Fair-Weather Fan

Am I a fair-weather fan?  I grew up in Denver where the religion was football, and Mile High Stadium its cathedral.  In the Bronco’s early years fans were plentiful, loud and loyal. The team was lousy. Whenever Hank Stram and the hated Kansas City Chiefs came to town you could count on a loss with a lopsided score.  The only solace was, weather permitting, throwing snowballs at the Chiefs from the old South Stands.

The Broncos went through many lean years and dozens of now forgotten quarterbacks. Things turned around when Craig Morton became Denver’s first bona fide big-league quarterback.  He led the Broncos to their first Super Bowl.  They lost.  Then came John Elway and the glory years of the Broncos.  Elway led the Broncos to five Super Bowls.  Absent a supporting cast, the first three were losses.  Finally surrounded by championship talent, Elway ended his career with 2 Super Bowl victories.  Following the 2013 season, quarterbacked by Peyton Manning, Denver lost in what was probably the ugliest Super Bowl ever played.  Two years later, Manning and the Bronco’s redeemed themselves in the championship game.

Twenty-five years I lived away from Denver, first in Manhattan KS and then in St. Louis.  During all that time I remained a Bronco fan.  When in St. Louis, I enjoyed the Rams.  Called “the greatest show on turf” and led by quarterback Kurt Warner, they went to two Super Bowls, winning one and losing the other. However, St. Louis was a baseball town, not a football town, and the Rams were destined to leave the city.  For me, it was still “go Broncos.”

Seven years ago, I moved to Kansas City, a great football town, on par with Denver.  During these years, I’ve seen the decline of the Broncos and the rise of the Chiefs.  My roots are in Denver.  My home is in Kansas City.  Pulled in two directions, a few years ago I found myself beginning to cheer for the once-hated Chiefs.  With the acquisition of the amazing Patrick Mahomes, surrounded by good coaching and a championship worthy team, I’ve jumped ship and now cheer unabashedly for the Chiefs.  Perhaps I am a fair-weather fan.

This past Sunday the Chiefs won an astounding playoff game, coming back from a 24-point deficit. Next Sunday they play for the AFC championship and, if all goes well, they will be in the Super Bowl for the first time in 50 years.

January is a dark, cold and dingy month, a month of melancholy.  Yet, with a winning team to cheer on, how much brighter the month seems.  My new philosophy: life is too short to cheer for a losing team. Call me a fair-weather fan.


Speaking of good cheer, I just heard three good jokes on the radio.

Q:  What did the band leader name his daughters?
A:  Anna-One, Anna-Two

Q:  What do you call an illegally parked frog?
A:  Toad (Towed, get it?)

Q:  What’s happened to the man who fell into the upholstery machine?
A:  He’s completely recovered.

Contradiction

We are challenged by contradictions; contradictory opinions, contradictory beliefs, contradictory perspectives, even contradictory ‘truths’.

The most common response when faced with contradiction is to declare your position right and the other's position wrong, of course. You know your are right. Experience tells you so. Accompanying this response, there is usually little self-reflection, little curiosity, only argumentation.  Being understood might seem important, but understanding the other does not. Often an escalation occurs and contradiction morphs into conflict. Sanctimony and outrage replace dialogue. End of discussion.

When faced with contradiction, the challenge is to enter into constructive dialogue, and for that time to suspend criticism while listening open-mindedly to the perspective of the other.  Dialogue does not include accusation and condemnation. Dialogue does not include threats and ultimatums

Dialogue is less about talking and more about listening, really listening. In the course of dialogue you need not agree, but you can acknowledge the viewpoint of the other.  Contradiction may not resolve, but contradiction need not lead to conflict.

In philosophy, there is a concept called ‘pluralism’.  Pluralism emphasizes that we exist in an extraordinarily complex world, too complex to be grasped through a simple and single lens. Often, contradiction is nothing more than a different perspective, the world viewed through a different lens. In this complex pluralistic world, contradictions should be approached with tolerance and humility, not in the spirit of argumentation, but in the effort to learn and share from the perspective, the lens, of the other.

In philosophy, there is a concept called ‘the dialectical principle’.  Sometimes, if one is willing to examine seemingly contradictory perspectives there emerges, in lieu of contradiction, a new and more nuanced understanding, a meeting of the minds, a synthesis of ideas.

Relationships are filled with contradiction. The world is filled with contradiction.  And that’s okay.

How To Be

There is one basic question that is at the heart of all religion and philosophy.  How should life be lived? 

Buddhists believe that life is to be lived in renunciation of needs and desires.
Hindus believe that life is to be lived over and over according to one’s karma.
Jews believe that life is to be lived making this world holy, according to Torah.
Moslems believe that life is to be lived in surrender to Allah, according to Koran.
And Christians believe that life is to be lived with faith and in hope for eternal salvation.


