There's more than one way to live a life.........

 I don't know about you, but sometimes I feel as if we(mankind) are

''progressing''(which ever way you interpret that word) faster than

we perhaps may be able to process ''properly''. (Properly as in

understanding the width and breath of it.)

Sometimes our progress has even had dire and down right

catastrophic consequences which we most probably had not anticipated.

Springing to mind is splitting the atom, plastics, dynamite, 

combustion engines, the internet, chemical and biological weapons,

etc. etc. etc.

Some of us may have found the speed and width of mankind's ''progress'' 

too much to bear so we have headed for the mountains, wide open

spaces, small towns, and far away places.

In search perhaps for more intimate and 

tightknit communities, communities where ''everybody

knows your name''.

Perhaps also desiring a more ''organic and earth-friendly'' way of living 

rather than what some of us may view as a

 ''synthetic, hectic, and technology driven'' lifestyle.

The above image is depicting two women belonging to 

the Mennonites, a Protestant religious sect related to the Amish,

running for shelter during a dust storm.

The Mennonites, much like the Amish, live their lives according 

to their religious beliefs rather than the trends and ever evolving

changes in todays societies.

(Although, some Mennonites have adopted electricity and 

the use of automobiles.)

Somewhere I read (forget where) ''there's more than

one way to live a life.''

Whether we are aware of it or not, may I suggest that most

of us live our lives much in line with a sort

of ''blue print'' buried deep within us.

Something along the lines of: get an education, get

a job, get married, buy a house/unit/property, have children,

raise children, retire, enjoy the grand-children.

Not that there is anything wrong with that, but that blue-print does

not take into consideration losses such as: health, jobs, positions, 

partners, properties, money, loved ones, etc. etc.

Nor does it take into consideration that external and unpredictable

events may actually rip up the blue-print into small little pieces.

''Inevitably, hardships and challenges will be part of life's lessons;

however, what differentiates people is how they react, respond,

recover and revise their blue-print when in a situation

where their power of adaptability will be tested.''

(Dr. Samineh I. Shaheem)

Let's call that blue-print ''What my life should be like''.

As I view it, from a very young age our

perceptions of what our lives should be like is

heavily influenced by expectations from our families,

our friends, siblings, teachers, traditions, cultural

background, people we admire, and people we usually

hang out with.

If we deviate from the blue-print, more often

than not... in my experience, we will be asked to

provide an explanation for our deviation.

''You're gonna do what??"

Quit school and travel the world.

Become a monk.

Become an artist.

Join the Navy.

Give away all my stuff and go live in a collective.

Become a deep-sea diver.

Become an Opal hunter.... and so on.

Although a blue-print can be helpful, failing to live up

 to it we may feel dismayed, confused, and or even

depressed.

We may battle with thoughts like: I should have (insert here

your expectations) by now, I ought to have.....,

I've let my folks down by not having achieved.........

But here's the thing, life has a way of getting in the way

of ''blue-prints''.

Things happen, unexpected things happen, and we may have

to revise and or adapt our blue-prints accordingly.

We are the choices we make, so if our original blue-print

no longer ''fits'', it may be time to design a new one.

One that includes what we are truly passionate about,

 is important to us, and that which fulfills in us

a sense of meaning and purpose.

''There is more than one way to live a life.''

about the image: charcoal on rice paper

To Be or to Have, that is the question........

 What is the difference between ''to be'' or ''to have''?

If I am what I have, then what am I if I lose what I have?

According to Erich Fromm there are two modes of existence:

To have or to be, having or being.

If we state that ''I have a very nice home'', that is very different 

to stating that ''I am very happy in my home'' as it refers to

two fundamental different modes of existence.

''Two different kinds of orientation toward self and the world,

two different kinds of character structure the respective

predominance of which determines the totality

of a person's thinking, feeling, and acting.''

Put differently: ''to have'' is commonly about possession,

ownership, and or something that is required.

''To be'' is commonly about existence/state/condition,

to be, as in: I am, You are, they are, something is.....

Perhaps one could say: 

Being is about ''animate'' things, having is about ''inanimate'' things.

