It's already happened

There used to be a member of the community who always responded to my greeting of "What's happening Abe?" with a casual "Rabbi I think it's already happened."

Tongue in cheek, but incredibly profound.

I have a friend who once asked for some guidance regarding whether he should propose to his girlfriend of 2 years.

"What's your doubt?"

"I don't know, but I'm not sure..."

My response was simple "Either propose or end it. If she hasn't convinced you yet then she's never going to".

In life we are so often waiting to be inspired, waiting for a sign, waiting for the right time and for the best opportunity.

The best opportunity has probably already happened.

You can't have your cake and eat it

Compromise is a phenomenon that none of us can escape. Whenever we invest time in any endeavour, we unavoidably deny investment in another.  We can be good at many things but we cannot be our best at anything, unless we are prepared to sacrifice other values and ideals on the altar of that success.

In 2012, Anne-Marie  Slaughter published the article "Why Women Still Can't Have it All". It was a explanation as to why she, who served as Director of Policy Planning for the United States Department of State, voluntarily left her role to spend more time with her teenage sons.

True balance in life is an illusion; we cannot have the best of all worlds. Practical balance is the acceptance of the fact that one cannot be one’s best at all areas in life; it’s the choice of which areas to excel and in which areas to capitulate.

Time is a commodity that must be budgeted. Investment in one area, detracts it from another. Priorities ultimately will determine where the commodity should be spent.

Absolute success comes with an absolute cost. 

The problem with immoral religious people...

Nothing outrages us ‒ both those of faith and those without ‒ more than the religiously pious who act in a socially immoral manner.

Be they thieves, philanderers or sexual deviants, the hypocrisy strikes a chord within us that stokes the coals of hatred.

We admire those who live by their principles. We respect their personal sacrifices of lifestyle, convenience and social norms to remain true to their values. We may disagree with their beliefs, but we admire their conviction.

This admiration is a moral contract. The principled person sacrifices things that many of us cannot or will not, and in turn we respect them for it. But when they fail to uphold even the most basic of moral tenets, that contract is broken. 

Our admiration was misplaced.

When that trust is broken, our moral outrage is born from feelings of deceit.

In an age of internet-assembled philosophies...

"Those who hear the warnings of this curse should not congratulate themselves, thinking, 'I am safe, even though I am following the desires of my own stubborn heart.'” (Devarim 29:18)

The verse speaks of individuals who, despite hearing the warnings of the Torah to those living an immoral life, are convinced that they are the exception to the rule; the smokers who feel they can beat the statistics.

The human personality’s natural ego considers itself immune to popular critique; we find unique ways of justifying our hypocrisy and validating our inconsistencies.

In an age of internet-assembled philosophies, we tend to think of ourselves as sophisticated and well-read, whereas in reality we have only replaced genuine self-assessment with over-inflated self-congratulations.

In the lead-up to Rosh Hashanah, a time when we try to contextualise our lives, perhaps it is opportune to develop humility. Not the humility of the self-effacing type, but rather the humility that seeks to understand before developing an opinion.

Tolerance

Last week I participated in an interfaith dialogue between members of the Jewish, Christian and Islam faiths.

The event was both insightful and fascinating; being amongst people from such a culturally diverse spectrum seeking to find common ground during a time where religion is so often used as an excuse for separation.

In our groups we were asked to suggest ideas for promoting dialogue and fostering tolerance. Each group shared their views, a conglomeration of the group’s tri-affiliated co-religionists.

One of the groups claimed that as a prerequisite for promoting tolerance was the removal of the ‘Abbot’ government.

How ironic that the promotion of tolerance necessitates an intolerance towards those positions unaligned with my own.

I think there’s a term for that...intolerant.

Correlation is not causation!

Anyone who has taken an intro to psych or a statistics class has heard the old adage, "correlation does not imply causation." Just because two trends seem to fluctuate in tandem, this rule posits, that doesn’t prove that they are meaningfully related to one another.

Correlation is a statistical measure that describes the size and direction of a relationship between two or more variables. 

Causation indicates that one event is the result of the occurrence of the other event; i.e. there is a causal relationship between the two events. 

Causality is the area of statistics that is commonly misunderstood and misused by people in the mistaken belief that because the data shows a correlation that there is necessarily an underlying causal relationship.

