Awakening From Your Anger

Category: Important Concepts

  • Why We Ignore Climate Change, Part 2

    distrust04

    These posts explore a précis I did of George Marshall’s book Don’t Even Think About It: Why Our Brains Are Wired To Ignore Climate Change (2014), starting 20170122. In reading the book, I was surprised by some of the research that he encountered. Hence, I believe it important to disseminate his findings.

    Chapter 6. The jury of our peers. How we follow the people around us. We watch the behavior of others to identify an appropriate response to situations (the bystander effect or pluralistic ignorance). If no one is responding to a crisis, then it must not be a crisis! However, caution must be noted with the slippery we.

    Again — trust! But in attempting to generate inclusion and response (the ‘slippery we’), it is easy to alienate those who do trust the “message.”

    Chapter 7. The power of the mob. How bullies hide in the crowd. According to self-categorization theory, we seek to establish similarity with the groups that we identify with, and differences against the people who are not like us. This leads both sides to under-estimate the diversity of views within their own ranks and those of their opponents. One of the consequences is that the in-group often develops a sense of superiority. The advent of the Internet has produced entirely new areas of communication, and has allowed frequent outright bullying of the out-group because of the anonymity provided.

    The noise of our culture distracts from awareness. Here, for me, Marshall identifies one of the major complexities of modern living — we have too many people, many of whom are  formulating logical and ethical difficulties (of which a major one is global warming) as emotional issues. And in so doing, they add huge noise which confuses the system.

    Chapter 8. Through a glass darkly. The strange world of climate deniers. For conservatives, climate change has become an issue at just the right time to replace the Red Menace bogeyman that had so long been the mobilizing enemy.

    Disinformation! Marshall suggests that a major transition in the climate denial store occurred with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. It is a fascinating hypothesis, and one that is consistent with the emotional issues.

    Chapter 9. Inside the elephant. Why we keep searching for enemies. In the end, many struggles come down to there being identifiable vested interests; however, we usually forget that we are participants in those interests. The real difficulty is your own immaturity, especially our inability to deal with our own shadows.

    In a super-wicked difficulty, we are the participants. This is the central thesis of this blog — that the major issue is our acedia, our unwillingness to engage in the painful struggle to maturity. For me, Marshall correctly identifies that we “need to find narratives based on cooperation, mutual interests, and our common humanity.”

    Summary #1. Those who passionately accept or passionately deny climate change have one thing in common: they are regard each other as a major threat. However, in between these two conflicting groups, the vast majority of people find it difficult to give any importance to the issue at all; they happily identify that there is a problem, but otherwise, they give it a little  consideration.

    An accurate assessment of the complexity.

    Chapter 10. The two brains. Why we are so poorly evolved to deal with climate change. Our psychological evolution has prepared us to respond strongly to four key triggers (PAIN): personal, abrupt, immoral, now. Climate change triggers none of these. We can understand the difficulty of climate change with our rational brains, but this does not trigger the emotional brain into action. Climate activists maximize the data without impacting the emotional brain; climate deniers activate emotions, and minimize the data; whereas the group in the middle are aware of the data, and are waiting to see the emotional responses generated as social cues.

    Again, an accurate assessment of the complexity.

    Chapter 11. Familiar yet unimaginable. Why climate change does not feel dangerous. There are two main drivers of risk perception: 1) dread risk, intergenerational and irreversible, a sense of powerlessness in the face of involuntary and catastrophic impacts, and 2) unknown risk, invisible and unprecedented, an anxiety that comes from the uncertainty of new and unforeseen danger. Because climate change does not have the stigma of attack, and extreme weather events have a degree of familiarity, the uncertainty of climate change does not instill dread or danger. Rather, there is leeway to “believe what you want.” Climate change does not feel threatening, unless you choose to feel that it is.

    See the next comment.

    Chapter 12. Uncertain long-term costs. Why our cognitive biases line up against climate change. Climate change lacks salience: it is abstract, distant, invisible, and disputed. It requires the acceptance of short-term costs to mitigate higher but uncertain losses in the far future. In addition, disinformation has created uncertainty. To mobilize people, an issue needs to be emotional; it needs to have immediacy and salience — our decisions are directed by largely intuitive mental shortcuts (cognitive biases). It is possible that no amount of psychological awareness will overcome people’s reluctance to lower their standards of living.

    Sad! As I look around at this very moment on a cold but sunny day in Canadian winter, I do not feel threatened, and I can easily fall into the numbness of “what’s the big deal.” Yet, intellectually, the complexity of the issues overwhelms me, and I truly believe we are shortly destined for extinction. We do not seem capable of managing such complexity.

    To be continued.

  • Anger #06 The Pot

    Comment: The metaphor of this email, that of the mind being a pot of stew, is very useful for recognizing the origin of most of our thoughts and feelings, as well as the options of how many people become pressure cookers. It blends well with the previous metaphor of Sailors On A Ship.

    MacQuarrie Email Program #06 — The Pot

    angry06a-thepotMy father (who eventually committed suicide) is supposed to have said: “Never go to a psychiatrist who is less intelligent than you are.” I think it is probably true that he did say this, because I strongly have come to believe: “Never go to a therapist who is less emotionally intelligent than you are!” I say that because, early in my own therapy, I recognized that I could easily out-think most therapists.

    I also learned that, frequently and inappropriately, many therapists are prone to tell clients what they should be doing. Even if that were effective (which it is not), I can simply read what I should be doing in a book.

