Firstly, there are the 'facts' as I learned about at University, where I was mostly concerned with learning to communicate accurate science, technology and calculations to other professionals. But now after dealing more with real people, I realise that those things are not sufficient to convey information within a human society, such as a workplace.
This is because people are motivated more by 'emotional response' to a situation. Although we might know (and can re-read) what was recorded in black and white, and although we (or someone who was there) may relate to us what else was said at a particular meeting or gathering, these things are not enough to explain to us "what the atmosphere was like."
Usually, humans like to gossip and discuss these emotional responses with 'eye witnesses' or 'reporters' who may have interviewed those who were there. The way the biology of memory works, each time we recall something, such as when we discuss it with friends, then it is possible that the memory is 'modified' in the light of what the friends say; when it is again re-consolidated into the long-term memory in our brain, it may not be exactly the same as the original.
In our legal system, this unreliability of 'witness statements' is well documented, and the police and courts make every effort to prevent witnesses from discussing the event they have seen with other witnesses until after they have made their formal, legal statements.
For example, someone may say "did you see that woman with the green coat do such-and-such?" and you may say "Oh, I thought she had a blue coat – maybe I was mistaken". However, when the surveillance video is viewed, it may be noted that the woman wore no coat at all!
What I have learnt over the last five years is that there is knowledge, and there is understanding. There are facts, and there is opinion. There are the recorded minutes of the meeting, and there is the eye witness account of someone who was there in the flesh.
One is not more 'valuable' than the other, but both representations are necessary in order for we humans to gain some understanding of 'what actually happened'.
In this, we are not like computers or machines, which will faithfully reproduce the data that is entered into them, time after time after time, with no alterations (unless there is a 'bug' in the system or someone 'hacks in' and tampers with the data).
What interests me, is the innate human ability to gather great amounts of this data and, although they think they faithfully represent it decades later, actually tinge the original observations with other memories and the recollections of others. The story may well become more interesting, even if the black-and-white 'accuracy' has been blurred. But it is a story worth listening to, in any case.
I have learnt, in the workplace, that it is therefore important to not only look at the 'facts', and not only to ask people their emotional response, but also to get responses from several people before deciding on what 'actually may have happened'.
The New Testament is an example of this. The four Gospels were written several decades after the events of Jesus life and ministry, and we can read for ourselves that they did not reproduce reports of what happened in exactly the same way as each other. Biblical scholars testify to three components of their representation – knowledge, memory and experience. Each one of the components, and each one of the separate Gospels, is important in trying to understand 'what really may have happened.'
In my changing role in the workplace, I often come across human resources material that mentions 'knowledge' and 'experience'. I'm beginning to find that this is not an equal 50/50 split as I originally thought, because experience comes bundled with memories about 'why' things were done.
For example, minutes of meetings at the work place do not record the experience or the atmosphere; but when you string together a series of experiences from different perspectives of people who were there, you end up with a well rounded version of events that tell a coherent story. The value of taking the time to do this, is that we can learn lessons from these stories. This is what the Gospels do.
Today, at the work place you can ask, "So what were they thinking when they thought it would be a good idea to…...". If you are aware that human beings are not like computers; that the 'data' that is remembered is partly an emotional response to other humans in the situation, then you can calmly listen to various viewpoints and gain a greater perspective about how to move forward and improve your business, whatever that business may be.
Just like The Gospel presentation, putting together various viewpoints will better encapsulate the experience and the atmosphere. When believers read these various accounts, they can recognise that the Holy Spirit speaks into their heart when they read the Bible. This is one way that the Bible comes alive to those who follow Jesus!