(picture source: thinkso.com)
Are too many bloggers the opposite of past generations of activists? Are they, despite claims to the contrary, generally sedentary rather than active, individualised rather than collective, and intellectually disparate rather than united?
We need to get people motivated to cross the street, to care about making a measurable dent into life's most pressing issues within their own lifetimes.
The idea that life should be one third learn, one third earn, one third return is appealing, even if not necessarily complete (where is the time for playing, for reflecting, for relaxing etc?), and provides a neat encapsulation of Charles Handy's advice that we should carefully "chunk" our time in order to lead a "portfolio life".
Others are trying to scale this idea to the societal level, advocating living in intentional communities.
...as the only way to really find inner peace.
...as argued in this thoughtful piece? The idea that we are often very wrong in the assumptions we make about what other people are thinking and feeling strikes a chord. Is there a word for "false empathy" - i.e. for trying to put ourself into the other's shoes, but coming to completely wrong conclusions? Maybe we'd benefit from "cognitive reframing".
So often we seem to impute to others far worse feelings and motives than we subsequently learn were really there, and often isn't the truth that the other person was focused on his/her own problems and, far than condemning us, was probably not thinking about us at all? Even if/when they were, what harm does it really do us?
As the article concludes, "when we become strong enough to accept and live with any response we might get from people, our need to know how others will react to us, and our tendency to project our thoughts and feelings onto them, naturally begin fading away".
This article also makes reference to the Lost Art of Compassion, which argues that the Western practice of psychology has taught us to work with damaging emotions and patterns, but "has not offered even one clear, practical, well-researched method for people to use to develop compassion".
In contrast, through the practice and "steady cultivation of positive emotions and mental states such as affection, even-mindedness, empathy, gratitude, and especially compassion...we not only free ourselves from negative emotions, but are moved to ease the human suffering around us that is fed by such emotions".
We only have to think about compassionate people that we know or witness to sense that this is true, so at a time when it is becoming ever clearer that so much education is irrelevant or unfit for purpose, should we make space for training courses and exercises in compassion - in schools, at work and in wider society? If so, who would be best qualified to deliver such training in an integrating, secular manner - i.e. free from any particular tradition or belief system, from any of the "-isms" or categories that currently divide us?
Halcyon would like to explore this further with like-minded partners...
...in many parts of the world, while we sit here blogging, tweetng, facebooking and passing the days in other, ever-novel forms of self-indulgence.
For example, in Ghana, children burn electrical components to melt off the plastic and reclaim the copper wiring - releasing toxic chemicals into the environment in the process while, in Brazil, man-made fires clear land for cattle or crops. (Thanks to Greenpeace for this salutary reminder.)
Startling as these anecdotes are, other sources such as Worldmapper can show us the bigger picture about the world we live in, by mapping the state of the world's most pressing issues, while other maps show e.g. the geographical prevalence of different diseases around the world.
...self-interest and caring for others." If true, then:
(1) What is the approximate balance between the two today - in individuals, organisations and societies? How much time do we really spend thinking about and then acting on other people's needs?
(2) How can we start an open and ongoing debate about what the balance should be - next year, in 2015, in 2030 etc? I f we don't do this, then how can individuals really know how to lead a "good" life, can organisations know what their wider responsibilities really are and can societies really know how to develop fair policies for all?
(3) How can we then best collaborate with one other, sharing our good practices and our ideas and reaching out for a consensus on the most effective actions, projects and policies to get us ever closer to that optimum balance between self-interest and active compassion?
What will be the best fora and media for involving as many people as possible in both the debate and the sharing?
Halcyon intends to play a key role in starting to answer such questions.
...won by a particular nation being an accurate proxy of the way it looks after its disabled. Or is it merely that investment is concentrated in high-profile events like the Paralympics to the detriment of day-to-day care? Or, less cynically, is it just that a particular crop of athletes all happen to come good at the same time?
Whatever the answer, (a) watching paralympians perform in Beijing and then (b) listening to many of them being interviewed afterwards has been truly awe-inspiring and humbling; not in the conventional, sometimes patronising ("gosh, haven't they done well, in spite of everything!") sense, but in realising that with regard to (a), just how motivated and exceptional these individuals are in so many ways while, with regard to (b), just how much we are all the same in so many other ways.
So how do we keep these heroines and heroes in the headlines? Personally, I'd like to read more about Ellie and David and their teammates' journey ahead than about many of their "able-bodied' counterparts who actually fill our backpages and bulletins...
