It has seemed to me in my practice that I am dealing with more and more persons, particularly over the age of 50 but sometimes far younger, who are having significant problems with a lack of motivation. Sometimes these are people who have been quite active in the past and accomplished a lot. Now they find themselves not being very active, and it bothers them.
The Problem
This blog is written mainly for people who have been motivated in the past to do things and who, due to age, depression, or some othe reason find themselves in a temporary state of not being motivated. The techniques I discuss here are not likely to work in cases of what I might call "primary motivational problems" in which the brain was never very motivated (as in some cases of Autism Spectrum Disorder) or in which some fundamental change has occurred in brain function (as in frontal lobe dementia). This blog is aimed at persons who have had motivation and find themselves doing less than they did in the past. Their motivation may wax and wane. Some of these techniques are also likely to help persons with ADHD who have always had some problems with it but who at times can be highly motivated.
So first of all, a definition. Motivation is the drive that comes from within us to do things, accomplish things, create things, impact our environment, and be active. It is not simply the same as energy, but it is certainly linked to it. If one has little energy, then there is likely to be less motivation. If there is more energy, then it is easier for us to motivate ourselves.
Motivation is linked to the capacity to experience pleasure, but it is again not exactly the same. If there is no pleasure from doing things, then there is less motivation.
But even without energy and without pleasure, persons who have been active in the past may still have a type of motivation. They may at least "want to want to do something." That is, they may be dissatisfied with doing very little and at least wish the situation were different. They want to be more active and motivated but just don't know how to get there. In conditions I referred to as "primary" motivational problems, the person no longer wants to be more motivated, and/or they may never have experienced the desire to do more.
Part of my fascination with motivation comes from watching my grandson, who is almost a year old. Motivation is never an issue with him. Never. He always wants to do something. He always wants to climb or explore, or pry the cover off an electrical socket. Ouch. So motivation is not a problem for him. But many of the clients I work with have been motivated in the past but have lost that some time during their lives.
Possible Causes for the Problem
Where does the problem come from? Well, all emotion and behavior is rooted in the brain. (We now know that there may be some exceptions to this, but they are not the point here.) The brain is certainly the culprit for much of our lack of motivation. Motivation can come from the serotonin system, the domamine system, and the frontal lobes. For more information, see http://wings.buffalo.edu/aru/ARUreport01.htm .
There are undoubtedly psychological problems which interfere with out motivation. I think that poor parenting can interfere with our motivation. All children have to be told, "No, don't do that, don't touch that," etc. But too much scolding, punishment, and cautioning of children creates excessive inhibition and guilt. It is likely to carry into adulthood, creating a condition where we are more focussed on minding the rules than exploring and trying new things.
Clearly, for some if not most of my patients, depression has been a problem. It drains motivation. That is one of the symptoms of depression.
And then there is the role of natural aging. A lowering of motivation appears to be part of the life cycle. When I look around the assisted living center where my mother stays, most of these people are tired and seemingly not very motivated. Clearly, there are physical changes in brain and body which have led to their inactivity. Changes in the white matter of the frontal lobes of the brain may be partly responsible for low motivation in later years. But on the other hand, we all know that some older people stay mentally and physically active and alert. My mother reads a book a week. At 86, she can hold her own in any discussion. She is not as motivated as she used to be, but she is very inquisitive.
It is not clear that we need to accept decreased motivation with aging. Perhaps we do. But I am of the same mind as the poet Dylan Thomas who wrote, "Do not go gentle into that good night--rage, rage against the dying of the light." I don't believe in dwindling away. We don't have to be rocket man over the grand canyon to stay active. (If you don't know what I'm talking about here, you really need to see the video on Youtube of the man flying over the Grand Canyon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4CX-8Eo_6I ).
But age undoubtedly has some effect on us. Chuck Yeager, the famous test pilot is reputed to have said, "There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots."
Our Environment Changes Too
There is a scene in the movie Chariots of Fire where they are entering Cambridge, and there are a variety of activities the freshmen can join in It's a scene that reminded me of my own high school and college years. That type of cafeteria of available activites is usually not spread before us in later life. And we don't have the energy to pursue all of those activities.
But maybe it would be nice if there was a "high school" or "college" for us to attend our whole lives long. There would be plenty of people to meet and associate with and plenty of activities to engage in. There might be less premature aging and fewer couch potatoes among us if we had more choices. Some large churches provide this type of atmosphere. This kind of social setting can give us social and intellectual stimulation. There would always be clubs to join, and things to try out.
Then there is the issue of feeling like what we do matters. When we work at a job, there is often an overall sense that no matter whether we like our job or not, it matters to somebody. A customer's roof gets put on and protects against the weather, or it doesn't get put on and the customer suffers. Somebody's clothes get cleaned or they don't have the clean clothes to wear. A customer at a restaurant is served, or they don't get fed a meal. Once we retire, we are mostly doing things for ourselves. Our behaviors don't necessarily "attach to" or relate to the outside world. As a result, there is no boss who is going to be pleased or displeased and there is no issue of whether we get a paycheck or not. Who is going to care and who is going to be affected if we clean out the garage or just watch TV instead?
I sometimes wonder if the active, motivated state that we have during a regular work week somehow carries over to mowing or cleaning the house on weekends. In other words, I think that it is good for our brains to have to do things and work hard; it is my belief that staying motivated and active through the work week keeps our brains "tuned up" so to speak, perhaps through greater use of the neurons and/or through greater blood flow.
The Negative Side of Habits.
As we will see, habits can be a positive effect on motivation; but just for a moment, let's admit that maybe there is a downside to certain habits. I suspect that building up habit patterns over a life time may interfere with breaking out of ruts and trying new things. For example, if our habit is to have breakfast with the guys at McDonalds on Saturday, get a haircut, mow the lawn, and then drink a beer Saturday evening, followed by church and watching NFL football on Sunday, could those habits interfere with acquiring new behaviors? Possibly. On the one hand, these are good things to do, and it helps us to be able to do them easily without really having to decide to do them. However, some behavioral habit patterns may also prevent us from trying new things in life.
Some Techniques to Work on Motivation
Here are some possible ways of motivating yourself when you feel like you are not really doing as much as you want to in life.
1. Commit yourself to a goal or action in front of other people--Let other people know what you plan to do. It motivates some people to follow through when they have made a public or semi-public commitment to a course of action. ("I am going to build a new deck for my house; I am going to take a course in French. Etc.")
Or similarly, belong to a group that encourages you towards your goal and to whom you report your success. Psychologist M.E.P. Seligman writes about an online group to which he belongs. All the members encourage each other to stay on their exercise regimens through email.
