This post was also inspired by a news article:
https://www.psypost.org/2019/10/new-psychology-study-identifies-hypo-egoic-nonentitlement-as-a-central-feature-of-humility-54657
I loved this one.
I believe I have written in the past about how humility does not mean putting oneself down or being afraid to acknowledge anything good about oneself. I take my cue from Ezra Taft Benson's defining pride as "enmity between God and man", and figure that the secret is loving more. Then it is okay to like what is good about you, knowing that it is not a reason to look down on others.
(Frankly, when you are allowed to like yourself and enjoy good things about you, I think having good feelings toward others can be easier.)
Obviously I was thrilled to find a study that backs me up. It was less thrilling but still kind of interesting to find a term for that specific aspect of humility, hypo-egoic nonentitlement: "they do not think that they are entitled to be treated special as a person because of their accomplishments or positive characteristics."
That was all very interesting, and I recommend the article, but what really got my attention was the list of other non-egoic phenomena: flow, mindfulness, awe, and mystical experiences.
My growing political philosophy - which I am not ready to write extensively about yet - focuses on the destructiveness of competition, if you will, where even many people who claim to be progressive and eschew bigotry still fall easily into racist and sexist behavior because there is such a draw to putting others down. That might fall under egoic (or even hyper-egoic) entitlement. It worries me greatly, but it is something that I have tended to think about more in terms of economics, politics, and social relations.
What struck me here was the personal. There is a definite logic to seeing that a narcissistic person might not be awe-struck that often; what could be greater than themselves? It also goes some way toward explaining the reduced chances of mystical experiences.
Those are things I value anyway, and I have a growing appreciation for mindfulness. Maybe it was "flow" that struck me most.
I associate flow with creativity, but I have felt it at times while doing tasks that were not necessarily creative. There is a sense of things coming together, and inter-relatedness. Connection.
I have known many people who were amazingly creative and amazingly kind, and have thought perhaps that one of the rewards of creativity was that they found a satisfaction that did not require domination or superiority toward anyone else. Perhaps it was actually reversed, where they could be creative because they could embrace equality and egalitarianism already. That would be something that could make us free.
Some of these gifts may come without a lot of intent. I can't imagine mindfulness not taking work, but that might be just be me. There are still a lot of forces leading toward ego and entitlement, even if it merely starts defensively. It may take more work now than it used to.
Mainly I just wanted to share that there is a better path, and reading about it gave me a glimpse of perfection and beauty (which might relate to the awe-inspiring and the mystical). I am grateful for that. I am grateful for the intangible beauty that you can touch if you will just reach out.
Sunday, October 20, 2019
Sunday, October 13, 2019
Preparing Together - Your neighbors and you
I recently attended a presentation about community emergency preparation and I invited all my neighbors.
Sadly, the person behind Prepare Out Loud has left the Red Cross and started his own company, Tipping Point Resilience:
https://www.tippingpointresilience.com/
That is probably for the best, but I had been waiting for about a year for a Beaverton or Aloha event where I could invite neighbors. Fortunately, NW Oregon Public Health Awareness has come up with their own program, Preparing Together:
https://www.co.washington.or.us/HHS/News/preparing-together.cfm
The logic in this is obvious. Most disasters have the potential to create large-scale health problems through issues with water sanitation or exposure to the elements. Washington County presenter Cynthia Valdivia presented at our local library.
She told us that she is the only person for Washington County, and the only Spanish-speaking presenter for the state of Oregon. There are coverage issues, and so they have helpfully made the presentation and a kit available through the library system. I currently have one checked out:
363.34 PRE Preparing Together [kit]: a discussion guide to help you, your family, neighbors and community prepare for disaster
It is an impressive kit, with the presentation and handouts available on a CD, as well as laminated copies of the presentation, other resources, and prepaid envelopes for sending in the evaluation sheets. It would be very easy - though intimidating - to give a presentation to friends or neighbors.
That could be worthwhile, because none of the neighbors came. That's really what I want to write about, but not like it sounds.
