Policies that never cease to "amaze" me... And trees.

It's interesting how symbolic trees can be.  Trees are used to show family relations; they are used for many metaphors such as sturdy and strong; even Jesus Christ used them in parables.  If I may, I'd like to use an analogy using trees.

The gorgeous trees on the campus of Utah State University.

Trees are made of several parts: roots, trunk, branches, leaves.  All these play a vital role in the health of the tree, with some parts playing a more significant role than others.  For example, the leaves are needed collectively but losing one leaf isn't nearly as damaging as say losing the trunk.  If the roots aren't healthy, the whole tree will die regardless of how great the rest of the tree may be.

Now, lets compare this to a recent news.  The New York City mayor attempted to prohibit sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces to be sold in the city.  I believe that I understand why.  Sugary drinks are highly correlated with obesity.  Thus, in its simplest terms, outlaw sugary drinks = big win versus obesity.  But let me explain why this type of policy is only "striking at the leaf" of the problem.

What is the real problem regarding obesity?  At it's core, it is a lack of a healthy lifestyle.  This is the figurative root of the problem.  Factors related to this root are: lack of exercise, poor eating choices, ease of lifestyle, etc.  These all form the trunk and lead to the branches of low self-esteem, low energy, low motivation, etc.  These in turn lead to the actual behavior, the leaf.  One leaf is drinking sugary drinks.  It is on the obesity tree; however, drinking sugary drinks does NOT cause obesity.  Unhealthy lifestyles cause obesity (as well as a handful of other factors including genetics).

So essentially, what is this policy doing? Chopping at the leaf (even if it is a big leaf) of the grand tree of obesity.  Sure, it looks like its doing work.  You now have a whole leaf in your hand that you can proudly wave around saying, "Look! We've helped curb obesity!"  But did it?

If you want to kill a tree, kill the roots.  Chopping at every single leaf will feel like we are doing a lot, because we are doing a lot, but are we doing a lot of the right thing?  By the time we have a few more leaves cut down, the tree will grow back the original leaf that we chopped off.

To destroy obesity, the root of the problem is where we must focus our attention.  The real question is how can we help people to have healthy lifestyles?  Maybe, just maybe, if we focus on the real problem and not just the symptoms of the problem, we will be able to conquer it.  For good.

Shaping Who We Become

What we do shapes who we become.

Our brains are very moldable; they change constantly based on what we’ve learned through experience or otherwise.  In other words, we change our brains in a small degree with every decision we make.  Does it make sense why making good decisions are always important, even when it appears that no one will be affected by it?  The fact is someone is always affected, and that person is the one making the decision.

Because of this, when people become addicted to things (e.g., substances, activities) their brains change.  According to Lewis in a neuroscience article, the brain changes to better enjoy the addiction.  This is a strong influence in the addiction.  However, it is just that—an influence.  Our choices are never determined, even in addiction.  We always have the choice.

But let’s not disregard the influences that affect our choices.  Our biology is one of the many factors that influence us.  However, it is one that follows us everywhere we go.*  Thus, if our very brains change with choice, how important are our choices!

Because our choices are influenced, we must keep in mind what influences us in the directions we want.  That is how we can start on the improvement process: surround ourselves with the influences that will improve who we are as people. 

Once again, choices are not determined by these sources.  Who we are as a person is possibly the biggest factor in the choice process.  For example, someone who has made sure they were not a person who stole probably won’t steal even if the influences around them were pushing in the direction of stealing.  However, if that person chose to have those influences around them often, slowly they as a person will change and slowly stealing will be something that seems like a good decision.

No one is exempt from being influenced.  Rather, we are all subject to it.  As Lewis stated, “biological vulnerabilities are part of what it means to be human.” However, we can control through our active choice what influences we have around us most of the time.  That is how great men and women became great.  They chose to have the right influences around them, and they themselves became good influences because of it.  

* As a side note, I believe that the biological factors are closely tied to our spirits.  This is not to say that things don’t go wrong in this imperfect world (e.g., chromosomal problems, malformations, etc.) but our strengths may stem from who we are as spiritual beings, as well as our weaknesses.  I will write more about this some other time.

