Thursday, 18 February 2010
Consultation
Monday, 15 February 2010
What's the Rush?
I recently had an e-mail correspondence with my dissertation chair that brought back some fond memories. A particular day is still very clear in my mind: I was so excited thinking I was going to learn something new. My chair, Susan Hawes, had sent me back a draft of my dissertation with comments. I was reading my methodology section. I thought it was pretty good: being a good doctoral student I was very interested in matters of epistemology and ontology. In retrospect I was getting carried away with my own geek-like cleverness.
In the margin on a particular page there was a single word written and underlined. Tautology. "Great," I thought. I was so excited. There was some new intellectual puzzle for me to ponder and think about. Of course, as was frequently the case with Susan, I had no idea what she was talking about. She's the kind of professor who (at the time) seemed both brilliant and totally unintelligible.
I drove the 60+ miles home eager to think new deep philosophical thoughts. While I didn't know what the word tautology meant, I knew it was the study of something. Must be good, right?
Imagine my surprise when I got home and looked the word up. An unnecessary or unessential repetition of meaning, using different and dissimilar words that effectively say the same thing twice. I was mortified, of course. Mortified both because I was such a geek thinking I was going to get to be all smart and because I had written a chapter of my dissertation in which I went on and on about the same thing. This of course wasn't new feedback to me: my advisor for my masters thesis once wrote a comment saying "I'm reminded of a dog tied to a stake running around and around in a circle tearing up all the grass."
Some lessons take time to learn, don't they?
Anyway, back to my point. I clicked on a few links in our e-mails and went to some of Susan's websites (here, here, and here). Imagine my surprise when I was able to actually understand what she was writing about. She is no long unintelligible. Now she just seems brilliant to me. That's progress.
This has all gotten me to go way back into my education and think about the nature of learning and wisdom. I started college when I was 16. I of course thought I knew everything. I promptly got put into my place and received (I think) a D in my first every class, which was philosophy. Whoops.
Two years later, a Junior in college, the situation had improved. I thought it was so clever of me when I understood what my history and systems of psychology teacher said: the older we get the more we know what we don't know. I was clever, perhaps, but didn't really get what he was saying. Lost in the nature of my own cleverness, I was amused that I was so smart I understood him when I was 18. I failed to reflect on the very humble nature of what he was talking about.
And then of course there was Susan, almost fifteen years later, reminding me how much more there was for me to learn about what I didn't know.
I was always in such a rush. I'm not rushing so much anymore because every time I do I'm reminded how little I actually know. It's also rather unsettling to keep on learning new things and discovering how little I actually know about anything.
It's this rushing that I think is a larger problem. I can't turn the television on without seeing an add promising a quick fix for a problem, a faster path to financial freedom, and now even an education in "less time than ever before." Mirroring the world at large, psychology seems to be after a quick fix too. The field wants to create technologies that fix depression faster, resolve the sequela of trauma in the fewest sessions possible, and end panic and anxiety in six sessions of cost-effective cognitive behavioral group therapy.
I don't think these endeavors are bad: there is a lot of human suffering and humanity needs lots of tools to help address these situations. I worry about the unintended costs of all this rushing. Learning--and wisdom--take time. It's not that we learning something once and are done with it. We go over and over the same things countless times. Repeating them in different contexts, different levels, and from different perspectives.
What's the rush?
In the margin on a particular page there was a single word written and underlined. Tautology. "Great," I thought. I was so excited. There was some new intellectual puzzle for me to ponder and think about. Of course, as was frequently the case with Susan, I had no idea what she was talking about. She's the kind of professor who (at the time) seemed both brilliant and totally unintelligible.
I drove the 60+ miles home eager to think new deep philosophical thoughts. While I didn't know what the word tautology meant, I knew it was the study of something. Must be good, right?
Imagine my surprise when I got home and looked the word up. An unnecessary or unessential repetition of meaning, using different and dissimilar words that effectively say the same thing twice. I was mortified, of course. Mortified both because I was such a geek thinking I was going to get to be all smart and because I had written a chapter of my dissertation in which I went on and on about the same thing. This of course wasn't new feedback to me: my advisor for my masters thesis once wrote a comment saying "I'm reminded of a dog tied to a stake running around and around in a circle tearing up all the grass."
Some lessons take time to learn, don't they?
Anyway, back to my point. I clicked on a few links in our e-mails and went to some of Susan's websites (here, here, and here). Imagine my surprise when I was able to actually understand what she was writing about. She is no long unintelligible. Now she just seems brilliant to me. That's progress.
This has all gotten me to go way back into my education and think about the nature of learning and wisdom. I started college when I was 16. I of course thought I knew everything. I promptly got put into my place and received (I think) a D in my first every class, which was philosophy. Whoops.
Two years later, a Junior in college, the situation had improved. I thought it was so clever of me when I understood what my history and systems of psychology teacher said: the older we get the more we know what we don't know. I was clever, perhaps, but didn't really get what he was saying. Lost in the nature of my own cleverness, I was amused that I was so smart I understood him when I was 18. I failed to reflect on the very humble nature of what he was talking about.
