Time to Think: Listening to Ignite the Human Mind

Product Information

Council thinking time (2 minutes): The Facilitator gives the Council a couple of minutes to jot down legibly on a piece of paper their initial thoughts. (These notes will be given to the Presenter at the end of the process.) This is the first book I wrote by myself (except for that Nancy Drew look-alike when I was eight). Like the book with Peter Kline four years earlier (see blurb below), it was ‘specialist’. That’s book-speak for don’t count on lots of readers, or any. I mean, how many people were ever going to want to read about eight choreographers’ famous creations as seen through the lens of ‘nothing is ever still’? I read Jane Eyre that summer and thought that her life would definitely qualify her to write. I fantasised about braving the English moors but didn’t feel too hopeful sitting in Clovis, New Mexico. I also have seen people claim this promise, clip it to their listening portfolios, sell it as their skill set, and not come close. It is as if we can never know it. It is as if it is here and not here, evident and elusive, finished and foetal at once.

For three years Christopher and I had been thinking about love, both its expression in our relationship, and as a force in the world. During one of our fortnights together, (in year 3 of what became a 7-year transatlantic courtship, now a 30-year marriage!) on an apple farm near Canterbury, we wrote down what we thought was important about love. They were ‘principles’, 101 of them. Christopher suggested we call the collection, ‘At Least a Hundred Principles of Love’. Just in case more showed up. That was prescient. When asked to think some more, the Thinker may be surprised at how many different thoughts come to mind, and because they are in the Thinking Environment created by the Partner, they have the leisure to express and explore them. It is a fact that we often find out what we think by talking out loud, and this is one of the core benefits of this process. At Scripps I learned about the majesty of writing and about the importance of being true to yourself (a magical duo for aspiring writers). I also got to critique fine literature (full of suffering), and revel in its philosophy. I think polarisation starts with, and is fed by, interruption. The minute one of us in stark disagreement interrupts the other, the brain registers the interruption as a physical assault. Immediately the brain hormones of adrenaline and cortisol bathe the cortex, the very centre of our thinking; the amygdala, dictator of feelings, dispatches the triumvirate actions of freezing, fleeing, fighting. And presto, we disconnect. Our thinking shrivels. And polarisation is born.

Retailers:

It is important to recognise that the limiting assumption is not necessarily imaginary. The value is in helping the Thinker to face the issue and consider it from different perspectives. The phrase ‘what more’ can sound unnatural when spoken in some situations. However, to ask ‘what else?’ may lead the Thinker into another subject, while ‘what else about that?’ may limit them to the same one. As I have said before in this series, the technique must be the tool and not the master, and I have heard Nancy offering similar advice herself. This is a process which has been tried and tested over many years, so it is worth while adhering to the exact words where possible; however, the comfort of the Thinker and the rapport within the Partnership are key elements in helping the Thinker to think more clearly, so the words could be changed if necessary to ensure these conditions are met. It is different because it requires a donning of humility, a rich regard for difference and for “other”. It is different because it upends the appearance of stability, because it wants to, and does, produce independent thinking. And so it is subversive. It is different because it requires us to stop wanting to impress and to start wanting to free. It changes what we call expertise. It changes what we charge for and pay for and what we reward. It can change our very purpose.

The origins of Nancy Kline’s Thinking Environment are steeped in one observation and one question. The observation is “The quality of everything we do depends on the quality of the thinking we do first”, a statement that has powerful implications. The consequent question is: “What does it take for people to help each other to think well for themselves?” Teach the 10 components. Consider a light touch introduction, depending on how receptive the group is. You might want to focus on fewer at first, particularly Attention, Equality, Diversity, and Appreciation. Remember to practice these yourself, becoming a Thinking Environment for others.Since then I have written everything as if it were a letter to the reader. It was the best writing advice ever. I now give it to others (when I’m not busy scorning the whole idea of advice). This we can stop. We can stop all forms of interruption. We can decide right now to be masters of our attention, to commit to the flourishing of our minds, of our hearts, of our very nature. Where in your circles can you point to a single person who you are certain will not interrupt you when you speak? Who in your circles has ever made this promise to you? And kept it? And have you ever made that promise to anyone?