In truth, I am usually thinking outside their box. I don’t say this to judge harshly or absolutely. Each of us has our own pattern or structure for how we process our experience of the world around us.  Some are more comfortable with strict absolute rules and boxes and frameworks by which to lead their lives. Others seek to in a more free floating and relative way of approaching the different paths and choices. Some are simply a "balloon without a string”.

Oh, you have a box. I am not getting in there with you Not room in there

I have found that it is not uncommon to be told, 

“It seems that you are really thinking “outside the box”. 

My common response with a smile is

“There’s a box ?” 

In truth, I am usually thinking outside their box. I don’t say this to judge harshly or absolutely. Each of us has our own pattern or structure for how we process our experience of the world around us.  Some are more comfortable with strict absolute rules and boxes and frameworks by which to lead their lives. Others seek to in a more free floating and relative way of approaching the different paths and choices. Some are simply a "balloon without a string".

As years have passed, I also have become more familiar and comfortable with the knowing that some people just need the "box" more than others. 

For some people, it appears that they have an easier time of thinking when they do it within the boundaries of a "box". It is as if it is a safer more controlled environment in which the familiar 'more traveled road" is desired because it is not necessary to consider options or rethink another scenario to the "story" that they live. Many seem to be more insistent on wanting to talk about the box than they do the contents of the box.

Conflict among people doesn't really come from people being different. But, rather from those who demand a "box" of rigid rules and codes of conduct not just for themselves but seek to impose them on everyone around them. Many times, they don't even have a reason or rationale for specific beliefs or choices. These people very commonly quote either science or scripture as 'fact" and proceed to use these to bolster the sides of their box. They seem unwilling to accept that they created the "box" or it was given to them by others who they have never considered questioning. This can result in not accepting responsibility for the "authorship" of one's own reality or at the very least the interpretation and "story" of one's own experience. This leads to political behavior which demands the restriction and limitation of the freedoms and behaviors of others. It enables the practice of religious behavior which is focused on telling others what they "should not do" rather than inspire them. Both religiously and politically, this "lifestyle" of judgement is practiced by demanding rights for one's self which we are unwilling equally to give to others. We expect respect for our own beliefs and yet condemn those expressed by others.

When we realize the nature of the "box" and that it's rigid conformity requires that thoughts or solutions to challenges must fit within the confines of what is known or been done or tried. Knowing that trying the same thing over and over again while each time expecting a different results is said to be a definition of "insanity".

What if you approach situations by "drawing" rather than coloring within the lines. By considering that it is more important to ask "how" is it possible, rather than "is it" possible. To question whether when someone of either medical or political profession tells you , "Nothing can be done for a specific condition or challenge. They may be expressing the limit or lack of their own knowledge or imagination rather than absolute fact.