    I needed someone who would challenge me to act differently!, not just think differently. Fortunately, I found this. I found therapists who would assist me in becoming an authentic person, with a sense of aliveness, personal integrity, and the ability to contribute to others. And I’ve made my mis-takes, many of them. And I learned from them — generally more from my mis-takes than from my successes. (Notice how I spell the word mis-take: a take that missed — that is all it is, nothing more, and certainly not a place for personal judgment.)

    Most importantly, l learned some simple metaphors that have allowed me to act differently, as well as think differently (as noted, the action is more important than the thinking). Examples include the metaphor of Sailors On A Ship discussed in the last email — in a future email, I will show you how to use this metaphor for effective action. (Sorry if I seem to be shifting back and forth between past and future emails — I am attempting to build an integrated model for you.)

    The Pot

    In this email, the metaphor I want to emphasis is called The Pot.

    Imagine a pot of stew, sitting on a stove being heated; only the ingredients in this pot are your VBMEs (values, beliefs, memories, and expectations). The heat is the Current Stressors of your life (financial worries, relationship stresses, home and work situations, plus the many issues that bother you when you watch TV. et cetera). It is a pot of energy, waiting! It is here that your sailors become active — determined by your VBMEs, and activated by your Current Stressors.

    The contents of the pot percolate from the heat; stuff moves under the surface (the other-than-conscious mind) and on occasion something comes to the surface (the conscious mind). When it does, you call it an emotion, a feeling, a thought, a belief — some name that allows you to recognize it. If the “something” surfaces with enough energy, it pops out of the pot, and you call it a behavior. Note that behaviors reduce the energy in the pot!

    Then somebody does something (the Spoon) that stirs the pot. What comes to the surface are more emotions, and what comes out of the pot are more behaviors, all partly determined by what the Spoon has done. But more importantly, your emotions and behaviors are determined by what is already in the pot.

    Consider: if this was an actual pot, and the spoon brought a carrot to the surface, would you say that the spoon caused the carrot? Weird, eh. But that is what you are saying when you say: “She made me angry!” or “He made me do it.” Yes, others can stir, but they do not cause your emotions or your actions — they are your choices, even though they originate with the other-then-conscious mind.

    What happens when the pot is full, or stirred?

    Actions empty the pot, but stuff gets added every day. And when the pot gets full, i.e., when the energy gets high, three things happen:

    1. the high energy limits the ability for information to get to the human brain — you start to lose choice.
    2. if the energy is really high, you act from the lizard brain — survival mode.
    3. you lose the ability to distinguish what is in the pot from what the spoon is doing — you lose the ability to distinguish past pain from present issues. You begin to feel unsafe.

    A full pot, not thinking clearly, not safe (for yourself and possibly others). So you say to yourself (or some else says to you): Put a lid on it! Question: What happens to a pot of stew, on high heat, when you put a lid on it?

    angry06b-thetimebombIt becomes a pressure cooker! From my perspective, there are four kinds of pressure cookers:

    • panic attacks: a loose lid
    • explosions: a tight lid
    • implosion: a sealed lid (de-pressure-is-high!)
    • a time bomb: no escape valve

    It is as a time bomb that the many violent massacres of our society occur — someone is so caught that they eventually take a shot-gun or semi-automatic and blow people away!

    This is not a psychiatric model; this is a sociological model, and for me, is a much more accurate description of what happens in our society under today’s cultural conditions.

    Task: Relate what I have written here to your own life. Especially note when you blame others  because they have brought a carrot to the surface — and recall, the carrot was already there, waiting.

    From all this, I developed the process I call Blowing Out®, the topic of the next two emails.

  • More On Problems

    problems1Previously, I written a number of blog posts on the nature of change, and the distinction between difficulties and problems (they start here as of 20160630). I need to add to that, especially with a highly useful concept ( concerning logos, ethos, and pathos) that I encountered somewhere in my career, one attributed to Plato (I’m currently searching for a specific reference).

    Anyway, the distinction is that between logical issues (logos), ethical issues (ethos), and emotional issues (pathos). An example will help.

    Suppose my toaster is not working, and I want toast.

    The Difficulties: In theory (the Logical), I (or someone else) could take the toaster, determine what is the difficulty, and with the right parts, simply fix the toaster, returning it to its functional state. This is the logical approach to a technological difficulty. (Logical resolutions work best with technological issues.)

    However, in our culture, it is much more likely I would put the toaster in the garbage (increasing the environmental load), and go to the local store to purchase a new toaster. I bypass the logical.

    The difficulty here is that we somehow believe it to be less expensive to do this than to find someone, as above, who has the necessary skills and necessary parts for the repair process. In our complex culture, there is a certain truth to this (it is much less so in a third-world country where many people make their living with such simple repairs — but we are not a ‘third-world’ country!).

    To find someone in my city who would be willing to do such repairs and who had the necessary parts (likely needing to be back-ordered rather than immediately available) would take much searching and massive effort as well as considerable time — in the past when I have gone to electrical stores, they have simply said it is cheaper to buy a new toaster.

    So with difficulties of this nature, such as the toaster, I therefore do not bring a logical resolution to the logical problem. It is ‘too expensive.’ Instead, I move to the Ethical: I go to a store for a toaster.

    In buying the toaster at the store, probably as a very cheap price (because the many environmental costs are ignored), they will give me a warranty for the new toaster — an ethical statement that the toaster is new, and will function without difficulty for a certain period of time. Let’s assume the warranty is good for 90 days.

