A Collection of Stances

Every problem needs a stance (or a attitude that a person, group or culture takes towards that problem). I have listed some common stances below. Some are more embedded in the events they describe, while others are more reflective of them. I would guess that in human culture we are broadly moving away from reflective stances towards more interconnected ones.

• The everyday stance – 'What problem?'

• The reflective stance (Cartesianism) – ‘Let’s step back from the problem and be objective about it in terms of what we know.' (Both idealism and empiricism are contained within this stance).

• The reflexive (postmodern) stance– Include yourself and your ‘stepping back’ in your consideration of the ‘problem.’

• The emotional/impulsive stance – ‘Let’s get upset about the problem!’ Emphasises its affective dimensions and the victims whilst demonises its perpetrators (rhetoric).

• The active/impulsive stance – ‘Let’s just do something!’

• The hedonistic stance – ‘Fuck the problem; let’s partaaay!’

• The cynical stance – ‘Were fucked, the universe is fucked: don’t get worked up trying to solve it!’

• The stoic stance – Don’t get upset about the problem. (‘It’s not really a problem; it’s an opportunity for growth, etc.’)

• The pragmatic stance – ‘What can we do to salvage something from this mess!’

• The interconnected stance (Heideggerian /ecological /networked-self)– there is no immediate problem, it is symptomatic of a wider and more deep seated malaise. This stance emphasises the universal interconnectedness of all things and the unforeseen consequences of actions—‘a butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil….etc’