What Self-Esteem Is and Is Not

Based on his brief introduction to the article "What Self-Esteem Is and Is Not," it seems as if Nathaniel Branden is a leading expert in the field of self-esteem . He claims to have been lecturing on self-esteem decades before the topic became mainstream, which seems valid based on the fact that his arguments are both strong and mature (two things that must have developed over time). This article, from what I gather, is a condensed compilation of ideas first recorded in the several books that Branden has written. In an attempt to simplify the somewhat abstract idea of self-esteem, he breaks the concept down into three phases of understanding: self-esteem building, misconceptions about self-esteem, and awareness of the effects. It is these three phases that conveniently translate to the article's three key points.

According to his definition of self-esteem, "the disposition to experience oneself as being competent to cope with the basic challenges of life and of being worthy of happiness", Branden outlines a series of six practices that he feels will foster its construction. They are as follows: living consciously (grounding yourself in the pursuit/acceptance of knowledge and truth), self acceptance (allowing for development and reliance on one's self), self responsibility (accountability for one's actions and personal developement), self assertiveness (self truth regardless of disapproval or outside pressure), living purposefully (making and seeking goals), and personal integrity (being reliable and not hypocritical). It is the author's assertion that with the right mindset and proper emphasis placed on these six practices, good self-esteem can be achieved. The key here though is that self-esteem is not universal blessing given to all; it is a state of being that "has to be cultivated, that has to be earned". This idea boldly denies a claim made by other experts in this field: that self-esteem is developed through interactions with others. Branden claims that "no one—not our parents, nor our friends, nor our lover, nor our psychotherapist, nor our support group—can 'give' us self-esteem," because we must develop it ourselves.

The second key point in this article builds on the topic proposed at the very end of the first key point: most experts and amateurs have many misconceptions about self esteem. In order to highlight and combat these fallacies, Branden proposes scenarios (usually in the form of quotations) where individuals make uneducated claims. For example, he introduces the idea of teacher saying this: “Children should not be graded for mastery of a subject because it may be hurtful to their self-esteem.” Or (quoting still others): “Self-esteem is best nurtured by selfless (!) service to the community.” Having just read Branden's six practices, it is clear to the reader that such claims are in direct contrast to self assertiveness. Other misconceptions that he condemns throughout this second section of the article include the idea of offering up self-esteem issues to God, the thought that founding self-esteem on "external achievements", and the prospect that violence is a direct result of high self-esteem. Branden finds the third of these examples particularly outrageous. He cites a quote about this topic from a book that opposes his opinions, "We propose that the major cause of violence is high self-esteem combined with an ego threat [which is caused by someone challenging your self-evaluation]" and refutes these notions by highlighting that others have ignored the fact that such self-esteem is not based on reality and that violence is actually a result of deficiency.

The final key point gets away from what self-esteem is, and in turn touches on an awareness of what affects it. Branden starts off this section by listing some unhealthy things that may contribute to our pseudo-self esteem, but have no relevance to reality: wealth, presitge of spouse, car, clothes, career success, or golf club memberships. On the contrary, things that actually contribute to real self-esteem include living consciously, self-responsibility, and knowledge. It is his hope that we as a society will begin to foster understanding about this topic so that we may all grasp reality and achieve self esteem.

The article as a whole had a pretty powerful impact on me, and thus evoked strong emotions across the board. Self-esteem, as Branden sees it, is far different than anything I have ever been taught. The biggest challenge to my prior beliefs was when he pointed out that it had no explicit communal foundations; to me self-esteem had always been something that you developed as a result of those around you. Several quotes from Branden stick out as having a considerable impact, but the one that left the biggest impression was this: "It cannot be acquired by blowing oneself a kiss in the mirror and saying, “Good morning, Perfect.” It cannot be attained by being showered with praise. Nor by sexual conquests. Nor by material acquisitions… however, just as people dream of attaining effortless wealth, so they dream of attaining effortless self-esteem—and unfortunately the marketplace is full of panderers to this longing." The relevance here is two-fold: that self-esteem cannot just be desired (it must be worked for) and that there are individuals who capitalize on this misconception. Branden's take on this topic has definitely changed my mind. I now have a greater understanding of the true definition of self-esteem, whereas my previous notions were really pseudo-self esteem. It is clear that the latter of these two is hollow, empty, and incapable of promoting well being, while the former undoubtedly facilitates human flourishing.

