I looked up an article by Kenneth Minogue in which he discussed “politicized compassion.” Consider this quote (italics mine):

It is a politicised virtue, which means that it is focused not on real individuals but on some current image of a whole category of people. Correspondingly, it invokes hostility towards those believed to have caused the pain and misery of others. Public discussion thus turns into melodrama…. Further, our sympathy for the oppressed is a demonstration to ourselves of our own benevolence. The fact is, of course, that political exponents of niceness may or may not be personally generous and benevolent. Doctrine is not character.

That last line got me. You have liberals and conservatives advocating compassion and justice who are not generous in their own lives. Then you have things like “born again Christians” having a 27 percent divorce rate, compared with 21 percent among professed atheists. Doctrine is not character; it doesn’t change a person. Change comes from the inside out. Love, though, can really change people.

2 Comments »

I hate to admit it, but this is encouraging:

The regions of the brain that become active during mind wandering belong to two important networks. One is known as the executive control system. Located mainly in the front of the brain, these regions exert a top-down influence on our conscious and unconscious thought, directing the brain’s activity toward important goals. The other regions belong to another network called the default network. In 2001 a group led by neuroscientist Marcus Raichle at Washington University discovered that this network was more active when people were simply sitting idly in a brain scanner than when they were asked to perform a particular task. The default network also becomes active during certain kinds of self-referential thinking, such as reflecting on personal experiences or picturing yourself in the future.

The fact that both of these important brain networks become active together suggests that mind wandering is not useless mental static. Instead, Schooler proposes, mind wandering allows us to work through some important thinking. Our brains process information to reach goals, but some of those goals are immediate while others are distant. Somehow we have evolved a way to switch between handling the here and now and contemplating long-term objectives. It may be no coincidence that most of the thoughts that people have during mind wandering have to do with the future.

Even more telling is the discovery that zoning out may be the most fruitful type of mind wandering. In their fMRI study, Schooler and his colleagues found that the default network and executive control systems are even more active during zoning out than they are during the less extreme mind wandering with awareness. When we are no longer even aware that our minds are wandering, we may be able to think most deeply about the big picture.

I can relate. I won’t go into details about any tendencies toward “zoning out” that I may or may not (you can ask my wife). I will say that I’ve learned to think hard about important issues I’m working through and then set them aside. I know that the next time I sit down things will become more clear. What’s interesting is that the most powerful type of zoning out is not conscious (e.g., wracking my brain on something while doing other things) but unconscious. I wonder if the time I spend consciously thinking is counter productive compared with going on a walk or switching completely to something else?

(h/t Kottke)

1 Comment »

Is life a game? If life is a game, then everything I do can be measured by whether it helps me score points and achieve game related outcomes. Every person I meet, every conversation, is either moving toward a “win” or not.

Every group has different rules and ways to score. One of the tasks on joining a new group is to learn what game its playing and the rules.

I was on my way to meet someone yesterday, and I caught myself thinking about the outcome of our conversation. I wondered if meeting him would be a waste of my time (a “no win”). Rather than looking forward to the potential of a new friendship, I was evaluating him in terms of the game I was playing.

But what if there is no game. The “game” I imagine is my way of taking control based on an illusion that robs me of this moment and prevents me from valuing the person in front of me. You can’t love someone and use him or her at the same time, even if (or especially if) you’re deluded.

I woke up today and, before opening my eyes, reminded myself, “There is no game.”

3 Comments »

I was moved by reading this post by Mark Scandrette about his friend, Dieter Zander. You may not know the name, but Dieter was an early leader in getting “church” outside the box of American churchianity. I met and interviewed him many years ago when he was living in a cool house in San Francisco with a skateboard propped outside the door. For two hours he inspired my wife and I with tales of re-imagining what it might look like to follow Jesus together in the most liberal city in America. He left a lasting impact on my thinking.

