"There is no qualitative or quantitative measurement for pain. It is simply there - sharp or dull, shooting or stabbing, bearable or excruciating, local or general. It is unexplained, uninvited, unavoidable." Sorry, I have no idea who said this but it's true and is probably one of the best definitions of pain I've ever read.
The problem is - how to deal with pain. Two things I do know that I've learned from experience - you can't rush getting out of emotional pain because if you do, it will return and be ten times worse. And, wallowing never helps. But you will wallow some and you need to allow yourself to do this but not stay in it.
I suspect the critical component is that you need to truly understand what happened and why. That's why if you rush you probably won't be dealing with those issues. It isn't so much the 'who' that caused the pain (you or someone else) but the 'why' - why did you experience pain. Again, a host of reasons for the why. I believe that it's my desire to not repeat painful situations that is the basis of analyzing. And yet... one can't protect oneself from the possibility of pain or one never will risk.
Once you have discovered this 'why' then you can develop options to reduce the pain/resolve your situation. Without this knowing you really are doomed to repeat it or become so insulated that you live in a kind of numb existence - neither hot or cold. But once you have options, you can mitigate against this in the future. Awareness will be your key option.
Perhaps I haven't said anything particularly new but sometimes it's important to state the obvious. I think part of the problem one faces in dealing with pain is to be open. Sometimes it is very difficult to allow yourself to be vulnerable again. Unfortunately, it really is the only way to live, otherwise you are only existing... a terrible place to be.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
"Politically Correct"
Are you politically correct Cosmic Reader? I'm not. That's not said with shaking fist raised in rebellion... it's said as a matter of fact. I suspect that my bottom line is that I would never allow anyone else to dictate my thinking (a definite absolute). I have been called stubborn but I think it's more that I like to determine, for myself, what I believe.... and why. And the 'why' is as important as the 'what'.
I believe strongly that all voices should be heard. But drowning out another's voice does not make one's position the 'correct' one. Volume should never be the overwhelming determinant. Partly it's because I'm one of those... "come, let us reason together..." and this means that all voices are given an equal opportunity to present their stand.
It seems that being politically correct means accepting the new/current status quo - but I'm never quite sure who is the source for this. If I can't trust the source, how can I trust the statement? How can I based my stand on what someone tells me is the majority view? Besides, the majority is not always right.
As long as you don't yell, I will almost always consider what's being said. Since truth can always stand up to scrutiny, it is never threatened. I believe that the more you meet what is said with the need to defend your position, the less likely you are convinced of what you say you believe.
I believe strongly that all voices should be heard. But drowning out another's voice does not make one's position the 'correct' one. Volume should never be the overwhelming determinant. Partly it's because I'm one of those... "come, let us reason together..." and this means that all voices are given an equal opportunity to present their stand.
It seems that being politically correct means accepting the new/current status quo - but I'm never quite sure who is the source for this. If I can't trust the source, how can I trust the statement? How can I based my stand on what someone tells me is the majority view? Besides, the majority is not always right.
As long as you don't yell, I will almost always consider what's being said. Since truth can always stand up to scrutiny, it is never threatened. I believe that the more you meet what is said with the need to defend your position, the less likely you are convinced of what you say you believe.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Fruitfulness
'Fruitful' happens to be my favorite word probably because it is an action word. Being fruitful is, for me, my ultimate goal, my passion. There are a number of steps, tasks, we have to accomplish along the way to being fruitful.
The first is to discover what fruit we are. We can't expect to be a date if we are an olive on an olive tree. Yet, that's precisely what we sometimes do. We ignore our own talents and gifts and attempt to make ourselves something else in order to please someone else, or ourselves, or because it is more glamorous than our assumptions on our own fruit. In the final analysis though - we can't be something we aren't and besides it wastes our time and talent. Simple example: we can't expect to be a concert pianist if we don't have the talent or don't undertake the discipline to become a pianist or have the passion. It doesn't mean that we can't learn to play or enjoy it - one can always appreciate even if we can't emulate it. But it's crucial to understand and appreciate what we are.
The second task is to be available to all the influences that will help me be the best I can be. It can be difficult being a loner because you don't have someone to talk with, provide feedback, learn other ways of being a great olive. While our gifts and talents provide us with a foundation, there are always subtleties to be learned.
The third task is to act. It makes little difference if you are the best you can be if you never act on it. This can be a tad scary but it does no good to hang on the tree until you rot. Granted you don't want to be picked before the right time - it (we) need maturing. But to never act is a waste and a denial.
The first is to discover what fruit we are. We can't expect to be a date if we are an olive on an olive tree. Yet, that's precisely what we sometimes do. We ignore our own talents and gifts and attempt to make ourselves something else in order to please someone else, or ourselves, or because it is more glamorous than our assumptions on our own fruit. In the final analysis though - we can't be something we aren't and besides it wastes our time and talent. Simple example: we can't expect to be a concert pianist if we don't have the talent or don't undertake the discipline to become a pianist or have the passion. It doesn't mean that we can't learn to play or enjoy it - one can always appreciate even if we can't emulate it. But it's crucial to understand and appreciate what we are.