When thought about in terms of the bigger picture, the most applicable reference that comes to mind is The Fountainhead. This compelling novel, written by Ayn Rand, follows the lives of two students as they leave architecture school (one because he graduated, the other because he was kicked) and try to make it as professionals in New York City. The main theme throughout the book is that Howard Roark (the individual who was kicked out of school) has real self-esteem while Peter Keating (the individual who graduated school) has pseudo self-esteem. As a result, Roark exhibits independence, resilience, and determination, while Keating demonstrates weakness, relies on other peoples approval, and is continually parasitic. The book really shows what solid self esteem can do. Roark's successes are monumental, his failures are manageable, and he is able to treat others with respect. Even though the connections with Branden's six practices are not explicit, it is clear that Roark's ultimate triumph is a direct result of self acceptance, assertiveness, responsibility and so forth.

The fundamental meaning behind Branden's writing can be summarized in two parts. The first being that achieving true self esteem is challenging but rewarding, and the second being that there are handful of contemporary misconceptions about what self-esteem really is. Relative to my life, this article is very important. Prior to reading it, my knowledge of this topic was limited and false. I intend to use my new found understanding in order to make positive life changes. The practice I will put the most focus on is self acceptance. My reasoning behind this is that relying on others opinions for your own self esteem is the most detrimental misconception. Practicing self acceptance ensures that I will my self-esteem will come from within. I will play to my strengths, take pride in my achievement, and remain confident in my own self worth, all the while paying no attention to others' opinions of me. I am positive that good self acceptance, and consequently self-esteem as a whole, will be vital to in my quest to construct a good life.

Questions:

How does one identify if there self-esteem is poor?

Is it possible to have good self-esteem even if it is founded in misconceptions?

Once self-esteem is achieved, how does one maintain it? Is it a constant struggle or does it get easier with time?

The Pleasant Life, the Engaged Life, and the Meaningful Life: What about the Balanced Life?

In "The Pleasant Life, the Engage Life, and the Meaningful Life: What about the Balanced Life?" it is immediately made clear that the authors, Joseph Sirgy and Jiyun Wu, strongly disagree with the ideal about authentic happiness put forth by Martin Seligman. They feel that although Seligman does touch on valid topics in his popular book title Authentic Happiness, he has neglected to include a huge part of the subjective well-being that stems happiness: balance. While one might have adequate pleasure, enlightened desire, and objective meaning, Sirgy and Wu assert that one may still be void of well being; satisfaction limits require a balance of life domains for this well being. In order to support these claims, the article is broken down into two key parts: a series of 3 postulates, and a series of 3 hypothesis.

Postulate one essentially says that balance in an individual's life correlates to higher levels of subjective well-being. This implies that they must divide their time, effort, and enthusiasm between multiple life domains. This postulate is supported by several examples, one of which refers to a woman named Carol: "Carol put all her energy in caring for her children." As a result, 100% of her well being was staked on her family's harmony. When things went wrong, the effect on Carol was detrimental; she had "over-invested herself in the family domain".

Postulate two says that every life domain has a satisfaction limit, and thus subjective well-being must be made up of the balance of many domains. Essentially what is meant by this is that once a life domain has been maxed out, it can no longer make any contributions to an individuals overall well-being. The easiest way to visualize this is by filling up an inflatable pool with many different buckets of water. The buckets are all different sizes and each of them can only be used once. In this analogy, the buckets are the life domains and the inflatable pool is well being. So let us say that your bucket representing work life is 5 gallons in size. Even if you have ten gallons of water (happiness from work) to put in the bucket, 5 gallons will over flow and you will only be able to add 5 gallons to the pool (your well being). In order to fill the pool, one must have the specific water that fills many of these buckets.

Postulate three deals with the idea of basic needs (those needs that are necessary for survival) and growth needs (those needs that are necessary for development). This postulate says that subjective well being is contingent on a balance between both of the needs; an individual must meet both their survival needs and growth needs to be happy. The article makes reference to the East Asian notion of the Ying Yang. This divided circle represents the "balance between fulfillment of physical (lower-order needs) and spiritual needs (higher-order ones)".

The second key point in this article is the collection of the three hypothesis. They are essentially postulates one, two, and three combined to draw hypothetical conclusions. Hypothesis one says, "People experiencing moderate levels of satisfaction from multiple life domains are likely to report higher levels of subjective well being." This one is pretty self-explanatory. Hypothesis two essentially says that by focusing one's life on multiple domains, one can fulfill a wide variety of developmental needs. The last hypothesis in a way combines the previous two: "People experiencing satisfaction of a wide range of human developmental needs are likely to experience higher levels of subjective well being." And thus, the theory of a balanced life is brought full circle.

