Making Ourselves Miserable

The most striking thing about this excerpt, "Making Ourselves Miserable," from Mark Leary's book The Curse of the Self is his use of extremely relevant metaphors to explain his points. He opens the excerpt with a reference to the Wizard of Oz, where he uses the Lion, the Scarecrow, and the Tin Man to represent how humans often long for things that they have had the from the very beginning. Leary Point's out that "like Dorathy and her companions in Oz, we create a great deal of misery in our own minds without realizing that we are reacting to our self-generated thoughts" and that the only way to fix this is to learn the same lesson that Dorathy learned herself: that the majority of our problems are in our heads and we can subsequently fix them ourselves. The ensuing article expands on this idea by detailing various emotions that come from the "self" (describe as your introspective voice) and what their detriment is. Key points include worry, imagining significant others, and attributions/emotions.

Worry, as described by Leary, is the concern for "what might or might not happen in the future." He immediately clarifies that in many cases worry is a positive thing; it promotes well being and prevents stupidity. At the same time though, it can be unwarranted and thus detrimental to an individuals life. In Leary's opinion, worry is only a positive thing when it leads to an increase in one's safety (for example, one who worries about the consequences of smoking may stop their bad habit). In direct contrast to this is the parent that worries about their kid being out past curfew or the individual who worries about their plane crashing; neither can effect the situation with their worry. As he continues his discussion on worry, Leary reveals what he feels is the original cause of worry: the switch from hunting and gathering to agriculture. While the former was only concerned with their present situation and well being (and was thus happy/worry free) the latter is always preoccupied with factors that might ruin their harvest. Farmers are constantly concerned with losing their crop to pest, inclement weather, or robbers. Leary's discussion continues on to include the ultimate worry: death. In this section of the article, he once again uses a truly meaningful reference to convey his point. Instead of the Wizard of Oz, this allusion is to Shakespeare's Julius Caesar: "cowards die many times before their deaths; the valiant never taste of death but once." The conclusion drawn from all of this is that unwarranted worry achieves nothing of value. It only causes pain.

A second key point from Leary's article is his discussion of Imagining Significant others. This topic ultimately breaks down into two categories (jealousy and pride/shame) but the message that spans both of these topics is this: humans develop emotions based on what happens to those they care about (their psychological appendages). Jealousy in particular, especially unwarranted jealous, occurs when we fictionalize on of our "significant others" enjoying someone else's company more than our own. Our "self" often "ruminates and ruminates, even imagining in vivid detail where the loved on might e and what he or she might be doing." Leary continues on to talk about pride/shame which are nouns that describe feelings of happiness or sadness that are inline with another's successes and failures. This proves problematic for one's well being because it means that, similar to worry, your happiness is contingent on factors that are out of your hands. The most interesting complication in regards to these two terms, according to Leary, is when our responses to other successes and failures are reversed. We sometimes delight in other's shortcomings and distress in their victories.

The final key point from this article deals with attributions and emotions. These two things are relevant to the rest of the article because was proven in the 1970s that while emotions are sometimes the result of stimulus, "research shows that people's interpretations and attributions play an important role." Accordingly, Leary highlights three aspects of this: depression, guilt/shame, and making matters worse. Depression is characterized by a "depressogenic way of thinking" where an individual is despondent about the future and disappointed in themselves about the past. Guilt and Shame are two emotions that often result from a similar events: guilt produces regret and while shame produce self-blame. Finally, making matter worse describes the scenarios where one views his reactions to and event as "a poor ability to cope with stressful events" and thus makes emotion matters worse. All three of these are examples of how our interpretation of events and emotions can have very unique outcomes.

All in all, this was a really powerful article that I loved. Every single issue that it covered really hit home with me. As I mentioned in my own introduction, Leary's allusions are powerful tools for conveying his message and every single one of them evoked a sense of relief (by this I mean that I was relieved that others before me, and presumably others after me, have and will go through the same emotional trials as I have). Perhaps the reference that had the greatest impact on me was one to Mark Twain: "our self fills our lives with many tragedies, most of which never really occur." Worry has always been a big problem in my life. The stresses of school, landing a job, meeting girls, and being a good christian have me consistently concerning myself with the future. The ideas that Leary articulate in "Making Ourselves Miserable" really gave me a moral boost and assurance that my worries are unwarranted/unhelpful.

In terms of the big picture, this article seems to be a little different than all of the others read prior to it. Although it clearly deals with constructing a good life for human flourishing (as the others did) this one highlights specific things that would prevent this. The best part is that these specific things are easily grasped: worry, shame, guilt, etc. This is in direct contrast to other articles that have had much more lofty meanings that were difficult to digest. This article reminds me of a book that to this day sits on the coffee table in my living room. The book's title is "Don't Sweat the Small Stuff; and It's All Small Stuff". I have never actually read the book, but from what I gather it is about overcoming all sorts of setbacks and in turn thriving. Such a message correlates directly to Leary's. There is no need for "depressogenic way of thinking" because its all small stuff. There is no need to concern oneself with parts of the future that cannot be effected; such worry is unwarranted and pointless. After reading Leary's excerpt and thoroughly enjoying it, I definitely intend to go home and read the book that has been staring me in the face my entire life.

When this article is put in context of the big picture, it seems clear that the ideals expressed in it need to be understood in order to construct a good life. The list of things that prevent human flourishing definitely consist of topics discussed in the article, including but not limited to, worry, depression, guilt, and making matters worse. I think that Leary's ultimate message is that the introspective conversation that is constantly going on in our head needs to not prevent us from living a full life. Animals do not have a well defined self, and as a result they simply respond to stimulus. We are faced with a much more intimidating task: controlling/taming the self to allow for this desired flourishing. We must not fictionalize situations in our head (resulting in things like jealousy) and we must not concern ourselves with matters that are out of our hands (resulting in things like worry). All we know is the present, and all we can do is try our best to thrive. As a result of Leary's article, that is what I intend to do: thrive.

Questions

What is the best technique for distinguishing useless worry from useful worry?

How can one combat impulses that seem natural and ingrained in their being? Jealousy for example.

My biggest problem is that at times I root against people. Not on purpose; it just feels natural to not want others to succeed so that my successes are amplified. How can I fix this?

A Blizzard Under Blue Sky

From her brief introduction found in Literature and the Environment, Pam Houston seems to be an extremely talented writer. Her credentials are extensive (a Ph.D in creative writing from University of Utah and a best selling book) and her subject of interest is unique (love, gender, and the outdoors). It comes as no surprise then that "A Blizzard Under Blue Sky" a truly compelling short story despite the fact that it only spans four pages (that's my kind of short story, hahaha). The reason that Houston is able to draw readers in is because she opens by introducing the underlying topic of the piece, then puts this topic on the back burner to make room for a fascinating narrative, and in the end ties this the theme and the tale together without making the connection seem forced. Based on her writing structure, the three key points of "A Blizzard Under Blue Sky" seem to be identifying/treating depression, persevering through a near death experience, and then realizing how the two are intertwined.

Houston opens her story by detailing what has got her down in life: there are bills to pay, work to be done, and men uncommitted men. The combination of this, and maybe even the haze of winter, made it so that "the machine that drives [her] is broken". According to the story, the doctor suggested medication to get her functioning correctly again, but Houston was adamant that she would never fix her depression with pills. She came up with an alternate solution: winter camping.

From here, Houston drops basically all discussion about her depression. As a result, the reader almost forgets why she was going camping in the first place. Instead of dwelling, she immerses herself in nature hoping to get the same results a prescription would have achieved artificially. One quote in particular perfectly describes her healing journey through nature: "When everything in your life is uncertain, there's nothing quite like the clarity and precision of fresh snow and blue sky." Although her initial accounts of winter camping seem jovial and fun (she even mentions that the clarity and sereneness feel like a forth dimension) Houston's experience quickly takes a turn for the worst. The sun creeping behind the mountains amplifies her lack of experience, her lack of supplies, and the overall lack of warmth. Accordingly, she is faced with a 14 hour sleepless night where her only concern is survival (for both her and the dogs). When the sun came up on Houston's snow cave the next day, she describes a feeling of pure joy and relief based on the fact that she is alive: "for the first time in many months I was happy to see a day beginning." She forgot about the bills, about the man, and about the depression. Life and happiness became synonymous.