The second task is to be available to all the influences that will help me be the best I can be. It can be difficult being a loner because you don't have someone to talk with, provide feedback, learn other ways of being a great olive. While our gifts and talents provide us with a foundation, there are always subtleties to be learned.
The third task is to act. It makes little difference if you are the best you can be if you never act on it. This can be a tad scary but it does no good to hang on the tree until you rot. Granted you don't want to be picked before the right time - it (we) need maturing. But to never act is a waste and a denial.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Up for an adventure?
What's your attitude, Cosmic Reader, about the word 'adventure'? Do you seek it? Do you run from it, concerned that it will shatter, or at least question, your status quo? Do you embrace it as if it was a long lost friend? Do you share it with others or hold it closely to yourself? Or do you tolerate it as something to be endured? Personally, I've always thrived on adventures - for me they've been great fun and I've always learned something about myself, about life, about other people once I can review what happened.
Our attitudes about 'change' and our attitudes about 'adventures' are closely related. The mindset that we approach either is about the same. And when I say 'adventure' I'm not talking about walking into places that even angels fear to tread. That is never the point. Adventures should never be viewed as adventure for adventure sake - at least that's my mindset. OK, maybe a little adventure for adventure sake, but that thinking should never direct what you do and how you approach the adventure.
If you approach an adventure with fear, then it will cripple you to see the vast array of options available to you in the situation. If you approach it willy nilly you will undoubtedly also miss the options. I'm not suggesting that you let an adventure merely wash over you - that can lead to disaster. But I do suggest that you approach it as an opportunity for an 'object lesson', something new to be learned.
I can honestly say that I've never been disappointed by an adventure. Occasionally I've been disappointed in myself in terms of how I've reacted to it. Adventures don't come when they are convenient to us - they come .... sometimes when you least expect it.
Our attitudes about 'change' and our attitudes about 'adventures' are closely related. The mindset that we approach either is about the same. And when I say 'adventure' I'm not talking about walking into places that even angels fear to tread. That is never the point. Adventures should never be viewed as adventure for adventure sake - at least that's my mindset. OK, maybe a little adventure for adventure sake, but that thinking should never direct what you do and how you approach the adventure.
If you approach an adventure with fear, then it will cripple you to see the vast array of options available to you in the situation. If you approach it willy nilly you will undoubtedly also miss the options. I'm not suggesting that you let an adventure merely wash over you - that can lead to disaster. But I do suggest that you approach it as an opportunity for an 'object lesson', something new to be learned.
I can honestly say that I've never been disappointed by an adventure. Occasionally I've been disappointed in myself in terms of how I've reacted to it. Adventures don't come when they are convenient to us - they come .... sometimes when you least expect it.
Listening.... one of the greatest gifts
At a very early age I discovered people were more interested in themselves then in the other person. Observation is what led me to this very obvious conclusion. As a result, I determined, at a very early age, to focus on listening. Actually I think I've honed this ability quite well over then years.
Whether you realize it or not, listening is one of the greatest gifts you can give another person. And by 'listening' I don't mean: half way through what they are saying you are composing your response or responding with a..."I know exactly what you mean because when I was in the same situation". First: you can empathize but you are never in the exact same situation.
When talking with another person you really have to have your priorities straight - is your primary reason in talking with them to tell your story or to listen to the other person's story. That determination makes all the difference in what will transpire in the conversation. I would also contend that in every situation that you determine to have the other person the focus of the conversation that you learn something new about yourself.
Listening is an art. But it also takes a great deal of concentration. You actually have to understand what the other person is attempting to convey and sometimes that takes the form of helping them to know what it is they are saying. No greater tool is available for this than asking questions. Questions let the other person know you really are listening to them. They also help to refine thinking and sometimes rethink thinking.
In your listening, never assume. Never assume they actually do know what they are saying which is another reason to ask questions. Never assume the words they use hold the same definitions as what you may think - ask them to 'define' words. And never take offense at what's said. It may not be meant in the way you think... then again, if it is - if you take offense you can never help the other person rethink their thinking.
Whether you realize it or not, listening is one of the greatest gifts you can give another person. And by 'listening' I don't mean: half way through what they are saying you are composing your response or responding with a..."I know exactly what you mean because when I was in the same situation". First: you can empathize but you are never in the exact same situation.
When talking with another person you really have to have your priorities straight - is your primary reason in talking with them to tell your story or to listen to the other person's story. That determination makes all the difference in what will transpire in the conversation. I would also contend that in every situation that you determine to have the other person the focus of the conversation that you learn something new about yourself.
Listening is an art. But it also takes a great deal of concentration. You actually have to understand what the other person is attempting to convey and sometimes that takes the form of helping them to know what it is they are saying. No greater tool is available for this than asking questions. Questions let the other person know you really are listening to them. They also help to refine thinking and sometimes rethink thinking.
In your listening, never assume. Never assume they actually do know what they are saying which is another reason to ask questions. Never assume the words they use hold the same definitions as what you may think - ask them to 'define' words. And never take offense at what's said. It may not be meant in the way you think... then again, if it is - if you take offense you can never help the other person rethink their thinking.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
The Tortoise had it right
Contrary to myth, the tortoise was not slow and plodding he was steady and consistent. The hare, on the other hand, well... what can one say about the hare except he acted as expected - spasmodically and unpredictable, but with flair.
It would be my contention that the tortoise got a bad rap and was not honored for his victory. While the hare may have been chastised for his behavior, the tortoise was only defined as slow and plodding. 'Slow' and 'plodding' have never really been qualities that have been lauded. More a.... if all else fails, be slow and plodding.
By now, gentle reader, you may have concluded that this is a tongue-in-cheek post. Nay. Nay, I say. Well... maybe just slightly. But look at the underlying assumptions on this little tale. Look at your perceptions of the words: slow, plodding, steady, consistent. The former two rarely are viewed as positive attitudes to cultivate. And while we may tsk the hare, the flair he gave was also given a more positive reaction. Kind of a ... isn't it too bad the hare lost?... rather than ... wasn't that a great tortoise win.
Our mindset about how we define words explains a great deal of how we act and react the way we do.... obviously. Thus what we need is more critical thinking, more 'thinking outside the box', more thinking about how we define the box. We may just discover that though the tortoise won the race, he had it right all along. Flair is good but so is steady. And consistent is not a dull word.
It would be my contention that the tortoise got a bad rap and was not honored for his victory. While the hare may have been chastised for his behavior, the tortoise was only defined as slow and plodding. 'Slow' and 'plodding' have never really been qualities that have been lauded. More a.... if all else fails, be slow and plodding.
By now, gentle reader, you may have concluded that this is a tongue-in-cheek post. Nay. Nay, I say. Well... maybe just slightly. But look at the underlying assumptions on this little tale. Look at your perceptions of the words: slow, plodding, steady, consistent. The former two rarely are viewed as positive attitudes to cultivate. And while we may tsk the hare, the flair he gave was also given a more positive reaction. Kind of a ... isn't it too bad the hare lost?... rather than ... wasn't that a great tortoise win.
Our mindset about how we define words explains a great deal of how we act and react the way we do.... obviously. Thus what we need is more critical thinking, more 'thinking outside the box', more thinking about how we define the box. We may just discover that though the tortoise won the race, he had it right all along. Flair is good but so is steady. And consistent is not a dull word.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Most People
Are you a 'most people'? Do you 'go along to get along'? Do you 'run with the pack'? Or... do you follow a 'different drummer'? I think I've used enough trite phrases to ask my question. But the question remains.... how do you see yourself? How do you act?
A 'most people' approach to life is basically the safe and easy way. A, to use another quaint phrase, 'don't rock the boat' lifestyle. There is little demand on you intellectually or spiritually - all you need do is to discover what the prevailing view is and parrot it. However, this is usually accompanied with a 'look over your shoulder' view so that you are 'politically correct' and still able to change if/when necessary to continue to be part of the crowd. But change is based on what everyone else believes.
The other approach to life requires a responsibility lifestyle - being responsible to and for your beliefs regardless of others' agreement. Following the different drummer will demand courage of conviction, standing on what you believe is right, an uncompromising mental attitude toward discovery among other attributes. It isn't necessarily a loner lifestyle but it often is. Also, this doesn't mean that you are always right - many times you aren't, but the reasons for your stance are well thought out. Yet, it is not a defiant stand because in the face of incontrovertible evidence, you can and do change.
Are you the kind of person that attempts to hide in a crowd? Or do you stand apart based on your convictions? Are you a .... most people....
A 'most people' approach to life is basically the safe and easy way. A, to use another quaint phrase, 'don't rock the boat' lifestyle. There is little demand on you intellectually or spiritually - all you need do is to discover what the prevailing view is and parrot it. However, this is usually accompanied with a 'look over your shoulder' view so that you are 'politically correct' and still able to change if/when necessary to continue to be part of the crowd. But change is based on what everyone else believes.
The other approach to life requires a responsibility lifestyle - being responsible to and for your beliefs regardless of others' agreement. Following the different drummer will demand courage of conviction, standing on what you believe is right, an uncompromising mental attitude toward discovery among other attributes. It isn't necessarily a loner lifestyle but it often is. Also, this doesn't mean that you are always right - many times you aren't, but the reasons for your stance are well thought out. Yet, it is not a defiant stand because in the face of incontrovertible evidence, you can and do change.
Are you the kind of person that attempts to hide in a crowd? Or do you stand apart based on your convictions? Are you a .... most people....
Saturday, April 17, 2010
One of the last nails....