    So I take the toaster home, and enjoy my toast for the next few weeks. But then, the toaster fails, at day 89. I go to the original store where I bought the toaster, together with my original purchase receipt. Then give me a replacement toaster, a new one — mine has crashed within the warranty period, and the warranty guarantees a replacement (meanwhile the failed toaster goes into the garbage — more garbage). This is an ethical resolution to a logical problem (repeating again, as above, that a logical resolution is ‘too expensive.’)

    But suppose I have had a busy week, and I do not get back to the store until day 91. What then?

    I tell the store that the toaster failed two days ago, on day 89 (and of course, explaining that this was within the warranty period), but I have had a really busy week. So what is the store manager to do?

    On the one hand, I’ve brought the toaster back on day 91 — it is out of warranty! It is beyond the ethical resolution!

    But on the other hand, thinks the store manager, “if I refuse to give this guy a new toaster, he will leave the store disgruntled, and likely complain to his many friends as to how unfair my store policy is, and I might lose 10 future customers as a result. I’ll give him a new toaster — it’s a cheaper solution.”

    So I get a new toaster again. But this is not an ethical resolution — it is an Emotional resolution.

    Over the years of my career as a therapist, this distinction between logical, ethical, and emotional has been one of the most useful concepts I have encountered! When I have a difficulty, I ask myself:

    • Is there a logical issue here? What will be require for resolution? Is there a known process that can be brought to bear on this issue?
    • Is there some kind of written (or even verbal) agreement (the ethical) that applies to this difficulty? If so, to what have we actually agreed?
      • Fundamentally, this is the concept of fairness — do we have an agreement as to how we will act when difficulties arise. It is fair that we keep this agreement, and unfair if one of us does not.
      • And if we do not have an agreement, fairness has nothing to do with the issue at hand!
    • And finally, what are the emotional issues within this difficulty? No known process to be applied; there is no agreement as to how we should act. So now I have two further options as to how to act . . .
      • I can do a transaction for payment — how much is it going to cost for resolution, to me, to the other? And if I don’t get paid, I resent — for which there are likely to be future consequences!
      • Or I do give a gift of my time and my effort. No payment necessary, not even a thank-you. But gifts are paradoxical — when I gift to others, somehow they recognize this, and they want to gift back (or they gift forward!).
    • But beware: the major problems of living arise when I am not clear about the distinction between gift and transaction! I resent ‘gifts’ when they are actually sneaky transactions.
      • The store manager above needs to be clear; otherwise he or she will become very dissatisfied.

    Keeping all of these distinctions in awareness is perhaps difficult initially, but with time, very rewarding:

    Logical? Ethical? Emotional?

    Transaction? Gift?

  • Anger #05 The Other-Than-Conscious Mind

    Comment: Most of us live with many internal conflicts — for me, the metaphor of this post is highly useful as a frame for this style of conflict. Unfortunately, for most human beings, especially those who have not exposed to the skills of living necessary in our complex culture, the other-than-conscious mind is a place of mystery and mutiny. It can be managed, and when successful, the conscious and other-than-conscious can be a powerful team.

    MacQuarrie Email Program #05 — The Role of the Other-Than-Conscious Mind

    Sailors in mutiny
    The internal mutiny by which we live.

    Much has been written about the other-than-conscious mind (the OOC mind — I don’t like the term unconscious; it is too confusing and misunderstood). Some of what has been written is actually very valuable, but relatively little has been written about the value and importance of integration of conscious and other-than-conscious. Together they are a powerful team.

    So, in this email, I’m going to introduce you to some of the most important metaphors I use about the OOC mind (remember please that a metaphor is simply a way to think about something else). Also please note that two images are attached to this email.

    Task: Your task associated with this email is simply to watch yourself in all you do, checking out to what extent the following ideas are useful to you. I suggest you read this email several times a day, especially before you undertake the daily practice of awareness as described in a previous email. I’ll expand the ideas in later emails.

    The first image Sailors On A Ship [above] is based on a loose interpretation of the writings of Plato, and as a metaphor is over 2000 years old. Imagine an old-fashioned sailing ship (sails only, no fossil-fuel based engine):

    The human mind is very much like a ship where the sailors have mutinied, and locked the Captain … in the cabin [brig]. Each sailor believes himself free to steer the ship as he pleases. First one sailor and then another takes over the helm, while the ship travels on a random and erratic course . . . these sailors cannot agree on a goal and, even if they could, they do not know how to navigate the ship to reach it. . . . The task of the individual is to quell this mutiny, and release the captain . . .  Only then is he free to choose a goal, and steer a direct course to reach it.

    Most people can easily recognize that this metaphor describes their daily life in detail — that they make plans, and then sabotage themselves in various ways. Over subsequent emails, you will learn much more about these sailors, and how to manage them. Eventually you will develop a powerful Captain.

    shipatseaThe second image is called A Ship At Sea. Again, imagine an old-fashioned sailing ship, with sails, helm and rudder, potentially managed by an effective Captain and a crew of well-organized Sailors. What would happen to such a ship if there were no helm or rudder? It would drift with the wind. Or such a ship without sails? It would go nowhere. No wind, and even with sails and rudder, it would flounder. Plus the ship needs a good Captain and a well-trained crew.

    Now — considering yourself as the ship, what within you corresponds to the rudder and helm? the sails? the wind? a Captain? the sailors? My answers — please check your own answers (further details will be developed over the course of this program):

    • the helmsman-helm-rudder system: the conscious mind, able to guide the ship once effective decisions are made (and mutiny is no longer an option).
    • the sails: the other-than-conscious mind, that component of myself that actually does the work, the source of my life energy and my vitality.
    • the wind: from whence comes the origin of my life energy. Depending on interpretation, this could be a deeper realm of the other-than-conscious, or it could be an interface with Spirit/Creator/… (your choice).
    • the sailors: principally the means by which I are aware of my other-than-conscious mind. The transformation of the sailors from that of mutiny (this is a very common situation for many people) to that of an effective working crew is one of the major skills to be developed in this email course).
    • the captain: essentially my decision maker, ideally my wise one. Who would you be if you functioned in the way which really satisfied you, a person with authentic personal power? Potentially that occurs when you have developed your own Captain, that part of yourself able to integrate all parts of this ship into authentic living.

    Please note in all this the goal is that of integration of conscious and other-than-conscious (much can be done in 90 days, and it is a life-long task).

    Coming next: The Mind — A Pot of Stew.

  • Why We Ignore Climate Change, Part 1

    distrust02I’m going to spend the next few posts examining a précis I did of George Marshall’s book Don’t Even Think About It: Why Our Brains Are Wired To Ignore Climate Change (2014)[1]. Marshall has been a major figure in the international environmental movement, and his book seeks to answer the question of “why, when the evidence is so strong, and so many agree that this is our greatest problem, are we doing so little about climate change?[2]”

    I encountered his book last year when I was attempting to come to my own answers about this question, and I was surprised by some of the research that he himself encountered. Unfortunately, amongst other sources, the book has only added to my sense of how deeply we are stuck as a society.

    However, if we do not find a way through the morass of global warming, the outcome is less than desirable. Hence, I believe it important to disseminate his findings.

    I do it also because The Climate Mobilization group to which I belong is developing a process called Crisis Reading groups, providing reading to explore the morass. Although this book is likely too long for this process, a précis of the book might be useful to them.

    There are 42 short chapters in Marshall’s book; here in this blog I intend to cover 8-10 chapters per posting, and hence there are likely to be six or so posts on this topic. As format, I shall first list the notes I kept on a given chapter, and then follow each note with reflection as to what I believe to be its importance.

    So . . .

    Chapter 1. Questions. How is it possible, when presented with overwhelming evidence, that we deliberately choose to ignore something while being entirely aware that this is what we are doing?

    As a culture, we both demonstrate awareness of the problem, and ignore the necessary action. In spite of all the rhetoric and disinformation, I continue to believe that the evidence is overwhelming, and that the major problem is the complex nature of our acedia. But understanding is the booby prize. We are currently on a tightrope between disaster and response; I wonder when we will overcome the massive difficulties of response, as well as what environmental disaster will be needed to initiate this mobilization.

    Chapter 2. We’ll deal with that lofty stuff some other day. Why disaster victims do not want to talk about climate change. Following the survival of threat, people choose to emphasize the positive, and minimize the negative.

    Obviously a survival mechanism, and an useful one for acute issues. The fact that “we survived,” then means that we can feel good about our resilience and the likelihood that we can deal with the next issue. However, it makes it difficult to recognize that there is an underlying chronic problem — a narrative of recovery is more hopeful than impending doom.

    Chapter 3. Speaking as a layman. Why we think that extreme weather shows we were right all along. We interpret events in the light of our prior assumptions and prejudices (confirmation bias). We fail to recognize that weather (short-term experience) is different from climate (long-term pattern). Because we are familiar with weather, we tend to interpret climate in a manner that confirms the current weather. For example, cold weather means cold climate; however, periods of cold weather are simply part of the instability of global warming.

    Familiarity confuses us! The convincer for people is their own interpretation, confirmed by discussion with the group they trust. It is so difficult to create change because the need is to change the pattern of trust, not the kind or amount of information.

    Chapter 4. You never get to see the whole picture. How the Tea Party fails to notice the greatest threat to its values. For many Republicans, the nature of climate change fits perfectly into a set of pre-existing ideological grievances about the distribution of power. They are outsiders driven by their values, defending their rights, and deeply distrustful of government and corporations.

    They too want change! Marshall maintains that Republicans, even those as entrenched [my intentional wording] as members of the Tea Party, are seeking the same thing as staunch environmentalists [who, of course, are not entrenched] — they want good information in an age of information overload. Personally, despite having six university degrees, all of them in some kind of science, I do not trust modern science — for me, it is so entrenched in scientific materialism.

    Chapter 5. Polluting the message. How science becomes infected with social meaning. Attitudes on climate change have become a social clue as to which group the individual belongs. [NB: the TIC model.]

    Science, as imperfect as it is, is not a social issue — it is one of our best attempts at truth. I’ve previously written about Whom Do You Trust, and the TIC Process whereby people are entrenched in their own trust issues. One of the ways, then, of dealing with information overload is to use social cues to group (and assess) information, thus creating a bias of data based on the group presenting the data. Again, trust is the basic issue.

    To be continued.

    [1] Marshall, G. (2014). Don’t even think about it: Why our brains are wired to ignore climate change. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.

    [2] Marshall, G. http://climatedenial.org, accessed 20170121.