And then of course there was Susan, almost fifteen years later, reminding me how much more there was for me to learn about what I didn't know.
I was always in such a rush. I'm not rushing so much anymore because every time I do I'm reminded how little I actually know. It's also rather unsettling to keep on learning new things and discovering how little I actually know about anything.
It's this rushing that I think is a larger problem. I can't turn the television on without seeing an add promising a quick fix for a problem, a faster path to financial freedom, and now even an education in "less time than ever before." Mirroring the world at large, psychology seems to be after a quick fix too. The field wants to create technologies that fix depression faster, resolve the sequela of trauma in the fewest sessions possible, and end panic and anxiety in six sessions of cost-effective cognitive behavioral group therapy.
I don't think these endeavors are bad: there is a lot of human suffering and humanity needs lots of tools to help address these situations. I worry about the unintended costs of all this rushing. Learning--and wisdom--take time. It's not that we learning something once and are done with it. We go over and over the same things countless times. Repeating them in different contexts, different levels, and from different perspectives.
What's the rush?
Friday, 12 February 2010
Friday News Roundup
Should Parents Spank Their Kids?
During my graduate training I frequently was told that I shouldn't take a direct stand on spanking and corporal punishment. It was suggested that taking a direct stand might be judgmental, might not be respectful of different choices about child-rearing, might not tolerant or understanding of religious views, etc.
In a recent statement from an the American Psychological Association task force, it was concluded that "parents and caregivers should reduce and potentially eliminate their use of any physical punishment as a disciplinary measure." Some things never change: the APA isn't taking a direct stand. One wouldn't want to appear to be judgmental or disrespectful.
The release goes on to find strong correlations between physical punishment and an increase in childhood anxiety and depression, and increase in behavioral problems, including aggression, and impaired cognitive development--even when the child's pre-punishment behavior and development were taken into consideration.
Muarry Straus, a professor at the University of New Hampshire, points out that while the evidence is correlational--not proof, the association is "more robust and stronger than the correlations that have served as bases for other public health interventions, such as secondhand smoke's relation to cancer, exposure to lead and IQ scores in children, and exposure to asbestos and laryngeal cancer."
Here are a few interesting facts, a survey from 2000 indicates that corporal punishment of minors within the home is lawful in all 50 states of the US, has been outlawed in 25 countries around the world, is legal in schools in 20 US states, and outlawed in schools in countries including Canada, Japan, South Africa, New Zealand, and nearly all of Europe except the Czech Republic and France.
Interestingly, corporal punishment is banned in most juvenile correction facilities in the US yet continues in public schools. Why? In 1977 the Supreme Court found that the Eighth Amendment only protects convicted criminals from cruel and unusual punishment--not children in a classroom. A Time magazine article from 2009 wrote that "Texas paddles the most students in the nation, as well as the most students with disabilities.... Nationwide, students with disabilities are paddled at more than twice the rate of the general student population.
Interesting.
I too wish not to be disrespectful. However despite my training, I'm going to go ahead and be judgmental. I think spanking is wrong and that it isn't a useful from of discipline.
There are many other forms of effective parenting--forms that are much more effective that do not involve hitting children. These aren't easy parenting tools. They take time, they take planning, they take education, and they take the development of a ongoing relationship with a child. They are important. I like teaching them and seeing a child blossom and grow--and I equally enjoy seeing the children's parents blossom and grow.
What do you think?
During my graduate training I frequently was told that I shouldn't take a direct stand on spanking and corporal punishment. It was suggested that taking a direct stand might be judgmental, might not be respectful of different choices about child-rearing, might not tolerant or understanding of religious views, etc.
In a recent statement from an the American Psychological Association task force, it was concluded that "parents and caregivers should reduce and potentially eliminate their use of any physical punishment as a disciplinary measure." Some things never change: the APA isn't taking a direct stand. One wouldn't want to appear to be judgmental or disrespectful.
The release goes on to find strong correlations between physical punishment and an increase in childhood anxiety and depression, and increase in behavioral problems, including aggression, and impaired cognitive development--even when the child's pre-punishment behavior and development were taken into consideration.
Muarry Straus, a professor at the University of New Hampshire, points out that while the evidence is correlational--not proof, the association is "more robust and stronger than the correlations that have served as bases for other public health interventions, such as secondhand smoke's relation to cancer, exposure to lead and IQ scores in children, and exposure to asbestos and laryngeal cancer."
Here are a few interesting facts, a survey from 2000 indicates that corporal punishment of minors within the home is lawful in all 50 states of the US, has been outlawed in 25 countries around the world, is legal in schools in 20 US states, and outlawed in schools in countries including Canada, Japan, South Africa, New Zealand, and nearly all of Europe except the Czech Republic and France.
Interestingly, corporal punishment is banned in most juvenile correction facilities in the US yet continues in public schools. Why? In 1977 the Supreme Court found that the Eighth Amendment only protects convicted criminals from cruel and unusual punishment--not children in a classroom. A Time magazine article from 2009 wrote that "Texas paddles the most students in the nation, as well as the most students with disabilities.... Nationwide, students with disabilities are paddled at more than twice the rate of the general student population.
