This is Memorial Day. A time to reflect, as Americans, what a gift of freedom we've been given by those who fought to maintain that freedom for us.
I fear that in our 'political correctness' we will not honor those who died or were injured in body or spirit to maintain our freedoms. The Vietnam vets got the worse reception, but we've also glorified the WWII vet now, that didn't always occur when these vets came home. The Korean War 'conflict' vets also received little recognition for their sacrifice and the vets from other skirmishes that have occurred have received little thanks.
Honoring vets is not honoring war but it is acknowledging those who became our frontline of defense against those who would take our freedoms. These men and women who fought for us have become far too often, the poor relations. These people interrupted their lives in order to be that frontline of defense - putting aside personal goals and plans.
I believe it is the responsibility of one generation to demonstrate by their words and actions the respect that should be shown toward those who are vets or current service people. We need to be an example to the next generation that they need to honor these people. They put themselves in harm's way so we wouldn't have to.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Saturday, May 29, 2010
A new creation
That's the point, new, that most Christian's miss. When we accept Jesus as Lord we become a new creation. It's not something we can earn, or something we can 'purchase', it is the free gift that comes when we become part of the Family of God. But it is a gift that will require our response.
The definition of new creation, in this case, means a new manner of being, something that didn't exist before. The rest of the sentence reads, "... old things have passed away, behold all things are new." Clean slate. New beginning. It's not a matter of how you feel... it is a fact - deal done. We are made a new creation.
Do not read 'new creation' as never making another mistake or all problems evaporate. Not the case. We all are, after all, human thus prone to making mistakes - willful and not. However, now we have a foundation for change, a foundation to build upon. We are able to overcome. We don't need to be, to feel defeated. Actually, the new creation reality gives us hope. And hope is hard to break no matter how small.
Our responsibility is to discover what this new creation is, in our individual case. It does demand a responsibility from us. The responsibility is to grow and mature and not need to be constantly babied, though there is a season that this does occur. Fortunately we have a handbook that helps us in growing - it's called the Bible, the inspired Word of God. It would be unfair to provide us a new beginning and not give us a way to understand what has happened and a way to mature. This begins our 'what's next' quest.
Being a new creation is never ending - we will always be engaged in the discovery and practice of being a new creation. It isn't always easy but it is empowering because we aren't alone in this.
(This will be a subject that I'll return to often since all I've done now is to introduce the subject.)
The definition of new creation, in this case, means a new manner of being, something that didn't exist before. The rest of the sentence reads, "... old things have passed away, behold all things are new." Clean slate. New beginning. It's not a matter of how you feel... it is a fact - deal done. We are made a new creation.
Do not read 'new creation' as never making another mistake or all problems evaporate. Not the case. We all are, after all, human thus prone to making mistakes - willful and not. However, now we have a foundation for change, a foundation to build upon. We are able to overcome. We don't need to be, to feel defeated. Actually, the new creation reality gives us hope. And hope is hard to break no matter how small.
Our responsibility is to discover what this new creation is, in our individual case. It does demand a responsibility from us. The responsibility is to grow and mature and not need to be constantly babied, though there is a season that this does occur. Fortunately we have a handbook that helps us in growing - it's called the Bible, the inspired Word of God. It would be unfair to provide us a new beginning and not give us a way to understand what has happened and a way to mature. This begins our 'what's next' quest.
Being a new creation is never ending - we will always be engaged in the discovery and practice of being a new creation. It isn't always easy but it is empowering because we aren't alone in this.
(This will be a subject that I'll return to often since all I've done now is to introduce the subject.)
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Bloom where you are planted....
When I was in college, a few centuries ago, this phrase was one of the prevailing suggestions of the day. At that time, I really didn't agree with the thought because if anyone was going to plant me, it was me. I always wondered who the implied person was that was doing the planting and how 'bloom' was being defined - by me or by this unknown entity. And, I reasoned, did I want to stay put regardless of the planter!?
I still believe that you need to know who it is that's doing the planting. Parents? You? Friends? Family? Your job/profession? ??? God.... Obviously the 'who' of the planter is of paramount importance. Because there is the implied agreement with the planting by you, the plantee. For a plant to take root there has to be some form of agreement, acceptance that where the plant is will be where the plant will be productive and subsequently will be harvested. See... this is no light decision.
There's a scripture that I've always liked that talks about a good plant bringing forth good fruit and a bad plant bringing forth thorns and bramble fit only for the fire. So the subsequent fruit is the next important consideration. And a big component in this is you, your attitude - are you being fruitful? The reality is that you will produce fruit - the only question is the quality of the fruit: good or unfit. What kind of harvest are you creating?
So, Cosmic Reader, you can see that there is a great deal to be considered in the planting and blooming. And what if you find yourself, "... a lonely little petunia in an onion patch..."? OK, maybe I'm reaching but the point is worth considering.
Now... having said all that there is a caveat. For the Christian the planter is God so you can be comforted that you are in the best possible place for you to bloom. And it doesn't necessarily mean that you will always stay in that place, but it does assure you that you have the promise and potential of fruitfulness as long as you stay in His hand.
I still believe that you need to know who it is that's doing the planting. Parents? You? Friends? Family? Your job/profession? ??? God.... Obviously the 'who' of the planter is of paramount importance. Because there is the implied agreement with the planting by you, the plantee. For a plant to take root there has to be some form of agreement, acceptance that where the plant is will be where the plant will be productive and subsequently will be harvested. See... this is no light decision.