In Erich Fromm's publication ''The Art of Living'' he

writes: ''That we want to live, that we like to live, are facts

that require no explanation. But if we ask how we want to live -

what we seek from life, what makes life meaningful to us -

then indeed we deal with questions to which people will

give many different answers.''

Most of us have probably said things like ''when I have this, that, 

and the other, then I will be happy.''

Most of us have probably also discovered that when we did have

this, that, and the other, we found new things that we thought 

we had to have in order to be happy.

However, the excitement that we often experience when we acquire

materialistic things usually doesn't last.

Having stuff, it seems, can only offer us a momentary sense of satisfaction

and fulfillment.(Happiness)

We can even become so ''addicted'' to the possessing of stuff that

we ignore our inner selves cravings for meaningful interactions

with others. Instead of spending time with our loved ones,

we spend our time working in order to amass more money,

in order to amass more possessions.

(I am not talking about those of us who work endless hours in

order to meet basic physiological needs for food, shelter and

clothing.)

According to some statistics(forget where I read them) that I came

across, there was an indication that most people who say that they are

unhappy because they believe that they don't have enough money,

may perhaps not be unhappy due to a lack of money, but perhaps

more so due to a lack of self-fulfillment.

Self-fulfillment is not about having, it's about being.

Being, in my view, is knowing who you are and also what you are not, 

it's knowing what your core values and principles are 

and adhering to them. 

''If well-being - [defined as] functioning well as a person,

not as an instrument - is the supreme goal of ones efforts',

two specific ways stand out that lead to the attainment of

this goal: Breaking through one's narcissism and breaking

through the property structure of one's existence.''

(Erich Fromm)

(My understanding of ''property structure'' used in the quote above

is: ''having, owning, possessing structure''.)

So perhaps the quote can be interpreted as:

If well-being is one's goal as a human, then attaining such

one must must let go of the narcissism of having in

preference of being.

Instead of viewing oneself as: I am what I have, rather...

I am what I do, I am what I am.

''Life is problems. 

Living is solving problems.''

(Raymond E. Feist)

about the image: Hamlet pondering whether to Be or to Have

ink on paper

Some wounds take longer to heal......

 In those days it was called ''shell shock''.

A term for something that many

soldiers who returned home from the Great War (WW I)

suffered with.

Though the war was over, for many of the returning

soldiers the war never ended. 

It still raged in their minds, their souls, and in their memories.

Sadly, soldiers who suffered with shell shock were often

looked down upon. Even viewed as if it was a lack of moral

stamina and backbone that was the cause of their illness

rather than their experiences as soldiers.

According to Wikipedia ''some men suffering with shell shock

were put on trial, and even executed, for military crimes

including desertion and cowardice.''

The treatment of shell shock was often brutal, including

electric shock treatment in the hope of ''shocking'' the

sufferers back into their pre-war ''heroic'' selves.

Ten years after the end of WW I, there were over

65.000 war veterans still receiving treatment in Britain.

Though we no longer use the term shell shock, it is the forerunner

to PTSD. (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder)

Shell shock, some say, was specific to combat experiences whereas

the concept of PTSD has developed to be more

wide ranging.

PTSD is a disorder characterized by a difficulty in 

recovering after having experienced or witnessed a traumatic,

and or terrifying event.

Such as for instance: combat exposure, physical and or 

emotional abuse, any kind of violence, any kind of

a serious accident, serious illness, loss of someone

important, loss of home, experiencing some form

of natural disaster, etc. etc.....

PTSD is a complex condition and it does not

fit into a ''one-size-fits-all'' definition.

Having said that, may I suggest that all of us who

suffers with it have one thing in common:

it interferes with our lives.

My beloved son suffers with mental health issues.

Due to his illness I have had to face many heart wrenching,

dangerous, and absolutely terrifying situations.

( I will not go in to detail as even writing this is making

my heart pound and my hands shake.)

Although today he is much better, every time he leaves 

the house I become hyper vigilant, and 

I have to fight off flashbacks and a racing mind.

Although PTSD is commonly (often) linked with war veterans,

unfortunately that does not mean the rest of us are ''immune''.

