I know I said finally but just thinking how so many people grew up in environments where conflict was cruel or violent and maybe had to take on the role of peacemaker that most of us do everything we can to avoid differences of opinion or conflicts but as far as I can see globally and intimately it has allowed abuses to flourish, bullies to dominate and people feeling disempowered and anxious. I don't see any other way but to start to build our tolerance and skill with it. Adios
I suppose I am talking about power within a social group - within Unpsychology in this case where the group kind of has "rules" or norms and I suppose you are indicating maybe one of those might be not to have open conflict online, although I know one of the things that Warm Data seems to pride itself on is no rules. Whereas I come from a marginalised position in society which sees it as actually HEALTHY to openly disagree, please note I don't mean disrespect, but differences enhance our abilities in relationship. You are correct I have persisted and I don't feel personally suppressed but there were efforts by both yourself and Lesley to persuade me that we didn't have differences about the value of extraordinary for all....it's not a crime...it's merely something I wanted to point to and there's a chance you might think about what I have said as it is so completely different from what you were proposing.
However what I do want to finally say is I admire you for keeping going in the exchange - most people for whatever reason don't engage and not only have you done so but you have done so with grace. I appreciate that...it's been a great exchange from my end. Thank you
Maybe so much of the desire to define oneself on the spectrum of extraordinary to ordinary is self justification. It didn’t matter that Ursula said she was ordinary, but she said it knowing that as a writer of repute, those who loved her work would disagree or read humility, or ask themselves why she would say that... To be a writer, to challenge minds, in our society, is seen as extraordinary so claiming it isn’t feels inauthentic ...”...protest too much...”
Going back to Kubler-Ross, in the acceptance that our world, and us, is in a palliative state, what does it matter what is extraordinary or ordinary in the broader relational context? The states after “the end” - the non-existent utopia, the salvaged new world, the spiritual afterlife is entirely unknowable. In the moments when we find some internal peace in “acceptance” maybe it’s enough to just observe how the curve is playing out for others, human and non-human life/organisms as they cycle and iterate unable to hold a single truth that stops them from resting in acceptance. Extraordinary things happen there ‘imho’...
Then the rejection/anger at the feeling evoked by words - whatever their truth, is a expression of one’s unease with the reality we find ourselves in and many want so desperately not to be. The plants, the animals, the planet but specifically and wholly understandable to us - the body keeps living, even when it is dying. Biochemically, every process continues as best it can nothing gives up until it does, one by one. The desire to hold “truth” is a symptom of this in our collective palliative process.
Continuing on from where I said ‘IMHO’ ....In this state of acceptance, there is a lucidity that allows us to see the rose grown for a prize as simply the most amazing flower, an incredible arrangement of matter from transformed elements of earth, sunlight and water. A cup of tea made unsolicited or breakfast made by a mother for a child is a tangible act of love beyond the minimum requirements of parenthood or how society says a mother should behave, an ordinary thing done everyday for a life time holding the sublime magic of existence - universal and uncoded- for a moment, before the wailing collective picks apart “the truth” or the “right way” to do it and we are back in the noise.
Ah interesting...covid lockdowns actually demonstrated how quickly nature can recover from manmade destruction without our help...personally I believe the issues we need to face as a collective is what you and I are playing out here...how can completely different points of view between people, nature..effectively different needs be negotiated. At the moment there is no negotiation the group with the most power dominates...that could be with money but in a way it is more social status. So on this substack Nora and people that hold her views and way of doing things hold the social power and then someone with a different worldview, more comfortable with open conflict comes in and whilst it is shutting down in the politely and nicest way, it is still a suppression by the dominant viewpoint. Spiral this up and out and the result are wars, genocides, mistreatment of vulnerable people, natural sites . Until on the intimate level here and now, there is a willingness to hear non dominant voices and the wisdom they offer ..indigenous people's, children, mentally unwell, the imprisoned, the homeless, those kicked to the edges of society.we are doomed to extinction and maybe that is OK...maybe we can't undo centuries of destruction and violence and its time for extinction...the planet would likely breathe a big sigh of reluef
Hmm, you're right I'm not particularly OK with open conflict online, and I'll also question whether a small Substack has social power in the way you describe it. If you were railing at Joe Rogan et al, or many of the much larger and more influential Substacks, you might have a point. Ironically the whole reason that Unpsychology exists is to hear non-dominant voices - particularly in the area of 'mind' and 'mental health'. We've been doing it for nine years in our magazine. I'm not complacent about social power, but you haven't been suppressed – in fact you've kept going with your views - and that's fine. I agree with a lot that you've said, and disagree with other things. I'm just not sure I or Unpsychology are the powerful opponents you imagine... Go well...!
I have just seen this Steve so will just add...how do we know what is a good thing in these times about social media ? How do we judge good/ bad ? It surely just is happening...and similarly others may say what you wrote could be considered bad..as I did by comparing to religious and political exhortation to remain small as a good thing. We are all doing that...but the willingness to see that there are opposing differences because of life experiences rather than try and smooth them over. Why can't I disagree with you ? Where is the curiosity about why i feel that way rather than an attempt to persuade me to your perspective which is already outlined in your article
Thanks Yinchi, I certainly wasn't putting aside your disagreement. I am curious about where you are coming from and feeling, hence my engagement with your comments. I have no interest in persuading you of anything, and in my piece I was trying to ask a question of myself about what happened to me when I go into a judging place. Have a good day/evening. Not sure where you are in the world, but I wish you well, and I'm off to sleep right now...
Well Steve I have to admit to chucking my phone down in disgust when I got to the piece about elegance . I recently saw photos of Muhammed Ali, arguably a great example of someone who experienced their extraordinariousness talking down and helping a young man who was threatening to jump and commit suicide from a building...numerous examples of people like him who have got over their fear of not been liked or part of some cozy social grouping and prepared to be fully themselves and in doing so have inspired many to do the same. Whilst I do see the importance of the here and now ordinary, it doesn't mean that there is no importance to every single one of us living our extraordinarness. And that has grace and authenticity just as nature does when you come into relationship with it...but elegant that has all sorts of judgemental connotations particularly related to social elitism. And no I am not going to apologize for disagreeing with you so strongly.
Thanks for this Yinchi. Just a quick response before bed. The specific meaning of the word comes from Rob MacNamara's book, The Elegant Self, which I loved when I first came across it. It's not about social elitism at all, but about being in a place where we could all be with polarities and see things from a different perspective. For some people, being fully themselves does mean being more collectively engaged - for others it means being extraordinary in the way that Ali was. I love authentic extraordinariness, because it carries the humility of the ordinary too. Didn't Ali exemplify that too? Or Bowie? Or Greta? My main lament is that at a time we might need more small time heroes (a la Ursula LeGuin), we have social media noise and people pretending or aspiring to a kind of inauthentic extraordinary - which is definitely not a good thing...
Hi Yinchi and Steve, both people I know and love and have had long conversations with... I loved your piece Steve, it speaks to something I am also wrestling with, and sense others are wrestling with, each in their own languages and stories. And... although I didn’t throw my phone down at the word ‘elegance’, that word did stick out for me. Maybe because that word has been used so often for people with fine furnishings and fancy fashions, although I have many other associations with it too that are probably closer to what you meant. That someone reads a word and goes on an unexpected travel with it seems to be part of the weirdness we’re in. Words written especially can’t necessarily express the nuance we were meaning. Anyway I resonate with what you’re both saying and don’t think they are even in opposition with each other.
Well yes that's true that we can focus on the word elegance and whether I have taken it off in a different direction to what you intended Steve. But to do so would overlook the real point which is my actual opposition to what seems to be your view that it is bad (my word) to think of oneself or aspire to be extraordinary . So even though Lesley you are concluding they aren't in opposition...why would that be such a bad(again my word) thing to be in opposition. Because I certainly do not agree with what you are saying...that's exactly what relugions and Governments rely on to manipulate people ..who am I little ordinary person to complain or stand up and do something to change the course of history. Maybe Martin Luther King and the Pankhurst sisters should have just focussed on their ironing
Yinchi, I’m already confused by the multiple posts and points of view and can’t work out which comment is attached to which and don’t want to spend the day working it out. I don’t necessarily disagree with anything you’re talking about and am not interested having an argument about which viewpoint is “correct”, and yet sense that could easily happen here. I have benefited from being in conflicts before (including several with you), but I’m not interested in doing it here. Talking at the same time, on the phone, or zoom or being in person works better for me. I know we were planning to talk soon so happy to bring this conversation there.
