During recent tragedy one thing that's changed is my conception about being angry with God. To be clear, I'm not sure I can say I have ever been angry with God in my life. Some may ask why, and it's likely because I've never really taken the absolutist, omnipotent, or total control of every worldly detail view of God. I believe God is only omnipotent as they have access to all power, and even then I understand that a belief in a just God obviates the ability to believe in an omnipotent God as certain laws greater than that God must then be followed. I've also believed strongly in free will, and that God's protection or preservation thereof is a necessary condition for their existence, or at least their Godhood. However, I am also convinced in a personal God, one who cares deeply for their children and wishes involvement in their lives (but like any good parent, must limit their involvement to allow independence to develop).
I find the parental analogy very compelling, and this has led me to an interesting thought on being angry with God. A quick search on being angry with God will reveal how many people are uncomfortable with the idea. It feels blasphemous, perhaps, but I think there's one person who's quite OK with people being angry at God and that's God themself.
My wife and I hope to have kids, and that hope's no longer in the distant future, so I've read the occasional article about parenting, discussed it with friends and family, and tried to gain what experience I can watching over others' children. I've learned that a mature adult generally weathers the storm and is understanding of a child's anger, even though it often ends up pointed toward them, without becoming upset or angry about the situation themselves. Good parents understand and allow their children to become angry, they often don't take it personally, and recognize that they may have to accept their child's fury themselves because understanding the larger situation is beyond the child (at least at this point in their development).
Some of this thinking may have come together when a friend of mine who is a mother took a sip of her son's drink, leading to a short spat of crying and yelling, "I didn't want you to do that!" over and over. That moment seemed so childish, crying out wishing an event hadn't happened but not providing any ideas for redress or seemingly unwilling to come to an understanding or acceptance of the painful reality of what's occurred, and yet it also seemed so familiar as I and my loved ones were often doing the same only our yells were, "I wish she hadn't died." This may seem uncaring on my part to compare a child's displeasure and losing out on a sip of milk to the death of a loved one, but from God's perspective it might not be so different, and again I find the similarities of the emotional turmoil experienced eerily similar.
Yes, I'm certainly speaking from a Christian perspective here, but I've tried to ensure I'm speaking in the most general terms. If you're an atheist, agnostic, or otherwise unaligned or undecided allow me to speak to you a little more closely at this time, and if you're one of my Christian or otherwise theistic audience members lend me some latitude for a moment. One of the important roles of God is that of an abstraction, or even verbal shorthand. Some theists like to make much of Einstein's very profound theism, but the God of Einstein probably more resembled the impersonal physical laws pervading all creation through all time than the proverbial sky daddy in which many of them might profess faith. From this perspective anger at God is easy to understand; we're angry at the whims of fortune that brought us to our current place (and hey, like the ancient myth-makers knew when they came up with Thor, Ares, or Sopona it's more cathartic to personify your ill fate than to allow it to persist ethereal).
So I think God completely accepts our anger towards them. That said, anger isn't a healthy emotion. Without even addressing the psychology, it increases blood pressure and depresses the immune system so it is unwise to maintain for long periods of time. I think this is why forgiveness is so powerful, and so important. The concept of forgiveness is often abused, taken to mean we can't treat people or entities with suspicion or coolness when that may be exactly what is deserved, but I think forgiveness starts with releasing the feelings of rancor and hatred toward others. Forgiveness can go beyond that, but often anything beyond that requires penitence on the part of the trespasser, so the beginning may well be the most important part of forgiveness if only because it will be the most often used.
Whether one conceives of God as a loving cosmic Allfather or even as an impersonal cosmic force permeating the universe and seen in its structure and beauty we can accept anger toward God, and perhaps even recognize it as necessary at times. When to move beyond this anger, to forgive God and once again connect with the omnipresent divinity will depend on the individual and is likely to be a difficult task. I pray those in need may do so, and hope these meager thoughts on the matter help.