There's a scripture that I've always liked that talks about a good plant bringing forth good fruit and a bad plant bringing forth thorns and bramble fit only for the fire. So the subsequent fruit is the next important consideration. And a big component in this is you, your attitude - are you being fruitful? The reality is that you will produce fruit - the only question is the quality of the fruit: good or unfit. What kind of harvest are you creating?
So, Cosmic Reader, you can see that there is a great deal to be considered in the planting and blooming. And what if you find yourself, "... a lonely little petunia in an onion patch..."? OK, maybe I'm reaching but the point is worth considering.
Now... having said all that there is a caveat. For the Christian the planter is God so you can be comforted that you are in the best possible place for you to bloom. And it doesn't necessarily mean that you will always stay in that place, but it does assure you that you have the promise and potential of fruitfulness as long as you stay in His hand.
Defeat, Failure - not the same thing
Defeats and failures are not the same. In the first place I really have never believed in 'failure' then again - it could be my definition. Defeats, however, do happen and how we respond to them is critical.
Definition: failure, for me, doesn't exist because I don't accept the traditional definition of the word. It is all the attendant negative and debilitating emotions that accompany the word that I find fault with. 'Failure', to me, is merely not taking the best approach in a particular situation. Thus failure doesn't hold me in its grip. I simply reassess and change. Too simplistic? Not realistic? Perhaps.
Defeat: is a loss - one didn't win. It's more like a disappointment. And, I suppose, one could argue that my definition of 'defeat' is merely a substitution for failure. I disagree. A defeat puts a period at the end of the sentence. You really can't tweak it. It's not that a reassessment can't occur but that's for the now or future - it doesn't change the past. And that's the point.
If/when we allow a defeat to wash over us we can drown in an emotional tidal wave. That's why how we respond is critical. A defeat should signal a time to move on. We should view it as a particular option that didn't work and change focus/direction/whatever we need to change. And believe it or not, there are moments when we have to look defeat squarely in the eye and not just let it go but accept that, in this particular issue at this particular time, leave it. Never easy.
Definition: failure, for me, doesn't exist because I don't accept the traditional definition of the word. It is all the attendant negative and debilitating emotions that accompany the word that I find fault with. 'Failure', to me, is merely not taking the best approach in a particular situation. Thus failure doesn't hold me in its grip. I simply reassess and change. Too simplistic? Not realistic? Perhaps.
Defeat: is a loss - one didn't win. It's more like a disappointment. And, I suppose, one could argue that my definition of 'defeat' is merely a substitution for failure. I disagree. A defeat puts a period at the end of the sentence. You really can't tweak it. It's not that a reassessment can't occur but that's for the now or future - it doesn't change the past. And that's the point.
If/when we allow a defeat to wash over us we can drown in an emotional tidal wave. That's why how we respond is critical. A defeat should signal a time to move on. We should view it as a particular option that didn't work and change focus/direction/whatever we need to change. And believe it or not, there are moments when we have to look defeat squarely in the eye and not just let it go but accept that, in this particular issue at this particular time, leave it. Never easy.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Epitaph
If you were to write your own epitaph right now... what would you say? Would you be happy with what you've accomplished? Would you be pleased with who you've become? If someone else wrote it - how would it mesh with what you would say? Would you emphasize the same things that someone else would?
Perhaps a lot of questions, but the point is - rather than focusing on what you've done, have you become the person you want to be? Is the person you see as you the same person that others see as you? Obviously my contention is that it's far more important the 'who' of you over the 'what' of you.
It could be argued that the 'what' points to the 'who'. Yes.... and not completely. One sees the public face of people in the what but of paramount concern and interest should be the underlying 'who'. A different way of looking at this is.... do you walk your talk?
We are all in a state of constantly 'becoming' and this is good because this means we're growing and learning and experiencing. It allows us the opportunity to refine. But this is also based on an undergirding foundation - the 'place' from which growing and refining takes place. It really is quite important for us to be on intimate terms with this.
We need to know and accept our 'who' because without this understanding our 'what' has no substance. And... our 'who' has no depth from which to change and grow.
Perhaps a lot of questions, but the point is - rather than focusing on what you've done, have you become the person you want to be? Is the person you see as you the same person that others see as you? Obviously my contention is that it's far more important the 'who' of you over the 'what' of you.
It could be argued that the 'what' points to the 'who'. Yes.... and not completely. One sees the public face of people in the what but of paramount concern and interest should be the underlying 'who'. A different way of looking at this is.... do you walk your talk?
We are all in a state of constantly 'becoming' and this is good because this means we're growing and learning and experiencing. It allows us the opportunity to refine. But this is also based on an undergirding foundation - the 'place' from which growing and refining takes place. It really is quite important for us to be on intimate terms with this.
We need to know and accept our 'who' because without this understanding our 'what' has no substance. And... our 'who' has no depth from which to change and grow.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Life vs..................
What's the dearest thing to you Cosmic Reader? Your life? Your family? Your friends? Your money/possessions? And what are you willing to give up to retain it? Your job? Your family? Your goals? Your friends? Your integrity? Your life?
This is not some isolated, sophomoric question - it is extremely important. You really need to know what is of supreme importance for you and what price you would be willing to pay. If you don't know then you could find yourself facing precisely that issue - you could be blindsided and not know your response. Perhaps I've not listed those 'things' that are important to you or the price you are willing to pay - simply put in your choices.
In some respects this post could have a subtitle of: How precious is your life? It would seem that after everything is stripped away, what you are left standing with is your life. But what is even
more precious to you than your life? What would you be willing to sacrifice your life for in order that the 'item' most precious isn't denied/betrayed?
Obviously only you have the answer to that question. For God it was His Son He was willing to sacrifice in order that you would be saved, because you were so precious to Him that He wasn't willing to have you without hope. Your response to this invitation, to accept Jesus as Lord, makes all the difference. The only catch is... for you to have life, you have to be willing to lose your life.
This is not some isolated, sophomoric question - it is extremely important. You really need to know what is of supreme importance for you and what price you would be willing to pay. If you don't know then you could find yourself facing precisely that issue - you could be blindsided and not know your response. Perhaps I've not listed those 'things' that are important to you or the price you are willing to pay - simply put in your choices.
In some respects this post could have a subtitle of: How precious is your life? It would seem that after everything is stripped away, what you are left standing with is your life. But what is even
more precious to you than your life? What would you be willing to sacrifice your life for in order that the 'item' most precious isn't denied/betrayed?
Obviously only you have the answer to that question. For God it was His Son He was willing to sacrifice in order that you would be saved, because you were so precious to Him that He wasn't willing to have you without hope. Your response to this invitation, to accept Jesus as Lord, makes all the difference. The only catch is... for you to have life, you have to be willing to lose your life.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Immediate..... Postpone....
How are you on waiting Cosmic Reader? Do you do it well? Are you able to wait to get the prize you have been wanting or do you need to experience your reward - now, regardless of what it is, even if it isn't your prize? Are you an immediate or postponed gratifier?
Most people are immediate gratification-ers rather than postponing. This is comparable to 'a bird in the hand is worth more than 2 in the bush' thinking. But in many cases, it is a fallacy. "Settling" for mere immediate gratification never compensates for the prize you really wanted. Many times people keep trying for the prize but the lure of immediate causes them to settle before it can be attained.
Most people are immediate gratification-ers rather than postponing. This is comparable to 'a bird in the hand is worth more than 2 in the bush' thinking. But in many cases, it is a fallacy. "Settling" for mere immediate gratification never compensates for the prize you really wanted. Many times people keep trying for the prize but the lure of immediate causes them to settle before it can be attained.
Perhaps a more salient question is... how long are you willing to wait till you reach the prize? How important is the prize to you? Are you willing to postpone and continue 'working' in order to attain your goals? None of those are easy answer questions and yet they are critical to the ultimate decision of accepting now rather than waiting till later.
An equally salient issue is - is the prize attainable in the first place? Not always, in starting out, do we know the end from the beginning. Not always do we know we can actually attain the prize - it is something hoped for but it is an unknown. So if we have a compromise 'prize', is it worth taking it rather than pressing on?
Is the prize worth the time, energy, effort needed to attain? Or..... is the easier route your preferred method of action? Difficult questions. Difficult answers.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Christianity - Political Correct...... oxymoron
We live in a world that is full of compromisers and relativists and fence straddlers. And, one of the current, rather painful, straddle is Christian and politically correct. Quite honestly, not possible. Why attempt to marry two diametrically different approaches to life?
The 'don't rock the boat' or 'trying to please' mentality attempts to do both but it is really a lost cause. Part of the dilemma rests in what each proposed to do/be in life. Politically correct really defines 'shifting sand'. There are moments that we find that a word has been redefined or at least modified so that what wasn't incorrect earlier suddenly is. The one with the loudest voice tends to have the greatest determination. Plus we discover that behaviors that were totally unacceptable a few years ago and now the modus operandi. No explanation for the shift, but it has occurred.
On the other hand, Christian, hasn't changed. What was foundational 2000 years ago is still foundational. 'Correct' behavior is still according to a standard that is easy to discover, though sometimes difficult to follow due to our own discomfort at taking a stand. Christians have a 'hand book' to follow that is unshifting.
More and more there is a conflict in definitions, in behavior, in standards between Christian and politically correct. My belief is that it's going to intensify - the minority has the advantage and Christians are so concerned about being 'tolerant' that they, too often, compromise. The 'convenient' Christian has empowered the minority to make the standard for all.
Eventually everyone will have to take a stand and it will be either/or. Either you are an uncompromising politically correct or you are an uncompromising Christian. You will need to choose.
The 'don't rock the boat' or 'trying to please' mentality attempts to do both but it is really a lost cause. Part of the dilemma rests in what each proposed to do/be in life. Politically correct really defines 'shifting sand'. There are moments that we find that a word has been redefined or at least modified so that what wasn't incorrect earlier suddenly is. The one with the loudest voice tends to have the greatest determination. Plus we discover that behaviors that were totally unacceptable a few years ago and now the modus operandi. No explanation for the shift, but it has occurred.
On the other hand, Christian, hasn't changed. What was foundational 2000 years ago is still foundational. 'Correct' behavior is still according to a standard that is easy to discover, though sometimes difficult to follow due to our own discomfort at taking a stand. Christians have a 'hand book' to follow that is unshifting.
More and more there is a conflict in definitions, in behavior, in standards between Christian and politically correct. My belief is that it's going to intensify - the minority has the advantage and Christians are so concerned about being 'tolerant' that they, too often, compromise. The 'convenient' Christian has empowered the minority to make the standard for all.