  • Anger #04 The Triune Brain

     

    MacQuarrie Email Program #04 — How We Function: The Triune Brain

    angry04-thetriunebrainCommentary: A huge advance in knowledge of the brain has occurred in the past century; it is astounding what we have learned. However, at the same time, we have learned relatively little about the mind. An assumption of the modern neurosciences is that mind and brain are synonymous (a reflection of scientific materialism) — it is not an assumption with which I agree (nor do I agree with scientific materialism). But I don’t often know where to draw the distinctions, so I often use the term mind-brain when I am unclear.

    The Triune Brain

    One area that seems fairly clear is the concept of what is called the triune brain, referring to the layered structure of the brain, and the apparent layering of the mind. Simplistically, the mind-brain acts as a set of filters of incoming data. Think of sunglasses — they are a filter to reduce the glare of sunlight. They serve a purpose, but they also change what you see. Similarly the filtering aspect of the mind-brain serves a purpose, and distorts how you behave. (What follows is relatively simplistic, but accurate enough to be useful.)

    The Filter of Safety

    Neurologically, 99% of the data that you have been observing in the Now I Am Aware Of exercise of the last email enters the base areas of the mind-brain, the brain stem or Lizard Brain, where it is selectively scanned for your safety. If you not safe, you will immediately go into survival mode to protect yourself; this takes about 200 msec or 2/10th of a second. When in survival mode, the words that would be used to describe you might include serious, anxious, cold — it is from this level that you would violate others. In survival mode, others don’t matter! You are in action to defend your very existence.

    The Filter of Life Energy (Emotion)

    Most of the time this mode of survival is not necessary, so the incoming data advances through the Lizard Brain up to the Mammalian Brain (or Limbic System); the other 1% data (smell) goes here directly. Here the data is assessed (in about 300 msec) for whether the result will be pain or pleasure, pain or gain. It is at this level that most of our emotional experience develops:

    • pain may lead to some kind of moving against or away from, manifest as anger, fear, sadness, disgust, and other so-called negative emotions, or
    • pleasure/gain, with a movement towards, manifest as excitement, interest, enthusiasm, et cetera.

    If the emotion is really intense, the information is processed at this level, and it appears in your awareness together with as the inability to think clearly. This is especially so with the emotions of powerlessness such as rage. Then, in an attempt to get back to a place of power, you may move into survival mode, and violate from a stance of righteous indignation.

    In any event, information is sent back down to the lizard brain (the seat of all movement) for movement into action.

    The Filter of Choice (Awareness)

    Finally, if the experience is energetically less intense, the data rises still further to the cerebral cortices, the Human Brain, the seat of memory and language, the ability to “think,” and make choices. This requires about 400 msec of processing time. Almost all of this brain processing takes place at the other-than-conscious mind level, and seems to be under conscious choice, but like a pot of stew, what surfaces is only a small part of that actually present in the pot.

    Again, information is sent back down for the initiation of movement into action.

    Safety precedes Life Energy precedes Choice (S > E > C)

    It is essential to recognize that this entire process is a bottom-up processor: safety is more important than life energy, which in turn is more important than choice. Consider, for example, what happens with New Year’s Eve resolutions — the vast majority fail. Why? Suppose you are a smoker, and you decide to stop New Year’s Eve. Almost certainly some part of you wants to smoke (derives pleasure from smoking), and you then attempt to impose the “choice” of not smoking onto that part of you than does want to continue. It doesn’t work! The emotional mind-brain is far more powerful than the human mind-brain.

    If you really want to stop smoking, you need certain requirements:

    • Can you find an alternate way of satisfying the emotional system?
    • Can you have a goal of health (in a felt pleasurable sense) rather than a get-away from mode of not smoking?
    • Can you find ways to reward yourself, both intermittently (small pleasures to replace the momentary cigarette) and long-term (something desired to purchase with the money saved)?

    All this and more will allow safety and pleasure to support choice, rather than conflict with choice.

    Task for this email: Write down two or three instances when you have wanted to change something about your life, and have been unsuccessful. What happened? How did you attempt change? How did you deviate from the goal you set for yourself? Consider to what extent the ideas of safety, pleasure-pain and choice entered into your lack of success? Knowing all this, what could you have done differently.

    Coming next: The Role of the Unconscious

  • Anger #03 Awareness and Discipline

    PersonalGrowth1

    The tasks in this post: the development of awareness (task #1) and discipline (task #2).

    The work of change may seem massive, but really it’s just one step after another, and once you know the steps, you simply keep stepping (and find ways to keep yourself stable in the meantime).

    However, it is easy to get into despair and/or overwhelm. What follows are primary skills, both for personal growth and for getting out of feeling overwhelmed.

    Awareness

    Awareness is “attention to my spontaneously emerging experience.” Awareness is NOT thinking — it is experiencing, noting what is actually happening, especially in my body. Fundamentally, I can be aware of three areas:

    • what is happening outside me (my so-called five senses),
    • what is happening within my body, and
    • third, the story I am creating as a result of these two ongoing experiences (generally what I call my thinking).

    Awareness allows me to be present NOW, HERE! My story is usually about the past or the future — potentially useful, but not awareness, and not with any of the power of awareness.

    Discipline

    Discipline is “doing what I want to do, even when I don’t want to do it.” I want an outcome, and yah, it takes work to get it. Discipline is doing the work because I want the outcome, recognizing that often I don’t want to do the effort, but I do it anyway.

