Tired of defeat? Does the thought of making another New Year’s resolution only to see yourself fail yet again leave you depressed? Do you feel as if your New Year’s resolutions are mere wishful thinking? They need not be.
Make it happen. Reach your goal. Succeed! Keep your New Year’s Resolution. You can do it. Here’s how.
Let’s say your New Year’s resolution is to spend less money and save more in the year 2016. Your finances are out of control, money is tight, and it’s not because you’re out of a job and aren’t bringing in a good income. It’s your spending habit that’s doing you in; hence, your New Year’s resolution to “spend less and save more.” How to succeed?
First, whatever the resolution may be, move from the general to the specific. In this example, “spend less, save more,” you want to move from the general idea to a more specific target: exactly how much do you want to save this year and how much less money do you want to spend? Hence say: I want to save $500 by the end of the year and spend $50 less per month on frivolous purchases.
Secondly, take a measurable and quantifiable inventory of the situation you want to change. Again, in this example, you need to identify and quantify how much you seem to be overspending—monthly, weekly, or daily—to know what you’re in for. In other words, “Know your enemy.” Why are you making this resolution? What are you presently doing that dissatisfies you or makes you want to change? Ask yourself why you want to change this behavior. After you understand the “what and why of it,” apply your WILL and “make it so” by developing a “how” plan. How are you going to tackle the change?
This is the “awareness” stage. Begin to see where, how, and why you are in the situation that you want to change. In this example you already know that you are overspending and saving very little, if anything. But you may not know how or why you’re doing it. You now need to begin to monitor your spending pattern. Look and see! Become self-aware about your spending habits. Then identify what you would define as “frivolous” spending; this is where you want to cut back or stop spending altogether.
Three, dig deeper; get in touch with your deepest motives and values. Again, in this example, your spending habits may reveal some deeper values of which you are not consciously aware. You may discover for example that you routinely splurge in one category of things while remaining tightfisted and quite stingy in another, like splurging on electronic gadgets while remaining very tightfisted when it comes to purchasing clothes or dining out for example. This reveals a personal value you have: you like what you can do with electronics but have little interest in dressing up nicely or couldn’t care less about what you eat. You now have a motive, something that will give you energy and interest to reach your goal for saving money and a good reason to spend less money on other things. Or perhaps you need to come to terms with an out of control indulgence in buying electronic gadgets.
Four, see your New Year’s resolution as a paradigm shift in the way you view yourself in the bigger picture of life’s trajectory. Where are you taking yourself in this life’s journey? What is your place in life? In short, fit your New Year’s resolution within your global self-identity as to who you are becoming. Visualize the kind of person that your New Year’s resolution points to: instead of seeing yourself as a slave to money, e.g., visualize yourself as a master who is in full control of your money.
Five, break it down into workable, bite size, doable chewable steps. In terms of savings, for example, you may have a goal of saving $50 per month by the end of 2016. Start off by saving perhaps $12 in the first month. And, do that by saving a mere $3 a week, possibly by simply putting $3 in an envelope each week and placing it in a secret drawer. Now that’s realistic and workable, wouldn’t you say? The next month you may want to set aside four or five dollars a week. By the fifth or sixth month, you’ll be surprised at how good you will feel and how tangible and workable it really becomes by having taken such small concrete steps toward success. Indeed, most major goals and tasks can and should be broken down into small workable steps. That’s how NASA took us to the moon!
Six, exercise bragging rights; that is, take pride in your accomplishment(s). Confide in a close friend or friends that you trust. These are carefully chosen friends, friends that will appreciate your successes and cheer you on, without judging or condemning you, should you slip and falter a bit. These are friends that will love to hear you brag when you succeed and will compassionately embrace you when you stumble forward. Note: there is no shame in stumbling. Just keep moving forward (hence the idea of stumbling forward); don’t stay down and don’t quit. Your well-chosen friends are there to help you do exactly that.
Finally, be realistic but make it a real challenge. If it is not challenging, it is not a viable resolution. If it is unrealistic it is a setup for personal defeat and demoralization. Remember to state your resolution in the most positive and specific manner possible. For example, instead of saying something like, “This year I am determined to watch less TV.” Rather say, “This year I will commit fifteen minutes each day to reading that novel I’ve always wanted to read.”
Have a Happy New Year’s and best wishes on your resolution(s)!