A good example is that the rate of drowning on Sydney’s beaches is positively correlated to the sale of ice cream.

An incorrect conclusion is that “the consumption of ice cream leads to drowning”. More likely the reason would be that both drowning and ice cream sales are positively affected by hot weather; more people are at the beach and more ice creams are sold- correlation does not imply causation!.

A few examples from recent articles and headlines:

“Spiritual people are more likely to be mentally ill” -The Daily Mail 

 “...children whose parents smoked were more likely to exhibit delinquent behaviour”- The Guardian

“People who have large weddings are less likely to get divorced”- Psychology Today

“Men and women who eat more of the sweets are also likely to be depressed”-LA times

“Coffee may prevent depression, scientists say”-BBC

Don’t be duped by Facebook trends- correlation does not imply causation

Addicts and Codependents

The world of addictions is a scary one to witness. The addict is a con-artist extraordinaire. He has to be as his survival depends on it. It isn't that he wants to lie, it's that he cannot not lie. The truth is too scary and too painful. Admitting his addiction is half the problem.

But every story of addiction has another story of co-dependency- " a helping relationship where one person supports or enables another person's addiction, poor mental health, immaturity, irresponsibility, or under-achievement."

The codependent prolongs the addictive cycle; he makes excuses for the addict, bails out the addict and defends the addict. The codependent ensures that the addict need never take responsibility for his actions.
They show kindness when harshness is needed, they open their arms when their arms needed to be folded. 
Their reluctance to be perceived as the 'bad guy' dupes them into becoming the bad guy.
Addicts are not the only ones who need to be in therapy...they are just the obvious ones.

Can legends be true?

"In the Chinese language, the word "crisis" is composed of two characters, one representing danger and the other, opportunity."  -John F. Kennedy, Speech at United Negro College Fund fundraiser,April 1959.

In researching this quote I discovered that it is a mistranslation of the Chinese character for opportunity.
But does it really matter? Is the concept of crisis presenting an opportunity wrong?
If I can learn a true idea from a faulty proof or feel inspired by a fictional story- does it make the experience any less authentic?

Is the truth less valuable if the proof is faulty, flawed or fiction? Maybe the truth is in our conclusion?

When you trust someone...

How were referees introduced into sport?

Surely the earliest form of games developed out of a sense of healthy competitiveness. Two or more individuals or teams, pitted against one another in a battle of strength, skill or wit.

Games were based on trust and therefore the adjudication and fairness of a particular play or move were left in the hands of the players themselves.

With the development of the games came a corresponding raising of the stakes for winning or losing, whether financial or just for prestige. Suddenly there was an incentive to cheat.

Quickly, our honesty was questioned and we doubted the testimony of our opponent. We stood to lose too much, and our adversary gain too much. We could no longer trust or be trusted.

To reinstate fairness into the system, we introduced a neutral third party. These arbitrators would act as objective outsiders, incorruptible and fair. This ushered in the age of the referee ‒ policemen for sport.

Trust is at the core of every relationship. If you have it, the relationship will flourish; if not, it will perish.

In religious circles, trust was supported by using God as the referee.  One would take an oath or pledge using the name of God;  the fear of taking His name in vain would serve as an insurance policy, protecting against fraud and deceit.

It seems, however, that God's status as a referee has become inadequate even in religious circles. An oath in the name of God has lost its value.

If players no longer respect the referee, then the game loses all its integrity. If civil society can no longer trust one another, then society will cease to be civil.

The risk of trusting is being deceived.

The risk of not trusting is far greater.

Cases of mistaken identity...

First there’s a man who says he’s a woman

Then a black woman who is really a white woman

And now a white woman who thinks she a sick woman

The first case won support, the second ambivalence and the third scorn.

All cases of identities misunderstood, misconstrued or ill-conceived.

It seems that the once obvious question of identity is no longer obvious.... 

What is your blind spot?

Last week I discussed the inability of many to speak up about something incongruous and stupid due to social pressures, real or imagined.

The other extreme of this is having a blind spot.

People are generally motivated to view themselves in a positive light and biases are viewed as undesirable. We tend to think of our own perceptions and judgments as being rational, accurate, and free of bias when analysing our own decisions and positions.

However, when we are made aware of various biases acting on our perceptions, decisions or judgements, research has shown that we are still unable to control them. This contributes to the bias blind spot, as even if someone is told that they are biased, they are unable to alter their biased perception.