Here in Australia, 25% of people who are exposed to traumatic

events experience PTSD.

Sadly, there are a number of myths around PTSD.

Myth 1: Time heals all wounds.

Myth 2: People with PTSD are weak

Myth 3: Only soldiers get PTSD

Myth 4: Everyone with PTSD has faced some kind of dangerous

event.

This is how ''those in the know'' view it:

PTSD can take years to develop, it is an illness and not a

weakness, it can affect anybody who has experienced a traumatic event,

 even the loss of a loved one can lead to PTSD.

''Everyone has a different capacity for trauma, which is 

informed by a combination of risk factors including

neurobiology, past experiences and genetics.''

(SANE AUSTRALIA)

Considering the state of our planet right now,

with its COVID, wars, poverty, natural disasters,

homelessness, famines, refugee crisis's, etc. etc.

will mankind's paramount question become: 

Will it be possible in 20 years for a human to live on earth

and not suffer with PTSD?

I reckon the time has come for us to be kinder and 

more compassionate and understanding toward each other.

''Kindness is choosing to acknowledge and celebrate

the beauty in others, regardless of whether or not they

can find it in themselves.''

(RAKtivist)

about the image: ''Three colours, red, white and blue.''

Acrylic on large canvas. This is an ANZAC soldier

clinging to an Australian flag to help him stand up.

I donated this painting to a branch of RSL (Returned and

Service League of Australia) in Queensland, Australia.

''You can't outsource your pain.''

 -''Yes, he said and then continued ''but you can't outsource your pain''.

Wow, I thought, that's a cracker of statement.

(Outsourcing, as in passing on one's task to someone else.)

Ever since my son made that statement a week ago I have been 

 wrestling with that thought. What else can't we outsource?

Memories? How we feel about and view ourselves? 

How we feel about and view others?

Hmmm, can our own emotional well-being be ''outsourced'' to others?

Well, how about blame?

Not exactly outsourcing, but.... by blaming someone else

for an outcome we may not be happy with, we ''remove'' the

responsibility and accountability from belonging with us.

''What do you mean??? My fault??You started it!!!''

''I only posted that because someone told me that you

had posted lies about me on your site yesterday.''

Etc. etc.

As I view it however, blaming someone else or others for

how we feel we basically resign ourselves to not being in

charge of our own emotional wellbeing. It may perhaps be easier

to assign blame rather than to examine our own behaviours,

but it can also keep us stuck in a mindset that prevents us

from finding new and more helpful ways of dealing

with difficult situations and emotions.

As much as we may want to ''outsource'' suffering and

pain, heartache and disappointment, what if hidden

within such experiences there are also invaluable ''treasures''?

According to some recent research, psychologists have

become aware of a phenomenon called ''post-traumatic growth''.

Richard Tedeschi and Lawrence Calhoun discovered through

doing a large number of interviews with people who had suffered

serious traumatic life-events, that for many of them

their experiences became a powerful spur for personal development.

According to Tedeschi and Calhoun, their (the people interviewed)

suffering lead them to a ''deeper level of awareness''.

Pain comes in many different varieties; acute, chronic, physical,

emotional, psychosomatic, etc. etc.

None of us like it, 

 most of us probably try to escape it,

numb it, make it go away, so if I was to suggest that pain

has the potential to be a really good ''teacher'',

you may possibly think me nuts.

Some years ago I came up with this:

 ''Joy is a friend, but pain is a teacher''.

I think that perhaps it popped in to my head because

pain has helped me to gain a deeper understanding of

compassion, patience, long-suffering and the value of

mindfulness.

Loading my car one day with all my music equipment,

I managed to tear all the ligaments and muscles in my lower

back. The sound of the tearing was awful and as I collapsed

on the floor in agony, I knew that I had done some serious damage.

(The pain was actually so severe it temporarily blinded me.)

Long story short; After months of pain relief injections and

staying in bed, physio and a bunch of other treatments, I started

to swim laps in my local pool. In the beginning the pain was

so bad that each stroke made me nauseous, but I persevered

because after finishing my laps, I discovered that I felt a bit better.

Back pain, migraine, head-ache, stomach ache, heart-ache,

mental anguish, etc. etc. is often not ''visible'' to others. 

If there is no plaster cast, bandage, or stitches, how bad

can the pain really be? At least there should be some

blood somewhere, shouldn't there???

(This kind of thinking in my experience, can at times unfortunately make

 it difficult for some of us to be compassionate.)

From the first scrubbed knee to the first broken heart,

the pain that goes along with those experiences

offers us an opportunity to understand and to sympathize

with others when they go through such events.

Ours is not the task of passing judgement or moralizing

whether the sufferer is worthy of our compassion or not,

our task is merely to offer our support and understanding.

Sometimes pain can teach us things we didn't

think we needed to learn.

Sometimes suffering can soften a heart we didn't

notice had grown hard.

Sometimes it may seem easier to blame others

 for our shame,

offer wild aspersions, set wagging tongues aflame.

But,

somethings in life, most precious and rare,

can only be experienced with a heart that cares.

''We create our own unhappiness. The purpose of suffering

is to help us understand we are the ones who cause it.''

(Willie Nelson)

about the image: War, .... is it not outsourcing of the worst kind?

Those who decide whether to go to war or not rarely do the

fighting, instead... they ''outsource'' the fighting to others.

Acrylic on large canvas.

Shopping for thrills............

 The Dark Net.

A place (virtual) where it is possible to buy absolutely anything.

''Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?

The Shadow knows.'' (Walter B. Gibson)

(The Shadow was a crime fighting fictional character (superhero)

popular during the 1940-50's created by Walter B. Gibson.)

However one may define ''evil'', I am pretty sure it can be bought

on the Dark Net.

Some time ago I watched a doco series on The dark Net and it

sent shivers down my spine. If Walter B. Gibson was alive today

he would need no imagination to find material for his books.

All he would have to do would be to peruse the Dark Net.

What is it with humans that as soon as we invent something

with great potential for ''good'' we immediately find ways

of using it for something ''bad''?

Take dynamite for instance. Invented by Alfred Nobel, a

life-long pacifist, to assist in making tunnels and clearing the way 

for the railway.

When he discovered that it was also associated with mayhem and atrocities,

he was absolutely horrified.

How about nuclear fission, thalidomide, morphine, gunpowder,

refined sugar, alcohol, etc. etc.

And, oh yeah, .... the Internet.

How about technology as a whole?

''Technology is a tool, in itself it is neither good nor bad,

it is moral-less. As in, it depends on what the user of it

is using it for.''

So some say.

What technology makes possible and what humans actually

do with it are two different things.

I pull out my card to pay for my groceries.

It's declined. What? I know I have enough money to

pay for my stuff. I've been hacked!! All the money is

gone and I am devastated, but who is responsible?

Am I responsible for trusting the bank?

Is the bank responsible for not keeping my money safe?

Or is it the person who used technology to steal my money?

The capacity for anonymity (for those of us not tech savvy) 

that the Internet offers seems to me to be both a ''good'' and a ''bad'' thing.

It can protect both innocuous and offensive behaviours.

In itself anonymity as far as I can ascertain, is neither good nor bad,

it is what we use it for and what the end results of it is

that deem it one or the other.

If we use anonymity to slander someone, make illegal threats,

distribute misinformation, distribute harmful viruses, distribute

illegal publications in either text and or image form, etc. etc. then I

would deem that as using anonymity in a ''bad'' way.

Using anonymity in order to be nasty, sneaky, or plain mean, is

in my view behaving cowardly.

So, what is the Dark Web/Dark Net?

''It is a hidden collective of internet sites accessible only by a

specialized web browser.''

Some use it to evade government censorship, some to

conduct illegal practices/business, some to get (or share) information

not available (possible) on the ''visible'' internet.

But, according to the documentary I watched, it is a ''place/space''

where a lot of illegal transactions take place.

I try my hardest to believe that deep down inside most of us

is the desire to be ''good'', to to be kind, to be honest, to be

life-affirming, to be supportive and understanding, but after

having watched the documentary.....it seems that in some

of us.......''evil'' lurks.

''I know I shouldn't smoke, but .........''