Eventually everyone will have to take a stand and it will be either/or. Either you are an uncompromising politically correct or you are an uncompromising Christian. You will need to choose.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Christianity is not a spectator sport
Have you ever thought about the fact that the ONLY way one can judge whether you are a Christian is by your behavior? Sure, you can say you are a Christian but how does anyone know except by your actions? For that matter.... how do you know if you are?
We have more than a sufficient supply of 'spoken Christians' in the world, but unfortunately we have few action based ones. The book of James talks about this and the need to 'prove' your faith by your actions. We all do. It's far too easy to be a 'convenient' Christian. This is a person who talks the talk and may even walk the walk but only in front of their church and, sometimes, family. In the world they would... rather not talk about it.
I titled this... Christianity is not a spectator sport. (That phrase is not my own, but it says it all.) Christianity starts as a choice - you choose. But once the choice is made, you can't just sit back and do nothing. In Ephesians Paul says that we are God's workmanship, "...created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." (NKJV). It's not that works get us what we need (salvation) but they do emanate from a changed life.
If you were to look at your life and behavior, could you be accused of being a Christian? If not then maybe now is a time for reassessment. We all have a call on our life and it's our responsibility to find it and fulfill it - and it's not hiding. Then it's simply a matter of walking in it. Remember - I never said it was easy, didn't use that word. But it really is quite simple.
We have more than a sufficient supply of 'spoken Christians' in the world, but unfortunately we have few action based ones. The book of James talks about this and the need to 'prove' your faith by your actions. We all do. It's far too easy to be a 'convenient' Christian. This is a person who talks the talk and may even walk the walk but only in front of their church and, sometimes, family. In the world they would... rather not talk about it.
I titled this... Christianity is not a spectator sport. (That phrase is not my own, but it says it all.) Christianity starts as a choice - you choose. But once the choice is made, you can't just sit back and do nothing. In Ephesians Paul says that we are God's workmanship, "...created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." (NKJV). It's not that works get us what we need (salvation) but they do emanate from a changed life.
If you were to look at your life and behavior, could you be accused of being a Christian? If not then maybe now is a time for reassessment. We all have a call on our life and it's our responsibility to find it and fulfill it - and it's not hiding. Then it's simply a matter of walking in it. Remember - I never said it was easy, didn't use that word. But it really is quite simple.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Adventures!!!
So, Cosmic Reader, what's your opinion about adventures? Do you like them? Not like them? Plan them? Let them occur naturally? Welcome them? Avoid them at all costs? I believe that adventures are always just around the corner.... waiting to spring. Love that. Not sure if it's the waiting or springing that always brings a smile.
Obviously I am a bonafide aficionado of adventures. I've always found them to be great fun.... if not a tad painful at times. One does need to remember that not every adventure is pure fun, sometimes they can be 'difficult'. However, every, as in EVERY, adventure provides opportunities to learn something new - about yourself, about others, about life. Then again, I take a position that every day there are opportunities galore to learn - life is a learning lab.
For me, adventures introduce me to something I didn't know before, or reminds me of a previous learning that I had temporarily merely filed away. Adventures can be solo or can be with others... I suspect it's one's attitude about 'adventure' that determines its impact. Do remember that 'control' whether solo or in a group really doesn't exist. You either enter into the adventure or you don't.
Another facet of adventures is that it is related to anything and everything. A quiet walk in the woods can turn into an adventure almost immediately. Then again, a walk on city streets can have the same affect. That's why adventures can be planned or spontaneous - both have the same result........... something new, something different - even when the experience is apparently mundane.
I would invite you into the exciting world of adventure. Whether the adventure is quiet, noisy, peaceful, energetic, with others, alone, full of wonder, full of remembering - the life of an adventurer is truly bursting with discovery. And, presupposing you can laugh at yourself, quite a lot of chuckles.
Obviously I am a bonafide aficionado of adventures. I've always found them to be great fun.... if not a tad painful at times. One does need to remember that not every adventure is pure fun, sometimes they can be 'difficult'. However, every, as in EVERY, adventure provides opportunities to learn something new - about yourself, about others, about life. Then again, I take a position that every day there are opportunities galore to learn - life is a learning lab.
For me, adventures introduce me to something I didn't know before, or reminds me of a previous learning that I had temporarily merely filed away. Adventures can be solo or can be with others... I suspect it's one's attitude about 'adventure' that determines its impact. Do remember that 'control' whether solo or in a group really doesn't exist. You either enter into the adventure or you don't.
Another facet of adventures is that it is related to anything and everything. A quiet walk in the woods can turn into an adventure almost immediately. Then again, a walk on city streets can have the same affect. That's why adventures can be planned or spontaneous - both have the same result........... something new, something different - even when the experience is apparently mundane.
I would invite you into the exciting world of adventure. Whether the adventure is quiet, noisy, peaceful, energetic, with others, alone, full of wonder, full of remembering - the life of an adventurer is truly bursting with discovery. And, presupposing you can laugh at yourself, quite a lot of chuckles.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Humble
Humble, like 'Patient', is not a behavior that slips easily into my repertoire. I know I'm not patient and I really don't see any humble behavior emanating from me either. One could easily make a case for arrogant, and there are those who have. Maybe.... but I tend to think of it not as arrogant but as aware of who I am and what I think.
I remember once being accused, and yes that is the proper word, of not being transparent. This was at a time when transparency was all the rage. I completely disagreed but contrary to typical behavior, didn't say anything. Quite honestly I don't know if the other person specially defined transparent, didn't see, didn't want to see, couldn't see, but they definitely didn't perceive.
