Roxanne

by Roxanne - November 12, 2011November 6, 2011

Evil is the Absence of Empathy

What causes some to be cruel and others to be kind?

In her New York Times book review, 6 Degrees of Empathy, Katherine Bouton writes,

“The Science of Evil,” by Simon Baron-Cohen, seems likely to antagonize the victims of evil, the parents of children with autism spectrum disorder, at least a few of the dozens of researchers whose work he cites — not to mention critics of his views on evolutionary psychology or of his claims about the neurobiology of the sexes. “The Science of Evil” proposes a simple but persuasive hypothesis for a new way to think about evil.

Bouton explains –

Dr. Baron-Cohen, a professor of developmental psychology at the University of Cambridge and director of the university’s Autism Research Center, proposes that evil is more scientifically defined as an absence of empathy, exacerbated by negative environmental factors (usually parental, sometimes societal) and a genetic component. When these three exist in tandem they result in what he calls a Zero-Negative personality. Zero-Negative takes at least three forms (and possibly more), borrowing from terms used in psychiatry: Zero Type P (psychopathology), Zero Type B (borderline disorder) and Zero Type N (narcissism).

So basically, one might say that self-centeredness or selfishness is strongly correlated with what we would describe as evil or cruelty.

Autism, of course, is the polar reverse of this. It has been proposed that in some forms of autism, the person over-identifies with others. This results in high empathy – so much so that communication becomes minimal. Why? If one believes that they identify strongly with others, why ask?

Since social environment plays a role here we need to ask, “How much self-centeredness is promoted in our culture of individualism and isolation?”

Certainly, our own freedom to choose who we want to be plays a role too. We all know people who come out of situations where little or no empathy can be found – yet choose to live lives focused beyond themselves. As persons we make a moral choice to develop compassion and empathy for others – or not.

Failure to do this is a failure to realize that we are all connected. It is a failure to realize that my own well being is contingent on the well being of others.

Empathy is the core of what it means to be truly human. In Christianity Jesus is the model. Jesus wanted us to be able to feel what others feel. We are to make their feelings our own. That is the task of being on mission for Christians – this means we enter the world of those who are different and see it from their point of view. This makes us truly human, who we are meant to be.

The movie Avatar is a film that tries to make this same point. Although steeped in all the patriarchal trimmings (white male saves the planet, yet again) there is still something to be learned. Watch and enjoy.

by Roxanne - November 9, 2011November 6, 2011

InnerPeace – Replaying Conversations

Do you ever find yourself replaying a conversation you had with someone? Replaying conversations is often a symptom of interacting with an addict, manipulator or narcissist – especially if it only happens with certain people in your life.

Often, you may be trying to figure out what didn’t sit right in the conversation. The answer is – plenty – because conversations with addicts and narcissists don’t make any sense. You may not recognize their faulty logic immediately. It may not be apparent to you until after you are out of the emotional grip of the person. But later on you may realize that the words and actions of the person weren’t consistent, the “logic” was in fact illogical or the overtone was subtly (maybe overtly) sarcastic, angry or demeaning.

Another possibility the conversation seems unfinished or not quite right is that you may not have felt heard. And this is probably true. Active addicts, like narcissists, are extremely self-centered. They don’t respond appropriately to what others say, nor do they acknowledge what was said. Certainly they don’t ask the questions that are part of a normal conversation. They tend to talk in statements and make demands.

So the next time you find yourself replaying a conversation – stop. Consider that it isn’t you that missed something, rather something is amiss with the other person. If the pattern continues reassess how much time you spend with this person and minimize or eliminate your time with them as appropriate.

by Roxanne - November 6, 2011October 21, 2011

Flower Bouquet Comes Your Way

Something about a colorful bunch of flowers just cheers me up, lightens my mood and lifts my spirits . . .

by Roxanne - November 4, 2011October 18, 2011

“It Takes a Pillage” Part 2

We in the United States wage economic terrorism, along with other rich countries and our multi-nationals who have carte-blanche to do whatever they want. This is what is meant by systemic injustice.

Most Americans are very concerned with personal immorality, but we rarely want to learn or understand about the poverty, death and violence we create through our unfair trade and tax laws.

However, as moral persons we are responsible for both personal morality and the morality, or immorality, of our trade laws and economic systems.

Our country holds both the purse and the purse strings and still we want more! We can’t hope to end terrorism against us when we continue to wage economic terrorism against others around the world.

This article from the Guardian describes a good example of the systemic evil perpetrated by rich countries – including the U.S. You won’t find this in the U.S. media. The article explains how we want the rules for global taxation to remain in our favor and in the favor of rich countries and mult-national corporations, rather than be FAIR. Here’s an excerpt:

On one side of this fight sit Britain, the US, the EU and other rich countries, which want to maintain the pre-eminence of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), a club of rich countries, as the body that dominates the setting of global tax rules. On the other side, along with South Africa, sit Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Mexico and other developing countries, which want developing countries to have a bigger voice.

When a multinational from one country invests in another, these global rules form the framework for deciding which country gets to tax which bits of the resulting income, and to what degree. Current OECD-dominated rules tend to skew taxing rights towards richer countries, and do a poor job of stopping multinational corporations (typically from rich countries) setting up schemes to avoid tax, often via tax havens.

The developing countries are seeking to strengthen the UN’s own tax committee – the committee of experts on international co-operation in tax matters – which could potentially represent and advance the interests of developing countries far better than the OECD ever can. And, as Chile’s permanent mission to the UN noted recently, the UN tax committee “is the only body with global membership in which these issues can be discussed“.

More than a quarter of G20 member states – including Mexico, its next chair – are on record in favour of a stronger committee, and now, after years of relative quiescence on this crucial issue, developing countries seem to be finding their voice.

The world doesn’t need Free Trade – we need FAIR Trade. This is the way to peace and sustainability.

When I asked my friend L, “Why do we think we have the right to loot and pillage other countries?” she didn’t hesitate one second responding sarcastically, “Because we think we’re ‘blessed.'”

What about you? Do you think what we have in the United States is the result of being “blessed”? Think again.

This article is just one more reminder that our U.S. economy and lifestyles are carried on the backs of others in poor countries – and we make it that way. To refuse to learn more is to collude with and be culpable for systemic evil.

by Roxanne - November 2, 2011October 18, 2011

InnerPeace – Meaning of Life or A Life of Meaning?

What is the meaning of life? Isn’t this the question we all ask ourselves as some point? Many spend a large part of their lives searching for the answer this very question. This question has motivated trips to gurus in India and more. But upon further reflection, I think this is the wrong question. It seems to me there is a much better question to ask.

Instead ask, “How will I bring meaning to my life?” This is something we can do for ourselves. In the end, when all is said and done, we want our lives to mean something. We want the world to be better off because we were in it. We want to be better persons on the inside for having lived our lives.

This is a question of how to best serve the world and bring meaning to our lives.

This is a better question because if the world is, in fact, a random event then I will still have made good use of my life and contributed to a better world for those, including perhaps my own children, who come after me.

On the other hand, if something larger than ourselves initiated the process of creation (the big bang) and pervades the universe, including us, than living a life of meaning connects me with this larger life force or “love” if you will. Observing the universe convinces me that this life force is creative, generative, other-centered – the best part of myself even.

In the end serving others will bring us to a life of depth and meaning. This is a valuable outcome regardless whether or not we believe in a Creator. Serving others forces us to let go of our own ideas of how our life should be. We think too small. We can’t begin to comprehend where life or the universe would like to take us.

Let go. Focus outward. Live.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: