|
Others ~ Selected Correspondence Compassion
The only other thing I would mention is that there is another easy way of understanding the nature of the animal instinctual programming that I have run across and that is to observe children. Granted that the children that I work with as a social worker have, in many cases, been horribly abused by their parents and caretakers, but they seem not to have developed the internal controls that are inculcated by society as morals, ethics, and values, and the underlying instinctual package is plain for all to see. The malice and sorrow of these little people, their fights with one another, their pain and suffering, is readily apparent. The children are very obviously in a primitive survival mode almost all the time. The destructiveness of these self-centred passions is something I wrestle with everyday in my work. How do you wrestle with this? From a pure AF point of view, nobody is helped by empathetic responses to these painful situations, but the program runs deep. Actual Freedom could be interpreted by some as cold detachment. This is probably residual catholic programming on my part as my estimation of my own power to effect change has diminished rather significantly over the last few years. Still, the question lingers. Guilt moves in mysterious ways (not). I meant the word ‘wrestle’ both figuratively and literally. In a figurative sense, one is helping the children with their feeling responses to situations, whether by using a sort of Cognitive-Behaviour therapy (learning to think about what one is doing rather than blindly react). But I also meant quite literally I ‘wrestle’ because sometimes physical restraint is applied if the child is physically out of control. Wrestle is really the wrong word. We call it ‘therapeutic holding’, which is a way of pinning the child on the floor when they are punching, kicking, throwing things, etc. It is designed to be a benign use of force to get them to calm down. As soon as they stop fighting and begin to relax, you begin to relax your hold on them progressively. I must say I have had mixed feelings about this holding activity. But it serves to point up to me that in our society, in childhood, one must learn ‘self’-control early lest one learn it later in life at the point of a gun. In this type of situation, one must monitor oneself constantly to ensure that one is not overreacting. Empathy is rather hard to muster up when someone is spitting in your face or trying to bite your hand off. I think you are right that AF could be interpreted as cold detachment. However, there are other responses to painful situations besides empathy. One does not abandon caring for others by seeing the futility of empathy. It has taken me awhile to sort out these things for myself. Working in a profession that stresses the value of empathy so much I have had to really think deeply about this all. By observing the other people that work with, I don’t think my response to these situations is markedly different than others. If my emotional reactions to highly emotional situations is attenuated or diminished, I think it has some real value in the situation in helping to calm things down. I think it is a big strength in dealing with highly enraged individuals. Gary to No 38
I think you are right that AF could be interpreted as cold detachment. However, there are other responses to painful situations besides empathy. One does not abandon caring for others by seeing the futility of empathy. It has taken me awhile to sort out these things for myself. Working in a profession that stresses the value of empathy so much I have had to really think deeply about this all. By observing the other people that work with, I don’t think my response to these situations is markedly different than others. If my emotional reactions to highly emotional situations is attenuated or diminished, I think it has some real value in the situation in helping to calm things down. I think it is a big strength in dealing with highly enraged individuals. Whew. Not an easy task. The empathy issue is one of the nubs, for myself. I have an internal resistance to AF because it feels like I would be failing my fellow human beings. I know that this is rubbish and actually contributes to the overall misery, but the Mother Teresa syndrome runs deep. You mentioned Mother Theresa in connection with the issue of empathy. I do not know if you are familiar with any of the detractors of Mother Theresa or not, but the work of some paints quite a different picture of this poster girl of compassion than that ordinarily received through the mass media. Here’s a link to an interview with Christopher Hitchens: http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/hitchens_16_4.html. He wrote a book named ‘Missionary Position’ which exposes MT for being, among other things, a religious zealot who is selfishly interested in expanding the Catholic fundamentalist doctrine and who squanders the monetary contributions on expanding her sect, not on the care of the dying. Gary to No 38
The richness, the depth of each human feeling reveals the understanding of what it is to be a human being in such an empirical, intimate way that it is later instantly recognized in a fellow human being who is going through the same emotional, human experience and who can then be met by compassion, that very kind understanding that you will have enjoyed with another, not only when life was being particularly difficult or sad, but also when you wanted to share your utmost joy or love. Now my experience over the last several days is that compassion only served to perpetuate sorrow, so I would ask Irene how her compassion (assuming she is feeling such for me over the loss of my friend) is going to assist me? * It looks as though I may be getting back to writing after a bit of a zombie period, so I am replying to your mail of two weeks ago. I do not think you did answer my question – which was ‘in what circumstances you consider sympathy and compassion do not perpetuate sorrow and what beneficial effect they may have on the other’. The remarks you made about ‘genuine’ sympathy were:
