May
Polarity Examples
Steve Pavlina has been talking about polarity for over a year now. I poo-poo’d the idea in favor of balance. I didn’t think that it was healthy to concentrate your energy in either direction.
Last week I was looking at the political landscape and trying to understand what was motivating the presidential candidates. I finally saw what Steve meant by being consciously focused on the direction of energy flow.
I realized that you can become extremely effective by consciously and consistently applying yourself in either direction. I also realized that indeed 99% of the population is not polarized. Only a tiny percent of the population is even paying attention or conscious. Of that percent, still fewer take the same side consistently and exclusively. As I looked around for more examples and a better understanding of polarity, here’s what I found.
Lions for Lambs
Spoiler Alert
There are 3 major characters in the movie Lions for Lambs: a college professor who was drafted into the Vietnam War, a journalist that’s been in the industry for 40 years, and a young, upwardly mobile senator.
The professor has dedicated his life to engaging young minds as a political science teacher. At one point in the movie he admitted that he started out wanting to get the accolades that come with getting papers published and presenting theories. After a while he realized that no one read his papers, and theories needed to be actionable. He decided that he needed to engage his students and press them to be active in the political process. He remained in academia because he thought he could serve more people by waking up the apathetic promising students and having them take action.
The senator started off as a breath of fresh air to the party (GOP), according to the journalist. However, he was always self motivated and held his gaze on the presidency. He called the journalist in to present a new plan for Afghanistan. The plan was really an attempt to divert public focus from the problems happening in Iraq, and to provide a quick win for the senator in particular. He had many high-minded reasons for the new strategy in Afghanistan, but he finally admitted what he really wanted was PR.
The journalist walked away knowing that she was a pawn. She stormed into her boss’ office and hurriedly blurted out all of her reservations. She even admitted to feeling icky about the whole plan, least of all her involvement and responsibility in promoting the war in Iraq. Her boss reminded her that she has a mother that requires 24-hour care. She responded by saying she still can’t publish the story from the senator. Her boss urged her to earnestly consider the consequences of her actions.
At the end of the movie, we see the report as given by the senator in a ticker on the television screen that the apathetic student is watching.
In the movie, the professor’s primary concern was service to his students - outflow polarization. The senator’s primary concern was eligibility for the presidency (inflow polarization). The journalist was aware of what was going on and had good intentions, but caved in the end. She may have been conscious, but she was not polarized (or maybe she was inflow polarized).
Inflow Polarized Example: The Salesman
When I was a consultant I worked on a project sold to a customer without regard to whether or not it was feasible. I worked on many of these projects, but what made this one rare was that I admired the guy who made the sale because of his clarity, precision, focus and consistency. Let’s call him Al.
Usually these sales are made by someone who truly does not understand the scope of the project or the machinations of the client, but Al was well-verse in both. He was sharp, smart, and quick. It wasn’t an oversight that made the project unfeasible. He sold it because it would significantly boost his career.
Typically salespeople sold and moved on, but the company was in the middle of a restructure and he had to stay and implement. Instead of folding and taking a backseat at that point, as some of the other salespeople did, Al pursued the project with tenacity. He didn’t skip a beat. He determined that it would be an even bigger boost to his career if he could implement the project. He was intent and clear on the outcome and was willing to say or do whatever was necessary to make the project successful. Sometimes it meant treating the team to dinner. Other times it meant mandating 12-hour days.
He showed that the project was progressing at a steady clip in the right direction and exited. To the project team, it came out of the blue. All the other salespeople were stuck in implementation of projects they sold, but this was steadily negotiating his rise up the corporate ladder. In fact, he made it look easy. He was well aware of his power and was not afraid to use it the subjugate, manipulate, or flatter someone. He may not have used the term polarity, but he was very clear that anything that he did would benefit him. If it benefited someone else, that was gravy. If he needed to help someone in order to advance, he would do so, but he did not go out of his way to help anyone.
Al was an extremely successful salesman and is probably CEO of a company today.
Inflow Polarized Example: The Spiritual Zealot
It’s easy to label whole professions as lightworker or darkworker professions, but what we must really examine is motive. There are many people in search of enlightenment who can be considered darkworkers by Steve’s definition.