The feelings that this article evoked were those of relief. This balanced life that Sirgy and Wu describe is something that I have always strove for; therefore it was comforting for a reputable article to outline it in such detail. The most influential and educational part of this piece for me was the happiness pie example, proposed by Firsch. It is a technique where one divides his overall happiness up into pieces of a pie, with ultimate goal of showing the participant whether or not their pie is balanced. A healthy pie is one where pieces are of relatively equal size; where happiness stems equally from work, recreation, learning, creativity etc. An unhealthy pie is where "one or two life domains" dominate. As a result of this article, I will continue my daily pursuit of a balanced life in order to ensure subjective well being.

In terms of the big picture, this article ties right in with the title of the course: "Constructing a Good Life for Human Flourishing" and the connection is two fold. Let us look at the first half of the title: Constructing a Good Life. The term construction, although never explicitly used by Sirgy and Wu in the article, is in the essence of their message. The whole point of what this article was trying to say was that we need to CONSTRUCT a life of balance. Several examples follow. We should construct a happiness pie that has sections of equal size. We should construct a balanced life with knowledge of each domain's satisfaction limit. We should construct a life where our needs are in harmony. Now let us look at the second half of the courses title: Human Flourishing. This part is pretty straight forward. In my opinion, the term "subjective well being" used by Sirgy and Wu is a synonym for human flourishing. And thus in my opinion, the course title translates to "Constructing a Balanced Life for Subjective Well Being".

This article has a clear cut application in life, but it is important to note that the ideas expressed cannot simply be willed; they must be worked for. Achieving balance in life is a difficult process that is characterized by trial and error, as well as triumphs and defeats. The only draw back to this article in terms of application to one's life is that there was no physical study done; everything mentioned is hypothetical (still, it is all strongly supported with fact). Accordingly, the authors encourage "happiness researchers to subject all of the theoretical propositions to rigorous, empirical tests." We are all essentially happiness researchers, and the going through such "rigorous, empirical tests" may be an arduous task.

Despite these set backs, striving for balance in your life is a worthy pursuit. I think the best way for me, or someone else, to go about this would be through deep introspection. In doing so, one could identify the life domains that are too dominant or too subordinate and then try to even them out. As I stated before, the happiness pie might be the most valuable technique for going about this, however, the most important thing to keep in mind are satisfaction limits. Even if excelling at a sport or at work bring you lots of happiness, there is only so much these life domains can bring to your overall well being. Personally, I intend to keep all of these things in mind as I continue to strive for balance in my life. Hopefully, subjective well being, or in the words of our course "human flourishing, will be achieved.

Questions-

The example of a working mom is given early on in the article. It says she maintains a sixty hour work week while also continuing healthy relationships with both her husband and child. How is such a feat achieved with limited time and resources?

Is balance the only key to happiness, or do Seligman's notions hold true?

I'm a little confused on the balance of needs? Is that something that comes natural or has to be worked for?

The Adventures of Johnny Bunko

"The Adventures of Johnny Bunko" is an off-beat manga comic written by Daniel H. Pink. Manga, as defined by dictionary.com, is "a Japanese graphic novel, typically intended for adults, characterized by highly stylized art." This one in particular takes the reader through the journey of a young professional as he learns six keys to career success. Although the illustrations themselves seem somewhat childish, the keys prove to be extremely valuable pieces of advice that everyone who is making career or educational decisions should hear. For the sake of space I will highlight three of them; the first of these being that there is no plan.

It is made clear that several people in Johnny Bunko's (the main character of the story) life told him that everything would work out okay if he just stuck to plan. His father told him that he should get a degree in accounting and that his passion for art could take off from there many years down the road. His academic adviser said he should apply to work at an accounting firm and that his marketing career would take off from there many years down the road. But Johnny Bunko's life is a testament to the fact that there is no plan, and if there is...that it never works out right. Instead, Bunko is encouraged make decisions based on fundamental reasons (reasons that have value but no definite direction) as opposed to instrumental reasons (reasons that just keep leading to something else). Accordingly, fundamental reasoning leads to success and instrumental reasoning leads to sadness.

A second key point referenced (the fourth referenced in the time line of the story) is that persistence trumps over talent when it comes to success. In the "The Adventures of Johnny Bunko" they go to a metaphorical casino where you bet on people instead of casino games. Johnny is asked whether he would bet on the success of an extremely talented individual who is relatively unmotivated or a relatively untalented individual who is extremely motivated. Turns out that betting on the individual who lacks talent but gushes with persistence is much more profitable. The reasoning behind this is that talent can only get you so far. True success is achieved with "doggedness" because those who are persistent are "often the ones who stick with it when others don't."