    The skill is to make it easier. For example, I practice yoga. I enjoy it, I want the benefits, but often I don’t really feel like doing it. So my discipline is to do “two minutes of yoga.” Not much, eh! Well, every day, I do my two minutes of yoga, even when I don’t want to do it. And, by the end of two minutes, I often feel better; I like how I feel, so I do 45 minutes, because I like it. But, if at the end of two minutes I don’t like how I feel, I stop, and congratulate myself — I have kept my commitment. No self-criticism, ever.

    Task(s)

    For 20 consecutive minute each day for the next week, sit quietly and repeat the following: “Now I am aware of …” and name a body sensation. Don’t describe it, just name it (one or two words), and move on to the next sensation. “Now I am aware of … my fingers tingling … the coolness of my toes … the tension under my eyes …).

    You will lose track. You will drift off into thoughts, day-dreams, etc. That is what the mind does. When you notice you have done so, gently come back to NIAA (now I am aware of …).

    Commentary

    As you get used to the process, lightly give attention to various components (mainly to sharpen your skill): external body sensations (what you feel at skin level), internal body sensations (those truly within), external sounds, internal sounds (including talking to yourself), external visual (with eyes open), internal visual (with eyes closed, including mental images). I say lightly, and I mean lightly — no one does this practice perfectly. The nature of the mind is that it wanders, and the discipline is to gently bring it back, without criticism of self.

    If you will do this for 6 months, I guarantee you will change your life. This skill of awareness is subtle, and powerful. Essentially as you become aware of what you are actually doing, there will be occasions where you don’t like what you are doing. You will choose to stop, and you will change your life for the better, a little bit. The results accumulate over time, and eventually you are in a much better place.

    In a later email when I describe the skill of knowing your own truths, I will say more about this. For now though, how do you know when you are speaking your truth, and how do you know when you are telling a lie.

    Ideally, you will continue this practice of awareness for the rest of your life — because you want to! You may eventually change it to what is today called mindfulness practice or vipassana meditation, all just variations on a theme.

    My personal choice is a vipassana retreat (I suggest 10 days) — largely because I can recommend such a retreat to anyone. Vipassana is a Buddhist practice, but as compared to other “religions,” Buddhism does not emphasize belief systems, only practice.

    Vipassana also operates from a principle called dana — the teachings are free. If there are any changes for a retreat, they are minimal, and only to cover costs; sometimes the entire retreat (days to months) are free, and costs are covered by donation. If able, sign up for a retreat.

    Coming next: How We Function — The Triune Brain

  • Anger #02 What Is Anger?

    This is the second of my email anger program so that the program is not lost. It is a duplicate of a previous sampler post of 20160809.

    angerface3
    Anger is a masque of deeper issues.

    This one is fairly long. Apologies.

    To begin: Are you still reading your outcome title (Email #01), at least once a day? If yes, great. Congratulations. If not, that is the difficulty of discipline — you are not wrong, your behaviour is not wrong, but to the extent that you made a commitment, you did not keep your commitment. And people who do not keep commitments are much less likely to get outcomes that they want. Simple, yes; painful, yes! I did not say this program would be easy; I did suggest that it is effective. Please continue to read your outcome statement each day.

    Task for this email: After reading this email, monitor your emotions for a few days (don’t attempt to change them, just monitor them). When you notice an obvious anger-based emotion, answer the following questions:

    • Do you have a sense of power? Can you move forward with it? If so, likely it is anger.
    • Do you feel overwhelmed? Is there an underlying powerlessness? If so, likely it is rage.
    • Do you feel indignant, determined “it” should not be. If so, likely it is self-righteousness.
    • Where in your body are you feeling this emotion.

    What is anger? Most people know that they are emotional, but often they do not know what emotions are. Most people know when they are angry —  you, for example, wouldn’t be reading this if you weren’t angry, but you do you know what anger is. In this email, we clean up some language. (Suggestion: if you will pay meticulous attention to your language for six months, I guarantee you will change your life for the better. More in another email.)

    What are Emotions? There are many definitions, but my best definition of emotion is “a biologically adaptive action tendency.” What does that mean? Well, you are designed to respond to your environment, and when things change, you as a biologic organism adapt — usually very effectively! When something happens, you (your mind) processes what is happening, usually at the other-than-conscious level and with amazing speed. Your mind then sends a signal to your body to react, to move into action. The very beginning of the experience of action is the felt sense called emotion.

    Another definition of emotion I use is “energy to which I give meaning and direction.” In the so-called pleasurable emotions, I move towards something — I am excited or interested. In the so-called negative emotions, I move against or away from — I am angry, afraid, sad, et cetera. Check it out: notice what you are feeling right now, give it a name, and point to where that feeling is in your body. (Don’t be surprised if you cannot do this — when I first started my own therapy work, I could not do so.) How or to where does this emotion want you to move?(Suppose you are hungry. Where in your body? To where do you want to move?)

    So, what are feelings? Aren’t they emotions also? Sort of. Again many definitions, but I want to make a clean distinction. Examples of emotional words are: angry, excited, afraid, et cetera. Emotions point at my body, and can be described in a single word. Yes, they can refer to something else, but the felt sense is in the body, and can be pointed at. Feeling words point to my relationships: hostile (towards), included (with), ignored (by), etc. Again, one word, but they point outwards. There is usually an underlying emotion, but the feeling points outwards. Then, to make matters more confusing, there are also the feeling judgments — my thoughts about my emotions and feelings: I feel that … (finish with the thought, e.g., “this is wrong.”). There is an underlying emotion or feeling (unnamed), but the description is a thought, and always more than one word is required.