‘But for sympathy to be beneficial to both people involved they are already
regarding each other as fully equal and is then always appreciated as an intimate and very pleasant exchange by both’ My recent experience was that sympathy did not lessen suffering – indeed it increased it. So, perhaps I have not experienced what you mean by ‘genuine’ sympathy. I certainly think my wife and I (and a few others) expressed what I think you mean – it did no good, only encouraged a wallowing in pain and sorrow. If you are meaning ‘Divine Compassion’ (by whatever name), I have experienced this in the past. As I am not experiencing it now, I can only go by memory but, from what I can remember, it did nothing to alleviate suffering – it only meant that I could share and ‘take on’ the suffering of the other – it had no beneficial effect on them whatsoever. Thinking about it now, the only effect ‘divine compassion’ had was to encourage the other to rely on me as an authority in some sort of ‘guru’ role – hey, I had not got this until now! Isn’t it great how discussing these things leads to personal discoveries. Alan to Irene
I do not relate strongly to the feeling of compassion. Perhaps a little bit though. I have become more aware of the extent of people’s unhappiness. It has struck me often how unhappy people look as they go about their business. If you even just look at the faces around you, you will see how miserable, unhappy, depressed, or angry people look. As I have become more aware of these feelings, emotions, and their associated basic instincts in myself, I seem to see it more in other people. The less I became busy with my own worries, the more I was able to extend my range of attention – which meant that I also became increasingly aware of the amount of suffering and malice there is all around. In my spiritual years I had stuck my head in the clouds because I did not want to cope with the feelings of desperation that are the inevitable result when one first acknowledges one’s own situation and the situation of one’s fellow human beings. One then usually escapes into the ‘trap of compassion’ and is seduced to be content with the compassionate feeling of Oneness and Love for all and misses out on the opportunity of doing something ‘hands-on’ about malice and sorrow – in oneself.’ True again. One often has a corresponding sense of being on a mission to save other less fortunate souls. As I work in the social work field, I can see that social workers often have a sense of missionary zeal that is closely linked to Christian morality and ethics, harkening back to the time of Manifest Destiny, and the emergence of the social work field due, in large part, to the appalling poverty and social conditions during the Industrial Revolution. One sees over and over again that Compassion fails to deliver the goods. I am shocked sometimes by the anger that I see fellow workers express to the very clients they are charged with taking care of. I myself, when younger, worked in a mental institution and witnessed scenes of violence by the caretakers towards the patients and was violent myself towards my institutional charges. One sees the (and it is so-labelled) familiar ‘Compassion Fatigue’ among mental health field workers. A curious expression, it points up the fact that Compassion is phoney, not substantial, and is based on a sense of mission stemming from the professional and personal identity. It so easily turns to anger when others don’t live up to one’s expectations or when one’s sense of grandiosity is not fulfilled. One also sees the pity that fellow workers lavish on themselves by complaining that they are burdened and ‘burned out’ by taking care of so many people. Such a sense of exhaustion immediately relates back to the imperative in the field of being loving and compassionate, denying one’s anger and hostility towards the work, the institutional setting, and (oftentimes) one’s clients. Gary to Vineeto
When the meeting occurred, I acquitted myself very well I think – I reported the facts of the situation and how I reacted to them. I also reported what I believed to be the shortcoming of the supervisor in dealing with the situation and how it affected me. OK. You sound like you are benefiting from actualism in that you are sticking with the facts of the situations in which you find yourself. While feedback may serve to provide you with information of how others want you to be (and why), only you know what is best for you ... we are all alone in this methinks. Yes, I think you are right about this. When it comes right down to it, I have to live my life and my life alone. What other people think about me is not the most important thing, in fact, it is not important at all. I think I got unduly upset by negative evaluation of me which was really just telling me that I was not happy in the job and would be better served by finding something else more satisfying. By saying what other people think about me is not important I am not suggesting that one have a ‘I don’t give a damn’ attitude, and brazenly defy social conventions. If one wishes to remain in a particular job, one has to keep the customers satisfied. If that does not cut it anymore, one needs to be looking for something else. * I was not