Belief Makers

According to Mr. Seligman, the practical reason for doing this is that, if we believe that a bad event is temporary, we tend to do something to change it, whereas, if a good event is seen as temporary we tend to not do anything to keep it.

It did sound somewhat funny to me: if love is lasting forever, does that make me do more to keep it alive? What if love is temporary, but something I and other people can keep choosing? Wouldn't I then do more to make it possible? So, I decided that most events (good and bad) are temporary, but I can work on making them appear more frequently if I want to.


Pervasiveness
Pervasiveness is the measure for how universal things are. Do they show up everywhere all the time, or, do they just show up here and there independently of one another.

Again the test said that I was more optimistic regarding the bad events than the good events.

This time I chose to not believe in the test. I actually think that at times I am very pessimistic about bad events. A few bad events can drain my energy and 'make' me think that life in general is challenging and difficult whereas a few good events will fill me with energy.

I guess that the reason for my test results is that I tend to have just a few areas of focus in my life and they are always intertwined. For a while, I have focused on my health and my work. When something affects my health, it also affects my performance at work. When I felt stressed at work, it affects my health. Since these are my main areas of focus, I tend to see them as my whole world. So, when these are affected, I see the events as universal.

If the test were questioning anything that were not work or health related, I would give an answer reflecting my beliefs that one event did not relate to another. I can see how it could be useful for me to not bundle everything together and to have a broader and more independent perspective. For me solution is simple: meditation.

When I meditate I get a lot of energy, and I also experience everything being one and yet separate. This means I can choose for myself which events to treat separately (i.e., the bad events) and which to treat together (i.e., good events).

Personalization
Personalization is about attribution, i.e., who is to blame. If you want to be less optimistic, then all you have to do is personalize 'bad' events and not personalize 'good' events. For example, if you were to lose your job, you could decide a) I got fired because I did a bad job (personal), or b) I got fired because there was a financial crisis (not personal).

During a good event, you are going to be more optimistic if you believe that you caused or influenced it, e.g., our project was a success because I did a good job (not because the team was fantastic or not only because the team was fantastic).

Seeing this definition, I decided that I would like to be moderately optimistic regarding bad events. I would like to see the event as something that just happened AND as something that I could influence. Say, I just got fired; I would like to tell myself both that the job wasn't a good match for me (not personal) and that I could do a better job in choosing my next position (personal).

Some of the Questions
Since I told you in Optimism Test: Part Two that my friends didn't like the questions, I'll now go over a few of them:

13. You owe the library $10 for an overdue book
a) When I am really involved in reading I often forget when it's due
b) I was so involved in writing the report that I forgot to return the book

This question is about permanence. Is it something that I always do or was it an independent specific event?

17. You prepared a special meal for a friend and he/she barely touched it
a) I wasn't a good cook
b) I made the meal in a rush

This question is about pervasiveness. Am I just generally a bad cook (pervasive) or did I just not cook well this time (not pervasive)?

47. You are in the hospital and few people come to visit
a) I am irritable when I am sick
b) My friends are negligent about things like that

This question is a about personalization. Did your friends not visit you because of something that you did (personal) or did they not visit you because of something that they did (not personal).

My Answers
I'll start by pointing out that the questions we are discussing are all about bad events... I also want to point out that it doesn't matter whether or not the answers are not exactly what you would do. The question would be one of which answer is closer to how you would respond. As I mentioned in Optimism Test: Part Two, I didn't find these answers particularly relevant to me, but I did answer them anyway.

Question 13: The Library Book
Personally, I haven't turned a book in late since I was 18, but if I had an overdue library book, the reason would be that something specific came up.

Question 17: Grumpy in the Hospital
I've been in a hospital only once and I didn't stay overnight. Only two people showed up, but only three people knew that I was there. I believe that if someone didn't turn up at the hospital it would be for his or her own reasons, not because I was particularly grumpy. I mean, how would they know that anyway, if they hadn't been there to see me?

Question 47: Cooking for a Friend
I rarely cook and when I do it is often done in a rush. From my perspective, if you are preparing a special meal, then it wouldn't be done in a rush. If so, would you still call it special? I believe that I myself and most other people can prepare a fantastic meal, when we take the time to do it.

So What?
Here's what I came away with for myself.

1. Optimism and happiness are independent of each other. You can be completely happy, and yet not completely optimistic. You can also be completely optimistic (e.g., I know I can do this job) and completely unhappy (e.g., I hate this job).
   
2. I don't want to be a complete optimist. For me, being a "moderate" optimist is more useful in most cases. I believe that this helps me prepare for and prevent bad events, without fearing that they are frequent, universal or everlasting.
3. I would like to grow my belief that I can create possibilities for good events and that the good events will last. So, I will work on making good events more personal and more permanent.
   
4. Recognizing my tendency to control my environments, I do realize it might be better for me to take some good things less personally. This is a bit opposite of what the Optimism Test would say. I believe to be completely optimistic, it's useful to believe that the universe will keep providing the good events and that there is nothing for me to control. So, I blame the universe for great events in my life.
   

What About You?
Although I don't agree with everything, I found Dr. Seligmen's book and the Optimism Test really insightful and useful. After the book and the test, there are several aspects of how I interact with the world that I am going to change. I'd like to invite you to read (or listen to) his book and certainly to take the Optimism Test to see what it tells you about yourself. If you do, I'd love to hear about what you learned? What did the test say about you? Did you agree or disagree? Why did you agree or disagree? Is there anything about yourself that you would change?

Then, while discussing the topic, Mark asked a question that got us to an excited new place of exploration.

Mark: Do you believe that people can control others?

Iris: If the person believes he can control others, yes...

Mark: Really????

Iris: Yes.

Mark: So you believe you can be controlled by others?

Iris: No, but I believe that someone who believes that he can control others surrounds himself with people who want to be controlled.

Mark: Hmmm..

The Control Matrix
I explained to Mark that my concept isn't about true or not true, it's just about what I've experienced. I believe that people create their experiences by surrounding themselves with others who support what they want or believe. When one person believes that he can control others and really wants/needs to be in control, he will eventually be surrounded only by people who want/need to be controlled.

Wow, fun! This theory reconciles so much of my experiences that run contrary to my beliefs. On the one hand, I believe that no one can actually make someone else feel, think or do something they don't want to do. On the other hand, I see examples of what would appear to be one person controlling another all the time.

Inspired by Faith's framework presenting consciousness and competence, I created the same kind of visually representative grid around control:

1. The lower left quadrant represents people who are controlling and want to be controlled
2. The lower right represents people who are controlling, but who do not believe they can be controlled by others
3. The upper left represents people who are not controlling, but believe they can be controlled by others
4. The upper right represents people who neither want to control others nor believe that they can be controlled by others
   

Examples of Control Relationships
Based on this model, I can think of many examples that fall into one or another quadrant.

1. Think of couples where one partner is controlling, and the other is compliant.
2. Think of bosses who push their employees around, and employees who do whatever is asked of them without questioning. Or they may leave, or get fired!
3. Think of bosses that trust their employees to find answers and create solutions themselves and how they end up with employees that can create solutions and be trusted.
   
4. Think of parents who push their children to always get A's in school. If one child responds by diligently working hard, the parent's belief that they can control the child is reinforced. If another responds by fighting the parents, the parent operates on the belief that they can control him as well.
5. Think of large bureaucratic organizations where each person in the hierarchy is both in control and controlled.
   
6. Think of emerging entrepreneurial organizations where trying to control others doesn't work at all.
   
7. Think of people who seek wisdom from others; they find others who will give them wisdom.
8. Think of people who seek wisdom on their own.
   

In the end, you can find relationships that fall into any one of the four quadrants!

What I like about this concept is that it explains why we can meet people with completely different and contradictory sets of beliefs, and each of us will have evidence to support them.
I might believe I am in control of others, because I've surrounded myself with others who want to be controlled. You might believe that no one can control another, because you've never tolerated someone trying to control you.

I used to be in the not-controlling/want to be controlled group. This made me quite attractive to the controlling types. Nowadays, I'm in the not controlling/not controlled group and I have noticed that some people who in the past were part of my life don't fit in my life anymore, or, I don't fit into theirs. When working with a controller, the easiest way to get the boot is to cut the strings.

Iris' First Axiom of Control
Of course, you can extend my little theory to cover a multitude of beliefs. But here's what I've come to so far:

1. Over time, the people in our lives are the ones who comply with our beliefs
2. As our beliefs filter people in and out of our lives, they grow stronger based on the evidence of the people in our lives. It's a feedback loop.
   
3. When we change our beliefs significantly, the people in our lives might also change their beliefs, or, we might change the people in our lives.
   
4. We can learn a lot about ourselves from the beliefs of the people in our lives. Their beliefs will tend to be compliant with or reciprocal to our own. If I want to be controlled, then I probably have people in my life who are controlling. If I want to control others, then I probably have people in my life who want to be controlled.
5. You can extend this concept to any number of characteristics. Empowered people are surrounded by either other empowered people, or, people attracted to empowered people. Energetic people are probably surrounded by other energetic people. And so on...
   
6. A new variation on Henry Ford's quote might be: If you believe you can be in control of others or believe you can't be in control of others, you're right!
   

The limited sleeping situation I mentioned before has persisted, so I have had ample time to reflect on my responses. I went to sleep at 4 am this morning. Is this becoming the new normal for Jaedon? Anyway, here are my reflections....

So are those negative thoughts really automatic? Maybe... One framework for looking at someone's competence in a particular skill area is that of Levels of Learning, represented as a grid of four squares, each representing the following states:

1. Unconscious Incompetence: We don't know what we don't know
2. Conscious Incompetence: We know what we don't know
3. Conscious Competence: We know and can act on what we know when thinking about it
4. Unconscious Competence: We don't know what we know (the skill is now automatic/second nature)

Denied Legitimate Wants!

In early memories I recall myself hiding on the stairs in the hallway after bedtime, because I heard my parents fighting. From experience I knew that when alcohol was involved, these fights would grow louder and louder and could grow into problem situations. I would listen to the flood of intense frustration, irritation and anger, knowing that there could be a moment that this would escalate into physical violence. I was the soldier at his post ready to run to my brother and call him out of bed to help me separate our parents.

I must have been five or six years old when I heard that the parents of my neighbor friend were divorcing. This was far from a regular happening those days and I remember that there were lots of discussions about it. Someone (I think it was the father of my friend) explained to me that in a divorce two parents decide to no longer live together because they are no longer happy together. This made so much sense to me that I went to my mom and asked her why she and daddy didn't divorce also!

My parents stayed together "for the children" until I was fourteen years old. Then my mom moved out and my brother and I stayed with my dad. This was a strange time. None of us could cook, my dad still came home drunk most of the time, and I remember our first Christmas together filled with emotions, lots of alcohol and lots of Miles Davis, Herbie Hancock and Nina Simone. The music was played so loudly that the neighbors called the police.

I don't know exactly when it started, but while drunk my dad started to project his anger towards my mom onto me. I would get really scared and once had to lock myself up in my bedroom, while he was yelling from the other side. I told myself that this was unacceptable and that the next time this would happen, I would leave. The next time came long before I was fifteen years old. My dad chased me around the living room couch and up into my bedroom and then chased my brother with a piece of wood into his room, and I'm not sure but I seem to remember that he climbed out of his window over the roof to the neighbors house to protect himself.

Hidden behind the closed bedroom door, I made plans about what to do next. I waited until my dad left the house the next morning. Then I walked to the supermarket and walked back with an empty shopping cart. I filled this cart with my clothes, my music installation and other things I held dear and walked out of that door, deciding that this was the last time this would ever happen to me. I remember crying from relief and sadness while putting one foot in front of the other in the direction of my mom’s house. I did not know if she would be home and I did not know if her door would be open for me. She was there and she opened her door graciously and lovingly...

I turned fifteen. My mom had gone to school and graduated with great results. Then she found a job in a furniture store that she seemed to enjoy a lot. But slowly something started to change. She got more frustrated and started to have problems at work. I would come home after school to a seemingly normal home situation, but there would be little things that seemed "off".

For the longest time I could not put my finger on it. What was happening? For example: my mom take the pictures off the wall and placed them on the floor facing the wall. When I asked about it, she would laugh and say she was cleaning and that she had put them there. Another time I would come home and all my clothes would be pulled out of my drawers and be lying on the floor. She would explain that she had been looking for something special. My mom would start walking backwards though the living room and would stop and laugh when I would ask her why she was doing that. A little weird and I didn't understand...

Then my mom slid into full-blown psychosis and would sit with a knife on her bed at night too afraid to sleep. The next day, I decided to go to the doctor for my mom. He listened to me and then told me he could not help. I had to make an appointment and go to a special psychiatric department in another side of town. Say hello to healthcare and the child support system!

From the doctor I walked straight to this government-run department and asked to talk with someone. The people were very friendly and told me that they could come by and visit my mom, but that they could not come into the house uninvited. I told them that I would let them in. Say hello to adult responsibilities!

They came by; I let them in; my mom sent them away refusing help. I will skip my mom's response to me...

I lived with my mom until I was eighteen years old. I finished high school, and went to college while my mom went though different periods of psychoses and better times where she tried to put her life back on track. While I never got support from any of the healthcare related organizations, different families supported me by offering a bed, a meal and love when needed. They invited me into happy households and gave me the opportunity to experience the things I would otherwise never have experienced.

Why do I tell you all this? Lee, Teflon's dad, asked me at different occasions during the past few days: "Do you believe that we are in control at all times? Are you in control when you get raped? Are you in control while we are fighting in Afghanistan? Are you in control while Obama is doing nothing in the While House?"

I told him: listen, I do not believe we are in control over situations. Things happen. We do our part, and others do their part and together we create the situation. I could not control my dad's drinking habit; I could not control my mom's psychoses; I could not force the healthcare system to help my mother. However, I could take care of myself by opening myself to other possibilities and taking steps to change the situation and embracing what would come my way. I believe you can choose your happiness and actions during a challenge; over these you are always in control.

Only tonight I realized that while the Option philosophy has taught me that I can choose happiness in any situation, I figured out myself at a way younger age that every challenge includes valuable wonderful opportunities. Life for me is not about keeping out challenges or even fixing the challenges; it's about going with the flow. Letting go of control, I can grasp new opportunities that might otherwise have eluded me.

My wish for you is to let go of controlling your situation and to take control of your happiness and your actions. By doing this, I believe that you'll open yourself up to new possibilities that can't be found otherwise.