At a faculty dinner once, a tablemate from the Education Department spoke about a high school student in one of her student-teacher’s classes. This student never spoke in class, never raised his hand in response to the teacher’s questions, and, when asked a direct question, would look down and not respond. Unsure of how to advise this student-teacher to reach this student, she asked the table for recommendations.
Others proffered various suggestions, which they then discussed. I eventually asked if the student was Native American, and with a somewhat surprised look, my colleague acknowledged that he was. I then suggested that the situation she described was more likely cultural in nature and had little to do with the student’s mental health or intellectual acumen but rather the result of adherence to traditional Native American values, especially if raised on the reservation, which he was. This underlines the crucial role of cultural sensitivity in understanding and addressing student behavior.
This is, however, not an essay intent on addressing cultural sensitivity. Rather, it focuses on the importance of mindfulness and the problems associated with absolute thinking. In the abovementioned case, the educator’s understanding of the “role of student” was steeped in a Western definition of “engaged student.” This understanding of student involvement included raising hands in response to questions and responding when called on in class. This definition of “student” precluded considering the student in question’s situation as anything other than indicative of a problem that troubled students have and that teachers need to solve. By being mindful of cultural differences and individual student experiences, educators can avoid such absolute thinking and better understand their students.
The teacher’s rigid or “absolute” definition of “functional student,” which included ALL students, resulted in a mindless reaction to this situation rather than viewing it as potentially unique to this individual student. In other words, the teacher’s unconditional understanding of the construct “student” prevented the teacher from considering that the “problem” might be the teacher’s approach to teaching rather than the student’s approach to learning. Educators must consider each student’s unique experiences and backgrounds, which can significantly impact their learning and behavior. This only happens when remaining open to the possibility that multiple explanations for an observed phenomenon may exist.
When we think we know and understand a situation, we attend to the minimal number of cues necessary to complete a task or, in this situation, reach a conclusion. The result is never exploring additional cues or information that could suggest an alternate explanation for the encountered phenomenon. This is, in short, a definition of mindlessness. Educators should be cautious of such mindless approaches as they can lead to overlooking important cues and information that could provide a deeper understanding of their students. This highlights the need for caution and thoroughness in problem-solving, particularly in educational and authoritative settings.
The difference between “absolute thinking” and “conditional thinking” is that absolute thinking is rooted in the belief that “this is the way,” the undisputed fact. Believing this automatically terminates further consideration of other or alternative explanations or solutions. Like a detective who “knows” John Jones is guilty and then looks exclusively for evidence to support that hypothesis, never considering that there could be or are other suspects, the absolute thinker defaults to a mindless consideration of the evidence. Mindfulness, on the other hand, necessitates “conditional thinking.” In conditional thinking, I remain open to the metaphorical fact that there may be more ways to get from Philadelphia to New York City than via I-95 and that circumstances or context could warrant pursuing a different course of action.
Ensuring “conditional” thinking may be as simple as how we phrase our questions or describe a situation or object. For example, notice the difference in what comes to mind when presented with these two statements: A baseball bat is the weapon, and A baseball bat could be the weapon. In the first, there is no doubt, at least in the speaker’s mind, whereas in the second, perhaps it is, but then again, perhaps something else is the weapon. This illustrates how mindfulness and conditional thinking can open a range of possibilities, fostering a more open-minded and flexible approach.
Absolute statements leave no room for question; there is no room for exploring “what if…” Conditional statements, on the other hand, invite speculation; they expand the boundaries of possibility. Such differentiation becomes important when considering how individuals in positions of real or presumed authority deliver information.
Assume you are speaking with a physician – or therapist, lawyer, detective, or another perceived as in authority. You’re told that all indications are this is cancer – or ‘depression,’ ‘liable,’ ‘proof.’ First, what are you experiencing emotionally, and second, in what role have you cast yourself that triggers that emotional reaction? Likely, you are emotionally upset and see yourself as a “patient” or “client/patient” or “defendant” or “suspect,” mindlessly considering that role as you act according to your absolute understanding of how one in that role should act.
What if that physician, therapist, lawyer, or detective said, All indications suggest this might be cancer/depression/liable/proof; might you feel more hopeful if not empowered to explore how best to act on rather than react to the statement? And because this person in a position of authority presented a conditional statement, might you be more inclined to see yourself as a mindful individual in a position to do something in response to the information rather than mindlessly submitting to a constraining role held as absolute fact?
We live in a time and culture enamored of absolutes. We seek “the answer,” and we follow it mindlessly once we believe we have found it. My grandfather used to say that we know what we have learned and learned what we’re taught, but this is not all there is to know. Mindfulness involves remaining open to the idea that things are not always how they appear.