Showing posts with label circumstances. Show all posts
Showing posts with label circumstances. Show all posts
Sunday, September 17, 2017
Anger at God
Labels:
character,
choices,
circumstances,
complaining,
emotions,
enjoying life,
god,
Holiness,
maturity,
parenting,
prayer,
religion,
sin,
values,
virtue
Tuesday, August 4, 2015
Fix it Mommy!
Over this last weekend I had the opportunity to see a number of my cousins, many of which have young children. One moment in particular stuck out for me. One of the mothers asked for some sort of cream or lotion to give her child. The child specifically wanted what I believe was an anti-histamine cream to relieve some itching, but the mother knew that anything with roughly the same physical properties would fill the child's real need; to have their problem attended to and be given a simple solution.
Children are obligated to go to their parents to fix the majority of their problems. In infancy they have only the one signaling mechanism to do this, crying, and deploy it whenever they experience discomfort or want so they can obtain the attention of parents that will then fix the problem. As children get older parents teach them more sophisticated signaling mechanisms (such as 'using their words'), but the drive is the same, get the attention of mom or dad so that they'll put in the effort to fix my problem.
I also witnessed the impotent rage and anguish children experience when this process fails, or even more horribly when mom or dad suddenly turn and become the cause of vexation (like being told to leave the swimming pool). The wise parents I was with simply weathered the tantrums and softly prompted their kids to learn to manage their emotional responses with greater aplomb. The lesson will hopefully be learned by these children, though it will probably take a few more years of experience and cerebral development.
What struck me was the inborn drive represented by this, and the realization of how often this thinking expresses itself throughout society. We are constantly turning to figures of authority and power hoping that with their attention and efforts focused on us our problems will get fixed. We get angry when those we think are supposed to fix our problems do things that stifle our enjoyment and comfort. At another point I also discussed with my father, a professional psychological counselor, how so many want a pill to fix their problems and prefer that solution despite numerous benefits therapy has over drugs.
We can be active and fight to better our lives when possible, and feel the disappointments of unfortunate but unyielding circumstances without letting that sadness or anger hijack our mind. I'm taking a class in pharmacology over the summer and the lesson that comes up over and over is that all drugs have side effects, and therapy is always just a matter of handling one thing with a cost that's deemed acceptable. As Thomas Sowell put it, "All that goes with the territory, that is with a universe we did not make having constraints we cannot escape, and offering only trade offs however much the intelligencia and the politicians proclaim solutions."
The realization that there are no easy solutions for the biggest problems in our lives and that we're doomed to an eternal existence of managing (as opposed to fixing) the obstacles in our personal lives and our community is sobering, indeed. It is also what we must accept if we want to truly gain maturity beyond the child yelling, "Fix it, mommy!"
Children are obligated to go to their parents to fix the majority of their problems. In infancy they have only the one signaling mechanism to do this, crying, and deploy it whenever they experience discomfort or want so they can obtain the attention of parents that will then fix the problem. As children get older parents teach them more sophisticated signaling mechanisms (such as 'using their words'), but the drive is the same, get the attention of mom or dad so that they'll put in the effort to fix my problem.
I also witnessed the impotent rage and anguish children experience when this process fails, or even more horribly when mom or dad suddenly turn and become the cause of vexation (like being told to leave the swimming pool). The wise parents I was with simply weathered the tantrums and softly prompted their kids to learn to manage their emotional responses with greater aplomb. The lesson will hopefully be learned by these children, though it will probably take a few more years of experience and cerebral development.
What struck me was the inborn drive represented by this, and the realization of how often this thinking expresses itself throughout society. We are constantly turning to figures of authority and power hoping that with their attention and efforts focused on us our problems will get fixed. We get angry when those we think are supposed to fix our problems do things that stifle our enjoyment and comfort. At another point I also discussed with my father, a professional psychological counselor, how so many want a pill to fix their problems and prefer that solution despite numerous benefits therapy has over drugs.
