I must admit here that I absolutely love Christmas and this time of year, and here's one of the reasons why:
Friday, December 10, 2010
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Which method or technique is best for personal growth?
I've consciously dedicated the past eight years of my life to personal growth (personal development, spiritual growth, spiritual path -- whatever you want to call it...) and lots of people have been asking me which methods or techniques I have found to be the best. There is no easy answer to this question because everyone has to find what works best for them. (Believe me, there is tremendous value in the active search itself...). So instead, I'd like to highlight two characteristics that I believe such a method or technique should have:
A: it should increase the client's self-knowledge or self-awareness (Socrates: Know thyself...) with information that the client can use to take constructive action to improve whatever it is he/she wants to improve (happiness, health, flexibility...). The reason for this is simple: as soon as I know why something is happening to me, I can do something about it (conversely, I cannot do anything about something I do not know about...).
B: it should strengthen the individual's ability and willingness to make active choices about his/her behavior (one of the main reasons I like holotropic breathwork is because it does exactly this -- if I want to go deeper in the state of altered consciousness, I make the choice to breathe more intensively, and if it's too much for me at the moment, I slow down. Conversely, I am not a big fan of anything like hypnosis or past-lives therapies because they offer no such choice. Another example is the difference between PBSP vs. Family Constellations: PBSP is completely client-driven, whereas family constellations depend a lot on the input of other people that are present)
As I have written before, the best method or technique I found for my personal development is a combination of holotropic breathwork and PBSP (I've written about both of these in previous posts). I also threw in a little Rolfing for the physical body and over the course of about 3-5 years this personal growth cocktail has improved my life immensely. What are or will be the ingredients of your personal growth mix?
A: it should increase the client's self-knowledge or self-awareness (Socrates: Know thyself...) with information that the client can use to take constructive action to improve whatever it is he/she wants to improve (happiness, health, flexibility...). The reason for this is simple: as soon as I know why something is happening to me, I can do something about it (conversely, I cannot do anything about something I do not know about...).
B: it should strengthen the individual's ability and willingness to make active choices about his/her behavior (one of the main reasons I like holotropic breathwork is because it does exactly this -- if I want to go deeper in the state of altered consciousness, I make the choice to breathe more intensively, and if it's too much for me at the moment, I slow down. Conversely, I am not a big fan of anything like hypnosis or past-lives therapies because they offer no such choice. Another example is the difference between PBSP vs. Family Constellations: PBSP is completely client-driven, whereas family constellations depend a lot on the input of other people that are present)
As I have written before, the best method or technique I found for my personal development is a combination of holotropic breathwork and PBSP (I've written about both of these in previous posts). I also threw in a little Rolfing for the physical body and over the course of about 3-5 years this personal growth cocktail has improved my life immensely. What are or will be the ingredients of your personal growth mix?
Thursday, November 18, 2010
The best is yet to come
I definitely count myself among the optimists as far as the future of our planet and of the human race is concerned, so I really enjoyed the article called "The best is yet to come" by Jurriann Kamp, which was recently published in the Intelligent Optimist Newsletter.
Here is the start of the article - if you would like to read more, just click on the article title above...
Humankind continuously exceeds its own expectations when it comes to the development of new technology. However, we are really bad at one thing—predicting that development. And that’s a problem that leads to a lot of unnecessary pessimism. For example, in almost all future scenarios of climate change, clean and renewable energy advances little by little. As a result, the earth keeps getting warmer and warmer. But these kinds of scenarios are always based on known facts. Yet, as history shows, it is the unknown that revolutionizes the world again and again.
Here is the start of the article - if you would like to read more, just click on the article title above...
Humankind continuously exceeds its own expectations when it comes to the development of new technology. However, we are really bad at one thing—predicting that development. And that’s a problem that leads to a lot of unnecessary pessimism. For example, in almost all future scenarios of climate change, clean and renewable energy advances little by little. As a result, the earth keeps getting warmer and warmer. But these kinds of scenarios are always based on known facts. Yet, as history shows, it is the unknown that revolutionizes the world again and again.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Some interesting thoughts about our perception
PERCEPTION
> . . . Something To Think About . . .
> THE SITUATION
> In Washington , DC , at a Metro Station, on a cold January morning in 2007, a man with a violin played six Bach pieces for about 45 minutes. During that time, approximately 2,000 people went through the station, most of them on their way to work. After about 3 minutes, a middle-aged man noticed that there was a musician playing. He slowed his pace and stopped for a few seconds, and then he hurried on to meet his schedule.
> About 4 minutes later:
> The violinist received his first dollar. A woman threw money in the hat and, without stopping, continued to walk.
> At 6 minutes:
> A young man leaned against the wall to listen to him, then looked at his watch and started to walk again.
> At 10 minutes:
> A 3-year old boy stopped, but his mother tugged him along hurriedly. The kid stopped to look at the violinist again, but the mother pushed hard and the child continued to walk, turning his head the whole time. This action was repeated by several other children, but every parent - without exception - forced their children to move on quickly.
> At 45 minutes:
> The musician played continuously. Only 6 people stopped and listened for a short while. About 20 gave money but continued to walk at their normal pace. The man collected a total of $32.
> After 1 hour:
> He finished playing and silence took over. No one noticed and no one applauded. There was no recognition at all.
> No one knew this, but the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the greatest musicians in the world. He played one of the most intricate pieces ever written, with a violin worth $3.5 million dollars. Two days before, Joshua Bell sold-out a theater in Boston where the seats averaged $100 each to sit and listen to him play the same music.
> This is a true story. Joshua Bell, playing incognito in the D.C. Metro Station, was organized by the Washington Post as part of a social experiment about perception, taste and people's priorities.
> This experiment raised several questions:
> *In a common-place environment, at an inappropriate hour, do we perceive beauty?
