Terren says:

Hey Alex,

For me the nature of epiphany involves bringing two (or more?) pieces of a map (mental model) together such that what was before separate, now becomes whole. Sometimes this unification is utterly surprising or astounding, because we had no idea those maps that we considered separate actually could fit together in the context of a bigger, simpler map.

I think there are a couple of factors that create the “ripeness” of an imminent epiphany… though I’m not sure these are strictly necessary, I think they facilitate them. One is, a person’s desire to create bigger and bigger maps. The more we desire to understand our world, the more likely we are to actually integrate the various narrow and often contradictory maps we use. This requires us to creatively seek parallels among seemingly disparate aspects of our existence (something that humor depends greatly on, btw).

For instance, one can be a great dog trainer but a bad parent to one’s own child. But if this person has the trait of seeking to understand parenting and dog-training as much as possible, they will come to see where training dogs and kids are similar and where they are different, and this will result in epiphanies as those maps are integrated. On the other hand, such a person might not ever compare the two disciplines or behaviors involved, in which case such epiphanies would be much less likely.

Another factor that “ripens” is a person’s ability and willingness to hold contradictory views or perspectives without judgment. First, one must develop the ability to do this, (commonly referred to as critical thinking), and it is not something that comes naturally for most. It is far easier to find a map that works and stick with it until forced to change it… and this makes epiphanies less likely.

Then, we must be willing to do it. Politically-minded or religiously-minded people who feel strong internal pressure to “pick sides” and dismiss or deny alternative perspectives encounter far fewer opportunities to test their maps and integrate them into larger contexts. Integration is threatening to those who may be wedded to their models out of various kinds of needs, such as needs for emotional safety and belonging.

All this implies that epiphanies come easier to those who are able to make better maps, willing to let go of familiar old maps and endure the uncomfortable state of being lost.

I see epiphany as part of a never ending process of forming and integrating maps. It is creative destruction, constantly changing. The “ripeness” of an imminent epiphany refers to how uncomfortable one is with the contradictions inherent in their current maps or worldview. There is a tension that must build up, whether one is conscious of that tension or not, that results from our maps telling us contradictory things about something important to us. Those contradictions must be held, not denied or judged, in order for integration to occur.

By the way, I have had epiphanies in which the triggers were both conscious and unconscious. This is again another place where I question the utility of the left/right brain distinction. In other words, sometimes I have had an epiphany “taught” to me by someone wiser, or by analyzing something myself and realizing the integration that way. Other times, it is that “shower moment” of sudden, unexplained realization. The trigger can be anything, in the same way that any old loud noise can trigger an avalanche. I think it’s often a “shower moment” because consciously focusing on one’s contradictions tends to be stressful, and for reasons I can’t articulate, I think the experience of stress is fairly antithetical to the experience of epiphany. Something about integration seemingly requires us to be relaxed. That’s why humor is such a great tool for enlightenment because it relaxes us while exposing the contradictions in our behavior.

Thanks for your writings and questioning, they are valuable.

Terren