A few days before, another co-worker had made a point that is related. We were talking about having children (neither of us do) and mentioned that he'd noticed that people who have children rarely seem to be concerned about stuff like climate change---even though he thought that if you did have them, the logical thing would be to be totally freaked out about how environmental catastrophes would affect your progeny.
This got me thinking about the huge swath of people in our society---perhaps even the majority---who don't seem to really care much about things that can and do have enormous impact on their lives. Why is this the case? I think I've come up with a hypothesis that might explain part of the problem. To explain it, I'm going to have to talk about a modern therapeutic tool that is based on ancient Roman philosophy.
&&&&
I was listening to "The Sunday Edition" podcast today and it contained an interview between Michael Enright and Jay Rosen about how the media has covered Mueller's investigation of Donald Trump, and, the greater issues that the Trump presidency raises for journalism in general. It is an interesting conversation and I'd recommend it to readers. It ends with an observation: Rosen suggests that as media institutions continue to wither and die, citizens are going to have to develop personal connections to individual journalists---bypassing both large corporations and advertising. This is obviously something I support, which is why I put out "The Guelph-Back-Grounder" and suggest that readers share it on social media as well as subscribe through Patreon or put some money in the Tip Jar.
Another related issue comes from the latest Liberal budget which offers financial support for the media. It turns out that the way this support is designed it will never be anything more than a mechanism to prop up existing legacy media. Your tax dollars will go to "The Toronto Star", "The Globe and Mail", and,---gag---"The Toronto Sun". Not a penny will go to "The Back-Grounder" or any other "indie" or "citizen media". This is disappointing, but of course, not surprising.
&&&&
One of the most effective modern tools for psychotherapy, cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), is based on the idea that our mind is not the atomic whole that Christianity and our criminal justice system assumes, but rather a complex homeostatic entity where different elements---logic, emotions, hormones, past history, etc---interact in order to create the illusion of unitary consciousness. The key issue here is that one part of that community has a limited ability to change what other parts focus on and this can have long term consequences for our mental health.
That is to say we have an ability to choose to obsess about the injustices of the past, worry about the future; or instead, choose to focus on the here-and-now. In addition, we can learn to control our emotions by developing habits and tactics aimed at breaking up the destructive patterns of behaviour that can form in relationships. One practical way of, for example, diffusing anxiety is to develop the habit of paying attention to where you have centered your attention. People who are anxious tend to fixate on their own body and become oblivious to their surroundings---"is my fly done up?" "Should I have my legs crossed?" "Is my hair mussed up?" And so on. The idea is to force yourself to instead change your focus of attention to the person you are speaking with. "That guy sure has a nice smile." "That sweater might be a bit warm for this hall." "Where did she get those shoes?" Studies have shown that switching attention like this does wonders to lessen anxiety.
This sort of work doesn't just take place within the minds of people, it can also be useful for redirecting dysfunctional relationships. For example, I once heard of a man who had a mother who tended to save up all her frustrations and anger about his siblings and "dump" them on him whenever he came to visit. As a result, he absolutely hated visiting her and even started to get migraine headaches on the rare occasions he did. His therapist suggested he could "short-circuit" the dynamic between mother and son if he always brought her a gift---like flowers---to "deflect" her habit of using him to vent all her negativity. The idea is that when she was ready to start to complain, the gift pushed her to instead feel grateful for the roses and occupied her mind as she put them in a vase. This offered a "breathing space" where the son might have a chance to change the conversation towards something more positive.
&&&&
The two psychologists who developed this system: Aaron T. Beck and Albert Ellis both acknowledge that the Greco-Roman practical philosophy of Stoicism was instrumental to developing this therapy.
What the ancient Stoics focused on was the ability of one part of the mind to influence other parts through the use of discursive, logical reasoning.
Here are a few examples of the Stoic worldview encapsulated in pithy quotes:
&&&&
The reason I've mentioned both Cognitive Behaviour Therapy and Stoicism is because it seems to me that lots of people in our society are doing something similar when it comes to distressing social trends. As near as I can tell, many parents are choosing to avoid thinking about the awful and increasingly frantic news that comes from the scientific community about climate change. They aren't doing this as a conscious form of therapy, but simply because it hurts to think about raising children to live in a world that will become more and more miserable as every year goes by. Similarly, it has to be pretty scary for a person of colour to contemplate that some white nationalist gun nut can pop out of the shadows to kill them and their friends pretty much at any given moment.
There is nothing wrong with developing strategies for exerting some control over your emotions. It is debilitating to constantly feel dread about the future. The problem is, however, that if too many people use this tactic too often, it is tremendously dangerous to society. To understand this point, consider the difference between Stoicism and the earlier Greek philosophers like Socrates and Plato. I'd suggest that they would be appalled by the Stoics because it was aimed at learning to accommodate yourself to a world where you have absolutely zero influence over the community. And that's the difference between the Athenian Democracy and the Roman Empire. Socrates was a citizen of a society where it was expected that he would take part in a collective decision-making process and where he had actually fought as a foot soldier in order to promote Athenian policy. Plato's most famous work's title is usually translated as The Republic, but a much more accurate translation would be The Polis---which could be translated as "the self-governing community", which is where words like "politics", "policy", and, "police" come from.
In contrast, the Stoic philosophers lived in a huge Empire which was ruled by an autocratic despot---the Emperor. There were "citizens" in the Empire, but this was simply a legal designation that conferred certain privileges on the bearer---with no responsibilities or authority. In fact, I've heard that the Empire was so fearful of collective decision-making that it actually banned volunteer fire departments because this would encourage people to think that their city belonged to them. The army wasn't composed of citizen heavy infantry, but rather career soldiers who were schooled in "professionalism", loyalty to their unit and commander, and, paid in land and citizenship once they had finished their term of service.
&&&&
We live in strange times. On the one hand, we live in an era where the political community (ie: Plato's Polis) has expanded dramatically in many different ways. Gays, women, people of colour, etc, have many more rights than before. At the same time, however, masses of people feel that they live in a huge, booming, complex world where they have absolutely no influence at all. They believe that "all politicians are the same" and that our democratic institutions are not much more than a sham. They also increasingly reflexively dismiss any and all news coverage as being "fake" and consider any involvement in the public sphere as being a total and utter waste of time and effort.
That is to say we have an ability to choose to obsess about the injustices of the past, worry about the future; or instead, choose to focus on the here-and-now. In addition, we can learn to control our emotions by developing habits and tactics aimed at breaking up the destructive patterns of behaviour that can form in relationships. One practical way of, for example, diffusing anxiety is to develop the habit of paying attention to where you have centered your attention. People who are anxious tend to fixate on their own body and become oblivious to their surroundings---"is my fly done up?" "Should I have my legs crossed?" "Is my hair mussed up?" And so on. The idea is to force yourself to instead change your focus of attention to the person you are speaking with. "That guy sure has a nice smile." "That sweater might be a bit warm for this hall." "Where did she get those shoes?" Studies have shown that switching attention like this does wonders to lessen anxiety.
This sort of work doesn't just take place within the minds of people, it can also be useful for redirecting dysfunctional relationships. For example, I once heard of a man who had a mother who tended to save up all her frustrations and anger about his siblings and "dump" them on him whenever he came to visit. As a result, he absolutely hated visiting her and even started to get migraine headaches on the rare occasions he did. His therapist suggested he could "short-circuit" the dynamic between mother and son if he always brought her a gift---like flowers---to "deflect" her habit of using him to vent all her negativity. The idea is that when she was ready to start to complain, the gift pushed her to instead feel grateful for the roses and occupied her mind as she put them in a vase. This offered a "breathing space" where the son might have a chance to change the conversation towards something more positive.
&&&&
The two psychologists who developed this system: Aaron T. Beck and Albert Ellis both acknowledge that the Greco-Roman practical philosophy of Stoicism was instrumental to developing this therapy.
 |
| Zeno of Citium, the founder of Stoicism. Photo by Paolo Monti, c/o Wiki Commons |
What the ancient Stoics focused on was the ability of one part of the mind to influence other parts through the use of discursive, logical reasoning.
Here are a few examples of the Stoic worldview encapsulated in pithy quotes:
Anything in any way beautiful drives its beauty from itself and asks nothing beyond itself. Praise is no part of it, for nothing is made worse or better by praise. Marcus Aurelius
Cling tooth and nail to the following rule: Not to give in to adversity, never to trust prosperity, and always to take full note of fortune's habit of behaving just as she pleases, treating her as if she were actually going to do everything it is in her power to do. Whatever you have been expecting for some time comes as less of a shock. Seneca
Man is disturbed not by things, but by the views he takes of them. EpictetusThe important issue for Stoics was to try to step outside of the interior dimension of personal distress and look situation from a totally object, impersonal viewpoint.
