When Helping Hurts

I just finished reading an important book called “When Helping Hurts: How to Alleviate Poverty without Hurting the Poor. . . and Yourself,” by Steve Corbett and Brian Fikkert. The topic of the book is one that I have struggled with for some time. I always have felt that one of the the major callings of my life, and for all Christians, is to address the problem of poverty, as this is a major emphasis of Christian spirituality. However, it is unclear to me how to do so. This is the focus of this fine book.

Perhaps what I most appreciate about this book is that it attempts to address some of the root problems concerning poverty concerning individuals’ views of themselves. As discussed in the book:

“One of the major premises of this book is that until we embrace our mutual brokenness, our work with low-income people is likely to do far more harm than good. . . I confess to you that part of what motivates me to help the poor ismy felt need to accomplish something worthwhile in my life, to be a person of significance, to feel like I have pursued a noble cause. . . to be a bit like God. . . And in the process, I sometimes unintentionally reduce poor people to objects that I use to fulfill my own need. . . One of the biggest problems in many poverty-alleviation efforts is that their design and implementation exacerbates the poverty of being of the economically rich – their god-complexes – and the poverty of being of the economically poor – their feelings of inferiority and shame.”

I totally resonate with the idea of having a god-complex. And, so, it makes sense to me that most poverty-allivation efforts contribute to the idea that the helper is superior and the helpee is incapable. As this book discusses, the central question for real poverty-alleviation concerns how to mutually acknowledge people’s brokenness and problems while helping those financially struggling to develop the characteristics that will help them to work to attain sufficient money to provide for themselves and their loved ones (but not necessarily become financially wealthy, which may be another problem in itself).

God’s Prerequisites

One of my students, Jackie, is a lovely young woman, and also an atheist. Last week, she spent her 10-day Fall break touring Italy. One of her first visits was to the Duomo (Cathedral) Pisa. Interestingly, this church admits visitors for free if they agree to pray at the site. Being an open-minded (and poor) college student, Jackie decided to give prayer a shot. Basically, she prayed the “skeptics prayer,” that if God really was there, that God would reveal Itself to her. Much to Jackie’s surprise, she felt something profound and left thinking that maybe God and Jesus really were real. She decided to see where this led her. 

One of Jackie’s next stops was at St. Peter’s Basillica in Vatican City. Still feeling somewhat of a spiritual high from her recent prayer experience, Jackie decided to talk with a Priest who was taking confessions in the Basillica. Although Jackie had been baptised Catholic, she never went to confession as a youngster. She stumbled a bit with what to say to the Priest, but ultimately said that she wanted to confess her sins. The Priest told her that if she really was Catholic, she should have been going to confession all along, and that her desire to confess her sins now was inappropriate. Jackie left Rome angry. Her sense that God and Jesus were real had went away.

Speaking with her further, I don’t think that Jackie really wanted to confess her sins. I think she wanted to share her excitement that she was beginning a new spiritual life, that she had connected with God maybe for the first time, and perhaps receive some guidance or encouragement. For whatever reason, the Vatican Priest didn’t get this impression. His mind was focused on the prerequisites for confession and the Catholic faith.

Maybe this is irritating to non-Catholics to read this, but I imagine most of us have some prerequisites that we think people need to fulfill to be a “real Christian.” For example, maybe we believe that Christians need to have a particular political view, level of worldly success, attitude toward the theory of evolution, dress code, sexual orientation, national or racial identity, preference for music, group of friends, or personal or family history. I have certainly been guilty of this kind of thinking.

Formulating prerequisities to the Christian faith, however, may actually be one of the most unChristian things we might ever do. If there was one attribute Jesus was most known for, it might have been his openness to work with people from all perspectives. My reading of the New Testament is that Jesus was willing to enter into a life-changing relationship with ANYONE willing to surrender themselves and their lives to Him, irrespective of their political views, levels of worldly success, etc. 

Non-Christians often time seem to develop their ideas about Jesus and the Christian faith from members of the church. Unfortunately, I often times wonder if they have gotten the wrong impression because they see our biases more than the pattern of thinking and acting Jesus came to exemplify and inspire. My prayer is that we all could do this better. People like Jackie depend upon it.

The Genetics of Religion and Spirituality

One of the most intriguing questions regarding personal religiousness and spirituality concerns why some people are more motivated than others to seek and find a faith perspective. For many, this raises the question of whether nature (for example, genetics) vs. nurture (for example, upbringing) makes more of a difference.

Psychologists often use behavioral genetics research to try to untease the relative effects of nature vs. nurture. For instance, in one large study, approximately 2,000 identical twins and 2,000 fraternal twins born in Virginia were asked questions about their religious values, church attendance, and religious affiliation. Identical twins were considerably more similar to each other in their values and attendance, but not so much in their affiliation. Research conducted at the University of Minnesota comparing identical and fraternal twins raised apart (in separate home environments because of being split apart through the adoption process) suggests something similar with the extent to which individuals report being intrinsically religious (whereby they pursue religion because they sincerely believe). Taken together, this line of research suggests that one of the main reasons why individuals differ in strength of religiousness (but not affiliation) is because of their genetics. Similar to mental illness, intelligence, and personality, it seems that there is some kind of predisposition to being relatively more or less religious, with estimates suggesting that 30-50% of differences in personal religiousness is due to genes.

What does this mean? Some have suggested that this “explains away” the need to assume that there is a real God, the idea being that the primary motivating force behind religious belief is genetics. This fits well with naturalistic evolutionary accounts suggesting that religious belief came to our species because of its’ adaptive value. Similar arguments have been made because of research showing that particular parts of the brain seem to be most involved in particular kinds of religious or spiritual activities (such as meditation or deep prayer).

However, this research does not say that religiousness or spirituality is “genetic.” If it was, 100% of the variation among people’s religiousness and spirituality would be due to genetics, not 30-50%. The best estimate we have is that 50-70% of the differing levels of strength of religious and spiritual beliefs across individuals seems to be due to non-genetic factors.

Contrary to the notion that such research “explains away” God, these studies actually reinforce some of my spiritual inclinations. That is, this research seems very consistent with the idea that people have spiritual gifts, one of which is “faith.” Some people likely possess a personality that is more amenable to faith, perhaps because of openness or humility, whereas others more naturally question and doubt, are closed to religious and spiritual notions, or desire more personal control of their lives. For instance, I am naturally drawn to questions of faith; others seem to care less. Part of this must be due to a natural difference among people that motivates or doesn’t motivate a spiritual quest.

I don’t think this research suggests that our spiritual lives are pre-destined either. Like I said, 50-70% of the differences among us in religious and spiritual belief seem to be due to non-genetic factors. I think God wants a relationship with all people and that this, to some extent, is influenced by one’s attitude and free will. If it is more difficult for someone to find God because of their nature or because of certain experiences they have had, I think they will be judged fairly and justly.

The Experience of the Sacred

People often question the meaning of the terms “religion” and “spirituality.” One of the challenges in defining such terms is to identify a definition that captures the essence of the concepts, while at the same time limiting them to not be all-inclusive.

Psychologsts of religion often have defined religion and spirituality in terms of the “Sacred,” which further is defined as that which is holy, set apart, or distinct. The problem with this seems to be that the terms used in the definition are no clearer than the terms trying to be defined!

In light of all the great religious and spiritual traditions across the world, I’ve always thought that the Sacred has something to do with an entity that lasts forever. God, Jesus, the soul, and everyday objects connected with such entities (for example, Holy Communion) fit this definition. When I present this definition to students, many agree, while others say that this leaves out their view of that which is Sacred and, by implication, also what is spiritual. For instance, an atheist who finds intense positive emotion in sex or music might say that they have had a “spiritual experience,” which my definition wouldn’t recognize as such. My response typically is that the Sacred and the spiritual seem to have qualities different from merely experiencing intense positive emotion.

I’ve been thinking more about this recently, though, and wonder if there is another reason to believe that the Sacred is distinct. I wrote in my last post about the fear that I experienced in the presence of the mountains of northwest Scotland. At the same time, I’ve been living in what is considered to be one of the most “haunted” houses in Scotland. I’ve been interested in how students react to the possibility that ghosts are among us. Universally, the first response is that of fear, even though there is no real concern that the ghosts would ever directly harm anyone. This makes me wonder whether real encounters with Sacred entitities (and ghosts fit my definition of Sacred, I think, because they are thought to live forever) seem to always provoke a sense of fear. Perhaps this is because Sacred entitites always have a sense of mystery to them, a sense of the unknown, and also a sense of power, that makes people feel vulnerable and afraid. 

This also makes me wonder what happens when people who used to have very profound feelings in the presence of the Divine lose that feeling over time. This can sometimes really frustrate people who long for that “real presence” that they used to feel. It almost seems that some kind of desensitization process occurs. When I heard about ghosts being in this house for the first time, I was afraid to go in the basement. But, now that I’ve done it a number of times, I don’t really think about it anymore. Last week, when I was in the mountains, I really felt the presence of God. However, I imagine that if I lived in the mountains, that feeling would subside. For people who want to retain that sense of the Sacred, this suggests that they might do well to seek out different kinds of experiences (for example, different kinds of nature experiences, different kinds of interactions, different kinds of ways of visualizing spiritual stories [I’m here thinking of Brother Lawrence’s ideas about “practicing the presence of God”).

Yet, I think part of living in this world is to see great spiritual truths dimly. This is probably part of why we experience fear in the presence of the Sacred and also part of why we become desensitized. However, it is the Christian’s awesome hope that, someday, we will see these great truths completely and that we will experience the Sacred face to face. The mystery of the unknown will be lifted and our fear will be transformed to something more like rapture or ecstasy. No desensitization will occur and we forever will grow in our delight of our God.

The Awesomeness of God

This weekend, my family and I are exploring the Isle of Skye, situated near the coast of northwest Scotland. I’ve been to some beautiful places before, but I’ve never experienced such a spectacular display as I’ve experienced here. Words and pictures really cannot do it justice. I find myself in the midst of mountains, waterfalls, lakes, wildlife, strong winds, and ominous-looking clouds that make me feel emotions I’ve never really felt before. The new header for the blog comes from a picture I took today.

As I was walking tonight, surrounded by mountains, I felt overwhelmed by the glory I was witnessing. And, then, I realized that even what I’m observing is relatively small compared with the grandeur of the entire universe. The whole experience has left me with a sense of awe, including a kind of fear. However, this is not the usual kind of fear. The kind of fear I felt tonight feels different than anything I’ve ever felt before. Perhaps this kind of fear only can come when faced with the reality that you are in the presence of something much greater than yourself. This helps me to make sense of the Bible’s teaching that fear can be good and, indeed, the beginning of all wisdom (Proverbs 1:7).

I’ve always been taught, and have believed, that God is powerful. But, in some ways, the reality of that idea has escaped me. When I’m in this setting, I experience a new appreciation for the kind of power that God must have. God must be SO great to have created all of this! This is good for me to realize because it teaches me that, ultimately, I am not in control. There is something much larger than me operating in the universe.

And, yet, I am reminded of the paradox that, while God is so mighty, God also was so willing to be made little, to become a person, to suffer, and to show mercy, grace, and love to otherwise insignificant people like myself. This combination of power and love is difficult for my brain to wrap itself around, but just getting a whiff of it revolutionizes my mind. It shows me much God must treasure each and every one of His children, including me, and how God calls His followers to act in radical ways that express this truth to a world that, whether it knows it or not, desperately wishes for this to be the case.

In the end, I have come to realize that there exists a God that smashes every conceivable preconception that us tiny humans might have, even at our best and most insightful moments. I feel God’s awesomeness anew, but I have the sense that God is infinitely more awesome than even this.

How Universal vs. Culturally-Specific is Behavior?

One of the classic debates about human behavior has to do with nature vs. nurture. Basically, this debate is about the extent to which people’s behavior is driven more by biology (genetics, brain chemistry, hormones, evolutionary history) vs. nurture (early child environment, peers, previous experiences, present circumstances). Something that has been on my mind lately, though, has to do with similarities and differences in behavior across the world. How universal vs. culturally-specific is behavior?

It is popular at present to emphasize the importance of culture in influencing behavior. And, surely it is important, a fact that should help people learn from people with different backgrounds. For example, I took one of my classes out to observe behavior in the city square in Dalkeith, Scotland yesterday, and one of my students noted that few Scots seemed to drink a beverage on the go. Most people who drank a beverage seemed to go to a restaurant, pub, or shop and drink it there, typically with family or friends. If someone had a beverage while wakling, my student noticed that they were bringing several and were not drinking theirs as they walked, presumably because they were going to meet some others to share their drinks. In the United States, it seems much more common to drink as you go.

I realize this may seem trivial, but it seems to point to different emphases across cultures in the importance granted to taking a break to enjoy a beverage, spending some time with family and friends during the day, and the general pace of life experienced.

On the other hand, to be honest, I’ve noticed many more similarities across cultures. For example, a couple of days ago, I sat at a pub next to two young women, one of whom had a baby. I noticed that the baby started to fuss a bit, at which point the mom (I assume) put a pacifier in the baby’s mouth. This calmed the baby for a while, until he spit out the pacifier. This sequence repeated a couple of times, until the baby started to cry. The other woman then picked the baby up and spoke musically and bounced the baby up and down a bit while making exaggerated facial expressions. This calmed the baby down right away and within a minute or so, the baby was smiling.

Dare I say that this basic scenario is repeated countless times across the world. Babies, no matter where they are from, likely get fussy, then,cry, but ultimately get calmed by pacifiers, touch, a musical voice, and exaggerated facial expressions. Perhaps behavior is more universal than many like to think. Although culture is a powerful force in shaping behavior, people seem to be people, no matter what their culture.

Travel and Meaning

For the past 6 days, my family and I have been living outside of Edinburgh, Scotland, as a part of a teaching sabbatical. At the same time, I have been pondering Rob Bell’s new book “Drops Like Stars.” Interestingly, this book has helped to make sense of my experience thus far.

I came to Scotland for several reasons, including (1) my desire for my family and I to expand ourselves together, (2) my fascination with Europe, (3) the desire to build a unique and meaningful family history, and (4) my interest in cross-cultural aspects of human behavior. Our experiences have been interesting, some almost magical (such as watching my daughter, Ellie, immerse herself in a Scottish class for girls), and some quite frustrating (such as having Annika told yesterday in church that she couldn’t go to Ellie’s Sunday school class because she was a little too young). Amazingly, our girls have been thrilled for most of the trip, and almost have carried my wife and I at times, as both of us probably have missed home more.

In this context, it is interesting for me to think about Bell’s book, which basically is about how suffering often leads to creativity and meaning. At one point in the book, Bell notes how people generally want to feel alive, like we’re “in the game, like important things are on the line,” and it’s up to us to make a difference. At a different point, he discusses how discomfort and suffering often lead to raw experiences that often make life most meaningful and which often bond people together.

I think this explains people’s urges to travel. It’s amazing for me to receive e-mails and Facebook messages from people back home who say things like “you’re living the dream.” I think people deeply yearn for different experiences, for challenge, for “flow,” but often do not allow themselves the privilege because of the mundane day-to-day necessities of life. People not experiencing the challenge forget how challenging challenges can be and people currently experiencing the challenge, like my wife and I, sometimes can become discouraged from the difficulties.