Monday, December 28, 2015
Monday, December 21, 2015
Wanted! Candidates with Bad Character
What do we want in a president, that is, what kind of person?
I have to ask. Because it seems that nice guys—sincere, honest, transparent, respectful, considerate, measured and well balanced, wise and insightful—are not respected and would certainly not score well in a debate.
Apparently we Americans like a good hostile attitude. We seem to prefer politicians with a lot of anger, impatience, arrogance, haughtiness, and in-your-face attitude. Could it be because this is how most of us Americans might be described when it comes to getting what we want?
It also seems that we prefer simple-mindedness, black and white and simplistic all-or-nothing thinking. We don’t like complexity and prefer to believe that there are simple one-step solutions to everything. If the problem is complicated, we don’t want to hear about it. Come up with an easy solution and solve it quickly and make it go away, whatever it is.
Yes, we hate to wait. We want immediate results, as in “what has the new president done in his/her first 100 days in office. If there is no evidence of major strides, major changes, he/she is already failing. What?!
So, when it comes to politics and politicians none of the quality character virtues apply. They are not to be patient and kind or humble and wise, for that translates into weakness in our minds. They are not to be deep thinkers and penetratingly insightful, for that makes us suspicious as to their decisiveness and we can’t easily predict exactly where they’ll come out on major decisions. We prefer the, “don’t think, just do” approach to decisions.
They are also not to be considerate, respectful, and inclusive, for that is tantamount to fraternizing with the enemy. It would seem that, for most of us Americans, anyone that does not think, believe, or act and conform to our way of thinking acting and being, should be identified as the enemy—as in “If you are not with us, you are against us.”
We even appear to dislike the virtue of integrity in our politicians. Yes, it’s true. For example notice how we prefer smear campaigns over campaigns that respect truth in substance and content. We love it when our candidate exaggerates and stretches truth, even to the point of basically telling “little white lies” about his/her opponent, if it makes our favored-candidate look better and win votes. We also love it when rich powerful people clandestinely throw huge amounts of money into the process, backing our favored-candidate with no accountability as to source, cost, intent, and effect.
So what character traits do we really seem to prefer in our candidates? Apparently we like hubris, pride, and arrogance—an exaggerated sense of self in a candidate. We like hate, anger, and mean-spiritedness in our candidates with an exaggerated sense of righteous-indignation who are more than willing to condemn anyone that falls on the wrong side of things. We seem to prefer power-hungry, grandiose, self-aggrandizing pompous types with a self-conceited Superman self-image that basically says, “Give me enough money and power and I will save you; trust me, I am your answer to all your worries!”
It is no wonder that our country seemingly has so few quality good leaders from which to choose.
I have to ask. Because it seems that nice guys—sincere, honest, transparent, respectful, considerate, measured and well balanced, wise and insightful—are not respected and would certainly not score well in a debate.
Apparently we Americans like a good hostile attitude. We seem to prefer politicians with a lot of anger, impatience, arrogance, haughtiness, and in-your-face attitude. Could it be because this is how most of us Americans might be described when it comes to getting what we want?
It also seems that we prefer simple-mindedness, black and white and simplistic all-or-nothing thinking. We don’t like complexity and prefer to believe that there are simple one-step solutions to everything. If the problem is complicated, we don’t want to hear about it. Come up with an easy solution and solve it quickly and make it go away, whatever it is.
Yes, we hate to wait. We want immediate results, as in “what has the new president done in his/her first 100 days in office. If there is no evidence of major strides, major changes, he/she is already failing. What?!
So, when it comes to politics and politicians none of the quality character virtues apply. They are not to be patient and kind or humble and wise, for that translates into weakness in our minds. They are not to be deep thinkers and penetratingly insightful, for that makes us suspicious as to their decisiveness and we can’t easily predict exactly where they’ll come out on major decisions. We prefer the, “don’t think, just do” approach to decisions.
They are also not to be considerate, respectful, and inclusive, for that is tantamount to fraternizing with the enemy. It would seem that, for most of us Americans, anyone that does not think, believe, or act and conform to our way of thinking acting and being, should be identified as the enemy—as in “If you are not with us, you are against us.”
We even appear to dislike the virtue of integrity in our politicians. Yes, it’s true. For example notice how we prefer smear campaigns over campaigns that respect truth in substance and content. We love it when our candidate exaggerates and stretches truth, even to the point of basically telling “little white lies” about his/her opponent, if it makes our favored-candidate look better and win votes. We also love it when rich powerful people clandestinely throw huge amounts of money into the process, backing our favored-candidate with no accountability as to source, cost, intent, and effect.
