What's the meaning of that?

When the words and thoughts come howling and roaring into your head, beware!

 

Think, reflect, consider before you act, consider even before you entertain those thoughts and words, think about them. The words, thoughts and ideas in your head are probably not even yours. They probably belonged to your mother or father, your holy person, your political party, your cultural traditions, and were handed down to you as they were handed down to the people who handed them down to you. But while the words and thoughts are in your head, you’re responsible for them! Will you hand them down, unexamined, or will you think, reflect, consider before you act?

 

Partial meanings, expectations and outcomes are in the words and traditions themselves. But these are only partial meanings. You complete them, you fill in the rest, you add your meanings. You can pass on and act on the partial meanings reflexively, without thinking, or you can take responsibility for what comes next. The words, thoughts and ideas may not have originated with you, probably didn’t, but while they’re in your head, you’re responsible for them.

 

Please, please, take that responsibility seriously. Look at it as a gift, an opportunity to see things differently, to think about thinking; go deep connect with your spiritual wisdom at share it.  The Course says the ego speaks first and is always wrong. So, when the words and thoughts come roaring and howling into your head, beware, pause, take a deep breath and think about what you’re thinking and the kind of world and experiences you really want.

Thinking About Thinking

Setting an intention, being aware of when we are not meeting it and then re-commiting to it, all without blame and guilt, is awkward. It is thinking about thinking, not something we’re trained to do. The more we do it however--think about how and what we’re thinking, the easier it becomes, and the greater the rewards. There’s a growing sense of self-mastery, clarity, less fear, doubt and worry, and even a greater sense of community, one’s purpose and connection to the whole.

 

We are the thinker, not the thoughts. Thoughts flow through us. It is our choice to entertain them; it is our choice as to which thoughts to entertain - those arising from spirit—intuitive, creative, fresh, innovative, inclusive and inspirational or those arising from the ego—fearful, anxious, punishing, exclusionary, legalistic. Setting an intention to think about thinking, being aware of when we are not meeting it and then re-commiting to it, all without blame and guilt, is awkward but worthwhile.

The Map Is Not the Territory

The map is not the territory, Alfred Korzybski wrote in 1922. We know this, but forget. The words--the maps we use are not the same as the feelings, facts and phenomena we want them to represent. As I wrote yesterday, words are but symbols of symbols, maps that are only rough approximations of the territory we want them to represent. We know this. Yet we still act as if the map is the territory, that our words are accurate descriptors.

 

We also know that meanings are in people, that the thing you see when you see the word ‘table’ is probably not the thing I see when I hear the word table. These two phenomena: the map is not the territory and meanings are in people, create a lot of our human conflicts, ineffectiveness and inefficiencies.  If we could stay aware of these two phenomena, be more careful and precise with our choice of words, then we would have less conflict, and be more effective and efficient.

 

One way to do this is to treat our beliefs and words as theories and hypotheses the way scientists understand theories and hypotheses as “more or less informed assumptions or inferences we make about what’s going on” both within and outside us, not as facts, not as Truth, but merely our perceptions and ideas about Truth, perceptions and ideas colored by our biases – cultural, religious, political and familial. “You are never upset for the reason you think,” The Course says.

 

Accepting our beliefs and words as theories and hypotheses about what’s going on internally and externally, means we are more open to corrections, more prepared to make adjustments in the light of new information. We are not as devastated and disappointed when our plans and expectations are not met.  When our theories and hypotheses are not confirmed we can build new ones more aligned with what’s really going on internally and externally. Accepting our beliefs and words as theories and hypotheses means we don’t always have to be right and can avoid the stress of always having to be right. We can allow life and love to flow thru us as they will, showing us wonders our limited thinking denied and kept from us. We can be expansive, creative and innovative, and experience much less fear, lack and limitation.

