Situations

In how many ways do you use the word situation, and why? 

How do you usually acquire the knowledge you need in various situations and locations?

How do you assess circumstances in various situations?

When does a situation require your knowledge?

When does a situation require your opinion?

When, in your view, is an urgent situation likely to improve through investing in enlightened productivity, and what is that situation?

What, if any, is your acquaintance with the theory of situated cognition?

If the situations in most people's lives were not so tragic, they would merely be ridiculous. 

What do you know about situational comedy as a form of entertainment, whether factual or fictional?

What do you know about situational tragedy as a form of entertainment, whether factual or fictional?

At present, many people around the world, as usual, apparently do not have the opportunity to enjoy simple comfort and simple hygiene and pleasantly familiar surroundings and pleasantly familiar social circumstances.

They do not feel safe.

They cannot find contentment in healthy ways.

The world around them, and the people around them, are not only threatening but actually harmful.

Are you in such a situation?

If so, how are you attempting to protect yourself from harm?

If you are not in such a situation, what are you doing to help protect people who are at risk from harm, in whatever form that harm may take?

How do you assess situations as physical, political and economic locations?

The easiest way to develop and implement good public policy, and good organisational policies, is by answering important questions honestly, in every problematic situation.  

How have you attempted to become aware of, and to improve, your situational awareness?

Political situations are, in fact, dangerous everywhere.  They have always been dangerous everywhere.

How dangerous or safe is it for you to be involved in improving situations, particularly when urgency is evident?

What have you already discovered about investing in urgent reforms?

What experience have you had in addressing conflict situations, whether on an interpersonal level or a political level. 

How have you assessed employment situations?

What is your acquaintance with situational ethics?

Most public and private infrastructure is inappropriate for the locations in which it is situated.

Anything in the wrong place, or in the right place at the wrong time, is likely to cause problems.

Any persons with an inadequate understanding of appropriateness or lacking a desire to avoid wrongdoing will obviously cause problems, too.

How do you identify and assess rhetorical situations?

In many situations, persons in positions of power have a duty to locate the truth with appropriate seriousness and urgency.

If they are incapable of doing so, or unwilling to act as required, they should give up the power and allow people with more ability, initiative and credibility take on the associated duties. 

But what happens in real life situations?

What do you know about no-win situations? 

How do you assess conduct?

How do you know when conduct within a situation is dangerous or otherwise unpleasant?

How do you know when unpleasantness is necessary?

How do you know when unpleasantness is unjustified?

If incompetent and/or corrupt individuals are unwilling to give up power, then power must be taken from them as appropriately as possible.

The associated authority and duties, of everyone involved in the transitional process, should always be expressed with adequate maturity and suitable competence.

But where are the people with the necessary abilities, and who are they?

What do you know about language, including body language, in relation to situations?

Perhaps you have conducted research recently to update yourself on a situation, before making a decision, or otherwise to keep yourself informed.

There are only two situations in which improvements are impossible:

1. When the situation is already perfect

2. When the situation is so bad that no amount of intervention will improve it

Perhaps your life is in one of those situations.  It obviously cannot be in both at the same time.

What are your theories on the relationship between situations and freedom, including existential freedom?

How and when do you compare views about situations and freedom?

When does any situation not involve investing in the very best mental health, in your view?

When has an opinion on etiquette caused you to experience cognitive dissonance, or even culture shock?

Etiquette tends to be specific to particular situations and locations while courtesy is more universal.

You may associate situations with problematic incidents.

Perhaps you have been in an emergency situation on the top of a mountain or on top of a building or at the bottom of a cliff or at the bottom of a social hierarchy.

What do you know about situation theory and situation semantics and situation calculus? 

What do you know about accidents and their causes and consequences in various situations?

What makes a person important, in your view, in a particular situation?

And what, if anything, makes particular people and particular places not important at all, in any situation, or in a particular situation?

How have you been investing in mutually beneficial pleasantness in various situations, especially if bullies have been present or otherwise rude and/or demanding persons happened to be nearby? 

How, if at all, have you been involved in the management of incidents and similarly problematic situations?

When, if ever, have you been an obstacle to the improvement of situations, and why?

When, if ever, have you experienced the STAR and/or SOARA interview techniques?

How well do you regulate your emotions to ensure you acknowledge and express your knowledge, skills and feelings with adequately self-control, honesty and courtesy, whether in public, in private or in community situations, and how do you know?

Attempting to locate the truth in confusing situations requires intellectual rigour.

One of the most confusing situations is when many of the people involved do not regard the situation as confusing at all.

Perhaps you have sometimes felt afraid to admit to feelings of confusion.

Civility should never be used as a diversion from dire warnings.  Indeed, dire warnings require a level of assertion unlikely to be regarded as polite in non-emergency situations.

Confusions and diversions can often be dangerous, particularly in the medium and long term.

How do you ascertain necessary continuity, whether in terms of reporting upon a situation or anything else?

How do you know when something is not worth continuing?

Perhaps you are not interested in continuing to receive free access, or any access, to this level of Civility Today.

Perhaps you prefer to give your attention to reporting on an interesting narrative rather than on the facts of a difficult, ongoing situation, whether you are personally involved in the situation or not.

Where, if anywhere, have you been investing in political kindness to help improve situations?

Perhaps you have been experienced a situation room or incident room or control room or cabinet room or board room.

How do you know when a situation requires formality?

How do you tell when a situation requires a formal standard rather than an informal one?

What do you know about standards in relation to social expectations?

To have a relatively formal standard of etiquette is not necessarily to encourage exclusivity.  It is to encourage self-discipline through the social control of mutually expected conduct.  It is a form of mutual consent.

How do you think about situations as contexts?

Many people have attempted to establish households and communities by geographically and sexually situating them inappropriately, both physically and politically.

How do you usually assess situations in relation to your sexuality, and in relation to other people's expectations?

When public expectations are unmet, scandals may arise.

Perhaps you know of several scandals involving the Situation Room in the White House in Washington DC.

Perhaps you know of several scandals involving locations used for similar purposes, by various governments, in various parts of the world.

How do you interpret particular situations?

What training have you received to help you interpret situations accurately?

• Training - Part One
• Training - Part Two
• Training - Part Three
• Training - Part Four

 

In universities, the staff and students often fail to examine situations from perspectives other than specialist ones.  Yet specialists do not know anything about the real world.  They merely have a little expertise of possible usefulness in specific situations.  That tends to complicate matters when a broader perspective is required.

Most experiences of schooling accurately reflect the boredom to be experienced in most workplace situations.

How do you know when studies are likely to be adequately useful to the student?

And how do you define the meaning of usefulness in various situations?

When, if ever, have you been asked to provide an update of a situation in terms of the facts on the ground?

Providing guidance on how to research situations properly is called teaching.

Asking people for money, or anything else of possible value, is called begging.

Taking money from people is called theft and/or government. 

Exchanging a valued item or idea for something of equal value is called trade. 

Giving something of possible value to someone else is called gifting or dumping, depending on the situation. 

Perhaps a polluted and polluting government has been imposed on you, or even dumped on you, at various times of your life, with or without your informed consent.

Journalism is meant to provide societies with a quality analysis of relevant people, events and situations in a timely way. 

Quality journalism does so in suitably comprehensible and comprehensive ways.

It may do so through relevant news reporting.

It may do so through the deeper assessment of current situations.

It may do so through the careful conduct of accountability interviews with influential people. 

It may do so through the production of insightful audio assessments, audio-visual documentary presentations, visual records through photography and other arts and/or primarily through textual presentations, such as this one.

Quality journalism prevents situations from being misinterpreted.

How purposefully do you review experiences of compatibility and incompatibility, in various situations and relationships?

How well have you been investing in the delights of adequately ethical compatibility, and where is your proof?

How well have you been investing in useful studies to help you improve situations?

How do you define and measure appropriateness in government-related situations?

In every society, except the most corrupt ones, scandalous situations are tolerated only until journalists widely and wisely reveal the extent of the problems.

There have been many scandals associated with lobbyists and political donors.

There have been many scandals involving rude and selfish young men, and older ones.

There have been many scandals associated with financial institutions and the business empires they have financed.

There have been many scandals involving military personnel, equipment and ambitions.

How do you usually review various situations and concepts and experiences in relation to civility and incivility?  

How have you attempted to improve your reviewing abilities, if at all?

How do you usually compare interpretations of situations?

Facing up to problems realistically, and solving them in a timely way, makes situations better.  

But what is the most realistic way to approach difficult situations, particularly ones involving urgent problems?

How do you usually assess human factors in various situations?

Perhaps you regard civility as one of those factual factors, at least in some situations.

How can you be sure you identify and assess facts with adequate accuracy?

How well are you investing in reality, and how do you know, and when will you really know the truth?

In some situations, rudeness may be regarded as a personal asset.  It may allow a rude person to dominate and control and influence and possibly even be admired.  

Much wealth has been acquired through rudeness.

Wealth enables people and organisations to acquire influence, whether the wealth has been acquired directly or indirectly through rudeness or otherwise.

How is it possible to avoid unpleasant situations, particularly those associated with unreasonable decisions when not actually involved in the associated decision-making processes?

Many bad decisions have had long-term, harmful consequences beyond the lifetimes of the decision-makers, as any acquaintance with history will indicate.

Making good decisions requires sufficient information about each unreasonable situation, primarily in order to prevent one's own gullibility from arising but also to overcome and address the evident gullibility of other people.

Good decision-making practices especially requires adequate knowledge of the available choices in order to address situations appropriately.

How do you decide whether a situation is reasonable or unreasonable?

How do you decide whether a situation is dangerous or safe?

How do you decide whether a situation is beyond your control?

How do you decide whether a situation is difficult or not?

How, if at all, do you attempt to maintain civility and equanimity in various situations, including difficult ones?

When do you know for certain that a situation needs to improve?

How do you decide upon the required changes?

When, if ever, have you felt powerless to contribute to a situation requiring improvement? 

How have you attempted to acquaint yourself with patronage opportunities in various parts of the Adelaidezone?  

How have you attempted to acquaint yourself with investment opportunities in various parts of the Adelaidezone?

Who has been your guide in such situations?

How are you usually involved in investing in advanced decision-making practices, whether from or with or in Adelaide or the Adelaidezone or otherwise? 

 How do you assess responsibility and morality in various situations, including your own responsibility and morality?

What do you know about the history of Situationist International and similar groups, and their opponents?