Our blind spots are the points in life where we cannot possibly perceive of any other legitimate way of viewing a particular idea or approach. The left can’t understand the right, and the right can’t see the value in the left.

Our blind spots cause us to negate contrary opinions and nullify the people who hold them. We become incapable of seeing any legitimacy in opinions and lifestyles different to our own.

Everyone is guilty of this, from the most fundamentalist ‘religo’ to the most fundamentalist atheist.

Although the blind spot is not ‘curable’, it can be treated. But like alcoholism, it requires the person to first acknowledge that they have a problem before it can be addressed.

Witch Hunts

Throughout history, witchcraft caused panic and fear among many communities. This resulted in the burning at the stake of anyone thought to be a ‘witch’ or believed to have dabbled in black magic. Unfortunately, it also targeted those only suspected of participating in this practice. 

In modern times, the  'witch hunt’ has become the act of seeking and persecuting any perceived enemy, particularly when the search is conducted using extreme measures and with little regard to actual guilt or innocence. At times it is sanctioned by government and at other times only by the ‘court of public opinion’.

Sadly, the casualties of these hunts are often innocent of the crimes they are accused of. During the McCarthy era, for example, many victims were perceived communists.

Often an innocent yet poorly judged comment or joke can lead to a person being labelled anti-Semitic. The abuse they subsequently suffer can, ironically, germinate negative sentiments within them, feelings never before thought of or considered.

Unfortunately, we see witch hunts happening everywhere, often targeting the innocent. The friendly overtures of a  teacher makes him a paedophile; an ill-timed joke brands the joker a racist; a poorly judged Facebook post labels the user a sex addict.

Are these innocents merely a casualty of war? Is it now accepted that the weeding out of society’s ‘scum’ necessitates collateral damage? Can’t we as a society read each story and controversy independently of popular trends and judge each person on their merit, rather than within a broader context?

My sense is we cannot.

We want blood, because even if there are unnecessary victims, at least we can sleep at night knowing that all the ‘bad men’ are behind bars, guilty or not.

An uneducated (or perhaps rational) view of MONA

Last week I visited the fame MONA art gallery in Hobart. By all accounts this is a "must see" when in Tasmania, or to quote the concierge at the hotel "You'll love it or hate it, but you have to see it."

I accept that I may not be the most cultured of individuals, but I would like to think of myself as being open and aware of my own ignorance. 

So when I see a famed artwork that looks like my infant nephew could have done it, I can accept that I am the one at fault and not the artist or their critics/fans.

But I too have my limits.

One of the centrepieces of the gallery is the Cloaca, a machine designed by Wim Delvoye (and a lot of scientists). It is a machine that is smelt well before it is seen. 

The purpose of the machine is literally to make human faeces. The machine is fed regular food daily through an insinkerator and then it methodically passes the digested food through multiple 'stomachs' and 'intestines', all mimicking the body. Finally the finished product is 'defecated' by the machine at 2pm every day. (According to a documentary I saw, you can purchase these 'prized' products for a mere $1500).

According to the artist, the Cloaca satirises modern art saying that most of it is ****, "this is a work of art about waste".

The only thing that remained with me after the exhibit, beside the unpleasantness of the smell that still lingers, is the irony that those who marvelled at the exhibit were the exact people the artist was mocking...

Who is missing the point, me or those who claim to understand...?

Education at its worst...

From the beginning of time until fairly recently, education was a family affair. The family unit in general and the parents in particular prodded, nudged and guided their young by teaching them skills, etiquette and acceptable behaviour.

As civilisation progressed and the demand for skills broadened beyond the ability of individual families, education needed to be outsourced and eventually evolved into what we call schools.

For better or worse, schools are the surrogate households of today and teachers, our children’s surrogate parents. If we are to judge an educational institution based on its success, what are the KPIs (key performance indicators)?

In my opinion, the education system in the west has evolved into a “12 years preparation for HSC”. Every year is just one more stepping stone towards that all-important ATAR, which, in turn, is only valuable in order to get into the best universities.

However, if a school produces many distinguished students with enviable grades, but who lack motivation for life, what is it worth? If the character of our children is not moulded and their morals not refined, of what value is their education?