A third key point (the fifth one mentioned) in "The Adventures of Johnny Bunko" is that in order to succeed one must make "excellent mistakes." This is a little bit deceiving. It does not mean to make stupid mistakes or have ignorant mishaps; instead, it means to take bold chances and fall flat on your face doing it. Why? Because failure is a learning experience that makes an individual stronger. My film professor once told the class "I am not your professor because I'm intrinsically better at this stuff than you. I am your professor because I have made 25 years worth of mistakes more than you guys." It seems like such a quote is quite fitting in the context of this key point. In order to grow, develop, and ultimately triumph, one must first make mistakes and learn from them.

In all honesty, this manga evoked some pretty strong feelings in me. Maybe its this way for everyone who reads it, but the book explicitly stated the exact sort of struggles that I am going through right now (and it even included pretty illustrations for these struggles too). I recently switched my major from engineering to film. To me, engineering was a safe bet and it was lifestyle/career that had been drilled into my head from a very young age. Thus when I got to Notre Dame, I blindly declared my major as mechanical engineering. Big mistake. I had no passion for it. I had no desire to excel. I had no positive outlook on my future as an engineer. This lack of passion, desire, and foresight proved disastrous. I soon fell into a mild depression over the fact that I wanted nothing to do with engineering, all the while feeling that nothing else was practical. Since then I have come to my senses. I love film. I am in the zone when it comes to film. I could sit at a computer for hours, days, or weeks working with film and have no sense of time. On the contrary, I never found my engineering zone...and something tells me I never would have. Needless to say, "The Adventures of Johnny Bunko" gave me new found encouragement. I have abandoned the plan, I have found my persistence, and I plan to make/learn from many mistakes.

Quite ironically, there is an explicit relation between one of the key points from "The Adventures of Johnny Bunko" and something else in my life. The truth is that I agree with and plan to live by all of this manga's six points, but there is one point in particular that I have trouble coming to grips with: "persistence trumps talent." Let me explain why. I have always been an extremely resilient, persistent, and motivated person. On the contrary, I have repeatedly lacked the natural talent necessary to succeed in many aspects of my life. For example, my grades in school are above average not because I am bright (I am fairly certain I read at an 8th grade level) but because I put in night after sleepless night trying to get everything done. The feelings of envy that I have for those who cruise by on their natural ability are overwhelming. I would give anything to have half of their talent. So much so that I made a short film about this topic that I entered in the Mishawaka Film Festival "3". This film can be found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aszi2w9-ajw . Accordingly, out of all of the Johnny Bunko key points, "Persistence trumps talent" will be the toughest one for me to accept on my road to professional happiness.

Essentially, Johnny Bunko addresses a predicament that most individuals experience: should I go through the motions professionally and be miserable, or should I take risks and pursue what profession makes me happy. Having been lectured on maturity, fiscal responsibility, and job security all of our lives, it is quite challenging to rebel against the former. However, "The Adventures of Johnny Bunko" make it clear that true fulfillment is only possible with the latter. In terms of applying it to my life, the process of gearing my professional efforts towards these six key points should be pretty straight forward. Just for clarification though, I will state each point and give a brief description of my intentions for the future.

There is no plan - I intend to abandon any preconceived notions about what my future should look like and what it’s going to take to get there.

Think strengths, not weaknesses - I intend to focus on the things I excel at, and not get deterred by my shortcomings.

It's not about you - I intend to appeal to the costumer, but stay true to myself.

Persistence trumps talent - Despite my bitterness towards this topic, I will continue to be motivated, persistent, and triumphant.

Make Excellent Mistakes - There is no doubt I will make plenty of mistakes, but I intend to make them excellent ones and to learn from them.

Leave My Imprint - Trust me. I'll never let the world forget Will Thwaites.

Questions:

It doesn't seem like the 3rd point fits very well with the others: "It's not about you." The rest are very positive and encouraging, but this one seems negative and limiting?

What is the success rate for those who live this way?

And if success is less common than failure, will the happiness I get from shooting for the stars be worth it?

The Walling of Awareness

"The Walling of Awareness" is an excerpt from Jerry Mander's book Four Arguments for the Elimination of TV. His book as a whole, as described in Literature and the Environment's summary of Mander, is a bold criticism of technology and the artificial environments humans have created for themselves. According to him, becoming void of all natural influences that our world provides is "the great danger of the modern age."

