Polarized Problem-Solving (Blog)

[Steve Pavlina]

Use this thread to discuss the following entry from Steve Pavlina's blog:

Polarized Problem-Solving

[Alan!]

How interesting, and controversial ;-)

I guess I'm looking for something a little more concrete and conclusive for which polarity is "better". I know (or did know?) that a fear-based polarity is "bad", where a love-based polarity is "good".

"Love is heaven and fear is hell. Where you place your attention is where you live."

So are you condoning a fear-based polarity where it is appropriate? Is it ever appropriate? What if the whole world took this attitude?

hmmm...

[shiatsustudent]

I am stuck in a bad situation at work and have tried various approaches to solving it. What I recognise now is that although I start with one approach I allow that energy to fade away so that I end up in this middle non polarized state.

For example, last week I had enough and I was going to raise a grievance against my line manager. Great, but once done I was again beguiled by some smooth talking and the impetus is gone. I started with a great fear driven approach; well researched and a well structured argument in my email but did not have the polarization to follow through.

Although I got some initial results I am really back where I started.

[unknown]

But if I already have chosen my polarity... (done it before posts about it and thats true - it was difficult choice) Is it important to research other polarity? Because about fear based problem solving I know nearly nothing.

But these posts are great! Made me think and use my polarity in all areas of life. I also needed to modify some of "why?" for my goals. Thank you very much!

Luck for all of you!
Aija

[wolfgang]

Please take "what would Hitler do" out of your blog.
Anyone reading this, please never consider problem solving by trying to think like Hitler.
good bye...

[Andrew Brunelle]

I believe that neither polarity is good or bad in itself, it's all in how you use each one. You always have a choice between picking love or fear for each situation, and as of lately, I have been going with the love polarity, but there are times when I feel that using a fear-based polarity will solve the problem in a more comfortable way for both myself and the other parties involved. But I like this approach, comparing how two different people would solve this problem, rather than two options on how you would solve the problem. Good day.

[javamannen2]

"Love is heaven and fear is hell. Where you place your attention is where you live."

So are you condoning a fear-based polarity where it is appropriate? Is it ever appropriate? What if the whole world took this attitude?

Please take "what would Hitler do" out of your blog.
Anyone reading this, please never consider problem solving by trying to think like Hitler.
good bye...

Hitler would be an adequate rolemodel for a darkworker. He polarized and reaped great rewards (and of course, ultimately, payed a great prize). To Satan (Hitler's "rolemodel"), Hell is THE place to be. And as you polarize toward ultimate Power, you create your own Hell with you as the Ruler. Which is exactly what a rational darkworker SHOULD strive for. If you consider yourself a "darkworker" but don't accept this, you are not fully aware of the consequences of the choice you think you made. You're a dilettante. Somewhere along the road, a REAL darkworker will come in your way, one who has come to terms with his choice and is unencumbered by morals, and he will CRUSH you because your conscience is limiting your power.

[munish]

Sometimes you may have to take tough decisions,even if you are love polarised .Like if you want to save your Garden/crop from rats ,you need to lay traps for them. (fear based polarity).

[nownow]

This article will be a shock to anyone who had the idea that being a lightworker is really about serving others.

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by javamannen2

a REAL darkworker will come in your way, one who has come to terms with his choice and is unencumbered by morals, and he will CRUSH you because your conscience is limiting your power.

God forbid someone should have a conscience.

It's nice to see a personal development site that promotes evil and can consider having a conscience to be a bad thing, while succombing to fear and pursuit of domination of others can be called a good thing.

[JAlvy]

So, Steve has classified himself as a lightworker. This example is of how he used fear-based energy to accomplish a goal. So different polarities can be used to attain different goals? But a certain polarity can be a "preferred" polarity?

I suppose I just feel like although I'd be most effective on the "dark" side, it's not how I want to live ALL the time.