I use to do a great deal of studying on end times according to scripture. And I was always somewhat puzzled by the lack of specificity related to the United States. Here we have a country based on a solid foundation - a Christian country. A country of creative and enterprising individuals who are constantly trying to develop a 'better mouse trap', to better life. Yet... the U.S. is not involved as a major influence in the end of days and I was curious - why?
But I think I have a glimmer of an answer - we have denied our heritage and have become only a shadow of what we were and what we could be. We have been building our own coffin while still alive. Our 'end' is coming earlier than the final days though it began only a short time ago, as far as time is concerned.
The time line seems to have started back with Roe v. Wade. What a significant court decision! What did the church do????? Do you remember the church doing or saying anything? This, to me, was the first nail. I'm sure there were signs prior to this but this has to be one of the first really significant and visible nails.
The next nail came rather quickly when Madalyn O'Hair won her court case and prayer was banned from the opening school exercises. Again I don't remember much of a reaction by the church. There were sundry other foundational ruptures - example: the increasing violent and explicit behaviors allowed in movies and television. The young were under attack with little protection.
This week we had another nail provided by the court case that determined that a National Day of Prayer was unconstitutional. This will be the last year for the National Day. Have you heard much from the church regarding this? Probably not.
But what I find totally fascinating is that these three major nails were all COURT cases! It wasn't Congress, the legislative body, that made the decision. It was the judicial, interpreting law, that has led the downward spiral. Granted this is only one person's opinion.... I wonder how long this right will last before the court takes the right to speak away as well?
But I think I have a glimmer of an answer - we have denied our heritage and have become only a shadow of what we were and what we could be. We have been building our own coffin while still alive. Our 'end' is coming earlier than the final days though it began only a short time ago, as far as time is concerned.
The time line seems to have started back with Roe v. Wade. What a significant court decision! What did the church do????? Do you remember the church doing or saying anything? This, to me, was the first nail. I'm sure there were signs prior to this but this has to be one of the first really significant and visible nails.
The next nail came rather quickly when Madalyn O'Hair won her court case and prayer was banned from the opening school exercises. Again I don't remember much of a reaction by the church. There were sundry other foundational ruptures - example: the increasing violent and explicit behaviors allowed in movies and television. The young were under attack with little protection.
This week we had another nail provided by the court case that determined that a National Day of Prayer was unconstitutional. This will be the last year for the National Day. Have you heard much from the church regarding this? Probably not.
But what I find totally fascinating is that these three major nails were all COURT cases! It wasn't Congress, the legislative body, that made the decision. It was the judicial, interpreting law, that has led the downward spiral. Granted this is only one person's opinion.... I wonder how long this right will last before the court takes the right to speak away as well?
Friday, April 16, 2010
Fan-hood
This particular post is a tad frivolous, but one does have a responsibility to frivolity occasionally. The focus of this post is being a fan. Are you one? I am, though I must admit I don't venture into fan-hood very often. And, I can count on two hands those things that would classify as being fan-hood.
Fan-hood means: sharing the focus of your fan-hood with others, attending, whenever possible, the venue that the focus is involved with, discovering more about the focus but definitely NOT obsessing. Obsessing goes over the edge and one really shouldn't do that because life is more than simply being a fan.
My fan-hood's are: Celtic Woman, Dame Judi Dench, golf, Meryl Streep, mysteries (books), England, especially London, and PBS. I can see that you might wonder at the non live ones but they probably have more history.
I've always been a huge fan of mystery books, especially Victorian or Edwardian, and consume them by the bucket load. Then again, I've always enjoyed puzzles and this is fun for me. And, if spending one's time is an indication of fan-hood status then this ranks about second.
Golf. A dream. I love golf but haven't done so in years. Now that I have the time I hope to move this activity into the active fan-hood status. PBS. Not carte' blanche' because I don't spend all my time glued to the TV. But, I find that if I am watching then it more often than not is PBS (or NCIS).
Of the people mentioned, Dame Judi Dench has to be one of my favorite actors (I guess we don't use 'actresses' any more). She has a remarkable ability to immerse herself in whatever role she is playing. And, I've never seen her play the same person twice. Meryl Streep has the same quality.
But it is Celtic Woman that holds the highest spot in my fan-hood. This is a group that is so enjoyable to listen to or watch that I would recommend it to everyone regardless of age or music affiliation. They are a joy to hear, especially when they blend their voices. Grand.
I realize that I have not listed any men in this fan-hood, but there are quite a few - mostly actors and a couple of intellects. However, they are primarily in the pre fan-hood classification.
Fan-hood means: sharing the focus of your fan-hood with others, attending, whenever possible, the venue that the focus is involved with, discovering more about the focus but definitely NOT obsessing. Obsessing goes over the edge and one really shouldn't do that because life is more than simply being a fan.
My fan-hood's are: Celtic Woman, Dame Judi Dench, golf, Meryl Streep, mysteries (books), England, especially London, and PBS. I can see that you might wonder at the non live ones but they probably have more history.