    What is Anger? Anger is an emotion, one that shows that my beliefs have been disrupted, without my intention or permission. Suppose someone in a crowd pushes me — my mind processes this, says this should not be happening (a thought), and sends a signal to my body that I push back: I’m angry. But perhaps I don’t — I also know, perhaps unconsciously, that the consequences might be less than pleasant, so my mind send a second message, very quickly: Stop! Be cautious instead. Angry and afraid at the same time. Did I say emotions, especially anger, were simple?

    Now, suppose the same crowd, only this time we are friends, and we playing football. If someone pushes me, will I be angry? Not likely — because it is expected and allowed as part of the game. Same actions, but different emotions, depending on my beliefs! Complicated, again.

    What about rage? Think about your own rage. Rage is also an emotion, this time more complex. When angry, I feel powerful — I can do something with my anger. But in rage, I feel powerless; I’m overwhelmed, and I puff myself up so as to get back to a state of power. And I don’t think clearly — a dangerous combination. At this point, I am likely to violate others — to violate someone is a behavior — to restrict them without their permission, to hit them, to block them, to scare them, etc. Not fun — for anyone!

    Note carefully! Emotions and feelings are not wrong, or bad; they simply are. They are the way in which my body gives me information, sometimes information that I do not want to recognize. They always have a positive intention — the “negative” ones usually to protect me, in some fashion. What is potentially inappropriate is what I do with my emotions. This behavioral response can certainly be dangerous, unacceptable to yourself or to others, and much else.

    Safety: So, anger and rage can be dangerous, especially if we are unaware of the complexity of what is happening (we will be exploring this in detail over the next weeks). My bottom line is safety, for myself and others — always, and to the best of my ability.

    I sum up safety with two statements: No SAD and STOP. No SAD means:

    • I will not intentionally Scare another human being,
    • I will not Attack another biological creature, and
    • I will not Destroy in anger that which I would not destroy when peaceful.

    My experience, after 25 years of being a therapist (including as I resolved my own issues of anger) is that, if I stay within the parameters of No SAD, I can be fully expressive of my emotions, and both I and those around me are totally safe.

    However, that does not mean that those around me will feel safe (more accurately, they do not feel secure) — my actions may still scare them — what I am doing may remind them of painful times in their own past. I do not intend to scare them, but that does not mean they are not scared.

    STOP responds to this. STOP means that if I am told to stop, I stop immediately (no questions, no argument). Someone is scared — always inappropriate. Then I find another, safer way to deal with my anger. Usually this means I will take a time out  to briefly separate myself from others, and thus allow them to recover from their scare (more about time-outs later).

    Coming next: Awareness and Discipline

  • Civil Disobedience

    civildisobedience1

    One of the issues I am pondering these days is that of civil disobedience. The central issue is that of how to respond to a breach of law when the law goes along with the breach. As such, if we are to resolve our cultural dilemma of climate disruption, we must deal with the negative forces that are leading to global warming. In particular, we must recognize that these negative forces are currently poised in the dominator roles of our culture. These powers are in the position to mandate the continuance of:

    1. consumerism,
    2. the military-industrial complex, and
    3. the fossil fuel industry

    via legal means, imposed by government forces which are in alignment with these forces; it also means that to resist these forces often requires stepping outside the bounds of legality. To oppose these forces thus requires some form of civil disobedience.

    Such disobedience can be placed on a spectrum between sabotage and non-violent civil disobedience (NVCD). Much has been written on NVCD, the earliest being the play Antigone by Sophocles (5th century BCE). The modern writings on NVCD have mainly begun with Thoreau in [On the Duty of] Civil Disobedience, 1848. Thoreau was essentially questioning the distinction between legality and justice, wherein:

    It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do what I think right. . . . Law never made men a whit more just; and by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice.

    There is much to be explored in Thoreau’s writing, but essentially he was an advocate of NVCD when government and legal systems were acting in ways that are unjust. His primary suggestions, as elucidated by Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr, were to:

    • use only moral or legal means to oppose unjust law
      • boycotting, picketing, blocking traffic, non-violent resistance, non-payment of taxes
    • first make an effort to bring about change through legal means
      • work within the system before and during
    • be open and public about actions
      • the disobedience must be fully revealed and public
    • be willing to accept the consequences of such actions
      • prison, fines, deportation, loss of job, social disapproval

    The intention behind NVCD is to induce shame in the dominator by highlighting the discordance between legality and justice. The difficulty is that these processes are slow to induce social change: witness the years required before the British Empire released India from colonialization (Gandhi), or the years of societal demonstration before significant reduction of racial inequality (Martin Luther King Jr). The major difficulty with NVCD in regard to global warming is that we probably do not have time for slow resolution; we are too close to the edge of irreversible global catastrophe.

    Sabotage, on the other hand, is usually illegal, likely violent or violating, action engaged in secretly, and often such that the perpetrators attempt to avoid the personal consequences of their actions. While sabotage might be somewhat satisfying to the perpetrators, I am not sure it does anything other than anger the recipients, and provide a justification on the part of the dominator for the suppression of any kind of civil disobedience.