[danas]

"What would have been a love-polarized way to solve this problem? There’s no single right answer. One approach would have been to simply let it go, accept it was my fault for not requesting a refund sooner, accept it was my mistake for choosing a poor host, forgive the company for their error, let them keep the money, and move on. "
I would actually consider this a darkworker approach as from this no one grows nor learns anything, and you have thrown away good money out of fear that you might "look bad"

[fretho]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

God forbid someone should have a conscience.

It's nice to see a personal development site that promotes evil and can consider having a conscience to be a bad thing, while succombing to fear and pursuit of domination of others can be called a good thing.

The GREY SIDE is calling!

Seriously, I think there's ways to have a conscience and use self-interest as a motive. It's all in how you look at it. You can be too proud to step on anyone, seeing hurting others as against your personal code of honor. Being ego-driven isn't inherently evil. (Or may be it is evil, and we're just talking chaotic versus lawful here. )

[Eduardo César]

Now we can see the true power of Darth Pavlina!

But serious: It seems more like he used the appropriate tool for the chosen task, backed up by conscious choice. Thats it, a matter of choice (and consequences).

[Dan.Linehan]

I don't see this as a fear based problem resolution.

If you believe that transparency/truth is a universal good, then notifying the customer base of your situation is more of an ethical imperative than anything negative.

Just because it was negative for some people in that company, who were perpetuating the use of dishonest methods doesn't mean it was "bad."

You struggle in this post to find a good lightworking solution to this problem, I think that how you solved it was pretty much it.

You forced the company to be accountable through honest means. That's not darkworking nor is it a fear based action in my opinion.

Hitler used a myriad of lies and deception, this is the opposite of transparency.

[Frankie]

I agree with you, Dan.

Furthermore, I don't see how just letting $300 go is a good lightworker solution. If you let $300 go and don't even try to get it back, then you are perpetuating the idea that the company can get away with that sort of service and essentially steal from its customers. But you're also basically donating $300 to a bad company. That $300 could be used in a myriad of other ways to help other people. It's actually hurting the company to let them keep the $300. It's like giving a lazy person a handout so that they can continue being lazy. And with the idea of helping them hire a consultant to improve business practices.... that sounds like it would take a lot of effort. You would have to contact the consultant, convince the company that they should do it AND pay for it.... all to assist a company that, most likely, was so bad off that they were going down the toilet anyway. Not the best way to give back to the world. The best way to give back would be to get the 300 dollars back.

[Vanilla]

This blog contradicts other blogs where it was said that it wasn't a good idea to mix polarities. Now, it is okay????

Also, I don't agree with the idea that a lightworkers only forms of response is to just let it go. Lightworkers aren't doormats...

Perhaps I don't understand the polarity concept, but...it just doesn't resonate with me...and I don't agree with it. If it is correct, I'm sure I will learn in due time.

[grogan]

So now you've chosen to polarize to love Steve, you don't (or seldom) use the fear based approach?? - You don't have that freedom now?

[Jaben]

Steve I like your example of using the light polarity in this blog. I can see how I can use this in my personal life. Thanks.

Good question Grogan. Steve was just testing the dark polarity. Now supposedly he has polarized so he doesn't use the dark polarity anymore. Right?

In this thread Steve says the following:

After deciding to polarize, one's understanding of and respect for the opposite choice only deepens.

Although they take different paths, ultimately the dark side and the light side both lead to the same place.

A few questions for Steve:
What place do both sides lead to?
You didn't choose the lightside because you think it is better than the dark side?
Why did you choose it?
Can you describe your respect for Hitler?
Was Gandhi a lightworker or a darkworker?

[javamannen2]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

God forbid someone should have a conscience.

It's nice to see a personal development site that promotes evil and can consider having a conscience to be a bad thing, while succombing to fear and pursuit of domination of others can be called a good thing.

I try to be a loving person and work for the highest good. I consider a conscience a very good thing to have. I was just explaining what "darkworking" really is, i.e metaphysical evil. I guess what Steve is trying to do is showing people that they have a choice. Everyone has the potential for Good and Evil. Noone else can choose for you. But I too think it's unfortunate that Steve won't take a clear stand.

