To be two-dimensional means to \u201cappear to have length and breadth but no depth.\u201d In other words, there only exists what we see from a singular stance, what\u2019s on the surface \u2014 nothing behind the object, nothing backing it up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To be three-dimensional adds the depth; there exists more than what we see. In fact, there may be far<\/em> more than what we see. We know that. We recognize the existence of a third dimension; it\u2019s not in question. We also accept and affirm our inability to see all dimensions from a singular stance. <\/p>\n\n\n\n We live in a three-dimensional world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As this year nears its hopefully auspicious end, I\u2019ve been playing with how we collectively see the world. Note that I don\u2019t believe \u201cthis thing we keep calling 2020\u201d has inserted all sorts of newness and new perspective into our lives. Rather, I believe it’s revealed \u2014 more like \u201cripped the BandAid off\u201d \u2014 of what was already there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With all due respect, 2020 has made clear that we stink at handling conflict.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Consider what sage conflict resolution experts advocate\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n From Steven Covey: \u201cSeek first to understand, then to be understood.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n From Bren\u00e9 Brown: \u201cI believe one of the most courageous things to say in an uncomfortable conversation is, \u2018Tell me more.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n From Dale Carnegie: \u201cYou need to understand the other side’s concerns and motivation.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hear the experts\u2026 understand another\u2026 tell me more\u2026 work at it\u2026 work some more.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n But the ripping off of the figurative bandage has allowed us to fuel this faulty notion that we really don\u2019t have to work to understand another; there\u2019s no need to listen well\u2026<\/em> Why? Because we think we already, completely understand another. 100%\u2026 \u201cWhat else could their reason be?\u201d<\/em> we ask. Note the said question is not evidence of curiosity; it\u2019s instead justification of a minimal at best stab at discernment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That\u2019s what happens when we wrestle with conflict in a two-dimensional world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A two-dimensional world encourages the fallacy that it\u2019s me against you\u2026 us against them\u2026 black vs. white. If a person articulates an opinion, we think we completely get them \u2014 and get why they adhere to that perspective, because we’ve concluded there exists only two possible ways to think.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A two-dimensional world \u2014 a two-dimensional approach to conflict \u2014 ignores depth. Hence, it\u2019s grossly incomplete.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Regardless of whether a person articulates a perspective via Twitter\u2019s allowed 280 characters, Snapchat\u2019s 250, or even the 2,200 allowed on Instagram \u2014 it\u2019s not enough to substantiate another\u2019s perceived all-knowing; it\u2019s not enough to form a full perspective. That\u2019s true in person, too. To understand another in the midst of conflict, especially when emotions may run high, it takes work\u2026 hard, ongoing work. <\/em>It takes more than one, two, maybe even more than 17 conversations. The work is not for purposes of determining which so-called \u201cside\u201d another has adopted; the work is for purposes of actually understanding all the nuances that have shaped the way the other feels the way they do.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Name your topic\u2026 the election, choice of candidates, the vaccine, whether to get it or not, media bias, \u201cMe Too,\u201d inequality, immigration, healthcare, looting, critical race theory, the Supreme Court, the coming announcement of Time’s<\/em> \u201cPerson of the Year\u201d, \u201cHillbilly Elegy,\u201d or even the great mask debate of 2020\u2026 there are far more than two dimensions shaping a person\u2019s perspective. <\/em>\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n A two-dimensional approach is oversimplified. <\/p>\n\n\n\n A two-dimensional approach ignores the reality of nuance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A two-dimensional approach puts others in an unfair, inaccurate box.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cPick a side, any side!\u201d <\/em>we\u2019ve heard people say.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But in a three-dimensional world, that simply doesn\u2019t make sense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Respectfully\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n AR To be two-dimensional means to \u201cappear to have length and breadth but no depth.\u201d In other words, there only exists what we see from a singular stance, what\u2019s on the surface \u2014 nothing behind the object, nothing backing it up. To be three-dimensional adds the depth; there exists more than what we see. In fact, … <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"