The final key point of "A Blizzard Under Blue Sky" is the first two key points combined: experiencing nature is an excellent way to deal with depression because it allows one to have "remembered about joy." Houston asserts that nature forces you to step outside of your problems and embrace simplicity. Her story is a tangible (maybe a little extreme) example of this, but it undoubtedly encourages readers to use the natural world as a resource to facilitate "hopefullness".

I thought "A Blizzard Under Blue Sky" was a wonderful story and achieved exactly what it intended to. It provoked happiness, maybe even amazement, based on the fact that upon setting out Houston was initially skeptical about the healing power of the natural world, and in turn found how revolutionary an extreme experience can be. Whats most interesting is that Houston immediately turned down anti-depression medication. Most people would be thrilled at the prospect of a pill filling the void in their lives. Pam Houston had a contrary view: "one of the things I love the most about the natural world is the way it gives you waht's good for you even if you don't know it at the time." The important thing to note here is that she did not know how nature would heal her, but she had an unwaivering faith that it would even in extremely harsh conditions. Prior to reading "A Blizzard Under Blue Sky" my experiences with nature have not been all that rewarding; I have never had a life changing experience as a direct result of the natural world. Houston helped me to identify why I had never stumbled upon such an organic change before. While she experienced joy by letting go everything but the prospect of life, I have always gone into the environment with expectations and goals. I intend to change this.

In terms of the big picture, "A Blizzard Under Blue Sky" ties in directly with all of the other Literature and the Environment readings. This fact makes sense based on the fact that they were all specifically selected to be a part of this a book with the term "Environment" in its title. For example, Houston's work ties in directly with Thoreau's experiences highlighted in "Solitude". Both of these individuals found pure bliss through total immersion in nature; the only difference is that Thoreau's was non-life threatening and by choice while Houston's was definitely life threatening and was essentially forced upon her. What we can gather from "A Blizzard Under Blue Sky," and all of the readings from Literature and the Environment, is that nature is a powerful tool for contemplation, introspection, and healing. It is no coincidence that nature retreats are popular and powerful experience. One can undoubtedly experience God and do some meaningful soul searching while experiencing his creation first hand.

I think that this piece of literature is getting at a very important point: emotional fluctuations are inevitable but they do not have to be debilitating. In her story Pam Houston is going through a very difficult time, and her problems are very universal: love, work, and money. The natural journey that she consequently details proves that sorrow is curable (and that there is no need for medication). In terms of my life, I intend to take the lessons taught by Houston and apply them to my life. With that being said, I do not have the time to go winter camping on a regular basis, nor do I have the desire to, but I will seize any opportunity I can to expand my natural boundaries. This might include exploring a national park on a weekend instead of going to the movies, or it might mean vacationing to the wilderness of Utah instead of defaulting back to the same beaches I have always gone to. Whatever my wilderness immersion ends up being, rest assured that I will go out of my way to take seize it. Maybe I will experience a life or death situation and come out of it with a newfound conception of joy, but even if I do not, I will soak up whatever nature has to offer me.

Questions:

Houston mentions that nature "gives you what's good for you even if you don't know it at the time". The experience she details is pretty extreme. Has she had other natural experiences that were similarly rewarding and yet less dangerous?

I've got to know, what does "love junkie" mean?

For someone who does not have Utah at their finger tips, whats the best way to seek out nature that is of similar scope or has similar significance? AKA how do you find compelling nature in South Bend?

Time and Eternity/Books of Hours

In chapters three and four of Sacred Time and the Search For Meaning, Gary Eberle once again delves into a deep analysis of the meaning of sacred time, how we achieve it, and what makes it desirable. His investigation of the topic draws convincing support from many different sources, including mythology, history, and religious tradition. The real value though (or detriment if you don't believe in what he is selling), comes from his personal assertions about the subject of sacred time. Based on the fact that this excerpt is two chapters long, the Eberle's material can easily broken down into two key points. These points are first introduced in the chapter titles, "Time and Eternity" and "Books of Hours," and then are developed in the ensuing text.

Chapter three, titled "Time and Eternity," addresses the disconnect between the dynamic time that we experience and the eternity that we hope to one day embrace. Eberle opens the chapter by briefly talking about the paradox that is time: "everything changes and yet also remains the same." Logos, defined as man's ability to comprehend the unifying undertones of of the ever shifting world, is what combats this paradox. Several philosophers are referenced in regards to comprehending our dynamic reality. Zeno, for example, described things as an arrow in flight (the now constantly replacing the previous now) and Plato said that "the moving shadows are what we normaly take for reality in the world of time," but sometimes a philosopher will catch a glimpse of whats casting the shadows. Eberle then asserts that although the relationship between time and eternity is almost impossible to comprehend, ideas put forth in mythology come close to explaining it. The ultimate conclusion drawn here is that "the world of pain and death, dominated by the destructive aspect of Time, is not the be-all end-all" because"even we modern time-bound creatures may find a way to become immortal." The remainder of this chapter is spent discussing how this immortality can be achieved: through religious traditions, prayer, and meditation. The support given for this is that such spiritual practices foster the natural rhythms intrinsic to our being. His assertion towards the end of the chapter perfectly sums this up: "Religious rites and symbols, with their unique ability to penetrate and unify layers of consciousness, provide a powerful way to mark and effect life changes and to coordinate them with events in the outer world."

In chapter four, titled "Books of Hours", Eberele addresses when exactly it was that time and eternity became separated from each other. The terminology that he uses to describe this, "secular time" referring to our modern hustle and bustle and "sacred time" referring to solidarity with eternity, makes reference to the main point in the previous chapter: that religious practices foster a healthy understanding of time. In support of this point, Eberele highlights the similarities and differences between the daily planner of medievel times (prayer books) and the daily planner of today. The only real similarities he points are that each is "fancily bound and has an impressive clasp," and that both were/are revered extensively, unfortunately the likeness ends here. While prayer books fostered contemplation, reflection and the distant future, daily planners foster efficiency, sorrow, and the immediate future. The most explicit example of this transition from revering sacred time to revering secular time can be seen by analyzing the Benedictine monks. Originally, they were not constrained to a strict conception of time; they simply woke up with the sunrise, went to bed with the sunset, and timed there daily activities by the number of prayers they completed (it is important to note that this meant that hours were much longer in the summer than in the winter, and that time was contingent on the rate that they said prayers). These temporal practices were very conducive to appreciating sacred time because it was in line with natural cadences. Unfortunately, "the flexible, fluid, dynamic rhythm of the chant was being replaced by the steady beat of a the metronome" when the Benedictine monks instituted their first mechanical clock. Clocks soon spread across the world, and in turn, the transition from "temporal nonchalance" to the fast paced (daily planner) lifestyle would never be halted.

The combination of these two chapter evoke some pretty strong emotions in me. I was really amazed (and at the same time depressed) by the fact that we ignore our intrinsic rhythms. To me it seems like we are doing ourselves a great injustice by ignoring the sense of time that comes from within. For example, I have a terrible time waking up in the morning. This probably is the result of two things: poor sleep habits and my reliance on an alarm clock. I am confident that if I had been forced to abide by my natural sleep schedule (sleep when I am tired, probably sometime after sunset, and wake when I am rested, probably sometime after sunrise) that I would be able to wake up much easier and feel much more rested. Another thing that stirred up strong emotions was Eberele's commentary on the Benedictine monks and their temporal transitions. Prior to 1200, and the introduction of their first clock, these Monks lived a very envious lifestyle: one free from the pressure of deadlines, time restrictions, and tangible lateness. It was very sad to hear how this simplicity was destroyed by clocks. Eberele quotes Eviatar Zerubavel in support of this: "The replacedment of seasonably variable 'hour'...by durationally uniform hours...anchored in clock time alone was just one further step in the evolution from naturally based temporal order to an artificial and conventional one." All in all, these two chapter made me question my conceptions of secular time and envy those who have experienced sacred time.