Think of the person whose sole motivation in life is to be enlightened for its own sake. They will do anything to stay in an enlightened state including cutting themselves off from society. They love the spiritual high of melting into Spirit. Rather than deepen their spiritual understanding for the benefit of all, they pursue spiritual understanding so that they can have nirvana.
Similarly, if the spiritual zealot manages to improve the consciousness of mankind in the process of gaining enlightenment it’s a bonus. If they have to neglect their families and society to do so, they will do that as well.
The spiritual zealot will achieve enlightenment because of his persistence, but there may be a string of casualties in his wake.
Lightworker/Outflow Example: Google
From Google’s corporate site:
“Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”
It’s more than a platitude. It’s reinforced by Google’s 10 things:
- Focus on the user and all else will follow.
- It’s best to do one thing really, really well.
- Fast is better than slow.
- Democracy on the web works.
- You don’t need to be at your desk to need an answer.
- You can make money without doing evil.
- There’s always more information out there.
- The need for information crosses all borders.
- You can be serious without a suit.
- Great just isn’t good enough.
Google went public with a stock price close to $100 per share and is now over $500 per share. When they went public the analysts were skeptical of the value assigned to the stock, and the followers were concerned about its integrity. Google has kept its focus on service to the user and expands by asking how many more they can serve and what will enhance their user’s life.
For another view of polarization you can check out Christine Kane’s article on creating and getting.
In Spirit,
Nneka


May 1st, 2008 at 8:40 am
Good observations Nneka. I always find it useful to be very clear about the terms we use. Often polarity & duality are lumped together, but are they the same? There’s some subtlety here & a progression.
Duality is one or the other. Hot or cold. Polarity is the possibility of exploring one end or the other, together with the availability of both: warm for instance.
In duality there’s separation. Polarities well-balanced & wielded can lead to wholeness.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Hi Pamir, I think it’s just the opposite. What Steve is saying is that when we pick a side we are more effective. We are clearer. I found this to be true in my own life.
I’ve only tried it on small things so far and I’m working on bigger ideas right now. I started off with the question, “How do I want to show up in this situation?” If I say love. I say I want to do what is best for all parties involved. I want to give of myself to the greater good. The answer is very clear. If I say fear. I want to totally dominate. I want to do what is best for me regardless of where the chips might fall. I am equally effective.
Thing is once you choose, everything falls into place easily. Choosing to give does not mean you don’t receive. Conversely, choosing to get does not mean you don’t give. It is a matter of where you set your focus. Choosing one side or the other is much more effective than vacillating between the two.
It was helpful to me to take an inventory of my life to date. I realize I would take 9 steps with love then 3 out of fear. Rather that be ahead by 9, I would be ahead by 6.
Here’s an example, I took a job at the beginning of my career and my intention was to get as far ahead as possible and learn as much as possible in that time frame. I didn’t help anyone unless it helped me. Near the end, I felt very out of sync with this mode of operating. One day I was asked to take one for the team. I did, and it was my unraveling.
It takes courage and discipline to choose and stick with it. It takes even more to choose the same way consistently.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:50 pm
What you say is true in the examples you give. The world is a plane of duality. Choosing one or the other duality will produce its expected results.
I was referring to more primordial forces & truths, such as yin & yang. Fortunately because humans are endowed with spiritual ’software’ we’re able to experience polarity, the next level from duality.
What’s interesting about this model is that when primordial polarities are well-balanced it creates a third state that is unlike either pole.
For instance, we have two eyes which reveal the world to us. Yet we have one spiritual eye which reveals the world in an entirely new way, and more importantly reveals worlds very different than this physical one.
May 4th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
“Only a tiny percent of the population is even paying attention or conscious.”
i think it was Gurdjieff who called it ‘the collective unconscious’
Robert
The Spiritual Entrepreneur
http://sae.holisticplus.org
May 5th, 2008 at 8:39 am
Pamir, I can understand what you are saying. I don’t think I’m near there though. Today when I work both polarities it creates muddiness and mediocrity. I want to work with this idea of polarity and see where it goes. I suspect, as you said, that there is a point at which I won’t need to deliberately work in any direction and I will be completely aligned with the One. Then, things just are, but I’m learning and growing
May 5th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Tai Chi Chuan can be translated as “Polarity Boxing”. It is a great martial art, because the training forces you to recognize what you are doing–and hopefully to stop attempting to do both a thing and its opposite at the same time (which Tai Chi people call “double-weighted”).