I saw the presentation was coming and thought 'This is my chance', so I made a flyer with the information and printed 13 copies for every house on the block but ours and the one where they are doing Air BnB or something. I knew it was unlikely that everyone would be home, so I took some tape so that I could leave a flyer on the door, and then my mother and I went door to door.
Most of the people we talked to had at least some interest, but were not sure if they could come. That is not surprising at all. Maybe if I do a presentation on the block some would come. Having food might help.
We talked to people at seven houses, but we saw new children and grandchildren and found out about health issues, and talked about water storage options. We have had three visits with neighbors since then. (All of which have involved a little food, actually, so that might be something.)
Building relationships takes time. Establishing trust and comfort needs time. Learning who has which skills and vulnerabilities does not only take time but is helped by that trust.
It would have been an amazing experience to walk into the library community room and find a bunch of familiar faces, but that not happening doesn't make it a waste. If people remember that preparedness is a thing, and that we are part of a community, that is good. If it reminds them that was have a library and it has events, that is a good thing.
And even something as simple as talking to a few neighbors here and there and maintaining contact can also be a very good thing.
Sadly, the person behind Prepare Out Loud has left the Red Cross and started his own company, Tipping Point Resilience:
https://www.tippingpointresilience.com/
That is probably for the best, but I had been waiting for about a year for a Beaverton or Aloha event where I could invite neighbors. Fortunately, NW Oregon Public Health Awareness has come up with their own program, Preparing Together:
https://www.co.washington.or.us/HHS/News/preparing-together.cfm
The logic in this is obvious. Most disasters have the potential to create large-scale health problems through issues with water sanitation or exposure to the elements. Washington County presenter Cynthia Valdivia presented at our local library.
She told us that she is the only person for Washington County, and the only Spanish-speaking presenter for the state of Oregon. There are coverage issues, and so they have helpfully made the presentation and a kit available through the library system. I currently have one checked out:
363.34 PRE Preparing Together [kit]: a discussion guide to help you, your family, neighbors and community prepare for disaster
It is an impressive kit, with the presentation and handouts available on a CD, as well as laminated copies of the presentation, other resources, and prepaid envelopes for sending in the evaluation sheets. It would be very easy - though intimidating - to give a presentation to friends or neighbors.
That could be worthwhile, because none of the neighbors came. That's really what I want to write about, but not like it sounds.
I saw the presentation was coming and thought 'This is my chance', so I made a flyer with the information and printed 13 copies for every house on the block but ours and the one where they are doing Air BnB or something. I knew it was unlikely that everyone would be home, so I took some tape so that I could leave a flyer on the door, and then my mother and I went door to door.
Most of the people we talked to had at least some interest, but were not sure if they could come. That is not surprising at all. Maybe if I do a presentation on the block some would come. Having food might help.
We talked to people at seven houses, but we saw new children and grandchildren and found out about health issues, and talked about water storage options. We have had three visits with neighbors since then. (All of which have involved a little food, actually, so that might be something.)
Building relationships takes time. Establishing trust and comfort needs time. Learning who has which skills and vulnerabilities does not only take time but is helped by that trust.
It would have been an amazing experience to walk into the library community room and find a bunch of familiar faces, but that not happening doesn't make it a waste. If people remember that preparedness is a thing, and that we are part of a community, that is good. If it reminds them that was have a library and it has events, that is a good thing.
And even something as simple as talking to a few neighbors here and there and maintaining contact can also be a very good thing.
Sunday, October 6, 2019
Seeking the truth
About a month ago I saw two articles in the newspaper (which I saved because I knew I would eventually get to writing about them).
They would have both caught my attention anyway, but seeing them just four pages apart made a stronger impression.
False claims blur line between mass shootings, 2020 politics
by Will Weissert and Amanda Seitz of the Associated Press
https://www.apnews.com/bd653f4eb5ed4f34b6c936221c35a3e5
I saw both in The Oregonian, which changed this title to "False claims blue 2020 lines".
The article largely focused on false claims about the Odessa shooter who killed seven people, claiming that he had a Beto O'Rourke sticker on his vehicle and initially that he was a Democrat Socialist, followed by claims that he was a registered Democrat, all three of which are false.
The article focused on how quickly rumors like these spread, and how attempts to correct the false information don't gain the same traction.
The false claims fit into a framework that might warrant further exploration later, but for today's topic we are just going to go to the other article.
Why does so much news seem negative? Human attention may be to blame
by Amina Khan of the Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2019-09-05/why-people-respond-to-negative-news
This title was also changed, which may be something to think about when deciding if you are comfortable reading only headlines.
This article reports on a study from the University of Michigan that recruited 1156 people in 17 countries. The study's lead author was Stuart Soroka. I mention that because accepting information at face value is risky, as demonstrated by the first article. Even a compelling sample size with a clear trend can have variables and other factors, and the article gets into that.
For me, if a study sounds suspect to me, I will usually try and look at the source and methodology and sample size. Doing so often reinforces my skepticism. The problem is that if the conclusion sounds logical to me, I probably won't look it up. (Later I may wonder and have a hard time finding it, which is why I try and at least note sources now.)
Being more accepting of that which confirms your biases is nothing new; you can find lots of studies on that. However, if we are primed for the negative - which appears to be true - and false claims spread quickly - deliberately by a few and then enthusiastically by many - we get into a situation where it is easy to have a worldview that is both negative and wrong.
I am just finishing up a book on crime that talks about the misperceptions about the frequency, types, and targets of crimes versus the reality. Esther Madriz says this:
"Living with these images confuses the imagined with the real and creates a society in which most people live according to the imagined."
We cannot do that. If we believe that truth is the most precious gem, we can't go along believing falsehoods that encourage our biases about who is bad and good and smart and stupid.
So dig deeper, read more, ask questions often. Always stay close to the Spirit, remembering that the fruits of doing so are peace and love, not gloating and smugness.
It matters now and it is going to matter more.
They would have both caught my attention anyway, but seeing them just four pages apart made a stronger impression.
False claims blur line between mass shootings, 2020 politics
by Will Weissert and Amanda Seitz of the Associated Press
https://www.apnews.com/bd653f4eb5ed4f34b6c936221c35a3e5
I saw both in The Oregonian, which changed this title to "False claims blue 2020 lines".
The article largely focused on false claims about the Odessa shooter who killed seven people, claiming that he had a Beto O'Rourke sticker on his vehicle and initially that he was a Democrat Socialist, followed by claims that he was a registered Democrat, all three of which are false.
The article focused on how quickly rumors like these spread, and how attempts to correct the false information don't gain the same traction.
The false claims fit into a framework that might warrant further exploration later, but for today's topic we are just going to go to the other article.
Why does so much news seem negative? Human attention may be to blame
by Amina Khan of the Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2019-09-05/why-people-respond-to-negative-news
This title was also changed, which may be something to think about when deciding if you are comfortable reading only headlines.
This article reports on a study from the University of Michigan that recruited 1156 people in 17 countries. The study's lead author was Stuart Soroka. I mention that because accepting information at face value is risky, as demonstrated by the first article. Even a compelling sample size with a clear trend can have variables and other factors, and the article gets into that.
For me, if a study sounds suspect to me, I will usually try and look at the source and methodology and sample size. Doing so often reinforces my skepticism. The problem is that if the conclusion sounds logical to me, I probably won't look it up. (Later I may wonder and have a hard time finding it, which is why I try and at least note sources now.)
Being more accepting of that which confirms your biases is nothing new; you can find lots of studies on that. However, if we are primed for the negative - which appears to be true - and false claims spread quickly - deliberately by a few and then enthusiastically by many - we get into a situation where it is easy to have a worldview that is both negative and wrong.
I am just finishing up a book on crime that talks about the misperceptions about the frequency, types, and targets of crimes versus the reality. Esther Madriz says this:
"Living with these images confuses the imagined with the real and creates a society in which most people live according to the imagined."
We cannot do that. If we believe that truth is the most precious gem, we can't go along believing falsehoods that encourage our biases about who is bad and good and smart and stupid.
So dig deeper, read more, ask questions often. Always stay close to the Spirit, remembering that the fruits of doing so are peace and love, not gloating and smugness.
It matters now and it is going to matter more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)