Why We Should Care About Legalization of Marijuana

Let me begin with a story.

A professor not too long ago had a conversation with his students about some social policies that were in the mainstream political world's discussion at the time.  The students' views were that the it was the government's responsibility to take from those that have plenty and give to those that don't have enough.  The professor stated that it sounded good, with the "Robin Hood" type heroics, but that it doesn't work as well as it sounds.  The students insisted that they were right.  So the Professor conceded and said if it was the best way, then their class would go by the same policies.  After their first test, he told all the people with A's needed to give up some of their points because some people got F's on the test.  The Professor decided that if everyone got somewhere around a C it would be fair.  Not too surprisingly, on the second test the highest score was a B and there were a lot more F's.  He once again gave the points from the highest scores and gave to the lowest.  On the third test, almost everyone was below a C.  Why?  Were they affected by social policy (at a university class level)?

I bet most of you would say that the policies wouldn't affect your behavior much.  But in this little experiment, the professor showed that even the apparently good students (those receiving A's at the beginning) were quickly affected by poor social policy.

Let's go to the whole marijuana deal.  Recently a few states have legalized the recreational use of marijuana.  Who cares, right?  Now I've heard before that we shouldn't have control over other people's lives.  If they want to smoke pot, they shouldn't be stopped by me.  It is actually almost word for word (not necessarily regarding marijuana however) what Vice President Joe Biden said during the vice presidential debate.

However, laws are rarely neutral.  They either encourage or discourage certain acts.  In other words, if you legalize recreational use of marijuana that law, to some degree, is not neutral.  By legalizing it, the law is in fact supporting the behavior.  Possibly even encouraging it.

Can you start to see why the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has such a strong stance on certain laws (e.g., same-sex marriage, etc.)?  Social policy has a strong influence on the entire nation as a whole.  If people were on a continuum, one side being the best citizen and the other being the worst, social policy essential shifts the majority of the continuum to whichever side it supports.

So for legalizing marijuana: those that want to smoke pot but didn't because of the laws now will smoke pot.  Those that were slightly tempted before now will be tempted a lot more.  Does this make sense?  The policy, although not directly affecting us, does in fact influence our actions.

Of course we still have the choice.  But it certainly increases the probability that people will indulge.

This explains two things.  First, why the members of the LDS church are told to be "in the world, but not of the world."  We are to purposefully step away from social policy the best we can and live in a more Christ-like way.  Second, why the Church has such a strong stance with policy that goes against what doctrines and principles they are upholding.  They fully understand that it is a law, something that cannot be altered, that policy and laws of the land influence actions.  

So those who have questioned this, saying something similar to "Why should we have a say in how someone else lives their life?  It won't affect me!  They should be the ones to decide."  Remember that you are being affected by it, maybe not by a lot all at once, but still it is affecting you.  Also remember, you aren't controlling how they live.  If they really want to live that way, they probably will (as much as they can) with or without the law's consent. 

In the Bible, when there is a wicked king, how often do the people as a whole stay righteous?  I don't believe that the United States is for some reason exempt from this influence.  We still have the choice.  But it has to be a conscious, committed choice in order for social policy not to affect you.  

Just something to think about.

Parameters

"People have to be given the freedom to show the heart they possess.  I think it's a leader's responsibility to provide that type of freedom.  And I believe it can be done through relationships and family.  Because if a team is a real family, it's members want to show you their hearts." - Coach Krzyzewski

 The job of a coach is a tough one.  He is supposed to lead and guide a team, with specific direction and goals, without stifling the strengths and the creativity the team possesses.  How can that be done?

I’d like to suggest a principle of powerful leadership that works for coaches.  In fact, it works for coaches, parents, teachers, and other leaders.  It is the principle of parameters. 