2. Reinforce yourself--Give yourself something out of the ordinary for following through. The trickiest part of this strategy is not rewarding yourself with the same reward at other times. For example, if the reward for cleaning out the car is a Starbucks coffee, then it is important to not have Starbucks in the week or so leading up to the time to clean the car.
3. Creative procrastination. If you just can't seem to set that dentist's appointment for next week, set it up for a few weeks out, or even a few months out. It may seem easier. Then when the time rolls around, just keep the appointment.
4. Do a little bit. Sometimes doing just a little bit of something can be energizing. After doing a little bit, one may find it easier to take the next few steps. If not, then at least something has been done. If necessary, do the simplest, most minimal amount just to get started. If you need to have an appliance repairman come to the house, put the phone book on the desk in plain sight. This may lead you to a chain of behaviors that eventually gets the appliance repaired.
5. Get your spouse to give you a nudge. Tell him or her what you are trying to do, and get them to remind you or prompt you to do what you really want to do. When they do remind you, don't take it out on them. They are just doing what you told them to do.
6. Find a different time of day. This blog on motivation has taken me a long time. I find that I just don't have the motivation to work on this blog about motivation in the evening. :) But it has written itself in the morning. Find the right time of day.
7. Build habits. While I wrote about the downside of habits above, the upside is probably greater than the downside. If appropriate, find something which is done every day at the same time, or perhaps every week at the same time. If you build a habit, you don't have to make a conscious decision to do it. It is my habit to get on the computer to pay bills, work on blogs, and balance my checkbook every morning. That is a good habit. I don't have to decide what to do; I just do it. And as a result, it gets done and without having to force myself to do it.
8. Become part of a group which has regular activities; this way you stay active without having to plan every single activity yourself. And there will be people there expecting to see you.
9. Go places that would stimulate you to want to do more. If you are an amateur astronomer, and there is a company that sells telescopes, go to their showroom. If you are a sportsman, go to a Bass Pro Shop. If you are an artist, visit an arts supply store. See if this stimulates your interest.
10. Use reminders. Put up pictures to remind you of things you enjoy doing. If you have a boat in storage and never use it, put up a picture of it in your office or home to remind you how much fun you have with it.
11. One of my favorite strategies is taking lessons. But I will admit that it can be expensive. My piano and painting lessons are not too bad, but the flying lessons are killing me. But not only am I motivated to do my homework and keep doing my hobbies, it makes me feel good that I am learning new things.
12.Schedule activities. Have regularly recurring activities. Again, this way, you don't really have to make a decision to do something. And you don't have to decide what to do; and you don't have to work as hard making arrangements for the activities.
13. Clear away the negative thoughts that would interfere with trying things. What kinds of negative thoughts? Well, I don't know what yours would be, but here are some that people might encounter:
I'm too old for this.
I'll fail.
I'll look stupid.
I'll never stick with it.
This is for young people, not for me.
Then there are other negative thoughts that may have some validity that you may need to find a way of solving:
I don't have the money for this.
I will pay for it tomorrow with aches and pains.
I'm not as mentally sharp as you used to be.
Some of these thoughts may have some validity. But that doesn't mean that they have to totally dominate your decision making and prevent you from doing some of the things you want to do. Just make the necessary adjustments to the activity so that maybe it will work for you.
Monday, September 10, 2012
Wednesday, June 06, 2012
How Tightly is Your Front Door Shut? The Preservation of Identity and Self-Esteem versus the Mature Need to be Known.
We all have a front door to our personality, and for some of us it is bolted shut. For others of us, we open it up from time to time. We can let others see in, or even come in for a visit. And for still others of us, it swings open too easily.
All counselors have had patients who seemed to use a high degree of defensiveness and denial. This shows up on psychological tests as a high degree of defensiveness. It can get in the way of counseling when people are overly defensive, and it can be very frustrating. For example, I might administer a 175 question personality inventory and find that a patient has answered false on every single symptom question. Even the healthiest of persons has some kind of symptom. The patient is not identifying problems to work on, and they are not identifying any of their own coping mechanisms which need to be worked on. Sessions in this case can be quite stilted, slow, and uncomfortable. The patient may "throw a bone" to the therapist, some little problem to work on, but nothing significant. Sometimes that changes later in the therapy process when the client is more comfortable to open up.
However, there can also be a problem when a person has an overly wide open front door. Imagine the following scenario: "Hello, my name is Ed. What's your name? I just got out of Griffin Memorial Hospital, but my schizophrenia is under control. I'm not suicidal anymore, and my medication is working just fine. I'm going home for some pizza right now; would you like some? It would not be wise for us to be totally transparent and let the world see everything about us; and it would not be wise for us to expose our "inner DNA"--our identity and self-esteem--for just anyone to influence or experiment with, since this is a precious commodity.
We all keep a front door closed so that the outside world does not see too much. Jung drew a distinction between the persona and the ego and the self. Normally we just let the world see our persona.
I try to be sympathetic with my patients and to realize that there is a reason whey they are the way they are, and to that end, I have come up with an explanation that makes sense to me of why some people are so defensive.
Traditionally, patient defensiveness in therapy would be seen as either a result of anxiety about opening up, or a result of low psychological mindedness. These would remain possible reasons in my mind, and I won't discuss them here, but what also makes sense to me, is that psychological defensiveness is protecting something very precious.
Think of a cell and its DNA. There is one thing in a cell which it absolutely must protect. It is right at the center. It is the code, the DNA. Without it, it dies. People have a kind of DNA. Cell DNA gives a map for the how the cell will function. A person's identity and self esteem also tells them their path and how they will function. Without identity a person would be lost and drifting. Without a sense of identity it would be harder to have a sense of self-esteem. And without self esteem the person might feel that there would no reason to even try to function.
Using this model, the resistance of some people to opening up in psychotherapy is at least somewhat logical. The resistance to letting others see one's DNA is similar to not letting others try to change one's DNA. The organism may be programmed to protect that core. Just as the cell is programmed to protect its DNA core, the human being, especially after reaching the late teen years, is probably programmed to protect their identity core: "I belong to the nation of A and the religion of B. My clan is C. And I will defend them to my death." This is an identity core. If I let you see into my core too closely, however, you may see my uncertainties, and then you may want to change me. That threatens what I have been taught. Moreover, if I did change my identity it would require a great deal of energy.