This all reminds me of the nobel-award winning psychologist’s Daniel Kahneman’s idea that there is a difference between happiness in the moment and perceived life happiness more generally. In the day to day experience of our lives in Scotland thus far, life has been somewhat difficult. This has reminded me of what is really important to me in life – the importance of a spirituality that matters more than any earthly endeavor, the value of family and friends, and the meaningfulness of being rooted in a place. On the other hand, there is little doubt that this will be one of the most meaningful experiences of our entire lives. During the experience, it is important for me to consider how to cultivate this as much as possible.

Uncertainty

Over the past couple of months, I’ve increasingly become sensitized to how people vary in the amount of certainty vs. uncertainty they claim for their beliefs. In fact, it seems to be one of the key variables that distinguishes people’s religious and spiritual convictions. That is, some people seem to suggest that they “are absolutely certain” that what they believe actually is true, while others seem more capable of committing themselves to a belief while still recognizing that they may be wrong about at least some elements of the belief.

Maybe a story might help explain this. A couple of months ago, I was discussing religion and spirituality with a bunch of students. As I listened to everyone, I was so impressed by the diversity of thought present and, though I didn’t necessarily agree with the outcomes of people’s reasoning all the time, I could appreciate how they arrived at their various positions. At some point, I stated this and noted that, though I am a committed Christian, I am not completely certain that I am correct (and that I couldn’t understand actually how someone could be completely certain about this). A couple of minutes later, someone got up to leave, put his hand on my shoulder, and whispered in my ear that “you can’t be a Christian and not be certain,” at which point I became highly irritated.

I wonder if there is a need for certainty that motivates some people more than others. It surely seems that certainty would confer all sorts of psychological benefits, including better mental health and greater closeness within a group of like-minded individuals. However, with people who do not share one’s convictions, I would imagine that certainty would bring frustration. In the realm of religion and spirituality, I would predict that expressions of certainty would turn people off from attempts to evangelize because people also have a need for control over the process of belief in ways that brings up questions in the face of expressed certainty.

Blending the Best of Different Cultures

The more that I learn about different cultures, the more that I become fascinated by cultural differences. Obviously, each person has a unique cultural heritage consisting of a blend of different cultural influences. However, research suggests that there are a couple of dominant cultural orientations across the world.

The independent cultural orientation generally values the glory of the self. This is seen in values to self-actualize, fulfill one’s potential, achieve self-esteem, reveal one’s unique talents, stand up for one’s personal rights, and take personal responsibility for one’s actions. Although it may be difficult to recognize, this orientation uniquely is promoted in the United States, particularly among men (but increasingly among women as well). In contrast, the interdependent cultural orientation generally values the glory of some group (for example, one’s family, community, tribe, or country). This orientation is promoted most clearly in Asia and Africa. Both orientations are represented in key cultural institutions (for example, democratic vs. communist governmental structures) and practices (sending kids to day care when young while parents work vs. staying with them).

It is easy to believe that the values taught to us are universal values. Often times, however, they are culture-specific. For instance, the value of becoming independent and fulfilling our potential often is unquestioned within our society. However, once there is a recognition that other cultures possess different values, it is natural to wonder what values should be followed. In my view, I often have tried to consider how to take the best of different values in order to achieve a good life.

Clearly, the freedom and opportunities associated with an independent cultural orientation is the envy of the world. This probably is part of the reason why the United States historically has received so many immigrants. The focus on independence also encourages individuals to achieve. American society obviously has benefited from this achievement, as seen in the tremendous wealth that has been attained. On the other hand, the focus on standing out in excellence brings with it many disadvantages, including isolation and the stress of trying to do well in everything. In contrast, an interdependent cultural orientation often possesses the advantages of interconnectedness among people and a more laid-back lifestyle.

I often wonder how I can appreciate the opportunities I have in the United States, choosing what fits best for me, while at the same time rejecting strong values for achievement, materialism, and pride to have a more balanced lifestyle filled with strong relationships with family and friends. For example, this summer, I am trying to work a “reverse-week,” working two days per week, but taking five off. Obviously, not everyone has this opportunity, but being a faculty member, I’ve decided to teach on Saturdays, “work” another day mostly by meeting with former students, and then take the rest to devote to my family and other friends, and complete other projects that I might find enjoyable (such as landscaping projects around the house, or going on a trip to take photography). Sometimes, I struggle with the “waste of my time;” in other words, the number of work-related projects I could complete if I spent more of this time in the summer. However, I’ve increasingly decided that I would find it more fulfilling to spend my time within relationships with others. In this way, I think I am applying the age-old wisdom, supported by modern psychological research, that one of the basic elements of a good life is close, meaningful relationships with others.

Helping Children to Read through the Summer

As the school year comes to a close, adults face the perennial question of how to help children during the summer maintain, or even bolster, their proficiency and interest in reading. In response to this challenge, many children will be offered all sorts of external rewards (such as treats, stickers, certificates of achievement, and even money) in exchange for reading.

These external rewards seem to “work” – for the short-term. In particular, use of rewards to motivate reading may be a good idea for children who wouldn’t read otherwise. Perhaps these kids will develop their reading skills and discover the joy of reading in the process.

