The objective of the game was to draw a continuous line through the center of each dot without going through a dot more than once. The game stimulated a person’s creative and logical thinking. It can be used to try one’s cognitive thinking ability. Cognitive thinking is defined as thus: cog•ni•tive [kog-ni-tiv] –adjective 1) of or pertaining to cognition. 2) of or pertaining to the mental processes of perception, memory, judgment, and reasoning, as contrasted with emotional and volitional processes.
We can see, from that definition, the original “box” was a mind game. The 9 dot box puzzle was a good way to challenge the way an individual thinks and uses their mind. Without being a psychology test it tested the person’s perception, creativity and reasoning. Corporate management consultants used the puzzle as a way to help corporate businesses encourage more creative thinking from their employees and executives alike. It is highly suggested that the actual phrase “Think outside the box” came from the lips of one of these consultants. No one can be sure from who or where exactly it came from originally.
From the pages of a puzzle book published in 1914, titled “Sam Loyd’s Cyclopedia of 5000 Puzzles, Tricks and Conundrums", to a corporate seminars, to television shows and commericials it traveled. From television it spread to the rest of the population’s ears and now has become an almost meaningless phrase. Think outside the box is now mostly just a old cliché.
It is the aim of this article to resurrect the meaning of the saying. Not so much the corporate business aspect of the of it’s meaning, but the overall and general spirit of it. I personally find the phrase stimulating in itself. Kind of like the line from the movie the Matrix “Free your mind”. You see free thinking is the ultimate way to see yourself through life. We are all raised by our parents and trained as children growing up in school to always contain our thoughts within boxes. As adults we are all expected to think within certain parameters, no matter the topic. Then there are the subjects we are trained to stay away from mentally. Those taboo and socially unacceptable areas I speak of are termed “politically incorrect” subjects. We are conditioned to think that our curiosity into the unknown or unexplored is not to be pursued. Alas many do dare to re-visit those subjects society as a whole has been mentally conditioned to ignore. Those that dare to look into things and revisit the facts on any particularly distasteful topic are shunned by society. Yet out-side the box thinking persists by those cerebral “rebels” among us. Many subjects are considered “open and shut cases”. We are told “the jury is in” and that society has “ruled” or “come to a decision” on particular subjects. Yet there are those among us who dare to challenge the status quo and continue to search for truth on their own.
The motive of a person thinking outside the box on any given particular subject is usually a simple and honest desire to confirm what the real truth is. It is generally discouraged by society to challenge the official or traditional line of thinking of many subjects. To help me explain to you what I am speaking of concerning unboxed thinking let site some examples. First let me start with the two party dominated political system of America. The Republican and Democrat political parties basically have a strangle hold on the American voters. Sure there are third party candidates and independents but they rarely win statewide or national elections. Those that do win an office are marginalized as far as party affiliation goes. They are the “odd ball” politicians that rarely get noticed as non-Republican and non-Democrat. Such is the Republican-Democrat party dominated political system in America. The Libertarian or Constitution parties get very limited coverage in the main-stream news or on political commentary network shows or talk radio. When they are brought up it is as a side subject. Republican commentators constantly encourage their listeners and readers to not vote third party or independent. They claim it is a vote thrown away and actually will help the Democratic candidate win. They are generally correct as that does split the votes of those who are not voting for the Democratic Party candidate. As this will lesson the chance of the Republican winning the election. This is all based on the assumption that the voters would vote for the Republican if there was no third option candidate to vote for. The same is true if Democratic pundits tell the people to not vote for a 3rd party candidate who will not vote for the Republican one. Again, the logic behind this is sound in that it does keep votes from going to the Democrat. Yet if one dares to think outside the box on this topic it don’t take long to figure out that as long as voters cave into the two party system there will never be a third way to go. This being locked inside of a 2 political party system “box” hampers the political growth of the country. This box also locks out many voters and would-be voters. I would suggest that the political party system in this country be done away with, even outlawed, if constituents wish to truly have a voter voice in politics. Let each candidate stand on their own merit and not join a particular corporate party. This would do away with party politics and party voting blocks and realign the focus on the individual running for office and their stance on the issues that matter to each individual voter. This article is not about the silliness of partisan politics, nor about the ballot box. The above example is to explain an aspect of out side the box thinking people need to have in general, not just about politics.
