Recently I was driving on one of the long and open California Highways, lost in my own thoughts, as I heard a low and raspy voice tearing through the thin garments of my mental imagery. The radio station I happened to be on presented seemingly rational and specific arguments against the evolution theory, and in the defense of creationism. "How peculiar" - I thought to myself. "Past attempts of resolving complex matters in an "either or" fashion has always and inevitably proved to be misguided."

So many times we find ourselves negotiating and attempting to resolve a conflict. Sometimes the conflict is external, between us and our spouse, for example. At other times the conflict is internal, and we could catch ourselves saying something like: "One part of me wants X, and the other part of me wants Y." Even better example is when we observe someone gesturing with one hand, as if they hold something in it, saying: "On one hand" as they bounce the hand in the air, and then pursue to put up another hand, saying: "and on the other hand" as they bounce the second hand. These are examples of overt behaviors that point out to a currently experienced conflict that the person would like resolved.

Can you think of a time when you felt torn between two options, two possibilities or alternatives? I bet you remember this experience to be less than comfortable. We tend to dislike dilemmas or conflicts and tend to seek ways to resolve it. In this particular instance the argument between creationism and evolutionism seemed so huge and fundamental, it was hard to think of a place to even start thinking about it-now think about it!

As I was contemplating the issue, two key principles of Neuro-Linguistic Programming, also known as NLP, came to mind: Law of Requisite Variety and The Principle of Hierarchy of Ideas. First, allow me to entertain you with a quick explanation of what these principles are:

The Law of Requisite Variety has been adopted by social science from cybernetics. In simplified form it means that the one with the most flexibility of behavior will control the entire system. For example, children many times exhibit vastly larger flexibility of behavior than adults. Screaming bloody murder, throwing themselves on the floor, rolling across the aisle kicking and screaming just to get the toy they want, is quite a flexible behavior indeed. Since most of us had the pleasure to be either participant or a sympathetic observer of these behavioral fireworks in local supermarkets, it is rather clear that in most cases the children were in charge of the situation.

One of my friends mentioned an instance in which her 3-year old son decided to exercise his lungs and rolling abilities in the living room, while demanding desert instead of the dinner. She decided to join the festivities and outdo the behavioral flexibility of her child by rolling harder and screaming louder. A moment later she noticed her son stopped the show and was staring at his mother with bafflement and concern. In this case my friend exhibited larger behavioral flexibility and got back in charge of the situation.

Hierarchy of Ideas is another important NLP law, which states that the one who controls the level of abstraction in the communication, controls the communication itself. Any issue that comes to mind can be either chunked down toward more specificity, or chunked up toward more generalization and abstraction. If I am the one doing the chunking, I am the one leading and controlling the conversation or negotiation. For example, let us take a car as an example, since I love my car. To chunk down toward more details you could ask "Which car specifically do you have?" The answer would be Honda, Beemer, Mazda, etc. And to chunk up toward more abstraction you could ask "What is a car an example of?" Well, a car could be an example of transportation, or an example of things made of metal, or an example of technology.

Something to keep in mind is that the more abstract we get, or using the NLP lingo - the more chunked up we get, the easier it is to reach agreement. All of the things that we consider to be universal truths are abstract. The more abstract we get in our communication, the easier it is to resolve a conflict. For example, one of the universals is that everyone wants to be happy. Most people have a very different idea as of what specifically "happy" means, however, the more abstract we get in our communication, the easier it is to agree that everyone wants to be "happy," right?

The beauty of NLP is in its vast scope of applications, from therapy and business, to arguments with your spouse and customer service. After all, Neurolinguistics is a study of communication, and we communicate all the time. So let us get back to the specific argument of creationism vs. evolutionism, while we are putting our NLP hat on.

First, shall we agree that instead of only two possible standpoints of either evolution or creation there could be more possibilities and combinations? Lets use what we know this far to see how through controlling the level of abstraction in our conversation we can reach agreement. What an awesome tool to have in relationships! So lets start with creationism and chunk up toward the bigger picture and the higher level of abstraction:

- What is the purpose of creationism?

I would say the purpose of it is to understand the world around us in its entire diversity, as well as our place in it.

- And what would be the intention of that?

Perhaps, to understand the laws of creation and the laws of the Divine.

- To understand the Laws. Great! For what purpose?

To get a glimpse into the Divine, and ultimately, a better understanding of ourselves, humans.

- What is the intention of better understanding ourselves?

To be more in charge of ourselves, our destiny, and the world around us.

- And what would be the purpose of that?

To understand and strive toward actualization of our true potential, to be a harmonious part of creation (in Divine grace), and ultimately, to be happy.

Now, lets examine evolutionism and chunk up the idea of evolutionism to get to the bigger picture and higher level of abstraction:

- What is the purpose of the evolution theory?

The theory attempts to explain the world around us and its origins, including the origins of humans.

- For what purpose?

Possibly, to understand ourselves and the world around us.

- And what is the intention of that?

Perhaps, to master ourselves and our world.

- For what purpose?

To fulfill our potential, our creative genius, and ultimately, to be happy.

As we are playing with the levels of abstraction, moving from a specific idea or term, to the bigger picture of a meaning and purpose, we discover something interesting. There is really no conflict between the ideas of Creationism and Evolution, is there?

On one hand, the Divine does not operate with a magic wand, and things do not just pop out of the blue, do they? (Well, except your In-Laws). The Divine operates through Laws and Principles, which science explores through a variety of methodologies and tools.

On the other hand, scientific methodology is clearly limited and science always has a list of phenomena which it cannot adequately and fully explain at this time. There is no need to look far. Human body and mind have plenty of yet resolved mysteries and abilities beyond current scientific understanding, such as the placebo effect, some of the phenomena exhibited in hypnosis, etc.

Once we agree to keep an open mind and an attitude of curiosity, we make the first step toward deeper understanding of ourselves and our world. This is the attitude from which the entire body of knowledge currently known and Neurolinguistic Programming, or NLP, was born.