A message from Dena Jensen
Dear Readers,
As it is the New Year's Eve, I found this appropriate to post. I think we can look back on this year of 2012 and see the changes in the world. Our New Years' are usually brought in with reflection of the past year, and resolutions of the New Year. I propose to make changes within you and when chaging, seek the best you, and the most happy you in those changes. This year make it about a true change of personal growth. Be happy and excited for this new you!
Thank you for reading our Posts and as you continue to read, my dad and I will continue to post.
Happy New Year to all!
We are always changing
Your approach to relationships with your family and friends especially with your marraiges might be expanded by considering a change of heart or what is sometimes called an awakening of the spirit. This is convincing when reading the case studies in William James's (1842-1910) classice book, "Varities of Religious Experience".
William James is known as the father of American Psychology, and he reported firsthand accounts of persons who had an awakening of their spirit that was strong enough to immediately and dramatically change their behavior, thinking and lives. This then leads us to another story:
Bob was a health enthusiastic and euqally dedicated to maintaining his mind. He kept both mind and body in great shape. Bob was rational, analytical, and thoughful. When relationg with his wife he had the energy to give a lot of attention to her. He provided her everything and yet she found her relationship with him had no "zip, zing or spice". She found him lacking. Realizing this he tried to tell more jokes, travel to extoci destinations, and meet more friends of her liking. But, nothing he did helped, and though he tried to change, he still remained quite boring and unintersting. Can he change, should he change? If so, how could it happen?
Decades ago, it was popular in psychology deptartments to teach a course ono individual differences. A book entitled, "Stability and Change in Human Characteristics", by Benjamin Bloom was often used. Benjamin Bloom convincingly showed that this matter about stability and change was a central question that needed and answer. Now, half a century later, there is still no accepted resolution to the question of stabillity and change.
In general, we act as if each individual were a stable material object. However, when much reflection is given to this question, the answer is in favor of emphasizing change. You and I, and all people change during the course of their life. During the year, during the day, and even each moment. It is more useful to conclude that in understanding people we are dealing with constantly changing entities and not stable objects. Wouldn't you agree?
With the question of mind, body, and spirit, there is a quantitive jump in complexity. We know the changes in the mind influence the body. we know that bodily changes dramatically alter the mind, but now we add the spirit and the interactions jump multifold. Those who seem to know most about the spirit point out that the spirit also changes. Experssions as: "The Sprit Soared", "The spirit was strong that day", and "The experience seem to have broken his spirit", lead to the belief that people's spirits range from strong and vibrant to weak or dead. Sometimes it seems that the spirit departs for a period of time and we feel the absence. Differences in spirit are said to vary from person to person, and within the person, from time to time and place to place. Whenever this happens, people are changed.
Thus, when we consider that all of us are constantly changing it is foolish to fight personal change or try to project an image that we are a finished product. Pretending that we are stable will clash with the truth, and increased unwanted personal instability will be one of the by products.
About Personal Development
- Dena Jensen
- Corlu, Tekirdağ, Türkiye
- Hi! My name is Dena Jensen. I facilitate this webpage and my father and I write articles and share our beliefs on how we can change for the better. We hope that you will help us by discussing with us in our Topics we will be writing and joining our Online Conversations!
Monday, December 31, 2012
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Choosing To Be Good
Choosing to be good is the surest way to live free.
This concept is a little hard to explain. However, maybe this true story about a grandfather who lived his whole life on a homestead in Star Valley, Wyoming will help you understand the message I am trying to convene.
Lorenzo was a poor dairy farmer. With little money, and having to milk his cows twice a day, 365 days a year, he hardly had any free time, nor could he afford to do things most men would choose to do. It would seem that his poverty robbed him of what many would consider freedom. Yet, this man was happy, laughed a lot, and had few complaints that could not be handled through humor. He enjoyed the respect of his family and friends. Twice a day he would offer prayers of gratitude to the Lord. He loved his horse, dog, grandchildren, and sons who worked on the farm with him. He was known for his honesty, kindness, and good nature. By living a good life, by living truthfully, by living true to his conscience, could it be said that he was living free?
In our society, the core question of political, economic, legal and metaphysical philosophy is the question of freedom. It is also an obsession among the general population to be personally free. While this question may not be as important as those presented earlier the freedom question will not go away. So, at this time you might want to reexamine, "How free am I?"
This question and answer that you pose, however, depends on the definition of freedom. Often freedom is associated with the term, "agency", referring to the belief that people are free agents. In the usual way of thinking, refers to having the conditions and opportunity to have choices, to say and do as one pleases. Another definition refers to the ability to make choices. A more profound and deep understanding of freedom has to do with how you live. Are some ways of living the key to being free?
In this last way of defining freedom it is how you live that determines your true and honest experiences of human freedom. Inthe simpilist terms, it is defining freedom as that state of being that occurs when living a life that is congruent with your true nature or conscience. The relevance of this discussion about freedom is that in marriage both husband amd wife often complain of losing their freedom. That complaint has merit according to some of the definitions, but in reality, both marriage partners can experience a more joyful and complete feeling of freedom by living true to their conscience.
The important point to recognize is that in marriage more of the problems, decisions, choices, and opportunities will be about non-material things. It is here that the successful marriage pertner will benefit from taking advantage of the many opportunities to choose and seek a life based on meaningfulness.
This concept is a little hard to explain. However, maybe this true story about a grandfather who lived his whole life on a homestead in Star Valley, Wyoming will help you understand the message I am trying to convene.
Lorenzo was a poor dairy farmer. With little money, and having to milk his cows twice a day, 365 days a year, he hardly had any free time, nor could he afford to do things most men would choose to do. It would seem that his poverty robbed him of what many would consider freedom. Yet, this man was happy, laughed a lot, and had few complaints that could not be handled through humor. He enjoyed the respect of his family and friends. Twice a day he would offer prayers of gratitude to the Lord. He loved his horse, dog, grandchildren, and sons who worked on the farm with him. He was known for his honesty, kindness, and good nature. By living a good life, by living truthfully, by living true to his conscience, could it be said that he was living free?
In our society, the core question of political, economic, legal and metaphysical philosophy is the question of freedom. It is also an obsession among the general population to be personally free. While this question may not be as important as those presented earlier the freedom question will not go away. So, at this time you might want to reexamine, "How free am I?"
This question and answer that you pose, however, depends on the definition of freedom. Often freedom is associated with the term, "agency", referring to the belief that people are free agents. In the usual way of thinking, refers to having the conditions and opportunity to have choices, to say and do as one pleases. Another definition refers to the ability to make choices. A more profound and deep understanding of freedom has to do with how you live. Are some ways of living the key to being free?
In this last way of defining freedom it is how you live that determines your true and honest experiences of human freedom. Inthe simpilist terms, it is defining freedom as that state of being that occurs when living a life that is congruent with your true nature or conscience. The relevance of this discussion about freedom is that in marriage both husband amd wife often complain of losing their freedom. That complaint has merit according to some of the definitions, but in reality, both marriage partners can experience a more joyful and complete feeling of freedom by living true to their conscience.
The important point to recognize is that in marriage more of the problems, decisions, choices, and opportunities will be about non-material things. It is here that the successful marriage pertner will benefit from taking advantage of the many opportunities to choose and seek a life based on meaningfulness.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Seek A Meaningful Life, And Happiness Will Follow
Everyone faces this motivational question. You probably have guessed it by now, but these illustrations and examples introduce a new concept. Here is the next story:
Two beautiful girls graduated from high school and searched for the good life. The responsibilites of parenthood soon fell upon Wilma. The other, named Sue, had a talent for art and design and found she could create, sew, and sell fashoinable clothes to "high- end" and very glamorous people.While Wilma struggled with a marriage, she dedicated her life to her children. After a second divorce with her second husband, she cared for her three children. Meanwhile, Sue had one child, but eventually chose to live unattached by marriage. She associated with a fast crowd, having boyfriends, alcohol, and drugs while living in exotic cities.
Now they are both old and still good friends. Eventually Wilma found that family and religion provided meaning for her life. She is the most cheerful person you could meet, filled with gratitude for the love and respect she recieves daily from her husband and many children, and even grandchildren. Sue, however was motivated more to seek life's pleasures not the meaning of life. Now she has no husband and only a distant son. Her life is hard now and as her beauty slips, she is trying to give up drinking and worries about the lack of sales and the difficulty of sewing with arthritic hands. If you saw them during their early twenties you likely would have concluded that seeking happienss through pleasure was the way to go. Unfortunately, it is hard to see at a young age that you can find pleasure from seeking a meaningful life, but not a meaning life through pleasure seeking.
From Freud's Pleasure Principle to B.F.Skinner's Reinforcers The Driving Force in life is said to be hedonistic personal pleasure. It certainly doesn't require a Ph.D. to know that men like pleasure, and like all animals try to avoid pain.
This fundamental truth was known from day one, and requires little time to recognize that each day you spend time trying to do more pleasurable things and want to spend less time doing things which are troublesome, painful, annoying and frustrating. This is a true and correct principle. It could be considered a basic law of human behavior.
But we also sometimes know we willingly accept a great deal of pain and difficulties to do something that we might consider meaningful.
One winter, you might have shoveled a neighbor's side walk because you thought it was s good thing to do. At the onset you knew and later it was confirmed that your face and fingers would become cold. You had discomfort of putting on and off your boots, and perhaps you even huffed and pıuffed, and felt muscle strain while exerting yourself.
An athlete in training experiences pain in physical workout. A father puts up with much unpleasantry working at a butcher shop in order to send his son or daughter to college. It is not hard to find examples of meaning trumping pain and pleasure.
Both living to maximize pleasure and living to find meaning in life and true descriptions of of the human condition. They are opposites, but they both operate in our lives. It is good to live a life of pleasure, even joy, as long as it is a solid and true principle.
The desire to first seek meaning and purpose in life is not meant to destroy or replace the pleasure principle, but it could be seen as a higher law. While both motivations are correct, you must choose for your life whether one or the other is more important. You will eventually choose to guide your life by one or the other. Nothing dooms a marriage faster than building it around each partner's personal pleasure. Each partner will soon find that all too often getting their pleasure takes away or interferes with their partner's way of increasing momentary pleasure. The simple word for this is selfihness. On the other hand, a marriage is unequalled in providing meaning and purpose for living, and especially living for another.
Two beautiful girls graduated from high school and searched for the good life. The responsibilites of parenthood soon fell upon Wilma. The other, named Sue, had a talent for art and design and found she could create, sew, and sell fashoinable clothes to "high- end" and very glamorous people.While Wilma struggled with a marriage, she dedicated her life to her children. After a second divorce with her second husband, she cared for her three children. Meanwhile, Sue had one child, but eventually chose to live unattached by marriage. She associated with a fast crowd, having boyfriends, alcohol, and drugs while living in exotic cities.
Now they are both old and still good friends. Eventually Wilma found that family and religion provided meaning for her life. She is the most cheerful person you could meet, filled with gratitude for the love and respect she recieves daily from her husband and many children, and even grandchildren. Sue, however was motivated more to seek life's pleasures not the meaning of life. Now she has no husband and only a distant son. Her life is hard now and as her beauty slips, she is trying to give up drinking and worries about the lack of sales and the difficulty of sewing with arthritic hands. If you saw them during their early twenties you likely would have concluded that seeking happienss through pleasure was the way to go. Unfortunately, it is hard to see at a young age that you can find pleasure from seeking a meaningful life, but not a meaning life through pleasure seeking.
From Freud's Pleasure Principle to B.F.Skinner's Reinforcers The Driving Force in life is said to be hedonistic personal pleasure. It certainly doesn't require a Ph.D. to know that men like pleasure, and like all animals try to avoid pain.
This fundamental truth was known from day one, and requires little time to recognize that each day you spend time trying to do more pleasurable things and want to spend less time doing things which are troublesome, painful, annoying and frustrating. This is a true and correct principle. It could be considered a basic law of human behavior.
But we also sometimes know we willingly accept a great deal of pain and difficulties to do something that we might consider meaningful.
One winter, you might have shoveled a neighbor's side walk because you thought it was s good thing to do. At the onset you knew and later it was confirmed that your face and fingers would become cold. You had discomfort of putting on and off your boots, and perhaps you even huffed and pıuffed, and felt muscle strain while exerting yourself.
An athlete in training experiences pain in physical workout. A father puts up with much unpleasantry working at a butcher shop in order to send his son or daughter to college. It is not hard to find examples of meaning trumping pain and pleasure.
Both living to maximize pleasure and living to find meaning in life and true descriptions of of the human condition. They are opposites, but they both operate in our lives. It is good to live a life of pleasure, even joy, as long as it is a solid and true principle.
The desire to first seek meaning and purpose in life is not meant to destroy or replace the pleasure principle, but it could be seen as a higher law. While both motivations are correct, you must choose for your life whether one or the other is more important. You will eventually choose to guide your life by one or the other. Nothing dooms a marriage faster than building it around each partner's personal pleasure. Each partner will soon find that all too often getting their pleasure takes away or interferes with their partner's way of increasing momentary pleasure. The simple word for this is selfihness. On the other hand, a marriage is unequalled in providing meaning and purpose for living, and especially living for another.
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Your Conscience Is More Than Social Learning
Throughout the centuries, references have been made to a conscience. Sometimes it has been called a moral sensitivity, an inner knowledge. or a voice that idnetifies right and wrong, the good and bad. In the twentith century, it has been associated with religion, however, even secular humanists refer to a conscience; as do political and social theorists. It seems to be accepted distnct and universal attribute. Perhaps one of hte most intersting explanations of conscience or something like conscience, has been made by social biologists. In the writings of E.O. Wilson, the evolutionary biologist, there is an excellent account of how moral sensitivity or altruism has a genetic basis and improves reproductive fitness.
In most cases, the explanations such as those given by the social biologists ans some philosophers refer to something innate and inherited. Conscience is seen as part of the basic makeup of humans.
It was long into the marriage when John discovered that the disputes about right and wrong were misguided activities. When he and Joan decided to change the goal to being good rahter than being right, the disputes seemed to evaporate. The advantage in an argument about right or wrong goes to the person who has hte best debating skills and is the most aggressive in the argument and that was not John.
Now, after John and his wife stopped approaching their disagreements by trying to determine who was right and instead asked each other, "What is the right thing to do?" things changed dramatically. When searching for what was good, John found he was not at a disadvantage. There was no advantage to the best debater, because they appealed to their conscience rather than intellect. Of course, they did not always get the same answer when they listened to their conscience. It was, however, easier to let go of their own position and consider the answer the other found when searching for what was good. This is hard to do when searching for what is right. Thus, if you believe you have a conscience you might as well use it and if you use your conscience you will come to realize how fast many personal disagreements will melt before your eyes when searching foro what it the good thing to do."
For most social psychologists, conscience refers to learning social norms. But, if you define conscience as simply the learning of social morals and taboos, you probably would have naswered this question in the negative because you can dispense with the belief in a conscience and simply explain it as the aquistition of cultural teachings about right and wrong. In philisophical discussions of ethics, something similar to an innate capacity to recognize and know about good and bad, right and wrong is frequently proposed.
So, now you see that it is also important that you come to some conclusion about whether you believe you have a conscience. If you do, then your conscience will become extremely important for becoming the best marriage partner.
In most cases, the explanations such as those given by the social biologists ans some philosophers refer to something innate and inherited. Conscience is seen as part of the basic makeup of humans.
It was long into the marriage when John discovered that the disputes about right and wrong were misguided activities. When he and Joan decided to change the goal to being good rahter than being right, the disputes seemed to evaporate. The advantage in an argument about right or wrong goes to the person who has hte best debating skills and is the most aggressive in the argument and that was not John.
Now, after John and his wife stopped approaching their disagreements by trying to determine who was right and instead asked each other, "What is the right thing to do?" things changed dramatically. When searching for what was good, John found he was not at a disadvantage. There was no advantage to the best debater, because they appealed to their conscience rather than intellect. Of course, they did not always get the same answer when they listened to their conscience. It was, however, easier to let go of their own position and consider the answer the other found when searching for what was good. This is hard to do when searching for what is right. Thus, if you believe you have a conscience you might as well use it and if you use your conscience you will come to realize how fast many personal disagreements will melt before your eyes when searching foro what it the good thing to do."
For most social psychologists, conscience refers to learning social norms. But, if you define conscience as simply the learning of social morals and taboos, you probably would have naswered this question in the negative because you can dispense with the belief in a conscience and simply explain it as the aquistition of cultural teachings about right and wrong. In philisophical discussions of ethics, something similar to an innate capacity to recognize and know about good and bad, right and wrong is frequently proposed.
So, now you see that it is also important that you come to some conclusion about whether you believe you have a conscience. If you do, then your conscience will become extremely important for becoming the best marriage partner.
Monday, November 26, 2012
Let Your Conscience Be Your Guide
An appeal to conscience is found in all cultures in all times.
An artist can draw a picture of the conscinece sitting on a woman's shoulder, and whispering in her ear. This is a humorous visulization, but, let us hope that it doesn't trivialize this important resource for aquiring truth and knowledge. Maybe we should worry about the impact of the following conversation:
The postmodernist skeptic: So, you claim to be my conscience. Actuyally, you are nothing more than just an emotional reaction mixed with teh things taught while growing up: nothing more.
The conscience: Sorry, but let me help you understand that in all these conversations we are having, you are not just talking to yourself.
The postmodernist: Okay, so you exsist, but why do some people have you and some people don't?
The conscience: I'm there for all. I am with people, however, there is no snse in sticking around if a person won't listen to me. I even leave when a person listens, but consistently choooses to act contrary to what I tell them. Yes, I can see why you would falsely conclude that some poeple don't have a conscience.
The postmodernist: How convenient for you. You disappear when things don't go your way.
The conscience: You don't understand my motives. I want to be with each and every person. My motivation is to stay and not leave. I'm always available, but each person can choose to tune me out. Furthermore, once a person freely chooses to act contrary to what I say, they do not want me to be with them.
The postmodernist: Interesting; just what I thought. Freedom is more powerful than conscience.
Conscience: Yes, but freedom needs conscience more than conscince needs freedom.
At a later point in time, we will discuss about living free and truthful. You may be surprised to learn that living according to your conscience is the only way to truly live free. But, before discussing in more depth it is well known that people through all times and in all place report that they are able to be informed by their conscience. People who recieve this type of guidance most often place it above all other forms knowledge. Some are so trusting and so dedicated to this knowledge, coming from their conscience, that they will forfiet their life rather than violate their conscience. It is rooted in the deepest feelings as well as intellect.
As mentioned, the problem with this kind of knowledge is that it does not give the same answers to all people. Everyone seems to have their own conscience and sometimes listening to one's conscience may cause Person A to flee and Person B to fight. Is there a way to reconcile these opposite responses both based on the conscience?
If you are to trust your own conscience it would be well to understand these contradicitons between what conscience tells different people. Can this problem be resolved?
A most straightforward answer is that what is absolutely right for Person A might be absolutely wrong for Person B, based on the differences in the persons, the time, and the circumstances. This is due to context and is not to be confused with relativism. This does not mean that there is no absolute truth and that all is relative to each person's conscience. It means that each person recieves an assurity that they are acting according tot heir conscience, even though the answer may not be the same as that recieved by someone else. This, indeed, is a complex question. But, to live free you must come to terms with your own conscience, and decide to trust your conscience. Put conscience in the very center of your relationship, your family, especially your marriage, but before doing this, more needs to be said about following your conscince.
We will discuss this in next weeks' post.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Subjective and Objective Truths
"Life's meanings come from subjective as well as objective truths."
Professor Jensen encountered this kinid of knowledge when studying hte easrly existentialists, Martin Heidigger (1889-1976) and Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1885) in a seminar with graduate students.
These early existentialists, who are known as deep thinkers, talk in complicated ways about the most simplest things. These two existentialsists have helped scholars realize that there is a different way to view the world and to gain knowledge. There is a subjective type of knowing that is more fundamental, than a scientific analysis of what Kierkegaard calls objective truth.
This experimental type of know is for Heidigger, the most important way to find meaning in both material objects and ourselves.
So, for students who want, need and maybe demand an academic base for this, we will use this insight from existential philosophy.
Existentialism is concerned with both the nature of knowing and also the nature of being a person.
Now, also consider what is probably the most profound statement ever made by a philosopher. It was set forth as the foundation of his work by the father of philosophy, Rene Descartes (1596-1640).
He was searching for the one truth about which a person can be absolutely certain. His conclusion was that he knew for certain, that he existed. In other words, one can only be certain of one's own existence. Thus his famous statement, "I think therefore I am". Even a child knows this to be true. First we accept that we exist, and then we explore what we become.
"Know thyself", "To thine own self be true", "Just be yourself", are a sampling of advice you have undoubtedly heard. Why must you consciously work to accomplish the obvious? Who else could you be, and aren't you always aware of just who you are.
Who else would you know you better than yourself? For are you not with yourself 24 hours each day and everyday? Maybe it is easier to understand the popularity og these sayings if you remember the popular phrase, "The unexamined life is not worth living!"
The conclusion to all this is that to be the best possible marriage partner, friend, person you can be, you must know "What are we?" Then, use the most sensible and appropriate methods to understand the illusive and hard to observe spirit of your partner. Omitted is an even more important way to respond to the spirit of the one you love.
Professor Jensen encountered this kinid of knowledge when studying hte easrly existentialists, Martin Heidigger (1889-1976) and Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1885) in a seminar with graduate students.
These early existentialists, who are known as deep thinkers, talk in complicated ways about the most simplest things. These two existentialsists have helped scholars realize that there is a different way to view the world and to gain knowledge. There is a subjective type of knowing that is more fundamental, than a scientific analysis of what Kierkegaard calls objective truth.
This experimental type of know is for Heidigger, the most important way to find meaning in both material objects and ourselves.
So, for students who want, need and maybe demand an academic base for this, we will use this insight from existential philosophy.
Existentialism is concerned with both the nature of knowing and also the nature of being a person.
Now, also consider what is probably the most profound statement ever made by a philosopher. It was set forth as the foundation of his work by the father of philosophy, Rene Descartes (1596-1640).
He was searching for the one truth about which a person can be absolutely certain. His conclusion was that he knew for certain, that he existed. In other words, one can only be certain of one's own existence. Thus his famous statement, "I think therefore I am". Even a child knows this to be true. First we accept that we exist, and then we explore what we become.
"Know thyself", "To thine own self be true", "Just be yourself", are a sampling of advice you have undoubtedly heard. Why must you consciously work to accomplish the obvious? Who else could you be, and aren't you always aware of just who you are.
Who else would you know you better than yourself? For are you not with yourself 24 hours each day and everyday? Maybe it is easier to understand the popularity og these sayings if you remember the popular phrase, "The unexamined life is not worth living!"
The conclusion to all this is that to be the best possible marriage partner, friend, person you can be, you must know "What are we?" Then, use the most sensible and appropriate methods to understand the illusive and hard to observe spirit of your partner. Omitted is an even more important way to respond to the spirit of the one you love.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)