When relating this reading to the big picture, one connection immediately jumped out at me. This was the term "kairos" which holds a place very near and dear to my heart. When I was younger, I went to a Catholic high schol where retreats played a big role in our spiritual lives. The most prestigious, powerful, and mysterious of these retreats was called Kairos. Eberle defines kairos as "moments when time presented us with possiblities of action, decision, and most of all, opportunity." The Kairos retreat I went on, and later lead, perfectly embodied this definition: we discussed christian action, evaluated personal decision, and saught new spiritual opportunities. The most important ideal of the Kairos, which ties in very well with all of Eberle work, is that we must capture the sense of eternity that we experience on the retreat (where it is very easy to ignore secular time) and apply it to our everyday lives (where it is very hard to ignore secular time). With the right attitude and determination, one can undoubtedly leave the retreat with a renewed sense of eternity, even if it only remains resilient for a little while.

Essentially what Eberle is trying to get at is that ever since the middle ages, there has been a steady progression away from sacred time and towards secular time. To me it seems like this has been caused by things that include but are not limited to: industrialism, consumerism, capitalism, colonization, etc. In terms of application to my life, I intend to take the things I learned in this article, particularly those about natural rhythms and intrinsic beats, and apply them to my everyday activities. Ultimately, this will be a very difficult task. The society that we live in is one dominated by secular time, with little to no emphasis placed on sacred time. Accordingly, it will be tough rebelling against these wildly accepted ideals. Regardless of these facts, I intend to. The happiness, contentment, and peace that Eberle says result from an emphasis on sacred time are definitely worth the struggle. At the end of the day, secular time is focused on material gain; the spiritual gain I will receive by focusing on sacred time will be far more beneficial to my well being. Sacred time seems like a necessity for constructing a good life and for flourishing.

Questions -

Are spiritual retreats a good way to capture this dynamic between time and eternity?

Did those who studied mythology realize that they had stumbled upon tangible explanations for a very intangible concept?

Is there anyway to undo the damage that has been done by clocks and other secular time devices such as daily planners?

The Snow Man

From his brief history presented in Literature and the Environment, Wallace Stevens seems to be break the traditional mold for successful poets. He was a lawyer, a business man, and accustomed to city life, whereas most traditional poets concentrated on much more abstract professions and preferred life in the countryside. However, what does link Stevens to poets like Robert Frost is his use of natural imagery to bring his poem to life. In particular, his poem "The Snow Man" encourages the reader to "cultivate a more ample perception of the natural world." Although short, this poem is packed with meaning and several key points that follow.

The first key point that I gather from Stevens poem is that an individual must make himself one with nature; not a visitor that is passing through, but an integral part of the environment. This point comes from phrases that Stevens incorporates such as "One must have a mind of winter," "And have been cold a long time," and finally "and not to think of any misery." When studied together, these three seem to imply that in order to receive the knowledge of nature, one must embody the environment and tune out all distractions. By utilizing winter time, Stevens is able to address some of these mental disturbances. If we are too busy thinking about how cold it is, then we will never unlock the valuable secrets that nature has to offer.

The second key point that Stevens addresses in "The Snow Man" is that if we do not accurately tune our senses to understand nature, then all value will be lost. It is from this phrase that I gathered this notion: "For the listener, who listens in the snow, and nothing himself, beholds, nothing that is not there and the nothing that is.' From Stevens description, nature seems to be a fleeting entity; if we do not capture its knowledge when we have the chance, then it will escape with no notice of us.

The feelings that "The Snow Man" evokes are two fold: excitement and regret. I feel excitement because I look forward to the next opportunity I have to just sit back, relax, and take in the world around me. The way that Stevens describes letting nature envelope you seems so relaxing, fulfilling, and tranquil. I the regret that I feel comes from the fact that I have not done this before. In my 20 years on this earth, I cannot remember a single time that I shut out all distractions just to take in nature. I have been camping, hiking, and fishing before, but I have never experienced the enlightened euphoria that Stevens describes. Despite this regret, I look forward to my next opportunity to take nature in.