Success in life, however one defines it, cannot be relegated to a number out of 100. Do teachers view their role as merely transferring information from their heads into the heads of their students ‒ a virtual USB data transfer?

Education needs to be reframed. It isn’t about teaching people what to think, but rather how to think. Education is giving children the life skills needed to know how to approach difficult problems, how to confront moral dilemmas and how to create meaningful lives.

No ATAR can ever do that.

If you could have a superpower what would it be? Why?

 

Do we possess a natural inclination to morally refine ourselves? Is there a drive to change ourselves, our environment and ultimately the world?

From an evolutionary view point, prominent atheists such as Sam Harris have suggested the logical and mutually beneficial rationale for the ‘inherent’ desire within man to be good. “We are good because it works in our favour in the long run. Society will be safer because we need to trust one another,” claims Harris.

Theists would point to our God-given souls that pine to cleave to God and His goodness as the inner spark for moral redemption.

Both approaches seem to suggest that, at least in principle, we want to not only be good, but be better.

Is this true?

Given an opportunity to do an anonymous good deed, would we? Do we look for opportunities to help, or pretend we are blind to the injustices and misfortunes of others?

Would a cash windfall motivate us to direct that windfall towards making a positive impact on our surroundings, or would we self-servingly use it as a means to take more for ourselves?

In a witty, insightful and somewhat confronting and depressing piece, author and actor John Hodgman conducted an informal survey in which he asked people to choose a super power they would ask for if they could. It became evident that how we answer the question reflects a lot about the kind of person we are.

“Does the choice of power indicate the person you wish you could be, or reveal the person you’re afraid you already are?”

Sadly, “No matter which power people choose, they never use it to fight crime.”

If we are indeed designed, by nature or by divinity, to strive for goodness, perhaps many of us are lemons...

Have we become irrelevant to the next generation? or We have become to the next generation!

Historically, the passing of the baton from generation to generation was considered a transfer of the mantle of wisdom and leadership. Our antecedents were appreciated and respected for their knowledge and worldly experience; they were our guiding lights.

The broad-based value of honouring elders in general, and parents in particular, was always understood as a statement of deference and admiration. It was a way for society to acknowledge the social hierarchy, with seniors considered superior, both in character and wisdom, than their progeny.

But we live in a different era. The knowledge of our elders has become redundant. Their frames of reference are insignificant and their wisdom is obsolete. Children are worldlier than their parents even before they reach adolescence, and the accepted paradigm of parental wisdom is all but nullified. People have become fossilised while still in the prime of their lives.

Perhaps there are two dialectical responses. On the one hand we can accept the new paradigm and all that it entails; we cannot change progress. Our relationships with our children will be more cordial than reverential, and more casual than respectful. As parents our roles as models will be ever decreasing.

An alternate approach is to become moral giants by committing ourselves to lives of value and purpose. By investing in our character, we act as a guiding light to our children. We may know less than them, but we will always be 20 or 30 years ahead of them in terms of character refinement. We will always have something to teach, and they something to learn.

But it requires willpower to be that example, to be endearing and enduring role models.

Us and Them...

Xenophobia: "Deep-rooted, irrational hatred towards foreigners" (Oxford English Dictionary)

The interaction with ‘others’ presents a challenge to all people of all faiths, races and cultures. We are challenged to look beyond superficial differences and to find the inner being, the human part that we all share.

I am not sure whether we in society are becoming more tolerant of each other, or more splintered. I regularly overhear conversations dealing with ‘us’ and ‘them’, where ‘We’ are the preferred lifestyle and value choice, and ‘They’ are to be distanced, excluded and, at times, ostracised.

Racism is born out of a narcissistic sense of superiority. Whether the group is privileged by virtue of birth (colour and culture) or by way of choice (religion), this innate conviction of superiority results from a deep insecurity and self-doubt. The louder I shout, the less convinced I am.

“And you shall love the stranger, for you were a stranger in the land of Egypt.” The Torah demands that we see ourselves in others.

Our common humanity unites us, our pithy insecurities divide us.

Role Models

In a beautiful column I read recently by David Brooks, he cites two kinds of value systems, or, to be more specific, two different kinds of bucket lists.

There is the professional bucket list, which details the goals and ambitions we must achieve to attain prestige, wealth and honour in our lives.

