“Diametric Motivational Approach (DMA) combines four different reinforcements (social incentive, progress monitoring, immediate reward, and evaluating consequences) in order to reach the possible full potential of every learner. Its modest origin, scientific foundation, and prospective reach could explain its role in sustainable education.”
I found this excerpt doing a search for “diametric”. It is clear that this belongs to the realm, the world, of social conditioning. The statement only touches briefly on karma in “evaluating consequences”. I suspect that many would subscribe to the notions of motivations it portrays. They have a “what is in it for me” flavour. We could rephrase, “kudos, ambition – advancement, satiation of need / greed, effect or affect”. It is self-ish.
They are largely non Buddhist.
Phrased in a way that does not use “big” words and societal justification of how things should be there is an implicit subscription to the common view of how an “advancing” society might be. There are assumptions and expectations, which may or may not be general. They are to an extent society specific.
Many people want to “win” and “be right”, the notion of victory underpins much of “western” society. There are winners and losers.
If someone wants so very badly to win, they can have a very narrow egocentric perspective. They might adopt a win-at-all-cost mentality. The notion of karmic consequence may not enter their mind (or heart) for even a picosecond. They might imagine others to be similarly victory oriented and it may not occur that others cede to them because they can’t be arsed or they want to make them “happy”.
They may not imagine that someone else might think, “if they need to, let them experience the consequences of their actions upon the karmic potential hypersurface.” There may be no judgement simply a willingness to let the other person explore their own folly {or reasons}.
Winning can be diametrically opposed to letting people experience under some circumstances. One of these orientations has more clarity and less obsession. It might be argued that the more passive person is learning to experience what it means to be a loser. It depends upon the motivation. If one consciously steps back and lets the would be victor move forward, it is different from capitulation.
Aikido uses the force, the energy, of the aggressor and makes space for it to manifest. It can be turned back or simply let to pass by.
Most people do not expect an Aikido like orientation, itching for some level of confrontation as they may be.
Those who have victory may be entirely blind to the consequences of that victory both for themselves and others. They may be unable to see the karma caused by the manner of the victory and even if the consequences manifest, they will be unwilling or unable to see or accept the causal link. As a consequence, they are likely to repeat their folly.
I’ll speculate that many assume and expect that I have a similar motivation to them within the common view of the socially conditioned world. I’ll speculate further that it is impossible for me to persuade people to the contrary and that even if I demonstrated by my actions the truth of this difference, they would be unable to see, accept or appreciate this.
There are many different orientations to life and people can judge those who differ, who do not conform, harshly.
Believe it or not a “loser” can in the long run be the “victor”. That which is won is not material and not subject to rational metric. Loss of attachment is in one context victory. Obsession with attachment is to be the ultimate loser. Freedom is surrendered for trophy and kudos.
There is potential, power, beyond the material and societal. Most do not aim for this, which is a shame.
It takes all sorts…
Dreamyoga 