> *If so, do we stop to appreciate it?
> *Do we recognize talent in an unexpected context?
> One possible conclusion reached from this experiment could be this:
> If we do not have a moment to stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world, playing some of the finest music ever written, with one of the most beautiful instruments ever made . . .
> How many other things are we missing as we rush through life?
(if anyone knows who wrote this, please let me know, I'd love to give the credit where the credit is due)
> . . . Something To Think About . . .
> THE SITUATION
> In Washington , DC , at a Metro Station, on a cold January morning in 2007, a man with a violin played six Bach pieces for about 45 minutes. During that time, approximately 2,000 people went through the station, most of them on their way to work. After about 3 minutes, a middle-aged man noticed that there was a musician playing. He slowed his pace and stopped for a few seconds, and then he hurried on to meet his schedule.
> About 4 minutes later:
> The violinist received his first dollar. A woman threw money in the hat and, without stopping, continued to walk.
> At 6 minutes:
> A young man leaned against the wall to listen to him, then looked at his watch and started to walk again.
> At 10 minutes:
> A 3-year old boy stopped, but his mother tugged him along hurriedly. The kid stopped to look at the violinist again, but the mother pushed hard and the child continued to walk, turning his head the whole time. This action was repeated by several other children, but every parent - without exception - forced their children to move on quickly.
> At 45 minutes:
> The musician played continuously. Only 6 people stopped and listened for a short while. About 20 gave money but continued to walk at their normal pace. The man collected a total of $32.
> After 1 hour:
> He finished playing and silence took over. No one noticed and no one applauded. There was no recognition at all.
> No one knew this, but the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the greatest musicians in the world. He played one of the most intricate pieces ever written, with a violin worth $3.5 million dollars. Two days before, Joshua Bell sold-out a theater in Boston where the seats averaged $100 each to sit and listen to him play the same music.
> This is a true story. Joshua Bell, playing incognito in the D.C. Metro Station, was organized by the Washington Post as part of a social experiment about perception, taste and people's priorities.
> This experiment raised several questions:
> *In a common-place environment, at an inappropriate hour, do we perceive beauty?
> *If so, do we stop to appreciate it?
> *Do we recognize talent in an unexpected context?
> One possible conclusion reached from this experiment could be this:
> If we do not have a moment to stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world, playing some of the finest music ever written, with one of the most beautiful instruments ever made . . .
> How many other things are we missing as we rush through life?
(if anyone knows who wrote this, please let me know, I'd love to give the credit where the credit is due)
Thursday, September 16, 2010
The 4 rules of Reiki for a happy life
A couple of weeks ago I was watching a television program about healers and the various techniques they use, and the moderator asked a Reiki master the following question: "What if I came to you and said that I have no health problems, but I am not happy - what would you tell me?" The Reiki master smiled, said that it's a difficult question and told him that there are four rules for happiness. And he added that the best part is that one doesn't have to live by these rules at any time in the future, or even tomorrow, today is enough :-)
So here they are:
So here they are:
- On this day, live without anger.
- On this day, live without rushing.
- On this day, honestly perform you work.
- On this day, delight in God's creations, in your own life.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Nimm dir Zeit (Take the time...) - some wisdom from the mountains
This past weekend my girlfriend and I explored the beautiful nature of the Austrian Alps, specifically the lovely town of Wagrain. One of the days we stopped for lunch at a mountain top restaurant, and on the cover of this restaurant's menu was a lovely poem called Nimm dir Zeit (Take the time), which I want to share here in my rudimentary German to English translation. I hope you like it as much as we did (and if anyone knows the author, please let me know!!):
Take the time
Take the time to work, it is the price of success.
Take the time to think, it is the source of strength.
Take the time to play, it is the secret of youth.
Take the time to read, it is the foundation of wisdom.
Take the time to be friendly, it is the door to happiness.
Take the time to dream, it is the way to the stars.
Take the time
Take the time to work, it is the price of success.
Take the time to think, it is the source of strength.
Take the time to play, it is the secret of youth.
Take the time to read, it is the foundation of wisdom.
Take the time to be friendly, it is the door to happiness.
Take the time to dream, it is the way to the stars.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
The 10/10/80 rule of happiness
One of the biggest mistakes, I think, that "happiness searchers" make is that we think we should be happy 100% of the time. Not only is this an unattainable goal, but being happy 100% of the time would probably be unhealthy as well. (I am also reminded of a statement I quoted a few months ago on this blog, which went something like this: "If you were happy 100% of the time, how would you actually know you're happy?")
Over the weekend, while reading the Czech popular magazine called Reflex, I ran across a quote by a noted psychotherapist, who said that a psychologically healthy person should be sad 10% of waking hours, upset 10% of waking hours, and happy and satisfied 80% of waking hours. I am not sure to what extent this is supported by research, or how other psychologists would react to this, but I think the idea that we should actually be sad or upset twenty percent of the time is a pretty good one.
Of course, this split should be taken more metaphorically, rather than aiming to actually have 10/10/80 every day. But I really do find it to be a good guideline, one that can help us be more fully human, which, at the end of the day, is where the search for happiness should take us.
Over the weekend, while reading the Czech popular magazine called Reflex, I ran across a quote by a noted psychotherapist, who said that a psychologically healthy person should be sad 10% of waking hours, upset 10% of waking hours, and happy and satisfied 80% of waking hours. I am not sure to what extent this is supported by research, or how other psychologists would react to this, but I think the idea that we should actually be sad or upset twenty percent of the time is a pretty good one.
Of course, this split should be taken more metaphorically, rather than aiming to actually have 10/10/80 every day. But I really do find it to be a good guideline, one that can help us be more fully human, which, at the end of the day, is where the search for happiness should take us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)