Mark Scandrette writes:

Last year Dieter had a sudden stroke that left him significantly disabled with a speech impediment and some physical paralysis. Known and loved for his ability to teach and inspire, with an exceptional gift for making people aware of God’s presence through music, this stroke, as you may well imagine, has been simply devastating.

“What does the second half of life look like when so much of what you have known and been identified with has taken from you? And how do I comfort a friend who has suffered and lost so much?”…

(Later at a local pub)

We sit across from one another at a local brewpub, talking slowly, sometimes eating in awkward silence and with eyes full of tears. Even with his limited capacity for speech Dieter finds ways to convey his love, concerns and affirmation. I’ve come here today to pay my respects to a mentor, to receive his wisdom about the struggles and seasons of life, and maybe to offer some encouragement and comfort. “Mark, I’m in the winter, ” he says, “The spring. The summer. They were new and exciting. The fall was still colorful– even when you feel the chill of winter coming. But the winter, here it is dark and cold. You are in the fall, headed towards winter, where I am. We don’t know when or if spring and summer will come again.” I tentatively ask Dieter how he is learning to make sense of the unfolding story of his life. “It would take a long time for me to explain,” he says, “Its hard to talk about. Maybe you and I will go on a retreat someday and I will tell you. For now I will say– I know that God loves me more than I ever knew before– and that my family and my friends are so important– and I love the small things– the food and drink, sunshine, sleep, and walking with my dog. To love and be loved is what really matters to me now. It took me along time to learn this.”

Amen. What can anyone say to follow up after such words.

FYI, Mark Scandrette has written a great book called Soul Graffiti. I bought that book after hearing about Mark’s connection with Dieter. I read most of it, and it’s very good. But one day I was having coffee with a friend and lent it to him. My friend wouldn’t call himself a follower of Jesus at all, but he loved the book so much he told all his friends about it. He’s never given it back to me though, so maybe it’s found a home.

2 Comments »

The Economist summarizes a  study about living abroad and creativity. Creative people like to move a lot, so you naturally find many creative people living abroad. But according tot he study, it’s not just that such people choose to live abroad; the experience of living in other cultures shapes their creativity.

I’m not proud of how many times I’ve moved in the last twenty years since graduating from college. It makes me worry sometimes actually. Looking back, it didn’t start twenty years ago. I moved for the first time almost 42 years ago, one month after I was born. In my first three and a half years I moved four times and spent three years in Japan. After returning to the USA, I lived in a small town in Arizona, then in the deep south, and then in Albuquerque, New Mexico. What a study in contrasts! I was constantly adjusting during all my formative years, so perhaps it’s no surprise that I’m still doing that. You can’t get away from who you are, and in the end I wouldn’t want to. For better (or worse sometimes) I’m creative, always drawn to something new, and constantly resisting being fit into a box. The trick is finding out who you are, you’re values, and what you’re passionate about and good at — “called to do” — and do it well. For creative types, that additionally means finding something worth doing to completion and sticking with it while you can.

This gets a bit complicated, but here’s a quote:

…adaptation may be the key psychological element that explains why living abroad is associated with creativity. Because culture is such a pervasive force, impacting and shaping every aspect of one’s life, adapting oneself to a new culture—learning how to behave and think in different way—may make individuals chronically aware of multiple perspectives and approaches when dealing with mundane and novel situations and, thus, may be associated with increased creativity.

…an individual who has lived abroad can frame…a problem or behavior in multiple ways, understanding that it has multiple meanings depending on the cultural context… Thus, individuals who have adapted to multiple cultural contexts may be less susceptible to functional fixedness, the inability to see objects performing atypical or novel functions…In addition, adapting to and integrating a diverse set of ideas and behaviors may expose people to new ideas and allow for individuals to more easily go through the process of unconscious idea recombination (Schooler & Melcher, 1995), as well as conceptual expansion (Leung et al., 2008; Ward, 1994), making it easier to be creative. (h/t Sullivan)

Comment »