There are certain ideas I keep coming back to, in my writing and in everyday conversations, and I bet that anyone I speak with frequently is familiar with them. A few of those ideas I’ve given titles to, turning them into “terms.” Of those terms, a few have gone on to become tenets of my vision for The Thinkpieces.
The purpose of this piece is to overview these recurring terms and establish definitions for them. Because many of my concepts build on each other, establishing these definitions will make my work easier to understand. I begin with what I consider the pillar behind The Thinkpieces – critical engagement – before moving on to pre-work, and then to borrowed terms from psychology and sociology.
original terms
Critical Engagement
Critical engagement is the cornerstone concept at The Thinkpieces. It refers to the ability to engage meaningfully with one’s inner and outer worlds. “Meaningfully” means engaging 1) in a way that employs logical and critical thinking skills, and 2) in a way that is self-aware and self-aligned.
To be critically engaged means to understand one’s own story, aspirations, values and overall inner world, and to act in accordance with this understanding. Logical and critical thinking skills support this process, providing clarity when navigating one’s external world. This sense of clarity, in turn, allows one to bring a little bit of themselves into everything one does, strengthening one’s sense of self and boosting confidence.
TLDR: Critical engagement exists at the intersection of critical thinking and personal fulfillment. It bridges the logical and the emotional. Another way to think about it is “meaningful engagement.”
Pre-Work
Pre-work refers to the “time and effort” that takes place behind the scenes of anything worthwhile. It refers to the work that most people might not realize is there, that is indispensable for any project, creation, relationship – you name it – to run smoothly.
As an example, consider a major event that runs perfectly smoothly. Could be a gala, a wedding, a conference. One event alone can take days and sometimes weeks of setting up. But behind the good outcome, and the obvious work (setup), is extensive research on the logistics of an event; hours of brainstorming, discussion, and decision-making, as well as years and even decades of combined experience from all contributors. By the time a coordinator leads a perfect event, they have probably assisted in 10, 100, or 300 other ones first.
TLDR: When seeing successful final outcomes, many people lose sight of the often-invisible research and experience behind it. Most people take that type of work for granted, which is why I term it pre-work (the work before the work).
borrowed from psychology:
Congruence
Congruence, a concept first coined by psychologist Carl Rogers, refers to a psychological state where an individual’s perception of themselves aligns with who they aspire to be. This concept plays closely into the “personal fulfillment” part of critical engagement.
My reworking of the concept incorporates an element of agency. To be congruent, in my version of it, refers not to a psychological state, but to the ongoing and intentional action necessary to get to where one wants to be. To illustrate: Many claim to value their “peace” but, in practice, spend most of their mental and emotional energy feeding into drama. Someone congruent acts in accordance with what they say (or don’t), and what they say (or don’t) closely aligns with what they value.
Analog to this is the idea of “beginning with the end in mind”, coined by Stephen R. Covey. The basic premise is someone needs to know where they’re going, before they can plan how to get there. It becomes impossible for one’s steps to lead to one’s destination, when there is no clear destination in mind. Congruence begins by first identifying where one wants to be.
TLDR: To be congruent is to think, speak, and act in a way that is in alignment with one’s deepest values and, therefore, in a way that is conducive to one’s goals.
borrowed from sociology:
Sociological Imagination
Sociological imagination, first coined by C. Wright Mills, refers to the ability to step back, or zoom out, from one’s social position (see also: positionality) and understand how it fits the wider picture. Someone who utilizes the sociological imagination can separate themselves from their personal experiences and beliefs, to understand how larger social forces have shaped those experiences and beliefs.
My first sociology professor in undergrad would use the metaphor of “fish can’t see water” to illustrate. Borrowed from David Foster Wallace, the fish metaphor tells us that as social beings, we lose sight of the norms, customs, and constructions that rule our lives, precisely because we grow so accustomed to them. The goal is to become able to see the water, to better understand the invisible forces shaping our lives.
While I don’t often refer to this concept by name, I’d like to think I employ it and promote it any time I discuss social situations. Those I speak with frequently also tend to favor this outside-looking-in type of analysis, whether they’ve heard of the term or not.
TLDR: The sociological imagination allows one to make sense of otherwise complex social situations, by zooming out beyond personal experience, and using an informed, outside-looking-in approach.
closing thoughts
Put together, these concepts form the foundation behind the analytical framework that shapes The Thinkpieces. Several other key ideas influence my analyses, but they’d be too many to name! This glossary of sorts is meant to serve as a general overview of foundational ideas, for the time being. Other glossaries and explanations of terms will eventually follow.
About the Author