I saw Robert Peston quoting a member of the public, saying "...why should bankers get paid so much money when I haven't had a pay rise for a long time, things are getting more expensive and I'm in lots of debt. They don't deserve it..."
Well I tell you something...they do! There is a growing sense of socialism and the feeling of "it's not fair" brewing at the moment. This is following a few decades of centre-right policy and society aligning with an overall desire to work for, and take personal responsibility for, our own wealth. But things are tough now - we are in the midst of an era of austerity, unemployment is at a new peak and the press love sending shock waves of fear through our communities...
The tragic thing is that this new found sense of socialism reminds me of the way children at school expect their teacher to support them wholeheartedly when things are bad...but when things are good, the student will turn on the teacher. In other words, it seems to me that society is saying "woe is me, the world is unfair, someone help me and lets punish those in a better position"...simply because things are difficult. And Robert Peston is loving it... The fact of the matter is that the people that complain do not have the intelligence or strength of character to succeed in the banking world. It is tough. Bankers in the top positions have made many personal sacrifices that many people would not be prepared to make. Fine, we can challenge their judgement when it comes to gambling our country into a financial mess and question their personal values when it comes to friends and family. But we all must take responsibility for our own decisions and follow our innate drive. Therefore, to non-bankers who believe Robert Peston is speaking on their behalf, I say...you could have applied to Goldmann Sachs or Barclays but you chose not to. Get over it. And even if you did work for one of the banks, you would probably not have survived. It's not in your nature to succeed in the banking environment. It is not safe, cosy, warm and friendly. Bankers put up with this because there is a large financial reward. It suits only a small minority of people.
Things are tough but don't try to blame others without taking a look at yourself first. And more importantly, don't listen to Robert Peston or any of his sensationalist bollocks. He has been the worst thing for this country for over 3 years and is milking the system and other peoples' misery. He is no different to Bob Diamond or Steven Hester if you actually think about it. Cut throat, highly successful, unpleasant.
Showing posts with label community. Show all posts
Showing posts with label community. Show all posts
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Currency of community
I have talked previously about the currency of favours (see here). Recently, the Mosaic Church in Coventry announced the launch of its Grout system - essentially a currency that can be acquired and spent within a community. Grouts are transacted for giving time or something more tangible. This is a true community currency and slightly different to the principle I mentioned which relies on the trading of actions without the need for a transactional, quantifiable currency. Nonetheless, as schemes like these appear and evolve (and they are excellent), I hope to see them move away from the reliance on a currency with guaranteed returns and mature to one that relies on passive confidence that acts of good will be reciprocated as I describe here.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Watch 'Pay It Forward' Streaming
I've talked about "Cooperative behaviour cascades in human social networks". For those that don't know, "Pay it Forward" is an outstanding movie from 2000 that sees the theme in practice.
Here is the movie. Click on the red arrow - when it turns green, click on the green arrow. Then click on the screen and it will open in a new window so you can enjoy the full screen. The video, as posted here, is too wide for the posting space.
Here's a link to the movie on Tudou: http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/KfuiMUDLv4s/
Here is the movie. Click on the red arrow - when it turns green, click on the green arrow. Then click on the screen and it will open in a new window so you can enjoy the full screen. The video, as posted here, is too wide for the posting space.
Here's a link to the movie on Tudou: http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/KfuiMUDLv4s/
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Politically illiterate
Global problem
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." Winston Churchill
Some people, who have the power to vote, seem to know nothing about politics yet have a voice that is heard and a vote that can have drastic implications on the future of the planet. Too many people vote for ‘fashion’ politics in the West. Some women do not even know the difference between Left and Right (and women died for the right to vote). Too many people are too ignorant and too lazy to care. If we are forced, at a young age, to know the basics of politics and the significance of our votes, future generations may become more aware and more conscious of their place in the world.
Global solution
Teach and assess 15 year olds on the simple and currently relevant tenets of politics across three basic streams. 1) Political ideologies (Left / Right), 2) current world leaders of major economies (USA, UK, BRIC, Middle East) and 3) major political structures (democracy / autocracy) – this is not intended as a history lesson so communism is out, except in the case of China. Teenagers should be assessed by a simple multiple choice exam (30 mins, no more) and given a certificate if they pass. They should then be able to vote in local and National elections. And the ballot boxes should be at schools so teens get used to the process of voting. The actual vote will still be influenced by the usual factors (family, peer group etc) and teens will not necessarily have a strong opinion on the major issues underlying party policy. But a vote is as much about an ideological stand point as it is about policy.