Teenagers are often loathe to open up in counseling about their problems and about their identity. They particularly don't seem to want to open up about their problems to adults, and again, I think this makes sense. They have finally started to have a clear sense of identity, and they don't want to start over. Of course, they are not necessarily thinking in these exact terms. I suspect that what they are actually thinking is, "Why is this shrink talking nonsense? I'll just go along with him to the extent I have to, to get him and my parents off my back." But his organism and genetic code may be thinking (not really "thinking," but sort of), "I have to preserve the important formative experiences of my identity. I've got the truth now about who I am, and even if I am not totally sure it all makes sense, I can't start over now."
Here is a second analogy. Imagine a sci-fi thriller movie in which the crew is in hibernation. They wake up and find reason to suspect that their computer guidance system software has become corrupted. The spatial coordinates in the computer are not quite right. But on the other hand, those coordinates are all they have. They can't call home, especially if they don't know which direction to point the antenna. Even though the information in the computer is not quite right, the crew would fight to preserve that flight computer and its coordinates, because it is all they have. Now, in the same way, we are probably programmed to defend our inner identity because it is all we have.
It takes a very mature person to be able to select the right therapist, open up their front door just the right amount, and then allow dialogue with their therapist with the aim of changing their internal identity and sense of direction. Then, after a correction, the front door has to be closed once again. The therapist has to be told goodbye in a mature fashion (see my blog on saying goodbye to the therapist), and the person goes on with their new set of inertial coordinates, their slightly altered sense of identity and coping abilities.
Some people are never ever able to open the door and let see someone else see in. They are never able to open the window shades and let a therapist have a chance to help them alter their inner DNA so as to feel better, have a happier and more productive life and so on.
Finding the balance between adequate self-protectiveness and reasonable openness to correction is difficult. It can be hard to find a balance between protecting our inner DNA code and being mature enough and strong enough that we can let someone else see in and help us with some of our internal issues.
All counselors have had patients who seemed to use a high degree of defensiveness and denial. This shows up on psychological tests as a high degree of defensiveness. It can get in the way of counseling when people are overly defensive, and it can be very frustrating. For example, I might administer a 175 question personality inventory and find that a patient has answered false on every single symptom question. Even the healthiest of persons has some kind of symptom. The patient is not identifying problems to work on, and they are not identifying any of their own coping mechanisms which need to be worked on. Sessions in this case can be quite stilted, slow, and uncomfortable. The patient may "throw a bone" to the therapist, some little problem to work on, but nothing significant. Sometimes that changes later in the therapy process when the client is more comfortable to open up.
However, there can also be a problem when a person has an overly wide open front door. Imagine the following scenario: "Hello, my name is Ed. What's your name? I just got out of Griffin Memorial Hospital, but my schizophrenia is under control. I'm not suicidal anymore, and my medication is working just fine. I'm going home for some pizza right now; would you like some? It would not be wise for us to be totally transparent and let the world see everything about us; and it would not be wise for us to expose our "inner DNA"--our identity and self-esteem--for just anyone to influence or experiment with, since this is a precious commodity.
We all keep a front door closed so that the outside world does not see too much. Jung drew a distinction between the persona and the ego and the self. Normally we just let the world see our persona.
I try to be sympathetic with my patients and to realize that there is a reason whey they are the way they are, and to that end, I have come up with an explanation that makes sense to me of why some people are so defensive.
Traditionally, patient defensiveness in therapy would be seen as either a result of anxiety about opening up, or a result of low psychological mindedness. These would remain possible reasons in my mind, and I won't discuss them here, but what also makes sense to me, is that psychological defensiveness is protecting something very precious.
Think of a cell and its DNA. There is one thing in a cell which it absolutely must protect. It is right at the center. It is the code, the DNA. Without it, it dies. People have a kind of DNA. Cell DNA gives a map for the how the cell will function. A person's identity and self esteem also tells them their path and how they will function. Without identity a person would be lost and drifting. Without a sense of identity it would be harder to have a sense of self-esteem. And without self esteem the person might feel that there would no reason to even try to function.
Using this model, the resistance of some people to opening up in psychotherapy is at least somewhat logical. The resistance to letting others see one's DNA is similar to not letting others try to change one's DNA. The organism may be programmed to protect that core. Just as the cell is programmed to protect its DNA core, the human being, especially after reaching the late teen years, is probably programmed to protect their identity core: "I belong to the nation of A and the religion of B. My clan is C. And I will defend them to my death." This is an identity core. If I let you see into my core too closely, however, you may see my uncertainties, and then you may want to change me. That threatens what I have been taught. Moreover, if I did change my identity it would require a great deal of energy.
Teenagers are often loathe to open up in counseling about their problems and about their identity. They particularly don't seem to want to open up about their problems to adults, and again, I think this makes sense. They have finally started to have a clear sense of identity, and they don't want to start over. Of course, they are not necessarily thinking in these exact terms. I suspect that what they are actually thinking is, "Why is this shrink talking nonsense? I'll just go along with him to the extent I have to, to get him and my parents off my back." But his organism and genetic code may be thinking (not really "thinking," but sort of), "I have to preserve the important formative experiences of my identity. I've got the truth now about who I am, and even if I am not totally sure it all makes sense, I can't start over now."
Here is a second analogy. Imagine a sci-fi thriller movie in which the crew is in hibernation. They wake up and find reason to suspect that their computer guidance system software has become corrupted. The spatial coordinates in the computer are not quite right. But on the other hand, those coordinates are all they have. They can't call home, especially if they don't know which direction to point the antenna. Even though the information in the computer is not quite right, the crew would fight to preserve that flight computer and its coordinates, because it is all they have. Now, in the same way, we are probably programmed to defend our inner identity because it is all we have.
It takes a very mature person to be able to select the right therapist, open up their front door just the right amount, and then allow dialogue with their therapist with the aim of changing their internal identity and sense of direction. Then, after a correction, the front door has to be closed once again. The therapist has to be told goodbye in a mature fashion (see my blog on saying goodbye to the therapist), and the person goes on with their new set of inertial coordinates, their slightly altered sense of identity and coping abilities.
Some people are never ever able to open the door and let see someone else see in. They are never able to open the window shades and let a therapist have a chance to help them alter their inner DNA so as to feel better, have a happier and more productive life and so on.
Finding the balance between adequate self-protectiveness and reasonable openness to correction is difficult. It can be hard to find a balance between protecting our inner DNA code and being mature enough and strong enough that we can let someone else see in and help us with some of our internal issues.
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
My One Hundredth Blog Post
Today, I publish my 100th blog post.
