Consequently, theshape of the gridlock [9], in which further progression towards an ever-greater executive capacity givento a selected group of institutions has become nearly impossible, is not an anomaly to be overcome.The gridlock is the only configuration in which the global system could have settled. It isthe configuration any system is bound to adopt when it is composed of a multitude of differentlypositioned, differently oriented, heterogeneous decision-makers, operating in different dimensionsand scales, none of which universally dominant and all are co-dependent and constrained by others.

In summary, X, Y and Z clearly occupy entirely different positions in the social fabric andeach experiences life entirely differently. They live with entirely different sets of constraints andopportunities and consequently face different challenges both psychologically and in their interactionswith the rest of the world. And yet, all three of them suffer from a cognitive dissonance between theirindividual drives and dispositions and the demands of the social roles they feel obliged to play.

examining the options available to individual persons weighing a decision vis-a-vis theirperceived socio-symbolically cohered contour. For that, let us look at a few concrete examples.

Accordingly, the life conditions describe a person’s material and immaterial conditions,whereas the lifeworld describes the subjective perspective pertaining to these conditions

The Life We Live and the Life We Experience: Introducing theEpistemological Difference between “Lifeworld” (Lebenswelt) and “LifeConditions” (Lebenslage)

The subject of this article is theintroduction of a lifeworld-concept, that is based on an epistemological distinction between“lifeworld” (Lebenswelt) and “life conditions” (Lebenslage).