Living Life in Reverse by Elizabeth Alraune
If you want to share this story,
provide a link to this blog,
and credit the author, Elizabeth Alraune
*****************************************************
Once upon a time, life ended on earth before it began.
To live life in the direction of birth was considered
the way to go because youth and infancy would be
the gift for living a long and prosperous life.
The elders of the community were revered for all knew
that without them there would be no society. They
had the wisdom of their age to know what would work,
and what wouldn’t. They knew they needed to
appreciate the gifts of life because over time
their lives would transition.
They knew that nothing was permanent.
But, over the years, as the generations continued
to move in this direction, many began to fear birth
and conception. Along the way, they perceived
their life slipping away, as they were losing their freedoms,
and they were required to attend school and
unlearn everything that they had ever learned.
As they grew younger still, and drew closer to birth,
they lost their ability to eat, as they had –
often remembering the delicious foods they used to eat.
As they remembered how they used to
be able to feed themselves,
they didn’t appreciate others feeding them.
Often people would become disillusioned by the losses
in their life as they got to the birthing point
of their dreams and relationships. By the time
they reached their late teens, many were cynical
and sarcastic…mourning the fact that they didn’t
appreciate what they had when they had it. Often
one could be heard to say, “Seniors have no idea
how good they have it. The wisdom of old age is
wasted on them.”
They also noted that the parts of them that
they admired changed with youth. They lost
their personality often looking at the
seniors with jealousy. If only they could
be that way again.
One day, the universe wondered if it should
reconsider the order in which life was lived.
It held a forum, heard opinion, and then
a vote was taken. By an overwhelming majority
it was felt life was meant to be lived
in the other direction. It seemed to be
the preference, as many feared birth,
and there had been numerous complaints.
The universe wasn’t convinced but,
listening to those who live life,
decided to change everything
– and let life be lived backwards –
to let people live in the
joy of their accomplishments,
to be able to build on them.
Many now felt that people in their
senior years would be able to
reflect on a life well lived,
and be able to come to the point
of death peacefully – there would be
no more kicking and screaming
at the time of departure.
Death would be welcome,
as they would have accomplished
all that they had come to do.
At first, people seemed to enjoy
the fact that they could live life “backward”.
It had been what they had been wanting all along.
It would be so great.
The first few generations died peacefully,
knowing what it had been like to
live life in the other direction.
They appreciated the universe’s change of heart.
The thing was, though, that as new generations
were being born, the awareness of the
earth’s previous inhabitants was beginning
to fade into nothingness.
There were tales and stories,
but no one seemed to take them seriously.
Youth became a troubling time because every child
was in a hurry to grow up. Youth wanted to
get on with its life. The appreciation of having
needs taken care of, and the appreciation of the
leisure of youth was lost.
Adulthood became one challenge after another.
People were more stressed than they
ever had been in the history of mankind.
If it wasn’t one thing, it was another…
and to make matters worse, they watched as
their parents became seniors and wrinkled
and then passed on, in mourning,
because they had felt that they had not done
all that they could, or should have.
Seniors began to leave kicking and screaming.
Death began to be feared. It was no longer
a peaceful passing from one existence to another.
It had become another reluctant
choice that people were making.
Seniors could often be heard to say,
“Youth is wasted on the young,” and
conversations ensued about what it would be like
to live life in reverse – wouldn’t it be great?
The universe just listened, but this time
did nothing to change the order of life.
“These humans! They don’t seem to get it.
Life is meant to be lived, period.
It doesn’t matter if it’s death first,
and then birth, or birth first and then death.
It’s what’s in the middle that counts.”
The universe always looked for
opportunities for people to realize this simple truth.
It worked on creating a focus on
something outside of the immediate human self,
for it seemed that while humans
were focused on one another,
they couldn’t focus on their death, or
the things that concerned them about the process of life.
The universe recognizing that fear and Love
were unable to co-exist, created many opportunities
for the expression of Love so that people
could be distracted from their fears.
People had seemed to have forgotten
in the middle of all of their concerns
about how their lives were being lived –
why exactly they were living
their lives in the first place.
When Love was ignored,
the universe got creative,
and provided humans with
opportunities to rediscover
why exactly they were here.
It didn’t always occur as pleasant,
but during these times,
as well as at all times,
there was always
an opportunity for Love to show up
and confirm the purpose of life.
The universe noted that while
humans had much to divert them,
they had the ability to focus on
only one thing at any given moment.
The one thing that people
could count on to feel good
with each and every moment that
their focus was on was Love.
It was this thing that would,
when focused on, would
give a human his purpose.
Humans were offered times to
be reminded of their purpose,
and to be reminded that it was
this purpose that was important,
not their life itself.
For the purpose is what
links one human to another,
and transcends each individual’s experience.
If humans remembered that
they were a part of the ever-present Love,
their struggle would be over because
they would recognize that the
experience of life comes through the body,
and that life is not itself the body.
Having this perspective would allow them to
experience the infinite and to
see and feel Love and beauty
in everyone and everything.
In its infinite wisdom, the universe realized
that there was no way it could make humans happy.
Only through the choice of a human’s focus
could a human be,
and truly feel,
content.
At each moment,
if you listen,
you might just hear
the universe whispering,
“What are you choosing to focus on?”
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Saturday, November 15, 2008
The Pale Blue Dot - Carl Sagan - A Worldly Perspective
This is extraordinary.
Talk about perspective.
The part that got me the most was
"The Earth is a very small stage
in a vast cosmic arena.
Think of the rivers of blood spilled
by all those generals and emperors so that,
in glory and triumph, they could
become the momentary masters
of a fraction of a dot. Think of the
endless cruelties visited by the
inhabitants of one corner of this pixel
on the scarcely distinguishable
inhabitants of some other corner,
how frequent their misunderstandings,
how eager they are to kill one another,
how fervent their hatreds."
If you would like to see the
total text of this video,
you can click here.
When we are being so focused on
our own little fraction of this dot,
everything might seem like a big deal.
Presented in this light,
it is all microscopic.
Definitely gives me something
to think about.
Talk about perspective.
The part that got me the most was
"The Earth is a very small stage
in a vast cosmic arena.
Think of the rivers of blood spilled
by all those generals and emperors so that,
in glory and triumph, they could
become the momentary masters
of a fraction of a dot. Think of the
endless cruelties visited by the
inhabitants of one corner of this pixel
on the scarcely distinguishable
inhabitants of some other corner,
how frequent their misunderstandings,
how eager they are to kill one another,
how fervent their hatreds."
If you would like to see the
total text of this video,
you can click here.
When we are being so focused on
our own little fraction of this dot,
everything might seem like a big deal.
Presented in this light,
it is all microscopic.
Definitely gives me something
to think about.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Is that "W-A-L-R-U-S"? - a Perspective on Words & Communication
Is that "W-A-L-R-U-S"? by Elizabeth Alraune
If you want to share this article,
provide a link to this blog,
and credit the author, Elizabeth Alraune
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A few years back, I went to London, England. I needed to get a passport-like photo taken, but the machine I wanted to use was out of order. When I called the company that owned the machine, I asked where they had another location. I was told, “Walrus.” “Walrus?” I confirmed. “Walrus,” was the response. I should have asked for the spelling, but the person had said, “Walrus.” I asked around, and no one knew where there was a “Walrus” until, that is, someone realized that “Walrus” was “Woolworths.” Apparently, the person I spoke with and I both thought we were saying the same thing – but boy, were we not!
Similarly, while I was there, I learned that elevators are called “lifts,” escalators are called “elevators,” what we would call subways are underground walkways for them, and what we would call subways in the US, are called “tubes” in the UK.
We speak the same language, don’t we? And yet, as you have probably realized, there is a great potential for misunderstanding.
In this case, it is quite easy to see how there would be an error. However if one did not know these differences, and did not know that there WAS a difference, can you imagine the frustration?
Asking around for “Walrus” was quite frustrating!
In a case like the above, it would probably be fairly easy to forgive a misunderstanding – and even define the differences. After all, most would recognize that it’s a different culture, and the differences are to be expected.
However, most people who live in a similar place would not be as likely to expect these types of misunderstandings from words. As a result, they would have expectations from a conversation, not realizing that they may define things, or hear something, differently than how the person who spoke it meant it.
What happens in those times when someone tells another “Woolworths", and the other hears “Walrus,” and neither knows what the other thinks they’ve said? Quite possibly there could be conflict, argument, upset. And neither would know how to fix it. After all, weren’t they both saying the same thing?
Hmmm. Does this sound like anything you’ve experienced?
My example is quite humorous in retrospect. But oftentimes when this happens it is not – especially not in the context of close or intimate relationships. We want, and expect, those closest to us to the person we need, do the things we want, and say all the right things. In some cases, this person may think they are, but how you hear, see, or experience it, has you feel otherwise.
The next time you have a disagreement, consider this: Words were just the beginning of your conversation.
- Ask the other person to tell you what they think was said – the words, and the meaning behind the words. Listen carefully for differences in “accent” and meaning.
- Ask for spellings. Is that “W-A-L-R-U-S?” In other words, “THIS is what I have heard, am I hearing your correctly?"
- Ask for pictures, “Can you show me a picture of the elevator, or describe it to me?” In other words, “How does (THE THING YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT) look, feel, sound to you?” How do you know what it “looks” like? How will you know it when you are it, experience it, or see it?
- Take no meaning, or word, for granted. If anything, consider that all that you “know” means something other than what you think.
It’s important to remember that we don’t all hear things the same way, and we don’t have the same experiences. Words are only the starting place for our communications. How someone experiences what we say will have greater impact on our conversation - and its effectiveness - than what we meant, or what we said.
If you want to share this article,
provide a link to this blog,
and credit the author, Elizabeth Alraune
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A few years back, I went to London, England. I needed to get a passport-like photo taken, but the machine I wanted to use was out of order. When I called the company that owned the machine, I asked where they had another location. I was told, “Walrus.” “Walrus?” I confirmed. “Walrus,” was the response. I should have asked for the spelling, but the person had said, “Walrus.” I asked around, and no one knew where there was a “Walrus” until, that is, someone realized that “Walrus” was “Woolworths.” Apparently, the person I spoke with and I both thought we were saying the same thing – but boy, were we not!
Similarly, while I was there, I learned that elevators are called “lifts,” escalators are called “elevators,” what we would call subways are underground walkways for them, and what we would call subways in the US, are called “tubes” in the UK.
We speak the same language, don’t we? And yet, as you have probably realized, there is a great potential for misunderstanding.
In this case, it is quite easy to see how there would be an error. However if one did not know these differences, and did not know that there WAS a difference, can you imagine the frustration?
Asking around for “Walrus” was quite frustrating!
In a case like the above, it would probably be fairly easy to forgive a misunderstanding – and even define the differences. After all, most would recognize that it’s a different culture, and the differences are to be expected.
However, most people who live in a similar place would not be as likely to expect these types of misunderstandings from words. As a result, they would have expectations from a conversation, not realizing that they may define things, or hear something, differently than how the person who spoke it meant it.
What happens in those times when someone tells another “Woolworths", and the other hears “Walrus,” and neither knows what the other thinks they’ve said? Quite possibly there could be conflict, argument, upset. And neither would know how to fix it. After all, weren’t they both saying the same thing?
Hmmm. Does this sound like anything you’ve experienced?
My example is quite humorous in retrospect. But oftentimes when this happens it is not – especially not in the context of close or intimate relationships. We want, and expect, those closest to us to the person we need, do the things we want, and say all the right things. In some cases, this person may think they are, but how you hear, see, or experience it, has you feel otherwise.
The next time you have a disagreement, consider this: Words were just the beginning of your conversation.
- Ask the other person to tell you what they think was said – the words, and the meaning behind the words. Listen carefully for differences in “accent” and meaning.
- Ask for spellings. Is that “W-A-L-R-U-S?” In other words, “THIS is what I have heard, am I hearing your correctly?"
- Ask for pictures, “Can you show me a picture of the elevator, or describe it to me?” In other words, “How does (THE THING YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT) look, feel, sound to you?” How do you know what it “looks” like? How will you know it when you are it, experience it, or see it?
- Take no meaning, or word, for granted. If anything, consider that all that you “know” means something other than what you think.
It’s important to remember that we don’t all hear things the same way, and we don’t have the same experiences. Words are only the starting place for our communications. How someone experiences what we say will have greater impact on our conversation - and its effectiveness - than what we meant, or what we said.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
There Were Two...
I don't know if this is factual. However,
I would say this is a great example
of how differently people can view the
same situation, given the chance.
It's all about the way you see things.
Sometimes we're so busy looking at things
one way, and being unhappy, that we forget
that there might just be (and likely are)
other ways to look at them.
When you read below, think about these
few questions:
Which employee would you rather have working
for you?
Which employee would you rather be?
If you were in Africa, which representative
would you hope would come into your neck
of the woods?
The answers will tell you a little something
about your own perspectives. There is no
right or wrong. There is only what works,
and what doesn't. What works for you?
**********
Two sneaker companies each send a marketing
representative to a small African country
to assess the prospects of business expansion.
One representative sends back an e-mail saying,
"It's a dead end; everyone is barefoot."
The other representative sends back his e-mail saying,
"The sky is the limit; everyone is barefoot!"
**********
I would guess that many reading this would
potentially think that the second perspective
would be more empowering than the first.
My question would be for which party?
Maybe the African people wouldn't want the
sneakers. You never know. It might not be
something that would work for them.
Just because it works for the sneaker company,
and its employee, and it is empowering perspective
for them, doesn't mean that the Africans would
feel empowered by something that another thinks
would be potentially good for them.
The next time you are trying to be helpful,
and someone is resisting you,
consider that what we personally view as
an empowering perspective,
may not always occur as
empowerment to another.
I would say this is a great example
of how differently people can view the
same situation, given the chance.
It's all about the way you see things.
Sometimes we're so busy looking at things
one way, and being unhappy, that we forget
that there might just be (and likely are)
other ways to look at them.
When you read below, think about these
few questions:
Which employee would you rather have working
for you?
Which employee would you rather be?
If you were in Africa, which representative
would you hope would come into your neck
of the woods?
The answers will tell you a little something
about your own perspectives. There is no
right or wrong. There is only what works,
and what doesn't. What works for you?
**********
Two sneaker companies each send a marketing
representative to a small African country
to assess the prospects of business expansion.
One representative sends back an e-mail saying,
"It's a dead end; everyone is barefoot."
The other representative sends back his e-mail saying,
"The sky is the limit; everyone is barefoot!"
**********
I would guess that many reading this would
potentially think that the second perspective
would be more empowering than the first.
My question would be for which party?
Maybe the African people wouldn't want the
sneakers. You never know. It might not be
something that would work for them.
Just because it works for the sneaker company,
and its employee, and it is empowering perspective
for them, doesn't mean that the Africans would
feel empowered by something that another thinks
would be potentially good for them.
The next time you are trying to be helpful,
and someone is resisting you,
consider that what we personally view as
an empowering perspective,
may not always occur as
empowerment to another.
Monday, June 30, 2008
Learning from Another's Perspective
Today I was reminded of an experience
I had when I was a child.
I grew up with my grandparents, and
my grandmother was losing her sight,
and was in and out of a wheelchair
since she had broken both hips.
What I remember was one day I heard
somewhere - on the TV or radio - that
if you wanted to appreciate someone
who was blind, and what they were
going through, you should walk around
with your eyes closed, or in some way
unable able to see.
I couldn't have been more than eleven
at the time. I don't remember if there
was anything about not being able to
walk, or about wheelchairs, but I
remember, at one point wheeling around
with her chair, and walking around
with my eyes closed.
My grandmother caught me at one point,
and was really upset. She didn't get
why I was doing what I was doing. She
told me that I should be grateful for
my sight. I wish she could have realized
that what I was doing was an exercise
in appreciation, which could definitely
translate into gratitude.
Instead, coming from her perspective
which was a life severely limited by
the changes in her body, she was angry
and, I think defensive - somehow thinking
I was mocking her.
I don't remember much about my childhood,
but somehow I always remembered that.
It must have been the strong emotion
conjured inside of me from the hurt
my grandmother felt in her lack of
understanding, coupled with
my understanding of the intent
of the person who made the suggestion.
I was reminded of this today when I saw
the following video on YouTube.
It is about dining in the dark. It is
about how the other senses get fired
up when the one that many of us depend
on the most is unavailable.
The video is awesome in a few ways,
because besides showing sighted people
a thing or two to appreciate, it also
shows how those who live
with compromised sight, can function
well enough to even be the wait staff.
If you have a couple of minutes,
maybe you want to check it out. Maybe
you'll find yourself with an
interesting perspective to consider
in the process. After all, perspective
is appreciated the most when there
are a few to choose from. Don't you
enjoy the chocolate cake that much more
when you choose it over the carrots? :-)
Have a great day!
I had when I was a child.
I grew up with my grandparents, and
my grandmother was losing her sight,
and was in and out of a wheelchair
since she had broken both hips.
What I remember was one day I heard
somewhere - on the TV or radio - that
if you wanted to appreciate someone
who was blind, and what they were
going through, you should walk around
with your eyes closed, or in some way
unable able to see.
I couldn't have been more than eleven
at the time. I don't remember if there
was anything about not being able to
walk, or about wheelchairs, but I
remember, at one point wheeling around
with her chair, and walking around
with my eyes closed.
My grandmother caught me at one point,
and was really upset. She didn't get
why I was doing what I was doing. She
told me that I should be grateful for
my sight. I wish she could have realized
that what I was doing was an exercise
in appreciation, which could definitely
translate into gratitude.
Instead, coming from her perspective
which was a life severely limited by
the changes in her body, she was angry
and, I think defensive - somehow thinking
I was mocking her.
I don't remember much about my childhood,
but somehow I always remembered that.
It must have been the strong emotion
conjured inside of me from the hurt
my grandmother felt in her lack of
understanding, coupled with
my understanding of the intent
of the person who made the suggestion.
I was reminded of this today when I saw
the following video on YouTube.
It is about dining in the dark. It is
about how the other senses get fired
up when the one that many of us depend
on the most is unavailable.
The video is awesome in a few ways,
because besides showing sighted people
a thing or two to appreciate, it also
shows how those who live
with compromised sight, can function
well enough to even be the wait staff.
If you have a couple of minutes,
maybe you want to check it out. Maybe
you'll find yourself with an
interesting perspective to consider
in the process. After all, perspective
is appreciated the most when there
are a few to choose from. Don't you
enjoy the chocolate cake that much more
when you choose it over the carrots? :-)
Have a great day!
Sunday, June 29, 2008
A Perspective on a Book Banning
Did you hear about the teacher who was banned
from teaching until next September because
she had her students reading a book called,
The Freedom Writers Diary? (Click to see
more about the book on Amazon)
Here is the video featured on CNN:
The Story about Connie Heermann
The part that stuck with me the most about
the story is toward the end of the video.
Someone from the community is saying how
she believes that Connie was sending a
poor message "if you're told no, do it
any way. It it feels good do it."
It's hard to know in a relatively short
video all of the details of the story.
Apparently, the teacher sent home
permission slips to the parents. Out of
150, she got 149 giving her permission
to teach the book from the parents.
The trouble came when the school told
her to take the books back, and she
decided otherwise. She decided that
the book was something that the kids
she was teaching should see, and she
acted on her own.
If you think about it, maybe there was
another way she could go? Maybe there
was another way she could have acted
within the environment that could have
been more acceptable?
And, maybe not.
My point here is more about how there
is a presumption that when "I" say so,
that is the way it should be. Forget
what you want, or why you want it, and
just follow ME blindly because I know
what is best.
I am fairly certain that anyone who
might be reading this has had at least
ONE occasion in your life when you acted
contrary to what you were told, because
YOU knew better, and YOU knew why what
you were doing could be of some benefit
to yourself or others - and,
more importantly - YOU were right.
I would never say that the "I" is never
right...but I would say that it is a
wise person and society that takes a
moment to question what is being said,
and why it is being said, and explore
it in a personal context before making
a choice.
After all, with July 4th around the corner,
what better example of this exact type of
thinking is there than the United States?
The colonists looked at what Britain
wanted and claimed. They heard what,
in Britain's eyes was best, but those
who were the US' founding fathers thought
otherwise.
I wonder - did they send a poor message?
I know it's not the same, but pretending
like something doesn't exist, or ignoring
the presence of some behavior or words,
won't make them go away. If that was so,
all of those well behaved adults we have
in our culture would have well behaved
children.
Sometimes the best way to deal with something
is to stare it in the face. I would say
that even though the teacher was wanting
to say "you're not alone," she was also
choosing not to ignore what is present,
choosing instead to face it head on.
It's too bad the school board/community
didn't see it that way. Sometimes we
don't like the answers to the questions
we are asked, but there are times that
the actions taken by the rebel
can produce the results those who are
saying "Shhh" (both metaphorically and by
their actions) are attempting to accomplish.
I haven't read the book, or seen the movie,
but I would be willing to bet the teacher involved
in the story was a rebel of sorts, herself.
Apparently, the language was harsh,
but the results speak for themselves.
My question to that community is this,
"Are things better or worse than they
were 5-10 years ago?"
If they're worse, and you've been acting
the way you've been acting, what do you
have to lose by choosing something else?
Have you ever noticed that there are
times when the more you try to control
something, the more difficult it is to
control? I am sure you've probably
noticed that often times a "bad" thing
only gets worse when you
try to stuff it down.
You may think you're right, and maybe
you are. However consider this:
A champion is only a champion when
he goes up against another, and emerges
victorious. You can claim a victory
in this case, but how do you know
that what you think is best truly is,
if you haven't allowed your theories
and beliefs to be tested?
Of course, this is just MY perspective,
and that is the beauty of it all,
we all get to have one.
from teaching until next September because
she had her students reading a book called,
The Freedom Writers Diary? (Click to see
more about the book on Amazon)
Here is the video featured on CNN:
The Story about Connie Heermann
The part that stuck with me the most about
the story is toward the end of the video.
Someone from the community is saying how
she believes that Connie was sending a
poor message "if you're told no, do it
any way. It it feels good do it."
It's hard to know in a relatively short
video all of the details of the story.
Apparently, the teacher sent home
permission slips to the parents. Out of
150, she got 149 giving her permission
to teach the book from the parents.
The trouble came when the school told
her to take the books back, and she
decided otherwise. She decided that
the book was something that the kids
she was teaching should see, and she
acted on her own.
If you think about it, maybe there was
another way she could go? Maybe there
was another way she could have acted
within the environment that could have
been more acceptable?
And, maybe not.
My point here is more about how there
is a presumption that when "I" say so,
that is the way it should be. Forget
what you want, or why you want it, and
just follow ME blindly because I know
what is best.
I am fairly certain that anyone who
might be reading this has had at least
ONE occasion in your life when you acted
contrary to what you were told, because
YOU knew better, and YOU knew why what
you were doing could be of some benefit
to yourself or others - and,
more importantly - YOU were right.
I would never say that the "I" is never
right...but I would say that it is a
wise person and society that takes a
moment to question what is being said,
and why it is being said, and explore
it in a personal context before making
a choice.
After all, with July 4th around the corner,
what better example of this exact type of
thinking is there than the United States?
The colonists looked at what Britain
wanted and claimed. They heard what,
in Britain's eyes was best, but those
who were the US' founding fathers thought
otherwise.
I wonder - did they send a poor message?
I know it's not the same, but pretending
like something doesn't exist, or ignoring
the presence of some behavior or words,
won't make them go away. If that was so,
all of those well behaved adults we have
in our culture would have well behaved
children.
Sometimes the best way to deal with something
is to stare it in the face. I would say
that even though the teacher was wanting
to say "you're not alone," she was also
choosing not to ignore what is present,
choosing instead to face it head on.
It's too bad the school board/community
didn't see it that way. Sometimes we
don't like the answers to the questions
we are asked, but there are times that
the actions taken by the rebel
can produce the results those who are
saying "Shhh" (both metaphorically and by
their actions) are attempting to accomplish.
I haven't read the book, or seen the movie,
but I would be willing to bet the teacher involved
in the story was a rebel of sorts, herself.
Apparently, the language was harsh,
but the results speak for themselves.
My question to that community is this,
"Are things better or worse than they
were 5-10 years ago?"
If they're worse, and you've been acting
the way you've been acting, what do you
have to lose by choosing something else?
Have you ever noticed that there are
times when the more you try to control
something, the more difficult it is to
control? I am sure you've probably
noticed that often times a "bad" thing
only gets worse when you
try to stuff it down.
You may think you're right, and maybe
you are. However consider this:
A champion is only a champion when
he goes up against another, and emerges
victorious. You can claim a victory
in this case, but how do you know
that what you think is best truly is,
if you haven't allowed your theories
and beliefs to be tested?
Of course, this is just MY perspective,
and that is the beauty of it all,
we all get to have one.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
A Perspective on Perspective
Tonight there is going to
be a full moon that
will look HUGE.
Some will think that is
larger than usual
by its appearance.
If you want some more
info about the actual event,
click here.
It got me thinking about
my favorite subject,
(you guess it!)
perspective.
In one dictionary
perspective is defined as
"view or vista."
I thought it an interesting
definition to focus on in
this context. After all,
it is a literal something
that is being viewed, and
the view - the perspective -
that we will have will be
interestingly skewed.
Someone who knew nothing
about the so-called "reality"
of the moon and its size
could very likely argue
that the moon is larger
than normal tonight. Without
anything to say otherwise,
who would disagree?
That is the way perspective
is sometimes. Sometimes we
view something, and believe
that it is exactly as we
view it to be, because we
have nothing to support a
belief otherwise. Then,
one day, someone, or something
comes along, and gives us
something else to consider,
and we realize that maybe what
we considered "fact" - ie
the moon is larger than normal
sometimes - is actually an
illusion.
Interesting to note, one dictionary
definition of illusion is
"an erroneous mental representation."
I am not usually one to describe
things in a manner of
"right" or "wrong."
However, if I was going to,
it would be in the context of
what "works" or "doesn't work."
(If it doesn't work, then it would
be "wrong.")
Errors tend to, by definition be
"wrong." In this case, I would suggest
that the "erroneous mental representation"
would be that thing that is having
you feel in some way compromised.
The next time you are in the midst
of something that seems wrong,
perhaps consider that the situation
isn't as "large" as it seems to be,
and consider that maybe there are
some other facts, as yet unknown.
Become aware of the "reality" that
you are arguing for.
If you can take the effort to attempt
to realize a different perspective,
it might be worthy thing to do. In the
end you might feel a heckka of a lot
better.
Recently I was speaking with someone
who had been in a relationship. While
it was good, he was so very happy.
Then, one day, quickly and abruptly
it was over.
He didn't understand it. He knew the
few reasons she had given, and despite
my best efforts to give him a different
perspective, he clung to the conclusions
his perspective gave him - among them
that he wasn't good enough, and because
he had given all he had, and wasn't good
enough, he never would be good enough.
I attempted to explain to him that perhaps
his relationship life wasn't over. Maybe
he was 75% of the way there, and that while
he may not have been "good enough" for her
(which I question, but that is another
conversation) it was ONE person in a world
of many. At the time he was uninterested
in hearing what I had to say about it,
because he was focused on a different
perspective, one he seemed unwilling to
give up.
For some who are reading this, I am certain
you will identify. It hurts when a
relationship ends, especially when you
don't understand it, and especially when you
make it all about you, and your faults,
and inadequacies. I would never say to
point the finger at the other person without
considering your role in it, however, the
same applies in reverse. I would never
suggest that you totally point the finger
at yourself.
There are times in our lives that we must
make choices in regard to insufficient
information. He has a choice to make,
as we all do when a moment like this
appears in our life.
The choice we make will take our life in
a direction that is aligned with that choice.
Some would argue, "it's that I am being
real. I don't want to be delusional."
How do you know that you aren't being
delusional by the choice that you are making
that is having you feel miserable?
Even in the face of someone telling
you something about yourself, consider
that it is their perception which is
grounded in their perspective, their
version of reality, and it doesn't have
to be the one you choose for yourself.
Being caught up in others' realities is
something that often happens, and can be
quite difficult to release ourselves from.
However, if their "reality" doesn't work
for you, perhaps consider that in a "night
or two" you will see the same problem
in a different way. Just like when the
moon will seem to move away. And, when
that happens, you will be able to create
something different that works for YOU.
As a living, breathing human being,
perspective is like breaths we breathe...
there is always another one to be had.
And just like we consciously breathe
at times, we can consciously choose
a different perspective.
If only it was as simple as breathing
seemed to be!
Enjoy the moon tonight. It likely will
be beautiful. :-)
PS the definitions of the words,
came from www.dictionary.com.
be a full moon that
will look HUGE.
Some will think that is
larger than usual
by its appearance.
If you want some more
info about the actual event,
click here.
It got me thinking about
my favorite subject,
(you guess it!)
perspective.
In one dictionary
perspective is defined as
"view or vista."
I thought it an interesting
definition to focus on in
this context. After all,
it is a literal something
that is being viewed, and
the view - the perspective -
that we will have will be
interestingly skewed.
Someone who knew nothing
about the so-called "reality"
of the moon and its size
could very likely argue
that the moon is larger
than normal tonight. Without
anything to say otherwise,
who would disagree?
That is the way perspective
is sometimes. Sometimes we
view something, and believe
that it is exactly as we
view it to be, because we
have nothing to support a
belief otherwise. Then,
one day, someone, or something
comes along, and gives us
something else to consider,
and we realize that maybe what
we considered "fact" - ie
the moon is larger than normal
sometimes - is actually an
illusion.
Interesting to note, one dictionary
definition of illusion is
"an erroneous mental representation."
I am not usually one to describe
things in a manner of
"right" or "wrong."
However, if I was going to,
it would be in the context of
what "works" or "doesn't work."
(If it doesn't work, then it would
be "wrong.")
Errors tend to, by definition be
"wrong." In this case, I would suggest
that the "erroneous mental representation"
would be that thing that is having
you feel in some way compromised.
The next time you are in the midst
of something that seems wrong,
perhaps consider that the situation
isn't as "large" as it seems to be,
and consider that maybe there are
some other facts, as yet unknown.
Become aware of the "reality" that
you are arguing for.
If you can take the effort to attempt
to realize a different perspective,
it might be worthy thing to do. In the
end you might feel a heckka of a lot
better.
Recently I was speaking with someone
who had been in a relationship. While
it was good, he was so very happy.
Then, one day, quickly and abruptly
it was over.
He didn't understand it. He knew the
few reasons she had given, and despite
my best efforts to give him a different
perspective, he clung to the conclusions
his perspective gave him - among them
that he wasn't good enough, and because
he had given all he had, and wasn't good
enough, he never would be good enough.
I attempted to explain to him that perhaps
his relationship life wasn't over. Maybe
he was 75% of the way there, and that while
he may not have been "good enough" for her
(which I question, but that is another
conversation) it was ONE person in a world
of many. At the time he was uninterested
in hearing what I had to say about it,
because he was focused on a different
perspective, one he seemed unwilling to
give up.
For some who are reading this, I am certain
you will identify. It hurts when a
relationship ends, especially when you
don't understand it, and especially when you
make it all about you, and your faults,
and inadequacies. I would never say to
point the finger at the other person without
considering your role in it, however, the
same applies in reverse. I would never
suggest that you totally point the finger
at yourself.
There are times in our lives that we must
make choices in regard to insufficient
information. He has a choice to make,
as we all do when a moment like this
appears in our life.
The choice we make will take our life in
a direction that is aligned with that choice.
Some would argue, "it's that I am being
real. I don't want to be delusional."
How do you know that you aren't being
delusional by the choice that you are making
that is having you feel miserable?
Even in the face of someone telling
you something about yourself, consider
that it is their perception which is
grounded in their perspective, their
version of reality, and it doesn't have
to be the one you choose for yourself.
Being caught up in others' realities is
something that often happens, and can be
quite difficult to release ourselves from.
However, if their "reality" doesn't work
for you, perhaps consider that in a "night
or two" you will see the same problem
in a different way. Just like when the
moon will seem to move away. And, when
that happens, you will be able to create
something different that works for YOU.
As a living, breathing human being,
perspective is like breaths we breathe...
there is always another one to be had.
And just like we consciously breathe
at times, we can consciously choose
a different perspective.
If only it was as simple as breathing
seemed to be!
Enjoy the moon tonight. It likely will
be beautiful. :-)
PS the definitions of the words,
came from www.dictionary.com.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Highly Charged Perspective
Once again, an email is behind a post.
I received one recently about Rev. Joe Wright.
Now, before I go a step further, if you haven't
heard about him, let me tell you this topic
touches two things - politics and religion.
When those two things touch, it is always
interesting, wouldn't you say?
I am telling you this because I want you to
know ahead of time what it's about, and also
to let you know that I am not stating where
I stand in relation to the "facts" of the prayer
he gave.
I offer you his prayer, and the ultimate reaction
because I think it is an excellent example of
perspective in action. Everyone who reads what
he spoke of is likely to have a reaction to what
he says, based on where they come from.
For the purposes of this blog, I would say it's
not so much the words that are important, as
much as how he says what he does. Essentially,
he looks at things, and calls them by different
names. One name may seem more positive than
another - and therein lies some of the controversy.
I point to it as a very clear example of how
something could be called one thing by one person,
and another by someone else, and how it is viewed
(as in positive or negative) will depend on the
person's perspective.
I found the whole story at www.Snopes.com
(great site, btw, if you ever want to know if
something is true). You can see it for yourself at http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/wright.asp.
I tend to think that thinking is a good thing,
and that anything that gets us to question
may likely help us to find the answers we need,
better answers than we already have and/or
better questions.
When playing the role of observer, it is much
easier to ACT in relation to life.
When we already think we know something,
in my opinion, I think we become much
more reactive. I don't know about you,
but oftentimes I think that reaction does
us a disservice. We either are unable to
fully take in something wonderful, or
miss something in our reacting moment,
because we were too caught up in ourselves
to notice.
For example, here's an interesting
thought to consider:
how many of the people who reacted to
Rev. Wright's message potentially
missed an opportunity for
perspective that could have
empowered them as lawmakers?
As always, feel free to let me know your
thoughts, and have a GREAT week!
I received one recently about Rev. Joe Wright.
Now, before I go a step further, if you haven't
heard about him, let me tell you this topic
touches two things - politics and religion.
When those two things touch, it is always
interesting, wouldn't you say?
I am telling you this because I want you to
know ahead of time what it's about, and also
to let you know that I am not stating where
I stand in relation to the "facts" of the prayer
he gave.
I offer you his prayer, and the ultimate reaction
because I think it is an excellent example of
perspective in action. Everyone who reads what
he spoke of is likely to have a reaction to what
he says, based on where they come from.
For the purposes of this blog, I would say it's
not so much the words that are important, as
much as how he says what he does. Essentially,
he looks at things, and calls them by different
names. One name may seem more positive than
another - and therein lies some of the controversy.
I point to it as a very clear example of how
something could be called one thing by one person,
and another by someone else, and how it is viewed
(as in positive or negative) will depend on the
person's perspective.
I found the whole story at www.Snopes.com
(great site, btw, if you ever want to know if
something is true). You can see it for yourself at http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/wright.asp.
I tend to think that thinking is a good thing,
and that anything that gets us to question
may likely help us to find the answers we need,
better answers than we already have and/or
better questions.
When playing the role of observer, it is much
easier to ACT in relation to life.
When we already think we know something,
in my opinion, I think we become much
more reactive. I don't know about you,
but oftentimes I think that reaction does
us a disservice. We either are unable to
fully take in something wonderful, or
miss something in our reacting moment,
because we were too caught up in ourselves
to notice.
For example, here's an interesting
thought to consider:
how many of the people who reacted to
Rev. Wright's message potentially
missed an opportunity for
perspective that could have
empowered them as lawmakers?
As always, feel free to let me know your
thoughts, and have a GREAT week!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)