''I really dislike sites like these, but.....''

''I know I shouldn't make mean comments, but....''

''I shouldn't drink cos it makes me mean, but......''

When someone who views him/herself as ''good''

does something ''bad'', cognitive dissonance urges him/her to

ignore that behaviour because he/she can't deal with

the inconsistency between his/her behaviour and beliefs.

(Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort we feel when

we hold two contradictory opinions and

or when our behaviour is inconsistent with our beliefs.

Aka: An angel and a devil on each shoulder both telling us what

to do.)

These days we can behave badly behind the veil of

anonymity; we can browse sites that we don't

want anyone else to know that we visit, we can 

have relationships with a bunch of different people

without them knowing anything about each other,

we can be voyeurs', we can be critics, we can

be judge, jury and executioners, we can be assassins,

we can be superstars, but here's the thing,

 just because we can, that doesn't necessarily mean we should.

''In each of us, two natures are at war - the good and the bad.

All of our lives the fight goes on between them, and one

of them must conquer. But in our own hands lies the

power to choose - what we want most to be, we are.''

(Robert Louis Stevenson)

about the image: small shopping bags glued on a canvas with

sketched outlines of a bigger shopping bag. 

Added; some editing in Photoshop +

made-up sites

Before you make a choice, ponder the outcomes of those choices......

While fossicking in a second hand book shop I picked

up a book titled ''Choice Theory'' by William Glasser.

It looked interesting to me and as the cost of the book was a 

mere $2, I added it to the collection of books I was going

to buy.

Had it not been for a particularly stubborn and painful headache,

I think I could have easily spent another hour in that book shop.

Instead, I paid for my books and went in search of a strong cup

of coffee.

(Coffee, I have discovered, can often help alleviate my headaches.)

Lucky for me, next to the book shop I found a small Italian restaurant

who served Espresso's. I quickly ordered a double Espresso and sat

down at a small table.

While I was waiting for my coffee I started to read the cover of

''Choice Theory''.

Choice Theory, a New Psychology of Personal Freedom.

Sounded good to me. I have always been intrigued by how

we make choices. (Ask a three year old if he/she likes red or yellow

best and he/she will quickly give you an answer, but how does the

three year old make that choice?) 

Is there something more to making a choice other than ''because

I like it better?''

According to Choice Theory, ''we choose everything we do, 

including the misery (or joy) we feel. Other people can neither make us

 miserable nor make us happy. All we can get from them is information, 

and by itself, information cannot make us feel anything.''

Really? Can that be true? Others can't make us angry, irritated,

belittled, sad, frustrated, etc. etc.?

According to Choice Theory there are three ''common sense'' beliefs

that are the foundation of why we may feel that others make us

feel this, that, or the other.

First belief: I do countless things because I am responding to a 

simple external signal.

Second belief: I can control what I want others to do, and others

can control how I think, act, and feel.

Third belief: If others don't do what I want them to do, it is right,

perhaps even my moral obligation, to punish or reward them

in order to get them to do what I want.

''These three common sense beliefs are the foundation of the

external control psychology that essentially rules the world'',

writes William Glasser.

Basically, to sum up, William Glasser suggests that all

choices are based around five basic needs: survival, love and

belonging, power, freedom and fun.

Others suggest that our choices may be based on what maximizes

our interests and benefits.

However, what seems to be a common denominator when it

comes to choice making, is personal preference.

And personal preference, as far as I can ascertain, is often founded on

 conscious and subconscious bias.

Bias; basically a disproportionate weight in favour or against something,

 someone, an idea, a behaviour, action, etc. etc. 

Some biases may be innate, some learned.

 ''Why do you dislike the Smith's so much?

''Because the Connor's have always disliked the Smith's.

''Yeah, okay, but why?''

''I dunno, that's just the way it's always been.''

''Between stimulus and a response there is a space.

In that space is our power to choose our response.

In our response lies our growth and our freedom.''

(Victor Frankl)

Or put another way: Between an event and how we will

respond to that event, there is a space.

In that space we have the opportunity to decide how

we will respond to that event. As in;

Before we respond we have the opportunity to consider 

 the potential outcome(s) of our response.  