A story in the Book of Mormon illustrates this perfectly.  A man, known as the “Brother of Jared,” is given the task to build barges (i.e., boats).  As he is doing this, he encounters three problems.  He turns to the Lord, who answers in three different, distinct manners.  First, he tells the Brother of Jared exactly what to do.  Second, he asks the Brother of Jared what he’d like to do to fix the problem.  And third, the Lord says essentially that he’ll take care of it.

Each way demonstrates the Lord’s perfect understanding about being a leader.  The first and third questions are answered in a way that doesn’t require much thinking on the Brother of Jared’s part.  Might this be because the Lord knew that the issue was beyond what the Brother of Jared was currently able to fully comprehend? The second question, however, is the one I’d like to discuss, for it is a powerful principle of leadership that allows the growth of all involved.

“And the Lord said unto the brother of Jared:  What will ye that I should do that ye may have light in your vessels?  For behold, ye cannot have windows, for they will be dashed in pieces; neither shall ye take fire with you, for ye shall not go by the light of fire,” (Book of Ether 2:29).

The Brother of Jared was asked what he thought about the problem.  It was his choice, his creativity, his knowledge and skills, put to action.  However, the Lord gave him some guidelines—parameters—to follow.  No windows.  No fire.  With this guidance, the Brother of Jared was able to come up with a creative, well thought-out, idea of what could be done.  And with this experience, I believe that he became more confident in his ability to solve problems, to think for himself, and to be creative.

All too often leaders can stifle creativity, and fail to take advantage of the strengths of the group.  Yet, here is a powerful way to avoid that.  Give the group power to think for themselves.  However, if we know what doesn’t work (e.g., fire or windows) then we can start by giving parameters—the boundaries of what will work and what won’t.  That is where the principle of parameters can be a powerful tool.

Can you see how this, when applied right, brings answers to problems that you couldn’t come up with on your own?  As a leader, we must give people the benefit of the doubt.  We must have confidence in them.  If we don’t then we need to start looking harder at what strengths that each group member possesses.

This can certainly be applied as a parent.  The parent can ask the child, “What do you want to do?”  Then watch their child’s eyes light up with excitement.  Follow that up with some parameters.  For example, “We can do anything here at the house.  We can’t leave our yard or play in the road.  So what would you like to do?”  You might be surprised at how creative they can be.

Surprisingly, this is a good way to help spearhead our own problem solving.  We can look at the problem, find the parameters—the boundaries of what can work and what won’t work—and start from there.  Setting up some principles and rules will help inspiration come and ideas will flow. 

The Power to Act

I went to high school with a guy that always reacted.  He was a talented football player.  In fact, he was pretty good at almost any sport I saw him play.  However, he could instantaneously turn from normal competitive to furiously enraged.  All it would take was a purposeful bump as they ran down the court, or "trash talk" said on the football field.  He would instantly react to his opponent, become infuriated, and soon after would do something that he'd regret, generally leading to a penalty or even leading to him being kicked out of the game.  Afterwards, he'd say things like "That idiot.  I hate him.  He thinks he's so cool.  I just want to punch him in the face."

My high school colleague was being controlled by his environment, specifically his opponent.  I knew that the other teams knew that if they "got inside his head" he would do something he'd regret.  They knew they could get him out of the game.  And so they would.  And he'd react.

To React

I've said a few times already that my friend reacted.  So, we need to define it, along with the antonym: act.  Let's start with react.  To react we choose to do what something else is telling us to do.  For example, my high school friend would do exactly what the other team wanted him to do.  They could basically control him because he would choose to react.  

We can react to just about anything, including our emotions.  If I feel tired, I might react to that feeling and be lazy or irritable.  If I feel frustrated, I might react by yelling at my family.  If I feel embarrassed, I might react by running away and hiding.

Reacting is based on the situation.  If the situation is saying I should steal something, then I could react by stealing.  If the situation points towards trying alcohol, then I could react by drinking.  

Reacting is based on following what the situation is dictating.  We choose to be controlled, or manipulated, by it.

Or we can choose to act.