Why do I do it? Well, for one thing it gives me great satisfaction. Knowledge is not to be kept or hoarded. Moreover, I enjoy helping my patients solve their problems. I know that some people for one reason or another can't make it into therapy. I would hope both to encourage people and to explain some concepts regarding psychology along the way. I also enjoy the feeling of being connected to people.
Commercial publishing is not really an option. I've gone that route (mostly dry academic books on depression), and those types of books don't get distributed out to people very well. There might be some money to be made on popular books. But the money is not important. What really brings me satisfaction is knowing that people around the world can freely access this information.
Ideas don't belong to any one person. I don't know where they come from. Sometimes I think that I have a new idea, but I suspect that what really happens most of the time is that my mind takes information which I have encountered and puts a slightly different twist on it. They are my ideas, and yet they are not. And if I don't share them, someone else will. So why not share them for free? And it seems like the more I share my ideas, the more it stimulates me to think.
Each of us has something to contribute. If we give it away, the world is a better place for it. Now I don't blame people for making money off of blogs or books. I made a few dollars off of my academic books. But there is also a time to give things away.
I like the idea of Teilhard de Chardin about the noosphere. He was a Catholic theologian banned from publishing by the Vatican. (It always makes something more tantalizing somehow when it has been banned). He talked about the noosphere [(Greek word for mind=nous)+sphere] (sorry, I don't know how to pronounce it). Of all the spheres surrounding the Earth (atmosphere, biosphere), he theorized that this one was composed of thoughts. Here is a link, summarized in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Teilhard_de_Chardin and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noosphere . I like the idea of adding my own thoughts to the noosphere.
So, I hope there is something useful here for you. I would encourage you to read a little about Teilhard de Chardin, a very interesting thinker. And hopefully, you can add your own contribution to the noosphere in one way or another, too.
Why do I do it? Well, for one thing it gives me great satisfaction. Knowledge is not to be kept or hoarded. Moreover, I enjoy helping my patients solve their problems. I know that some people for one reason or another can't make it into therapy. I would hope both to encourage people and to explain some concepts regarding psychology along the way. I also enjoy the feeling of being connected to people.
Commercial publishing is not really an option. I've gone that route (mostly dry academic books on depression), and those types of books don't get distributed out to people very well. There might be some money to be made on popular books. But the money is not important. What really brings me satisfaction is knowing that people around the world can freely access this information.
Ideas don't belong to any one person. I don't know where they come from. Sometimes I think that I have a new idea, but I suspect that what really happens most of the time is that my mind takes information which I have encountered and puts a slightly different twist on it. They are my ideas, and yet they are not. And if I don't share them, someone else will. So why not share them for free? And it seems like the more I share my ideas, the more it stimulates me to think.
Each of us has something to contribute. If we give it away, the world is a better place for it. Now I don't blame people for making money off of blogs or books. I made a few dollars off of my academic books. But there is also a time to give things away.
I like the idea of Teilhard de Chardin about the noosphere. He was a Catholic theologian banned from publishing by the Vatican. (It always makes something more tantalizing somehow when it has been banned). He talked about the noosphere [(Greek word for mind=nous)+sphere] (sorry, I don't know how to pronounce it). Of all the spheres surrounding the Earth (atmosphere, biosphere), he theorized that this one was composed of thoughts. Here is a link, summarized in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Teilhard_de_Chardin and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noosphere . I like the idea of adding my own thoughts to the noosphere.
So, I hope there is something useful here for you. I would encourage you to read a little about Teilhard de Chardin, a very interesting thinker. And hopefully, you can add your own contribution to the noosphere in one way or another, too.
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Willpower
I always like to find a good, new book which summarizes recent research. I was very impressed with the book Willpower by Roy Baumeister and John Tierney. There is so much useful information in this book that there is no way to cover it in this blog. However, there are two major thrusts of the book which I would like to focus on: ego depletion over short periods of time and building willpower over long periods of time.
As the authors point out, the whole concept of willpower was considered quaint or even nonsensical in most of 20th century psychology. When I went to graduate school, there was absolutely nothing about it in my courses.
The book makes many points, but there are two major ones. First, there is evidence that in the short run, our willpower (or self-restraint, or whatever you want to call it) can become depleted. The source of the temporary depletion appears to be remarkably simple--less available glucose to the frontal lobes. And one momentary cure can sometimes be as simple as--sugar. Yes, sugar, that "evil" substance which has been accused of so many offenses, from hyperactivity to diabetes. I am not advocating a diet of sugar, either for ourselves or for our children. But the authors point out that in a laboratory situation, a quick hit of glucose seems to reverse the effect of willpower depletion. Ideally, we will all have appropriate diets involving protein, complex carbohydrates, and so on, which provide the body the energy it needs on an ongoing basis. But in a pinch, there is nothing wrong with a Hershey's Kiss. A small amount of sugar can assist the frontal lobes in their work of exercising willpower and restraint.
Now you may be asking: With all of the sugar being consumed in our society, why isn't there more self-restraint? The answer is that the sugar "hit" only works when there is a temporary state of ego depletion. The person has to have been actively using willpower over, say, a 15-30 minute period of time or more, for depletion effects to start to show up. The availability of glucose is a "necessary but not sufficient" condition for willpower to occur. This leads to the second major point of the book, and I think, the more important point: willpower can be trained. When we practice any type of willpower on an ongoing basis, it tends to have a generalized effect, heightening willpower in other areas.
Willpower doesn't just emerge from the brain like a flower growing from the ground. While I do suspect that some of it may be genetic, I also think that much of our willpower comes from social training. And I would give our society an "F" on that point. (With the possible exception of the Asian community.)
I do believe that there are other important virtues for our society to train in children besides willpower. I would vote for creativity and love as being two of the most important. But willpower (and a related concept of "grit") is right up there with them for me. Learning how to do the hard thing is so very important in growing up and being a happy, productive member of society.
The concept of willpower being important had not only disappeared from psychology at one point, I think that it has begun to disappear in the thinking of our younger generations. I once had an adolescent patient tell me that she saw no reason for having to do multiple math problems for homework when she already understood the concept. I did not have a good comeback for her at the time. I do now.
First, here is what I would have said then if I had thought it over then. When we practice something over and over, we overlearn it. By overlearning, we are less likely to forget it, and we are more able to remember it, even when we are stressed. Now, here is what I would tell her now. It's not just about math. Yes, the overlearning of math procedures is important. But there is really more at stake. When we learn how to do the hard thing in something specific, we are learning how to do the hard thing in general. And that is all too often what life requires of us. I don't always like to do the hard thing, but sometimes I do it anyway. We need to teach our children to do the hard thing because they will be faced with it over and over again in life.
Ancient Spartans knew how to teach their children how to do the hard thing. There were many things wrong with Spartan society; I could list several off the top of my head. But when it came to fighting off the Persians at Thermopylae, it was the Spartans that the other Greek city states turned to. Their soldiers had learned a steely will power. But are we teaching determination and restraint to our children? Are we helping them to learn it while they are young, so they will not try to escape the challenges of life when they are grown?
Baumeister's research suggests that even for those of us adults who may be lacking in it to some degree, it is not too late. No, I am not suggesting eating sugar. Read the book. I think you will find it very interesting.
As the authors point out, the whole concept of willpower was considered quaint or even nonsensical in most of 20th century psychology. When I went to graduate school, there was absolutely nothing about it in my courses.
The book makes many points, but there are two major ones. First, there is evidence that in the short run, our willpower (or self-restraint, or whatever you want to call it) can become depleted. The source of the temporary depletion appears to be remarkably simple--less available glucose to the frontal lobes. And one momentary cure can sometimes be as simple as--sugar. Yes, sugar, that "evil" substance which has been accused of so many offenses, from hyperactivity to diabetes. I am not advocating a diet of sugar, either for ourselves or for our children. But the authors point out that in a laboratory situation, a quick hit of glucose seems to reverse the effect of willpower depletion. Ideally, we will all have appropriate diets involving protein, complex carbohydrates, and so on, which provide the body the energy it needs on an ongoing basis. But in a pinch, there is nothing wrong with a Hershey's Kiss. A small amount of sugar can assist the frontal lobes in their work of exercising willpower and restraint.
Now you may be asking: With all of the sugar being consumed in our society, why isn't there more self-restraint? The answer is that the sugar "hit" only works when there is a temporary state of ego depletion. The person has to have been actively using willpower over, say, a 15-30 minute period of time or more, for depletion effects to start to show up. The availability of glucose is a "necessary but not sufficient" condition for willpower to occur. This leads to the second major point of the book, and I think, the more important point: willpower can be trained. When we practice any type of willpower on an ongoing basis, it tends to have a generalized effect, heightening willpower in other areas.
Willpower doesn't just emerge from the brain like a flower growing from the ground. While I do suspect that some of it may be genetic, I also think that much of our willpower comes from social training. And I would give our society an "F" on that point. (With the possible exception of the Asian community.)
I do believe that there are other important virtues for our society to train in children besides willpower. I would vote for creativity and love as being two of the most important. But willpower (and a related concept of "grit") is right up there with them for me. Learning how to do the hard thing is so very important in growing up and being a happy, productive member of society.
The concept of willpower being important had not only disappeared from psychology at one point, I think that it has begun to disappear in the thinking of our younger generations. I once had an adolescent patient tell me that she saw no reason for having to do multiple math problems for homework when she already understood the concept. I did not have a good comeback for her at the time. I do now.
First, here is what I would have said then if I had thought it over then. When we practice something over and over, we overlearn it. By overlearning, we are less likely to forget it, and we are more able to remember it, even when we are stressed. Now, here is what I would tell her now. It's not just about math. Yes, the overlearning of math procedures is important. But there is really more at stake. When we learn how to do the hard thing in something specific, we are learning how to do the hard thing in general. And that is all too often what life requires of us. I don't always like to do the hard thing, but sometimes I do it anyway. We need to teach our children to do the hard thing because they will be faced with it over and over again in life.
Ancient Spartans knew how to teach their children how to do the hard thing. There were many things wrong with Spartan society; I could list several off the top of my head. But when it came to fighting off the Persians at Thermopylae, it was the Spartans that the other Greek city states turned to. Their soldiers had learned a steely will power. But are we teaching determination and restraint to our children? Are we helping them to learn it while they are young, so they will not try to escape the challenges of life when they are grown?
Baumeister's research suggests that even for those of us adults who may be lacking in it to some degree, it is not too late. No, I am not suggesting eating sugar. Read the book. I think you will find it very interesting.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Four Ways to Be Positive with Your Spouse--Your Words, Your Prosody, Your Nonverbal Behavior, and Your Actins
I have written before about being positive with your spouse and establishing positive reciprocal behaviors (if you give out positives, you are more likely to get positives back from them.)
I have come to understand that our communication with other people is multichannel. (Translation: There are several ways that we can be positive with our spouse, and there are several ways that we can be negative with our spouse, simultaneously.)
There are at least four channels on which we are communicating at any one time:
1. What are we saying? What is the verbal content? If it was written down, would it be positive or negative?
2. What is the tone in our voice? This is our prosody. Think of it as the melody in the voice. It can be friendly or mean, inviting or critical.
3. What is our facial expression saying, and what is our body language saying? Are we smiling, grimacing, or frowning as we deliver our message?
4. Finally, what are we actually doing? Are we doing something nice for the person (e.g. preparing them food) or something mean (throwing something, slamming things, breaking things, hitting them)? Do we follow through on the things we have promised? Do we remember the special dates, birthdays, and anniversaries?
These four ways of responding to our significant others would seem to exhaust the multichannel communication. But they don't. We are also communicating with our pheromones. These are "invisible scents." We don't know that they are being emitted by our bodies, but they are. And the other person does not know that their brain is receiving them, but they are.
And there is probably at least one other type of communication going on, although perhaps less established scientifically--our pupil size. When we see something we like, our pupils get larger. the other person's brain may be able to pick up on that, and in turn, the second person's pupils may adjust. This can be another type of back and forth communication.
But let's stick with the first four because we can't control our pheromones and our pupil size.
As we attempt to reverse the flow of negative reciprocity in a relationship to positive reciprocity, something which can be difficult, words alone are unlikely to be able to do it. Compliments and positive observations about our partner are a good place to start, but more is needed.
We need to remember that we are communicating with the nonverbal behaviors--the look in our face, out body posture (are we turned towards them or away from them when they are talking to us). What is our body language saying? Is it positive or negative? Are we pointing a finger at them? Are we avoiding eye contact?
Then there is our prosody (pronounced PRAW-suh-dee). Prosody is defined by the online Merriam Webster dictionary as meaning "3. the rhythmic and intonational aspect of language." I think that this is often overlooked in our marital communication. Words can be positive but if they don't have a certain melodic sound, the full positive quality of a message can be tempered or totally lost.