Interesting.
I too wish not to be disrespectful. However despite my training, I'm going to go ahead and be judgmental. I think spanking is wrong and that it isn't a useful from of discipline.
There are many other forms of effective parenting--forms that are much more effective that do not involve hitting children. These aren't easy parenting tools. They take time, they take planning, they take education, and they take the development of a ongoing relationship with a child. They are important. I like teaching them and seeing a child blossom and grow--and I equally enjoy seeing the children's parents blossom and grow.
What do you think?
Wednesday, 10 February 2010
Nostalgia Workout
Now here is a workout that you probably won't be able to get at your local gym: a nostalgia workout. A recent BBC News article said that "nostalgia can give meaning to our seemingly dull lives."
Why do we care about our first car, kiss, or visit to the ocean? Some psychologists have pointed out that we care because nostalgia makes us feel good. Once considered a sickness (the word comes from the Greek "nostos"--return--and "algos" --pain). Modern day researchers have found that remembering past times improves mood, increases self-esteem, strengthens social bonds, and imbues life with meaning.
"Nostalgia," says a researcher from London, "is a way for us to tap into the past experiences that we have that are quite meaningful--to remind us that our lives are worthwhile, that we are people of value, that we have good relationships, that we are happy and that life has some sense of purpose or meaning."
A lot of times clients come to me with painful nostalgia. Negative feelings from the past--perhaps times they were bullied, painful relationships, or abandonment by others. This isn't the nostalgia I'm writing about here. This nostalgia is about positive life changing experiences.
Here's the workout. Routledge, the researcher from England, says that people who practice this Nostalgia workout for five minutes a day have a significant increase in psychological well-being, feel more alive and energetic, and see there life as more worthwhile.
So, rather than practicing negative nostalgia today, how about trying a different practice?
- list cherished memories
- find photos or mementos from happy times
- close your eyes and think about what is outside the "picture frame" to conjure subtle details
- reminiscing with people from your past strengthens relationships
- take mental snapshots and save mementos of happy times for future nostalgia
Saturday, 6 February 2010
Friday News Roundup
Sedentary TV Time May Cut Life Short
In a recent press release from the American Heart Association, a research report from the Journal of the American Heart Association was released. A study found that every hour spent in front of the television per day brings with it an 11 percent greater risk of premature death from all causes, and an 18 percent greater risk from dying from cardiovascular disease. The findings apply to both obese and overweight people as well as people with a healthy weight because prolonged periods of sitting have an unhealthy influence on blood sugar and blood fat levels.
Keep in mind that this isn't just sitting at the TV--this includes sitting at your desk, too.
Which is Worse for Your Brain: Texting or Pot?
A University of London study done for Hewlett-Packard found that "infomania"--a term connected with addiction to email and texting--can lower your IQ by twice as much as smoking marijuana. Moreover, email can raise the levels of noradrenaline and dopamine in your brain by constantly introducing new stimuli into your day. When those levels get too high, complex thinking becomes more difficult, making it harder to make decision and solve problems. The article gives several suggestions: take control of email, prioritize your prioritizing, blind-side the date (approach it form an unexpected direction), do less, and unplug.
Yoga Is Good For You
A study published by Ohio State University researchers in Psychosomatic Medicine showed that women who routinely practiced yoga had lower amounts of the cytokine interleukin-6 (IL-6) in their blood. IL-6 is an important part of the body's inflammatory response. It has been implicated in heart disease, stroke, type-2 diabetes, arthritis and a variety of other age-related debilitating diseases. Reducing inflammation may provide substantial short and long-term health benefits.
In a recent press release from the American Heart Association, a research report from the Journal of the American Heart Association was released. A study found that every hour spent in front of the television per day brings with it an 11 percent greater risk of premature death from all causes, and an 18 percent greater risk from dying from cardiovascular disease. The findings apply to both obese and overweight people as well as people with a healthy weight because prolonged periods of sitting have an unhealthy influence on blood sugar and blood fat levels.
Keep in mind that this isn't just sitting at the TV--this includes sitting at your desk, too.
Which is Worse for Your Brain: Texting or Pot?
A University of London study done for Hewlett-Packard found that "infomania"--a term connected with addiction to email and texting--can lower your IQ by twice as much as smoking marijuana. Moreover, email can raise the levels of noradrenaline and dopamine in your brain by constantly introducing new stimuli into your day. When those levels get too high, complex thinking becomes more difficult, making it harder to make decision and solve problems. The article gives several suggestions: take control of email, prioritize your prioritizing, blind-side the date (approach it form an unexpected direction), do less, and unplug.
Yoga Is Good For You
A study published by Ohio State University researchers in Psychosomatic Medicine showed that women who routinely practiced yoga had lower amounts of the cytokine interleukin-6 (IL-6) in their blood. IL-6 is an important part of the body's inflammatory response. It has been implicated in heart disease, stroke, type-2 diabetes, arthritis and a variety of other age-related debilitating diseases. Reducing inflammation may provide substantial short and long-term health benefits.
Monday, 1 February 2010
Mindful Monday
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)