When Worlds Collide

2023-06-08 17:47
ehowton: (emotion)

I've never been accused of being an empath.

I don't have the same trauma-response as the people who can walk into a room and pick up on the mood, or immediately pick up on an unspoken situation. No, I have other gifts; gifts which I feel are equally as powerful insofar as they're also immeasurably helpful, albeit differently. Perhaps even conversely. Those experiencing high emotions however, overtly disagree. But right now, I'm feeling everything - which is unusual for me. I am obviously highly entwined in the given situation.

What gets me in the most trouble is navigating the totality of these complex, dissimilar emotions as valid, despite at times appearing entirely contradictory - which (I assume) comes off as dispassionate, neutral, or even uncaring. Believe it or not, it is actually possible to comprehend how different people may assign different values to the same situation based on wildly varying perspectives. Apparently, it's also possible to feel these conflicting emotions as well - which by the way, isn't nearly as fun as it sounds. But that's who I am. That's my super-power.

When emotions run high, we want to feel loved, supported, and (perhaps to a lesser extent) validated. I can do that - I will do that - but I am capable doing it simultaneously with two different, unequally yoked parties who both probably feel entirely justified in their emotions and their emotions alone - and of course they are! Those feelings are powerfully real. I acknowledge that. I also acknowledge that both parties holding these opposing emotions have equally valid emotions. And that's what gets me in trouble. I mean, I get it, I do - it must be exceedingly difficult to feel, "supported" when the person who has triggered these emotions is also receiving support. Do you know what I find exceedingly difficult to do? Ignore the valid emotions of someone I care about. I'm not big on assigning blame - culpability isn't going to solve conflict.

And to some it may feel like betrayal. Just the idea of not, "picking a side" or blind, unwavering allegiance. I will admit my entire life from birth to death would probably be easier if I were that person.

Alas.
  • ◾ Current Location: 67526
◾ Tags:
  • Memory
  • Share

Comprehending the Incomprehensible

2013-08-18 00:00
ehowton: (Default)

Growing up in the Worldwide Church of God was akin to being in a secret society - no one else understood the things that we understood; during the End Times, we were going to reign over mankind by becoming...gods! We were afforded this luxury through works masquerading as faith - not the stereotypical traditional Christian belief of simplistically accepting Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior, but through following - to the letter - the Old Testament Holy Days. That was the sole path to eternal life through a series of successive biblical resurrections.

Following - to the letter - the Old Testament Holy Days was only half of the equation. The other half was not following traditional faith-based beliefs/behaviors for example the pagan perversion Christmas, and other follow-the-dotted-line activities such as birthdays. If we didn't celebrate the birth of Christ, we certainly weren't going to celebrate (or even for that sake, acknowledge) birthdays. Growing up our own birthdays came and went without so much as a mention because to do so wouldn't honor God (and any fanfare would potentially mark us to be cast into the Lake of Fire from which there was no return).

As I matured and started to question the world around me, many things started disappearing from my priority list - mostly because there were no answers. Its not that I was just super-smart and could out-think or out-reason the answers, rather, there were no answers. At least no answers which made sense, least of all, the very idea surrounding, "faith" as a sustainable course of action. None of this happened very quickly. These types of things rarely do. No, in fact changing one's belief system before one understands how belief systems even work, can take a lifetime. Or in my case, a decade.

To those who are completely devoid of comprehension, why anyone would ever "struggle" with or "question" beliefs instilled in them by another or even ponder the wherewith of the individual doing the instilling (or really, any understanding whatsoever of causation) the entire premise that one's beliefs might change over time due to experience, maturity, or even popular opinion is an entirely foreign concept. Nonetheless, even those in the lowest common denominator are themselves usually capable of taking in new data and processing it. Usually.

So it was of no surprise to me to discover, upon having children of my own, who were going to have birthdays, how I was raised was surely going to conflict with those closest to me. Even my own mother who had since decided all that hooey was just hooey couldn't quite grasp that beliefs which rose and fell during adulthood differed from those which were raised with said beliefs being immutable - which is the problem with beliefs over say, ideas. Ideas can change. We expect ideas to change, to expand, to mutate. But not beliefs. And I'm not talking just religious beliefs. People's worldviews are as fanatically immutable.

So I struggled with changing myself. I struggled with dismantling beliefs which weren't rooted in concrete empiricism, or logic. I worked to dismiss how I was raised from creeping into my decisions and my behavior. Not unexpectedly, it took awhile. I read and learned and questioned and grew and shared all this information with everyone who knew me, from my cult-like beginnings to what I had incrementally overcome. My children never knew the difference in the two me's.

Let's go back to my comments on processing data. Even now, those who were closest to me, and watched firsthand my transformation over nearly ten full years on a day-to-day basis will comment, without skipping a beat, "So now you're celebrating birthdays?"
◾ Tags:
  • Memory
  • Share

Authenticity

2012-11-21 00:00
ehowton: (Default)

Being enamored with intimacy, I give it a lot of thought. More philosophically than applicably, but in cases such as this, surely either one can beget the other. During my last post on the subject I touched on, "authenticity" being paramount as the cornerstone of the intimacy pyramid, but only intimated that it should recur at each level as a sort of anchor. Further analysis demands implicit interpretation.

Authenticity means being genuine - free from pretense. A tall order given the multi-functional shroud of self-identity each of us wears which only shows others what we want them to see, or perhaps more importantly keeps the constructs surrounding our own psyche safely in place. While it might be difficult at best to be genuine with others while hiding truths from ourselves, we'll forgo the psychoanalysis and focus solely on why it is important to be authentic during each level of the Intimacy Pyramid, keeping in mind that if we cannot be genuine and open at the lowest levels, we will never even reach the higher levels. All pyramids of ascending aspirations work on this principle. And that this ascension is in essence a self-strengthening process thus defining the rules which govern the physics behind our structure. That said, we'll start at the beginning - the lowest level of our triangular edifice.

LIKES, INTERESTS & SEX

There are many reasons to not immediately enumerate and disclose the sometimes very stark diversities of our every predilection; context for one, and an ever-evolving worldview for another. Nor is there a reason to feign complete agreeability with another's. Rather, an incorporated spirit of mutuality and open-mindedness can lay a solid groundwork. We don't necessarily have to be personally vested in our partner's interests as long as we are personally vested in our partner. When both parties are authentic in their communication about each other and themselves, and understanding of each other's needs, there is no divisiveness.

GOALS & ASPIRATIONS

As we learn which goals of ours are healthy and which are unhealthy, we may find a far greater shift in our values than the ones we grew up with. As we learn how to focus our attention on those goals everything above and below this level of the pyramid can shift along with it, which is where being authentic with one another becomes paramount. That which intrinsically drives us is not as easy to change as external motivators - this one takes not only sincere honesty with one's partner, but also within ourselves. If we don't know what is alive in us, how can we convince another?

FEARS & CHALLENGES

Our first real foothold into trust-building occurs at this level, as does the opening strains of vulnerability - disclosing to someone other than ourselves that which frightens us, or challenges us. It exposes our weaknesses and is the first step of disrobing from the heavy shroud we use to protect us. A delicate stage, complete honesty - authenticity - is absolutely required, as this will be the support for the remaining levels. We must understand change and causality to conquer this level - and take risks. Failing at this does not mean failure in life, it simply means try, try again. Knowing oneself doesn't mean just admitting to ourself we have shortcomings. It means knowing what they are, then actively working to overcome them. Otherwise the point it moot.

DIALOG

Constant communication. About everything. Not what we're doing, but why we're doing it. What we think, what we feel. Dialog is the linchpin of this entire construct. Not only can we not go any further without it, it can undo everything beneath us. Likes, interests & sex were forged with communication (and in fact a sort of communication themselves), and goals, aspirations, fears & challenges were normalized by it - hardened and tempered. Of all of these, dialog is imperative. Many successful relationships do not require anything past this very point, as it is the culmination of everything which came before it, and perpetuates it indefinitely.

TRANSPARENCY, VULNERABILITY & RECIPROCIOTY

For those of us unfulfilled without end goals - ongoing growth, experience & contribution - the top tier of intimacy is, almost interchangeably, transparency, vulnerability and reciprocity. Simply put, these cannot be reached without completely shedding ourselves of attachment and self-identity, and that requires more than complete honesty with another person, it demands first that we are authentic with ourselves. Intimacy and volatility cannot co-exist at these levels for the obvious reasons that it goes against the very nature of them. One cannot be truly transparent if the outcome is in question, nor can one be vulnerable to another if an emotional outburst were to occur - its exactly the opposite of relationship-building. Discovering that one can momentarily be flooded with emotion without drowning or without having to escape or erupt is a sign of maturational evolution.