Just so there is no confusion:

Don't be Evil!
Be Good!

[DrFredbert]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

God forbid someone should have a conscience.

It's nice to see a personal development site that promotes evil and can consider having a conscience to be a bad thing, while succombing to fear and pursuit of domination of others can be called a good thing.

Oh my god, I so agree!

*rummages through closet to find death ray machine*

[Steve Pavlina]

FYI I wouldn't use this fear-based approach today. The story I wrote was from many years ago, long before I launched StevePavlina.com.

A fear-based approach is thinking you need to recover money you've lost by taking it from somone. A love-based approach recognizes that money is abundant and can always be created anew, so there's no need to fret over losses or seek retribution when you have the option of focusing on the creative side.

In fact, this love-based approach helped me a lot on the path to financial abundance. Instead of fussing over my expenses, I largely ignored them and put my energy on the income side by focusing on creating value.

[javamannen2]

Originally Posted by DrFredbert

Oh my god, I so agree!

*rummages through closet to find death ray machine*

Oh no, they're on to me!

[yossarian]

Originally Posted by Dan.Linehan

I don't see this as a fear based problem resolution.

If you believe that transparency/truth is a universal good, then notifying the customer base of your situation is more of an ethical imperative than anything negative.

But Steve didn't spread transparency and the truth, he only used the threat of transparency to blackmail the company for his own personal gain. He was serving himself and only himself.

If he wanted to unearth unfair treatment of customers there would be no sum of money that could buy his silence. Instead of being paid off he would have sent the email to all the customers to protect them from potential mistreatment.

Alternatively he could have sent an email to the company counseling them on his issues, providing ideas to help them out, and also explaning very clearly that he sees it as abuse of customers and if they keep it up their business will surely erode over time and lose more and more good customers like they lost Steve.

That would have been the love approach IMO. The debate within the love community would just be whether it's better to reveal the issue to all the customers, or to put your effort into counselling the company, telling them you won't reveal, but that you suggest they do the revealing for their own good so they can turn a new corner.

I would call the two approaches the Priest and the Activist. The Activist fights corruption by spreading the truth to the people, the Priest fights the corruption through private counsel and encouragement.

[Glass Joe]

This is one of my favorite articles.

It may not change your own current behavior, but at least it can help you to understand other people's behavior better. Or even understand your own past behavior better.

The Simpsons – Homer Saves PBS

Betty White: You don't have the money, do you?
Homer Simpson: no...
Betty White: And you thought you could just stab your problems away?
Homer Simpson: uh-huh...

[JAlvy]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

FYI I wouldn't use this fear-based approach today. The story I wrote was from many years ago, long before I launched StevePavlina.com.

A fear-based approach is thinking you need to recover money you've lost by taking it from somone. A love-based approach recognizes that money is abundant and can always be created anew, so there's no need to fret over losses or seek retribution when you have the option of focusing on the creative side.

In fact, this love-based approach helped me a lot on the path to financial abundance. Instead of fussing over my expenses, I largely ignored them and put my energy on the income side by focusing on creating value.

So, to make sure, it is not possible/or effective to switch polarities based on what you want from different goals?

[eternomi]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

FYI I wouldn't use this fear-based approach today. The story I wrote was from many years ago, long before I launched StevePavlina.com.

Must have been waaaay before the "subjective reality" era...

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

In fact, this love-based approach helped me a lot on the path to financial abundance. Instead of fussing over my expenses, I largely ignored them and put my energy on the income side by focusing on creating value.

So you don't keep track of your finances at all then?

[songwriter]

I prefer to be assertive, not agressive or passive. But this has make me wonder... This is going into passive-agressive stuff... yeah... you may solve the problem but I think it's not the best way.

[songwriter]

I definitely not think the dark side and the light side leave to the same place, maybe externally but not internally. You're not gonna feel the same, and that's what matters for me, not for everyone of course.

[iry]

except to the extent you require their help

If we really need their help, we can only use "Love"? What if they still remain "evil"?