I think I answered your point about extraordinariness in my last comment, Yinchi (did I?). That isn't what the post was about though really. I was questioning (perhaps like Nora Bateson does) whether in order for change to emerge, we have to start with the intimate and the close in - otherwise things get messy, cynicism sets in and people start acting out – and then manipulation can happen all too easily. There's also another strand to this. My background is, among other things, in climate activism. The context of the world (together with 'nature' and humankind itself) being on the edge of mass extinction means that action is urgent, but governments and corporations don't grasp it (not its full extent anyway), and we (in our ordinary lives) still have to find responses. Standing up is one way. Feeling grief (and anger) is another. Working out what it all might mean for our families and descendants and the other-than-human world is another... its deeply political of course...
Thanks Lesley! I liked the word because it was newly and creatively crafted by MacNamara when he wrote his book. The book is very nuanced - though I don't totally agree with all his developmental assumptions... he was very influenced by Ken Wilber...
Touched. Thank you. Although while I was reading your piece I let it be a lesson to me - the paradox of having published a book about that ordinary everyday of mine is that for a while it threw me into a machine in which I became separated by obligations from that very way of being. I'm returned to it now - gladly! Proud of the book and the people it has connected me too (and loved the process of making it)... but find no deep wish to make the writing of books a career!
It really was a fascinating and finely-written piece. Still thinking about it. x
I've been thinking a lot about status lately and this has added a new flavour into the cocktail of thoughts. Thanks!
Thanks for the comment - I like the idea of a new flavour in the mix! I'm glad I found your Substack and website too...
I know I said finally but just thinking how so many people grew up in environments where conflict was cruel or violent and maybe had to take on the role of peacemaker that most of us do everything we can to avoid differences of opinion or conflicts but as far as I can see globally and intimately it has allowed abuses to flourish, bullies to dominate and people feeling disempowered and anxious. I don't see any other way but to start to build our tolerance and skill with it. Adios
I suppose I am talking about power within a social group - within Unpsychology in this case where the group kind of has "rules" or norms and I suppose you are indicating maybe one of those might be not to have open conflict online, although I know one of the things that Warm Data seems to pride itself on is no rules. Whereas I come from a marginalised position in society which sees it as actually HEALTHY to openly disagree, please note I don't mean disrespect, but differences enhance our abilities in relationship. You are correct I have persisted and I don't feel personally suppressed but there were efforts by both yourself and Lesley to persuade me that we didn't have differences about the value of extraordinary for all....it's not a crime...it's merely something I wanted to point to and there's a chance you might think about what I have said as it is so completely different from what you were proposing.
However what I do want to finally say is I admire you for keeping going in the exchange - most people for whatever reason don't engage and not only have you done so but you have done so with grace. I appreciate that...it's been a great exchange from my end. Thank you
Maybe so much of the desire to define oneself on the spectrum of extraordinary to ordinary is self justification. It didn’t matter that Ursula said she was ordinary, but she said it knowing that as a writer of repute, those who loved her work would disagree or read humility, or ask themselves why she would say that... To be a writer, to challenge minds, in our society, is seen as extraordinary so claiming it isn’t feels inauthentic ...”...protest too much...”
Going back to Kubler-Ross, in the acceptance that our world, and us, is in a palliative state, what does it matter what is extraordinary or ordinary in the broader relational context? The states after “the end” - the non-existent utopia, the salvaged new world, the spiritual afterlife is entirely unknowable. In the moments when we find some internal peace in “acceptance” maybe it’s enough to just observe how the curve is playing out for others, human and non-human life/organisms as they cycle and iterate unable to hold a single truth that stops them from resting in acceptance. Extraordinary things happen there ‘imho’...