trying to garner any sympathy or support. I also was open to any mistakes I may have made in the situation as well as how I had reacted emotionally to what was happening. Yes, you mentioned compassion being expected of you...and that this did not sit well with you? Pretence is no substitute to dealing factually/ unemotionally with a situation in the best way possible. One of the comments a customer made about me was that I don’t ‘show any compassion’. I think in the situation I was in it is reasonable for my employer to expect compassion of me – after all, I work in a ‘compassionate’ profession. It is not that that doesn’t sit right with me. Since it was something that someone else said about me, and the person is unknown to me, I am unable to know or understand just what they meant by that or why they said it. I am even unable to know why they found that disturbing. Evidently, in their perception of my lack of compassion, they found that annoying or disturbing, as they chose to complain about it. Whether I did or said something that offended them, or whether they were complaining about my general demeanour, I am at a loss to know – it is all speculation, as the person did not wish to speak to me about it. It is pointless for me to worry about it or to concern myself about it. People can be quite malicious, and I agree with Peter when he said that most people don’t want to look at their own maliciousness. * I think I am always honest with myself No 13. Is there a specific point you are trying to make? I fail to see where I could have been more honest with myself. Do you perhaps see something that I don’t? I only see what you tell me, ‘that you are often anxious, frustrated and angry’. <snip> Well, I would change that to ‘I am only very occasionally anxious, frustrated and angry, and it doesn’t last too long when it does occur’. It was time for a change, and I feel much better since I did. At the time, the last time I wrote to Peter, I thought maybe I was deluding myself, that I was doing something wrong. I don’t think so now, because I am back to being happy and harmless. I am out of the situation that producing a lot of conflict in me. People can be extremely malicious and small-minded. Unhappy people usually try to hurt others. I don’t have to be affected by other people’s unhappiness. After all, nobody is forcing me to be happy or unhappy. I very much like the way you are using actualism in the market place because, (after all), as humans living together we must, ‘get on’, or, perish as a species ... or live second-rate lives. As I often remind myself, ‘it doesn’t just happen ... we have to work at it ... but it gets easier’. This is no magic, feel good cure-all. Good luck with the method, Gary. Sometimes I wonder how, (as Bob Dylan sang), ‘we can even feed ourselves’... I was wondering if it was even possible to practice actualism and remain in the marketplace. I was afraid that the ‘no compassion’ complaint was evidence that it is not. But I don’t think that now. I have felt the same excitement interacting with people and helping others that you yourself described. This kind of helping is not dependent on being ‘compassionate’ – it is simply responding to another’s request of help. It is not necessary to commiserate with others to be of help to them. In fact, if you commiserate you are not helping. But they may feel personally affronted and insulted if you do not commiserate with them. I get the impression that a lot of the clients I used to serve wanted me to commiserate with them. By sharing sorrow with another, one is increasing another’s sorrow, don’t you think? I am fascinated by people, (and situations), now that the conditioned, instinctual, moral, ethical and intellectual straight jackets have been removed. I am now able to see the human condition for what it is...a fearful, complex and competitive jungle. Better still I am now able to do what is actually best for myself and others, (at the same time), almost automatically. Life doesn’t have to be a grim instinctual battle for survival. If it is, then something is wrong. The Human Condition is a competitive jungle. By grappling with the conditioned, instinctual, moral, ethical and intellectual straight jackets, more and more to be in the Human Condition feels incredibly sickening and tragic. By delving into one’s psyche, one stares this ‘institutionalized insanity’ directly in the face, and it is truly shocking and revolting. More and more, to be ‘human’ feels unnatural. To be happy and harmless feels like the best thing. Gary to No 13
Perhaps working in a ‘compassionate profession’ is what is most foolish. After all, it is you who chooses to work in a ‘compassionate profession’ and then must try to fit the mould. This must be difficult for one so forthright. Why would you want a good job recommendation for a profession for which you are not suited? I’ve never seen such maliciousness as I observed to be in action in my last job. It was a group of people who seemed to want to find a convenient scapegoat for their problems. It was a vicious, malignant process that was in operation in the group, and I could not be a part of it any longer. Perhaps I have made too much of this ‘compassionate profession’ business. Each job has its own set of requirements, its own culture, ethos, and operating principles. One can still care about and be concerned with other people without necessarily falling into the trap of compassion, don’t you think? Many of the professions are founded on compassion and concern for others. I doubt whether Social Work is unique in this regard. But these are often ideals that don’t measure up to the reality of the work. Certainly it sounds like in your