urgency & philosophy

Fri Dec 28 12:12:29 CST 2007

PS:  This is not about guilt or shame.
It is about Who Shall Survive, not as a theme-book
but a dilemma Global Warming means to many.

As a Moreanean, I must respond, it's in my bones.
Patty is doing what is right for her, I am calling the
question to the floor about it all.

Adam is doing what he wants and can - but we have to read
the writing on the wall about the collapse (yes, collapse)
of the earth's ecology.  If we feel immune, we are not, I from
what I read.  And I don't want to see suffering if we can address it.

How?  For me it's all about sociatry, the parts of Moreno's work that we can
bring forth - it was, after all, his vision to address the human condition,
worldwide.  Thanks for listening and responding Patty and Adam.

Ed

-----Original Message-----
>From: PATRICIA DESERT <honeybwomn at msn.com>
>Sent: Dec 28, 2007 12:57 PM
>To: Adam Blatner <adam at blatner.com>, Edward Schreiber <edwschreiber at earthlink.net>
>Cc: list at grouptalkweb.org
>Subject: Re: urgency & philosophy
>
>Actually, Adam, I have similar thoughts about this.  I have a low threshold 
>for being around those who consistently and intensely exhort me to rally to 
>action around a particular issue.  Part of it has to do with clairsentience 
>whereby I easily take in other's energy and can only do that for limited 
>periods of time without then needing time alone to recharge.  Partly it has 
>to do with my interests.  Global warming is an interest but it is secondary 
>to some other social issues that present right in my own community.  And a 
>big part of it relates to my work as a therapist.
>
>I deal with deeply painful and potentially destructive issues every day with 
>clients who come in angry, depressed, anxious, traumatized.  I am fully 
>present with my clients and at the end of the day I have little energy left 
>to become actively involved in the larger issues in the world.
>
>I believe that we all can choose how best can make a difference.  I only 
>have so much energy, time, and monetary resources.  So I have chosen my 
>life's work as a therapist to address the larger social ills at the micro 
>level.  After all, our world is a mirror of who we are.  As each person 
>heals so heals the world.  Others much more able I leave to address the 
>world's problems on a macro level.
>
>And like you, I used to feel shame that I wasn't more involved in politics, 
>social activism, fund-raising, etc.  Fortunately I have made peace with 
>myself around this and feel the world is blessed to have people like Ed who 
>obviously is interested and does engage in the larger issues facing our 
>world.
>
>Peace to all in the new year.
>
>Patti
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Adam Blatner" <adam at blatner.com>
>To: "Edward Schreiber" <edwschreiber at earthlink.net>
>Cc: <list at grouptalkweb.org>
>Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 11:25 AM
>Subject: urgency & philosophy
>
>
>> Dear Ed and others,
>>     This email leaves the issue of  the source of a quote,  and speaks 
>> rather to your
>> perspective of urgency of ecological work.
>>           First, of course you're right about the time theme.
>> (I'm even reminded of Al Gore's interview in the recent time Magazine as 
>> the 2nd place
>> person-of-the-year).
>>
>>       Yet, to shift the perspective a little, your urgency and passion, 
>> while noble, also
>> brings up some issues that deal with sociometry: How much worry is 
>> optimal? And might
>> people choose others who share similar tolerances for the degrees of worry 
>> they "vibrate
>> with"?
>>
>>     From other recent issues, I've become more aware that when it comes to 
>> worry, too much
>> makes me crazy, arouses my limbic system so that I can't think straight.
>>          I remember a funny mantra: When in trouble or in doubt, run in 
>> circles, scream
>> and shout!
>>
>>  Yes, a little edge, a little worry, is needed for arousing the nervous 
>> system to optimal
>> engagement.
>>     Too little and I become complacent, drugged, un-engaged. (This is one 
>> of the pitfalls
>> of drugs, alcohol, and for many, television and other pseudo-addictions 
>> and escapes.)
>>      There is a range that seems just right---I do my work with my skills 
>> in my area of
>> interest and ability. I may stretch a bit, give a bit to this or that 
>> political cause.
>>         But I find myself becoming wary about associating with 
>> acquaintances or groups who
>> engage in levels of worry that I find abrasive, upsetting.
>>
>>          This is important, because we are exhorted by thousands of 
>> sources to do more and
>> more. And there's always more to do! politically, socially, etc.
>>        Worse, it's often quite unclear what must be done.
>>               Meeting and talking about it with no particular suggestions 
>> to consider
>> rarely generates truly useful solutions unless it's dealing with something 
>> very local,
>> such as is one's own business (i.e., brainstorming)---and even then, no 
>> guarantee that the
>> improvisations and ideas will be fruitful. Even harder if the challenge 
>> requires the
>> cooperation and collaboration of scores or hundreds or thousands of 
>> groups, becomes
>> national and international in scope.
>>          How about giving money to a cause? Which cause? How do we know 
>> they're more
>> efficient than many organizations who are strikingly inefficient? And in 
>> many cases,
>> throwing money at a problem may go into the hands of corrupt politicians.
>>
>>      There's also the problem of recognizing and responding to how much 
>> worry can be
>> tolerable. (Here's where an issue of tele comes in.) There are some social 
>> and religious
>> groups that carry a higher degree of urgency--- social action oriented, 
>> missionary
>> oriented, this or that cause about homosexuality, abortion, women wanting 
>> to be
>> priests---whatever the issue, however you may agree or disagree with a 
>> given position, the
>> point is that for some groups these concerns are accompanied by a sense of 
>> urgency and
>> worry.
>>        Often these groups perceive other groups or people who seek more 
>> comfort and peace
>> of mind to be, well, complacent, and morally deficient, worthy of being 
>> judged and
>> scolded: "Stop living in denial!"
>> .    And perhaps for some there's more than a germ of truth: There are 
>> folks who are
>> indeed complacent.
>>             And others are in-between:
>>               (I remember a blessing that goes:
>>                     May the Holy Spirit forever continue to comfort... and 
>> disturb...
>> u.   )
>>
>>         The sociometric theme is that some folks feel vulnerable for not 
>> being more noble,
>> but can't handle with any comfort the degrees of worry and urgency claimed 
>> by other folks.
>> It then depends on who seems to be the great majority. (Scott Adams, the 
>> Dilbert
>> cartoonist, notes that in any encounter the one who is more insane tends 
>> to dominate.) So
>> in a group in which the more worried ones represent maybe 30%, that will 
>> end up seeming
>> like a majority to the quieter, lower-key others.
>>
>>         I haven't known how to talk about this because, on reflection, I 
>> used to feel
>> guilty, ashamed, vulnerable for not wanting to get too het up about 
>> certain political
>> issues. I realized gradually that worrying carries a threshold---some 
>> folks find it to be
>> painful when done at 40%  (at 80% it's called agitated depression and it 
>> can be one of the
>> worst, hellish feelings. I tasted this once in early 2002 following a flu 
>> syndrome.
>> Cleared up with SSRIs.).
>>        Some folks like that edge and become accustomed to and even 
>> desirous of
>> entertaining worry, stress---for them it's optimal challenge. Generally 
>> that may be at,
>> say, 14-20%  Others really suffer when they are preached at to worry about 
>> things at a
>> level of more than 10%
>>       My hunch is that kids at play, really engaged, spontaneous, trying 
>> out different
>> solutions, are vibrating at a level of excitement, making mistakes, 
>> feeling just an edge
>> of shame and fear that their mistakes may become too much, but this keeps 
>> them alert. They
>> don't want the game to be any less challenging. I put this at around 5%
>>
>> I know I feel very engaged and am quite active within my own range.  But 
>> 10% starts to
>> mentally, emotionally "hurt."
>>     So I just don't get heroic in certain ways. I can't justify not 
>> wanting to do more---I
>> wonder if even saying "it hurts" makes me seem like a wuss.
>>
>>     But I've come to a point of reflection where I can not only accept my 
>> limits, but
>> affirm them. This applies also to some other roles in my life. I'm not 
>> going to go much
>> past what Vygotsky the Russian developmental psychologist calls the ZPD, 
>> the zone of
>> proximal development, the region where I can stretch a little, but not get 
>> overloaded.
>> (That's the aforementioned 5%)
>>
>>        Thanks for helping me look at this dynamic. I wonder if anyone else 
>> senses this
>> edge of when are certain issues "too much" and when do I want to address 
>> them. I also note
>> that the variable of "what precisely can I do" is a factor here. My angle 
>> is to promote
>> psychological literacy in my corner of the world, and on my website, etc.
>>
>>       warmly, Adam
>>
>>
>> Grouptalk mailing list
>> List at grouptalkweb.org
>> http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
>> 