If Doctor Phil is a counselor, then so am I. Here's the quiz. Check yourself and read on. This isn't one of those reviews that states its thesis outright.

 

1.       Basically, the universe is

a.       threatening

b.      nurturing

 

2.       Most people who find a wallet

a.       keep the money

b.      return everything

 

3.       The best advice comes from

a.       others

b.      inside

 

4.       The best instruction comes from

a.       doctrine

b.      experience

 

5.       I approach new people with

a.       caution

b.      trust

 

6.       Good behavior means

a.       following the rules

b.      prioritizing the result

 

7.       The most meaningful activity is

a.       religious

b.      spiritual

 

8.       The best guide for me is

a.       tradition

b.      me

 

9.       The best standard for truth is

a.       theology

b.      science

 

10.   When I argue, I appeal to

a.       emotion

b.      reason

 

11.   Social success means

a.       knowing my place

b.      developing as a person

 

12.   I get my sense of self-worth from

a.       others

b.      myself

 

13.   The best communities are

a.       large and inclusive

b.      small and selective

 

14.   I wish others to be

a.       restrained

b.      liberated

 

15.   Basically

a.       there is nothing really new under the sun

b.      we are the forefront of an ever-advancing civilization

 

16.   I want people to

a.       depend on others

b.      empower themselves

 

17.   I evaluate things by

a.       where they are at

b.      where they are going

 

18.   I want to spend most of my time

a.       remembering or planning

b.      in the moment

 

19.   The best managers

a.       find problems to fix

b.      find successes to reward

 

20.   The meaning of a word is

a.       what I say

b.      what  the dictionary says

 

21.   The best parents and teachers

a.       maintain discipline

b.      encourage

 

22.   Religious and spiritual books are best interpreted

a.       literally

b.      figuratively

 

 

Scoring:

·         Count one point for each a, two points for each b.

·         If your total is between 22 and 30, your dominant approach[1] is Western.

·         If your total is between 31 and 37, your approach is mixed.

·         If your total is greater than 38, your dominant approach is Eastern.

·         If your score is 21 or less, apply for APS Accountant.

 

I admit to employing the arbitrary labels Western and Eastern. I'm going to take the standard academic dodge: these inadequate labels are the best we have.

 

Aside from a personal conviction that East is not West, why does this matter?

 

For starters, I like to have some clue about the basic beliefs that motivate certain behaviors. It's more than nosiness on my part. Western culture seems overrun with amateur advisors who simply should not advise. Driven by a mysterious obsession to interrupt, intervene, and instruct, they insist on tinkering with any life that functions perfectly well without them.  And they attribute the resulting dysfunction to a failure to follow advice! They seem oblivious to their part in it. Worse, to quote a popular recovery book, they appear to have been born that way.  One wonders if they burst out of the womb with convincing advice on parenthood and pediatrics. They are found everywhere: churches, counseling staffs, recovery meetings, government offices, TV commercials, and political rallies. Why?

 

I used to think these people (one school of Buddhism refers to flawed advisors) were simply educated barracudas lurking for unsuspecting prey. I have spent five decades or so as unsuspecting prey, and I am not so sure anymore. I am beginning to think they really believe in what they are doing. Certain they have been chosen for a special task, they heap ignorance upon evidence until it all smells the same. They specialize in the argument of the moment with faithful disregard of the eventual contradictions in their opinions. They redefine the meanings of everyday words to support their cases, all the while decrying dishonesty in others. When confronted, they confidently assert platitudes about God's ways or His time.

 

Sam Harris, in The End of Faith, has taken a stand against all of this. In a remarkable book advocating spirituality redefined for a scientific age, he argues against - sit down - religious tolerance.

 

Harris views religious tolerance - perhaps the most cherished of liberal ideals - as a direct threat to reason (contradictory versions of reality cannot all be real) and an indirect supporter  of religious intolerance (tolerating  fundamentalism condones the resulting intolerance of science, medicine, and religious freedom). Citing the massive disconnect between scientific knowledge and theological argument, he refers to theology as ignorance with wings. I like that description. Thousands of volumes have been dutifully written on what we can know about the unknowable, or what we can conclude without any real evidence.  Millions of Westerners accept the convoluted arguments of theology, believing that its overly-abstracted terms actually transmit things of real substance. I found Harris' general approach provocatively strange, yet disturbingly relevant. Harris points out the tremendous social damage achieved by fundamentalist Christians and Muslims who demand acceptance of whatever unprovable statements issue from their lips.

 

Soon a fundamentalist chaplain I know provided convincing evidence for Harris' case. The chaplain possesses an amazing talent for advising others. He wanted me to introduce an acquaintance to a nearby church. This church belongs to a denomination known for its screening of potential members and its acceptance only of God's chosen. The chaplain grandly described his acquaintance as "a leader of men" whose service to Christ could be limitless. I had already gotten bored with the chaplain's prolific visions, so I declined, but the acquaintance got in anyway. Soon the acquaintance, installed in the new church, demonstrated his exceptional leadership by organizing a gang of six racist white men. They called themselves The White Knights. The chaplain dismissed my alarm about this development. "No one else reports this," the Man of God from Texas admonished.

