Ok, here's a challenge for you for this week (and every week for the rest of your life, :-).
Pick three people (one of them needs to be a stranger), and give them a sincere, specific compliment (Not "I like your shoes." Make it something specific).
Note your reactions and theirs. Then tell us all about it below in your comments. Comm 150 class, you have an official write-up you will need to do (See Coursework Menu in I-Learn).
Years ago, when my oldest was a baby, she and I flew on an airplane. I remember sitting there, with her on my lap, as the flight attendant explained the safety procedures for the flight. Something stuck out to me - when she was talking about the oxygen masks, she told us they would magically drop from the compartment over our seats. Then she said, "If you are traveling with a child or someone who requires assistance, secure your mask on first, and then assist the other person." I remember almost being horrified at the thought. Why would a good mother do anything besides get that mask over their own child first? I made the decision right then and there that if an emergency happened, I was most certainly going to help my child first.
As the years have gone by, I have thought about that moment on the airplane with regards to my own life. I have thought about the information I have shared and studied about interpersonal communication. I have also changed my mind about my original decision.
In my classes, we start out each semester with a study of the self-concept, and I always ask this question of my students: Why, do you think we start out our study with a look at our own self-concept? I ask them how many of them are good singers, or dancers, or artists. Very few raise their hands. Then I ask them to close their eyes and imagine they are five years old; then I ask them again: How many are good singers, dancers--artists--? Almost every hand goes up. Then I ask: What happened to you? How did you go from being good at those things to where you are now?
Self Concept defined is the relatively stable set of perception one holds of themselves. And everything we learn about ourselves in the first few years of life comes through a process called reflected appraisal. We are what other people tell us we are. For small children, that is the force that shapes their self-concept. Can you imagine, if everyone really understood that, how much different some children's childhoods would be? It makes my responsibility as a parent seem that much more significant.
Psychologists tell us that a lot of the basic beliefs we have about ourselves form in childhood, and they are very resistant to change. This means that our self-concept is not based on accurate, up-to-date information.
Consider this story by an anonymous author:
~The story of HUGH.~
Once upon a time, a Royal Person was born. His name was Hugh. Hugh was unlike anyone who had ever lived before or who would ever live again. Hugh was precious---unrepeatable---incomparable. For the first 15 months of life, Hugh only knew himself from the reflections he saw in the eyes of his caretakers. Hugh was terribly unfortunate. His caretakers, although not blind, had glasses over their eyes. And each set of glasses already had an image on it. So that meant that each caretaker only saw Hugh according to the image on his glasses. Thus, even though Hugh’s caretakers were physically present, not one of them ever actually saw him. By the time Hugh was grown, he was a mosaic of other people’s images of him, none of which was who he really was. Consequently, Hugh really did not know who he was. Sometimes, in the dark of the night, when he was all alone, Hugh knew that something of profound importance was missing. He experienced this as a gnawing sense of emptiness—a deep void. Hugh tried to fill the emptiness & void with many things: power, worldly fame, money, possessions, chemical highs, food, excitement, entertainment, relationships, children, work—other people. But no matter what he did, he never felt the gnawing emptiness go away. In the quiet of the night when all the distractions were gone, he heard a still quiet voice that said: Don’t forget; please don’t forget me! But alas! Hugh did forget & went to his death never knowing who he was.
Obviously, you should read the story as if it were YOU instead of HUGH. Makes you think doesn't it?
As we get older, the influence of reflected appraisal declines because another process takes over. It never completely goes away though--we will probably always care about what others think of us. The new process that becomes more prominent the older we get is called social comparison. We are what we are of or by comparison to others. And, almost always, this is a deadly trap, because we set unfair standards to live up to--trait by trait. We have a tendency as human beings to compare our worsts with others' bests.
I love this story by Jules Feiffer:
Ever since I was a little kid I didn’t want to be me. I wanted to be Billie Widdleton. And Billie Widdleton didn’t even like me. I walked like he walked. I talked like he talked. I signed up for the high school he signed up for---which was when Billie Widdleton changed. He began to hang around Herby Vanderman. He walked like Herby Vanderman. He talked like Herby Vanderman. He mixed me up! I began to walk & talk like Billie Widdleton walking & talking like Herby Vanderman. And then it dawned on me that Herby Vanderman walked & talked like Joey Haverlin, and Joey Haverlin walked and talked like Corky Sabinson. So here I am, walking and talking like Billie Widdleton’s imitation of Herb Vanderman’s version of Joey Haverlin trying to walk and talk like Corky Sabinson. And who do you think Corky Sabinson is always walking & talking like? Of all people – dopey Kenny Wellington – that little pest who walks & talks just like me!” ("Ever Since I Was A Little Kid," by Jules Feiffer)
Our self-concept is further complicated by the fact that we live in a very intense media-related society. The media constantly blasts us with images and messages about who we should want to be. You know what the number one gift request has been for high school seniors every year since 2000? Plastic surgery. Who set this standard? People selling their products. But how come it's them that gets to set this standard? Why do they get to decide what's beautiful and/or acceptable?
Ultimately, it is US that gets to decide. But studies show that most people's self-concept is dominated by the negative. As humans, we have a tendency to focus more on our negative qualities than our positive ones. Consider all the compliments you have or will receive in your life. How many of us have a tendency to almost talk the giver out of them? And while I would dare say that I have had many many more compliments paid to me in my lifetime than negative comments, why is it that I remember specific details of the negative ones?
We could talk about this for the rest of our lives as human beings, and never come to any definite conclusions. This is one crucial area where I am particularly grateful for the Gospel. The Gospel teaches us that we are children of a loving Heavenly Father. Knowing that alone gives you a sense of purpose..of worth...of identity. The Gospel gives us the conclusions that we search for.
In Moses, Chapter 1, as God & Moses are talking, over and over again God calls Moses his Son. Then after God departs, and Satan comes and tries to tempt him, calling him "Son of Man." (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/moses/1). For every eternal principle, Satan has a counterfeit. Satan wants all of us to believe that we are less than what we are. We were sent here to do important work, and if we see ourselves as anything less than we are, then it's "mission accomplished" for Satan. Why would he try harder to take us out of the game when he can influence us to take ourselves out?
Let's go back to my beginning story about the oxygen mask. If you think of that example as an allegory for life, then it's not only "okay" for us to put the oxygen mask first, it's imperative. How can we serve and help others if we can't take care of ourselves first?
Our responsibility then, is to make sure our mask is secure.
Every message has two dimensions. CONTENT and RELATIONAL.
The content part of a message is the actual information being conveyed. Example: "I am hungry."
The relational part of a message is what's "behind" the message. It tells the listener how we feel--about them, us, or the message. Example: "I am hungry." (relational part--"I am hungry, and we are passing an Arctic Circle. I want you to pull over and get me something to eat!")
This brings a HUGE gender difference into play when dealing with communicating.
Men tend to pay attention to the content part of the message.
Women tend to pay attention to the relational part of the message.
Surprise, surprise, surprise!
Let me give you an example from my own life. When Eric & I were first married, he came home from work one day just exhausted. It had been a particularly hard day for him, and all he wanted to do was come home and relax. His brain was fried. I was at home; multi-tasking as usual. And this day, I had at least 79 irons in the fire--cleaning house was just one of them. And to put you in the frame of mind what I was feeling that day, I had been cleaning up everyone else's stuff. Now when you're a mom, you will understand that cleaning up everyone else's stuff day after day after day gets a little old every once in a while. So I was not in the best of moods. Enter Eric, into this relational petri-dish of emotion & multi-tasking, with his own petri-dish of emotion & tiredness (can you see the main scene set-up here?). He sits down in a chair in the living room, loosens his tie, throws his coat on the window seat & his stuff on the floor (my eye started to twitch at that moment just a little). He then grabs a book and proceeds to start reading (great way to unwind right? Grab a good book). Enter me, with a big bag of garbage (most of which is not my garbage mind you). I say, "Eric, will you please take out the garbage?" Notice that I have completely missed his relational messages, because I'm too darn busy with my own. He looks at me; sighs a long, tired sigh, says..."yes," grumbles something under his breath, then takes out the garbage. I stand there looking after him thinking, "The nerve! I have been cleaning up all day long, and all I asked him to do was take out the garbage!" I am ticked. And at this point, Eric has NO IDEA of this fact. Why? Besides being out of his mind exhausted, he was paying attention to the content part of my message. The poor man even thinks he's getting points for doing this task for me. He's thinking, "Ok, she asked me to take out the garbage, I said yes (even though I'm exhausted), and I did it right away. Points for me!" So he comes back in, steps over the stuff he threw on the floor, plops down into his chair, and continues unwinding. I am fuming. I move around him, making very obvious "tsk" noises--put his stuff away, vacuum around him (he even lifts up his legs so I can vacuum under them, isn't that nice), and do my very best to show him relationally that I am busily cleaning our house, and his stuff, and I am ticked at him. Does he get the message, even though to me, I am sending it loud and clear? Nope. Nada. Later on, after he has unwound a little, he wonders why I am upset, and I wonder why he doesn't get it.
Eric has studied the human brain with regards to content & relational communicating, and he explains that the male & female brain is vastly different (well no kidding?!). There's something in our brain called the corpus callosum that differs greatly in male & female brains (see http://www.wisegeek.com/are-there-differences-between-the-male-and-female-brain.htm and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_callosum for more info). This corpus callosum is a nerve structure that goes down the center of the brain, and it basically regulates the communication between the right & left sides. In women...the corpus callosum is HUGE. And the nerves that stem from it go all over the brain, connecting the right & left hemispheres in multiple locations. In men, the corpus callosum is much smaller, and it shrinks the older men get. Because of this structure, when women perform a task, they use their entire brain, and when men perform a task, they use one hemisphere or the other.
Also, (please understand I am not a brain expert, I just know the very very basics here) female senses are better than male senses almost across the board. Women have better eyesight, color differentiation, sound differentiation--our skin is 15 times more sensitive than male skin.
What does this mean in working terms? A few really vital things:
1. It means that generally, women are better multi-taskers. We really can have 79 irons in the fire, and do them all at the same time. Consequently, men are better concentrators. Because men use either one side of the brain or the other, it means that they can really focus on tasks, but only one at a time.
2. Women can operate on a level of subtlety that males can't even approach. Ever heard of "women's intuition?" Researchers argue that this is the root of a woman's intuition. I can communicate with my female friends without even using words or complete sentences.
3. This can have a HUGE impact on relationships. Think about it. If women have operated nearly all their lives on a level of subtlety and relational messages that men can't even comprehend, what can happen when a woman marries a man? Ladies, sometimes we think that since it comes so naturally to us, our husband should be able to understand the relational messages we throw his way. NO! It doesn't work! He doesn't get it! He's not insensitive, he just doesn't get it! Yet, sometimes, especially in a marriage, we expect others to think as we do. "If he really loved me, he would just know."
4. This doesn't mean that men are stupid, and women are unrealistic & conniving. It just means we're different. Neither one is better or superior to the other. It just means that it's different.
(Disclaimer: Obviously, this does not apply to all females and all males. I know men that are really quite good at discerning relational messages, and women who can concentrate on very intense tasks. For instance, my father would sit at the dinner table and just look at something he wanted, and my mother would almost immediately give it to him. That's some serious relational communication going down there!)
5. Not understanding crucial concepts such as these can lead to a whole lot of insecurity and other issues that can tear apart self-concepts and relationships.
6. We need to rely most on content communication. Interpersonal relationship expert Dr. John L Lund, in his book "How to Hug a Porcupine," asserts that it is vital that couples rely most on content communicating. "Say what you mean, and mean what you say." In his "Ten Articles of Commitment To Myself and To My Mate," Article III states: "I am willing to become a Content Communicator. I will own my words and be responsible for the verbal content of my messages. I will say what I mean and mean what I say. I will avoid hint dropping and relying upon body language or nonverbal means of communicating. I will not expect others to read my mind or discern the intent of my expectations. I will own my words in a respectful manner. I will not parent my equals by suggesting what they should, need, or ought to do."
Let's go back to that scene with Eric & the garbage for a minute: If both of us would have focused more on content communicating, can you imagine how differently the scenario would have played out?
(Eric, still exhausted, comes in, sits in his chair, pulls out his book etc.)
Me: "Honey, will you take out the garbage?"
Eric: "I am so tired right now Lori! I have not had a very good day at work. I need a few moments to myself. It would mean a lot to me if I could just sit here for a moment and read a book to unwind. Then I will not only take out the garbage, I will help you finish the housework."
Me: "That sounds great. I haven't had the best day either. Maybe we can talk later when we've had some time to ourselves (sits down on couch & pulls out her book)."
(insert appropriate Disney end credit music here).
Ahhhhhhhh. Much much better.
Now tell me what YOU think.
Oh and watch this link. It is HILARIOUS and illustrates these concepts well.
Class today was an introduction to basic communication principles. Isn't it interesting how we communicate in different ways? What is a strength to some is a weakness to others - And isn't it interesting that when pressure is applied (your grade depends on it, you only have 3 minutes to complete, etc), how communication sometimes breaks down when you need it to be the most clear?
I was thinking about the basic human needs we all learned when we were in 5th grade science: 1. Food. 2. Clothing. 3. Shelter. We all took one human need for granted--it didn't even make that list. The fourth need is our absolute need to communicate.
We need communication to SURVIVE, not just THRIVE.
I'll give you a poignant example: Frederick II, (emperor of Germany from 1196 to 1250), wanted to know what language was innate in humans, so he took 100 infants from his kingdom away fro their mothers (can you imagine?!), roughly the same age--and used them in what one medieval historian called "one of his most significant, if inhumane, experiments."
"He bade foster mothers and nurses to suckle the children, to bathe and wash them but in no way to prattle with the, for he wanted to learn whether they would speak the Hebrew language, which was the oldest, or Greek, or Latin, or Arabic, or perhaps the language of their parents, of whom they had been born. But he labored in vain because all of the children died. For they could not live without the petting and joyful faces and loving words of their foster mothers."
ALL of our basic needs are either directly connected to, or facilitated by communication. The ability to forge relationships is fundamental for human survival and success. It's as vital as the water and food our bodies must have in order to live.
The very first pages of the text we use in class gives an example of someone playing the "silent treatment" as a child. Anyone ever play that "game?" Been the recipient? I remember getting the silent treatment from my older siblings when I was a child. That was the WORST POSSIBLE TORTURE they could dole out. At first I tried really hard to ignore it--to act indifferent. But it wasn't long before a wider range of emotions took over. Sadness, anger, betrayal, loss...grief--and every emotion in between. I remember getting the silent treatment from a group of girls in elementary school. The pain I felt on the playground I still feel today when I think of it. Adults (as well as children) have used the silent treatment in virtually every society as a TOOL to express displeasure & gain control. I love the example the text gives about Senator John McCain. When he was a Navy Pilot, he was shot down over North Vietnam and held as a POW for over 6 years, often in solitary confinement. He describes the importance of communicating:
"The punishment for communicating could be severe, and a few POWs, having been caught and beaten for their efforts, had their spirits broken as their bodies were battered. Terrified of a return trip to the punishment room, they would lie still in their cells when their comrades tried to tap them up on the wall. Very few would remain uncommunicative for long. To suffer all this alone was less tolerable than torture. Withdrawing in silence from the fellowship of other Americans..was to us the approach of death."
Our need to communicate, and our effectiveness at it can determine so many things. It can enhance our physical health. It can maintain our emotional well-being. It shapes our self-concept. It satisfies our need for attention and affection.
Consider this scripture: When Adam was placed in the Garden of Eden, what was the first thing God said? Genesis Ch 2:18 - "And the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be alone." What I used to think that meant was that men were just no good without the women in their lives. :-) Now while that may be completely true (and I'll be glad to provide you with empirical examples...), it goes deeper than that. Man (meaning all of us) was created to communicate with others. We need others to survive and thrive.
We will literally die without it.
Let it be a dance we do.
May I have this dance with you?
Through the good ties
And the bad times, too,
Let it be a dance.
Learn to follow, learn to lead,
Feel the rhythm, fill the need.
To reap the harvest, plant the seed.
And let it be a dance.
Morning star comes out at night,
Without the dark there is no light.
If nothing's wrong, then nothing's right.
Let it be a dance.
-Ric Masten
(re-posted in part from one of my earlier posts...)
I'm always a little apprehensive when it a new class starts. What will the class be like? Will they be excited about learning? Will they like me? (Yep, even college professors feel like this!). More than that even, I wonder this about a new group of students: Will they be active or passive learners? You see, I've noticed something very significant since I've become an educator. There are those who act, and those who wait to be acted upon. The whole mindset of "look at all this coursework I have to do" or "do I have to do all this" is baffling to me. If knowledge is truly the only thing we can take with us, then why on earth would we want to cheat ourselves out of any learning experience? When we pay top dollar for a car, or a house, or anything that is considered valuable, we want the best right? Would you pay top dollar for a Mercedes then choose to have no engine in it? Yet some mindsets are like that for education. Some pay top dollar for an education, then never crack open the text book, skip classes, or even sleep through class. Some get by only doing the bare minimum course work then baulk when they receive a less than desirable assessment. Some have had straight A's but have never really risked anything for the sake of learning. And for what? A Mercedes without an engine?
Oh class--please be an agent of action in your learning. Ask yourself "what more can I do to better learn" instead of "what more do I have to do to get an A." I promise you it will be worth it.
As we come to the end of the Winter 2010 Semester, I am sad and happy at the same time. My Comm150 class this semester was particularly amazing. The combination of individuals were so unique, so inspired, so extraordinary....Ever have the feeling when you experience something that you know is monumental? That was this class. Spiritual & funny, dedicated and discussion oriented--a teacher's dream. OH I will miss meeting with them M/W/F from 2-3pm, but they PROMISED they would all keep in touch.
Ok, this isn't an official interpersonal communication post, but I just had to share that my daughter Rebecca Hope is competing in the 2010 Saint Anthony Idaho Junior Miss Program this Saturday at the SFHS JuniorHS Auditorium! The theme is "Once Upon A Time...". Doors open at 6:00pm, but it's gonna be packed, so get there early! (Tickets are $9)
I'm so proud of my girl! Over a year ago, she decided she was going to do Junior Miss. She had heavy speaking skills (she took 3rd place in the state her Freshman year in public forum debate), but didn't want to do a speech. So she decided to play the piano, and she picked out a specific piece that she wanted to learn for Junior Miss. Only one problem. She didn't know how to play the piano. Oh, she took a lesson here and there over the years, but nothing really significant. So she approached a college piano instructor & asked her to teach her this song. The piano teacher asked what level Becca was, Becca said "beginner," and the teacher handed the music back to her saying "this is too difficult a piece to learn for a beginner, and suggested beginning books for her to begin with. Becca politely said, "no, I really want to learn this song," to which the teacher replied again that it was way too difficult for her, she'd never learn it until she became more advanced. So Becca politely thanked the teacher, went home, and over the next year and a half, she taught it to herself. She really hopes the piano instructor's going to be there Saturday night. She's got a thing or two to show her...
Ok so here are some darling pictures of my girl. I simply cannot wait to see her Saturday night. I know she will be fantastic! I love you my Becca girl, and could not be prouder of the young woman you have become.
She is so photogenic! Even when she's trying to make a goofy face, she looks adorable!
In 1995 (when Becca was 3), getting her to wear CLOTHES was a feat, and a dress was nearly impossible! This is a rare shot taken on Easter Sunday. Awww aint she cute!?
Becca & her sister Sarah have always been close. They have this special bond that only sisters share, and it grows and grows each year.
The dark haired beauty that is Rebecca now, was completely blond not too long ago. And nope, she didn't dye her hair...it just went dark one season, and it's never looked back.
As a family, we've had the privilege to go on some really neat trips. This is one that we took to New York City, and Becca & her sis got their first ride in a NYC cab. Note their wide eyes....(I think Sarah's holding on to Becca for fear she may lose her out the door or something!).
Two peas in a pod--Sarah and Becca. Except that one may be a pea, but the other is an entirely different vegetable all together. Even though they are not a lot alike, they still are the closest of sisters.
Becca has goals to attend BYU-Idaho and receive her Bachelor's Degree, then continue on to Dental Hygenist school. I was a mess when my oldest baby girl put on that cap & gown, what am I gonna do when my youngest baby girl puts hers on?
The three of us together....Now there is a very silly place. But we like it that way, we laugh more.
Yes, it's true. Everyone loves our Becca!
Two of the greatest women in my life. How did I get so lucky!
Just look at how beautiful they are! WOW!
This is the dress she'll be wearing when she performs her "oh yes I can--just watch me play this difficult piece" piano number. She will be fantastic!!
And that's my girl. Rebecca Eryn Hope.
Becca please always remember that I love you the BLUEST!
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child:
but when I became a man, I put away childish things. -1 Corinthians 13:11
The world of the child is largely created for him by the adults in his environment. He has little or no control over the kind of input he receives. His self-concept is therefore quite dependent upon how he is treated and what is said and done to him. This is appropriate and necessary for the child.
Sad to say, most of us, as adults, continue to function in much the same manner as when we were children. We continue to expect others to make us feel good and we blame them for making us feel bad. This is not only inappropriate for and adult but it is also quite unnecessary. While it appears to be true that most of us will always need and welcome support from those around us, it is not true that we are entirely dependent upon them. Yet, many of us never seem to discover this basic truth.
Because we apparently never eliminate many of our past learnings, even when harmed by them, it would be quite helpful if more people became aware of another way of thinking about the self that is, perhaps, a little easier to understand than some of the commonly accepted ways. A simple analogy is presented below which can be useful in helping to understand certain aspects of any personal relationship. However, it is particularly relevant when dealing with children or when observing many of the personal, emotional interchanges between and among children.
Let us imagine and conceive of the self as if it were a bucket. How we feel and how we will behave at any given moment is dependent upon how much or how little we have in our buckets. If our bucket is filled to overflowing, (which almost never happens), we will feel joy, have energy, and look forward to each day with enthusiasm. We will radiate warmth, be tolerant, forgiving, understanding and supporting of others. We will be glad we are alive and will exultantly proclaim, "Life is good." This is a well-developed pro-life viewpoint.
If our buckets are completely empty, (which almost never happens), we will feel and display all those characteristics which are opposite to those just stated. We will fell depressed, have little energy, and dread the coming of the next day. We will be unhappy, bitter, complaining, vindictive, and non-supporting of others. We will whine and miserably or angrily proclaim: "Life is lousy, purposeless, and hopeless." This is a well-developed anti-life viewpoint.
When faced with a person whose bucket is empty, most of us tend to become defensive---we feel threatened, fearful, hurt, or angry. It is likely that if we are strongly attacked verbally, we will respond in similar fashion. The emotional heat so generated is often not conducive to the development of healthy working relationships, not to the development of kindly feeling toward our attacker.
If we understood and applied the idea of the self as a bucket, we might discover that we would be able to behave quite differently than is usually expected. For example, when an attack is being directed toward us, rather than feeling hurt or counterattacking, we might find that we will be able calmly to view the upset person from a non-emotional vantage point. We could then say to ourselves: ‘Oh, you poor thing! You must have an empty bucket!" This places the attacker in an entirely different perspective. It can make us realize that his state of distress has very little to do with us, even though he seems to think it does. We will be able to realize that he is behaving that way because he feels so bad about himself. His bucket must be empty or else he wouldn’t be behaving that way. We might even be moved to feel genuine sympathy for him.
If we adopted the bucket view of self, we would understand that the motive underlying his attack is more directly attributable to his empty bucket than to anything we might have done to warrant criticism. We would realize that the person who is characteristically bitter is a person who has an empty or near-empty bucket. The bitterness is an expression of that emptiness.
The person with an empty bucket does not feel good about himself. He is actually upset with himself. In fact, he dislikes himself or else he wouldn’t be so consistently hateful toward others. This is axiomatic: anyone who consistently criticizes, finds fault with, demeans, ridicules, or maliciously gossips about another person actually dislikes himself. Furthermore, his behavior may be characterized as an attempt to engage in bucket dipping.
In addition to our buckets, each of us is equipped with a dipper. The consistently negative person keeps his dipper working overtime in a futile attempt to diminish another person and seemingly enhance himself. He may often succeed in the former, but he always fails miserably in the latter. It is impossible to fill one’s own bucket by dipping into another’s.
Knowing that each of us has a dipper as well as a bucket makes it possible to understand some otherwise fairly inexplicable behavior. It also becomes relatively easy to identify those who approach each day with dipper clutched firmly in hand, frantically engaged in attempting to empty the buckets of those around them. Finally, this view of behavior allows us to cast our own reactions in a different light.
The task then, for a concerned human being who is striving to become more pro-life and more positive, is to exercise every opportunity to help fill another’s bucket and to become intently alert to the spontaneously negative use of his own dipper.
How we go about attempting to fill buckets, to help another person feel better about himself, is actually already well known by most of us; although, we perhaps never realized quite how or why it was so significant. We fill others’ buckets by giving them sincere praise, compliments, accepting smiles, and displaying concerned interest. Strangely and inexplicably, we can add to our own buckets most directly and most mysteriously by working diligently to put drops into another person’s bucket. Under no circumstances do we ever add drops to our own by dipping into another bucket.
Children are relatively helpless. If more time and energy is spent dipping from their buckets than is spent putting drops into them, they have little recourse available to them other than to cringe in defeat or strike out in retaliation. Thus, the constant ever-present phenomenon of children tormenting one another (as well as aiming their dippers at adults), is a relentless quest to "get even." Of course they never succeed. But, their attempt can be understood as an unconscious understanding of at least one half of our concept of buckets and dippers . . . they realize that others have buckets which often contain considerably more than they, themselves, possess. They wrongfully believe that if they dip sufficiently deep enough and often enough, they will not only diminish the supply of the envied one, but will somehow add the stolen drops to their own impoverished supply. Their temporary smile of sadistic satisfaction is soon overcome by the stark reality of the barrenness of their internal environment and they repeat their foolish and harmful bucket-dipping behavior.
When you next look upon or have occasion to relate to a child who is angry, sullen, whining, belligerent, rebellious, obnoxious, cruel, tormenting, destructive or non-cooperative, know that you are witnessing the behavior of a person whose bucket is empty. Psychiatric, psychological, educational, or intuitive diagnosis is unlikely to add much to your knowledge about how to react or respond to him. If the diagnosis suggests a procedure or method of approach which is successfully employed and a positive change occurs in the child, you will know that his bucket must have been filled. Because his bucket was filled, he feels good about himself. When he comes to feel sufficiently good about himself, he will no longer need to respond as he did formerly.
The imperishable child within the adults you see all around you (as well as in your mirror), will respond likewise when his bucket contains a sufficient amount to tip the balance in favor of positive and pro-life attitudes.
We nourish the bodies of our children, but how seldom we nourish their self-esteem. We provide them with beef and potatoes, but neglect to give them words that would sing in their memories for years.
-Gloria Pitzer
Here’s a thought:
When you run into someone who is disagreeable to others, you may be sure he is uncomfortable with himself. The amount of pain we inflict upon others is directly proportional to the amount we feel within us!
Not Understood (by anonymous)
Not understood. We move along asunder,
Our paths grow wider as the seasons creep
Along the years; we marvel and we wonder
Why life is life, and then we fall asleep,
Not understood.
Not understood. We gather false impressions
And hug them closer as the years go by,
Till virtues often seem to us transgressions;
And thus men rise and fall and live and die,
Not understood.
Not understood. Poor souls with stunted vision
Oft measure giants by their narrow gauge.
The poisoned shafts of falsehood and derision
Are oft impelled ‘gainst those who mold the age,
Not understood.
Not understood. The secret springs of action,
Which lie beneath the surface and the show,
Are disregarded; with self-satisfaction
We judge our neighbors as they often go,
Not understood.
Not understood. How trifles often change us.
The thoughtless sentence or the fancied slight
Destroys long years of friendships, and estranges us,
EMOTIONS ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF OUR LIVES. We literally experience millions every day, and have done since the day we were born. So we should be pretty familiar with them by now right? Imagine if someone from another planet were to come down and say “what are these emotion things that we hear so much about? I don’t experience them. What are emotions?” Could you define emotions if you had to? Would you say emotions are "feelings?" Really? I feel hungry right now, is that an emotion (actually in my case, it could very well be!)?
When Yale University psychologist Robert Sternberg asked people to describe an "intelligent person," one of the main skills listed was the ability to understand and get along with others. Psychologist Daniel Goleman calls it "emotional intelligence"; or "our ability to understand and manage one's own emotions and be sensitive to others'." (HUH—so intellectual ability isn't the only way to measure one's talents--NO KIDDING!?) In fact, emotions play a critical role in almost all of our interpersonal relationships. I know what some of you are thinking: “GREAT. Emotions. UGH. They’re so…..emotional. I’m not good at emotional.” Sorry, but there’s no getting around it. We better bone up on emotions if we are going to be effective and productive in our lives.
Let’s begin with the closest thing to math that you will ever see from me: A formula. Since emotions involve a process, there is a formula that corresponds:
Anyone who loves a good formula knows how to break it down. So let’s do just that.
Part 1: Stimulus: All emotions are caused by something (contrary to what you may think sometimes when your girlfriend breaks out in tears for no “apparent” reason). That “something” could be an event—a thought—a hormone—whatever. There has to be a stimulus in order for there to be an emotion.
Part 2: Physiological response: This is the way our body reacts. This is the “feeling” part. When we experience strong emotions, we may feel an increased heart rate, elevated blood sugar levels, a rise in blood pressure, a slowing of digestion, a dilation of pupils, and an increase in adrenaline secretions. We may shake—or cry—or sweat—or have a churning stomach—or tense jaw—or break out in red splotches all over—(I used to get so nervous when I’d play the piano in public that I would break out in these horrible red splotches all over my neck and chest. To this day when I have to play or perform in public I wear high-necked shirts.). The physiological response is the physical way our body reacts to the stimulus. This is the part that we feel physically.
Part 3: Cognitive interpretation: Now this is the real key to the emotion. Cognitive interpretation suggests we make a judgment, and that judgment determines the emotion. For example, let’s say you are walking down the street, and you see a guy stick his head out of the window, and he just starts yelling swear words at you. Very specific ones. Then he starts calling you names, and yelling horrible personal insults. What is your reaction? How would you “feel?” Angry? Embarrassed? Horrified? Surprised? Shocked? Let’s say for the sake of argument you feel intense anger. How dare someone do this to you!? So just as you look back to give whomever the tongue-lashing of his life, you notice the sign on the building he’s in: “Upper Valley Mental Institution.” How do you feel now? Your judgment of the situation just changed didn’t it? Perhaps it’s not anger you’re feeling now—perhaps it’s sympathy, or relief, or understanding—certainly not anger.
So here’s my next question: CAN WE CONTROL (100%!) ANY OF THE PARTS OF THIS “EMOTION” FORMULA?
Let’s break the formula down again to answer that question:
Can we control the stimulus 100% of the time? We can sometimes control the stimulus but not always. For instance, we can avoid things that we tend to respond negatively to (i.e.-scary movies, snakes, or scary movies about snakes etc.), but we can’t control the stimulus 100% of the time. To do that would be to control things outside of ourselves 100%. So the bottom line for stimulus is this: stuff happens, and sometimes we can control it, sometimes we can’t.
Can we control our physiological response 100% of the time? Again, we can sometimes. We can learn techniques to deal with things like stress, or pain, or nervousness, etc., but the bottom line is the same. We cannot control every single situation our bodies will come in contact with, so our body’s gonna do what our body’s gonna do.
This leaves cognitive interpretation.
Can we control our cognitive interpretation 100% of the time? Yes, yes, and YES! ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE TIME, we can control what we think and feel. THIS IS THE KEY to emotions! And I’ve heard all the arguments…all the “what if’s,” and I still stand behind this one. We can (100%!) choose what we feel. I heard one such “what if” in one of my classes: “What if someone had just murdered my child in cold-blood? I would have no choice but to feel complete anger. You can’t tell me I could control that!?” Yes, I can tell you that actually. You made a choice to feel anger. Was it an awful thing? Yes. But did you have a choice in feeling that anger? Yes. “That cannot be possible!” some of you are thinking. Let me remind you of a story to illustrate:
October 2006: A 32-yr old milk truck driver stormed into an Amish elementary school, tied up ten little girls and shot them all. Five of them died. Then he took his own life. The Amish people felt great anguish, but chose not to feel anger. They chose not to feel anger. In fact, the Amish chose instead to reach out to the milkman’s tortured family, and it so touched the family that they released the following statement to the public:
“To our Amish friends, neighbors, and local community: Our family wants each of you to know that we are overwhelmed by the forgiveness, grace, and mercy that you’ve extended to us. Your love for our family has helped to provide the healing we so desperately need. The prayers, flowers, cards, and gifts you’ve given have touched our hearts in a way no words can describe. Your compassion has reached beyond our family, beyond our community, and is changing our world, and for this we sincerely thank you. Please know that our hearts have been broken by all that has happened. We are filled with sorrow for all of our Amish neighbors whom we have loved and continue to love. We know that there are many hard days ahead for all the families who lost loved ones, and so we will continue to put our hope and trust in the God of all comfort, as we all seek to rebuild our lives.”
Let me assert again: We can 100% control our cognitive interpretation. What does this mean?
FACT: You, and only you are responsible for your emotions (write this down and star it!). No one can make you feel anything unless you let them.
There are exceptions to this rule however. Sickness (physical or mental), chemical abuse, phobias, depression…all these can rob a person of their ability to control their emotions. Still, for a healthy person, THE RULE APPLIES.
This fact also doesn’t negate the presence of emotional contagions. We are influenced by the feelings of those around us.
A million years ago when I attended Ricks College (now BYU-Idaho), I had a great psychology teacher. Brother Maelstrom. He taught that all emotions do four things:
1.Emotions always change. You can’t maintain an emotion forever.
2.Emotions focus our perceptions on the stimulus of the emotion. Therefore emotions make us see LESS clearly, not more clearly (i.e.: you’re walking through a meadow and noticing the flowers. Then you look up and see a bull..you immediately have a reaction? FEAR! RUN? All of a sudden, you don’t notice the air, the flowers, the colors, etc…you notice the route outta there!) Anyone ever hear of the term BLIND RAGE?
3.They make us self-centered. It’s all about what I’M feeling.
4.They make us impulsive and reactive.
Taking the above into account, here is another extremely important rule never to forget:
NEVER EVER MAKE AN IMPORTANT LIFE DECISION BASED ON EMOTION!
(What is an important life decision that people make at BYUI every day? Marriage!)
Most emotions have the potential to be facilitative (positive) or debilitative (negative). It’s all in how we interpret it.
But many of us struggle with how to positively express emotions. I’ve certainly had my share of “mom moments” for example (Bill Cosby called them “caniptions”), and I have had moments when I have most definitely “lost it.” How can we learn to control or more positively express our emotions?
First of all it’s important to know that expressing emotions is very culturally dependent. In individualistic cultures like the United States, we feel more comfortable in expressing emotions than do collectivist cultures (like Japan & India for example).
And while there aren’t any universal rules for the best way to communicate emotions, a wide range of research supports the fact that expressing emotions appropriately is healthy and valuable. The following suggestions can help (if you live in an individualistic culture):
1.Recognize your feelings.Be specific. What exactly are you feeling? Do you have a large “emotional vocabulary?” If not, get to work on it! Look at the chart below. Ask yourself: Do I use these specific words to describe my emotions? (For example, I have this problem with things that I like. I have a tendency to say “Oh, I love that,” or “I love him,” etc. I throw the word “love” around to fit any range of feeling I have. I sometimes do the same thing with “hate”). Ask yourself: What exactly am I feeling? For example, am I “ecstatic,” or just “content?” (See figures below from the 12th edition of “Looking Out Looking In”)
2.Tune in to your self-talk. Learn to control it. Your brain doesn’t know when you are “just kidding” when you self-depreciate. So stop it! The sub-conscious doesn’t know the difference—it will believe whatever your self-talk says. If you don’t control it, it will control you.
3.Dispute irrational thoughts or “fallacies.” Do we spend an unnecessary amount of time and effort on illogical conclusions that turn into debilitative emotions? There are 7 major fallacies that affect our emotional state. How many times have we been “guilty” of these?
1.The Fallacy of Perfection asserts that people should be able to handle every situation with complete confidence and skill. Believing in the myth of perfection not only can keep others from liking you, but also can act as a force to diminish your own self-esteem.
2.The Fallacy of Approval is the mistaken belief that it is not just desirable but vital to get the approval of virtually every person. In addition to the obvious discomfort that arises from denying your own principles and needs to gain acceptance and approval from others, the myth of approval is irrational because it implies that others will respect and like you more if you go out of your way to please them. Striving for universal acceptance is irrational because it is simply not possible.
3.The Fallacy of Shoulds is the inability to distinguish between what is and what should be. Becoming obsessed with shoulds has three troublesome consequences. First, it leads to unnecessary unhappiness, for people who are constantly dreaming about the ideal are seldom satisfied with what they have or who they are. A second drawback is that merely complaining without acting can keep you from doing anything to change unsatisfying conditions. A third problem with shoulds that you impose on others is that this sort of complaining can build a defensive climate with others, who will resent being nagged.
4.The Fallacy of Overgeneralization occurs when we base a belief on a limited amount of evidence and use overgeneralizations.
5.The Fallacy of Causation is based on the belief that emotions are caused by others rather than by one’s own self-talk. This fallacy causes trouble in two ways. The first plagues people who become overly cautious about relating because they don’t want to “cause” any pain or inconvenience for others. The second is when we believe that others cause our emotions. It’s our thinking, not the actions of others, that determines how we feel.
6.The Fallacy of Helplessness suggests that satisfaction in life is determined by forces beyond your control, that we are only helpless victims.
7.The Fallacy of Catastrophic Expectations operates on the assumption that if something bad can possibly happen, it will
(Fallacies information from “Looking Out Looking In,” 12th edition).
4.Accept responsibility for your own feelings. No more saying & thinking “You make me so angry!”
5.Let it go. I have a friend that will not go to our class reunions because “so-and-so” might be there. They did not like each other & had a huge fight in high school. This year I will be out of high school for 25 years. TWENTY-FIVE YEARS. I asked my friend if she even remembered why her and this other person were mad at each other in high school. She doesn’t remember. Holding things like this in is what my dad used to say is like holding a rattlesnake in your coat. “Others might be affected, but ultimately, you’re the only one that gets bit.” Let go of those debilitative emotions that are dragging you down.
6.Teach yourself to see things and people in more Christ-like ways. Give people the benefit of the doubt. Assume the highest motives in others. Learn to respond with compassion rather than anger. Be forgiving.
7.Ask Heavenly Father for help. The Atonement doesn’t just apply to sin. Christ can heal our hearts as well as our souls.
My next post will include Dr. John Valusek’s wonderful analogy of “Buckets & Dippers.” It will give you something to think about.
Now Ricky, go get me a tissue. I’m getting emotional.