I've always been a huge fan of mystery books, especially Victorian or Edwardian, and consume them by the bucket load. Then again, I've always enjoyed puzzles and this is fun for me. And, if spending one's time is an indication of fan-hood status then this ranks about second.
Golf. A dream. I love golf but haven't done so in years. Now that I have the time I hope to move this activity into the active fan-hood status. PBS. Not carte' blanche' because I don't spend all my time glued to the TV. But, I find that if I am watching then it more often than not is PBS (or NCIS).
Of the people mentioned, Dame Judi Dench has to be one of my favorite actors (I guess we don't use 'actresses' any more). She has a remarkable ability to immerse herself in whatever role she is playing. And, I've never seen her play the same person twice. Meryl Streep has the same quality.
But it is Celtic Woman that holds the highest spot in my fan-hood. This is a group that is so enjoyable to listen to or watch that I would recommend it to everyone regardless of age or music affiliation. They are a joy to hear, especially when they blend their voices. Grand.
I realize that I have not listed any men in this fan-hood, but there are quite a few - mostly actors and a couple of intellects. However, they are primarily in the pre fan-hood classification.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Your word
Are you a person of your word? Is your 'yes' yes and 'no' no? Or.... if there is a change, do you let others know?
I really can't think of anything that's more important than being a person of your word. Quite honestly, how can anyone rely on what you say if you aren't? And excuses really don't work. It is not enough to say, later, "...what I really meant was..." or "...things changed so I couldn't/didn't..." or "...I knew you'd understand when I couldn't/didn't...".
A far better approach is to, as much as possible, ALWAYS let those who would be affected by a change in your behavior, to be informed. If the choice is between looking silly for changing (or for not taking this approach initially) and letting them know versus letting others believe what you intended would continue... choose letting them know. What will happen to your reputation and relationships when you do not let others know of change is far worse than letting them know of the change.
And yes I realize that there is a probability that no one is 100% spot on with this quality. But, I do believe it is something we can all aspire to. To be known as a person of your word has to be one of the highest accolades one can receive.
I really can't think of anything that's more important than being a person of your word. Quite honestly, how can anyone rely on what you say if you aren't? And excuses really don't work. It is not enough to say, later, "...what I really meant was..." or "...things changed so I couldn't/didn't..." or "...I knew you'd understand when I couldn't/didn't...".
A far better approach is to, as much as possible, ALWAYS let those who would be affected by a change in your behavior, to be informed. If the choice is between looking silly for changing (or for not taking this approach initially) and letting them know versus letting others believe what you intended would continue... choose letting them know. What will happen to your reputation and relationships when you do not let others know of change is far worse than letting them know of the change.
And yes I realize that there is a probability that no one is 100% spot on with this quality. But, I do believe it is something we can all aspire to. To be known as a person of your word has to be one of the highest accolades one can receive.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Suicide... the final futility
This is somewhat of a change from my typical posts. .... A former co-worker died the other day. He took his own life. How incredibly sad. And somehow, I wasn't surprised that death was at his own hand.
I can't say that I knew him well but every time he saw me he engulfed me in a bear hug. That's the kind of person he was - if he knew you he would always greet you. But there was a pale of sadness that always hung around him. You could always sense it. Part of the problem, if I were to analyze it, was that he wanted to be married and to have a family around him. This didn't happen and since he was in his mid 50's I suspect he figured it wouldn't. Would he have been a good husband, a good father - I have no idea, but I think this was his heart's desire.
He was a great volunteer. He was always being asked to help someone out and I don't recall him ever refusing. He loved sports and spent his time involved in whatever the season's main sport was. That and the work he did for the heart drive each year were two things that identified who he was.
There is a sense of loss. But also a sense of futility. To be honest, I don't know which emotion prevails at this moment - sadness at the loss, or anger that it came to this. When loneliness and despair take root, and I believe they did, then this is a powerful combination. I'm not sure that he had the spiritual foundation that was strong enough to fight this.
I can't think of anything more despairing then the moment before one actually commits the act - a little madness, I think. Had he thought about how this would affect those who did care for him, would he have followed through? I don't know.
I can't say that I knew him well but every time he saw me he engulfed me in a bear hug. That's the kind of person he was - if he knew you he would always greet you. But there was a pale of sadness that always hung around him. You could always sense it. Part of the problem, if I were to analyze it, was that he wanted to be married and to have a family around him. This didn't happen and since he was in his mid 50's I suspect he figured it wouldn't. Would he have been a good husband, a good father - I have no idea, but I think this was his heart's desire.
He was a great volunteer. He was always being asked to help someone out and I don't recall him ever refusing. He loved sports and spent his time involved in whatever the season's main sport was. That and the work he did for the heart drive each year were two things that identified who he was.
There is a sense of loss. But also a sense of futility. To be honest, I don't know which emotion prevails at this moment - sadness at the loss, or anger that it came to this. When loneliness and despair take root, and I believe they did, then this is a powerful combination. I'm not sure that he had the spiritual foundation that was strong enough to fight this.