 

Dogs Hear More, Cats See More

There is so much more than we can comprehend. We are designed to be narrow, to function in a limited zone of comfort. But there is clearly much more. Dogs hear more than we do, cats see more. What understanding we have is gleaned through our physical and cultural experience, which is but a fraction of all that is.

 

Our scientists, religions and great teachers have barely touched the hem of Its garment. We will always, always have this longing to know God. Our teachings are helpful, but they are not the thing Itself. Learning is a pathway to illumination. But it is only when we become still and quiet, and let our everyday minds go, getting our bloated nothingness out of the way, that we know and can embody a greater portion of the Divine that dwells within us. Experiencing a personal communion with God, even in what we take to be difficult times such as these, is our purpose - what the Covenant is all about.

Being Right All the Time is Exhausting!

Having to be right about everything or most things is exhausting! Controlling the sun and the moon, the media, internet, world hunger, politics, justice, the people at work and in your family (get ready, Thanksgiving is coming!) is difficult.  Oh, you say you leave the sun and the moon to God? Is that because you’re doing such a good job with the other things, especially your family, friends and the people at work?

 

When we struggle to control the things and people in our lives and to be right who or what are we trying to please? The ego. What are we trying to prove? That my ego, my little ‘s’ self’s limited beliefs, attitudes and understanding of the world, are better than my big ‘S’ Self’s guidance. I’m settling for grandiosity instead of grandeur. I’m accepting a tiny tiny slice of reality instead of an appreciation of the wondrous magnificence of the mystery of life.  I’m limiting mySelf to myself.

 

Isn’t that sad?  Why settle for a little fenced-off part of Life dominated by fear, guilt and blame when we can experience the wonder, joy and creativity of the inner flow of unlimited unconditional Love?  “You have no idea of the tremendous release and deep peace that comes from meeting yourself and your brothers totally without judgment [and the need to control and be right]”—The Course in Miracles.

 

It’s OK to want to be right and control what you can, especially in your own life. In fact as long as we identify more with ourselves instead of ourSelves, we have an obligation to do so. But we can do so with the awareness that we’re limiting ourSelves, could have wonder, joy and peace instead, and whenever possible, let go of our self’s need to be right, control and judge and let ourSelves guide us to unimaginable wonder, joy and peace.

God as It

 

“God does not forgive because He has never condemned”—The Course in Miracles

 

And ‘He’ has never condemned because as I posted last time, ‘He’ is an ‘It,’ not a ‘He’—a neutral power like gravity or electricity, but greater and all encompassing. The gravity is not responsible when a building collapses. The gravity does not keep score, judge, punish, nor reward, it is just there, a force we can use or misuse.  When a building collapses it’s probably because we misused the gravity—bad design, construction, etc. So it is with God.

 

People dislike this view of ‘God’ because it makes them responsible for what happens in their lives. It’s very stark, very clear—there’s no one or no thing to blame, just ourselves. Much easier to be the innocent victims of a nasty, vengeanful God—I mean, after all, I’m just doing the best I can, right; shit happens! Aren’t there “Acts of God” in all our insurance policies?

 

Bull shit! There’s no one and no thing to blame but ourselves! But hey, why blame at all? Why not just finally learn how the world works and take responsibility for doing things differently, for using the power correctly? It’s a little difficult at first, growing up always is, but my, what a difference, what a positive difference being responsible and in-charge makes in our experience of living!

What I Mean by "God"

The word “God” that I use in these posts has many meanings. I want to clarify what I mean when I use the word.

 

To me, the word “God” is a symbol, as all words are symbols, that stands for the energy that creates, animates and guides all things; the source in and thru everyone and everything. It’s an energy that human beings have been seeking to understand and use since the beginning of time.

 

Science seeks to explain and use this energy as does religion. But the energy itself remains a mystery. Cutting edge science and spirituality have enabled us to understand some things about it, but not all. It’s encouraging to me that the findings of cutting edge science and spirituality reveal a congruence with many of the insights and core ideas of most of the world’s religions. Physics shows that the ancient idea of one God, one energy, is true. Contemporary spirituality shows that the ancient ideas of, “it is done unto you as you believe” and “seek ye the kingdom of heaven first,” work best.

