Posted on by Abe Austin

How Do You Identify?

I recently considered the markers we use to identify ourselves when meeting someone new. The most common descriptors seem to include what our work is, where we are from, what our race/heritage is, what religion we belong to, and what our family situation is. Of late, there has also been an increase in identifying oneself by one’s sexual and gender identity.

But why are these the sorts of markers that we use? Do these really represent the most fundamental qualities of a person? If I told you what I do for work, does that really tell you much about how I think and feel? If I disclosed my sexual preferences, would that really give you an accurate window into my soul?

I don’t think so. In my experience, most of these categories have little, if anything, to do with who a person is at their core. Really, I think we only use these because they tend to represent the smallest minorities that we belong to. The mentality seems to be “if you know what is most unique about me, you will know who I really am,” but I think this is a false assumption. Sometimes, it is the broadest of definitions that actually get the closest to the truth.

For example, the identification that I am “a son of God,” hardly puts me into a minority, but it is much more fundamental to who I really am. Descriptions like “I am a Software Developer,” or “my family is from Norway,” put me into smaller buckets, but those buckets are pretty shallow. Being “a son of God” has me in a bucket that is very wide, but also very deep.

I think it is therefore more useful to take those broader, wide-bucket categories, and then go deep with them. If I really wanted to introduce myself in a way that gave people a window into my soul, I might say something like “I am one of God’s creations, and I, in turn, share my Maker’s passion for creating new things. And not only am I a creation, but also a re-creation. I am one who has been redeemed by Christ, brought back from an addiction and loneliness that I thought I would never see the end of.”

Would this be an awkward way to introduce myself? Well, given that awkwardness is defined simply by whether it is how most other people do things, then yes, I suppose this sort of introduction would be unique and strange. Even so, I truly feel it would give a far better explanation of who I really am, it would point you to the parts of my soul that are most integral to who I am. I really think it would be a better, more interesting society if we all gave these sorts of introductions to who we are. Of course, before we could have a society where we all introduced in this way, we would first have to all know ourselves at this deep level, and that’s easier said than done. Lack of knowledge of self is probably the real reason why we fall back on the simpler, but shallowed definitions instead.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Do I Even Have an Addiction? -Part Three

A Social Shame)

I’ve already talked about our tendency to minimize our addictions, and I have encouraged all to bring their full resolve to addressing these “minimal” issues, so that they may quickly ascertain how “minimal” they really are. At the end of my last post, I suggested that even if one discovers that their vices are not a matter of choice, but of compulsion, they might still be reluctant to call their situation an addiction.

There are a few reasons why this might be, let us first consider that the person might have an aversion to that label due to social pressure. Most of us are blind to just how much we are molded by the society around us, so our addict-in-denial probably doesn’t even recognize this factor in his life at first. Through introspection, he may realize that he has always heard of addicts in association with murderers, liars, the homeless, and thieves. He has considered anyone with that title to be hopeless, broken, and perverse. In short, he views the label “addict” prejudicially.

He might express a fear of how others will view him if he labels himself as an addict. He knows that the label is stigmatized, for he has held that same stigma, and he is terrified that others will assume all manner of perversions about him that are inaccurate. He, himself, remains suspicious of addicts as a whole. He views them as an unpredictable group, and he only meets with them while inwardly pinching his nose. Frankly he believes that he is better than them. Thus, he would rather find a term that tells gives people a more favorable view of his problems.

And while that may sound terrible and judgmental, it is a completely understandable place for one to begin their journey. So many of the very people in the twelve steps started in just the same way. We have all had many years to reinforce the stereotypes of what an “addict” is, and it is going to take some time for us to broaden our perspective. We have to learn to let go of our bias and see things with more honesty and nuance.

Not That Bad)

But ignorance and bias are not the only possible reasons why one might be averse to calling himself an addict. Another reason might be that our one genuinely doesn’t think his problem qualifies under the category of addiction. Most of us feel that only certain sorts of actions can belong to an addiction. And maybe this is accurate, and maybe it isn’t, really this is merely a matter of semantics.

Some, for example, feel that an addiction must involve some sort of foreign chemicals. Thus, they would say that one could not be addicted to overeating. Others say that it doesn’t have to be a chemical, but the taking in of some substance must be involved, which would rule out being addicted to pornography or gambling.

There are also many different opinions as to how afflicted one must be before their situation can be considered an addiction. There is a sense that there is a quota of suffering and senseless behavior that must be met before the addiction is official.

But frankly, in this case arguing semantics isn’t very meaningful. So long as one realizes when and where they are powerless over their behavior, and acknowledges that they need drastic changes and external help, then who cares what they call it?

I have my own issues that fall into this gray area. One of them is my seeming refusal to get to bed on time. Every day I tell myself that I’m going to, I know that I am going to suffer if I don’t, yet night after night I find myself making the same unhealthy choice to stay up too late. Does that really qualify as an addiction? Even by the most broad and inclusive definition of the term, it seems a bit of a stretch. But I don’t care. If someone decided to call this problem of mine an addiction, I would feel absolutely no need to correct them. My addictions and my compulsive negative behaviors still live under the same umbrella, and I still need to work on each of them in the same way. In all cases I need to identify my triggers, discover my underlying mental and emotional states, seek support from understanding friends, and surrender my failings to my Higher Power.

“Addiction” or “compulsive negative behavior?” It just doesn’t matter. That which we call a thorn, by any other name, would pierce just as painfully. So long as we are no longer in denial about our affliction and our powerlessness, we may call it whatever we will. If you feel reluctant about labeling yourself an addict, I would simply encourage you to consider what the reason for that is. Is it due to some social bias, or have you become hung up on semantics? In either case, can you set aside the periphery and deal with the problem honestly and wholeheartedly? Are you humble enough to get the help you need?

Posted on by Abe Austin

Influence and Persuasion- 1 Kings 18:21, Matthew 26:41, Exodus 8:28,32

And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word.

Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.

And Pharaoh said, I will let you go, that ye may sacrifice to the Lord your God in the wilderness; only ye shall not go very far away: entreat for me.
And Pharaoh hardened his heart at this time also, neither would he let the people go.

COMMENTARY

How long halt ye between two opinions?
And Pharaoh said, I will let you go…And Pharaoh hardened his heart and would not let the people go
The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak
We find multiple examples in the scriptures of people that are of two minds. The Israelites try to conflate two incompatible theologies into one. Pharaoh says he’ll let his slaves go, but his hard heart keeps holding on. The apostles want to stay up with their beloved master, but they’re just too tired to do so.
Clearly the strife between competing thoughts and desires is not only between different people, but also within us. We have different voices inside that want different things, and each side debates against the others.
The question of how to persuade and influence others is also a question of how to persuade and influence our own selves. The mystery of how to change the world for good is the same as the mystery of how to change ourselves. Indeed, coming into harmony with ourselves is a prerequisite before we can hope to bring harmony to those around us.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Influence and Persuasion- Contention

Before really diving into this matter of “good” and “bad” ways to influence and persuade others, I wanted to address the fact that words like “influence” and “persuade” feel like they are taking on a more negative definition of late.

When two people debate about their different desires or beliefs, they can easily find it a negative experience, where each has their feelings hurt and grows more divided from the other. Repeated experiences like these might start to make one feel that “influencing” and “persuading” are synonymous with “manipulating” and “coercing.” To proselyte starts to be seen as just forcing your opinions on others.

But while these conversations can turn negative, they really don’t have to. I am sure each of us can recall a situation where we had our minds changed, and it was done in a way that left us feeling edified and improved. We can have a conversation that is mutual, where each side contributes to a greater whole, and where truth is found in the intersection of core beliefs.

Or put another way, each of us has an ego, and when that communicates with another ego, only contention can occur. But also we each have an eternal spirit, and when that spirit feels directly spoken to by another eternal spirit, it awakens and remembers itself. Then we see the truth in what is being shared, and are convinced in a wholesome way.

And this is the sort of experience I want to pursue with this study. I want to understand what it is that makes those moments work, and how we can actively work for them in all of our interactions with each other.