Then the rejection/anger at the feeling evoked by words - whatever their truth, is a expression of one’s unease with the reality we find ourselves in and many want so desperately not to be. The plants, the animals, the planet but specifically and wholly understandable to us - the body keeps living, even when it is dying. Biochemically, every process continues as best it can nothing gives up until it does, one by one. The desire to hold “truth” is a symptom of this in our collective palliative process.
Continuing on from where I said ‘IMHO’ ....In this state of acceptance, there is a lucidity that allows us to see the rose grown for a prize as simply the most amazing flower, an incredible arrangement of matter from transformed elements of earth, sunlight and water. A cup of tea made unsolicited or breakfast made by a mother for a child is a tangible act of love beyond the minimum requirements of parenthood or how society says a mother should behave, an ordinary thing done everyday for a life time holding the sublime magic of existence - universal and uncoded- for a moment, before the wailing collective picks apart “the truth” or the “right way” to do it and we are back in the noise.
All of this is so beautifully put, Catherine. From a rose to the noise... I will hold that image today...
Excuse my midnight typo fest 😅
Ah interesting...covid lockdowns actually demonstrated how quickly nature can recover from manmade destruction without our help...personally I believe the issues we need to face as a collective is what you and I are playing out here...how can completely different points of view between people, nature..effectively different needs be negotiated. At the moment there is no negotiation the group with the most power dominates...that could be with money but in a way it is more social status. So on this substack Nora and people that hold her views and way of doing things hold the social power and then someone with a different worldview, more comfortable with open conflict comes in and whilst it is shutting down in the politely and nicest way, it is still a suppression by the dominant viewpoint. Spiral this up and out and the result are wars, genocides, mistreatment of vulnerable people, natural sites . Until on the intimate level here and now, there is a willingness to hear non dominant voices and the wisdom they offer ..indigenous people's, children, mentally unwell, the imprisoned, the homeless, those kicked to the edges of society.we are doomed to extinction and maybe that is OK...maybe we can't undo centuries of destruction and violence and its time for extinction...the planet would likely breathe a big sigh of reluef
Hmm, you're right I'm not particularly OK with open conflict online, and I'll also question whether a small Substack has social power in the way you describe it. If you were railing at Joe Rogan et al, or many of the much larger and more influential Substacks, you might have a point. Ironically the whole reason that Unpsychology exists is to hear non-dominant voices - particularly in the area of 'mind' and 'mental health'. We've been doing it for nine years in our magazine. I'm not complacent about social power, but you haven't been suppressed – in fact you've kept going with your views - and that's fine. I agree with a lot that you've said, and disagree with other things. I'm just not sure I or Unpsychology are the powerful opponents you imagine... Go well...!
I have just seen this Steve so will just add...how do we know what is a good thing in these times about social media ? How do we judge good/ bad ? It surely just is happening...and similarly others may say what you wrote could be considered bad..as I did by comparing to religious and political exhortation to remain small as a good thing. We are all doing that...but the willingness to see that there are opposing differences because of life experiences rather than try and smooth them over. Why can't I disagree with you ? Where is the curiosity about why i feel that way rather than an attempt to persuade me to your perspective which is already outlined in your article
Thanks Yinchi, I certainly wasn't putting aside your disagreement. I am curious about where you are coming from and feeling, hence my engagement with your comments. I have no interest in persuading you of anything, and in my piece I was trying to ask a question of myself about what happened to me when I go into a judging place. Have a good day/evening. Not sure where you are in the world, but I wish you well, and I'm off to sleep right now...
Well Steve I have to admit to chucking my phone down in disgust when I got to the piece about elegance . I recently saw photos of Muhammed Ali, arguably a great example of someone who experienced their extraordinariousness talking down and helping a young man who was threatening to jump and commit suicide from a building...numerous examples of people like him who have got over their fear of not been liked or part of some cozy social grouping and prepared to be fully themselves and in doing so have inspired many to do the same. Whilst I do see the importance of the here and now ordinary, it doesn't mean that there is no importance to every single one of us living our extraordinarness. And that has grace and authenticity just as nature does when you come into relationship with it...but elegant that has all sorts of judgemental connotations particularly related to social elitism. And no I am not going to apologize for disagreeing with you so strongly.
