Posts Tagged ‘Think outside the box’

By Peter Stern, Philosophy Faculty

As I find myself getting older with ever increasing grace, realizing more and more how selflessly I’ve dedicated myself to helping others in myriad ways small and large, and yet still feeling like I should work more to further improve myself, I can end my day on a happy note and look forward to waking up the next day on an upbeat note as well.

I say these things not out of conceit or to blow my own horn–not as something personal, but as business, meaning it’s impersonal and objective, no different from saying that two plus two is four. I’m simply giving an honest appraisal of myself, taking note not only of my successes but also my shortcomings. For like arms and legs, fingers and toes, we humans wherever we happen to live and work and however young or old we may be we all unfortunately have some shortcomings.

This doesn’t mean we’re bad people who are out to harm others and need to be carefully watched and monitored. Nor does it mean we’re bereft of virtues and our lives must, of necessity, turn out badly. Oh contraire. Despite our shortcomings, we’re perfectly capable to doing good things and being regarded, rightly, as good people. So when I describe my virtues and the way grace follows me about, I’m being perfectly objective without ignoring I also suffer some shortcomings, though, since I wish to highlight my honesty, I should mention that these shortcomings seem to be decreasing both in number and severity as I continue working on them.

Of course by publicly making these claims of virtue, I expose myself to the possibility some may dissent from what they believe is my far too rosy account of my person. So be it. For I’m sufficiently convinced my virtues speak for themselves and that enough of you very dear turtles reading this post will find no difficulty agreeing with me and hence rise to my defense should some misguided personage wish unfairly criticize me, for their own purposes, whatever those purposes may be.

I wish to emphasize my virtues here in the Turtle because I believe one of my best traits is the graciousness and good cheer with which I take criticism. I don’t get angry or resentful, nor do I mindlessly lash out at my critic or critics. My response is the precise opposite. I welcome criticism since I view it as an opportunity to grow and mature. Here’s the kind of person I am: If I’m doing something wrong, I want to correct the situation as fast as possible. Criticism isn’t about hurt feelings and defensiveness; it’s about correcting mistakes, growing in depth and breadth, and becoming more accomplished in whatever one’s doing.

Now that you, you ever patient, understanding, and insightful Flaneurite, fully realize where I’m coming from you can better appreciate my immense disappointment in reading the post of a Flaneur reader furiously attacking my previous post about the hopelessly hackneyed phrase “thinking out the box.” This ruthless effort to undermine my integrity and philosophical commitment to clear expression and deep thinking jarred my hard won equanimity. As far as I was concerned the reader willfully chose to misunderstood the point my post was making.

Peter Stern's reaction to Blake Whitmore's critical post.

Peter Stern’s reaction to Blake Whitmore’s critical post.

The critic implied I wanted folks to remain victims of our pedestrian, shallow, mindless , and power crazed country. In fact, my point was precisely the reverse. I wanted to encourage people to think and create for themselves unfettered by mindless cliches about creativity and liberation.

I believe it’s no longer possible to pick up a freshman textbook on writing, or thinking, or communicating, or interpreting without running across the term “thinking out of the box,” so ingrained in the brains of our generation has this unwonderful phrase become. In fact my point was that its cliched status renders it incapable of inspiring genuine creativity and the kind of liberation which encourages becoming a free spirit.

One of the ironies of that phrase is that it conjures up one of the key issues inherent in wanting to go outside today’s system, whatever term we happen to use to describe it. The problem is this: if everyone’s doing it, is what they’re doing really liberation? For instance, if 2/3 of Wall Street traders sport tattoos, are tattoos still tattoos? Or if Neiman Marcus and Bloomingdales sell record numbers of grunge jeans, are grunge jeans still grungy? Or if you prefer let’s ask if almost all poets are writing in free verse is that verse any longer really free?

This is one way to characterize the problem of telling people to think outside the box. Exhorting them to think outside the box places them firmly inside it, with the additional drawback that they mistakenly think they’re really outside it and liberated. In many ways, after discussing Plato’s Cave Parable this week with RMU Humanities Professor Mr. Gerry Dedera,  I thought I could see parallels between the box cliche and the illusions the cave prisoners regarded as real.

Plato's Parable of the Cave illustrated.

Plato’s Parable of the Cave illustrated.

In conclusion, let me say that my critical reader helped me see that I should have stated more explicitly that I thought the box metaphor was the kiss of death, yet that for some people it could indeed inspire them to live a liberated life. On the other hand, implying that most people will be transformed by the notion of going outside a box leaves me cold and worried it’s the box, like Plato’s cave, that they’ll never leave.

Advertisements

By Blake Whitmore, RMU Student

As much as I enjoyed reading Dr. Stern’s post last Friday, “Where to Think,” I have to disagree with it. “Think outside the box” simply means don’t let ordinary rules, societal standards, and normal everyday constraints restrict your thinking. Although the saying has been around for a while, it isn’t one I hear annoyingly too often. If I didn’t think “outside the box” I wouldn’t be the person I am today.

When I was in kindergarten, my teacher gave us this worksheet that asked us what we wanted to be when we grew up. I left that question blank, because I was 6 for crying out loud. I think 18 is still too young to know exactly what you want to do for the rest of your life, but nonetheless my teacher insisted I answer it. Even when I was 6 I was a rebellious, outspoken little child. I refused to answer, so my teacher pulled me aside and started rattling off suggestions. I remember the list well, because it was my first experience in memory of gender profiling.

thinkoutsidetheboxMy teacher asked me if I wanted to be a nurse, teacher, stay at home mom, secretary, librarian, or the First Lady. I asked what “the First Lady” was and she told me it was the President’s wife. I was excited and told her that was it. When I brought home my worksheet to my mom, she asked why I would aspire to be the first lady and not the President. I told her because only men have been President. My mom said, “Don’t be afraid to think out of the box. Just because it hasn’t happened yet doesn’t mean it never will.” At that moment my mom began raising a little feminist who always thought out of the box and for the next two years I wanted to become the President.

My dreams of becoming the President faded to the background of my personality after learning what the job actually entails, but that never took away from the importance of that moment in my childhood. Seven years later I was attending Catholic school in one of the strictest dioceses in the country, Lincoln, NE. I was an ambitious 7th grader who always asked questions, especially during religion class and science class.

I started to notice that after a while my questions weren’t getting answered and the teachers began to be annoyed by my questions. Some teachers and administrators also showed signs of distrusting me. One instance was when I needed a permission slip signed. The school accused me of forgery and asked my mother, who confirmed it was her signature. Discouraged by my teachers, I felt like I had done something wrong. After weeks of frustration I was reassured of my actions through yet again the phrase, “Think outside the box.” A teacher said the phrase in an English class, not directly too me, but it left an impact because at that point I needed to remember that thinking differently is good.

Those moments lead to my realization and coming out as an atheist, a self-identity I consider very important to who I am today. My strong opinions and will power come from the very phrase Dr. Stern hates, claiming is due for retirement. NEVER! If people quit thinking outside the box then nothing will change, rules will be blindly followed, and humanity will be boring. “Carpe diem” has been around for centuries and it’s not going anywhere, so why should “think outside the box”? These words of wisdom should never die.