I'm the type that tries not to provide feedback unless it is solicited. However, if you don't want my opinion - don't ask because, right or wrong, I will tell you what I think/believe. For some, that's not being transparent. Not certain why but it isn't. The reason I don't tend to provide feedback unless asked is that I really don't like to waste my energy. If you aren't willing to hear what I say then I see no point in providing it.
It's not that I consider myself always right - far from it. I just know what I know. At the same time I'm not threatened by an opposing view. You might just persuade me to rethink what I know, or refine it. So 'arrogant' isn't really appropriate.......... then again, neither is 'humble'.
I remember once being accused, and yes that is the proper word, of not being transparent. This was at a time when transparency was all the rage. I completely disagreed but contrary to typical behavior, didn't say anything. Quite honestly I don't know if the other person specially defined transparent, didn't see, didn't want to see, couldn't see, but they definitely didn't perceive.
I'm the type that tries not to provide feedback unless it is solicited. However, if you don't want my opinion - don't ask because, right or wrong, I will tell you what I think/believe. For some, that's not being transparent. Not certain why but it isn't. The reason I don't tend to provide feedback unless asked is that I really don't like to waste my energy. If you aren't willing to hear what I say then I see no point in providing it.
It's not that I consider myself always right - far from it. I just know what I know. At the same time I'm not threatened by an opposing view. You might just persuade me to rethink what I know, or refine it. So 'arrogant' isn't really appropriate.......... then again, neither is 'humble'.
Monday, May 17, 2010
It's all about Attitude
I've written about attitude before and probably will again because, quite honestly, attitude does make ALL the difference. Quite surprisingly you can accomplish many things you didn't think possible with a logical, positive attitude. Duly note the qualifier. And yes, there are some things you can never accomplish regardless of your attitude. To repeat... duly note the qualifier.
For me, I've discovered that even when I haven't experienced a 'success' that if I started with a positive attitude the less than success isn't devastating. If I go into an endeavor with a negative attitude, then it's almost like a self fulfilling prophecy - no success. My heart wasn't in it in the first place so I saw no intervening 'adjustments'/refinements that could have turned it to a success.
I also realize that how one defines/measures 'success' plays a role. How many failures did Edison experience before he was able to successfully invent the light bulb? 1000? The point was that he believed in the possibility and was willing to endure until he succeeded. 'Endure' is also another one of those words that impacts on attitude.
There are a number of qualifiers on 'attitude' that one needs to take into account, among them: logic, endure, believe. All help determine and define attitude. But the bottom line is you - what are you willing to do to maintain a positive attitude?
For me, I've discovered that even when I haven't experienced a 'success' that if I started with a positive attitude the less than success isn't devastating. If I go into an endeavor with a negative attitude, then it's almost like a self fulfilling prophecy - no success. My heart wasn't in it in the first place so I saw no intervening 'adjustments'/refinements that could have turned it to a success.
I also realize that how one defines/measures 'success' plays a role. How many failures did Edison experience before he was able to successfully invent the light bulb? 1000? The point was that he believed in the possibility and was willing to endure until he succeeded. 'Endure' is also another one of those words that impacts on attitude.
There are a number of qualifiers on 'attitude' that one needs to take into account, among them: logic, endure, believe. All help determine and define attitude. But the bottom line is you - what are you willing to do to maintain a positive attitude?
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Old Fashion
Contrary to some people's opinion, being a tad old fashion is not necessarily a negative. Are you old fashion? In some things, I am. Do you even know what old fashion is? For that matter, were you even taught or did you observe what today would be called 'old fashion'?
So what, exactly, is old fashion? Definition time again: old fashion is acting on/practicing, in some fashion, something that you were taught or you observed from another time period. Another way of looking at it is - yesterday's modus operandi is today's old fashion. Examples: putting flowers on graves for Memorial Day, men opening doors for women, if it wasn't construed as 'sexist' or chauvinistic, is old fashion. Children being taught to respect their elders and women who enjoy doing the 'homemaker' tasks are other examples.
It's true that old fashion can be considered staid or inhibitive but it can also be a good way of doing things. And none of us would want to be considered old fashioned, or worst - anachronistic, such a negative description! We tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater and don't retain some of the positive methods from another era, thus we have to rediscover them. Then they become the new norm.
Just remember.... the way you do things, the way you look at things today has a very high probability of becoming tomorrow's.... old fashion. However, if you wait long enough you just might see them again.
So what, exactly, is old fashion? Definition time again: old fashion is acting on/practicing, in some fashion, something that you were taught or you observed from another time period. Another way of looking at it is - yesterday's modus operandi is today's old fashion. Examples: putting flowers on graves for Memorial Day, men opening doors for women, if it wasn't construed as 'sexist' or chauvinistic, is old fashion. Children being taught to respect their elders and women who enjoy doing the 'homemaker' tasks are other examples.
It's true that old fashion can be considered staid or inhibitive but it can also be a good way of doing things. And none of us would want to be considered old fashioned, or worst - anachronistic, such a negative description! We tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater and don't retain some of the positive methods from another era, thus we have to rediscover them. Then they become the new norm.
Just remember.... the way you do things, the way you look at things today has a very high probability of becoming tomorrow's.... old fashion. However, if you wait long enough you just might see them again.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Critical thinking
Since I'm an options planner I do enjoy 'what, if'. What, if always reminds me of puzzles, of which I am extremely fond, that expands how I think about something. Closely related are the 'if, then'. These kinds of mental gymnastics are great fun. I suspect that the bottom line in this is that I enjoy critical thinking. And I believe it is perhaps the single most important skill one can learn that education seems bent on stamping out.
It is the critical thinkers that press the boundaries of 'conventional wisdom'. These are the people who developed or discovered transistors so small that they can power our iPods, iPads, computers. These are the minds who are engaged in research to eradicate cancer and other deadly diseases. Critical thinkers expand our conception of what can be accomplished. These are the activities that need encouraging.
I realize that much time can be lost if we are ignoring 'logic', but also sometimes the wheel does need to be reinvented. In the reinvention we may discover a 'better mousetrap'. Okay, I've used a lot of cliches' but my point is that there really is a balance between the status quo and the extreme.
Refinement is a great ally in maintaining a smooth flow from what is to what might be. Critical thinking is the engine that moves us from what is to what might be. We should not abandon nor embrace either... and we need to remember that what might be is yesterday's what is.
It is the critical thinkers that press the boundaries of 'conventional wisdom'. These are the people who developed or discovered transistors so small that they can power our iPods, iPads, computers. These are the minds who are engaged in research to eradicate cancer and other deadly diseases. Critical thinkers expand our conception of what can be accomplished. These are the activities that need encouraging.
I realize that much time can be lost if we are ignoring 'logic', but also sometimes the wheel does need to be reinvented. In the reinvention we may discover a 'better mousetrap'. Okay, I've used a lot of cliches' but my point is that there really is a balance between the status quo and the extreme.
Refinement is a great ally in maintaining a smooth flow from what is to what might be. Critical thinking is the engine that moves us from what is to what might be. We should not abandon nor embrace either... and we need to remember that what might be is yesterday's what is.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Surprises
Do you like surprises? Many people don't. I'm really not sure why.......... Personally, I love surprises - all sorts.
Surprises can come in any form and be related to anything. Any 'ah ha' can be classified as a surprise because surprises, by definition, are unexpected. I think my favorite type of surprise is the understanding or appreciation surprise.
Understanding surprises are those insights that you either never considered previously or serendipitously happen. The 'quality' of the insight is really not relevant it's the newness (to you) that is the focus. When you experience an understanding surprise then you discover that it provides you an increase in knowing the whys of the issue. I've always been an advocate of 'what if' so this is a growth that I would encourage.
However.... not all understandings are joyful. They are all enlightening but sometimes the knowing is sad. One should never insist that only happy understanding surprises are acceptable. Accepting is never really at issue in understanding - one may not like the understanding but if it is.... it is.
Appreciation surprises are closely related to understanding, but still are different. Again it's not an issue of liking or disliking - if you appreciate, more than what you did prior to the surprise, then you are increased because of it. Like understanding surprises, accepting is never really at issue.
But... surprises can be fun. It's your mindset. The more you are open to a surprise I suspect the more you will discover them.
Surprises can come in any form and be related to anything. Any 'ah ha' can be classified as a surprise because surprises, by definition, are unexpected. I think my favorite type of surprise is the understanding or appreciation surprise.
Understanding surprises are those insights that you either never considered previously or serendipitously happen. The 'quality' of the insight is really not relevant it's the newness (to you) that is the focus. When you experience an understanding surprise then you discover that it provides you an increase in knowing the whys of the issue. I've always been an advocate of 'what if' so this is a growth that I would encourage.
However.... not all understandings are joyful. They are all enlightening but sometimes the knowing is sad. One should never insist that only happy understanding surprises are acceptable. Accepting is never really at issue in understanding - one may not like the understanding but if it is.... it is.
Appreciation surprises are closely related to understanding, but still are different. Again it's not an issue of liking or disliking - if you appreciate, more than what you did prior to the surprise, then you are increased because of it. Like understanding surprises, accepting is never really at issue.
But... surprises can be fun. It's your mindset. The more you are open to a surprise I suspect the more you will discover them.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Selective Amnensia
Isn't that a great title?! My high school best friend used those 2 words in describing her approach to her birthday. You have to understand, first of all, that I'm a great believer in celebrating and especially celebrating birthdays. Thus the 'selective amnesia' struck a chord. It wasn't associated with the word 'celebrate' but with the birthday number.
But... to definitions. Selective Amnesia is not forgetting or forgetfulness, nor any of the dementia/senility/alzheimer diseases - it is simply an excuse. However one of its values is that it is not age specific - anyone can use it!
Selective Amnesia is often used upon hearing the words... "Don't you remember?" or "How could you forget?" And you can easily answer with a ... "Goodness!" Which is not lying - lying is NOT permitted in Selective Amnesia. Goodness says absolutely nothing - it's a neutral word. The really tricky part is what you say after 'Goodness'.
The best approach to your follow-up is to say nothing. Or you can apologize, but you have to be careful here too because you can't lie and say you forgot. Most of the time Selective Amnesia has nothing to do with forgetting. Most of the time it is a conscious decision to not do ... whatever.
Perhaps somewhat tacky, but I typically say... "Goodness! Sorry if I upset you.", unless I really don't care that I upset the other person. Then again... if I don't care then I probably wouldn't have agreed in the first place to do whatever it was.
But... to definitions. Selective Amnesia is not forgetting or forgetfulness, nor any of the dementia/senility/alzheimer diseases - it is simply an excuse. However one of its values is that it is not age specific - anyone can use it!