On the other hand, considerable scientific research suggests that providing extrinsic rewards – particularly expected and tangible rewards (i.e., “bribes”) – to people who already enjoy an activity undermines  long-term interest in the activity. For instance, in one classic study, researchers at Stanford University examined what happens when preschoolers receive different consequences for playing with markers (which most preschoolers enjoy). In one condition, the kids were told that they would win an award if they played for a certain time, and then received that award afterwards; in another condition, they unexpectedly received the award; in a third, they received only mild praise. In the condition where the kids received the expected and tangible reward, free-time interest in playing with markers decreased by almost half, relative to the other conditions. Perhaps this is because the motivation of the kids shifted, such that they were doing the activity to receive the reward, rather than for the joy of the activity itself.

Given this, instead of relying on extrinsic rewards, adults might consider ways to nurture children’s love of reading this summer. For example, adults might pick up some reading material that they are excited about and role model the love of reading while kids are in their presence. Along with this, kids should be encouraged to read whatever most excites them. Anything counts here – comic books, magazines, the sports page, the manual for Wii – whatever is most enticing. Finally, when adults notice kids enjoying themselves reading, they might note this (e.g., “It looks like you’re having so much fun reading”) or initiate a conversation about what they’re reading that they most enjoy. If adults resist the temptation to bribe, perhaps children will develop a passion for reading that will last a lifetime.

Desiring God

With some reticence, I recently read “Desiring God,” by John Piper. The basic premise of this book is that the Christian life is meant to address our fundamental need for happiness and that the best Christian lifestyle is shown when happiness is achieved.

Piper makes a lot of interesting points in this book that I think can easily be related to Psychology. For instance, he points out that the Bible discourages certain emotions (e.g., jealousy) while encouraging others (e.g., hope).

There also are a lot of quotations from the book that I enjoyed, including the following:

“There is a kind of happiness and wonder that makes you serious.” (C. S. Lewis)

“All men seek happiness. This is without exception. Whatever different means they employ, they all tend to this end. The cause of some going to war, and of others avoiding it, is the same desire in both, attended with different views. The will never takes the least step but to this object. This is the motive of every action of every man, even of those who hang themselves.” (Blaise Pascal)

“If we consider the unblushing premises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.” (C. S. Lewis)

“There once was in man a true happiness of which now remain to him only the mark and empty trace, which he in vain tries to fill from all his surroundings, seeking from things absent the help he does not obtain in things present. But these are all inadequate, because the infinite abyss can only be filled by an infinite and immutable object, that is to say, only by God Himself.” (Blaise Pascal)

“The most obvious fact about praise – whether of God or anything – strangely escaped me. I thought of it in terms of compliment, approval, or the giving of honor. I had never noticed that all enjoyment spontaneously overflows into praise. . . The world rings with praise – lovers praising their mistresses, readers their favorite poet, walkers praising the countryside, players praising their favorite game. . . I had not noticed either that just as men spontaneously praise whatever they value, so they spontaneously urge us to join them in praising it: ‘Isn’t she lovely?’ ‘Wasn’t it glorious?’ ‘Don’t you think that magnificent?’. . . I think we delight to praise what we enjoy because the praise not merely expresses but completes the enjoyment; it is its appointed consummation.” (C. S. Lewis)

“If I were to ask you why you have believed in Christ, why you have become Christians, every man will answer truly, ‘For the sake of happiness.’” (Augustine)

Much of the time during this book, I wondered whether Piper was encouraging an extrinsic approach to faith (focused on personal happiness), but I think that he actually was encouraging intrinsic religiousness here. That is, he encouraged believers to seek good ends, but to delight in the process. I think this advice transcends many domains of life. It’s interesting to have so many references and thoughts compiled about how it relates to Christian faith.

Born to be Good

During the last month or so, I’ve been enjoying “Born to be Good,” a book about emotion, Evolutionary Psychology, and living a good life. It is important for me to note that the author of this book, Dacher Keltner, was my first mentor in Psychology when I was a student at the University of Wisconsin – Madison (he now is a Professor at the University of California – Berkeley). I took two courses with him and was his research assistant. I remember very vividly helping to code non-verbal behaviors for hours at a time in his lab, sometimes by his side, as we discussed various issues. I probably annoyed him with my visits during office hours, but during these times, my intellectual life was sparked, and he encouraged me to attend graduate school, which I probably wouldn’t have done otherwise. I also remember hanging out with him, going to lunch with him several times, and being invited to his house for a chili potluck with his research team (and learning that parsnips are really good in chili!). In many ways, I wouldn’t be the person I am today without his influence. Surely, my approach to being a Professor is modeled after his good influence. I owe Dacher a huge debt.

Anyways, perhaps I’m biased for the above reasons, but I think the book is brilliant at times. It follows along a tradition of recently published books in Positive Psychology, but is truly original in its foci.

The main thesis of the book is that Darwin’s theory of evolution, as applied to human behavior, often times has been misconstrued to focus overly on negative inclinations people experience. But, this only is half the story. Dacher argues that the positive instincts humans experience often have been overlooked. If we could become more focused and detailed in our thoughts about positive emotions hardwired into us, we might be more able to live a meaningful life.