By passing the exam and holding the certificate it demonstrates a fundamental understanding of current world politics and will give people this background for the rest of their lives as well as imparting the significance of this knowledge down the generations. This certificate will remove any form of alienation as there will be a consistent, Nationally mandated syllabus and exam – all people will have equal knowledge and be assessed on an equal basis. This will help prepare teens for the substantial exams they face later in their lives through being assessed and coping under pressure. This will give teens a Nationally recognised qualification to support applications to jobs and universities. This will force teens to become knowledgeable about things that do affect everyday life in our communities, our countries and across the world.
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." Winston Churchill
Some people, who have the power to vote, seem to know nothing about politics yet have a voice that is heard and a vote that can have drastic implications on the future of the planet. Too many people vote for ‘fashion’ politics in the West. Some women do not even know the difference between Left and Right (and women died for the right to vote). Too many people are too ignorant and too lazy to care. If we are forced, at a young age, to know the basics of politics and the significance of our votes, future generations may become more aware and more conscious of their place in the world.
Global solution
Teach and assess 15 year olds on the simple and currently relevant tenets of politics across three basic streams. 1) Political ideologies (Left / Right), 2) current world leaders of major economies (USA, UK, BRIC, Middle East) and 3) major political structures (democracy / autocracy) – this is not intended as a history lesson so communism is out, except in the case of China. Teenagers should be assessed by a simple multiple choice exam (30 mins, no more) and given a certificate if they pass. They should then be able to vote in local and National elections. And the ballot boxes should be at schools so teens get used to the process of voting. The actual vote will still be influenced by the usual factors (family, peer group etc) and teens will not necessarily have a strong opinion on the major issues underlying party policy. But a vote is as much about an ideological stand point as it is about policy.
By passing the exam and holding the certificate it demonstrates a fundamental understanding of current world politics and will give people this background for the rest of their lives as well as imparting the significance of this knowledge down the generations. This certificate will remove any form of alienation as there will be a consistent, Nationally mandated syllabus and exam – all people will have equal knowledge and be assessed on an equal basis. This will help prepare teens for the substantial exams they face later in their lives through being assessed and coping under pressure. This will give teens a Nationally recognised qualification to support applications to jobs and universities. This will force teens to become knowledgeable about things that do affect everyday life in our communities, our countries and across the world.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Unreciprocated favours
I talked about the currency of favours previously where people contribute their time in exchange for a personal benefit of some type. I recently came across a piece or research from the University of St Andrews that demonstrated this characteristic in orangutans (see here for the article). So in short, and cynically, humans are no different to monkeys.
Is there such a thing as selflessness in human conduct? The Machiavellians would say no. The Daoists would say yes. I would say ‘I hope so’ (then I have also raised the debate about altruism which is something similar). One principal difference between these ideologies is that of active calculation. The Machiavellians undertake certain actions in the knowledge of the immediate consequences to their benefit. The Daoists undertake certain actions according to the belief that nature takes its course and the consequences will be what they are – by forcing nothing, nature yields to the will of the inevitable and nature inherently exists to benefit (or enlighten) people who follow ‘the Way’. The end result yields personal benefits but the means of achieving these benefits is very different – as is the underlying set of personal values.
I have also talked about our cultural transition from ‘knowledge’ to ‘wisdom’ (see here) and how we must evolve our attitudes towards society from one of fact and solution to one of insight and responsibility. So the currency of favours is nothing new: Machiavelli wrote The Prince in the early 16th Century and the Dao De Jing was written in 500 BCE (give or take). So the question is whether we are happy to share the characteristics of monkeys in a quantitative, calculated Machiavellian approach to engaging in societal endeavours or embrace our responsibility to give selfless, unrequited favours with courage and vindication for the greater benefit of our communities.
As Barack Obama said, we are entering an era of personal responsibility. As the Buddhists say, everything is cyclical. I propose that the time for Machiavellian thinking is over and it’s time to embrace the tenets of the selfless philosophies. So let the currency of favours be implicit not explicit. Let the intent behind favours be unrequited, safe in the knowledge that nature deals in a currency that will see personal investment repaid. So let the expectation of repayment be passive and let the will to help others be active and selfless. Let us be humans not monkeys.
Is there such a thing as selflessness in human conduct? The Machiavellians would say no. The Daoists would say yes. I would say ‘I hope so’ (then I have also raised the debate about altruism which is something similar). One principal difference between these ideologies is that of active calculation. The Machiavellians undertake certain actions in the knowledge of the immediate consequences to their benefit. The Daoists undertake certain actions according to the belief that nature takes its course and the consequences will be what they are – by forcing nothing, nature yields to the will of the inevitable and nature inherently exists to benefit (or enlighten) people who follow ‘the Way’. The end result yields personal benefits but the means of achieving these benefits is very different – as is the underlying set of personal values.
I have also talked about our cultural transition from ‘knowledge’ to ‘wisdom’ (see here) and how we must evolve our attitudes towards society from one of fact and solution to one of insight and responsibility. So the currency of favours is nothing new: Machiavelli wrote The Prince in the early 16th Century and the Dao De Jing was written in 500 BCE (give or take). So the question is whether we are happy to share the characteristics of monkeys in a quantitative, calculated Machiavellian approach to engaging in societal endeavours or embrace our responsibility to give selfless, unrequited favours with courage and vindication for the greater benefit of our communities.
As Barack Obama said, we are entering an era of personal responsibility. As the Buddhists say, everything is cyclical. I propose that the time for Machiavellian thinking is over and it’s time to embrace the tenets of the selfless philosophies. So let the currency of favours be implicit not explicit. Let the intent behind favours be unrequited, safe in the knowledge that nature deals in a currency that will see personal investment repaid. So let the expectation of repayment be passive and let the will to help others be active and selfless. Let us be humans not monkeys.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Are people inherently good?
The Bible, Confucius, Sharia law and the Constitution of the United States of America are all historical examples of guidelines that set out the proper behaviour of people. This begs the question: if people are inherently good, altruistic may be a better word, and act for the greater good of their communities why have certain behaviours been mandated again and again through thousands of years of history? Agreed they all have their nuances. But fundamentally they all state a series of rules, rituals, principles or laws that are to be followed without question. There are, of course, cases where the rules have evolved – the best example in Western culture is the evolution and reinterpretation of Jewish law by the Christians and even differences have evolved between different Jewish and Christian groups.
If we look at the Bible, after the great flood that eliminated human kind, with the exception of Noah and his family, Genesis Chapter 20 verse 21 states “...I (God) will never again curse the ground because of humankind, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth..”. Confucius wrote his Analects at a time when China was in the throes of civil war and the country was in desperate need of cohesion. I could go on.
Perhaps Richard Dawkins (or in fact, Charles Darwin) is the most enlightened of all the great thinkers of the last few thousand years. The Selfish Gene, published in 1976, depicts the biological phenomenon that genes work towards a state of stable expression through their passive or inherent (but not conscious) propagation until such time that they are dominant in a given community (gene pool). Altruism in this case, states that sacrifice is a necessary part of the process to propagate the genes. Altruism is therefore a critical part of selfishness ie. The unprecedented expression of the gene to as high a level of frequency as possible until it is consistently and stably present throughout the gene pool.
If this form of selfishness is indeed our inherent behaviour, law and order exists to counteract our biological imperative. So are we inherently good? In terms of propagating successful or ‘fit’ genes – and I am talking about humans here – we are built with the nature to propagate and advance our species. You could argue that the great works of philosophy and religion spanning more than 5 thousand years have developed as a means of controlling mankind – this statement in itself is one that has been debated for years. But to take it a level further, you could argue that religious and philosophical texts of spiritual means actually exist to oppose human nature. Is our view on whether we are inherently ‘good’ skewed by the filters that these texts place on our apparently open minds? Is our nature, our biological imperative, constrained through the social constructs of religion, law and spirituality? If the human heart is evil and evil is the norm, can you argue that evil is actually good because it is the nature of the populous? As Shakespeare says, “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so” (Hamlet Act 2, Scene 2). Democracy exists to represent the thoughts of the masses on proportional basis (at least that is the intent). Therefore I propose that evil hearts are the norm and evil is good and laws exist to prevent society and the human species from progressing towards its full potential.
Then, as Isiah Berlin famously wrote, "few new truths have ever won their way against the resistance of established ideas save by being overstated". I am an atheist who believes that we have responsibility for our actions and that our actions must safeguard our communities and the future of the planet. Still, an interesting debate and one that I hope we can all enjoy.
If we look at the Bible, after the great flood that eliminated human kind, with the exception of Noah and his family, Genesis Chapter 20 verse 21 states “...I (God) will never again curse the ground because of humankind, for the inclination of the human heart is evil from youth..”. Confucius wrote his Analects at a time when China was in the throes of civil war and the country was in desperate need of cohesion. I could go on.
Perhaps Richard Dawkins (or in fact, Charles Darwin) is the most enlightened of all the great thinkers of the last few thousand years. The Selfish Gene, published in 1976, depicts the biological phenomenon that genes work towards a state of stable expression through their passive or inherent (but not conscious) propagation until such time that they are dominant in a given community (gene pool). Altruism in this case, states that sacrifice is a necessary part of the process to propagate the genes. Altruism is therefore a critical part of selfishness ie. The unprecedented expression of the gene to as high a level of frequency as possible until it is consistently and stably present throughout the gene pool.
If this form of selfishness is indeed our inherent behaviour, law and order exists to counteract our biological imperative. So are we inherently good? In terms of propagating successful or ‘fit’ genes – and I am talking about humans here – we are built with the nature to propagate and advance our species. You could argue that the great works of philosophy and religion spanning more than 5 thousand years have developed as a means of controlling mankind – this statement in itself is one that has been debated for years. But to take it a level further, you could argue that religious and philosophical texts of spiritual means actually exist to oppose human nature. Is our view on whether we are inherently ‘good’ skewed by the filters that these texts place on our apparently open minds? Is our nature, our biological imperative, constrained through the social constructs of religion, law and spirituality? If the human heart is evil and evil is the norm, can you argue that evil is actually good because it is the nature of the populous? As Shakespeare says, “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so” (Hamlet Act 2, Scene 2). Democracy exists to represent the thoughts of the masses on proportional basis (at least that is the intent). Therefore I propose that evil hearts are the norm and evil is good and laws exist to prevent society and the human species from progressing towards its full potential.
Then, as Isiah Berlin famously wrote, "few new truths have ever won their way against the resistance of established ideas save by being overstated". I am an atheist who believes that we have responsibility for our actions and that our actions must safeguard our communities and the future of the planet. Still, an interesting debate and one that I hope we can all enjoy.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Be a 'good' leader
A recent study by James Fowler, at the University of California, demonstrates that a single good action is amplified through our networks of friends and colleagues - in fact, everyone we encounter. The article "Cooperative behaviour cascades in human social networks" was published this month in a leading academic journal. He demonstrates something intuitively obvious - if we do something 'good' to someone they are more inclined to do something 'good' to other people with whom they interact...and so the web of positivity is cast.
Here is his website: http://jhfowler.ucsd.edu/
We are responsible for our actions and always have a choice. So the key lesson from Fowler's paper is that we can, individually, play a role in benefiting our communities. We must all take responsibility for our value systems and these are manifested through our actions. We must all be leaders and demonstrate our beliefs through our actions at every opportunity. We must all respond to challenges through actions that are balanced, just, inclusive and benefit our communities. We must remove our egos and selfishness to ensure that our actions exist with the single objective of benefiting our communities. Fowler's paper demonstrates that we, as individuals, can help change the world for the better. We must all be 'good' leaders.
Here is his website: http://jhfowler.ucsd.edu/
We are responsible for our actions and always have a choice. So the key lesson from Fowler's paper is that we can, individually, play a role in benefiting our communities. We must all take responsibility for our value systems and these are manifested through our actions. We must all be leaders and demonstrate our beliefs through our actions at every opportunity. We must all respond to challenges through actions that are balanced, just, inclusive and benefit our communities. We must remove our egos and selfishness to ensure that our actions exist with the single objective of benefiting our communities. Fowler's paper demonstrates that we, as individuals, can help change the world for the better. We must all be 'good' leaders.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
The wisdom economy
This week, the RSA talked about the transition from the 'knowledge economy' to the 'wisdom economy'. Intuitively, this sounds great. Words like 'consideration', 'thoughtfulness', 'insight' and 'consequence' come to mind. The basic premise is that knowledge and skills have been the differentiator for Western economies but we are seeing that the emerging markets are as intelligent, innovative and creative as the west. More importantly, the emerging markets are able to provide services and produce 'things' at a fraction of the cost as the western markets.
So what can differentiate the mature western markets? What is the next stage of maturity or evolution? The proposal is wisdom. The article states:
"A wisdom economy doesn’t ignore knowledge, but recognises that value is attached to the ethical and social framework within which that knowledge is used. Wisdom recognises that values and value-judgements are implicit in the way we live and that we need to be open about them. The knowledge economy is innovative. The wisdom economy is reflective. Reflection doesn’t displace innovation: but it asks what the purpose and end of the innovation will be. It stops to consider the consequences, and will sometimes place a higher value on inaction than on action as a result."
Here is the link to the article:
http://comment.rsablogs.org.uk/2010/03/03/knowledge-economy-wisdom-economy/
These types of idea are appearing more and more in conventional thinking. If wisdom is the next development of how we live together and operate, the time is right to sharpen our self awareness and review our values.
So what can differentiate the mature western markets? What is the next stage of maturity or evolution? The proposal is wisdom. The article states:
"A wisdom economy doesn’t ignore knowledge, but recognises that value is attached to the ethical and social framework within which that knowledge is used. Wisdom recognises that values and value-judgements are implicit in the way we live and that we need to be open about them. The knowledge economy is innovative. The wisdom economy is reflective. Reflection doesn’t displace innovation: but it asks what the purpose and end of the innovation will be. It stops to consider the consequences, and will sometimes place a higher value on inaction than on action as a result."
Here is the link to the article:
http://comment.rsablogs.org.uk/2010/03/03/knowledge-economy-wisdom-economy/
These types of idea are appearing more and more in conventional thinking. If wisdom is the next development of how we live together and operate, the time is right to sharpen our self awareness and review our values.
Friday, February 26, 2010
God for the weekend
Ever wanted to try god for a no-purchase-necessary, no-strings-attached weekend? Well, now you can. In Austria, a monastery is offering men the chance to be a monk for a weekend - for absolutely free! It's part of a recruitment drive to offer up a 'try before you buy' opportunity to people interested in monkism.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8525741.stm
Absolutely brilliant! It's putting religion up there with Easy Jet, Starbucks and McDonalds. I'm not religious but I say BOGOF. Do the monks get loyalty points or bonus prayer time if they recommend a friend?
Becomming a monk - a pretty fundamental life changing event - should really be handled more responsibly. Think of all the depressed people looking for meaning in their lifes - a quick weekend introduction to god in a peaceful, calm sanctuary will naturally appeal. These people could be making impulsive, life changing decisions while in a weakened mental state. This seems more like a tactic used by a religious cult than one of the major, venerable, global religions. It also seems a bit desperate. A quick, accessible fix.
If a religion wants to earn respect and include the 'right' people into its community, there has to be a more responsible way. This is the blatant commoditisation of god.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8525741.stm
Absolutely brilliant! It's putting religion up there with Easy Jet, Starbucks and McDonalds. I'm not religious but I say BOGOF. Do the monks get loyalty points or bonus prayer time if they recommend a friend?
Becomming a monk - a pretty fundamental life changing event - should really be handled more responsibly. Think of all the depressed people looking for meaning in their lifes - a quick weekend introduction to god in a peaceful, calm sanctuary will naturally appeal. These people could be making impulsive, life changing decisions while in a weakened mental state. This seems more like a tactic used by a religious cult than one of the major, venerable, global religions. It also seems a bit desperate. A quick, accessible fix.
If a religion wants to earn respect and include the 'right' people into its community, there has to be a more responsible way. This is the blatant commoditisation of god.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
21 hour working week (New Economics Foundation: NEF)
The New Economics Foundation (NEF) has just released a paper stating that a 21 hour working week is 'set to become the new norm'. According to the NEF "...so many of us live to work, work to earn, and earn to consume. And our consumption habits are squandering the earth’s natural resources... Spending less time in paid work could help us to break this pattern. We’d have more time to be better parents, better citizens, better carers and better neighbours. And we could even become better employees: less stressed, more in control, happier in our jobs and more productive. It is time to break the power of the old industrial clock, take back our lives and work for a sustainable future.”
http://neweconomics.org/press-releases/shorter-working-week-soon-inevitable-forecasts-think-tank130210
This is inspirational. That said, Isiah Berlin famously wrote "few new truths have ever won their way against the resistance of established ideas save by being overstated". Perhaps the paper by the NEF is trying to do something along these lines. I don't know many people who could handle a 50% pay cut - but then the principle is that wealth is spread and individual people are given the chance to focus on the pressing the matters stated above. The benefit is to society as a whole.
The important point is that an influential Think Tank has taken a stance on something (strangely) controversial that, if followed, could have major ramifications. I admire the principle and will follow the ensuing discussions with interest.
http://neweconomics.org/press-releases/shorter-working-week-soon-inevitable-forecasts-think-tank130210
This is inspirational. That said, Isiah Berlin famously wrote "few new truths have ever won their way against the resistance of established ideas save by being overstated". Perhaps the paper by the NEF is trying to do something along these lines. I don't know many people who could handle a 50% pay cut - but then the principle is that wealth is spread and individual people are given the chance to focus on the pressing the matters stated above. The benefit is to society as a whole.
The important point is that an influential Think Tank has taken a stance on something (strangely) controversial that, if followed, could have major ramifications. I admire the principle and will follow the ensuing discussions with interest.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Racist? Sexist?
Are we really as balanced and considered as we like to think? Is our thinking process truly rational? Do we have valid defences to our reasoning?
Project Implicit uses the Implicit Association Test to scientifically demonstrate our unconscious prejudiced associations. Gender, race, religion etc.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/
It is controversial - the data says what it says. We exist in a society of 'equal opportunities' but is this how our minds really work.
Take the tests and challenge your thinking.
Project Implicit uses the Implicit Association Test to scientifically demonstrate our unconscious prejudiced associations. Gender, race, religion etc.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/
It is controversial - the data says what it says. We exist in a society of 'equal opportunities' but is this how our minds really work.
Take the tests and challenge your thinking.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
One young world
One Young World is an organization that aims to be the voice of young people around the world on critical international issues such as the environment, health and interfaith engagement. Next week they are holding their inaugural summit in London and are expecting 1500 delegates from 192 countries to attend and debate the major socio-political issues we face today. The counsellors include Kofi Annan, Bob Geldof and Archbishop Desmond Tutu.
As people say, if you want to know what tomorrow will be like, ask kids. Now, more than ever, everyone can have a voice - next week, One Young World will be the forum for collaboration and unhindered creativity, the place to debate world issues and move our thinking one step forward. This is about bringing people together who are passionate about the world, under the auspices of established world leaders, who are interested in the thoughts and opinions of those closest to the volatile changes that underpin the way society works – on a global scale.
http://www.oneyoungworld.com/
By the end of February, 1500 people will have helped to influence the future direction for the world and will continue to do so through their evolving thoughts and actions.
This is a truly remarkable organisation.
As people say, if you want to know what tomorrow will be like, ask kids. Now, more than ever, everyone can have a voice - next week, One Young World will be the forum for collaboration and unhindered creativity, the place to debate world issues and move our thinking one step forward. This is about bringing people together who are passionate about the world, under the auspices of established world leaders, who are interested in the thoughts and opinions of those closest to the volatile changes that underpin the way society works – on a global scale.
http://www.oneyoungworld.com/
By the end of February, 1500 people will have helped to influence the future direction for the world and will continue to do so through their evolving thoughts and actions.
This is a truly remarkable organisation.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Positive psychology
Why settle for 'ok' when you can have 'great'?
Martin Seligman was the President of the American Psychological Association in 1998 and made the theme of positive psychology the basis for his tenure. Positive psychology is the study of optimal human functioning and challenges psychology's historical emphasis on the study of mental illness rather than on mental wellness. Traditionally, psychologists worked according to the disease model eg. curing schizophrenia. But what about nurturing genius and talent?
There are three features to the positive psychology model. These are 1) enjoyment 2) engagement and 3) affiliation. By understanding these three components, it gives us the opportunity to see how they are currently relevant to our lives. It also allows us to see how we can adapt our lives to achieve a 'positive psychology' state. We owe it to ourselves to understand this model and take responsibility for our own mental wellness. This way, we get the most out of life and are happier. This way we each play our role in building a happier community.
Martin Seligman was the President of the American Psychological Association in 1998 and made the theme of positive psychology the basis for his tenure. Positive psychology is the study of optimal human functioning and challenges psychology's historical emphasis on the study of mental illness rather than on mental wellness. Traditionally, psychologists worked according to the disease model eg. curing schizophrenia. But what about nurturing genius and talent?
There are three features to the positive psychology model. These are 1) enjoyment 2) engagement and 3) affiliation. By understanding these three components, it gives us the opportunity to see how they are currently relevant to our lives. It also allows us to see how we can adapt our lives to achieve a 'positive psychology' state. We owe it to ourselves to understand this model and take responsibility for our own mental wellness. This way, we get the most out of life and are happier. This way we each play our role in building a happier community.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Guns and alcohol
A new law has been passed to allow people in Arizona to bring their guns into bars and restaurants. The new law is supported, as you would expect, by the NRA.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33074414/ns/us_news-life/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31683427/ns/us_news-life/
While people carrying guns are not allowed to drink alcohol in these bars, there is surely something wrong here?
The American attitude to guns is what it is - people demand the right to carry / own a gun to protect themselves. This is a cultural thing, most prominent in certain areas - and whether you agree or disagree, it's a fact - much like the English like to play cricket and lose and the French like to write philosophy and be depressed. American politicians will naturally support the right to carry guns because they, as American citizens, will also share the desire. OK - agree or disagree it's a fact. But surely allowing guns to be carried in places where the social facilitator leads, in excess, to bad judgement, emotional inconsistency and physical impairment, this new law is surely insane.
I believe in the right to choose but politicians are there to help ensure our choices fall within a responsible framework. Do these politicians know nothing? Have these politicians not seen Bowling for Columbine?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33074414/ns/us_news-life/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31683427/ns/us_news-life/
While people carrying guns are not allowed to drink alcohol in these bars, there is surely something wrong here?
The American attitude to guns is what it is - people demand the right to carry / own a gun to protect themselves. This is a cultural thing, most prominent in certain areas - and whether you agree or disagree, it's a fact - much like the English like to play cricket and lose and the French like to write philosophy and be depressed. American politicians will naturally support the right to carry guns because they, as American citizens, will also share the desire. OK - agree or disagree it's a fact. But surely allowing guns to be carried in places where the social facilitator leads, in excess, to bad judgement, emotional inconsistency and physical impairment, this new law is surely insane.
I believe in the right to choose but politicians are there to help ensure our choices fall within a responsible framework. Do these politicians know nothing? Have these politicians not seen Bowling for Columbine?
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Our responsibility: Obama
Barack Obama talks about responsibility. After a decade of personalisation, the need for instant gratification and the falsely instilled belief that our actions are always right, it was refreshing when Obama raised these thoughts on responsibility. A little bit of introspection can go a long way. Slow down, think, ask what you can do to make your immediate world a better place. How can you change your ways? This is your responsibility. By making changes to your life, you can help change the world.
Currency of favours
This is fantastic - if you commit 4 hours of your time to a community project, you are given a ticket to a specially organised concert.
http://www.orangerockcorps.co.uk/
Young people taking action to improve their community and gaining rewards for doing so.
It is a transaction which means the benefits are quantifiable and involvement is unemotional towards the cause. There are clear benefits to any associated corporate brand. That said, it raises the importance of community involvement and is a talking point for kids.
All credit to the founders. By providing the opportunity, kids have an experience. With the experience, kids can start to think about how they need to engage with each other, their family and their community.
http://www.orangerockcorps.co.uk/
Young people taking action to improve their community and gaining rewards for doing so.
It is a transaction which means the benefits are quantifiable and involvement is unemotional towards the cause. There are clear benefits to any associated corporate brand. That said, it raises the importance of community involvement and is a talking point for kids.
All credit to the founders. By providing the opportunity, kids have an experience. With the experience, kids can start to think about how they need to engage with each other, their family and their community.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
