onespeakThis is part four in a series of Q&A posts about the Circle effect and we are continuing discussing what people experience in the Circles.

Typically, people think that controversies, arguments and debates are powerful motivators for resolving issues. A discussion without arguments is an enemy of collective intelligence because it lowers diversity. It doesn’t really stick with the Circles…

True, we don’t have controversies and arguments. But we don’t need to worry about diversity. Diversity is always there but it’s used in a completely different manner. All people have their own unique qualities and experiences and they don’t lose them. When we enable people to merge into collective and to add their personal input that is where they begin thinking differently, – “what can I bring to this common space, what can I add to it?” Now it is not what I can get out of it but what I can bring to it. I have to understand what everyone needs and what the collective needs.

Hence, I try to relate to others as if they are very close people, almost like to my children. In this state my desires connect with desires of the others – this is the process of building integral connections between all. That is what is happening in the Circle. Under no circumstances may we think of something negative. We only think of how to better feel desires of each person in order to fulfill or help to fulfill them.

In result, hopefully people get their issues addressed and feel connection to each other. What is more important? How are these two things connected?

Getting individual answers is not that important – they will get them if they connect and feel commonality. If we do not contradict each other but just add our opinions to the Circle and build our relationships basing on mutual understanding then we begin to perceive everything through our new integral “sense” – and that is where we will find all of our answers. All of a sudden we enter such a state where everything could be resolved and we just need to correctly position ourselves in regards to our issues. We need to nurture a feeling of possibility resolving everything through “WE”. This will open new horizons for us. This is an ascent to completely new opportunities.

Each person possesses different sensitivity and there are some people who cannot integrate themselves. What should we do then?

If everything is done correctly this shouldn’t happen because when people sit together in the circle they immerse into each other, i.e. the most disrespectful person receives from other tenderness and sensitivity and the most sensible one balances himself. Everything comes to the common denominator. There is no longer individual someone– everyone includes all others in oneself.

How can we help participants to observe the rules? Many, especially in the beginning, have problems adding to the Circle and not debating.

If we honestly look inside ourselves we’ll see that we are not used to supporting each other. When someone talks I automatically want to contradict; it’s in our egocentric nature. What we need to do is to put our arising arguments on the back burner. Suppose I have certain predispositions, a certain cultural background. I need to disconnect from all of it and try to become an apologist of our common opinion that is the only correct one.

People say that discussions without conflicts are boring. When everyone is complacent it’s not really a fruitful discussion, is it?

In our methodology, we have to positively relate to each other. We are convinced that you cannot resolve issues by arguing. We show people how they can solve a problem not even touching it because the problem exist on the level A but we enable people to rise to the level B and maybe even higher. Then the problem resolves by itself. Frankly, people who have tasted this ascent cannot even stand arguing – it’s too boring :)