The first point Mander brings to the audience's attention is the fact that modern society has developed a mistrust in natural observation. To do so, he highlights five studies reported on by the New York Times that make this mistrust blatantly obvious. I would describe the manner in which he presents this point as comically depressing (oxymoron?). Here is one example he gives: "A fourth project deomstrated that the juice of fresh oranges has more nutritional value than either canned or frozen orange juice." It seems that Mander's intention is to satirically critic how skeptical society has become, and highlight the man's ignorance of the fact that he is "one of many interlocking parts of the worldwide ecosystem."

The next main point that Mander transitions into is that a human's environment, as it stands, is almost 100 percent artificial, a fact that is detrimental to society's ability to rely on and grow from natural observation. He supports this point by through several examples, some of which are personal accounts and others that are more general. Mander's son once asked him "who built Mt. Tamalpais?" Such an inquiry seemed silly to Mander at first, but then he got to thinking about the environment children and adults are exposed to. How is anyone supposed to know worldly truths if everything they encounter is man made? Accordingly, it seems logical that a child would assume that mountains are man made like the buildings around him, or that organges grow in grocery stores like the rest of the food he and his mother shop for. The way that the world has developed causes individuals to loose all personal awareness. They only what they experience, which for the most part are objects, actions, and ecounters that are all man made.

One final point that Mander makes in this excerpt from his book is that our senses, which essentially define our existence, are being deprived by the artificially environment man has created. The example that he gives which carries the most weight is the current office setup. The white walls, the consistent lighting, the controlled temperature, and even the artificially produced white noise is all an attempt to keep employees focused and productive. While increasing human efficiencies, these office characteristics are desensitizing humans to stimulus. The senses are "abilities that have a range of capacity," for example our eyes naturally adjust to variations in light. To neglect to vary stimulus to the senses is to destroy the senses. The end result: humans live a mental life instead of a physical life because "mental images are the only stimulation."
The issues addressed in this portion of Mander’s book, and presumably the whole thing, were pretty shocking. He really brought to my attention the fact that most of the things I know about the world are either A.) observations of things that were manmade or B.) things about the natural world that were told to me through manmade institutions. The most horrifying part of this pieced of literature was the reference to the extreme form of sensual deprivation where an individual is in a temperature controlled bag, in water, blindfolded, with only air. The fact that one could go absolutely mad from a lack of stimulus is really scary. Obviously we are never really exposed to such extreme conditions even if we do work in an office building, but the example still has a powerful impact. After reading this piece, I intend to make an effort to increase both my natural observation and my variety of sensual stimulus. Hopefully such goals will be feasible.

Having combined all of these key points, it seems clear that the big idea is that man has tainted his own environment and thus is suffering the consequences of lacking natural observation. For me, the quote that really captures the essence of this article is this: "in less than four generations out of an estimated one hundred thousand, we have fundamentally changed the nature of our interaction with the planet." This is a pretty powerful statement, but it is indeed the big idea that Mander wants to convey. For me personally, this is pretty powerful. What this implies is that I am experiencing a world that is drastically different than the world that nine hundred ninety nine thousand, nine hundred ninety six generations of my ancestors experienced. Although shocking, it really makes sense. Their world was characterized by objects, events, and creatures that devoloped naturally over millions of years; our world is characterized by objects, events, and creatures that have been hastily man made in the past one hundred. What baffles me is that up until now, such a concept had never been brought to my attention prior to this. I had never stopped to think about how I had never seen an apple growing on a tree, and thus I just trusted what they told me in the textbooks. This ignorance is scary; do I not no one thing first hand from nature?

Mander's message is definitely meaningful. It brings awareness to seemingly endless influence that man made things have on man, and the absolute lack of natural observation that exists in society. I found Mander's message very similar to something we read in my Intro to Mechanical Engineering Class. The interesting thing though is that the book we read, called The Existential Pleasures of Engineering, argued the exact opposite. This text talked about how factory work and the industrial revolution created much more fulfilling work for people than hunting and gathering or farming. Its claim was that technology gives people purpose, and the production of new technology is what people really want to do with there time. If he had written this book/article earlier, Mander would have been considered what the author of The Existential Pleasures of Engineering referred to as an "anti-technologist" or one who believes that the push for new technology is ruing our society. The authors argument in this textbook is that technology provides many positive things: fulfilling work, following up on God's request to subdue the earth, and creating jobs and wealth for those in need. It would be quite interesting what the authors of each of these respective books would have to say to each other.