So what character traits do we really seem to prefer in our candidates? Apparently we like hubris, pride, and arrogance—an exaggerated sense of self in a candidate. We like hate, anger, and mean-spiritedness in our candidates with an exaggerated sense of righteous-indignation who are more than willing to condemn anyone that falls on the wrong side of things. We seem to prefer power-hungry, grandiose, self-aggrandizing pompous types with a self-conceited Superman self-image that basically says, “Give me enough money and power and I will save you; trust me, I am your answer to all your worries!”
It is no wonder that our country seemingly has so few quality good leaders from which to choose.
Monday, December 14, 2015
Happy Holidays or Merry Christmas?
What does “inclusivity” mean?
A town had an argument. Are they lighting a Christmas tree or a Holiday tree?
Those wanting to call it a Holiday tree argued for inclusiveness. They don’t want non-Christians to feel left out.
But tell me, why should Christ be left out of Christmas for the sake of inclusivity? In other words, why should the opposite happen; why exclude Christians from their own celebration for the sake of inclusivity?
Is it not just as disrespectful and offensive to Christians to have them deny the reality of the Christmas season and its real meaning so as not to offend those who have no belief in the message of Christmas?
Yes. Christmas IS about Jesus, the very Christ in Christianity. Christmas IS about all that is believed-in, believed-about, and hoped-for, surrounding the person of Jesus. That is why Christmas is celebrated. Yes. Jesus is the reason for the season.
Why take offense at the obvious? All religions have their Holy Day (hence “holiday”) celebrations, their liturgies, symbolisms, and dramatic reenactments. No one seems to take offense at Buddhist, Hindu, Judaic, or some other religious celebrations. When the Jewish community celebrates Hanukah, I hear no one demanding inclusive language for that occasion. And I dare say that I should not expect to.
Okay, perhaps it is because, unlike other religious celebrations in America, Christmas (along with its Christian message) pervades our popular and dominant culture. If so, why is that a “sin”? (Indeed, secularism has its own list of mortal sins that people must not commit and, it would seem, this is one of them.)
The problem to some degree is a controlling one, a question defining reality—that is, who gets to do so. This becomes a question of power and authority and of course control.
True, Christianity and Christmas pervades our American culture—TV commercials, businesses, town squares, etc. But that is because, thus far, the majority of the American people have been Christian or at least nominally so. (Granted, this may change over the years.) Nevertheless, our towns and schools and communities are presently bending over backwards to allow each religion their special days and have their recognition. However, this should not mean that Christians must abrogate their own faith and redefine their celebrations—such as Christmas trees, Nativity scenes, and Christmas hymns and carols in order to be all-inclusive. We must not deny the faith of the many for the want of faith of a few.
Let it be what it really is. A Christmas tree is a Christmas tree—it is the reason why the tree is decorated in the first place and it has a more intentional meaning than merely saying, “Have a happy festive time.”
When we start renaming things out of a demand for political correctness and a desire for all-inclusiveness we actually end up disrespecting and dishonoring everyone’s values and beliefs. For, it becomes a lie. Pretending that a thing is not what it really is or what it was really meant to be undermines true integrity and honesty and openness—and disallows authentic invitation and welcoming that leads to true inclusiveness.
That is to say that real inclusiveness honors and respects people’s differences of opinions, beliefs, values, and practices without forcing conformity or enforcing artificial unity by shutting people down for their differences or making people go underground with their precious beliefs and practices.
Let the Christmas tree therefore BE a Christmas tree. This is the Christmas season. Let it remain so. Non-believers should also be free to have their secular generic and innocuous holiday parties running parallel to the seasonal Christmas parties, but don’t demand that Christmas be changed into something it was never meant to be in the name of watered down inclusivity. For when that is done real exclusiveness begins to take hold, which is the disdain, rejection, and negation of a people’s true beliefs in the name of some vaguely defined vanilla flavored all-inclusive unity.
A town had an argument. Are they lighting a Christmas tree or a Holiday tree?
Those wanting to call it a Holiday tree argued for inclusiveness. They don’t want non-Christians to feel left out.
But tell me, why should Christ be left out of Christmas for the sake of inclusivity? In other words, why should the opposite happen; why exclude Christians from their own celebration for the sake of inclusivity?
Is it not just as disrespectful and offensive to Christians to have them deny the reality of the Christmas season and its real meaning so as not to offend those who have no belief in the message of Christmas?
Yes. Christmas IS about Jesus, the very Christ in Christianity. Christmas IS about all that is believed-in, believed-about, and hoped-for, surrounding the person of Jesus. That is why Christmas is celebrated. Yes. Jesus is the reason for the season.
Why take offense at the obvious? All religions have their Holy Day (hence “holiday”) celebrations, their liturgies, symbolisms, and dramatic reenactments. No one seems to take offense at Buddhist, Hindu, Judaic, or some other religious celebrations. When the Jewish community celebrates Hanukah, I hear no one demanding inclusive language for that occasion. And I dare say that I should not expect to.
Okay, perhaps it is because, unlike other religious celebrations in America, Christmas (along with its Christian message) pervades our popular and dominant culture. If so, why is that a “sin”? (Indeed, secularism has its own list of mortal sins that people must not commit and, it would seem, this is one of them.)
The problem to some degree is a controlling one, a question defining reality—that is, who gets to do so. This becomes a question of power and authority and of course control.
True, Christianity and Christmas pervades our American culture—TV commercials, businesses, town squares, etc. But that is because, thus far, the majority of the American people have been Christian or at least nominally so. (Granted, this may change over the years.) Nevertheless, our towns and schools and communities are presently bending over backwards to allow each religion their special days and have their recognition. However, this should not mean that Christians must abrogate their own faith and redefine their celebrations—such as Christmas trees, Nativity scenes, and Christmas hymns and carols in order to be all-inclusive. We must not deny the faith of the many for the want of faith of a few.
Let it be what it really is. A Christmas tree is a Christmas tree—it is the reason why the tree is decorated in the first place and it has a more intentional meaning than merely saying, “Have a happy festive time.”
When we start renaming things out of a demand for political correctness and a desire for all-inclusiveness we actually end up disrespecting and dishonoring everyone’s values and beliefs. For, it becomes a lie. Pretending that a thing is not what it really is or what it was really meant to be undermines true integrity and honesty and openness—and disallows authentic invitation and welcoming that leads to true inclusiveness.
That is to say that real inclusiveness honors and respects people’s differences of opinions, beliefs, values, and practices without forcing conformity or enforcing artificial unity by shutting people down for their differences or making people go underground with their precious beliefs and practices.
Let the Christmas tree therefore BE a Christmas tree. This is the Christmas season. Let it remain so. Non-believers should also be free to have their secular generic and innocuous holiday parties running parallel to the seasonal Christmas parties, but don’t demand that Christmas be changed into something it was never meant to be in the name of watered down inclusivity. For when that is done real exclusiveness begins to take hold, which is the disdain, rejection, and negation of a people’s true beliefs in the name of some vaguely defined vanilla flavored all-inclusive unity.
Monday, December 7, 2015
Is Peace a Choice or War Inevitable?
Next year on this day, 7 December 2016, will mark the 75th anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. We still remember. Yet, Japan and the United States of America are now friendly nations and have been since the end of World War II. Friends become enemies become friends.
Like personal relationships, enemy nations need not be destined to always remain so. There is always hope for peace.
We need not forget past harms in order to move forward with present healing in broken relationships, be they personal or national. A vision for change, a faith in its possibility, and the will to make it so, is all that’s often needed to make that change.
We could be talking about Israel and Palestine, the U.S. and Iran, or Iraq and Afghanistan and the principle still stands. We need vision, faith, and the will to see positive, constructive, and workable solutions for peace.
Vision: We need to see things differently, visualize anew. We need to visualize our enemies becoming friends. What does that look like? Can we see the possibility? What would it take for us to turn our enemies into friends?
The first step might be something as simple as re-humanizing them. They, our present enemies, are not monsters or sub-human critters to be stamped out, wiped out, and/or otherwise extinguished, as if they were alien creatures with no right to life on earth. They eat, sleep, and play as we do. They have family dreams, love their children, and wish to prosper and enjoy life as do we. They are, after all, only human, as are we. The second step might be something as simple as listening to their cry: Why the hatred, why the anger, from whence is the pain and hurt that makes them make us their enemy? How did we become so hateful to them? How do we begin to see our enemies in a new light? Can we see a future where our enemies become our friends?
Faith: Do we believe it’s possible, enemies become friends? Do we believe that people and nations can change? Do we believe in reconciliation? Do we believe in the possible healing of wounded hearts and wounded souls, in mercy, compassion, and forgiveness? If so, there is hope. And there is evidence for such hope: Healing, forgiveness, mercy, renewed trust, and reconciliation—it IS possible and it is something worth believing in. It CAN be. This is no pie-in-the sky fantasy dream. These are real, tangible, workable, and attainable possibilities. We must believe this, believe in its realism.
Will: Believe, envision, and then do. Action is born out of conviction, behavior out of belief. We do what we think. We live what we believe, and move toward what we see as worthwhile goals. Possibilities are then made real. We choose to will. And we will into reality what we choose to believe is possible, investing our time, our resources, our energy, and our gifts and talents to make it so.
“Peace in our time” is often looked at as a nice but naïve peacenik slogan—shallow, unrealistic, even childish.
Notice how much easier it is to arouse the WILL to fight than it is to muster up the WILL to make peace? The spirit of vengeance and retaliation, anger and hatred, is so much easier to arouse than the spirit of mercy and forgiveness or peace and reconciliation. Sure, there are reasons for this, doubt and distrust, betrayal and deception, to name a few.
For that reason we must be wise as serpents and innocent as doves, when seeking peace. The choice is ours. We can choose to lock ourselves into a state of perpetual hatred, violence, and war. Or we can choose to be innocent as doves and seriously seek peace. It takes will, vision, and faith. It IS a choice. We must believe in it and see its real possibility. Oh, one more thing: Beware! We often see only that which we CHOOSE to see.
Like personal relationships, enemy nations need not be destined to always remain so. There is always hope for peace.
We need not forget past harms in order to move forward with present healing in broken relationships, be they personal or national. A vision for change, a faith in its possibility, and the will to make it so, is all that’s often needed to make that change.
We could be talking about Israel and Palestine, the U.S. and Iran, or Iraq and Afghanistan and the principle still stands. We need vision, faith, and the will to see positive, constructive, and workable solutions for peace.
Vision: We need to see things differently, visualize anew. We need to visualize our enemies becoming friends. What does that look like? Can we see the possibility? What would it take for us to turn our enemies into friends?
The first step might be something as simple as re-humanizing them. They, our present enemies, are not monsters or sub-human critters to be stamped out, wiped out, and/or otherwise extinguished, as if they were alien creatures with no right to life on earth. They eat, sleep, and play as we do. They have family dreams, love their children, and wish to prosper and enjoy life as do we. They are, after all, only human, as are we. The second step might be something as simple as listening to their cry: Why the hatred, why the anger, from whence is the pain and hurt that makes them make us their enemy? How did we become so hateful to them? How do we begin to see our enemies in a new light? Can we see a future where our enemies become our friends?
Faith: Do we believe it’s possible, enemies become friends? Do we believe that people and nations can change? Do we believe in reconciliation? Do we believe in the possible healing of wounded hearts and wounded souls, in mercy, compassion, and forgiveness? If so, there is hope. And there is evidence for such hope: Healing, forgiveness, mercy, renewed trust, and reconciliation—it IS possible and it is something worth believing in. It CAN be. This is no pie-in-the sky fantasy dream. These are real, tangible, workable, and attainable possibilities. We must believe this, believe in its realism.
Will: Believe, envision, and then do. Action is born out of conviction, behavior out of belief. We do what we think. We live what we believe, and move toward what we see as worthwhile goals. Possibilities are then made real. We choose to will. And we will into reality what we choose to believe is possible, investing our time, our resources, our energy, and our gifts and talents to make it so.
“Peace in our time” is often looked at as a nice but naïve peacenik slogan—shallow, unrealistic, even childish.
Notice how much easier it is to arouse the WILL to fight than it is to muster up the WILL to make peace? The spirit of vengeance and retaliation, anger and hatred, is so much easier to arouse than the spirit of mercy and forgiveness or peace and reconciliation. Sure, there are reasons for this, doubt and distrust, betrayal and deception, to name a few.
For that reason we must be wise as serpents and innocent as doves, when seeking peace. The choice is ours. We can choose to lock ourselves into a state of perpetual hatred, violence, and war. Or we can choose to be innocent as doves and seriously seek peace. It takes will, vision, and faith. It IS a choice. We must believe in it and see its real possibility. Oh, one more thing: Beware! We often see only that which we CHOOSE to see.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)