Socrates taught that life should be self-examined and lived in pursuit of Truth.
Aristotle counseled that life should be lived in moderation, finding the Golden Mean.
Kierkegaard thought that life should be lived not in reason, but in a leap of faith.
Nietzsche taught that God is dead and life should be lived becoming the best you can be, becoming the ‘ubermensch’.
And William James wrote that the human experience is far too complex to be defined by any one way of being.


From Amos, one should seek good and not evil.
From first Isaiah, one should relieve the oppressed, defend the fatherless, and plead for the widow.
From second Isaiah, one should be a light unto others.
And from Micah, one should seek justice, love mercy and walk humbly.


For 60’s psychologist Timothy Leary, life should be lived turning on, tuning in and dropping out.
For psychiatrist Sigmund Freud, life should be lived loving and working.
For existential psychologist Abraham Maslow, life should be lived self-actualizing.
And for concentration camp survivor and psychiatrist Viktor Frankl, life should be lived meaningfully.


There are many paths from which to choose.   There is no one right way of being.  There is no one Truth.  There may be false paths, paths that lead astray.  But there are also many true and meaningful paths, many good ways to be.

How to be or how not to be, that is really the question.

Mind and Brain

“A biological analysis of a deed is like a chemical analysis of a painting.  It is not false, but it does not account for what makes the paints into a painting.  It stops before the essential part of the story starts.”  (Leon Wieseltier, 1952-- )

While teaching a class of psychiatry residents, I wrote this quote on the blackboard.  “The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven.” (John Milton from Paradise Lost) 

A week later, the quote remained on the board but underneath someone had scrawled, “Not true!!  Mind is Brain.”  Obviously, my quote pushed someone’s button.  I am almost sure that this uninvited editorial comment was written by an enthusiastic and aspiring scientist-to-be.  There is a growing belief among many researchers that mind and brain are equivalent. The way to better understand the mind is to better understand the brain. 

I wanted to let the young scientist that I strongly disagreed, and I wrote in response, “How sad and how absurd.”  The mind is more than just a brain. A mind is not understood by understanding brain parts. Love, a state of mind, is not understood by understanding chemicals of the brain.  Oxytocin and endorphins may significantly influence the perception of love, but to know this chemistry is not to know ‘the chemistry’ of love. 

I wanted to find out more about the person that wrote on the board.  I wanted to hear their perspective.  And I wanted to debate. 

I wanted to point out to this unknown editorialist the absurdity of the assertion that Mind is Brain. Remember if A=B and B=C then A=C. If mind is brain and brain is chemicals then mind is chemicals.  And if mind is chemicals and chemicals are atoms, then mind is atoms.  And so on and so forth into reductionistic absurdity. How little is revealed about the mind in this process! 

If I had met this person face to face, I would have asked if they thought the following statements to be true or false:

·         Hamlet is English words

·         Mona Lisa is brushstrokes on canvas

·         Beethoven’s 9^th is notes and chords

Of course, there is no Hamlet without English words.  There is no Mona Lisa without brushstrokes on canvas.  There is no Beethoven’s 9^th without notes and chords.  And there is no mind without brain.  So, the statements are true, but they tell us very little and convey nothing of the essence of the play, the painting or the music.  An analysis of the brain does not account for what makes the brain into a mind.  “It stops before the essential part of the story is starts.” 

If like the aspiring scientist-to-be you disagree with what I’ve said, pay this blog no brain.

Behavior Mod

“Give me a child and I’ll shape him into anything.”  (B.F. Skinner, 1904—1990)

Rewarding a desired behavior increases the frequency of that behavior.  This is the core principle of behavior modification, demonstrated by Harvard Psychologist B. F. Skinner in the mid-twentieth century.  This is the core principle of behavior modification (‘behavior mod’ for short), that continues to be demonstrated daily by animal trainers, teachers, parents, and electronic game designers, to name but a few.

If life is a laboratory, then the arcade at Chuck E Cheese was my laboratory for learning about behavior mod.  I remember observing children putting their tokens into the games.  If a child won the game, then tickets were automatically dispensed.  Kids collected and counted their tickets eventually exchanging them for prizes.  In the language of behavior mod, kids were conditioned (or trained) to spend tokens (desired behavior) on games (stimulus) in exchange for tickets (reinforcement).

Rewarded was token spending behavior.  Not rewarded was curiosity, creativity and risk-taking. Often avoiding the more challenging games, children sought out games with the best ticket payout.  A game that did not reward generously was a game ignored.  Kids loved spending lots of tokens on games in pursuit of tickets.  No amount of tokens completely satisfied and when the tokens ran out, kids became irritable.  Ultimately, tickets were exchanged for worthless trinkets.  From what I observed in the lab, the influence of behavior mod was powerful.