A quietness of mind doesn't mean a quietness of spirit. On the contrary it is essential to focus. Mindfulness is not near as important on the first four sections of the pyramid as it is on the last three. Autonomously comprehending universal rules which are rational and logical means in and of oneself - know what you know and know what you don't know - and know why. Constant and unprovoked reaffirmation is the internal system of checks and balances which ensure a well-oiled machine. That which is tended to can never rust!
  • ◾ Current Location: 67114
◾ Tags:
  • Memory
  • Share

Winning

2012-10-13 00:00
ehowton: (Default)


Correspondent Andrea Canning: "Are you bi-polar?"
Charlie Sheen: "I'm bi-winning."

Having read (and understood) the Paul David Walker (CEO Coach) statement, "Your thoughts, beliefs, ideas and other cognitive forms are only an approximation of reality. Not reality itself. We have experiences that cause insight into reality, and then we form cognitive frameworks to describe and categorize those experiences. There is no way that a description of an experience can duplicate the full reality." made me realize how fortunate I was to have the ability to not only recognize my shortcomings, but also trace them back (at least in proximation) to their roots and perhaps even more dazzling, be able to temporarily compensate for them when discussion arises. This is also why I greatly enjoy any new shortcomings of mine being pointed out, for if not an answer, it might at least be another clue! Paul David Walker goes on to say, "The key to wisdom is to know the difference between your wild hopes and fears and common sense, intuition or true wisdom. They often seem the same, but they are not. There is a distinct difference in the feeling. One comes from your thinking about your own thoughts, and the other comes from a direct experience of reality. Great leaders know when they are lost in their conditioned thoughts and when their thoughts come from insight into reality. Knowing `the difference` takes practice." Do you practice? If they feel similar and it requires practice to know the difference and you don't practice...how do you ever justify anything you do or think?

I came across a conversation recently between two adults concerning unintentional offense. The one who was offended admitted to having some emotional triggers, and while he didn't want to foster an environment where anyone was "walking on eggshells" he thought that other people should avoid his own personal triggers as he endeavored to avoid theirs. The problem with not taking personal responsibility for one's own shortcomings however, is what creates the eggshell scenario. It is no one else's job to be responsible for YOUR triggers. The very idea stems from entitlement, and entitlement stems from something far darker - our old friend cognitive distortion.

The relationship between personal responsibility and cognitive distortion didn't come to me right away, only after a very specific event occurred; one in which the party who was vying against personal responsibility made the comment to a third party that he'd "won" by getting an apology from the "offending" party. It wasn't at all about maturity; rather winning, losing, and blame. Those who embrace personal responsibility never place blame on anyone else - they understand the complexity of causality. I'm sincerely beginning to believe that anyone who plays the blame game is cognitively distorted. Those who see life in such all-or-nothing extremes end up hurting everyone, including themselves, in order to "win" as suggested by R. K. Jain, Harry C. Triandis in their book, Management of Research and Development Organizations: Managing the Unmanageable, pg. 162:

Research shows that the win-lose orientation is associated with cognitive distortion, that make the outcome of the conflict undesirable for both sides. The "product" that is an outcome of this conflict (e.g., a negotiated agreement) is likely to be poor. In such cases the position of the in-group is perceived as very much more desirable than the position of the out-group. While the in-group knows its position well, it does not know or fully understand the position of the out-group. The position of the in-group appears to be much more desirable than it is. The "common ground" between the two positions is seen as belonging to the in-group's solution, and the in-group perceives only its own postilion as acceptable, using a "narrow cognitive field" to understand the positions of the various parties. In other words, in the win-lose orientation, the group look at the conflict in a distorted, overly simple way.

Expectation determines one's perception of any given result - and we know on which path expectation lays, the path of cognitive distortion. There is simply no getting around it. But the win-lose scenario is also one perception of the basis of compromise, giving up something for something else you want more. Brad Spangler (Beyond Interactability) says, "Critics of the compromise approach to conflict solution believe that people should not have to make concessions as much as they do when they engage in negotiation. Proponents of integrative or interest-based bargaining argue that if people are open about their real wants and needs, then a win-win solution can often be found that provides what both sides want without compromise."

Real wants and needs. Remembering of course that "being honest with yourself is is not so easy. There's a little think called self-deception that gets in the way."* ARE WE ALL STRIVING FOR SELF-IMPROVEMENT HERE OR JUST TRYING TO SKATE BY?