Given this, much of the focus on the book is on specific emotional tendencies that instinctively lead us to happiness and positive social bonds. Consider, for instance, the following quote from the Dalai Lama, as he reflected on the Holocaust: “Events such as those which occurred at Auschwitz are violent reminders of what can happen when individuals – and by extension, whole societies – lose touch with basic human feeling.” Dacher argues that this is a countercultural statement in that many believe that following our feelings leads people to a downward spiral. However, in many cases, as the Dalai Lama suggested, following feelings may lead to a better existence for everyone involved.

Some more specific examples follow.

Rather than the common assumption that the most powerful are the cruelest, Dacher argues that the kindest tend to be the people at the top because of their superior emotional intelligence.

If allowed to choose something that might predict who would be a good mate, he suggests to look at how easily embarrassed someone gets, as this is an indicator of a person’s respect for others and the moral order. Consistent with this, those most well-adjusted seem most likely to get embarrassed, but those less adjusted seem least likely.

Although conflict predicts quicker divorces, marriages that end longer into the relationship are well predicted by the absence of laughter.

Playful tease is an automatic way many people test the commitments of others.

Depressed mothers who are encouraged to touch their children more become happier. Students appropriately touched by teachers are more than twice as likely to participate in class. Premature infants who are provided with infant massage gain weigh about 47% quicker. Touch also seems to decrease the amount of stress hormones, potentially meaning that children who are touched more when young are more likely to develop brains less susceptible to stress reactions. Touch also seems to help children with autism, ADHD boys, children suffering from asthma and diabetes, and people suffering from other diseases.

Children seem more likely to be resilient to the stress of their parent’s divorce when they have other adults with whom they can have close connections.

These are just some examples of the insights that come from this line of research. Clearly, our instincts are not all bad. In fact, we all have good hard-wired into us as well.

The Secret Message of Jesus

I recently just completed “The Secret Message of Jesus,” by Brian McLaren. This is supposed to be the best introduction to the thinking of McLaren, who himself is supposed to be a controversial leader of the “emergent” church. I didn’t find anything particularly controversial in this book, at least from my perspective. In fact, I found it to be a very refreshing and beautiful summary of the Christian faith.

Basically, this book is a summary of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. McLaren seems especially good at translating ancient ideas into contemporary ones. For instance, he emphasizes that the “good news” most centrally involves the idea that the kingdom of God is at hand (right now and in our midst). McLaren translates the idea of “eternal life” as “an extraordinary life to the full centered in a relationship with God.” If given a brief opportunity to summarize Jesus’ teaching, McLaren says:

“Everyone needs to rethink their lives as individuals, and we need to rethink our direction as a culture and imagine an unimagined future for our world. . . Because of the Kingdom of God is here. You can count on this.”

Maybe my favorite section of the book is when McLaren seeks to translate the idea of the “kingdom” of God into modern language. This is helpful to me because the “kingdom” is emphasized so much in the Gospels, but it just doesn’t hit the mark for me. Here are some of the words McLaren uses: The dream of God (e.g., in rending “Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven,” McLaren translates “May all your dreams for your creation come true”), the revolution of God (i.e., with the Gospel involving the invitation for people to join God’s revolutionary movement of change), the party of God, and the dance of God.

As a part of this, McLaren includes a story that I love. I’ll quote it in full below:

“My friend Tony Campolo tells a true story that also serves as a great parable. . . He was in another time zone and couldn’t sleep, so well after midnight he wandered down to a doughnut shop where, it turned out, local hookers also came at the end of a night of turning tricks. There, he overheard a conversation between two of them. One, named Agnes, said, ‘You know what? Tomorrow’s my birthday. I’m gonna be thirty-nine.’ Her friend snapped back, ‘So what d’ya want from me? A birthday party? Huh? You want me to get a cake and sing happy birthday to you?’ The first woman replied, ‘Aw, come on, why do you have to be so mean? Why do you have to put me down? I’m just sayin’ it’s my birthday. I don’t want anything from you. I mean, why should I have a birthday party? I’ve never had a birthday party in my whole life. Why should I have one now?’ When they left, Tony got an idea. He asked the shop owner if Agnes came in every night, and when he replied in the affirmative, Tony invited him into a surprise party conspiracy. The shop owner’s wife even got involved. Together they arranged for a cake, candles, and typical party decorations for Agnes, who was, to Tony, a complete stranger. The next night when she came in, they shouted, ‘Surprise!’ – and Agnes couldn’t believe her eyes. The doughnut shop patrons sang, and she began to cry so hard she could barely blow out the candles. When the time came to cut the cake, she asked if they’d mind if she didn’t cut it, if she could bring it home – just to keep it for a while and savor the moment. So she left, carrying her cake like a treasure. Tony led the guests in a prayer for Agnes, after which the shop owner told Tony he didn’t realize Tony was a preacher. He asked what kind of church Tony came from, and Tony replied, ‘I belong to a church that throws birthday parties for prostitutes at 3:30 in the morning.’ The shop owner couldn’t believe him. ‘No you don’t. There ain’t no church like that. If there was, I’d join it. Yep, I’d join a church like that.’”

Much of this book is about Jesus’ “secret message,” emphasizing that “the new kingdom – unlike its evil counterparts – doesn’t force itself where it is not wanted and welcomed. . . for all its power and reality, it comes subtly, gently, and secretly.” After all, “[people] can be invited, attracted, intrigued, enticed, and challenged – but not forced.” This message is displayed in radical acts like just mentioned as well as “visiting hospitals, giving out flowers, planting gardens, fixing houses for elderly or disabled people, cleaning homes, fixing cars, babysitting for single parents, building playgrounds, cleaning up trashy neighborhoods or streams or roadsides. . .”

I love this quote: “What if the real difference is made in the world not by us preachers but by those who endure our preaching, those who quietly live out the secret message of the kingdom of God in their daily, workaday lives in the laboratory, classroom, office, cockpit, parliament, kitchen, market, factory, and neighborhood?”

And, this one, too: “Faith that counts. . . is not the absence of doubt; it’s the presence of action.”

Finally, McLaren includes a couple of quotes that really identify the kind of longing I often experience.

“There is within us – in even the blithest, most lighthearted among us – a fundamental dis-ease. . . This desire lies in the marrow of our bones and deep in the regions of our soul. All great literature, poetry, art, philosophy, psychology, and religion tries to name and analyze this longing. We are seldom in direct touch with it, and indeed the modern world seems set on preventing us from getting in touch with it by covering it with. . . entertainments, obsessions, and distractions of every sort. But the longing is there, built into us like a jack-in-the-box that presses for release. . . Whether we realize it or not, simply to be human is to long for release from mundane existence with its confining walls of finitude and mortality. The good news. . . is that that longing can be fulfilled.” (Huston Smith)

“We do not want to merely see beauty, though, God knows, even that is bounty enough. We want something else which can hardly be put into words – to be united with the beauty we see, to pass into it, to receive it into ourselves, to bathe in it, to become part of it. . . At present we are on the outside of the world, the wrong side of the door. We discern the freshness and purity of morning, but they do not make us fresh and pure. We cannot mingle with the splendors we see. But all the leaves of the New Testament are rustling with the rumor that it will not always be so. Some day, God willing, we will get in.” (C. S. Lewis)

Five Undeniable Truths

Ever since I can remember, I have been on a quest to understand how to approach my life. Much of this quest has centered around the search for what is true regarding religious and spiritual matters. This spiritual quest has led me to read countless books, attend several debates, and engage in numerous discussions about related issues. Sometimes, I seem to make some conclusions, but inevitably, my conclusions are questioned again at some later point in time.

Something that recently has clarified my quest is an appreciation for five truths that I simply cannot deny. I summarize them below, in hope that I can return to them (and potentially refine or expand on them) in the future.

1. I am insecure, inadequate, and imperfect. Ever since I can remember, I have sought something more, whether it be achievement, approval, or close relationships. However, even when I get what I think I want, I still seem to long for more.
2. I haven’t read everything, nor do I understand every story that exists, but based on what I have read and what I do understand, the Christian story is the most beautiful story I’ve ever heard. The idea that a relational God created the world and people out of boundless love; that these people turned from God; but, that God sent Himself to rescue us. . . nothing could be more beautiful. In fact, no story could better make sense of, or address, my sense of incompleteness than this.
3. I think the Christian story is true. I’ve written about why in my posts dealing with “Why I Believe.” Given points 1-3, I surrender my life and myself to Jesus to the best of my ability.
4. Although I think the Christian story is true, I may be wrong about this. I have understood and known many non-Christians who make sense to me and who are good people. Many times, they make more sense and are more virtuous than many Christians I have known.
5. Given all this, and I hope with God’s help, I seek to live out what I consider to be the most distinctly Christian virtues, including radical authenticity, interconnectedness (with God and people), humility, grace, justice, and temperance.

Lithium in the Water

In contrast to a recent post, some have suggested how powerful antidepressant, actually all psychotropic medications, are for influencing people’s thoughts, emotions, and behaviors.

Related to this, a common student question I often receive is that if antidepressants are so helpful for improving mood, why don’t we give them out to everyone? The assumption is that psychotropic medications can influence the functioning of individuals even if they do n0t suffer from a psychological disorder.

Peter Kramer, the famed psychiatrist, once advocated that Prozac should be widely distributed, suggesting that perhaps it would be beneficial to society of we had everyone take the medication. Perhaps everyone would be happy, thereby leading to various benefits. I always thought this was just an interesting thought experiment, until I read about this study that reports on the decreased level of suicide in areas where more lithium is found in the water:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8025454.stm

Lithium is one of the primary treatments for bipolar disorder. It actually is a mood stabilizer, but it seems to also be associated with general mood improvement.

Of course, this raises all sorts of ethical questions. I’ll leave it to the reader to make their own decision about widespread dissemination of psychotropic substances for mass benefit, but it seems to me to be medically unethical and untenable.

The Effects of Prosocial Video Games

I write occasionally on this blog about the darksides of the media. For instance, I have noted on occasion the harmful effects of violent content in various media outlets, such as video games.

Given this, it is interesting that the first research report concerning the effects of “prosocial” video games was released this week. In this study, participants were randomly assigned to play prosocial games or a neutral game. Similar to the pattern with violent content, those who were exposed to the prosocial game behaved more prosocially when given the opportunity. 

This suggests that the effects of media need not be bad. Rather, it seems that the media can be used for good or bad, depending on content.