We can be active and fight to better our lives when possible, and feel the disappointments of unfortunate but unyielding circumstances without letting that sadness or anger hijack our mind. I'm taking a class in pharmacology over the summer and the lesson that comes up over and over is that all drugs have side effects, and therapy is always just a matter of handling one thing with a cost that's deemed acceptable. As Thomas Sowell put it, "All that goes with the territory, that is with a universe we did not make having constraints we cannot escape, and offering only trade offs however much the intelligencia and the politicians proclaim solutions."
The realization that there are no easy solutions for the biggest problems in our lives and that we're doomed to an eternal existence of managing (as opposed to fixing) the obstacles in our personal lives and our community is sobering, indeed. It is also what we must accept if we want to truly gain maturity beyond the child yelling, "Fix it, mommy!"
Labels:
character,
circumstances,
complaining,
contentment,
culture,
emotions,
impulse control,
maturity,
parenting,
self-awareness,
society
Saturday, December 27, 2014
Thirty Years
Yesterday was my thirtieth birthday. As I leave my thirtieth year of life and enter my thirty-first I reflect on the passed year. Year thirty feels as if I've been a plane that's waited at the gate, taxied up the runway, and taken off for a new destination. Here's the highlights:
- Working at inthinc : I continued my job at inthinc technology solutions for the first part of the year. This time taught me once again the importance of good management. Our last manager was very skilled at keeping the support team of which I was a part happy and feeling valued within the company. During the first part of the year we had no manager and a number of internal conflicts arose within the team as well as numerous difficulties arising from a lack of effective interfacing with the rest of the company. Our new manager, when hired, eventually turned out to make promises like a politician, fail to inform us about and connect us effectively with the rest of the company, and make the talent feel undervalued. I was the third person to leave the team as the burden on our team increased and feelings of valuation decreased. After leaving the company I continued to hear of hardships and found the company was losing money and talent at an alarming rate, though it seems to have stabilized at this point. I have a number of good friends from my time there, but am happy to have gone.
- Returning to University : Leaving inthinc prompted an overall career change. I had noticed that the career trajectory in technical support would take significant time to advance and might not lead to a place I really wanted to be. Looking at what field might be related to my previous scholastic experience in physics I found that radiology is something that would probably take about as much time to train in as it would to advance in my current work, had similar job demands at higher pay, and ultimately would be more fulfilling and interesting. I enrolled at Weber State University and started attending classes. I was reminded how much I appreciated the university atmosphere and learning new material.
- Entering Medicine : Preparing to enter the field of radiography I've been learning about the medical field generally as well. I trained as a phlebotomist and am making arrangements to test for my limited x-ray machine operator's license. I have been fascinated by the challenges and nature of the medical field. There's an intriguing intimacy to healthcare that makes me feel a great deal of responsibility toward patients. I never thought that biochemistry would hold any interest for me but after studying it (in part at least) for a semester I've completely turned the corner and am engaged by protein structures and metabolic pathways. There's clearly a lot to learn and do in this field and I'm eager to continue exploring it in year thirty one of life and beyond.
Labels:
career,
choices,
circumstances,
education,
enjoying life,
improvement,
learning,
maturity,
schools,
self-awareness,
skills,
success,
work
Monday, July 15, 2013
Well behaved women seldom make history.
I've never been very fond of the slogan in this post's title, I guess because the idea of rebellion and, "behaving badly" hasn't held much appeal for me. Imagine my surprise, then, when I found the original author of the famous slogan far from intended the meaning it now holds, and may even agree with me-at least to some degree.
The phrase, "Well behaved women seldom make history," was first written my Laurel Thatcher Ulrich in a scholarly paper on Puritan funeral sermons. Being far from an academic of history myself I've not read the original paper, but after looking into things a little bit it appears that the author's intention was to point out the way these Puritan women weren't seeking fame or glory. The same paper contains the (much more poignant, in my own opinion) line, "They never asked to be remembered on Earth. And they haven't been."