To Act

To act, we choose to follow what we see as right.  We follow what our core--our most basic beliefs--decides is the right thing to do.  This one requires effort.  Reacting is easy.  Acting according to our core is harder.  However, the difference is huge.  When we choose to act, we take away the power that someone or something else has.  If my high school friend had decided to act--and not react--he could have taken the power that his opponents had over him and used it for himself and his team.  This could have changed his entire high school career.

This is one thing that sets us apart from the animals.  They only have the ability to react.  This can help with their survival, but it can also lead to their demise.  Human beings on the other hand have the ability to choose.  Steven R. Covey, in his book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, addresses this.

"Look at the word responsibility--"response-ability"--the ability to choose your response. Highly proactive people recognize that responsibility.  They do not blame circumstances, conditions, or conditioning for their behavior.  Their behavior is a product of their own conscious choice, based on values, rather than a product of their conditions, based on feeling."

Responding

If there is something we are absolutely forced to do in this life, it is to respond.  

We can't help it.  We have to respond.  However, that response is our own.  We control it.  We decide.  This means that we cannot blame outside sources for our decisions; rather, we need to see that we have the power to act.  This is what true integrity is: the choice to follow our core values and beliefs even when the situation isn't favorable.  We can choose to have integrity.  We can choose to say no to whatever outside influence is trying to control or manipulate our actions.  This is a God-given gift.  We have this power.  It's up to us to take advantage of it.

A Final Word - Addiction

Some choices are harder than others.  For example, my decision today to take a shower wasn't too difficult even though the couch was pretty comfortable.  But someone struggling with drug addiction, trying to not be controlled by the addiction is a much more difficult choice.  So does that person have the power right then to say no to the addiction?  Maybe, but maybe not.  However, the choice could be between trying to fight it alone (reacting) or going and finding help (acting).  Finding help is harder, but once again, we always have the power to choose.

I believe that choosing to act involves using all of our resources.  We are given friends and family, church and government, to help us choose to act.  It's up to us to do everything we can to be in control, and not be controlled.  If we ignore this, we will by default react, and thus be manipulated and controlled by outside sources.  We must choose to act.

The "Now" Principle and Finding a Career

We all have the choice to take care of something today, or to put it off until later.  We have the choice to do the harder things now in order to have an easier tomorrow.  I call this The "Now" Principle.  It is applicable in every area of life. It includes: 

• visualizing your future, 
• seeing a vision of what you are seeking, 
• planning the path to get there, 
• then taking action now.

It can be applied short- or long-term.  It can be applied in personal, family, career, religious, or secular areas of life.  It is a principle of action, but also a principle of personal change.  As we do things now, we will be now what we want to become in the future.  For example, if I want to be a "go-getter" I can start acting now on getting things going.  It will eventually become a habit, and suddenly I will be a "go-getter."  But this goal will never be realized if I see it as something I want to become, but never start the process of becoming.  The "Now" Principle helps us get on the road of becoming.

The "Now" Principle requires the principle of patience.  It doesn't say anything about getting the results now; only the actions are now.  Some of the best applications of The "Now" Principle have results that come years later.  However, when we act now there are a few immediate consequences.  These often include:

• confidence, especially in that you won't have regrets
• a feeling of self-respect
• new found skills
• a new, and better, perspective on life and situations.

I've met several individuals who have told me they just can't decide what to do for a career.  They are in college, searching for a major they really connect with.  They desperately want to make the right choice.  They switch majors when a class doesn't go well, deciding at times they just don't like that major.  They will look for other good sounding majors before the next semester as to not waste more time and money.  All this often will bring with it a good load of stress and anxiety.  So, what is to be done?

The "Now" Principle helps us in this regard.  If we act now, our tomorrow will be much easier.  In this situation, we can act now like we are what we think we want to become. Let's walk through it to see how it applies.

First, visualize the future.  Where are you going to be? What will be included in your life then? How far into the future are you visualizing? 2 months? 10 years?

Second, see a vision of what you are seeking.  What is our current idea of what we want to do for a career?  If it's being a doctor, then what are you doing as a doctor?  Picture the everyday stuff.  If this isn't possible for you to do, then research is necessary.  Visit a doctor, talk to one about his experiences, his day to day routine.  Look up experiences from doctors online, via blogs or medical associations' websites.  After this researching, are we still interested? If not, move on to another idea, such as statistician.