The second list is the eulogy bucket list, the one which details the things we accomplish and people we touch that will leave our lasting legacy.

Most of us invest more time in the former than the latter, although I imagine we are more sensitive to and enamoured with the latter than the former.

How can we re-direct our efforts in a way that would re-focus our goals and ambitions?

One way is through role models.

Role models are those individuals who have trail-blazed the path towards perfection. Are our role models people of character, people of ethics and people of morality? Do our role models inspire us to be better, kinder and gentler?

As parents, the role models we wish for our children should be us...are we the role models we want for them...?

Tell me the future...PLEASE!

Last week I took a drive up the coast to a ‘Psychic Fair’. 

I went as a sceptic and left as a cynic.

Of greater interest than the psychics were the people who sought their services ‒ honest, hard-working Australians who were desperate to catch a glimpse of their futures or to receive messages of consolation from the ‘other side’. Their guiding motive was to have the hidden revealed.

Knowing the future is power; uncertainty leads to feeling vulnerable. Anxiety is the fear of uncertainty, “what might happen”.

There are two responses to anxiety:

1.     To put in every effort to create certainty.

2.     To accept life’s inherent uncertainty.

In most cases, the first option is ideal. If I can predict the future, then I can ensure I am fully prepared for it. But can you be fully prepared? What if the predictions are wrong?

A more considered response to uncertainty isn’t panic, but rather acceptance. It’s not that certainty isn’t desirable, it’s that it’s unattainable ‒ there are too many variables.

The false prophets promising guarantees of financial security, perfect health and ideal relationships do their ‘followers’ a disservice. The hard work of preparing for the challenges of life is the only guarantee. There are no short-cuts.

An empty vessel makes the loudest sound...

 

"It has often and confidently been asserted that man’s origin can never be known, but ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: It is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." ‒ Charles Darwin

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.” ‒ Plato

Recently, researchers at Yale proved that using a search engine to research a random topic makes people think that they know more about everything ‒ even topics unrelated to the question they just Googled.

In other words, a slight educational advantage creates a disproportional perceived knowledge advantage. Although we overestimate our abilities in general, where we are marginally competent, overestimation is exponentially worse.

This might explain why the most outspoken people are seldom the most knowledgeable…

Living in comfort with uncertainty

Once we lived comfortably with not knowing all the answers. We allowed the mystique of the unknown to not only puzzle us, but to inspire us. We had many answers but even more questions. Life and the world were mysterious.

But now we are all-knowing. Whether we are religious or anti-religious, we are certain of our convictions. We are right and others are wrong. We have all the answers; we have become fundamentalists.

Fundamentalism is the certainty of possessing the truth. There is no other way of considering an issue. “We are right and everyone else is wrong.”

There is comfort in a fundamentalist approach because it presents the world as a series of simple choices: good versus bad, wrong versus right.

It is this simplicity that makes all forms of fundamentalism appealing, because a complex world is a frightening place. By pigeon-holing communities and stereotyping individuals, I am protected from having to see the complexity of each unique person and each unique situation.

Our fear of humanising the ‘enemy’ and living with uncertainty causes us to move towards extreme positions.

The democratization of Intelligence

Democracy is a double edged sword.

On the one hand it gives a voice to everyone equally and on the other hand it gives a voice to everyone equally.

Equality is admirable and moral when viewed from a qualitative perspective; when looking at who a person is. No-one is intrinsically more important than anyone else, regardless of their religion, colour or nationality.

Equality is undesirable when dealing with what a person knows or can do.

Not every opinion counts. 

Uninformed opinions are worthless for they cannot grasp the complexities at stake. 

Poorly thought out ideas lack context and depth.

An untrained individual cannot make an accurate diagnosis.

An illiterate person cannot comment on contemporary literature.

They all lack the requisite knowledge.

Furthermore- even if we are immersed in a world of science doesn't make us scientists and just because we live in a world of philosophy doesn't make us philosophers.

Belief, whether it be in God or in his absence, cannot be a decided by democratic vote- because intelligence cannot and should not be democratized.

Incompetence breeds incompetence

As a student, one of my peers asked our Rabbi if it was a problem for students to look at their Rabbi with a sense of awe and omnipotence, almost as if they were infallible.

He answered that the real problem was when the Rabbi himself starts to believe it...

