The predisposed expectations.

How received information is being processed through personal predisposition.  From the very start, our brain gets a vast amount of data processed according to a current perception condition. Since most of us grow up cared for intimately by our parents these personal influencers contribute greatly to how we decipher the incoming information. With time, our accumulated experiences combined with the value parameters that have been indoctrinated to us, form a predisposition that shortcuts the deciphering of new information. This has a profound influence on the outcome of received information.

Guided by Nature's codes.                                                                                                                                 

All social interactions, subsequent reactions, and correlations are determined by a deeply rooted urge to connect, to be valued and respected. These urges bring about satisfaction and a sense of worthiness. Layers of predisposed expectations are governed by hereditary laws that approximate relationships between people. It makes us emotionally attached to the immediate family and subsequently to societies beyond. Paradoxically connecting to other societies causes segregation. This makes Egalitarianism an abnormality. Our social interdependence makes the perception and process of information a vital part of coexistence. However, the diverse interpretations of information can cause misunderstandings at various levels. While subjectivity plays a significant role in judgments and subsequent reactions to the perception of information, there will always be presumptive explanations as to why certain decisions were taken.  

Communication is an intrinsic part of social interaction and yet miscommunication outpaces the expected comprehension by a ratio of 8 to 1. That's because communication commences with the predisposition of self-interest. Because the principle of self-interest applies to the recipients, as well as the communicators, the expectations of the takeaway, are mostly contradictory. The information that enters our minds is filtered through the; "how does it impact me?" parameters. In most cases people expect the received message to match their preconceived expectations. This phenomenon happens also when asking a question. Instinctively we expect the answer to match what we hope the answer to be. Critical thought filtration tends to eliminate some aspects of the communicated message. It takes a conscientious mindset to dismiss the expectations and absorb the communicated message with less prejudgment. Repeating the question or questioning the answer are indications of predisposed expectations that were not met. While the personal filtration of information perception may change over time, it will always function as a screening that impacts our understanding. The supporting pillar of our self-esteem can not be completely ignored because it is part of our emotional reassurance.  

Psychological/perceptual arrow of time.                                                                                                             

New insights into the complexity of digesting communication became apparent to me when I paralleled my understanding of what was presented during a meeting, compared to what other attendees understood. It reminded me of the Psychological/perceptual arrow of time. The psychological perceptual arrow occurs because one's perception is a continuous movement from the known past to the unknown future. This phenomenon has two aspects: Memory - we remember the past and not the future; and volition - we feel we can influence the future but not the past. The two aspects are a consequence of the causal arrow of time: past events (but not future events) are the cause of our present memories, as more and more information enters our brains, we see correlations within the arrow of time.

Our prejudgment is a temporary condition that changes continuously.                                                              

To evaluate the large number of incoming impressions objectively, we would need to spend a disproportionate amount of time gathering comparative information. Instead, we rely on indications, intuitions, and presumptions to make up our minds about imminent issues. It is a continuing process of reasoning that is vaguely governed by some predispositions as to what is right and wrong, what is and what is not acceptable. Our prejudgment is not much more than a temporary condition. That is why people are spending a considerable amount of energy convincing others of their righteousness. Not because they have a finite answer but because the status quo does not exist in communication.  Either the message came through, or it didn’t. Interaction and collaboration with people result in granting each other trust credits, whereby certain communication flows are being graciously overlooked for the sake of reaching a common understanding.   

All ecosystems are continuously in motion.                                                                                                         

Consider everything around us as an assembly of uncountable particles of various sizes in various constellations. The motion of these particles, the energy, and the velocity of them have an impact on our memory. We tend to recall a constellation of information that was reinforced energetically, rather than information that came across as incidental. These differences only come to light with a change in current social or economic conditions.  For example, the heads-up information about an impending socio-economic shift can turn into opportunities as well as liabilities. Interconnectivity combined with the right interpretation of information can be part of progression but it can also avert bilateral conflicts.     

Projecting into the future.                                                                                                                                      In the 20th century, www. Networks fueled demand for "convenience" goods and services, and online communications grew exponentially. Because demand continues to grow, communication multiplies disproportionately.  For most people, it became difficult to process and evaluate incoming information in time. The second half of the 21st century will be characterized by an exponential increase in information to persuade people to make quick social and financial commitments. For instance, subscribing to an NGO venture through the internet, or making a bitcoin investment based on unverifiable information. Messages would need to distinguish themselves by being comparatively more informative. Achieving a comparably higher value perception will determine which cause is worthy of being pursued.         

The need for constructive adaptation. The continuously changing circumstances make planning for the future a formidable challenge. Combined with the prevailing predisposed expectations, makes it difficult to come to an amicable consensus. This reoccurring phenomenon can be observed in all interactive communications.  For example, when a teacher at a primary school class, summarizes the lecture, it turns out that a considerable number of students did not comprehend the key points of the lecture.  Similar discrepancies of understanding can be observed at geo-political conferences where it takes a disproportionate amount of time to arrive at some consensus and draft an agreed-upon summary of the meeting. The effects of such misunderstanding have profound effects.  Gifted people who can dispense of their predisposition and accept contradictory the content of information, have a great advantage. An open, receptive mind is like having a sharp deciphering instrument that can cut through layers of deception and misinformation to reach and understand the core of a message.  Such an ability upscales the capability of reaching better conclusions, faster. An advantage that includes assessing the risk factors of conveyed information. The ability to adapt perception helps in analyzing unfamiliar messaging.  

An example of conflicting moral commitments.  Imagine that you own a hotel, and one of the key principles in your corporate mission statement is a commitment to treat all employees and customers equally, regardless of their ethnicity, gender diversity, and religion. And then a group of eight hundred people is booking an event at your conference facilities. But when you look at the booking information, you realize that it is a radical religious group, that abides by its belief, that women should never leave their homes and should have no opportunities to be professionally independent. What do you do? Do you ignore the corporate principles that were followed by your employees all these years, or do you refuse to confirm this booking, and ask your customer to book at another hotel? Either way, you will have to deal with the consequences of your decision.    

Excerpt of a presentation by Julia Dhar. A business strategist, and champion debater. BCG's Julia Dhar teaches how to disagree productively and find common ground.

Starting an open-minded curiosity conversation.                                                                            

Finding yourself in a precarious situation happens when conflicting values call for an amicable solution to a situation. The open-mind curiosity conversation excludes any preconceptions at the start and offers the situation without prejudgment as part of an open discussion with your employees. Considering the subject matter as a shared reality, whereby any presumption is open for discussion. Such an open discussion may reveal yet unthought-of solutions.  While some shared ideas may seem unlikely, some combinations of opposing insights may lead to a new way of thinking. 

Rank the collective considerations in terms of: Most important, least important, and, unlikely. Identify the right causality that would benefit the cause.     Consider far-reaching consequences deriving from making your choice. Think of remote alternatives that could serve as interim solutions.  Evaluate your considerations in terms of potential short- and long-term consequences.

The chances of being trapped in a misunderstanding are greater than ever. The predisposed expectations are an attempt to encapsulate key points about the perception and reaction to information, worthy of consideration. Your contravention is welcomed.                              

Special thanks to the indirect contributors. Professor, Frans de Waal, Professor, Wolfgang Prinz. This review postulates a bottom-up model of empathy that ties together all levels, from state matching to perspective-taking. Gregory J Chaitin et al., Neurobiologist Professor Jean Decety, argues that empathy has deep evolutionary, biochemical, and neurological underpinnings. And Julia Dhar. A business strategist at BCG.