Third, plan the path to get there.  What needs to be done to become a doctor? What steps are in between?  Do not just focus on what a doctor does, but what a doctor is.  What kind of person will you be as a doctor? Will you be someone that wants to help individuals? Or someone that loves diagnosing and solving problems?  This step takes further research if you don't already know the path the law requires to become a doctor along with finding out the character traits and behavior of the type of doctor you want to become.

Fourth, act now.  If you want to be a doctor, start volunteering where doctors are.  Be around doctors.  Start to think like a doctor as much as you currently can so that you can begin to see the world like a doctor does. Become a doctor internally now, then be patient as the rest needs to unfold (such as medical school, residency, certification, etc.)  

This principle says if we act now like what we want to become, we will become it. We may adjust our vision as we grow and change, and as our circumstances change, but by applying The "Now" Principle we will be better able adjust to the change.  We will be able to handle the stress of change better, as we can quickly find the path we seek.  Direction amid chaos.

See the vision.  Find the path.  Then act now.

Constantly Rushing? Let's Change That

Counter-intuitive? Yes.  

Life is more rushed, more hectic, with always more to do; yet, don't we have tools to make things easier and quicker? Why does it feel like there isn't enough time in the day to do all that we are asked to do?

It comes down to our lack of ability to self-regulate. Self-regulation is essentially our ability to control our actions in spite of our internal conditions (emotions, mood, energy level) and external environment (our circumstances).  A study done by Laura Rabin, Joshua Fogel and Katherine Nutter-Upham of Brooklyn College of the City University of New York has shown that people that tended to be rushing struggled to self-regulate.  The study concluded that there were several associated characteristics to a low ability to self-regulate.  These characteristics included:

• Reduced agency
• Disorganization
• Poor impulse and emotional control
• Poor planning and goal setting
• Reduced use of meta-cognitive skills
• Distractibility

Can you see how these may reduce our ability to get things done, and done well? Even with all of our devices that are supposed to serve us and make us more efficient. (My opinion is that these devices have a "happy medium." If we rely on these devices we will struggle.  Same is true if we ignore them.  But if we find the middle ground, using them but not relying on them, we will find the greatest benefit.)

Each of these associated characteristics are things that we can learn to overcome; in other words, we aren't stuck as someone who is disorganized or someone who can't plan.

Although a person is prone to something, doesn't force them act accordingly.  For example, I am prone to make excuses which is related to the characteristic of reduced agency.  However, that doesn't mean that I am "an excuse-maker." I have the choice to make or not to make excuses.  So when we hear people say "this is just the way I am" they are really saying "I am prone to this and I haven't given any effort to improve myself."

Steven R. Covey called this ability "Proactivity." He stated that we aren't quite like the "pavlovian dogs" that drooled every time they heard a noise that they associated with food.  We have the ability to be aware of ourselves, of our feelings, moods, ideas, and thoughts.  This implies that when there is some sort of stimulus we don't have to react a certain way.

This is a fantastic principle.  A principle with some serious power.  We can choose to act by choice or react and respond the way the stimulus wants us to.  It is almost as though the "stimulus," whatever it may be, wants to control you.  If you are anything like me, I don't enjoy being controlled nor manipulated.  So when there's a circumstance that says you should react one way, take a step back and decide whether you want to be controlled by it, or if you want to control your own actions.

This is what Covey pointed out is our responsibility.  

"Look at the word responsibility--'response-ability'--the ability to choose your response.  Highly proactive people recognize that responsibility. They do not blame circumstances, conditions, or conditioning for their behavior. Their behavior is a product of their own conscious choice, based on values, rather than a product of their conditions, based on feeling."

Acting, instead of reacting, is what will help make us able to better overcome the characteristics that keep us forever ineffective, always rushing, constantly wanting more hours in the day. Can we face that responsibility? If we do, we will improve our conditions, become happier, less stressed, and more in control.