This is called the Dunning–Kruger effect — a cognitive bias where people ‘suffer’ from an illusion of superiority and thereby mistakenly assess their ability as much higher than it really is.

It is the inability of the incompetent to recognise their incompetence.

This makes me wonder ... perhaps the areas in my life where I am weakest are those I believe to be strengths ...

Blame the victim

Ever thought that a rape victim’s behaviour is responsible for their rape, a battered woman for her beating? Ever viewed people living in poverty as lazy, those sufferers from illness, mental or physical, as having invited their disease through poor lifestyle choices? Wondered if a bullied child asked to be bullied?
‘Victim blaming’ is an unconscious defence mechanism protecting us from feeling vulnerable. We would like to believe in a just world where actions have predictable consequences and people can control what happens to them, where good happens to the good and bad to the bad. ‘Victims’ threaten that belief.

When bad things happen to good people, the implication is that no one is safe, no matter how good we are, and that we too could be vulnerable.

In order to restore the equilibrium in our minds, we blame the victim. “If they deserved their ‘punishment’ then I am safe, because I wouldn’t have done what they did.”

A victim, by definition, is passive. Nothing the victim did can be the reason for what happened to them.

STOP BLAMING THE VICTIM

Between faith and hope

We might not all have faith, but we all have hope.

Faith is a belief in something that we cannot prove and is based on trust.

Hope is a want for something rationally illogical to happen, and is based on need.

We have faith in our doctors, but we have hope in new-age medical solutions.

We have faith in our relationships, but hope in our acquaintances.

Do we have faith in God or hope that there is one?

Do we have faith in the absence of God or hope that there isn’t?

Being right and being good

 

Being legal and being moral is not the same thing.

Is there something wrong with doing something legal if it appears immoral?

Morality should be a floor for launching off and not a ceiling to strive towards. We should not hide behind the fence of a technical legality when if it is morally flawed.

 People care what you stand for and represent, they don’t care whether it is legal.

And public figures....all the more so.

Trust broken

The disintegration of relationships - marital, social, political, professional and familial - is often rooted in trust or, more specifically, in its breach.

If I can’t believe what you say - be it a promise, an explanation or even a compliment - the seeds of distrust fester and our relationship crumbles.

The fear of emotional exposure and pain of our trust being betrayed causes us to build fortifying walls of emotional distance around ourselves. This protects us from pain, but also insulates us from potential love.

If we cannot trust, we cannot love.

The price of trust is vulnerability. The reward of trust is intimate relationships.

Fit to be led

We often lament the dearth of courageous leaders who take responsibility for their errors, yet we as a community punish those who admit their faults.

In principle we want accountable leaders; in practice we can only tolerate infallible role models.

If the paradigm our leaders are working within demands their infallibility, then responsibility becomes suicidal rather than admirable.

Perhaps what society is missing is not capable leaders, but rather mature followers who are ready to be led.

Social Snubbing

Why would deliberately ignoring someone or even pretending not to see them ever be a logical behaviour? What does it achieve and what is the logic?

It can only be fear; only anxious people avoid contact. Of course it doesn’t always feel like fear- it feels like anger, it feels like apathy- but make no mistake snubs are always anxiety driven.

What are people so scared of...?

The Facebook epidemic of Anniversary Announcements

Abraham Lincoln once remarked “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

Often we insist on asserting ourselves in areas where we are still uncertain, this being an attempt to disguise our doubt. The irony is that it is our lack of confidence that is inevitably exposed.

If I have to tell people how important I am it is a sign that I feel insignificant. If I need to tell the world how much I love someone, it is a sign of self-doubt.

Confidence doesn't need to be boasted, it is embodied. Self-assurance doesn't require a salesman, it sells itself. Love is something best held in confidence, publicizing it cheapens it.

“The emptiest vessel makes the loudest sound”- Shakespeare.

Blind spots

Blind spots are points outside our field of vision which, if not taken seriously, can lead to a motor accident.

Just as our vision suffers blind spots, so too does our personality.

Our psychological blind spots can be defined as areas in our life that we are oblivious to. They are usually the negative traits and habits that we are unaware of, but everyone else sees.

We like to think of ourselves within a certain frame of reference, composed of many positive and valuable character traits. Unfortunately we seldom live up the standards that we tell others we subscribe to.