The mental freedom one gains when he/she frees him/her self from the box placed around them at an early age is well worth the effort. We all have heard the analogy of a person “living in a cave” applied to someone who has been uniformed about a topic. Usually that topic is one considered to be general knowledge. The common wording of the assertional statement is something like “Unless you have been living in a cave you know about…….(fill in the blank)”. Social normalcy requires we all have so-called common knowledge of particular contemporary topics and events. That is not necessarily to say that is a unjustified social requirement. Yet there are those who, as the saying goes, “did not get that memo”. No matter how much one tries to stay on top of the latest news topics and events there will always be topics they miss. Once a topic has been brought to their attention they can always catch up on the facts. Not only are there contemporary, or present day events we can all go back and catch up on the facts about, but there are historical ones as well. Just because a person didn’t pay attention in history class in school does not mean they can’t read about historical events and people later in life. Nor does one have to be a history major in college to know history. Whatever the topic, if it is about past events as recent as yesterday or as old as ancient history, one can always read up on it. There hides a problem with that though. Books and articles, and television programs, are all written by those who we always suppose are experts on the subjects. Lets say it is about a specific period and place in history one is looking into. I will pick a commonly sited one for an example here, Nazi Germany. Specifically the Holocaust of the German and Polish Jewish people. If a researcher wants to go back and examine the evidence and facts and they come to a different conclusion, in any way, than the official and main-stream academic conclusion they are condemned. The term “Historical Revisionist” is a term used to describe those who present historical facts not before presented. When it comes to those who dare to look further into the time period I am using here as an example a more snide term is used: “Holocaust Denier”. It is claimed that only Neo-Nazis and racist haters of Jews “deny” the traditional recitation of that time period and the events that took place. It is even illegal to openly question or write exposes on the subject in at least 7 countries in the world. One being a neighbor to America, Canada. In America it is still legal to question the traditionally accepted history concerning the Holocaust. Yet an American that does and openly shares their views and findings is still subjected to ridicule from academia, political and religious leaders, and anti-racist groups. Never mind that even some Jews have written works that also challenge the official Holocaust stories, and therefore could not be “Neo-Nazis” with some “Anti-Semitic agenda”. I am not debating the Holocaust here, I am simply demonstrating the strength of mental boxes we can find ourselves locked into. What if all the stories of the Holocaust and all the historical books on the subject are correct and all the Revisionists wrong? What is important is that people dare to question even the most sensitive of subjects. Nothing should be taboo to question and re-investigate. No topic should be illegal to dare to offer a differing opinion or viewpoint on. Whether it be official government statements, or traditional explanation of history, everyone should be free to investigate on their own to see what the truth is. No matter what the topic in question is.
Anyone should be able to voice their own findings without social condemnation simply for doing so. Social pressure is a natural form of keeping a society civilized and culturally unified. There is also nothing wrong with breaking with social and cultural traditions in it self. Some cultural norms and traditions need to be broken, or at least modified in my opinion. What is important is that people are free to question authority without reprisal. Not just government authority but academic authority and even experts in their field. What makes one an “expert” on anything for that matter? A nice piece of pulp fancily printed upon, and framed on a wall? I will say this, I am an expert in what I believe. We all are experts on what we believe, because we know what we believe. We are all individuals and have our own minds and therefore all have our own individual beliefs. The issue of the “box” comes in when we look into what we believe and see why we believe it. We may know what we believe concerning a certain topic or issue, but we may not know why we believe it. We may not realize how we came to our conclusions. We have to remember what our sources of information were that led us to our beliefs. We also must take into account what events happened in our individual lives to lead us to where we are in our belief process? We all develop personal biases and they shape how we process information and the purest of facts. “Perception is reality” is an old saying and truism. How we perceive facts, or even incorrect information, is based on the focus of our mind’s eye. We use eye glasses, contacts and laser surgery to correct out of focus eyeballs. You mind’s eye, or “third eye”, also may require some help to see things more clearly. The biggest way to help bring your mind into clearer and shaper focus is to think outside the box. The proverbial interior of the box and it’s walls prevent your eyesight from focusing on the bigger picture. Being locked inside a big box would prevent you from seeing the outside world. And like the original puzzle box made up of dots can demonstrate you are only hampered from solving the puzzle by your lack of perception. If all one sees is a square made up of 9 dots arranged in sets of 3 dots in 3 lines that are side-by-side they will never figure out the puzzle. To solve that brain teaser one must not see a square of dots. The solution to the puzzle is a single line drawn dot to dot in a not-so-square pattern. We have all seen visual bran teasers where we have to stare at the picture to see the other “hidden” aspect drawn within the design. In other words what we first perceived was not the true picture, or at least not the whole picture.
Let me give you an example of my own having to think outside the box. When I first started hearing they phrase “think out side the box” it was on television shows and commericials years ago. The saying was almost always said in a betrayed office like setting. I deducted it was not Hollywood script writers that invented the saying, but that it originated out of corporate office boardrooms. Given that line of thinking I added my own assumption to it’s original reference. I assumed it to refer to the office worker sitting at their desk inside the privacy of a cubical with portable walls placed around it. I thought the “box” reference was to the boxed in office cubical. I laugh now at myself looking back at my naïve thinking. I have since learned that though I was correct that the actual phrase started within corporate America, I was wrong on why the term “box” was used. This is a perfect demonstration of what I am referring to in this article. I had to dare to think outside the box, and question my assertion. I had assumed, but I had not confirmed with facts and good information. I am not afraid of being wrong, I am afraid of NOT FINDING OUT I am wrong. I have no problem admitting when I learn I am wrong on a subject.
We never find out if we are wrong on a topic or in something we believe in if we don’t dare to question even ourselves. We must question authorities and experts as well. To do that questioning properly we must dare to think outside the box. We must constantly challenge others and our own selves to explore even the most taboo of sources of information on a topic. No source and no fact must be overlooked when seeking to establish truth on a matter. That can be a daunting task all in itself, but if we want to know the truth about a subject we must be willing to go where others may fear. Yet if we do perhaps in time others will follow and truth, not pre-packaged controlled information will prevail. Many complain about censorship, and that is a bad thing, but we become our own censors when we refuse to look into other sources of information for the facts.
Know what you believe and why you believe it. Do not believe anything until you can confirm it through facts you have accumulated from your own research. And finally let your own thoughts rule your life, not what you have been told think about something by others. But make sure your thoughts are not only your own, but the results of free thinking. There is no freedom living inside a box.
 |
| One "box" to think outside of is the television box! Whether it be political, social or cultural values, neither the news nor fiction shows or movies are good sources for generating your own Free Thought and Thinking. |
No comments:
Post a Comment