 

This energy is what I mean by the word “God.” Ubiquitous and invisible in its purest form, it steps down into the particular in our human experience of it. We experience it first in its ubiquitous invisible form, what we label “spiritual”, then as a mental/intellectual experience, then emotionally and finally physically. All four kinds of experience: spiritual, mental, emotional and physical, are manifestations of the one energy, co-exist simultaneously and are the labels we use to describe our experience of It.

 

This is what I mean when I use the word, “God.” I do not mean an old white man with a beard, sitting on a throne in the sky who keeps score, judges, rewards and punishes. I mean a neutral force like gravity or electricity that we can partially understand and work with. When we use electricity correctly, it’s a blessing. When we use it incorrectly, it’s a fearsome horror. It is not the electricity that blesses or destroys, but our use of it. The electricity and gravity, like my understanding of the energy that I call “God,” is neutral.

Spirituality is our basic, fundamental connection with this energy, the thing Itself. Religions are the various brands, the stories we make up to help us understand the thing Itself.

Blancing Prayer and Action

So now Rick Scott wants to have a “conversation” with Washington (he’s dead, isn’t he?) about the affordable care act. You see how well giving it over to spirit works? But I didn’t just give it over, I also took action.  Once again both/and and balancing giving it over/praying and action worked. Both are needed. But the giving it over needs to come before the action. Action first usually arises in the amygdala of the brain, the fear center, bringing on the flight or fight response. Acting first is the impulse thinking I blogged about two weeks ago.

 

Balancing both giving it over/praying and action is a constant ongoing activity. When we’re aware, we do the one, then the other. But when we’re not aware, full of lust, hate and fear, we default to action and impulse thinking. Fine. No sweat. No error, no foul. Simply train your awareness without guilt, blame or judgment so that you’re more conscious and able to choose giving it over/praying first. Form a new habit, a new default. The more you do it, the more you do it.

Rick Scott and the Affordable Care Act

Governor Rick Scott is once again talking about turning down a Federal program, this time the Affordable Care Act.  This is unacceptable. Too many lives, too many people’s health are at stake.  There must be something we can do to help the Governor change his mind! I know the hospitals want Florida to participate in the Act.  Are there other potential allies out there that can help us help the Governor change his mind? Obama’s organization is still intact, let’s reach out to them. The League of Women Voters too, and the AFL/CIO.

 

Despite the Governor’s beliefs, this is a humanitarian community concern. The ideology of fiscal austerity and fiscal whatever, cannot be allowed to Trump (ha, ha, ha!) the concrete needs of flesh and blood human beings! Besides, this is Florida—all kinds of people from all kinds of places, places with inadequate sanitary facilities, can come here with latent communicable diseases. If they get sick and go uncared for, it’s only a matter of time before we all get sick.  Good health care is not only for the so-called ‘deserving’, or ‘legal’, or those who ‘earned’ it; it’s required for the good and welfare of the entire community.

 

Governor Rick Scott is once again talking about turning down a Federal program, this time the Affordable Care Act.  This is unacceptable. Too many lives are at stake.  There must be something we can do to help the Governor change his mind! Let’s get on it!

 

Bursts of Wisdom

Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony –Gandhi

 

 

Your life is not a problem to be solved but a gift to be opened—Wayne Muller

 

 

We don’t see things as they are, but as we are—Anais Nin

 

 

Fear is the cheapest room in the house. I would like to see you living in better conditions—Hafiz

 

 

It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare; it is because we do not dare that they are difficult—Seneca

 

Political Consequences of Not Balancing Impulse Thinking With Deliberative Thinking, Part 3

This is the last post building on my post of a few days ago: We have, to me, reached an imbalance and a need to shift in our use of smart phones, iPads, Twitter, Tumblr and that kind of technology. These things have, as John J. Pitney Jr. wrote in the 10/15 Christian Science Monitor, “increased the speed and reach of communications…so that almost as soon as a thought enters your mind you can send it everywhere. Twitter-like thinking—the kind that relies on quick intuition and impulse—can work well when we’re playing sports, for instance.