 

Now for the real tragedy: the development that proves Harris right.

 

A few months after organizing his gang, Eric Manik went home with a gay man, murdered him, and was caught selling the dead man's belongings. This leader of men, who turned out to have out-of-state felony warrants, soon pled guilty. And yes, the chaplain continues to advise.

 

Is your score below 30? Hmm...

 

 

Two Ways
Characteristic	"Western"	"Eastern"
Basic view of universe	Threatening	Nurturing
General view of people	Evil	Good
Locus of Authority	Outer	Inner
Dominant instructive mode	Doctrinal	Experiential
General approach toward others	Fear	Trust
General ethical approach	Legalistic	Situational
Meaningful activity	Religious	Spiritual
Dominant persuasive appeal	Traditional	Personal
Standard of proof	Theological	Scientific
Dominant argument mode	Emotional	Rational
Social mode	Hierarchical	Self-actualization
Source of personal  esteem	Others	Self
Community evaluative mode	Quantity	Quality
Vision for others	Restraint	Liberation
Dominant evaluative mode	Static	Process
Goal for others	Dependence	Empowerment
Dominant evaluative criteria	Location	Direction
Dominant temporal approach	Past and future	Present
Dominant behavioral paradigm	Punishing	Rewarding
View of definitions	Vague	Precise
Personal growth mode	Vigilance	Encouragement
Favored interpretive mode	Literal	Figurative

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards, Paul

 

---

[1] Approach to what? Life? I don't know!

 

 

Excuses Begone! ( a review)

Dr. Wayne W. Dyer

KNME-TV5, Albuquerque, New Mexico

June 1, 2009, 7 pm

 

More Taoist and Buddhist motivational wisdom from Dr. Wayne W. Dyer. This set is on the personal excuses we may so often use to talk ourselves out of deep personal fulfillment. Dyer relates these common excuses, which he has compiled from a public poll on his website, to biologist Richard Dawkin's concept of social memes (ideas that spread, replicate, and mutate as they are exchanged and discussed). That's the summary. Now for some details.

Some memorable Dyerisms from this show:
"Choose, not excuse!"
"What you say can get in your way." (title of his new kids book)
"Don't complain. Don't explain."

Arguing that our thoughts determine everything else, Dyer returns to his roots with examples taken from Taoist and Buddhist texts:

Think correctly, and everything falls into place.
- Tao Te Ching

All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts... If a man speaks or acts with a pure thought, happiness follows him, like a shadow that never leaves him.
- Dhammapada

I am having trouble identifying the Dyer's cite of Tao Te Ching. I may not have heard it correctly (I have no excuse!). The cite from the Dhammapada is word-for-word from the Muller translation (my favorite), although Dyer skips a few phrases. Here are comparative cites from Tao Te Ching and Dhammapada:

Practice not-doing, and everything will fall into place (Tao Te Ching 3, tr. Mitchell).

Acting without contrivance, there is no lack of manageability (Tao Te Ching 3, Muller).

Trust your natural responses; and everything will fall into place (Tao Te Ching 23, tr. Mitchell).

If you are untrustworthy, people will not trust you (Tao Te Ching 23, tr. Muller).

¹All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with an evil thought, pain follows him, as the wheel follows the foot of the ox that draws the carriage. ²All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with a pure thought, happiness follows him, like a shadow that never leaves him. ³"He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,"--in those who harbour such thoughts hatred will never cease. ⁴"He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,"--in those who do not harbour such thoughts hatred will cease. ⁵For hatred does not cease by hatred at any time: hatred ceases by love, this is an old rule. ⁶The world does not know that we must all come to an end here;--but those who know it, their quarrels cease at once (Dhammapada 1.1-6 (tr. Muller).

Next Dyer presents, from his website poll, the 18 most common excuses we come up with to avoid personal change:

It's going to be difficult.
It's going to be risky.
It's gonna take a long time.
There's going to be family drama.
I don't deserve it.
It's not my nature.
I can't afford it.
No one will help me.
It's never happened before.
I'm not strong enough.
I'm not smart enough.
The rules won't let me.
I don't have the energy.
My own personal family history won't let me.
I'm too busy.
I'm scared.

According to Dyer, the last two are the most common excuses of all. Dyer exhorts his audience: "fulfill your dharma! (destiny)." I am not sure Dyer's destiny is the best translation of Dharma. My understanding is that dharma usually means right teaching but can also mean right duty or right law. Maybe some wit here can help me cross this river!

Dyer nears the end of his engaging talk with Carl Jung on personal change: Our most important problems cannot be solved. They must be outgrown.

Finally Dyer suggests we identify each excuse, and ask three questions:
1. Is it true?
2. Where do these thoughts come from?
3. What would my life look like if I couldn't use these excuses?

Regards, Paul