Despite the fact that his meaning is clear, its applicability is more of a gray area. There is little to no chance that Mander's ideals will ever be adopted by the majority of mankind. With that being said, it is important to note that breaking away from the conventional norms would require societal cooperation. One could adopt a lifestyle free of "Sensory Depriving Environments" and "Mediated Environments" but they would be presumably be solitary, relationship-less, and deprived. Plus, man is a social creature and thus would need human to human interactions that would be impossible while living on your own. In my opinion, the best way to apply this material to my life would be selectively. For instance, speak out against an office setting where all aspects of design deprive your sense. Also, make an extra effort to observe nature and do your best to share such experiences with others (especially your kids). This way one would not need to be ostracized from the rest of society, but would still be in tune with the natural world as best as he or she could.

Here are my questions for Mander, or just in general:

So what is the solution? How do either overcome these man made obstacles? Or do we have to start all over again?

You fight against widely accepted practices and technologies, and yet you enjoy coffee that was undoubtedly made by a machine? And you typed this book on a computer?

Is there a possibility of being observant of nature without disowning man's creations?

More, Better, Faster - Living at Digital Hyperspeed

In his blog about the healthy home, David Boiller writes an entry entitled "More, Better, Faster - Living at Digital Hyperspeed." Essentially, it questions what is being sacrificed by the faced paced lifestyles that society tends to lead. A good majority of this entry details the views and research of David M. Levy on the subject of "No Time to Think", but Boiller adds weight to the subject by infusing his own opinions.

The first key point brought up in the article is that the technological devices that were intended to help everyone connect have in turn made us distant from other humans information. Boiller quotes Levy in saying, “We now have the most remarkable tools for teaching and learning the world has ever known. How is it that we have less time to think than ever before?” This claim is applicable in two situations. First on a person to information level and second on a person to person level. The former implies that technology has made us distant from pure knowledge and the latter implies that technology has had detrimental effects on the dynamic of relationships. This degradation of person to person interaction is blatantly obvious if one considers how facebook, twitter, and text messaging has caused a severe decline in face to face interaction.

The second key point in this article addresses the fact that humans no longer have time to stop and think because they are too bogged down with things that require urgent responses. In the words of the article, fast time activities have a tendency to trump things such as "reflection, play, and long term relationships." This idea transitions into the topic of how the world has become a place of 24/7 total work. These high speed labors have now completely replaced slow-time alternatives. Accordingly, people are having to find ways to cope with this lifestyle, one of which is the use of "neuro-enhancing drugs" such as Adderral. Both Levy and Boiler find the fact that people feel the need to use chemicals to enable to keep up truly disturbing. Not only are individuals depriving them of valuable activities such as time for reflections, but now they are actually artificially enhancing their body functions to increase efficiency even more. Boiler in the end asserts that these trends toward a high speed lifestyle are scaring, dangerous and need to be stopped, but he admits that making any sort of change "is going to be a formidable challenge indeed."

Similar to the Mander's article on a related topic, information revealed by Boiler and Levy is a little bit shocking/terrifying. The technologies that they reference and the lifestyle that they describe are things that I am very accustomed too. It makes me question whether my education is focused too much on efficiency and not enough on reflection, and it makes me question if my relationships are fake based on the fact that the majority of my communication with friends and family utilizes technology. The scariest part for me was the reference to "neuro enhancing drugs". Now by no means to I take Adderall or anything of that sort, but I do enhance my efficiency with unhealthy amounts of caffeine. The work load that I am responsible for would seem impossible if I was not artificially keeping myself awake.

One of the first things that popped into my head that I feel relates very closely to second key point of this article is the use of steroids in professional athletics. In similar terminology to that used in the article, steroids are referred to as "performance enhancing drugs" while misuse of medicines like Adderall is referred to by Mander as a "neuro-enhancing drugs". The reason that athletes do take steroids is to keep up with the competition. Their paychecks are contingent on the fact that they are in peak physical condition and compete at a level that is equal to or greater than that of their opponents. Meanwhile, business professionals and students use comparable drugs to give them a mental edge. Their paychecks are contingent on the fact that they are performing with efficiency that is equal to or grater than others vying for their positions in the company or class rank respectively. We heavily condemn athletes for these performance enhancers, and yet the neuro-enhancing black market remains seemingly untouched.