 

“Of course, the internet also brings huge benefits. It is now possible to access more kinds of information than ever before in history. But most people have neither the time nor the know-how to sort through the countless government documents and scholarly studies available online. They have to rely on public figures and news organizations that are the objects of distrust or partisan scorn.

 

“As columnist and former Reagan speech writer Peggy Noonan has written, ‘Someday we’ll be told something true that we need to know and we won’t believe that, either.’ Long before anyone could have imagined the technological marvels that we carry in our pockets, the Founders understood the risk of hasty judgment.

 

“In The Federalist No. 71, Alexander Hamilton wrote: ‘When occasions present themselves, in which the interests of the people are at variance with their inclinations, it the duty of the persons whom they have appointed to be the guardians of those interests, to withstand the temporary delusion, in order to give them [the people] time and opportunity for more cool and sedate reflection.’

 

“The moral is that public figures, reporters, and commentators of all kinds should take a breath and think before they post. Slow down, because speed kills.”

Now what?

 

We’ve got to remember that the millions of Americans who voted for Romney are still here. They are not going anywhere. They are not all moving to Canada; tho it would be fine if Sheldon Adelson and the Kochs went. But even Adelson and the Kochs are still Americans, as are the millions that voted for Romney. We need their skills, hearts, minds and compassion. We don’t want to throw people away, deprive, diminish or dismiss them. We want to win them over, need to include them, but not at the cost of diminishing or dismissing the work—climate change, equal rights, immigration reform, greener energy, banking reform, ending the wars without starting any new ones--that must be done.

 

I have blogged about new process, methods and procedures for building and maintaining a healthier, more inclusive democratic governing consensus. We must learn more about these methods and implement them. Let this be the last BS election! If we always do what we always did, we’ll always get what we always got. Enough of that! Enough of either/or, win/lose thinking! Let’s shift to win/win and both/and. I find it difficult to believe that if we get over the polarization and the process, methods and procedures that sustain it, we won’t be able to meet the challenges we face. We can do it!

Political Consequences of Not Balancing Impulse Thinking and Deliberative Thinking, Part 2

The next few posts will build on my post of a few days ago: We have, to me, reached an imbalance and a need to shift in our use of smart phones, iPads, Twitter, Tumblr and that kind of technology. These things have, as John J. Pitney Jr. wrote in the 10/15 Christian Science Monitor, “increased the speed and reach of communications…so that almost as soon as a thought enters your mind you can send it everywhere. Twitter-like thinking—the kind that relies on quick intuition and impulse—can work well when we’re playing sports, for instance.

 

“Political polarization heats up when discourse moves faster than the speed of rational thought. Given a chance to consider an issue carefully, people may see the strengths and weaknesses of each side. But when they respond immediately, they will cheer for the home team and boo the opposition.

 

“This tendency is especially strong during the ‘live blogging’ of a speech or debate. We will often read ‘Wow!’ ‘Yea!’ ‘lol’. We will seldom see a commentator saying, ‘Gee, I wonder what will be said next. Let’s all sleep on it.’”

 

“Moreover, people of all persuasions know that the mainstream press is not as thorough or thoughtful as it used to be. Reporters are reacting to what they see online, then posting their own stuff in hopes of keeping up.

 

“As Jay Root writes in his wonderful new book on the Rick Perry campaign, ‘We’re not so much reporting the news as blurting it.’”

 

“Even basic factual accuracy can [and does] suffer. Racing for a scoop this summer, CNN and Fox initially – and falsely – reported that the Supreme Court had struck down the comprehensive health-care law.”