We would like to be someone admired by all, but often our insecurity that others have not noticed our ‘greatness’ demands that we reinforce it to them. We therefore subtly brag of our non-existent noble character.

“As you know I never judge others...”

“I am not one to mince my words...”

“I always speak my mind...”

“I always see the best in others...”

(Ironically these statements are usually followed by the opposite action, one of judging or avoiding confrontation.)

Our inability to deal with our flaws forces us to persist in unhelpful and counter-productive behaviour. Blind spots are not bad, but they need to be regularly checked or danger will likely follow.

Those who can ­do. Those who can’t ­tell others that they do.

Character flaws can guide our growth

The current happiness epidemic, which demands we feel happy at every moment in our lives, has reached a point of crisis. It has become the new-age drug, addicting a generation. We cannot get enough of it, and even when we have the ‘high’ it is temporary and leaves us feeling flat once it has passed.

We are made to feel inferior and insecure if we cannot reach the level of the perceived happiness of our Facebook friends. A moment of sadness is viewed as intolerable and we seek the support of friends and therapists to rescue us from this melancholy.

If negative emotions are so unwanted what service to they fulfil? Are they to be compared to a disease whose only task is to be eradicated?

Negative emotions necessitate that we confront imperfections within the world and within ourselves.  To live optimally in the world and endure its challenges, it's necessary to engage the full range of psychological states that we have inherited as humans. 

Anger is not necessarily a bad thing. It is the natural response to an unfair world. It prompts us to action; to stand up and do something about the distortion of justice. The danger in anger, is that much of the time the ‘injustice’ is only a ‘perception’ of injustice and should therefore be discounted whereas real injustice demands action.

Anger drove the civil rights movement, the end of apartheid and the creation of revolutions.                It can motivate positive action.

Guilt forces us to turn inwards and examine what led us to such a state and what we need to do in order to fix it. It can motivate us to make amends.

Envy demands that we ‘up our game’ and push ourselves to realise our neglected inner potential.

Without fear we would become uncritical risk takers and pathetically endanger ourselves.

 Frustration forces us to look at problems from a new angle and promotes innovation and ingenuity.

Sadness encourages us to see life in perspective; to think rationally and appreciate the small things.

Every negative emotion brings with it a groundswell of opportunities, avoiding ‘bad’ emotions means also successfully avoiding potential opportunities for real happiness.

Enablers

One of the most insightful books that i have read dealing with the complexity of the human mind actually focussed on addictions. ‘Addictive thinking’ was written by the renown Psychiatrist,  Rabbi Dr Abraham J Twersky, and in it he attempts to explain the distorted logic of the addict; rationalising their  behaviour,  defining triggers and situations that lead the addict down the inevitable path of regression.

But the most compelling and confronting point that he makes, and it would appear to be the consensus, is that it takes two to tango.

Addicts need enablers or co-dependants to allow them to continue. The enabler is usually close family to set up the necessary social infrastructure and support that instead of helping the addict, further ensure that the cycle of addiction is perpetuated.

The enabler starts initially by willingly turning a blind eye to the addiction. Then he/she starts justifying to himself and others that the behaviours are normal ‘considering the circumstances’; things are tough at work, he hasn’t been well, family problems etc. The enabler even lands up covering for the addict, making excuses for their anti-social behaviour.

These are the initial steps, but in time the enablers are forced to confront the reality that they are dealing with an addict.

Unfortunately this is not where the story ends. The co-dependants seek help and guidance, they are encouraged to take a firm stand on certain behaviours. Others, family and friends, are rallied to support the co-dependent. Together they demand that the addict make the necessary changes to their life...or else.

Or else what?

I’ll leave you, I’ll call the police, I’ll abandon you. Every threat under the sun.

And it is at this point that the real tragedy hits home. The addict calls their bluff. He succumbs to his addiction- yet they are still there, they don’t abandon him or leave him or call the police. So the addict never changes because he knows that he will never be rejected and he manipulates anyone who will allow him to.

The sad reality is that the co-dependent is as sick as the addict. Both of them are caught in a downward spiral of self-defeating behaviours that are seldom corrected.

Replace the word addict with Domestic violence, anger management, ungrateful children or any other dysfunctional relationship you witness or experience.

YOU are NOT the problem, but you are enabling it- willingly or unconsciously.