In terms of the big picture, this poem relates very closely to ideas expressed in Thoreau's work Walden. In this book, and more specific the excerpt we read (Solitude), Thoreau describes the rewards of living in isolation. Both of these men (Stevens and Thoreau) seem to discover deep meaning and experience great pleasure while organically exposed to nature. What I personally prefer about Stevens viewpoint is that there is no mention of solitude and a lack of human relationships. In his poetry, he seems to describe a solitary vacation in nature, while Thoreau promotes a solitary life in nature. After reading through this poem several times, one outside practice in particular was brought to mind. That practice is silent retreats. The idea of maintaining a several day private reflection coupled with the presence of nature seems to be exactly what Stevens was encouraging. By not speaking and simply experiencing the environment around you, one could most definitely get in tune with the natural world.

Ultimately, this poem has a powerful meaning for me. I had a somewhat negative response to Thoreau's idea of solitude in Walden based on the fact that it encourages a lack of relationships. On the contrary, my reaction to "The Snow Man" was a very positive one. I feel as if Stevens' advice is much more moderate, realistic, and beneficial. Based on this reading I intend to take time to imbibe nature whenever the opportunity presents itself. I know later on in the semester we will be going to an arborium. This seems like a great chance to soak up my environment, but I also intend to take steps outside of class to do so. Next time I am feeling depressed, angry, frustrated, or even restless, I will go out into the world and shut everything out except for the knowledge that nature is trying to impart on me.

Questions -

If the chills and wind of snow are distractions, what are the corresponding distractions in more clement weather?

What sort of natural settings work best? or is it a personal choice?

What if my access to nature is limited based on my current location? Is there other ways of achieving similar results?

Solitude

Starting in 1845, Henry David Thoreau removed himself from society in order to live a life of solitude at Walden Pond. During his extended sabbatical from mainstream live, he wrote the crowning work of his literary career: Walden. This book highlighted simple living and self sufficiency, but the most important factor related to these topics that Thoreau discusses is solidarity with nature. As for "Solitude" itself, this is Walden's fifth chapter, and it essentially boils down to three key points.

The first of these is that solitude is a very positive thing in terms of one's development. In order to prove this, Thoreau contrasts his feelings about isolation with the misconceptions held by the select few people he encounters during his 2 year separation. These passersby and visitors question him, asking "I should think you would feel lonesome down there, and want to be nearer to folks, rainy and snowy days and nights especially." Thoreau's feelings are the exact opposite of this. He absolutely relishes this alone time, especially the "rainy and snowy days." To support this notion, Thoreau talks about how much he enjoys the times when the rain is pummeling his cabin and he is cut off from any sort of human interaction. The reasoning behind this is that such isolation and carefree relaxation ensures that "many thoughts had time to take root and unfold themselves." It seems as if Thoreau's success and happiness in solitude results from two things: oneness with nature and removal from human contact. The former provides him with a natural liberty, allowing his body to imbibe "delight through every pore", and the latter facilitates an environment for deep contemplation that would otherwise be impossible.

The second key point is that the isolation which Thoreau chose to endure is small replica of the actual state of the universe, which is in fact very spread out. This idea is perfectly summarized by this quote: "Why should I feel lonely? is not our planet in the Milky Way...what sort of space is that which separates a man from his fellows and makes him solitary?" What he means by this is that in the grand scheme of things, we are essentially solitary figures. This does not mean that we are to ignore relations and interactions with other individuals; on the contrary it means that we are to identify the vast separations that exist in the universe and in turn learn how to function on an individual level. Thoreau himself "found that no exertion of the legs can bring two minds much nearer to one another." Accordingly, it is vital that each one of us come to grips with our internal development.