Selective Amnesia is often used upon hearing the words... "Don't you remember?" or "How could you forget?" And you can easily answer with a ... "Goodness!" Which is not lying - lying is NOT permitted in Selective Amnesia. Goodness says absolutely nothing - it's a neutral word. The really tricky part is what you say after 'Goodness'.
The best approach to your follow-up is to say nothing. Or you can apologize, but you have to be careful here too because you can't lie and say you forgot. Most of the time Selective Amnesia has nothing to do with forgetting. Most of the time it is a conscious decision to not do ... whatever.
Perhaps somewhat tacky, but I typically say... "Goodness! Sorry if I upset you.", unless I really don't care that I upset the other person. Then again... if I don't care then I probably wouldn't have agreed in the first place to do whatever it was.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Learning
I think I must be one of those... education for education sake. I love learning new things. Life long learning is definitely a high priority, and daily is a goal. And I think that it explains my particular toys: computers, iPods, and similar ilk. Actually I think one of the reasons fall is my favorite season is because that always meant I could go back to school.... and I really loved school. Also a large chunk of my life-time was spent in school and/or college environments.
Learning, in my definitional world, means opening up new possibilities, new options. Learning opens new doors, sparking the discovery process. It means the excitement of discovery and where discovery may take you. And one discovery typically leads to another which leads to a new way of thinking. To me, critical thinking is one of the highest goals one can aspire to. It was always my intention when I taught.
Undoubtedly this approach comes from parents (both) who were college graduates and were readers. I remember, in grade school, my Mom telling me that Dad's job was as an attorney and her job was taking care of the home but my job was to be a good student. (I suspect this was foundational in my continuing my studies through the doctoral level.)
But, for me, learning was fun. It was rarely drudgery. I think, giving myself far more credit now than probably existed then, that I typically played a 'game' of finding something new in each class. Over glamorizing? No, I really don't think so. Learning really is exciting and opens new adventures. But.... like everything else in life - it depends on your attitude.
Learning, in my definitional world, means opening up new possibilities, new options. Learning opens new doors, sparking the discovery process. It means the excitement of discovery and where discovery may take you. And one discovery typically leads to another which leads to a new way of thinking. To me, critical thinking is one of the highest goals one can aspire to. It was always my intention when I taught.
Undoubtedly this approach comes from parents (both) who were college graduates and were readers. I remember, in grade school, my Mom telling me that Dad's job was as an attorney and her job was taking care of the home but my job was to be a good student. (I suspect this was foundational in my continuing my studies through the doctoral level.)
But, for me, learning was fun. It was rarely drudgery. I think, giving myself far more credit now than probably existed then, that I typically played a 'game' of finding something new in each class. Over glamorizing? No, I really don't think so. Learning really is exciting and opens new adventures. But.... like everything else in life - it depends on your attitude.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Waiting....
(I realize that this may sound similar to an earlier post - "Pet Peeves". Kinda... but this is specific.)
I am a terrible wait-er. I hate to wait. For anything. Ever. At any time. Period. And don't try to tell me that this has to do with the reality that I have no patience. They are only slightly, tangentially related. Waiting, for me, is frustrating..... whether or not I have something to occupy my time while I wait.
I suspect that part of my intense dislike is related to my perception of etiquette. I think it is totally rude to keep other people waiting without first alerting them to the fact that you are not going to be ready on time. It's really not necessary to provide a 'reason'/excuse as much as it is important to provide some sense of when you are going to be ready.
Unfortunately, most people don't function according to that standard. They simply aren't where they are suppose to be when they are suppose to. And, to make matters worse they really expect you to 'understand' and simply wait.... till they are ready. Unfortunately, too, since I have the 'on time' standard then I am required to attend to that and be on time.
I suspect that part of this goes back to my father. He would never accept that you weren't ready when you were suppose to. If we were going to leave for ... at a particular time, then he expected to leave then. I'm not sure he ever left someone but I do know he threatened to. And, believe it or not, I really was basically a dutiful child.
Regardless of the reason for my standard.... there it is. Bottom line is that those of you out there in cyberland who DO make others wait, the message you leave others with is: "you aren't as important as I am. What I have to do is far more important than what you have to do." It really is a statement of the importance and value of the other person. Oh you can say what you want... it is! But I'm speaking to the chronic abusers, not the occasional late person. And... you know who you are!
I am a terrible wait-er. I hate to wait. For anything. Ever. At any time. Period. And don't try to tell me that this has to do with the reality that I have no patience. They are only slightly, tangentially related. Waiting, for me, is frustrating..... whether or not I have something to occupy my time while I wait.
I suspect that part of my intense dislike is related to my perception of etiquette. I think it is totally rude to keep other people waiting without first alerting them to the fact that you are not going to be ready on time. It's really not necessary to provide a 'reason'/excuse as much as it is important to provide some sense of when you are going to be ready.
Unfortunately, most people don't function according to that standard. They simply aren't where they are suppose to be when they are suppose to. And, to make matters worse they really expect you to 'understand' and simply wait.... till they are ready. Unfortunately, too, since I have the 'on time' standard then I am required to attend to that and be on time.
I suspect that part of this goes back to my father. He would never accept that you weren't ready when you were suppose to. If we were going to leave for ... at a particular time, then he expected to leave then. I'm not sure he ever left someone but I do know he threatened to. And, believe it or not, I really was basically a dutiful child.