I can't think of anything more despairing then the moment before one actually commits the act - a little madness, I think. Had he thought about how this would affect those who did care for him, would he have followed through? I don't know.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Relationships
Contrary to popular belief, relationships (marriage, friendship, family) is not, and can never be, 50-50. (Besides, what are you going to do with the other 50%?)They really are all or nothing at all (my definition of 'relationship'). And the other side of the 'equation' has to approach the relationship with the same mindset. If there's no level of mutual commitment then there is only acquaintance-ship.
Perhaps another way of looking at this is: do you count your friends by the number or by your involvement? Example: on Facebook I can have hundreds of 'friends' listed but how many of them do I communicate with? The answer to the communication question gives a hint as to the relationship. I'm one of those who have many acquaintances and few friends, but the friends I do have are long standing.
Relationships may not require 'work' but they do require time. Do you spend time, whether it be face-to-face or long-distance (phone, email, etc.)? If you don't then is there really a relationship?
When I was doing seminars, at one point I would have people get out their check register (we use to actually use checks and not Internet banking) and see where they spent their money. Wherever that was - that was their involvement. I had them do the same thing with their calendars - you can say you have a relationship but if no time is spent then it begs the question.
Relationships are never boring - they are in a continual state of discovery about the other person, about yourself. This births trust. Trust never happens immediately, it is forged over time but is the foundation upon which you continue to build.
Perhaps another way of looking at this is: do you count your friends by the number or by your involvement? Example: on Facebook I can have hundreds of 'friends' listed but how many of them do I communicate with? The answer to the communication question gives a hint as to the relationship. I'm one of those who have many acquaintances and few friends, but the friends I do have are long standing.
Relationships may not require 'work' but they do require time. Do you spend time, whether it be face-to-face or long-distance (phone, email, etc.)? If you don't then is there really a relationship?
When I was doing seminars, at one point I would have people get out their check register (we use to actually use checks and not Internet banking) and see where they spent their money. Wherever that was - that was their involvement. I had them do the same thing with their calendars - you can say you have a relationship but if no time is spent then it begs the question.
Relationships are never boring - they are in a continual state of discovery about the other person, about yourself. This births trust. Trust never happens immediately, it is forged over time but is the foundation upon which you continue to build.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Actions ... Words ... Words ... Actions ...
Which is the most important, Cosmic Reader, actions or words? To some, words are more important - to others, actions are. And while an argument can be made that they are equal in importance, I think the nod can go to actions.
Words are always important. They provide depth and understanding to the actions. Without words one has to assume based on the actions. But without actions, words are just that - words, without the accompanying statement that actions give. In some respect, actions are the period to the words. Simultaneously, words can 'flesh out' the why of the actions.
The reason I think that actions are the more important is that actions prove the words. Without the accompanying actions how does anyone know that the speaker stands on their words? I can say "I love you" but if I don't demonstrate it, how does anyone know? In scripture James talks about showing (proving) his faith by his actions. And that's the point I think - actions prove your words.
I realize this is a simplistic way of viewing words/actions but I believe that you can never assume. It's important to back up your words with actions and it is critical to explain your actions with words. So, simplistically, which is the most important actions or words.... the answer is 'yes'.
Words are always important. They provide depth and understanding to the actions. Without words one has to assume based on the actions. But without actions, words are just that - words, without the accompanying statement that actions give. In some respect, actions are the period to the words. Simultaneously, words can 'flesh out' the why of the actions.
The reason I think that actions are the more important is that actions prove the words. Without the accompanying actions how does anyone know that the speaker stands on their words? I can say "I love you" but if I don't demonstrate it, how does anyone know? In scripture James talks about showing (proving) his faith by his actions. And that's the point I think - actions prove your words.
I realize this is a simplistic way of viewing words/actions but I believe that you can never assume. It's important to back up your words with actions and it is critical to explain your actions with words. So, simplistically, which is the most important actions or words.... the answer is 'yes'.
Friday, April 9, 2010
Truth
Heady word. And, obviously, impossible to fully discuss in only a few paragraphs. Regardless... What does 'truth' mean to you? Is it relative - depending on the person or subject? Or, is it what it is. Personally I think there are 3 critical components to consider when you think about truth.
One is to speak truth in love as scripture commands. We can all handle truth a bit easier if we know it isn't going to be used to knock us down. Some people use truth as a weapon, typically offensive and not defensive. How something is said IS as important as what is said. Equally obvious is that I will be able to consider it far easier if it comes from a 'friend' then someone who is not. I tend to be less defensive if the 'correction' is coming from someone I trust.
Another critical component is my own motivation for speaking. Why I want the truth spoken is paramount - is it to defend myself? To justify? To explain? If one of my purposes (and this is a plural word) is so that the other person understands, then perhaps I'm not the one to speak. The caveat in this is whether there is more than one person aware/involved and that person is a friend.