teaching job you found yourself in a situation where you were mistreating others and being mistreated in turn, although the organization supposedly valued fair-play, tolerance, etc. I have decided that I am very well suited for the profession which I studied and have been labouring at. I am not ready to leave it. But I am most probably going to find a work-site that is a considerable change of venue from what I was doing before. I think any kind of change at this point would be best for me. Whether or not the same maliciousness will obtain in a new situation remains to be seen. Human beings being what they are, one cannot get away from maliciousness. It is part of life and part of being a human being. One will run up against it wherever one goes. Unless and until one self-immolates, one is going to be malicious oneself, wouldn’t you agree? May I ask why it is that you want a recommendation for a profession that require community pathos? I’m not sure I understand your question. I want a recommendation because I have not given up on working within the field of social work. You say that this profession ‘requires community pathos’. I am not so sure that the profession requires community pathos, I just don’t want to be a part of the pathos that was obtaining in my last job site. That is the basic reason why I left. I invested considerable time and money into my education, and I do not yet feel like leaving what I have been doing for so many years and striking out into unknown territory. But most likely I am going to change my practice field. For instance, I recently interviewed for a job working with emotionally disturbed children. This is a significant change for me, almost a change in career, certainly a significant change of direction. * Not unless you choose to work in the compassionate professions, of course, Gary. Compassion is phoney and does not solve anything, methinks. I don’t think, on the balance, that social work is any more or less compassionate than many other ‘helping’ professions, even including medicine, psychology, psychiatry, etc. The motivations for wanting to help people seem to be many and complex at times. Many people go into professions such as I mentioned with a great deal of idealism, and I suppose I did so too. I’m not sure I agree with you that compassion is phoney – not in this sense: I think it is very real – it involves sharing pain with others-one could not be compassionate were one not in pain oneself. Being in pain is not phoney, it is very real. Maybe by saying compassion is ‘phoney’ you mean that it is not actual, is that so? But being in pain is real, and sharing that pain is what is said to be an act of empathy. It does not solve anything because it obviously does not take away another’s pain, nor does it really teach another what their pain is or where it comes from. It may make the person who is initially the recipient of the compassion feel better- you know, to realize that someone else is sharing this pain with them- but it doesn’t really help them much to understand their pain. It is sometimes said, for instance, that the ‘helping’ professions alleviate people’s suffering. It must then involve something other than compassion, because I don’t see that compassion does anything to alleviate one’s suffering. * After all, nobody is forcing me to be happy or unhappy. Apart from ourselves, you mean...when we attempt to justify what we do wrong? For example ... ‘I am not into committing professional suicide – one of the realities is that one’s employability is directly affected in a large degree by the kinds of review-tations and recommendations one can acquire’... or ... ‘I think in the situation I was in it is reasonable for my employer to expect compassion of me – after all, I work in a ‘compassionate’ profession’. Is it reasonable, or not, to work in the business of compassion, Gary? If all it involves is ‘the business of compassion’, then I would say no. Unless, of course, I were Mother Theresa. But as I am not Mother Theresa, I would say it is reasonable to do the job that I was trained for. Gary to No 13
Having been full-on on the spiritual path for 17 years I had a few friends who either were either left limping along as church-going spiritualists or were still shopping in the spiritual supermarket. I naively thought they would be interested in actualism but the moment they realized it involved questioning their spiritual beliefs, their automatic self-defence mechanism cut in and when they realized it also involved effort and work it was way too much for their spiritual ego. I just refused to let this experience muzzle me, which is why I chose to write about my experiences rather than try and change other people. I had a lively back-and-forth with some people about love and compassion recently. It provided an opportunity for me to investigate my own beliefs and feelings about love and compassion, as well as to determine how other people think about it. What I found was that I became rather exasperated or frustrated that either I couldn’t express what I was trying to say or that people didn’t want to hear what I was trying to say. This feeling of exasperation was a red flag to me that I was dealing with my own beliefs and feelings. There is absolutely no reason why one ought to become frustrated or irritated about what someone else is saying unless it challenges or threatens some belief that they hold dear. And I think this is what was happening to me in the course of this correspondence. I was trying to influence others, and when their opposition to what I was saying became even more determined (naturally so), I felt misunderstood and frustrated. I then commenced to ask myself why I