From what I've found about Ulrich's career, the paper may have also served as criticism of the way history is studied. She seems to have lobbied criticism at the historical establishments and their failures to appreciate the effects and actions of the rank and file members of society. When honored as a professor at Harvard it was said
I think this is where my quarrel with the famous quote comes in; it reinforces the idea that to be great or important, to influence history, to "make a difference" one must necessarily acquire fame in the process. The first black president of the United States would not have been elected without a society that collectively let the scourge of racism whither on the vine rather than hold on to obsolete mentalities. Dr. Ulrich addresses the idea, "that 'empowered' women are by definition 'wild' women. That is a very old idea. Since antiquity, misogynists have insisted that females, being more emotional than males, are less stable, more likely to swing between extremes." She also points out that, "Marie Curie didn't win two Nobel prizes by throwing tantrums in the lab." and that Rosa Parks made history not only for her refusal to abide with the bigoted laws of her day but also because she was recognized as a hard working, upstanding, "well behaved" woman (other women had been arrested for the same thing, but unlike Rosa Parks their lifestyle choices made it too hard to build a case to fight the unjust law they were bucking).
In my younger years, probably until about my junior year of college, I enjoyed aspirations to fame and greatness. I wanted to win the Nobel for physics after making my own re-writes to the laws that govern our universe. I still wouldn't mind doing this, or any other number of fantastic ventures, but I'm also content with my current role in life, unimpressive though it may be especially when compared with the grandiose aspirations of my youth. I feel that I will have lived a life of incalculable worth and leave a powerful legacy even if no one remembers my name after 100 years as long as I continue learning and enriching my mind, be a good husband to my wife (and someday I'm sure, a good father to my children), work hard and earn money honestly, use that money wisely, and live in accordance with my values. I don't feel women should be robbed of this feeling of contentment that living an unassuming & simple but upstanding and meaningful life because they are told that they should be empowered & wild, rebellious, and "not well behaved."
The phrase, "Well behaved women seldom make history," was first written my Laurel Thatcher Ulrich in a scholarly paper on Puritan funeral sermons. Being far from an academic of history myself I've not read the original paper, but after looking into things a little bit it appears that the author's intention was to point out the way these Puritan women weren't seeking fame or glory. The same paper contains the (much more poignant, in my own opinion) line, "They never asked to be remembered on Earth. And they haven't been."
From what I've found about Ulrich's career, the paper may have also served as criticism of the way history is studied. She seems to have lobbied criticism at the historical establishments and their failures to appreciate the effects and actions of the rank and file members of society. When honored as a professor at Harvard it was said
Ulrich is a pre-eminent historian of early America and of the history of women. Her innovative and widely influential approach to history has been described as "a tribute to 'the silent work of ordinary people'" - an approach that, in her words, aims to "show the interconnection between public events and private experience."When briefly discussing the famous quote with my wife she quickly arrived at the conclusion of, "Well behaved people rarely make history." There are some striking examples of this in technology. Edison is famous for the popularization of electricity and numerous inventions, but his contemporary and most likely superior Nikolai Tesla is only recently being recognized for his startling genius. Steve Jobs recently passed away to much fanfare and mourning while Dennis Ritchie - inventor of the C programming language and developer for the Unix operating system on which iOS is built - passed away around the same time to little to no fanfare. Tesla struggled with mental illness (he almost certainly had OCD) in a time where it was much less understood or empathized. Jobs was a demanding CEO who while Mr. Ritchie was more likely a quiet academic and engineer. Even these examples show how we focus in on certain celebrities rather than recognizing the many brilliant minds and Menlo Park or Apple that worked under the direction of these magnates.