The last issue is... truth, according to who? While truth isn't relative we must always remember that the spokesman is. We see truth according to our eyes, but we have to realize that while it may be truth, the other person may see things differently. It is a conundrum to know something is truth and that truth is truth but it may be different to another person's mindset and philosophy.
I believe our responsibility is to speak the truth as we see it, and to state it to others in that context. Never compromise truth as you see and understand it but also listen to the reaction so that you can help the other person. Presupposing that you are interested in helping them to see and understand.... truth.
One is to speak truth in love as scripture commands. We can all handle truth a bit easier if we know it isn't going to be used to knock us down. Some people use truth as a weapon, typically offensive and not defensive. How something is said IS as important as what is said. Equally obvious is that I will be able to consider it far easier if it comes from a 'friend' then someone who is not. I tend to be less defensive if the 'correction' is coming from someone I trust.
Another critical component is my own motivation for speaking. Why I want the truth spoken is paramount - is it to defend myself? To justify? To explain? If one of my purposes (and this is a plural word) is so that the other person understands, then perhaps I'm not the one to speak. The caveat in this is whether there is more than one person aware/involved and that person is a friend.
The last issue is... truth, according to who? While truth isn't relative we must always remember that the spokesman is. We see truth according to our eyes, but we have to realize that while it may be truth, the other person may see things differently. It is a conundrum to know something is truth and that truth is truth but it may be different to another person's mindset and philosophy.
I believe our responsibility is to speak the truth as we see it, and to state it to others in that context. Never compromise truth as you see and understand it but also listen to the reaction so that you can help the other person. Presupposing that you are interested in helping them to see and understand.... truth.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Age - it isn't for cowards
The more I experience 'it' (age) the more I realize the validity of that comment. The more mature (I like that a whole lot more than 'older' though age and maturity are not naturally the same and I really hate 'senior') I become, the more I hear really banal comments from others. Example: 'dear' or 'honey' seem to take the place of one's name. 'Dear' is something I've never been and 'honey' is an ingredient when one is baking.
For some reason people like to refer to women 'of a certain age' as 'girl'. Grief! I stopped being a girl around 10 years of age. Interestingly enough - I don't ever remember hearing males 'of a certain age' referred to as 'boys'. Why is that I wonder? The problem is to not strangle the other person for making those kinds of comments.
Another issue is mobility. I grant you that I'm not as quick and agile as I was 40 years ago but I'm also not an invalid. (You do realize that one of the definitions of invalid is in valid - and I'm not in valid!) It is true that gravity hits at a certain time of life, but gravity has nothing to do with mobility. I may not like to walk as fast, then again.... I never did. Point is - before assuming, check to see if assistance is required.
Thus, you can see that for those brave enough age is a crown not a burden. It does take courage to not be beaten down by the forces of time, but it is a real insult when people assist with that through how they treat and react. In many societies, those past a certain age are venerated. I would never seek that, but don't make assumptions either. If life didn't make a coward out of me... don't assume you can.
For some reason people like to refer to women 'of a certain age' as 'girl'. Grief! I stopped being a girl around 10 years of age. Interestingly enough - I don't ever remember hearing males 'of a certain age' referred to as 'boys'. Why is that I wonder? The problem is to not strangle the other person for making those kinds of comments.
Another issue is mobility. I grant you that I'm not as quick and agile as I was 40 years ago but I'm also not an invalid. (You do realize that one of the definitions of invalid is in valid - and I'm not in valid!) It is true that gravity hits at a certain time of life, but gravity has nothing to do with mobility. I may not like to walk as fast, then again.... I never did. Point is - before assuming, check to see if assistance is required.
Thus, you can see that for those brave enough age is a crown not a burden. It does take courage to not be beaten down by the forces of time, but it is a real insult when people assist with that through how they treat and react. In many societies, those past a certain age are venerated. I would never seek that, but don't make assumptions either. If life didn't make a coward out of me... don't assume you can.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Worse case scenario
What do you do when the worse case scenario becomes what happens? What do you do when that which you feared the most is what you have to face?
Obviously the first thing you need to do is to make certain that the worst is really the worst. If it is.... then I'm one of those 'silver lining' types. As bad as it is, I try and find a glimmer of hope, something positive that I can build upon. The absolute worst thing you can do in a worst situation is to compound it. And the 'it's got to get better' mentality does not help because sometimes it won't get better and you need to cut your losses and move on.
My approach is not a pollyanna-ish approach, though admittedly it may sound like it. I would never advocate turning a blind eye or ignoring what's happened or staying in an untenable situation. But, I do advocate learning from the situation as you move on. One of my favorite quotes, paraphrased, is that if we fail to learn from history we are doomed to repeat it. Thus... what can you learn from what happens is my proactive approach.
Do I always do this? Pretty much. Granted it is preceded by some grumbling and a bit of 'poor me' but once I get that out of my system, I do move on. Moving on is really the only logical thing to do. Hard? Yes. But the alternative is certainly unattractive. And all you get from wallowing is dirty.