Man is disturbed not by things, but by the views he takes of them. Epictetus
Nothing has such power to broaden the mind as the ability to investigate systematically and truly all that comes under thy observation in life. Marcus Aurelius
&&&&
The reason I've mentioned both Cognitive Behaviour Therapy and Stoicism is because it seems to me that lots of people in our society are doing something similar when it comes to distressing social trends. As near as I can tell, many parents are choosing to avoid thinking about the awful and increasingly frantic news that comes from the scientific community about climate change. They aren't doing this as a conscious form of therapy, but simply because it hurts to think about raising children to live in a world that will become more and more miserable as every year goes by. Similarly, it has to be pretty scary for a person of colour to contemplate that some white nationalist gun nut can pop out of the shadows to kill them and their friends pretty much at any given moment.
There is nothing wrong with developing strategies for exerting some control over your emotions. It is debilitating to constantly feel dread about the future. The problem is, however, that if too many people use this tactic too often, it is tremendously dangerous to society. To understand this point, consider the difference between Stoicism and the earlier Greek philosophers like Socrates and Plato. I'd suggest that they would be appalled by the Stoics because it was aimed at learning to accommodate yourself to a world where you have absolutely zero influence over the community. And that's the difference between the Athenian Democracy and the Roman Empire. Socrates was a citizen of a society where it was expected that he would take part in a collective decision-making process and where he had actually fought as a foot soldier in order to promote Athenian policy. Plato's most famous work's title is usually translated as The Republic, but a much more accurate translation would be The Polis---which could be translated as "the self-governing community", which is where words like "politics", "policy", and, "police" come from.
In contrast, the Stoic philosophers lived in a huge Empire which was ruled by an autocratic despot---the Emperor. There were "citizens" in the Empire, but this was simply a legal designation that conferred certain privileges on the bearer---with no responsibilities or authority. In fact, I've heard that the Empire was so fearful of collective decision-making that it actually banned volunteer fire departments because this would encourage people to think that their city belonged to them. The army wasn't composed of citizen heavy infantry, but rather career soldiers who were schooled in "professionalism", loyalty to their unit and commander, and, paid in land and citizenship once they had finished their term of service.
&&&&
We live in strange times. On the one hand, we live in an era where the political community (ie: Plato's Polis) has expanded dramatically in many different ways. Gays, women, people of colour, etc, have many more rights than before. At the same time, however, masses of people feel that they live in a huge, booming, complex world where they have absolutely no influence at all. They believe that "all politicians are the same" and that our democratic institutions are not much more than a sham. They also increasingly reflexively dismiss any and all news coverage as being "fake" and consider any involvement in the public sphere as being a total and utter waste of time and effort.
 |
| This mural used to grace the side of the building now home to the Breezy Corners Restaurant in downtown Guelph, but I found it on a British Website devoted to non-violent revolution. |
I'm certainly aware of the limitations of political involvement, but looking at the governments of the USA, Ontario, Canada, and, Guelph only a fool would suggest that all parties do exactly the same things. They may only operate in a very small window of opportunity, but the different choices they make can have a huge impact on people's lives. Moreover, parliamentary politics is only a tiny part of the real political sphere. Most of the really important decisions that our society makes come about from things like community organizing, lobbying campaigns, protests, and, building practical alternatives to the status quo. That's how civil rights for people of colour, gay rights, access to therapeutic abortion, legal birth control, legislation to end acid rain and preventing the destruction of the ozone layer, etc, all came about.
Yes, listening to the news can be pretty painful. And a lot of it really is phony as a three dollar bill, but deciding to never pay any attention to it again is not the only option for dissipating that pain. You can be discriminating in your choice of news sources (like supporting "the Back-Grounder") and limit your consumption instead of cutting it off totally. An even more productive method is to get involved. There is no greater antidote to feeling alone in a hostile and frightening world than to connect with others in a community devoted to making the world a better place. It is always better to light a candle than it is to curse the darkness!
&&&&
No comments:
Post a Comment