    In this regard, I have been networking with a group of individuals who seek to offer protection services for groups that engage in civil demonstration, with the purpose being to maintain the principles of NVCD wherein these protest rallies occur. I believe that such protection service is very important, providing safety for all — but it is very easy for individuals to become provocative, or for spectators to provoke, which then leads to antagonistic responses. In particular in the Vancouver area, it appears that a number of neo-Nazi groups are now attempting to be provocative in just this fashion.

    Even for the people who offer such protection services, there is a range of responses. Some say that actions such as sabotage can be done without danger to those who simply practice of NVCD. I totally disagree with this — I doubt that the dominator society makes this distinction, and it is likely that if sabotage occurs at the same time as NVCD, repressive responses will be imposed on all, not just the saboteurs.

    So, what to do? I do not know. What is fundamentally needed is a massive mobilization of the general populous towards all types of civil disobedience, but forty years of attempting this on the part of many parties has been largely unsuccessful. Sooner or later, enough angst from environmental devastation will occur, but likely it will then be too late.

    Sad!

  • Anger #01 Why Change? Personal Power

    As indicated in the last post, I will gradually post my email anger program so that it is not lost. Although many people signed up initially, and feedback has been positive, there has been little in the way of continuing interest. Hence — this series of posts, one every few days until completion (30 emails) …

    I will add additional posts between the series, with a page under Postings dedicated to the anger program for those who want to follow it without having to sort through other posts.

    AngerBlowDown
    Is this you? Is this how you want to be?

    Why Change? Personal Power

    Welcome again. Welcome to a program that can change your life.

    I believe the above statement is absolutely true, partially because the tools I am offering are powerful, but more importantly because I trust the basic goodness of human beings. I believe in the principle that every human being is ALWAYS doing their absolute best at ALL times, and that when they are unhappy with their lives, what they need is not criticism but better resources, better skills to accomplish what they really need. Email me ([email protected]) if you do not believe me, and I will explain my rationale.

    These first few emails (the first eight or so) will provide simple tasks, but more importantly will give you some concepts that I believe are very useful to your progress. Play with the ideas, and if questions, email me as above. But do not attempt to accomplish the 90-day program in two weeks — it doesn’t work that way. Many questions I will defer until a later email when the answer will become clear.

    Also, be aware that, although this program is designed for anger management, almost all of it is applicable to every other emotional experience of your life. So, if you want to work on something else (low esteem, grief, et cetera), simply use your own word  any time you encounter an “anger” word.

    So, your first task, your first skill development. Take out some paper, and answer these questions: Why are you taking this program? What are you wanting? And if you get this (i.e., what you want), what else will you get? And if you get this next piece, what will you get that is even more important? Expand your answers until you can go no further (either you cannot name anything more important, or you are cycling back into previous answers).

    Now look at your answers, and see if you can answer these further questions about what you want. These questions are called the RPMS! of change. (I don’t expect that you will be able to answer them all — if you could, you would likely have what you want already.)

    • Is what I want realistic? (Can some one person, anyone, get this?)
    • Is it practical? (Can I myself get it?)
    • Is it measurable? (Do I have a way to know when I have it?)
    • Is it specific? (Do I know how to get it, the actions involved?)
    • !? (What is the first step for me to get it?)

    Why are these questions important? Basically for two reasons:

    • these questions are the basis of effective outcomes, and
    • people who set goals (outcomes) are more effective in life than people who do not. The likelihood of you completing this program is higher if you set a goal for yourself.

    Now, to complete this task for now, re-write what you want, using your above exploration.

    What outcome do I want?

    Give your description a two or three word title, and post the title (with or without the details) somewhere where you will read it every day: on the mirror where you brush your teeth, at the head of your bed, et cetera. Make a conscious choice that you will read it every day for the next five days, at least until you receive Email #2 of this series.

    As part of the description, add a brief description of yourself, your self-esteem, your sense of personal power. I want you to be able to look back at this description each month and note how you shift in the next three months. Also, be sure to date when you write this goal. If you wish, you may show this information (and any subsequent information) to another person (your life partner, for example), but think carefully before you make that choice — do not set yourself up to be criticized or judged by another person.

    My reflection of this process: I believe that every human being wants power. But power comes in two forms: it can be external power, wherein I dominate others, or personal power, wherein I influence others by my effectiveness as a human being. With personal power, I have a sense of aliveness, personal integrity, authentic relationships, and the ability to contribute. This form of power is available, but it takes skill development to achieve it. I trust that is why you are here.

    The skill of anger management is the ability to turn your power of domination into personal power whereby you influence. The intention of this program is to honor your anger — it is a signal to you that something is wrong, something is happening that is inappropriate to your current situation. But your anger will not tell you what the problem is! It may be that there is something inappropriate with those around you, or it may be a warning to you that there is something inappropriate within your own beliefs.

    Consider for a moment: Are you worthy of what you want? Do you deserve to get it? Do you deserve to be in charge of your anger? Honestly — you do not need to tell anyone else, just yourself. (I believe you are worthy, but do you? Many people don’t! And therefore, they don’t get what they want.)

    If you are one of these people who hate yourselves, who are constantly criticizing yourself, Or perhaps you are constantly criticizing others, at least to yourself? (It is the same problem!) Explore how you learned this? Who told you? How did you learn this? And what gave these others the right to judge you in this way?

    If applicable, I also invite you to put another sign along with your outcome statement:

    God don’t make no junk!

    (You don’t need to be religious — just recognize what it means! about you!)

    Coming next: What is Anger?