As usual, this rabbit hole has netted me knowledge - something I was previously unaware of. According to Psychology Today these black & white thinkers DO feel more than we do. I'd heard it said but I didn't believe it; couldn't (at the time) find any validation on the subject. But they do feel much more than we do. "Their emotions are more intense. Brain studies show that the `emotional` centers of the brain actually overpower the `logical` centers. On a scale of 1 to 10...they're at six or over and cannot then be reasoned with." This abnormal, uncontrollable phenomenon leads to Emotional Dysregulation - which is akin to thinking that even an iota of emotional management equals suppression. What's the solution? I have no idea. But every time they think they've "won" then we have all lost.






Question everything generally thought to be obvious.
~Dieter Rams

  • ◾ Current Location: 67114
◾ Tags:
  • Memory
  • Share

Security Deposit

2012-09-08 00:00
ehowton: (Default)

There are, arguably, lots of different reasons for bad behavior. That of course doesn't excuse the bad behavior - it never does. It just means that generally you suck as a human being - if you use your upbringing or your stressors as an excuse. Maturity, in part, is the ability to identify and over come bad behavior. Some can do it, some cannot. I'm really okay with that. As long as I don't have to interact with you.

But sometimes its inevitable. And even I, it would appear, am still not above being surprised at depths of psychosis of some people. I would have to say that I am generally trusting of everyone. But the longer I live, the less true that actually is. I saw a beautiful blonde at a stoplight several months back and my second thought was, "I wonder if in her world-view she suffers from expectation, having rigid rules which she believes will always apply no matter what external circumstances are?" It made me sad to think of her as unhappy in her needless frustration, always wondering why things never worked out the way she thought they should.

And I certainly didn't expect my renter to spray blood and urine all over the house requiring a Texas-law biohazard cleanup or to stuff a chain into the garbage disposal until it burned out because he believed he should have had a free-month's rent rather than returning his not insubstantial security deposit, which all of a sudden I'm glad we had. Taking the money was a lot easier (and cheaper) than suing him.

We also have a overwhelmingly efficient and magnificent property manager. I wish I was rich enough to give her the money!

I used to say in the lines of this blog too often that in general, I hated people. But the more distanced from them I became and the more I sought the middle path, the more I've let go of it. Its times like these that help bring me back to center - that even though his "needs" may have not been "met" immaturity and bad behavior is the retarded offspring of kissing cousins and probably make up a greater percentage of the general population than even I'd like to admit.
  • ◾ Current Location: 67114
◾ Tags:
  • Memory
  • Share

Values: The Beating Heart of Behavior

2012-06-28 00:00
ehowton: (Default)




I recently made the deductive statement that one's personal values surely changed as one ascended from one hierarchical need to the next, but when asked to back up my claim I found I wasn't immediately able to deduce why that may be the case. After all, aren't values inherent to who we are not only immovably individual, but also collectively cultural? This is what I have set out to prove or disprove.

In starting my search, I first had to define values - aren't they our guiding principles to differentiate between right and wrong and good and evil? Much easier to subjugate when I was younger, but now that I'm older and have my own thoughts about things, not so much. Perhaps maturity modifies ones values? After all, the passing of time allows intervals for experience; experience may yield lessons; lessons afford us the opportunity to learn; learning expands knowledge; knowledge which can be utilized grants us wisdom; wisdom changes us irrevocably. But is wisdom alone maturity?

"Maturity indicates how a person responds to the circumstances or environment in an appropriate manner. This response is generally learned and encompasses being aware of the correct time and place to behave and knowing when to act appropriately, according to the situation and the culture of the society one lives in."* So a learned response! And what is this about behavior all of a sudden, I thought we were discussing values?

People act according to their values which come from beliefs that stem from their worldview.*

So...values dictate to us how we act; behave. Interesting! I suppose one ought to start with their worldview in order to understand how that translates to behavior, because values seem to be affected by the beliefs which are spawned from it. So what is a worldview? James W. Sire, in Discipleship of the Mind, defines world view as, "... a set of presuppositions...which we hold...about the makeup of our world." Ah, presuppositions!

Presuppositions rest upon that which a person considers to be the truth of what exists. People's presuppositions lay a grid for all they bring forth into the external world. Their presuppositions also provide the basis for their values and therefore the basis for their decisions." ~Francis Schaeffer

Basically, your worldview is what you think the world ought to be. Where have we heard that word "ought" before? SHOULD STATEMENTS – Patterns of thought which imply the way things "should" or "ought" to be rather than the actual situation the person is faced with.

