HOW TO INTEGRATE
I. What is perspective integration?
What are we actually doing when we integrate different perspectives?
One nice metaphor is parallax vision. The view from our right eye is slightly different than the view from our left eye. Each eye gives us a view that’s true but partial, and it’s only by looking through both eyes together (along with other visual cues) that the world goes from flat to 3D.
One nice metaphor is parallax vision. The view from our right eye is slightly different than the view from our left eye. Each eye gives us a view that’s true but partial, and it’s only by looking through both eyes together (along with other visual cues) that the world goes from flat to 3D.
Another metaphor is the truth cylinder. Again, we’re playing with increasing dimensionality. The square and the circle are ‘true’ 2-dimensional shadows, but the cylinder is the 3D ‘truth.
One last metaphor — which has become somewhat of a cultural cliche, but a helpful one — is the blind men and the elephant. The blind man on tusk thinks it’s a spear, and the blind man on the tail thinks it’s a rope. But if they take off their blindfolds, they’ll see the elephant in the room. We want to be able to distinguish between tusk and tail while acknowledging the elephant. We can apprehend the parts while maintaining our capacity to comprehend the whole
Put simply: integrating perspectives can give us a more holistic view of reality.
And: like anything, perspective integration can be weaponized.
Some perspectives are inherently un-integrate-able. ‘Abortion never’ and ‘abortion always’ don't play well with other perspectives.
Other perspectives are morally unwelcome. A meaningful synthesis on race isn't between anti-racism and racism, but between the anti-racism proposed by Ibram X. Kendi and the color-blindness proposed by Coleman Hughes. We must be discerning about which perspectives we integrate, and how we frame the sides of the debate.
Finally, all perspectives are not equal. Both-sides-ism assumes perspectives are equal, whereas synthesis acknowledges that some perspectives are more relevant or important than others.
Ultimately, the idea is not to turn black and white into gray, which would collapse two shades into one. Instead, we want black, white, and gray. We want each individual eye and parallax vision; the 2D shadows and the 3D form; the parts of the elephant and the full elephant. And more.
Our view will always be partial, and we can always strive to see more faces of reality.
And: like anything, perspective integration can be weaponized.
Some perspectives are inherently un-integrate-able. ‘Abortion never’ and ‘abortion always’ don't play well with other perspectives.
Other perspectives are morally unwelcome. A meaningful synthesis on race isn't between anti-racism and racism, but between the anti-racism proposed by Ibram X. Kendi and the color-blindness proposed by Coleman Hughes. We must be discerning about which perspectives we integrate, and how we frame the sides of the debate.
Finally, all perspectives are not equal. Both-sides-ism assumes perspectives are equal, whereas synthesis acknowledges that some perspectives are more relevant or important than others.
Ultimately, the idea is not to turn black and white into gray, which would collapse two shades into one. Instead, we want black, white, and gray. We want each individual eye and parallax vision; the 2D shadows and the 3D form; the parts of the elephant and the full elephant. And more.
Our view will always be partial, and we can always strive to see more faces of reality.
II. Tools for perspective integration
Here are two tools for perspective integration:
1. STEELVENN
A “steelvenn” is a Venn diagram that steel-mans different perspectives on an issue. It doesn’t go as far as articulating a synthesis perspective, but it shows that different perspectives can co-exist. Steelvenns are an excellent tool for getting the right ingredients on the table, which can then be used to cook up some synthesis.
1. STEELVENN
A “steelvenn” is a Venn diagram that steel-mans different perspectives on an issue. It doesn’t go as far as articulating a synthesis perspective, but it shows that different perspectives can co-exist. Steelvenns are an excellent tool for getting the right ingredients on the table, which can then be used to cook up some synthesis.
Note: Venn diagrams aren’t entirely ideal for representing synthesis, because they limit us to common ground, while synthesis ideally seeks higher ground — a higher-order, more complex view. Still, Venns are useful for articulating different perspectives and showing indicating that they can co-exist.
To see a variety of steelvenns on issues from Michael Jackson to abortion, check out this thread.
To learn how to make steelvenns, hear Faces of X creator Stephanie Lepp on the Deep Dive podcast (3:30-9:30).
To see a variety of steelvenns on issues from Michael Jackson to abortion, check out this thread.
To learn how to make steelvenns, hear Faces of X creator Stephanie Lepp on the Deep Dive podcast (3:30-9:30).
2. INTEGRAL MATRIX
An “integral matrix” integrates different strategies for achieving the same goal.
Starting with some context: back in 2000, psychologist and author Daniel Goleman published a leadership matrix. Essentially, it identifies six distinct leadership styles, the circumstances in which they’re most useful, and the impact they have on the overall organizational climate. Take a look:
An “integral matrix” integrates different strategies for achieving the same goal.
Starting with some context: back in 2000, psychologist and author Daniel Goleman published a leadership matrix. Essentially, it identifies six distinct leadership styles, the circumstances in which they’re most useful, and the impact they have on the overall organizational climate. Take a look:
Notice that Goleman’s matrix can be abstracted and used for things other than leadership: what are the different strategies for achieving this goal? Under what circumstances is each strategy most useful? What impact do the different strategies have on the overall system?
Enter the integral matrix — a tool that integrates different strategies for achieving the same goal into one overarching integral strategy. It shifts the question from “which strategy is right?” to “under what circumstances is which strategy useful?” The integral matrix is an excellent tool for transforming a debate about which strategy is best into a dialogue about how to mix-and-match different strategies in pursuit of a shared goal.
To learn how to make an integral matrix, hear Lepp on the Deep Dive podcast (35:27-40:36).
Enter the integral matrix — a tool that integrates different strategies for achieving the same goal into one overarching integral strategy. It shifts the question from “which strategy is right?” to “under what circumstances is which strategy useful?” The integral matrix is an excellent tool for transforming a debate about which strategy is best into a dialogue about how to mix-and-match different strategies in pursuit of a shared goal.
To learn how to make an integral matrix, hear Lepp on the Deep Dive podcast (35:27-40:36).
Faces of X by Synthesis Media is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