Steve Pavlina has written some good stuff, but unfortunately he appears to have little or no grounding in the spiritual classics; and to be frank, this is not an area where individuality and improvisation offer much value.
May 6th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Hi Chris and welcome. You are correct in your link that these are incomplete ideas. Stick around, I’ll be talking about them a lot more, and from a spiritual frame of reference.
I’m experimenting myself. Should be interesting:-)
May 6th, 2008 at 8:42 am
[...] If you’re new here, check out the Best of Balanced Life Center and be sure to subscribe to receive the latest updates via email or RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!Earlier I gave a few examples of polarity in an effort to further explain the concept and better understand it myself. I posted the following in response to someone’s rant about darkworking. [...]
May 6th, 2008 at 9:12 am
Nneka, we’re all growing & that’s just beautiful. I’m a big picture guy, so I didn’t mean to just bust the frames. I also like to get to the heart of the matter & can appreciate Chris’ comment.
Many of these ideas are as old as the hills. I wonder if there’s really anything new in the world of spirituality. I think there are new expressions of ancient truths & better ways of them being applied in our unique times. But this also leaves too much room for these truths to be be diluted in service to pop spirituality.
The basic model behind my comments above is: Nondual consciousness is the origin of everything. At this level, it’s Pure Consciousness without any differentiation or separation.
When it starts to create it becomes conditioned consciousness, which is still extremely subtle & the blueprint of everything in creation. Then through densification, material forms finally emerge.
I’ll talk about it in Reiki terms since that’s my realm. Two energies that throb out of the field of consciousness are Earth Ki & Celestial Ki. These are polar forces, not dual. It’s entirely legit to move along the spectrum & immerse oneself in the qualities of either pole, really wield each energy & become one with it. In fact this needs to happen before the next step.
However, because it’s a continuous spectrum, because these two energies are polar expressions of the same energy, actually polar expressions of the consciousness behind them, we can also blend polarities.
This doesn’t negate the value of moving in one or the other direction, to utilize the qualities & functions of either pole according to what life presents us.
Ultimately, if Unity Consciousness is the truth of our being & our momentum is to consciously realize it, then blending the poles allows for the collapse of each into their original state, a return to our true nature.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:41 am
I love this discussion:-) If I seem a bit pushy myself, please don’t misinterpret, I’m just really excited and enthusiastic.
There is nothing new under the sun. We are just finding new ways to explain it so that more people understand and more of us are actually applying it.
We are approaching a critical mass in the practice of these ideas. More and more people are getting their feet wet and I feel that it is incumbent upon some of us to frame these things within a theological (read spiritual) reference. I’ve taken it up myself.
I grew up in a church that talked about these ideas all the time. It’s part of the creed. God is everywhere present. We are expressions of God. Our thoughts change our world. We can change our thoughts through prayer and meditation. I learned the theory and didn’t really put it into practice to the extreme. In fact, 99% of the membership doesn’t. The ideas make us feel good, but we don’t really practice them. What if we did?
A few years ago I challenged myself to really live it. I decided to test them in real life. If God is all there is and is all good, then what am I afraid of? When I shone that light on everything I did, my fears scurried away.
Then last year, I realized that I was only interested in expressing God and helping people do the same. I was thought though that you have to balance energy. I was taught that you give to receive and you have to be open. Now I’m thinking, let’s try concentrating only on giving. Maybe, I’ll get a lot farther a lot faster.
When I look around, the people who are successful (success defined as effective in their endeavors, not characterized by money or fame, but effective), seem only concerned with one direction of the flow. I watch people all around me who have good intentions, but keep going back and forth in an attempt to “balance” their energy. They are ineffective. They might do a little bit to help, but they are hedging and holding back.
May 11th, 2008 at 11:04 am
[...] That said, the direction of our work, as shown in Polarity Examples, is important. To know where we stand, to know what we want to accomplish, to know who we are, is important to maintaining focus and growth. To grow the characteristics of a lightworker in your persona rather than being a lightworker will do much in your life. [...]