Basically worldviews are manifestations of cognitive distortion! Now we're getting somewhere.

If you deny that your worldview fundamentally affects what you think and do, then you must acknowledge that your behavior is impulsive, reflexive, or emotional at best; ignorant or irrational at worst. Assuming that a worldview can be incorrect or at least inappropriate, if your worldview is erroneous, then your behavior is misguided, even wrong. If you fail to examine, articulate, and refine your worldview, then your worldview may in fact be wrong, with the above consequences, and you will always be ill-prepared to substantiate your beliefs and justify your acts, for you will have only proximate opinions and direct sensory evidence as justification.*

If we are supposed to, "examine, articulate, and refine" our worldview, then by default a change in our beliefs, values, and behavior will follow. Not only does it alter our values, but so does everything connected to it, every single time we reevaluate. And I aggressively reevaluate without provocation.







Like a stack of dominoes, once your worldview is modified, so then are the beliefs which are built atop it - "You want your beliefs to change. It's proof that you are keeping your eyes open, living fully, and welcoming everything that the world and people around you can teach you."* This means that peoples' beliefs should evolve as they gain new experiences, and when a person changes one belief, a multitude of other beliefs seem also to change simultaneously and effortlessly. Dispositionalism suggests that by changing the surrounding beliefs and desires, very different behavior may result.* As we have seen, the link between beliefs and behavior, are values.

If our worldview can and should change as we learn more, which can and rightly should then change our beliefs, then absolutely our values not only can change to match, but also should. This is covered in chapter 9 of the critical thinking textbook, Think where they discuss Lawrence Kohlberg's Development of Moral Reasoning. Development; growth, a process. Not only can values modify themselves, there is an identified, repeatable sequence - it is how we know what values are and measure them. A person's stage of moral development is correlated with his or her behavior.

  1. PRECONVENTIONAL VALUES
    • Stage 1
      • Does only what needs to be done to take care of self and avoid punishment.

    • Stage 2
      • Satisfy own needs first, consider other's needs only if it benefits you.


  2. CONVENTIONAL VALUES
    • Stage 3
      • Put other's needs first, maintain good relationships, conform to peer norms and seek approval from others.

    • Stage 4
      • Respect authority and societal norms; maintain existing social order.


  3. POSTCONVENTIONAL VALUES


Unfortunately less than 10% of American adults ever reach the postconventional level or moral reasoning; values. People with lower levels of moral reasoning tend to come up with simplistic solutions and then are baffled when they do not work. People outgrow their old way of thinking *when* it becomes inadequate for resolving more complex problems. Movement to a higher stage is usually triggered by new ideas or experiences that conflict with their worldview.

Now comes the really interesting part. You don't have to continue living by the same values. You can consciously change them - even radically if desired. You can go from a person who values peace most highly to one whose top priority is success, or vice versa. You are not your values. You are the thinker of your thoughts, but you are not the thoughts themselves. Your values are your current compass, but they aren't the real you. Why would you ever want to change your values? You may want to change your values when you understand and accept where they are taking you, and you realize that what you appear to value right now will not enable you to enjoy the "best" possible life for you.*

Which brings us to behavior. Behavior is the visible portion of our values - which we now understand to be a very fluid thing based on our ever-changing environment and our open-minded incorporation of new data. You cannot be open-minded and remain unchanged. Because of the trickle-up effect we've just outlined, if you find yourself behaving the same year after year, month after month or even day after day you know you are close-minded because your worldview has not changed.

So what are values? Here's a list of 418 of them. The author of that list says, "The next step is to prioritize your list. This is usually the most time consuming and difficult step because it requires some intense thinking." But don't forget our magnificent ability to think we are things we are not! From my Relationships post:

But being honest with yourself is is not so easy. There's a little thing called self-deception that gets in the way.*

I run across this all the time - people who think their values embody something like benevolence and goodwill but who's visible actions denote fear or greed. So while your behavior may be inconsistent with your stated values, there is no such thing as a right or wrong list. Just be aware that someone else's value priority may be different than your own, and this will absolutely manifest itself through behavior.