was trying to influence others, questioned myself on my stake in the discussion, and investigated into my own deeper fears, conflicts, and doubts about love and compassion. Because I was deliberately questioning the emotion of love, and I was getting determined opposition from others, it really highlighted for me just how highly love is sought, coveted and valued by human beings. Love and compassion (and their allied emotions: pity, sympathy, empathy, etc) are really regarded to be the pinnacle, indeed the summit of all earthly dreams and hopes. To reject love is to be dead, according to what I heard these other people to be saying. Since I have begun to investigate into these tender instincts, I have been able to see what a hold they have on Humanity, indeed what a hold they have on ‘me’. ‘I’ need love in order to confirm my existence. Without love, ‘I’ am nothing – I might as well be dead. Love, if I was following the thread of these conversations, is the do-all and end-all of earthly existence. Without it, life has no meaning, no reason. So, even though I was taking one side in the discussions, the discussions themselves were reflecting back to me the deep questions and doubts that I myself have on the topic in question. It reminded me of the work situation that I was in and the allegation against me that I had ‘no compassion’. I found this somewhat disturbing, but probably only because I myself regard ‘compassion’ as essential to ‘me’, and that without it, I must be a total outcast. So I think the discussion with others about the quality of love and compassion was helpful to me in the following ways: it helped me to uncover some deeper feelings and beliefs that were lurking behind my outright denial of love and compassion; it further helped me to see that I was trying to use influence to persuade others of the ‘rightness’ of my arguments, which I would only do if they represented beliefs to me and not actualities. Gary to Peter
Many of the professions are founded on compassion and concern for others. True, (but as you seem to be aware of the, ‘trap of compassion’), I am not sure what your point is here, Gary. Compassion is a trap, and one needs to be aware of this emotion when one is experiencing it lest one get caught up the emotions and be oblivious to the requirements of the situation. I think the point I am trying to make here is that the professions are often idealistically based, and professional ideals are a smokescreen for self-interest. We touched on this point earlier. Drawing the line between professional behaviour and self-interest is not always an easy thing to do. Because I would say that professional interest is often the same as self-interest. When there is a concurrence between profession and self-interest, the choice is easy to make. When there is not, the door is open to doing exploitative and unprofessional things. Compassion is condescending. * I doubt whether Social Work is unique in this regard. But these are often ideals that don’t measure up to the reality of the work. I have yet to meet an ideal that did measure up to work-place critical thought and sensible conduct. That is a very good point. Given the extent to which human beings are idealistic, perhaps it would be well to examine why. We have talked at other times on this list of the difference between the real, the spiritual, and the actual. And this difference between the ideal, the real, and the actual is very similar to that discussion. Because there seem to be two poles in existence: there is the ideal, and there is the reality. Then there is the actual. The ideal would not exist were it not for the reality. The ideal of Compassion is founded on, and inextricably linked to, the reality of suffering. Suffering is the raison d’etre, as it were, of suffering and sorrow. Then there is the third alternative, which is an actual freedom from both of these. Not a mere transcendence, but a freedom from both of the opposites. Both suffering and compassion are emotions, which I know some will deny, but to me, they are emotional, passionate responses. And as emotions, they are not intelligent. Nor are they sensible. Nothing but continual awareness will do. * While many of the professions are founded on a solid belief in compassion and concern for others, individuals within these institutions, like you, won’t change their ways overnight without readiness. Perhaps a new work-site will facilitate an improved Gary of renewed vigour? Yes, that is already happening. Were it not for the greed, corruption, avarice, rapacity, and dishonesty of human beings, there would be no need for these professions, would there? I don’t think it matters if ‘one cannot get away from maliciousness’ ... and ‘until one self-immolates, one is going to be malicious oneself’... if one is still capable of personal best. The ‘same maliciousness’ may prevail in the new job but one need not be a part and parcel of the maliciousness. I have become happier and more harmless with practice, methinks. I must admit to more than a little difficulty with the phrase ‘personal best’. Perhaps what you mean when you use the phrase is not what I associate to the phrase. What I associate to the phrase ‘personal best’ is the ideals that we were talking about. In ordinary usage, ‘personal best’ seems to refer to the ideal state or condition for which we strive, whether it be happy or harmless or anything else. Speaking personally, my ‘personal best’ has never been good enough. My ‘personal best’ is what inclines me to maliciousness, methinks. Perhaps we could explore this a little more. The phrase ‘personal best’ grates for some reason. Gary to No 13 Web page designed by The Actual Freedom Trust |