I have to pay close attention to my prosody when I am going to the hospital to test a new patient. They don't know me. Why should they open up and trust me? I have to use every aspect of communication when I introduce myself to convey that I am there to help them, through my words, my nonverbal behavior, and my tone of voice. Unfortunately, I think that after years of marriage, people simply don't put out the energy to use a friendly, pleasant tone with their spouse. Their voice with their spouse can become flat--or even grouchy. Watching the words we use is a fairly obvious way of being positive. But we communicate with more than words. The lilt or melody of our voice is our prosody. Sometimes I think that our tone may be even more important than the words we use. If you watch a mother talking to a newborn, she uses very exaggerated prosody. It is a friendly prosody. The infant hardly needs to understand the words. The tone says it all. It is warm. It is friendly. It is loving.
Finally, what are our actions saying? It is said that men often express affection by doing things for their wife--mowing the lawn, taking care of the house and car. I often like it when my wife offers to bring me a cup of hot tea when I am at the computer.
So, when trying to create a positive atmosphere in a relationship, remember these four things--words, body language, tone, and actions. Give your partner something which is really positive.
I have come to understand that our communication with other people is multichannel. (Translation: There are several ways that we can be positive with our spouse, and there are several ways that we can be negative with our spouse, simultaneously.)
There are at least four channels on which we are communicating at any one time:
1. What are we saying? What is the verbal content? If it was written down, would it be positive or negative?
2. What is the tone in our voice? This is our prosody. Think of it as the melody in the voice. It can be friendly or mean, inviting or critical.
3. What is our facial expression saying, and what is our body language saying? Are we smiling, grimacing, or frowning as we deliver our message?
4. Finally, what are we actually doing? Are we doing something nice for the person (e.g. preparing them food) or something mean (throwing something, slamming things, breaking things, hitting them)? Do we follow through on the things we have promised? Do we remember the special dates, birthdays, and anniversaries?
These four ways of responding to our significant others would seem to exhaust the multichannel communication. But they don't. We are also communicating with our pheromones. These are "invisible scents." We don't know that they are being emitted by our bodies, but they are. And the other person does not know that their brain is receiving them, but they are.
And there is probably at least one other type of communication going on, although perhaps less established scientifically--our pupil size. When we see something we like, our pupils get larger. the other person's brain may be able to pick up on that, and in turn, the second person's pupils may adjust. This can be another type of back and forth communication.
But let's stick with the first four because we can't control our pheromones and our pupil size.
As we attempt to reverse the flow of negative reciprocity in a relationship to positive reciprocity, something which can be difficult, words alone are unlikely to be able to do it. Compliments and positive observations about our partner are a good place to start, but more is needed.
We need to remember that we are communicating with the nonverbal behaviors--the look in our face, out body posture (are we turned towards them or away from them when they are talking to us). What is our body language saying? Is it positive or negative? Are we pointing a finger at them? Are we avoiding eye contact?
Then there is our prosody (pronounced PRAW-suh-dee). Prosody is defined by the online Merriam Webster dictionary as meaning "3. the rhythmic and intonational aspect of language." I think that this is often overlooked in our marital communication. Words can be positive but if they don't have a certain melodic sound, the full positive quality of a message can be tempered or totally lost.
I have to pay close attention to my prosody when I am going to the hospital to test a new patient. They don't know me. Why should they open up and trust me? I have to use every aspect of communication when I introduce myself to convey that I am there to help them, through my words, my nonverbal behavior, and my tone of voice. Unfortunately, I think that after years of marriage, people simply don't put out the energy to use a friendly, pleasant tone with their spouse. Their voice with their spouse can become flat--or even grouchy. Watching the words we use is a fairly obvious way of being positive. But we communicate with more than words. The lilt or melody of our voice is our prosody. Sometimes I think that our tone may be even more important than the words we use. If you watch a mother talking to a newborn, she uses very exaggerated prosody. It is a friendly prosody. The infant hardly needs to understand the words. The tone says it all. It is warm. It is friendly. It is loving.
Finally, what are our actions saying? It is said that men often express affection by doing things for their wife--mowing the lawn, taking care of the house and car. I often like it when my wife offers to bring me a cup of hot tea when I am at the computer.
So, when trying to create a positive atmosphere in a relationship, remember these four things--words, body language, tone, and actions. Give your partner something which is really positive.
Sunday, April 08, 2012
The Symphony Orchestra--Finding Happiness
In his recent book, Flourish, Martin E. P. Seligman puts forward the idea that while happiness is one worthy goal in life, it cannot be the only goal According to him, well being is constituted of five things, which can be put into the acronym of PERMA.
P--Positive emotion, happiness. Seligman does list happiness as part of the goal of life and part of the measure of well lived life. In his previous work, it was the capstone of life. Now he lists it as one worthy aspect of living.
E--Engagement--This diverges from sheer positive emotion. It is doing something which engages the person in life, whether it is operating a business, pursuing a creative activity, raising children, or something else.
R--Relationships--This speaks for itself. Relationships are in themselves a worthwhile aspect of living.
M--Meaning--The finding of something which makes sense of life, which gives it a larger context than just doing something for the moment, and involves something more than just feeling good.
A--Achievement--Accomplishing something which has value or worth.
Now some of my definitions here may not be exactly what Seligman would approve of, but I think they come close enough.
I am not sure why he left out three other pursuits, although I guess he would say they are included in the above. The three others which I would list are creativity, the shaping of the will, and altruistic love (referred to by Christians as agape). Creativity might be subsumed under engagement, or even under achievement, but I would like to see it have its own acknowledged place. The importance of the shaping of the will has been pointed out in the book Willpower by Baumeister. I think it deserves its own place, too. Seligman would most likely subsume agape under relationships.
However, one could probably keep coming up with more and more indispensable categories.
I don't know if the ultimate goal of life is happiness, PERMA, or altruistic love. I suspect it is all of these. But when I think of what constitutes a sense of life satisfaction for me, I realize that it is not just one thing. It is the resonance created by a variety of things happening in my life. It is like a symphony orchestra. The musical score for my life doesn't have just violins, trumpets, and French horns. It has a great variety of instruments and many people playing those instruments. In a symphony, it is the diversity, unity in diversity, and overall resonance which produces such a pleasing and satisfying effect. The total result is something above and beyond what any one instrument can produce by itself and beyond what any one musician can create by himself/herself. It is a situation where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
On the other hand, while I am emphasizing here the importance of having a diversity of pursuits, I will admit that I have six goals listed above all others for myself. I keep them on my Yahoo calendar "to do" list, so that I see them every time I log on to it.