Thanks for this Yinchi. Just a quick response before bed. The specific meaning of the word comes from Rob MacNamara's book, The Elegant Self, which I loved when I first came across it. It's not about social elitism at all, but about being in a place where we could all be with polarities and see things from a different perspective. For some people, being fully themselves does mean being more collectively engaged - for others it means being extraordinary in the way that Ali was. I love authentic extraordinariness, because it carries the humility of the ordinary too. Didn't Ali exemplify that too? Or Bowie? Or Greta? My main lament is that at a time we might need more small time heroes (a la Ursula LeGuin), we have social media noise and people pretending or aspiring to a kind of inauthentic extraordinary - which is definitely not a good thing...
Hi Yinchi and Steve, both people I know and love and have had long conversations with... I loved your piece Steve, it speaks to something I am also wrestling with, and sense others are wrestling with, each in their own languages and stories. And... although I didn’t throw my phone down at the word ‘elegance’, that word did stick out for me. Maybe because that word has been used so often for people with fine furnishings and fancy fashions, although I have many other associations with it too that are probably closer to what you meant. That someone reads a word and goes on an unexpected travel with it seems to be part of the weirdness we’re in. Words written especially can’t necessarily express the nuance we were meaning. Anyway I resonate with what you’re both saying and don’t think they are even in opposition with each other.
Well yes that's true that we can focus on the word elegance and whether I have taken it off in a different direction to what you intended Steve. But to do so would overlook the real point which is my actual opposition to what seems to be your view that it is bad (my word) to think of oneself or aspire to be extraordinary . So even though Lesley you are concluding they aren't in opposition...why would that be such a bad(again my word) thing to be in opposition. Because I certainly do not agree with what you are saying...that's exactly what relugions and Governments rely on to manipulate people ..who am I little ordinary person to complain or stand up and do something to change the course of history. Maybe Martin Luther King and the Pankhurst sisters should have just focussed on their ironing
Yinchi, I’m already confused by the multiple posts and points of view and can’t work out which comment is attached to which and don’t want to spend the day working it out. I don’t necessarily disagree with anything you’re talking about and am not interested having an argument about which viewpoint is “correct”, and yet sense that could easily happen here. I have benefited from being in conflicts before (including several with you), but I’m not interested in doing it here. Talking at the same time, on the phone, or zoom or being in person works better for me. I know we were planning to talk soon so happy to bring this conversation there.
I think I answered your point about extraordinariness in my last comment, Yinchi (did I?). That isn't what the post was about though really. I was questioning (perhaps like Nora Bateson does) whether in order for change to emerge, we have to start with the intimate and the close in - otherwise things get messy, cynicism sets in and people start acting out – and then manipulation can happen all too easily. There's also another strand to this. My background is, among other things, in climate activism. The context of the world (together with 'nature' and humankind itself) being on the edge of mass extinction means that action is urgent, but governments and corporations don't grasp it (not its full extent anyway), and we (in our ordinary lives) still have to find responses. Standing up is one way. Feeling grief (and anger) is another. Working out what it all might mean for our families and descendants and the other-than-human world is another... its deeply political of course...
Thanks Lesley! I liked the word because it was newly and creatively crafted by MacNamara when he wrote his book. The book is very nuanced - though I don't totally agree with all his developmental assumptions... he was very influenced by Ken Wilber...
I loved following you through this nuanced & quietly challenging piece
Thanks Tan, I think I often have you in mind when I am writing about the importance of the ordinary and everyday. It's your superpower!
Touched. Thank you. Although while I was reading your piece I let it be a lesson to me - the paradox of having published a book about that ordinary everyday of mine is that for a while it threw me into a machine in which I became separated by obligations from that very way of being. I'm returned to it now - gladly! Proud of the book and the people it has connected me too (and loved the process of making it)... but find no deep wish to make the writing of books a career!
It really was a fascinating and finely-written piece. Still thinking about it. x