Political Consequences of Not Balancing Impulse Thinking and Deliberative Thinking

The next few posts will build on my post of a few days ago: We have, to me, reached an imbalance and a need to shift in our use of smart phones, iPads, Twitter, Tumblr and that kind of technology. These things have, as John J. Pitney Jr. wrote in the 10/15 Christian Science Monitor, “increased the speed and reach of communications…so that almost as soon as a thought enters your mind you can send it everywhere. Twitter-like thinking—the kind that relies on quick intuition and impulse—can work well when we’re playing sports, for instance.

 

“[But] public life is different.  Impulse reacting draws on stereotypes and mental shortcuts that can mislead us when we apply them to political questions. It is better to [shift to] a more deliberative and reasoned approach, thinking things through and seeking additional information.

 

“A shrill feedback cycle is at work: hasty reactions to hasty reactions to hasty reactions.

 

“Without clearance from the State Department, a diplomat in Egypt rushes to tweet about an anti-Islam YouTube video. The Romney campaign rushes to attack the tweet. The Obama campaign rushes to criticize the Romney attack. Journalists rush to weigh the political consequences of the campaign exchange. For days, meanwhile, serious questions about terrorism and embassy security get too little attention.

 

“Political polarization heats up when discourse moves faster than the speed of rational thought.”

Either/or Thinking Blocks Empathy

 

Here’s another indication that we’re out of balance, have gone too far in the direction of either/or thinking and need to shift more towards both/and thinking. The October/November issue of the AARP magazine—yes, now you know, I’m old enough to be in AARP—has an article headlined: “Peaceful Politics: How to stay friends during election season—even if you don’t see eye to eye.”

 

The article cites a University of Michigan study showing that political differences made participants less compassionate toward their ideological opposites, even when they shared the same problem.  “Researchers approached subjects outside in the cold, then asked them to read about a hiker stranded in winter. Those whose political views were different from the hiker’s couldn’t identify with his plight, despite being chilly themselves, whereas those who had similar views could.” The study concludes: “It seems like political dissimilarity is blocking us from even beginning to step into somebody else’s shoes. But you don’t have to be this way.”

 

I think all of us, especially those that follow politics closely, have felt the pull of this insidious lack of empathy and perhaps even caught ourselves giving in to it. But, as the study says, “you don’t have to be this way.”

 

Next time you find yourself hating, blaming or enjoying the misfortune of those who disagree with you politically, remember, they’re flesh and blood human beings just like you. Realize you’ve gone too far with your exclusionary either/or, win/lose thinking and choose to shift to a more balanced inclusionary approach with both/and, win/win thinking.

Sports, Public Policy and Either/or Thinking

Clearly in the complex arena of public policy making, impulse thinking aided and abetted by instant communications has “obvious defects.” Impulse thinking may work well in sports games supported by rules and referees, but what rules and referees exist in the public sector are being rapidly eroded by the current win at any cost politics most prominently practiced by Republicans.

 

The constant pressure to get the ‘scoop,’ the need to be first and always right and the rush to judgment, lock journalists and politicians into a vicious spiral of impulse thinking and instant communications. Everything, no matter how complex or how important, has to be reduced to a tweet or a text and delivered instantly, before everybody else can deliver it. “The resulting commentary,” John Pitney says, “is long on reflex and short on reflection.” 

 

Plus this way of thinking and being reduces everything to trivia. Important things are no more important than the current score. People pay more attention to high school, college and pro sports than they do to voting and being informed on issues. Of course that’s understandable being that politics and the important stuff is so complex and messy and sports is so clean and straight forward. Much easier to follow sports and reduce everything, especially the messy important stuff, to a game and think of it as a game with only two sides, two choices, either a winner or a loser. Perhaps this way of thinking and being once worked well for us in the past, but it doesn’t work well now. The interdependence and complexity of real life no longer lends itself so well to the simple minded winner/loser sports/game metaphor.