I would encourage you to read both Flourish and Willpower. Make up your own mind as to what is important in your life. What are you aiming at? Remember that according to Socrates (as quoted by Plato in his Dialogues, Apology), "The unexamined life is not worth living." That may be a little harsh, but it is not far off the mark. But I think that the point in this blog is a little different: if you have not examined your life to know what is likely to bring you the greatest satisfaction, then you are likely to accept lesser satisfactions or to use your time in less than optimal ways.
(Now I would like to point out that I do also believe in "goofing off." But it does not bring me any deep satisfaction.)
Hopefully, you have a variety of aspects of your life that bring fulfillment, and hopefully you experience that sense of resonance which comes from pursuing not just one focus but several. Now I don't want to be a snob here. I know that there are many people in the world who cannot really get involved in a variety of activities because of financial reasons. However, I think that at least in American society, there are almost always opportunities for relationships with others, hobbies, and educational advancement. (These days one can practically get a college education online for free--not a degree but an education.)
Now what about people who have singlemindedly pursued one major area: explorers, artists, athletes, and so on? I suspect that even for these people, one area of pursuit isn't enough. While they may initially channel all of their energy into one area, eventually most people seem to need a diversity in their experiences.
I asked an acquaintance of mine about how she felt about being retired. She said it was wonderful; it was like being a third grader without parents telling you what to do. This view of life has much to commend it. There is so much to explore and learn about in the world. I hope that you are successful in finding a sense of richness, well-being, and resonance in your life.
P--Positive emotion, happiness. Seligman does list happiness as part of the goal of life and part of the measure of well lived life. In his previous work, it was the capstone of life. Now he lists it as one worthy aspect of living.
E--Engagement--This diverges from sheer positive emotion. It is doing something which engages the person in life, whether it is operating a business, pursuing a creative activity, raising children, or something else.
R--Relationships--This speaks for itself. Relationships are in themselves a worthwhile aspect of living.
M--Meaning--The finding of something which makes sense of life, which gives it a larger context than just doing something for the moment, and involves something more than just feeling good.
A--Achievement--Accomplishing something which has value or worth.
Now some of my definitions here may not be exactly what Seligman would approve of, but I think they come close enough.
I am not sure why he left out three other pursuits, although I guess he would say they are included in the above. The three others which I would list are creativity, the shaping of the will, and altruistic love (referred to by Christians as agape). Creativity might be subsumed under engagement, or even under achievement, but I would like to see it have its own acknowledged place. The importance of the shaping of the will has been pointed out in the book Willpower by Baumeister. I think it deserves its own place, too. Seligman would most likely subsume agape under relationships.
However, one could probably keep coming up with more and more indispensable categories.
I don't know if the ultimate goal of life is happiness, PERMA, or altruistic love. I suspect it is all of these. But when I think of what constitutes a sense of life satisfaction for me, I realize that it is not just one thing. It is the resonance created by a variety of things happening in my life. It is like a symphony orchestra. The musical score for my life doesn't have just violins, trumpets, and French horns. It has a great variety of instruments and many people playing those instruments. In a symphony, it is the diversity, unity in diversity, and overall resonance which produces such a pleasing and satisfying effect. The total result is something above and beyond what any one instrument can produce by itself and beyond what any one musician can create by himself/herself. It is a situation where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
On the other hand, while I am emphasizing here the importance of having a diversity of pursuits, I will admit that I have six goals listed above all others for myself. I keep them on my Yahoo calendar "to do" list, so that I see them every time I log on to it.
I would encourage you to read both Flourish and Willpower. Make up your own mind as to what is important in your life. What are you aiming at? Remember that according to Socrates (as quoted by Plato in his Dialogues, Apology), "The unexamined life is not worth living." That may be a little harsh, but it is not far off the mark. But I think that the point in this blog is a little different: if you have not examined your life to know what is likely to bring you the greatest satisfaction, then you are likely to accept lesser satisfactions or to use your time in less than optimal ways.
(Now I would like to point out that I do also believe in "goofing off." But it does not bring me any deep satisfaction.)
Hopefully, you have a variety of aspects of your life that bring fulfillment, and hopefully you experience that sense of resonance which comes from pursuing not just one focus but several. Now I don't want to be a snob here. I know that there are many people in the world who cannot really get involved in a variety of activities because of financial reasons. However, I think that at least in American society, there are almost always opportunities for relationships with others, hobbies, and educational advancement. (These days one can practically get a college education online for free--not a degree but an education.)
Now what about people who have singlemindedly pursued one major area: explorers, artists, athletes, and so on? I suspect that even for these people, one area of pursuit isn't enough. While they may initially channel all of their energy into one area, eventually most people seem to need a diversity in their experiences.
I asked an acquaintance of mine about how she felt about being retired. She said it was wonderful; it was like being a third grader without parents telling you what to do. This view of life has much to commend it. There is so much to explore and learn about in the world. I hope that you are successful in finding a sense of richness, well-being, and resonance in your life.
Wednesday, April 04, 2012
The Colors of Optimism
I was reading the most recent book by Martin E.P. Seligman, Flourishing, which I highly recommend. There are many interesting aspects of the book. He highlights the research on optimism and the multiplicity of positive effects which it has in peoples' lives. One positive effect for example is lower rates of coronary vascular disease. (I am not going to outline all of the benefits of optimism here. Just Google "benefits of optimism") and you will find numerous sites providing a list of the current experimentally validated benefits of such a positive outlook.)
However, reading his book, I found myself wondering just how optimistic is it realistic to be?
You have of course heard the following definitions:
The normal optimist--sees the glass as half full.
The normal pessimist--sees the glass as half empty.
Here are some more:
The radical optimist--It is bound to rain and refill my glass.
The radical pessimist--The little bit of water that I have is going to evaporate eventually, and I will have nothing.
The pragmatist--Simply goes to the faucet and fills the glass up without thinking about it.
On a more serious note, I realized that there are many "flavors" or "colors" of optimism.
The pragmatic optimist--This person understands the reflexive aspects of optimism. If I expect the best and act like it is going to happen, it is more likely to come true. Being optimistic leads me to better health behaviors. The pessimist might think that they have little control over their health outcomes. Then by not trying to exert a positive effect, they do not do what they are capable of doing--having checkups, exercising, and so on. If I am positive and optimistic, I will try harder at tasks. I won't feel that I am wasting my time. I won't be putting in a half hearted effort. If I am positive, then people will also likely respond to me more positively.
Moreover, it is also pragmatic because it feels better to be optimistic. If I am anticipating something negative will happen every day of my life, even if it never happens, I will be more likely to feel down and even depressed. If the events I worry about never happen, in one sense they might as well have. One elderly woman I tested in the hospital told me that she had been sure that she was terminally ill; she had believed this since her early 20's! How awful this must have made her feel--emotionally and physically-- for all of those years.