Obviously the first thing you need to do is to make certain that the worst is really the worst. If it is.... then I'm one of those 'silver lining' types. As bad as it is, I try and find a glimmer of hope, something positive that I can build upon. The absolute worst thing you can do in a worst situation is to compound it. And the 'it's got to get better' mentality does not help because sometimes it won't get better and you need to cut your losses and move on.
My approach is not a pollyanna-ish approach, though admittedly it may sound like it. I would never advocate turning a blind eye or ignoring what's happened or staying in an untenable situation. But, I do advocate learning from the situation as you move on. One of my favorite quotes, paraphrased, is that if we fail to learn from history we are doomed to repeat it. Thus... what can you learn from what happens is my proactive approach.
Do I always do this? Pretty much. Granted it is preceded by some grumbling and a bit of 'poor me' but once I get that out of my system, I do move on. Moving on is really the only logical thing to do. Hard? Yes. But the alternative is certainly unattractive. And all you get from wallowing is dirty.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
A Case for Quiet
There's really too much noise. Stop for a minute and what do you hear? Noise. ?
So often our lives are filled with so much sound that we can't hear. And I grant you that the sounds of the city can be soothing, but I'll wager the sounds of quiet to your city sounds most of the time. Actually it isn't total quiet... if you listen, in the quiet you can hear quite a lot.
The quiet sounds don't shout... they are quite tranquil. Songbird solo's and even the sound of the wind playing through the leaves - these are the peaceful sounds, the quiet sounds that restore. Far off you might hear the sounds of children playing, which typically means laughter - but it's never harsh. If you are in the woods, you might hear the sounds of the quintessential 'babbling brook'.
If you ever try listening to the quiet you really won't be bored, surprised perhaps, but not disagreeably so. The restorative power can prepare you for all the noise that inhabits your life - especially if you enjoy the hustle and bustle and noise of the city.
Our souls need this kind of quiet sound. It gives us a respite from the car horns and even from the sounds of lawnmowers. Just to sit and listen to... the quiet.
So often our lives are filled with so much sound that we can't hear. And I grant you that the sounds of the city can be soothing, but I'll wager the sounds of quiet to your city sounds most of the time. Actually it isn't total quiet... if you listen, in the quiet you can hear quite a lot.
The quiet sounds don't shout... they are quite tranquil. Songbird solo's and even the sound of the wind playing through the leaves - these are the peaceful sounds, the quiet sounds that restore. Far off you might hear the sounds of children playing, which typically means laughter - but it's never harsh. If you are in the woods, you might hear the sounds of the quintessential 'babbling brook'.
If you ever try listening to the quiet you really won't be bored, surprised perhaps, but not disagreeably so. The restorative power can prepare you for all the noise that inhabits your life - especially if you enjoy the hustle and bustle and noise of the city.
Our souls need this kind of quiet sound. It gives us a respite from the car horns and even from the sounds of lawnmowers. Just to sit and listen to... the quiet.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
The Cost of the Reward
We need to first establish the reality that for every reward there is a price you pay. You do realize that? It really is important to understand that you always pay a price for a reward - time, energy, money, etc. As long as the delicate balance between price and reward is in reward's favor there isn't a problem. Until the cost becomes too high, the trade-off is one we have to/are willing to pay. However, once the balance shifts then other issues arise such as satisfaction, core values like being valued, creativity options, etc. The issue is - balance shifts.
So what happens at this time? Again, many options are available: quit, find a more rewarding position, nothing. It's the last option that is the most devastating. If you feel like you are in a no win work environment and you do not choose to do something about it, then you end up shooting yourself in the foot.
Shooting yourself can take the guise of complaint (typically the major outcome), spreading dissatisfaction to others, scaling back your goals, scaling back your work behavior, and the biggest detriment - being fired. Fired is the least attractive option - choosing to give notice and find another position is far more effective. And, yes I know, sometimes another position is impossible to find.
There is another option in the midst of finding something else and that is.... finding something positive about what you are doing or can do. This isn't easy especially since you are typically dissatisfied at this point. But for your own well being, the cost of doing nothing is huge.
There is always a cost... the question is what are you willing to pay for your choice?
So what happens at this time? Again, many options are available: quit, find a more rewarding position, nothing. It's the last option that is the most devastating. If you feel like you are in a no win work environment and you do not choose to do something about it, then you end up shooting yourself in the foot.
Shooting yourself can take the guise of complaint (typically the major outcome), spreading dissatisfaction to others, scaling back your goals, scaling back your work behavior, and the biggest detriment - being fired. Fired is the least attractive option - choosing to give notice and find another position is far more effective. And, yes I know, sometimes another position is impossible to find.
There is another option in the midst of finding something else and that is.... finding something positive about what you are doing or can do. This isn't easy especially since you are typically dissatisfied at this point. But for your own well being, the cost of doing nothing is huge.
There is always a cost... the question is what are you willing to pay for your choice?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)