Questions to Apitholo #35

Further questions to apitholo, about apithology and humanity inquiry ...

Question #35 – What is the main barrier to this work?

This question is best answered in two scales of inquiry. These are the personal and the collective. However, what is more interesting, is how they may be connected. This also links into a key feature of apithology ethics (which is next week’s submitted question).

At the personal level, the main barrier to this work is how apithology answers questions that do not concern the self personally. What fascinates and motivates a person in their personal identity is not served by apithology’s focus on a more generative inclusivity.

Apithology outcomes are complementary to all human motivations. The reluctance to acceptance is generally not expressed as an antithesis, but more as an absence of immediacy. Apithology questions may not have occurred to a person personally, and so are of no interest when introduced directly. Sometimes there is a passing interest to discern difference. In recognising no personal significance, the result is indifference.

At the humanity level, something much more interesting is happening. At the level of this question, the main barriers are known as the Three Preventings. The first of these dynamics is ‘disinterest.’ - being one part of a generative trichotomy. Not stated as traits of people, this is one correlate in the macro-dynamics of humanity cognisance. Here, disinterest has the meaning of ‘to cause to regard something with no interest or concern’. This implies an active negation of a prompted interest, being something that we should have regard for, and chose not to.

At the personal level, this might be disregard of the feelings, concerns or wellbeing of another person, who you are not involved with or directly impacted by. At the humanity level, this is the active disregard of the perceptual environs of all humanity, in both present and future times, and a non-recognition of the impact of small actions in large systems on foundational humanity potentials. The symptoms are the same, the content is different.

It is not that the effects of disinterest cannot be seen (as apithology makes them so), it is that we collectively impose barriers of closure to our knowing of and caring regard for all others’ becoming. The effect of this is seen in the results of our choice in discernments. That fact, that we are our own barrier, is itself fascinating.

There is one additional feature to this question that is disclosed in its asking. Apithology is concerned with the generative, so rather than overcoming barriers it seeks to identify enabling affordances. In ecological theory barriers, or system gradients, are what give ecosystems integrity. Removal of them can be disastrous for many. In apithology, the approach to barrier removal is instead to enable the generative.

Accordingly, the apithology counterpart to disinterest is not an insistence on interest, it is the cultivation of ‘receptivity’. To be receptive, requires a different capacity for holding, and a proclivity for more interesting questioning. We find that disinterest is not a barrier to be overcome by shouting louder, but rather that receptivity is an enabler to be cultivated, by a desire for more than one person alone, can give to a humanity.

#humanity #learning #humanitypsychology

Apitholo ~The Centre For Humanity Learning

"Pathways for the Humanity Contributive"

“If you hold some of apithology’s questions, you may as well ask for all of its answers.” - willvarey

Categories: : Questions