The protective pessimist--Some people feel that it just hurts too much to be disappointed. They believe that it would feel better to not expect the best and then not be disappointed rather than expect the best and be disappointed. Moreover, they believe if they prepare for the worst, they will be better prepared.
The focused optimist. I perhaps like this one the best. I will start by assessing a situation for all of the possible positive and negative outcomes and preparing for the reasonable eventualities. Then I will stay focused on the positive potential. Better things are likely to happen if I am positively focused.
The tres chic philosophical pessimist--The undergraduate who has read too much Sartre. This type of person believes that it is just too naive to be optimistic. There is too much suffering in the world. They believe that a truly sophisticated person must be more cynical and pessimistic.
The philosophical optimist, a la Alfred North Whitehead--the world is evolving and getting better. My philosophy says so. Alfred North Whitehead and Bergson had very positive philosophical systems which stated that the world (universe) was constantly evolving into a better place.
The theological pessimist--This person almost literally believes that the world is going to hell. There may be a belief that terrible things must soon happen in order to fulfill Biblical prophecy.
The theological optimist--This person focuses on Bible passages which says that God is in charge of the world and that He will win over chaos, evil, and despair. There is more of a focus on heaven than on hell.
There is both personal optimism and global optimism. In personal optimism, I believe that my life will flourish. In global optimism, I believe that the world will continue to advance and overcome negative forces.
One might have both of these (My life will do okay, and the world will do okay). Or one might be a personal pessimist and global pessimist (My life is going down the drain, and so is the world). It might be possible to have one and not the other (My life is going to do okay, but the world is falling apart; or My life is going down the tubes, but the rest of the world will do okay.) I suspect that personal optimism and global pessimism are correlated, but I don't know that for sure.
Ultimately, we have to have something to base optimism on. It cannot be just wishful thinking. As a cognitive therapist, I counsel my patients to test out their negative thoughts. If they have fortune telling thoughts, follow up on them, and see if they come true. I continue to have negative, fortune telling thoughts (unfortunately), and I can tell you that most of mine never come true. They are generally a waste of time and energy. Try it out for yourself, and see if you aren't wasting time with most of your negative predictive thoughts. If they do come true, consider the possibility that they are reflexive, that is that they are self-fulfilling prophecies.
For the time being, I am going to choose to be a focused optimist. I am also a theological optimist. These two go together well for me. In my personal life, I will consider all of the things which could happen, and I will prepare for most eventualities. Then I will focus my energy on pursuing the positive outcomes which could happen and act as if I expect them to happen.
However, reading his book, I found myself wondering just how optimistic is it realistic to be?
You have of course heard the following definitions:
The normal optimist--sees the glass as half full.
The normal pessimist--sees the glass as half empty.
Here are some more:
The radical optimist--It is bound to rain and refill my glass.
The radical pessimist--The little bit of water that I have is going to evaporate eventually, and I will have nothing.
The pragmatist--Simply goes to the faucet and fills the glass up without thinking about it.
On a more serious note, I realized that there are many "flavors" or "colors" of optimism.
The pragmatic optimist--This person understands the reflexive aspects of optimism. If I expect the best and act like it is going to happen, it is more likely to come true. Being optimistic leads me to better health behaviors. The pessimist might think that they have little control over their health outcomes. Then by not trying to exert a positive effect, they do not do what they are capable of doing--having checkups, exercising, and so on. If I am positive and optimistic, I will try harder at tasks. I won't feel that I am wasting my time. I won't be putting in a half hearted effort. If I am positive, then people will also likely respond to me more positively.
Moreover, it is also pragmatic because it feels better to be optimistic. If I am anticipating something negative will happen every day of my life, even if it never happens, I will be more likely to feel down and even depressed. If the events I worry about never happen, in one sense they might as well have. One elderly woman I tested in the hospital told me that she had been sure that she was terminally ill; she had believed this since her early 20's! How awful this must have made her feel--emotionally and physically-- for all of those years.
The protective pessimist--Some people feel that it just hurts too much to be disappointed. They believe that it would feel better to not expect the best and then not be disappointed rather than expect the best and be disappointed. Moreover, they believe if they prepare for the worst, they will be better prepared.
The focused optimist. I perhaps like this one the best. I will start by assessing a situation for all of the possible positive and negative outcomes and preparing for the reasonable eventualities. Then I will stay focused on the positive potential. Better things are likely to happen if I am positively focused.
The tres chic philosophical pessimist--The undergraduate who has read too much Sartre. This type of person believes that it is just too naive to be optimistic. There is too much suffering in the world. They believe that a truly sophisticated person must be more cynical and pessimistic.
The philosophical optimist, a la Alfred North Whitehead--the world is evolving and getting better. My philosophy says so. Alfred North Whitehead and Bergson had very positive philosophical systems which stated that the world (universe) was constantly evolving into a better place.
The theological pessimist--This person almost literally believes that the world is going to hell. There may be a belief that terrible things must soon happen in order to fulfill Biblical prophecy.
The theological optimist--This person focuses on Bible passages which says that God is in charge of the world and that He will win over chaos, evil, and despair. There is more of a focus on heaven than on hell.
There is both personal optimism and global optimism. In personal optimism, I believe that my life will flourish. In global optimism, I believe that the world will continue to advance and overcome negative forces.
One might have both of these (My life will do okay, and the world will do okay). Or one might be a personal pessimist and global pessimist (My life is going down the drain, and so is the world). It might be possible to have one and not the other (My life is going to do okay, but the world is falling apart; or My life is going down the tubes, but the rest of the world will do okay.) I suspect that personal optimism and global pessimism are correlated, but I don't know that for sure.
Ultimately, we have to have something to base optimism on. It cannot be just wishful thinking. As a cognitive therapist, I counsel my patients to test out their negative thoughts. If they have fortune telling thoughts, follow up on them, and see if they come true. I continue to have negative, fortune telling thoughts (unfortunately), and I can tell you that most of mine never come true. They are generally a waste of time and energy. Try it out for yourself, and see if you aren't wasting time with most of your negative predictive thoughts. If they do come true, consider the possibility that they are reflexive, that is that they are self-fulfilling prophecies.
For the time being, I am going to choose to be a focused optimist. I am also a theological optimist. These two go together well for me. In my personal life, I will consider all of the things which could happen, and I will prepare for most eventualities. Then I will focus my energy on pursuing the positive outcomes which could happen and act as if I expect them to happen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)