Essentially what the arguments in Mander's blog mean is that technology and the mindset of society as a whole have brought us into an age where there is no time for leisure. Now this is not the traditional use of the term leisure as the article mentions, such as "golfing or movie going", but leisure in this context simply means time for reflection, aimless thought, and deep contemplation. This type of leisure promotes creativity and pure wisdom, both of which are dwindling characteristics in society. If these things, and many more including our sanity, are to be preserved, society as a whole needs to work to not be consumed by technology, efficiency, and productivity. On an individual level, I intend to take the things I learned in this article and apply them to my life. For instance, I will make a conscious effort to emphasis face to face interaction with friends as opposed to textual conversations. I will also do my best to cut back on caffeine intake as a way to increase my productivity. I am not quite sure how I will get all of my work done without it, but I will have to try if I intend to stay creative, wise, and sane.

Here are my questions in regards to this article:

Have studies shown that those who take neuro-enhancing drugs without a prescription experience serious health issues?

What steps could be taken to help society relieve its dependence on technology without reverting back to the middle ages?

Is there a way we can use technology purely to our advantage? Can it further relationships, foster creativity, and increase wisdom?

Chapter 10, Not Too Loose, Not Too Tight

The big ideas that I gathered from Chadron's excerpt "Not Too Loose, Not Too Tight" were all based on finding balance in one's life through a nine step Buddhist system. Chadron introduces the topic by describing how some people have a tendency towards being too loose, and others have a tendency towards being too tight. It is in the spirit of Buddhism that we are not told what is right, but instead "find out for ourselves". The nine part system originating from Buddhism that was previously mentioned is not linear; it is simply nine strategies for clearing one's mind and finding one's balance. They include things like "resting" "taming" "pacifying" and "one pointedness", some of which have several dimensions and all of which have a unique meaning.

My emotional reaction to this reading was a positive one. I felt strongly about the topic that Chadron covered, and the way he approached things. It stirred good feelings based on my knowledge of another individual who believed in a similar concept: Aristotle. He believed that true happiness in life stemmed from living virtuously, and that this virtuous living was achieved through the "Doctrine of the Mean". Aristotle believed that one must find the two extremes of an ideal are chosen and then the virtue is identified as the mean between the two (an idea that is very similar to the one in "Not Too Loose, Not Too Tight")

My intellectual reaction to the reading was positive as well. The excerpt exposed me to Buddhist traditions that I was not previously aware of that may very well help me construct a good life. My favorite aspect of the article was when Chadron talked about ultimately having to admit defeat every so often: "one pointedness". He emphasizes that at times we can be so overwhelmed that we really just need "a fresh start".

It seems that the author, Chadron, is expressing his opinion on the best way to "find balance in one's life." He achieves this by drawing from a Buddhist tradition that has universal appeal. It is my opinion that he expresses emotion very well. The excerpt is organized and detailed, but at the same time infused with way that Chadron feels about certain situations. For example: "but if aggression has its claws in you and you can't let go of those resentful, bitter, angry thoughts and plans, then you should emphasize the windy, airy, fresh quality of breath as it goes out, which helps you connect with freshness and spaciousness."

The framework is as follows: opening anecdotes followed by detailed list of a process. Each of the nine parts of the Buddhist tradition are stated and then described.

Just as in prior readings, the right brain is emphasized. This is once again in line with our class goals to explore the right brain. The article specifically focuses on right brain aspects such as subjectivity and synthesizing.

The author wants us to believe that this nine part Buddhist tradition is an excellent way to achieve balance in one's life. He attempts to accomplish this goal by combining explicit Buddhist directions with his personal emotions and feelings. The evidence provided is not very substantial in terms of empirical results, but the mindset that ensues from each of the nine parts seems truly liberating. This means that the evidence lacks some credibility but is strong in its emotional appeal.

One separate viewpoint on this topic might be that there is a more definite way of achieving balance than simply self meditation. Perhaps there is an adequate set of fact based guidelines for finding this balance, and thus individuals could follow such a list strictly. Evidence to support such a viewpoint would have to come from individuals who have achieved balance, and have a tangible recipe for it. Perhaps it would be a schedule of daily activities (exercise, prayer, communication, etc.) that would develop all areas of the soul. Such evidence would be credible, but very hard to come by. The topics covered in Chardon's excerpt seem subjective and thus tough to achieve objectively.

Ramifications of Chardon's viewpoint are as follows: without mental discipline, balance can never be achieved. Accordingly, the individual with a wandering mind and a short attention span would have difficulty achieving balance. Ramifications of the opposing viewpoint would be that developing an explicit list for achieving balance would be next to impossible. Such balance is a matter of the mind and soul, and thus transcends any tasks that could be written down on paper and then carried out. Based on these two sets of ramifications, Chadron's account seems more credible.

Questions: Why were the titles of the nine parts picked with overlapping names?

How often should these nine parts be practiced? Is it something we should take time for each day?