Regardless of the reason for my standard.... there it is. Bottom line is that those of you out there in cyberland who DO make others wait, the message you leave others with is: "you aren't as important as I am. What I have to do is far more important than what you have to do." It really is a statement of the importance and value of the other person. Oh you can say what you want... it is! But I'm speaking to the chronic abusers, not the occasional late person. And... you know who you are!
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Submitted: dominated? accountable?
For most people, this word conjures up unpleasant thoughts. 'Submitted' does not mean dominated. However, I will admit that there are people who will use this word to do precisely that - attempt to dominate another. In my world of definitions though, submitted is more closely defined by 'accountable'.
We all need to be accountable but we also probably need an outside source. It kind of begs the issue if we use ourselves. However, it is critical to define what this means - for ourself as well as the source. For me, the source's primary responsibility is to be totally honest, from their perspective. They shouldn't attempt to dictate - that ventures into dominant territory. The question is do we give them the 'right' to provide feedback, at their convenience, whether or not we have asked for it - a carte blanche vs requested basis.
Obviously this means that it is important to set the parameters of accountability so there's no misunderstanding. Example: if I have asked someone to act as my outside reference, how long will this last? Is it related to everything or only a particular issue? How/when can my source give me the feedback?
Personally I really dislike unsolicited feedback because inevitably it is provided at the worse possible moment. Then again, this may be the precise moment that I should receive it. But since my primary motivation is to 'true to myself', to learn from the situation and it's critical to be able to hear the source's analysis, I generally request a specific time for the feedback.
If you are the source of another's accountability and they don't raise these issues, I would strongly suggest that you do..... Otherwise you could be misunderstood, especially if the other person has a vested interest (which they always do) in the particular area you have been asked to assist in.
The bottom line is how we, who are asking another person to be our source for our accountability, view 'submitted'. Is it a domination by another: telling us what to do, how to do it, and when? Or is it an accountability issue? Never allow yourself, your personality to be subjugated to another's philosophy - but do allow yourself to grow through an accountability relationship.
We all need to be accountable but we also probably need an outside source. It kind of begs the issue if we use ourselves. However, it is critical to define what this means - for ourself as well as the source. For me, the source's primary responsibility is to be totally honest, from their perspective. They shouldn't attempt to dictate - that ventures into dominant territory. The question is do we give them the 'right' to provide feedback, at their convenience, whether or not we have asked for it - a carte blanche vs requested basis.
Obviously this means that it is important to set the parameters of accountability so there's no misunderstanding. Example: if I have asked someone to act as my outside reference, how long will this last? Is it related to everything or only a particular issue? How/when can my source give me the feedback?
Personally I really dislike unsolicited feedback because inevitably it is provided at the worse possible moment. Then again, this may be the precise moment that I should receive it. But since my primary motivation is to 'true to myself', to learn from the situation and it's critical to be able to hear the source's analysis, I generally request a specific time for the feedback.
If you are the source of another's accountability and they don't raise these issues, I would strongly suggest that you do..... Otherwise you could be misunderstood, especially if the other person has a vested interest (which they always do) in the particular area you have been asked to assist in.
The bottom line is how we, who are asking another person to be our source for our accountability, view 'submitted'. Is it a domination by another: telling us what to do, how to do it, and when? Or is it an accountability issue? Never allow yourself, your personality to be subjugated to another's philosophy - but do allow yourself to grow through an accountability relationship.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Turn the other cheek…???
I have to admit that I have problems with this philosophy. On the one hand we should turn the other cheek but this can be met with a slug. But there is also that admonition that we shouldn't cast our jewels before swine. Granted that means that we have now designated the slapper as 'swine'. Still....
Aside from all that, I do have problems with that approach. Part of this may stems from the fact that I'm not sure what is accomplished by turning the other cheek. Besides, I really abhor physical violence. And yes, turning the other cheek is not necessarily physical. But, just as obvious, I'm missing something significant. Honestly, I'm baffled. Just 'who' are we turning the cheek for? Ourselves? The other person? What's suppose to be learned? Understood? Accepted?
It can be argued that turning the other cheek is a demonstration of strength in vulnerability. That may sound like an oxymoron, but it isn't. It takes a high degree of either confidence in our own position or admission of acceptance of our own error but regardless, it is a position of strength. And obviously it is a position of vulnerability to allow oneself open to the possibility of being 'slapped' again.
It would seem the height of stupidity to put oneself in the same kind of position in the future. Isn't that what is to be learned? Rather than turning the other cheek, deserved or not, isn't the better approach to not allow ourselves this temptation? Obviously this subject is one that needs further thought because right now I don't understand.
Aside from all that, I do have problems with that approach. Part of this may stems from the fact that I'm not sure what is accomplished by turning the other cheek. Besides, I really abhor physical violence. And yes, turning the other cheek is not necessarily physical. But, just as obvious, I'm missing something significant. Honestly, I'm baffled. Just 'who' are we turning the cheek for? Ourselves? The other person? What's suppose to be learned? Understood? Accepted?
It can be argued that turning the other cheek is a demonstration of strength in vulnerability. That may sound like an oxymoron, but it isn't. It takes a high degree of either confidence in our own position or admission of acceptance of our own error but regardless, it is a position of strength. And obviously it is a position of vulnerability to allow oneself open to the possibility of being 'slapped' again.
It would seem the height of stupidity to put oneself in the same kind of position in the future. Isn't that what is to be learned? Rather than turning the other cheek, deserved or not, isn't the better approach to not allow ourselves this temptation? Obviously this subject is one that needs further thought because right now I don't understand.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)