We choose our response, just like others choose how

they will respond to our response.

I read somewhere that we make thousands of choices every day,

although many of them we don't make consciously.

We call them habits, routines and or behaviour patterns.

The more choices - simple or complex- we face

the more decisions we have to make and that takes mental

and physical energy. 

So... we may choose to not ''sweat the small stuff'' and instead reserve our energy

 for the ''big stuff''. (Whatever that may be for each of us.)

But, perhaps William Glasser has a point: 

''We choose everything we do, including the misery (or joy) we feel.

 Other people can neither make us miserable nor make us happy.

 All we can get from them is information,

and by itself information cannot make us feel anything.''

Those words may seem counterintuitive, but I have found

a sense of freedom in entertaining the idea that I can choose

how I will respond to all the things that happens to me.

Perhaps you may too....?

about the image: All the images on the candle is made by me.

Some are ink, some acrylic. Add a little fancy editing and

this was the result.

As you think, so will your life be........

Watching a documentary on the Vietnam war the other day, I

suddenly remembered a painting I did years ago depicting

two small Vietnamese boys being marched through the

Vietnamese jungle at gunpoint, treated

as adult enemy combatants.

At what age does a child stop being a child and

instead become an adult?

Depending upon our definition of the terms, some

of us may perhaps never experience ourselves as ''adults'', 

and perhaps some of us may feel that we were never children.

Watching a three year old sitting in a push-chair

using an i-Pad like a pro, I started to ponder whether our

speed of ''progress and enlightenment'' perhaps have

some potentially serious draw backs.

Take thinking for instance, before we had the internet

how did we find answers to questions we pondered?

We probably asked people in the know, we read books, 

we did courses, we studied, etc. etc.

We collected answers from different sources, processed

them, thought about them, and then arrived at an answer.

Thinking about things is important because it is by thinking

about things that we create an understanding of the world

we live in.

Why is the sky blue? Why does everything fall down?

Where does the wind come from? Why do people die?

What is time? etc. etc.

These are some common questions children often ask.

It may be tempting to answer: ''Google it'' rather than answer

''what do you think?'' but is that really helpful I wonder?

When my son was going through the ''why?'' stage he often

asked questions that made me reach for an Encyclopedia.

We would look up the answer together (which usually would lead

to another ''why?'') and though I don't know for sure whether

this may have something to do with my son's preference of

books rather than the Internet, but I am chuffed that he, just like me,

 loves books.

Back to thinking....what is it?

At what age does a human being begin to think?

(This question still perplexes me.)

Think about it for a minute. 

Is it possible to think without language?

What do we do with our thoughts?

Some suggest that thinking is not one single ''thing'',

rather our thinking can be divided into different

categories such as: reasoning, problem solving,

 judgement and decision making.

''The world as we have created it is a process of our

thinking. 

It cannot be changed without us changing our thinking.''

(Albert Einstein)

''Thinking is the mental process in which beings form

psychological associations and models of the world

they inhabit.'' 

''Thinking is the internal mental processes that makes sense of

our experiences.''

When we think something, more often than not we don't ask ourselves

why we think the way we do. 

In my view it can be quite helpful to ask ourselves that question now

and then, especially if the outcome of our thoughts often

lands us in some kind of emotional and or physical quandary.

My theory is that thoughts trigger feelings, feelings often

then motivates us to act some way or another,

the outcome of that act will then be either one we desired and or 

hoped for or not.

At what age does a child stop being a child and

instead become an adult?

Personally, I believe that has a lot to do with

thinking.

According to some ''in the know'' there are four types

of thinking skills: convergent or analytical thinking,

divergent thinking, critical thinking and creative thinking.

I believe that it is with the help of these different thinking skills

that we understand the world we live in, solve problems,

make reasonable and logical choices and develop our

own values, ethics and beliefs.

As far as I can ascertain whether one is a ''child'' or an ''adult''

 has less to do with one's age and more to do with one's

thinking skills.

''For in every adult there dwells a child that was,

and in every child there lies the adult that will be.''

(John Connolly)

about the image: acrylic on canvas