Reframing Your Consciousness

Discovering American scholar Gloria Anzaldua’s article 'Towards a New Consciousness' was like finding a key that unlocked a deeper understanding of the dissonance I felt when I moved from the familiar comforts of Tennessee to the frenetic pace of New York City. Anzaldua writes about borderlands, and specifically, the psychological experience of those who live on them. She states that living within "two self-consistent, but habitually incompatible frames of reference" transforms one's understanding of what cultural identities are and how they are formed. The article captured the profound cultural dissonance I experienced stepping across a border not of geography, but of consciousness—an unsettling transition that laid bare for me distinct insights into the complexity of the human experience, and, specifically, the American experience.

While first living in New York, I underwent a tremendous culture shock and thought that everything I had been taught growing up was wrong. As philosopher David Aiken from Duke University said, "there are two American histories, and two American literatures – which teach different American ideals and values, resulting in different societies and different vision of what it means to be an American." For awhile, I attempted to fully take to the ways of the northeast---but when they began talking about how ignorant people in the south are, I could not get on board with it. They didn't understand the culture of the south and why it is the way it is---they were speaking out of just as much ignorance. My shock soon faded and I began to see that people’s brains naturally form patterns; we see things through the lens of the time period and culture that we live in, and it is very hard to see things a different way. While people in both of my "worlds" were full of strong convictions, I came to feel that there is no possibility that one belief system or way of life is “right” and another is “wrong” considering how fully constructed both of the different societies that I’ve experienced are and the vast number of people that are happy in each one. Many of the people I know in the north and the south will go to extreme lengths to explain to me that they could never understand people of the other region (thinking I will affirm them), while I, having had to understand both of them, know that people are insurmountably more alike than they think they are deep down. There are benefits and problems within both regions that I detect--at times in one more than the other---, but neither is better or inherently right or wrong, they are only different--although this is a hard judgment to come to when one is convicted that their way is the right way, as most people are, and understandably so.

So, what happens when one has to balance two opposing cultures, or what Anzaldua calls the coming together of “two self-consistent but habitually incompatible frames of reference?" This causes massive shifts in one's "psychological borders." You learn to develop a “tolerance for ambiguity” and “a plural personality” allowing you to see the world and yourself through multiple ever-shifting lenses. While this is quite difficult on the psyche, I have found that as I was forced to begin thinking outside of my constructed worldview, I didn't take to another as I thought I would, but began to see worldviews I encountered from a deconstructed perspective and have the ability to understand and reason with them instead of either clinging to them in shock or disregarding them as crazy. I became curious about how people's worldviews and frameworks are formed and, mainly, what it is that makes people believe their frameworks are the only reality.

I have come to see that there are very few people who seem to think for themselves---people tend to be like sheep and herd to the same ideas depending on where they live and what they’ve been taught. The main separation I see between people is that there are those who are "sheep" and those who think for themselves, and that those who think for themselves are few and far between and likely do so by force of having to balance two or more opposing cultures. An average republican in the south would likely be a democrat if they lived in the north because they would simply be following along with the cultural conditioning. Similarly, I have met many countless “strong” democrats in the north who would likely be “strong” republicans in the south because they are one who is a product of their culture, not one who is an individual thinker; "it's just a coincidence that their beliefs are identical to their peers," they think, as entrepreneur Paul Graham, the inventor of Airbnb says. Many of the most devoted Christians would be devoted Muslims if they were raised that way, and many devoted Hindu’s would be Buddhist if they were born in a different family. Oftentimes, I have even thought that the kind of people who are most devoted to their belief system are in fact the ones who would be most devoted to whichever belief system they were brought up in because they have the personality of one who devotes themselves to things. As Graham said, "people are often fooled by the strength of their opinions into believing that they're independent-minded. But strong convictions are not a sign of independent mindedness. Rather the opposite." Most everyone thinks that they are independent thinkers because they have never had to fully infiltrate themselves into a different kind of thinking that would test the one they already know. In my experiences so far, I have not met people who have truly understood multiple realities who are able to devote themselves so strongly to just one of them.

According to Anzaldua, “the future will belong to the mestiza” because “the future depends on breaking down paradigms, it depends on straddling two or more cultures,” something that mestiza uniquely know how to do. Because of their ability to understand multiple realities, they understand humanity in a more well-rounded way than those who are only exposed to one consistent worldview. They develop a new consciousness based on the unity of the human race to solve their internal paradigm of cultural separation; “the self-added a third element which is greater than the sum of its severed parts...mestiza’s consciousness...comes from continual creative motion that keeps breaking down the unitary aspect of each new paradigm,” (Anzaldua 80). They are able to uproot the dualistic thinking that most people’s minds are stuck within and become enlightened to transcend the barriers of conflicting opinions. To solve the contradiction of cultures within themselves, they let go of dualism and see that there is more in common with humans across races and genders and that dualistic thinking is what separated us all to begin with. This ability to understand one's own consciousness through multiple perspectives eradicates ignorance and allows for unity because unity comes from being willing to understand others. It seems that most wars, violence, and marginalization comes from peoples lack of willingness to deconstruct their perceived realities and understand another--this is why Anzaldua says that “the future will belong to mestiza,” (80). In an ever growing interconnected world, the mestiza have the greatest aptitude for succeeding on this united world front.

I have seen that what Anzaldua said is true---that people will go to lengths to defend the worldview they understand. It interests me that much of our “societal beliefs” in the world have more to do with the human psyche's search for pattern, stability, and the subconscious avoidance of deconstruction rather than with what is right, wrong, good, bad, true, false, or best for humanity. Many people who have deconstructed realities pose a threat to those who don’t because they don’t want to break the illusion that their reality is the right one. For example, I experienced this when moving from the south to New York City; as I deconstructed the perceived “version of reality that my culture communicated,” I became a threat to those at home who had not as I spoke about new ways of thinking and watched their psyches recoiling in attempt to hold onto their reality. Regardless, I do not think that it is beneficial or necessary for everyone to have to undergo a deconstruction of their reality. Most people have too much of their own stress in trying to make it through life itself to be contemplating if the constructs of their society are satisfactory. It seems that even in a democracy such as America, our entire existence is decided and deemed by a few sole actors who are interested in thinking these big thoughts so that the rest do not have to. One can only hope that those few people, whether they be politicians, the top 1% wealthy, writers, creatives, academics, or behind the scenes actors that the average population does not know about, are good people that are doing what's best for the “sheep.”

Works Cited

Oshin, Mayo. “Elon Musks' ‘3-Step’ First Principles Thinking: How to Think and Solve Difficult Problems Like a...” Medium, Mission.org, 2 Nov. 2020, medium.com/the-mission/elon-musks-3-step-first-principles-thinking-how-to-think-and-solve-difficult-problems-like-a-ba1e73a9f6c0.