Me and my values? They are changing all the time. Every time I have a new thought, or leap to a new conclusion, or reach some personal milestone. My values these days are meta-values, those which underpin the kind of peace which can only come from a successful familiarization with one's self. In attempting to compile my list from the 418 options I was shocked I couldn't find my highest priority on there:


Symmetry.




  • ◾ Current Location: 67114
◾ Tags:
  • Memory
  • Share

The Sustainability of Blame

2012-06-24 11:49
ehowton: (Default)

Blame fascinates me. It fascinated me as a child and it fascinates me now. When I hear it from my children, I use it as a tool of instruction - to better their lives. When I hear it from an adult a little piece of me withers and dies because it kills me to see a grown-up confused about simple social constructs.

Fault-finding can be a powerful coping mechanism for children who require absolution from wrongdoing, and I applaud it and use it, applying it liberally as needed. But nothing screams "I am petulantly immature" as when an adult uses it, especially as a coping mechanism. Maturity provides us with much more effective tools in which to cope than blame - this, on the heels of [livejournal.com profile] pcofwildthings' post of the TED video on being wrong. Apparently I am the aberration in the world for teaching my children to celebrate failure as the world's most effective learning tool. Guess what? Even as an adult I too can still learn through failure. The rest of world apparently fears it, doesn't understand it, or fears that which they do not understand. Two of those scare me, one of them I can work with.

So when something goes wrong, what do you do?

Primitive (Childish) Defense Mechanisms

  • ACTING OUT*

    • "Acting out" refers to the discharge by means of action, rather than by means of verbalization, of conflicted mental content; Emotional Management - "The ability to manage emotions effectively is a key part of emotional intelligence. Regulating emotions, responding appropriately to them and keeping them in check despite wanting to do otherwise are all important aspects of emotional management."

      • PROBLEM SOLVING EFFECTIVENESS: Not effective; Problem still exists.



  • REGRESSION*

    • When confronted by stressful events, people sometimes abandon coping strategies and revert to patterns of behavior used earlier in development. For example, an individual might cry or sulk upon hearing unpleasant news.

      • PROBLEM SOLVING EFFECTIVENESS: Not effective; Problem still exists.



  • PROJECTION*

    • The misattribution of a person’s undesired thoughts, feelings or impulses onto another person who does not have those thoughts, feelings or impulses. Projection is used especially when the thoughts are considered unacceptable for the person to express, or they feel completely ill at ease with having them. For example, a spouse may be angry at their significant other for not listening, when in fact it is the angry spouse who does not listen. Projection is often the result of a lack of insight and acknowledgement of one’s own motivations and feelings.

      • PROBLEM SOLVING EFFECTIVENESS: Not effective; Problem still exists.



  • DENIAL*

    • Its not just a river in Egypt! It is the refusal to accept reality or fact, acting as if a painful event, thought or feeling did not exist. Children do this, as to immature adults. Many people use denial in their everyday lives to avoid dealing with painful feelings or areas of their life they don’t wish to admit.

      • PROBLEM SOLVING EFFECTIVENESS: Not effective; Problem still exists.



  • DISASSOCIATION*

    • Inability to recall important personal information that is too extensive to be explained by ordinary forgetfulness.

      • PROBLEM SOLVING EFFECTIVENESS: Not effective; Problem still exists.



  • REACTION FORMATION*

    • Freud believed that anxiety is an unpleasant inner state that people seek to avoid. In an attempt to protect ourselves from this anxiety, people employ reaction formation unconsciously in their daily lives. Reaction formation involves adopting opposite feelings, impulses or behavior. Someone adopting a reaction formation defense strategy would treat a spouse or loved one in the same manner in which they’d treat a hated enemy. Another example would be that two people really fond of each other fight all the time to suppress their desire of love for each other.

      • PROBLEM SOLVING EFFECTIVENESS: Not effective; Problem still exists.


There are however more mature defense strategies - coping mechanisms which afford us a greater flexibility in maintaining our sanity while simultaneously addressing the stressor. In learning about myself more and more, I find I employ neither the mature nor the primitive, rather the few in between, to varying degrees of success. Or failure. I have used "repression" - albeit not unconsciously, and "undoing" to less effectiveness than my primary mode of coping, which I recently learned was "intellectualization."