This information may be helpful for individual deciding how to consume the media, educators of media literacy, parents, and the media industry interested in making a positive difference in the world. In fact, if prosocial themes can be packaged with entertaining forms of media, this research suggests a clear avenue for improving the health and well-being of the world.

The Effectiveness of Antidepressants

Antidepressant medications now are the #1 prescribed medication in the world. An important question concerns the effectiveness of these medications.

Probably the best research study ever done regarding the effectiveness of different treatments for depression was sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health in the late 1980s. In this study, several hundred individuals diagnosed with clinical depression were randomly assigned to 16 weeks of either an antidepressant medication, a sugar pill, or a kind of psychotherapy. Interestingly, the results showed little benefit of antidepressants over sugar for those mildly (yet still clinically) depressed, but major benefit for those more seriously depressed. Psychotherapy more consistently benefitted individuals, whether mildly or seriously depressed (and other research tends to find that psychotherapy results in better long-term outcomes). This research is consonent with many other studies and challenges the necessity of antidepressant medications as the primary treatment strategy, particularly for cases of mild to moderate depression (but not serious depression, which I would define as recurring depression or depression with serious suicidal symptoms).

In this context, a new study caught my eye that adds to this growing literature. Rather than only looking at people purely depressed (without any other psychological conditions), the study also examined people with an additional diagnosis. Interestingly, the research showed that antidepressants are less effective when there is more than one condition. This, again, suggests some limitations to the use of antidepressants.j

You can learn more about the latter study here:

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1895672,00.html

Living Abroad and Creativity

I was intrigued last week when the first research study I’ve ever seen on the effects of living abroad was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. In general, the article revealed that living abroad seemed to boost creativity.

The authors of the article state that:

“Living abroad is often seen as a necessary experience for aspiring artists, and there is abundant anecdotal evidence for the idea that some creative individuals produce their best known masterworks during or following a stint abroad. . . The novelist Richard Stern noted the particular importance of living abroad. . . ‘Once I went [abroad], it was extremely exciting for me to become a new personality, to be detached from everything that bound me, noticing everything that was different. That noticing of difference was very important.’”

In particular, the research showed that time spent living abroad (but not time spent traveling abroad) showed a positive relationship with creativity. This effect occurred independently of a number of personality variables and other possible confounding variables, such as cognitive ability.

All this makes me think of the famous developmental psychologist, Jean Piaget, who argued that the mind develops either through assimilation (fitting information in with previous mental structures) or accomodation (which is so profound that entirely new ways of thinking develop). Perhaps living abroad and other profound experiences are so completely different from the norm that they require entirely new ways of thinking, thereby promoting creativity in various ways. I wonder in what other ways living abroad may influence people’s personalities and behavior and what variables may moderate this effect (for example, age of person living abroad).

Is Twitter Evil?

I recently was intrigued by an article that appeared on MSNBC.com:

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/04/14/1891640.aspx

Basically, this research shows that the brain seems to respond more slowly, and with an extended duration, to stimuli requiring individuals to process stories about virtue or psychological distress (compared with stories about skill or physical distress).

As reported in the article, the researchers said their findings “could have important implications for the role of culture and education in the development and operation of social and moral systems. . . Heavy reliance on a rapid stream of info snippets through television, online feeds, and social networks may cut down on the time required for feelings of admiration or compassion to sink in fully.”

Another researcher, Immordino-Yang, put it another way: “If things are happening too fast, you may not ever fully experience emotions about other people’s psychological states, and that would have implications for your morality.”

This, again, raises questions about the unreflective use of various kinds of technology.

The Psychology of Technology

I was intrigued this week with the release of a paper in American Psychologist regarding the psychology of technology. In this paper, University of California researchers reviewed some of the effects of technology consumption. I will summarize some of the major points of interest in this post.

Whereas settings used to be organized around a distinct set of activities (for example, recreation in the home), contemporary settings have become polyfunctional, whereby residential, work, and recreational functions now are performed within the same environment (for example, recreation and work are now often performed in the home).

Clearly, there are a lot of advantages to the boom in technology our culture has experienced within the past decade or two. Perhaps individuals are not as accustomed to thinking about possible downsides, however.

In terms of possible downsides, the scholars reported that people’s daily routines have become more fragmented as a result of the increase in technology. For instance, workers handle a greater number of tasks each day, switch their attention more frequently, and encounter more frequent interruptions. Additionally, the complexity and pace of work, and the number of hours worked, are increasing globally. Similar trends are observed within the home.

Much time also is spent on technology. For example, many students report spending a lot of unnecessary time on Facebook. A lot of time often seems to be consumed dealing with unnecessary e-mail communication.

All of these trends seems to have increased the frequency of distraction people experience and a sense of “information overload.” Stress, poor health, reduced productivity, less contemplation, poorer decision-making, worse performance on complex tasks, and reduced interpersonal sensitivity appear to be the result. Another problem concerns what the authors refer to as “absent presence,” which deals when people are physically in a location, but mentally distracted. This may lead to reduced social cohesion and moral understandings within local communities. True intimacy also may suffer.

A final concern raised in this article is about the growing divide resulting from the increase in technology. As society depends more on such technology, the “haves” gain more advantage, relative to the “have nots.” Social inequality may increase due to this.

I hope to devote a future post to possible remedies to some of these problems.