmatic viewpoint.
And in many ways that "evidence" may have merit, but little in this world is purely correct, except perhaps in the void of its own validity.
This is why the Moo Doe moral compass leads us to a "Correct" choice which is a balance between True and Right.
In the case above, it's True that both parents want the best for their children. It's True that they both see how to go about that differently. It's right that the study supports the statement of the Dogmatic parent. But without consideration for ANY other elements, you can't see what the correct path is.
The study may be "right" in the void of its own validity, but there may also be studies showing the opposite is "right." And it may be True that their kids have different behaviors and needs than is reasonable for the study to apply.
That's why it's a balance. But it's very hard to find that balance in human relationships (and indeed your own decisions), if you are anchored in a Dogmatic Orientation.
To round out the case above, The Dogmatic individual is participating in this conversation and parenting from their own rigid perspective. They aren't doing work to meet the other parent nor the kids in their perspective.
A Simple Guide to NOT Wrecking Yourself With Dogmatism
The answers to this lie throughout everything we talk about here in The Guardian Academy.
Start by knowing yourself. This is a long path. But until you know yourself, when you look at and relate with others, you won't be able to see The Mirror. You won't be able to see yourself, and you won't be able to see others.
It will be very difficult for you to be not Dogmatic, if you can't see clearly in life.
Second, you can cultivate an awareness of when you are making absolute statements. This might seem trivial, but simply stopping yourself when you make absolute statements and changing them to be NOT absolute I believe can have compounding effects on pulling yourself out a Dogmatism.
Change "It must be this way" to "it would be great if it's this way, but I can't fully control that, so I'll do the best I can within my power and head in that direction."
Then, you must ruthlessly audit your thoughts. Its a good start to shift from saying "it must be" to saying "i'd like it to be", but you can still get trapped in the deep emotional pull within that really really really needs it to be a certain way.
No matter how much you tell yourself "i don't need that specific outcome," if you are emotionally expecting it then when it doesn't happen you may be swiftly wrecked.
LET GO OF YOUR HATE
Feel the force flow through you.
Be real and present with yourself. Are you playing life like an Infinite Game or a Finite One? 5
The Infinite Game does not require dogmatic viewpoints. It just needs you to show up, always be present and take life one step at a time.