I think this is where my quarrel with the famous quote comes in; it reinforces the idea that to be great or important, to influence history, to "make a difference" one must necessarily acquire fame in the process. The first black president of the United States would not have been elected without a society that collectively let the scourge of racism whither on the vine rather than hold on to obsolete mentalities. Dr. Ulrich addresses the idea, "that 'empowered' women are by definition 'wild' women. That is a very old idea. Since antiquity, misogynists have insisted that females, being more emotional than males, are less stable, more likely to swing between extremes." She also points out that, "Marie Curie didn't win two Nobel prizes by throwing tantrums in the lab." and that Rosa Parks made history not only for her refusal to abide with the bigoted laws of her day but also because she was recognized as a hard working, upstanding, "well behaved" woman (other women had been arrested for the same thing, but unlike Rosa Parks their lifestyle choices made it too hard to build a case to fight the unjust law they were bucking).
In my younger years, probably until about my junior year of college, I enjoyed aspirations to fame and greatness. I wanted to win the Nobel for physics after making my own re-writes to the laws that govern our universe. I still wouldn't mind doing this, or any other number of fantastic ventures, but I'm also content with my current role in life, unimpressive though it may be especially when compared with the grandiose aspirations of my youth. I feel that I will have lived a life of incalculable worth and leave a powerful legacy even if no one remembers my name after 100 years as long as I continue learning and enriching my mind, be a good husband to my wife (and someday I'm sure, a good father to my children), work hard and earn money honestly, use that money wisely, and live in accordance with my values. I don't feel women should be robbed of this feeling of contentment that living an unassuming & simple but upstanding and meaningful life because they are told that they should be empowered & wild, rebellious, and "not well behaved."
Labels:
character,
choices,
circumstances,
contentment,
emotions,
history,
society,
women
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
What to write when nothing comes to mind
So I like to post at least once a month, and here I am sitting on about an hour left to August and I still haven't written a thing. There's lots to write about, I can always launch into another mathematics and society rant, or if I'm watching my blood pressure something about computer science and beauty has been ruminating lately. A friend put forth the interesting idea lately that computer literacy is the new literacy, and I'd like to write on that but felt oddly compelled to do some research before doing anything with that idea. I'm engaged now and should have lots of ideas and feelings about relationships, love, and weddings. I've even thought about doing some amateur tech journalism, but the most interesting thing I can think of now the big moves Microsoft is making, and since I'm currently working for them I'd prefer not to get into NDA territory, even though I probably wouldn't say anything that hasn't yet been said on most other tech news outlets.
So, plenty of interesting things to write, but just can't bring myself to put the words down. Why? Well, writing is hard. It takes a mental effort to organize ideas and thought, and even more if an idea isn't quite yet fully formed and needs additional thought to be complete. I got home tonight, ate some snacks for dinner while putting on some TV shows I wanted to catch up with, and then started thinking about writing. But I wasn't really thinking about writing, I was thinking about the show I was watching, and I'm only finally banging this out by pausing the show and focusing on writing.
My mom is a six time published (and that's just the novels) author, so I've picked up a thing or two about writing. One thing about it, which I suspect extends to any art in general, is that the most important thing is to sit down and do it. While the romantic thought of waiting for inspiration to strike and then whipping up a masterpiece overnight in a frenzy of artistic furor may be appealing, it's just not reflective of reality. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was painted because the pope offered a large commission, and Michelangelo signed it "Michelangelo, a sculptor" to express his feelings that he didn't consider himself a painter and would rather be working on his statue of Moses. The Sistine ceiling is well known as one of the greatest pieces of art in the world, and I've always liked the thought that Michelangelo didn't even want to paint it. I think we can learn a lot about how we can do great work even when we really don't want to do it.
So, plenty of interesting things to write, but just can't bring myself to put the words down. Why? Well, writing is hard. It takes a mental effort to organize ideas and thought, and even more if an idea isn't quite yet fully formed and needs additional thought to be complete. I got home tonight, ate some snacks for dinner while putting on some TV shows I wanted to catch up with, and then started thinking about writing. But I wasn't really thinking about writing, I was thinking about the show I was watching, and I'm only finally banging this out by pausing the show and focusing on writing.