Behavior mod is not just for kids. In a different laboratory, an adult version of the Chuck E. Cheese arcade, I observe grown-ups playing the slot machines. A slot machine (the stimulus) is basically an electronic game, requiring zero skill, that offers a monetary payout. For every dollar put into a slot machine (the desired behavior), the machine returns, on average, 96 cents (the reward).  Doesn’t sound like such a good deal.  However, the casino owners know that the longer you sit in front of the slot machine, the more money you spend, and the more the casino profits.  Through the power of intermittent reinforcement, attractive visual displays, and occasional ‘jackpot’ payouts, vulnerable adults become addicted to the slot machine.  They can’t stop spending.  Some lose far more than they can afford.  The influence of behavior mod is powerful.

I make the following offer (the stimulus) to any of you who might be interested.  Send me your money (the desired behavior) and for every dollar I receive I will gladly return 96 cents (the reward), minus the cost of postage and handling.  Behavior mod can be powerful . . . especially in the wrong hands.

Brains

One famous philosopher speculated how different the world must seem to a bat than to a person.  Another famous philosopher speculated how different the world must seem to a dog than to its owner.  Bat, dog, person; each is wired differently.  Each has a very different brain, thus to each their world is very different.  All that is seen, heard, smelled or touched is interpreted in the brain.  What I know of the world is determined by and limited by the wiring of my particular brain. 

Trying to understand the relationship of the world I know to the ‘real world’ out there, I consider this analogy:  the brain is to the universe as the record player is to the record. Now, my attempt to explain.

What is a record without a record player?  A record consists of waves and patterns etched into a continuous vinyl groove.  A record is potential not yet realized.  Without a record player there is no music. It is the record player that interprets the patterns etched in the vinyl, subsequently turning it into music.

Suppose aliens found a vinyl record.  Would they detect the waves and patterns?   Would they build a machine and try to solve the mystery and meaning of the patterns?  What if their machine started at the end of the record and played backwards, or played at the wrong speed?  Chances are an alien record player would play a different tune.  Perhaps aliens would build a machine that interpreted the patterns as pictures or smells and not sounds.  What if aliens had altogether different sense organs?  The record might then be played in ways we cannot even imagine.

If the universe is, like the record, a series of waves and patterns, then different brains will interpret waves and patterns differently.  A dog and I exist in the same universe, yet my world is filled with sights.  A dog’s world is filled with smells.  Same universe, but a very different tune.  The title of a onetime bestseller, “Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus,” suggests that even for the sexes; same universe, different brains, different tune.

I’ll take the analogy one step further.  If there were no waves and patterns, but only random irregularities in the vinyl groove, then the record being played would just make noise and not music.  But the patterns and waves in a record are not random.  They are unique to the artist's music.  So too, the universe is not random, but has its interpretable patterns and waves.  Our brains as record players, our minds the listeners, we recognize there are patterns.  Every day we see, hear, smell and feel the music of our universe.  Is it possible that there is an 'artist' responsible for this patterned universe?

If my analogy seems hard to follow, not to worry.  I am aware that many of you are too young to have ever listened to a vinyl record.  I am pleased to see that, in this world, records and record players are making a comeback..

Golden Rules

It is possible to be a well-disciplined person and an otherwise despicable human being.  I recently wrote about the importance of raising self-disciplined children.  I failed to mention one thing.  It is important to raise self-disciplined children AND it is important to raise them with a moral compass.

As a psychiatrist and therapist, it was not my place to tell people how to believe, but it was well within my domain to ask them to articulate what they believed.  I often asked patients and parents to describe their family values, what for them was the measure of ‘good behavior’, and what values made them proud to be a member of their family.

I often asked children and adolescents to explore their values, their behaviors and their choices according to the feelings that follow.  “If you choose to do such-and-such, how will you feel the next day?”  I suggested to them that, when faced with important decisions, they use a ‘mirror-test’.  “Choose today in such a way that, when you look in the mirror tomorrow, you are proud of who you see.”

I often asked parents how they conveyed their beliefs and values to their children.  I asked parents to consider if their behaviors were consistent with their professed beliefs.  As my wife is fond of quoting, “if you don’t model what you teach, you’re teaching something else.”  I reminded parents that it is not enough to just correct children’s misbehavior.  Parents must provide children with the language for understanding moral choice and behavior.

For parents struggling to find the right words to say, I suggested The Golden Rule as a good starting point.  Whether secular in origin or God-given, The Golden Rule is a universal principle for moral discourse and behavior.  Some iteration of The Golden Rule is found in almost every culture and religion. 

Some iterations focus on moral intent. “Love your neighbor as yourself.” (Leviticus 19:18). 

Some iterations focus on moral restraint. “Do not do unto others what you do not want done unto you.” (The Analects of Confucius).

Still other iterations focus on moral action. “As you would that men should do to you, do you also to them.” (Luke 6:31)

Intent, Restraint, Action . . .  I recommend that parents teach their children the I.R.A.’s of moral behavior.  It's a good investment.  Parents can expect to receive good dividends.