The final key point that Thoreau brings up in "Solitude" is that the dynamic of our society hinders personal maturation. To support this notion, he highlights several common interactions with other people: eating meals together, conversing at the post office, and reclining by the fireside. All of these, in Thoreau's opinion, are far too common and reoccur too often to actually promote growth. His claim is that, "Certainly less frequency would suffice for all important hearty communications." Extended isolation gives each of us time to have new experiences and construct innovative ideas that we can later share with our peers. However, if our personal encounters are repetitive, mundane, and dominant, we will never come up with new material to discuss. Thoreau adds weight to these claims with a specific example: "consider the girls of a factory - never alone, and hardly in their dreams," and then later proposes that we should all isolate our selves with a mile of separation between us and the next man.

The feelings that this article evoked were strong surprise. It was not good surprise, nor was it bad surprise; it was simply amazement caused by the information Thoreau discusses. I was surprised by the fact that he had such a positive reaction to a solitary lifestyle. Having grown up in an environment where human interaction has dominated every aspect of my life, it is quite surprising to see that an individual found the maximum development to be in solitude. After reading the excerpt from Walden, I have learned new respect for two things: isolation and nature. Prior to now I have taken both of these things for granted. This respect for these two concepts stems from a better understanding of the positive side effects of solitary contemplation and the enrichment achieved by solidarity with nature.

In terms of the big picture, "Solitude" ties in directly with several readings previously assigned in "Constructing a Good Life for Human Flourishing". These related readings include Emerson's Self Reliance and Branden's "What Self-Esteem Is and Is Not". Both of these articles touch on the fact that our happiness, strength, and dependence need to come from within. However, "Solitude," and Walden as a whole, take this concept to the extreme. Not only should we rely on ourselves and be introspective for self-esteem, but Thoreau asserts that we should sequester ourselves from others: "it would be better if there were but one inhabitant to a square mile". The one issue that I must confront when contemplating Walden's ideals is the fact that solitude being beneficial is counter intuitive to contemporary practice. For instance, solitary confinement is one of the most sever punishments utilized by the justice system. Also, films like Castaway depict humans going insane when separated from all human contact. I realize that these examples are extreme, but nowadays isolation has many negative connotations that hinder me from respecting Thoreau's ideas wholeheartedly. Perhaps the problem is that we encounter the same condemnation and questioning, in regards to solitude, that Thoreau experienced in the 1840's.

With that being said, I think that Walden, and more specifically "Solitude", if taken in the correct context, can have a very positive impact on someones life. First off, the idea of unity with nature is an extremely valuable one: Genisis 9:7 tells us to "Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it." If we utilize the awesome resource that is our environment (not exploit it) then benefits we will receive are endless. These benefits include, but are not limited to, serenity, responsibility, tranquility, etc. Second off, isolated introspection should prove to be a very positive thing. Although I do not think it is necessary that we all live a mile apart from everyone else, I do think we should all work to spend a healthy portion of our time in solitude. As Thoreau suggests, this aloneness ensures that we have constructive contributions to make when we do interact with others. Accordingly, solitude not only allows us to develop individually, but also fosters positive communal relationships.

Questions -

Is it possible that exploring nature can be a positive group experience?

It is often said that having children is one of the most rewarding experiences a human can go through. How does that fit into the ideas put forth in Walden?

When alone, should one simply let his mind wonder? or should be focus his energies on specific topics?

Self Reliance

Ralph Waldo Emerson was an American and a man of many hats; he dabbled in essay writing, philosophy, and poetry. Emerson is considered to have been part of a movement called transcendentalism, which was characterized by a belief that there is spiritual state that far surpasses anything discovered through the physical or empirical states. In the 1840's, he released a compilation of essays called Essays: First Series, the second of which was called "Self Reliance". This literary piece introduced the idea that relying on one's self is foundational for development. Although this piece of literature is long, dense, and somewhat repetitive, its contents can be broken down into three key points.

The first of these key points is the need for independent thought. Early on in the essay, Emerson brings up one of man's shortcomings: the feeling of inadequacy in regards to personal thought. He claims that we need to welcome originality in our thoughts with open arms; in fact Emerson wants us shout our unique ideas to the world. If we fail to do this, Emerson says, we are suppressing the individuality. Being young makes this task easy because we are bold, loud, and fearless. With an increase in age comes an increase in apathy, and as a result Emerson claims that our personal liberty wanes.