If the progression is not linear, where is a good place to start?

Sacred Time, Chapters 1 & 2

In reading the first two chapters of Sacred Time and the Search for Meaning, it is clear that Gary Eberle wants to establish early on his book that our current view of time is preposterous. He calls this view "the modern mentality" and adds that it "started emergin between the 1600 and 1700." The main idea throughout both chapters is that time, which we originally just wanted to be able to tell, now consumes us and it is supported by the way we interact with clocks. For example, we constantly check our watches while stuck in traffic on the way to work; we complain as our computers take a few extra seconds to download a file. Eberle proposes that there are two ways which time passes: vertical and horizontal. The horizontal is the typical way we imagine time passing, with the past behind us, the future ahead of us, ourselves in the present, and a constant/consistent motion forward. This concept of time is what makes our lives frantic, with an never ending desire to accomplish more in the available time (this is achieved through portable electronic devices, fast food meals, and multitasking. The second way of imagining time is vertically, and this concept of time will tie in with what a good life is.

This reading contributes to the big picture about the good life and human flourishing in two ways. First, it identifies the wrong way of looking and dealing with time. Second, it offers an alternative that is much more fulfilling and will undoubtedly lead to the good life and flourishing. This alternative is to make an effort to experience time vertically and to value your sacred time. Vertical time is experienced in "moments of rapture, deep meditation, dream states, or intense celebration" and it allows us to prosper by removing us from the unstoppable/fast paced horizontal time. Sacred time is a similar concept; it implies having an independent personal life where one is free to explore our own beings and enjoy freedom.

My emotional reaction to this reading was positive. It immediately made me question my fast forward lifestyle filled with gadgets and gizmos that prevent any alone time. The pressure of horizontal time is something that I am constantly feeling, and it is something I would like to try and alleviate. My intellectual reaction was a little more skeptical. Although everything said in these first two chapters, and all of the examples cited, seems to be very accurate, I am unsure of whether Eberle will provide a valid way of overcoming "this permanent state of jet lag" without totally having remove oneself from conventional society.

The author is expressing an opinion in these first two chapters, and that opinion is that being consumed by the passing of time is not a fulfilling lifestyle. He expresses emotion very effectively. The assertions he is making are obviously his own, but he gives them strong support with real life examples. One of the most convincing instance was with the invention of the telephone, where Watson's life was being disrupted right from the very first phonecall. The framework Eberle uses to convey this message is a series of anecdotes. He is simply stating opinions, with historical and contemporary support interspersed throughout.

In the first two chapters of Eberle's book, it seems like right brain is emphasized, which is in line with our course objective to explore the right brain. When he talks about sacred or soul time, the activities brought up to promote this are "dreams, memories, and daydreams" because in these, time does not exist at all. This coincides with the random and holistic nature of the right brain.

Thus far in Sacred Time, Eberle wants us to believe that the traditional lifestyle of non-stop work, multitasking, high velocity, and constant catch-up is unhealthy. He feels as if we have become slaves to time and that this trend must be broken. His message deals a lot with the fact that the technology that was supposed to maximize our free time has instead invaded our lives. Cell phones, pagers, and email are a constant intruder and burden. The evidence he provides goes back and forth between emotional appeal and current/historical fact. This combination makes his evidence seem both powerful and credible, and it is clear that all the evidence we need is in the world directly around us.

Another viewpoint on this topic might be that the hectic lifestyles we lead are a good thing. On one hand, it has turned us into an extremely productive society. We produce goods and provide services at very fast pace. The evidence for this assertion would be in the numbers. One could compare the contributions of an employee who works religiously to one who values his personal time, and the results would undoubtedly show that the workaholic was far more productive. At what cost though?

Buying into either viewpoint definitely has ramifications. If one buys into Eberle, it means they refute the modern lifestyle that is mainstream across the globe. You would undoubtedly be marginalized by society if you gave up on productivity, multitasking, and constant communication to focus more on your sacred time. On the other hand, the opposite viewpoint implies "constant jet lag". There is never a time to catch up. There is never an opportunity to experience time vertically. There is only constant push forward and a constant desire to cram more into the same amount of time.

Questions: Twice in the first two chapters Eberle has stated we can "overcome this permanent state of jet lag," but both times he says we need to know more about something else first. When and how is going to reveal how to achieve this?

As a motivated college student, is there a way to combine the high productivity lifestyle I will need to succeed in the professional world and the healthy lifestyle of letting time pass vertically?

What steps could I take to let technology not consume me, or to let technology maximize my leisure time like it was once promised to do?