My mom is a six time published (and that's just the novels) author, so I've picked up a thing or two about writing. One thing about it, which I suspect extends to any art in general, is that the most important thing is to sit down and do it. While the romantic thought of waiting for inspiration to strike and then whipping up a masterpiece overnight in a frenzy of artistic furor may be appealing, it's just not reflective of reality. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was painted because the pope offered a large commission, and Michelangelo signed it "Michelangelo, a sculptor" to express his feelings that he didn't consider himself a painter and would rather be working on his statue of Moses. The Sistine ceiling is well known as one of the greatest pieces of art in the world, and I've always liked the thought that Michelangelo didn't even want to paint it. I think we can learn a lot about how we can do great work even when we really don't want to do it.
Labels:
art,
circumstances,
complaining,
dedication,
discipline,
excuse,
hobbies,
success,
work,
writing
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Can't Complain
The title of this post is a common response to simple introductions like, "How's it going?" I often give it. When I do, I think of what I'm saying as very meaningful and important. Most people don't share this opinion. Most people don't go beyond, "Well I could, but what's the point?" My feelings are otherwise.
I see these two words in the same vein as "I cannot tell a lie," or "I can't kill another human being." Of course one can do these things (in the first case one is often presented with opportunities to do so, in the second it's sort of assumed that if you're saying this you're in a situation where someone gave you a gun, possibly in an abandoned warehouse with a guy tied to a chair), the capability to do so is there, perhaps even just cause to do so, but doing so would be a terrible violation of one's personal principles. I feel the same way when I say, "I can't complain."
I live in arguable the most prosperous country on earth, and certainly enjoy a number of amenities on a daily basis. I own my own computer, have running water, and live better most kings in history-probably better than anyone alive more than 300 years ago. I find spiritual fulfillment in my faith, have a family that loves me, and am unburdened by sickness or even mild infirmities such as headaches or sore muscles. I'm grateful for these many blessings in my life. That gratitude is important. Gratitude is a key to happiness. If were to complain over trifles such as one isolated incident of a headache I had the other night or a problem on my CS homework that I thought was poorly worded I would be denying the many good things I have and failing in my gratitude. When I say I can't complain I'm saying I will continue to live a life of gratitude for the many good things I enjoy, that I refuse to focus on whatever unfortunate circumstances may befall me and instead will focus on the happy happenstances of my existence. As a grateful person, I can't complain.
I see these two words in the same vein as "I cannot tell a lie," or "I can't kill another human being." Of course one can do these things (in the first case one is often presented with opportunities to do so, in the second it's sort of assumed that if you're saying this you're in a situation where someone gave you a gun, possibly in an abandoned warehouse with a guy tied to a chair), the capability to do so is there, perhaps even just cause to do so, but doing so would be a terrible violation of one's personal principles. I feel the same way when I say, "I can't complain."
I live in arguable the most prosperous country on earth, and certainly enjoy a number of amenities on a daily basis. I own my own computer, have running water, and live better most kings in history-probably better than anyone alive more than 300 years ago. I find spiritual fulfillment in my faith, have a family that loves me, and am unburdened by sickness or even mild infirmities such as headaches or sore muscles. I'm grateful for these many blessings in my life. That gratitude is important. Gratitude is a key to happiness. If were to complain over trifles such as one isolated incident of a headache I had the other night or a problem on my CS homework that I thought was poorly worded I would be denying the many good things I have and failing in my gratitude. When I say I can't complain I'm saying I will continue to live a life of gratitude for the many good things I enjoy, that I refuse to focus on whatever unfortunate circumstances may befall me and instead will focus on the happy happenstances of my existence. As a grateful person, I can't complain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)