Survey Says …
A Marketing firm was hired to evaluate participants abilities to work together. Each participant would be asked to describe a part of a product and work with the team to describe the whole product. This was a “blind” study. Each participate would be blind folded and provided with the latest noise cancelling headphones. They were led to their section in the warehouse and instructed to feel the object in front of them, then return to the conference room to discuss the results. With each participant back in the conference room, they proceeded to describe their findings.
Participant # 1 – “It’s a huge expandable sack, this be a new type of storage sack for farming gains.”
Participant # 2 – “It’s a long-curved board, this must be a part for a new type of canoe or kayak.”
Participant # 3 – “It’s a hose that is strong but flexible, this be a new a new design for a flexible irrigation hose.”
Participant # 4 – “It’s a large base with the feel of a Palm Tree, this must be a new design for a self-standing ornamental tree.”
Participant # 5 – “It’s a large soft flexible fan shaped object, this must be a new design for a sustainable air circulation system.”
Participant # 6 – “It’s a rope that felt like a flexible metal cable, this must be a high-tech graphite rope for recreation or industrial use.”
After everyone revealed their results, they were asked to work together and to come up a description. But, instead of working with each other they all looked at each other and began to argue. Each participant believed that their description was correct and that the others must be wrong. No one would move from their opinion and the arguments became louder and more continuous.
As the arguing continued, a man opened the door and explained that he was there to return the Elephant to the Zoo.
“An Elephant? That was not an Elephant” said all the participants in unison. Then they returned to their arguments, each insisting that their description was correct and that the others were wrong.
The Facilitator explained that they were each given a part of the Elephant – the stomach area, the tusk, the trunk, the leg, the ear, and the tail. The participants thought it was a trick and proceeded to argue.
Again, the door opened, the man asked the Facilitator if he should clean up the mess that the Elephant had left.
Looking at the still arguing participant’s, the exasperated Facilitator said, “No, I have a “team” of six volunteers that will sweep up after the Elephant.
Many of you will recognize this story as the Blind Men and the Elephant Parable. It is a Parable that is explained in texts from Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism as well as many modern interpretations. I thought that this modern interpretation was applicable to our current state of receiving information that we accept as truth. With easy access to the Internet, news spreads at the speed of light or the click of a mouse.
In the Buddhist text from the Tittha Sutta, Buddha warns of accepting false teachings as truth and further warns of clinging to these untruthful views. Similarly, in this modern interpretation we see that the participant’s cling to their views even as they are presented with the facts. We witness this every day, people believing and spreading untruths even as the facts are available. We have also witnessed the distress and divisions that clinging to falsehoods have caused.
From a Buddhist perspective, dualistic thinking creates an oppression in the mind which results in hindering our growth and potential. In other words, we cannot learn when we believe that we are always right and the “other” is always wrong. We must always be open to sweeping away dust of delusion that cause the thoughts of division. To See the unseen.