Non-conformity is the second of these key points found in Self Reliance. This term/point implies that we must exhibit uniqueness in everything we do. Emerson makes it clear that we should be true to ourselves and not be overcome by the influence of our peers. The reasoning behind this is that one can only trully trust himself. Others are selfish and malevolent, and they have motives that are not in line with our own. By conforming to your peers, you are doing yourself a great injustice and putting on a facade for those around you. Why be someone you are not? This Emerson's underlying message.

The final key point in Emerson's Self Reliance is that consistency is misconceived as a positive thing; it is assumed to bring order, purpose, and routine to an individual's life. On the contrary, it is Emerson's assertion that consistency can be detrimental to a man: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do." The problem with a routine is that it makes an individual function on auto-pilot, without taking into account the world around them. By rebelling against this, one is open to new things, ideas, and adventures. Consistency, in Emerson's opinion, causes complacency while inconsistency breads creativity. In support of this notion, he references Jesus, Socrates, Newton and others. They were inconsistent and misunderstood, and because of this they thrived.

The feelings that this piece evoke in me are excitement and relief. I have always been a very independent person, so it is refreshing to hear from Emerson say that my tendency to rely on myself is not necessarily a bad thing. Despite the fact that humans are social creatures, Emerson and I are in accord over the fact that we both think individuality is vital for human flourishing. This is not too say that relationships are a bad thing; it is to say that refusing to conform to the wishes of others is a noble and vital cause. The biggest thing I learned from this article was Emerson's take on consistency. Consistency is always thought of as a good thing and is synonymous with words like reliable, responsible and steadfast. However, consistency might be thought of in a different light with words like predictable, conventional, subservient. All in all, after reading the article, my mind was static in terms of dependence and conformity (I believe that both are harmful to ones development) and dynamic in terms of consistency.

Self Reliance definitely fits in with the big picture, and I see two important connections in particular. The first is to the other reading for 2/2/10 titled "What Self-Esteem is and is Not". I think the parallels between these two pieces of literature are key to one's understanding of either. Despite the fact that they use different terms (self reliance vs. self esteem) and different approaches (former notions and contemporary notions), I think that Emerson and Branden's message are essentially the same: well being is something that comes from within and that we are in serious trouble when other people become a dominant influence on us. There agreement on the topic gives weight to both arguments. The second connection, in regards to Self Reliance, is to course material we discussed early on in the semester. One of the first readings talked about how humans are dynamic individuals and thus exposing them to an unvarying stimulus can be detrimental. Humans build strength and versatility when there is a lack of consistency. Although we originally discussed this topic in regards to physical stimuli, it is easy applicable with Emerson's third message: consistency is bad. It seems clear, with the support of these two examples, that a routine can be damaging to ones health. Just like constant light can ruin an individuals eye sight, so can consistency ruin an individuals independence and versatility.

With all of these things considered, it is easy to see that this essay's intent was to foster independence, condemn conformity, and denounce conformity in order to ensure individualism. The reason Emerson feels so strongly about this individualism is because original thoughts, ideas, and innovations are a direct result of it. Without individualism, nothing new and of worth would ever be created. This is without a doubt applicable to my life. My first instinct in a lot of situations is to mimic a person or process that has had success in the past. The reasoning behind this is simple: if it worked once it will work again. Having read self reliance, I will now be wary of this thought process. Although imitation may get the job done, it prevents originality. If I intend to be a mover and shaker in the world (which I do), then I will need to take these notions about independence, conformity, and consistency to heart. From now on, I will strive to create, strive to rebel, and strive to be unpredictable; thanks to Emerson, I feel as if these three things are key to success.

Questions:

In what situations is a routine okay? Or is a routine never okay? It seems as if there is probably a time when its alright to have activities planned out.

How does one rebel against conformity if it is all they have known for all of there life? And what if they are then condemned for their lack of conformity?

Where does someone like a mentor fall into the ideas contained in self-reliance?

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?