Intellectualization is a 'flight into reason', where the person avoids uncomfortable emotions by focusing on facts and logic. The situation is treated as an interesting problem that engages the person on a rational basis, whilst the emotional aspects are completely ignored as being irrelevant. Jargon is often used as a device of intellectualization. By using complex terminology, the focus becomes on the words and finer definitions rather than the human effects.*

This is exactly me, warts and all. I assume, perhaps incorrectly knowing what I now know, that by first understanding the logic, I can then allow my feelings to catch-up. Then again, I know myself very, very well and how I act/react to certain stimuli through a rigorous regime of scenario running - my entire life has been a construct of problem solving by viewing problems as parts of an overall (holistic) system in an attempt to piece together outcomes or events based upon development of (causal) intended/unintended consequences rather than reacting to specific or individual parts in isolation - the behavior behind the seemingly innocuous event rather than focusing on the innocuous event itself. My global thinking, while sometimes a grievous hindrance to my own wisdom though incomprehension of simplistic ideas allows for a marvelous feedback-loop of self-correction. In my opinion. Your own outsider's view on this may vary :)

A feedback loop involves four distinct stages. First comes the data: A behavior must be measured, captured, and stored. This is the evidence stage. Second, the information must be relayed to the individual, not in the raw-data form in which it was captured but in a context that makes it emotionally resonant. This is the relevance stage. But even compelling information is useless if we don’t know what to make of it, so we need a third stage: consequence. The information must illuminate one or more paths ahead. And finally, the fourth stage: action. There must be a clear moment when the individual can recalibrate a behavior, make a choice, and act. Then that action is measured, and the feedback loop can run once more, every action stimulating new behaviors that inch us closer to our goals.*

Be mindful. Strive continuously for self-improvement. Never become complacent. And aggressively reevaluate without provocation.

Namaste.




Happiness isn't just the destination, its also the journey. ~ehowton

  • ◾ Current Location: 67114
◾ Tags:
  • Memory
  • Share

The Golden Rule

2010-11-14 13:05
ehowton: (Default)

Compassion isn't a political agenda item. Peace and conservationism aren't Leftist ideas, yet modern-day pundits decry it as a Socialist movement - something which threatens to tear the fabric of Democracy from our fingertips. Mention "giving" or "helping" or "recycling" and young Conservatives immediately close their minds to the liberal propaganda which is sure to follow, when in fact its these very ideas - peace, love, giving - that all people, regardless of political alignment, strive for and promote every single day. Conservatives tend to just not want it legislated. That's different than not giving.

Compassion is not a political weapon to be wielded. Its not to be denied, nor assigned to any group of people. Its a universal label, to be applied freely by all. Where then lies the stigma?

The problem isn't necessarily the Right and Left Wing talk show hosts equally stewing feverishly in their spun tales - for anyone with any level of maturity will soon come to realize neither camp is ever completely honest. In fact the very basis of that hosts existence, no matter which side they're on, is to accuse the other side of doing it wrong. My conservative friends don't listen to Olbermann, and my liberal friends don't listen to Rush. Unless its to get inflamed about something - because its the perfect environment for that; An emotional powderkeg. They don't listen to their respective personalities out of anything more than confirmation. Justification for their thoughts and actions.

No, the problem (as always) is people. People who are too busy lining up to be labeled to listen to what's being said. I am by no means advocating "vote for the person instead of the party" rather, I'm asking everyone to just take a step back from politics for a moment and consider the harm its doing to our opinions of one another by way of these labels, and the part you're playing through the propagation of this myth - the myth that your politics or religions are making this world a better place.

If you really wanted to make the world a better place, you'd lay down your political party and your religion and you would follow the ethic of reciprocity: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

I don't follow this advice more than when I'm behind the wheel of my car. I treat everyone how I wish I were treated, and my short commute is filled with the happy thoughts of a nation of drivers who aren't rude, careless, ignorant, angry, or stupid. Hands down its one of the more difficult things I do during the course of my day because it hurts my soul that most people simply don't care.

These same people, they've labeled themselves and call themselves by any number of names: Republican, Christian, Democrat, atheist, liberal, conservative...and they all pride themselves on being more open-minded than those who disagree with them. How wonderfully flawed.

Truly living by treating others as you yourself would like to be treated would culminate in a whole host of other little problems given our diverse nature, but it would be a damn fine start to a better world.

All of them, better worlds.
  • ◾ Current Location: 75409
  • ◾ Current Music: Newman - Plesantville
◾ Tags:
  • Memory
  • Share

Profile

ehowton: (Default)
ehowton
ehowton photography

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Page Summary

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags