Re: Request!

[Guest guest]

Facebook is a mixed bag for sure. I can see why you find it difficult, Alice - for one thing, the rules change constantly and not always for the better. I have very mixed feelings about it, especially in light of a recent synchronicity.I often listen to a recorded book as I walk the dog or do housework. Currently, it's Levy's book on Google <http://books.google.com/books/about/In_the_Plex.html?id=V1u1f8sv3k8C>, which describes the high ideals of the company's founders and the delightful workplace they've created. It's more complicated than that of course, and it's a long book which I'm only halfway through, but at this point Google seems like a delightfully Aquarian enterprise.Then, a couple nights ago, Tom and I watched "The Social Network," the recent film about the founding of Facebook which has worked its way up our Netflix queue just in time to provide a most startling contrast. Some of you fire-sitters may remember that I wrote my last paper at Pacifica on the Internet as Divine Mother. Sure enough, here are two fine examples. Google is based on the idea that by linking the infinite flow of information together, it becomes accessible to everyone. Facebook links people in the same spirit. Indra's net in two manifestations.Facebook has continuing issues with privacy, its founders have very difficult relationships among themselves, and, as Alice's recent post shows, its users have difficult relationships with it as well as within it. Personally, I don't know anyone who has a hard time with Google. Privacy issues do come up, but not among its founders who still share an office (at least as far as I know from In the Plex). Google's founders are creative, reflective and idealistic. If the movie is accurate, Facebook's are complex, often unconscious of the consequences of their behavior, and ambitious.Human interrelationships, as manifest by both FB's founders and users, are so full of unconscious motivation compared to our relationship with information, as illustrated by Google. But then there's the aspect of the internet that Google illustrates so well - that information isn't neutral; we can find whatever 'facts" we need to bolster our own point-of-view on Mother Internet...More questions than answers. Anyhow, an interesting synchronicity in my life.love to you all,Eve

Please, please, those of u on Facebook, communicate w/me on J-F or e-mail. I am heading for 89 n Facebk is so complicated, I get lost.......

Took me a log while, w/no DSL to get the simple message fr Dan Watkins.

I regret joining F bk n wish I knew how to exit

love

ao

[Guest guest]

Dear Alice:

It isn't hard to leave face book...all you do is go to the administrator page and there's a simple place to click to do that but I wish you wouldn't. I like having your page on face book so we can let people know about your books and share your poems. You don't have to use it personally...perhaps Mike and I can maintain it for you.

Face book is as good or as bad as what you make of it. More than half the planet is on face book and I truly believe it is a tool for connecting people and spreading information, culture, news and friendship in a rapid and exponential way. I have reconnected with people I grew up with; with friends I worked with in NYC 35 years ago and I have made new friends and connections for my work in the world. I earned $600 for my birthday wish last year to buy suitcases for foster children who are taken from their homes with their worldly belongings in a garbage bag. I'm writing a memoir and have been told when it comes time to bring it to an agent, they will want to know who my audience is. I've also joined with people who are doing the peacebuilding work in the world that I deeply care about. So it allows us to support one another in common causes and to share in the collective problems of our time.

Face book was probably the impetus for the Arab Spring as young people around the world are learning about freedom and democracy through their connections here. When something happens in the world we learn it here first and more and more major media also learns about it here and on You Tube...because youth all over the world have cell phones with cameras and can instantly post photos and videos to the Internet.

So, it is an awesome tool that has changed our world....and one can use it to the degree that it makes personal sense. I love face book...it's kind of like having a global family of friends....it helps millions of people feel connected and part of something larger than themselves...the biggest problem I find is to limit the amount of time I spend there.

Sending love.

Suzanne

Please, please, those of u on Facebook, communicate w/me on J-F or e-mail. I am heading for 89 n Facebk is so complicated, I get lost.......

Took me a log while, w/no DSL to get the simple message fr Dan Watkins.

I regret joining F bk n wish I knew how to exit

love

ao

[Guest guest]

And I have to respond.

Facebook is a major symptom of what's wrong with the internet, media,

and a consumer society. If you missed this, please watch:

http://youtu.be/B8ofWFx525s

" What's good for consumers is not necessarily good for citizens. " ~Eli

Pariser in The Filter Bubble

http://www.amazon.com/Filter-Bubble-What-Internet-Hiding/dp/1594203008/ref=sr_1_\

1?ie=UTF8 & qid=1306423195 & sr=8-1

We've been cut up, put in bubbles, taken sides. And we can't make this

better unless we understand this.

[Guest guest]

Hi Deb:

He makes some good points but others are not true to my experience.

In terms of google all information is available to everyone; what differs according to filters is how close to the top things pop up....I've used netflix for several years and my choices come in two to three days no matter what they are, unless they are unavailable. In terms of face book, yes I have roughly 2600 friends and they will post things on my news stream based on the friends I interact with most often first, but I also get to see a good deal of stuff that I am unfamiliar with. There is nothing that keeps me from going to any of my friend's walls and interacting with them directly or reading and sharing things that they are posting. Also, I filter my own information by making lists in various categories. So I have a list of "close friends" people I interact with regarding politics, psychotherapists, peacebuilding sites, etc.

So, I think he greatly overstates the power of filters if you know about that, which most of us do, and do your research accordingly. The purpose of filters is to help organize information into manageable categories so we aren't overwhelmed with more information than we can absorb at one time. We need filters but they are something that we can always take charge of, if and when we want to. Making good use of face book and other social networking is a skill and takes time. Everybody gets to decide for themselves, who to friend, where you choose to get information from by the organizations and face book pages you join and how much time you want to spend making it worthwhile. Nobody is filtering the information I get from the organizations I belong to...that comes directly from them. Thanks for the TED talk..

love to you....Suzanne

And I have to respond.Facebook is a major symptom of what's wrong with the internet, media,and a consumer society. If you missed this, please watch:

"What's good for consumers is not necessarily good for citizens." ~EliPariser in The Filter Bubblehttp://www.amazon.com/Filter-Bubble-What-Internet-Hiding/dp/1594203008/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8 & qid=1306423195 & sr=8-1We've been cut up, put in bubbles, taken sides. And we can't make thisbetter unless we understand this.

[Guest guest]

Hi Deb:

and facebook is also the source of correcting all those things that are wrong with our society; it is the source of hope and friendship that encouraged millions of young people around the world to believe in their right to fight injustice and stand up to repression, it is a source of global sharing of music and art and intellectual thought; it is a source of a genuine sense of connection and belonging for millions of people who are may otherwise be isolated, elderly, alone, and most importantly it is a source of spreading love and light around the world. There is so much possibility that comes from social networking and instant sharing....

Suzanne

One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious." – Carl Gustav Jung

Facebook is a major symptom of what's wrong with the internet, media,and a consumer society. If you missed this, please watch:

[Guest guest]

You might want to read his book. We can't assume what anyone else's experience is. It's technical. One of things important to Alice with Jung Fire was that it was inclusive. As pointed out, going back to Jung Circle, this wasn't always the case. Everyone was welcome, but there was a statement we adhered to, formulated by Maureen:

      " Jung Circle began (in November 1997) in response to what I felt as a need and desire to offer an alternative to certain Jungian discussion lists that were - at least in my experience and perception of them - all too often dominated by cerebral, or purely theoretical input, reductionist assumptions, and/or shadow-fuelled aggression, hence lacking in the sense of personal sharing which can thrive only when grounded in the mutual respect and encouragement of contributors' individually unique gifts, experiences, typologies and visions. Jung Circle, I hoped, would offer folk an opportunity to share Jung's vision and their own dreams and reflections in a more soulful and imaginative atmosphere that, again in my view, is more in keeping with the spirit of Jung's own humility, generosity of heart and mind, and overwhelming emphasis on the immediate experience of the Tao of Nature, to which the unconscious and the psyche in general belong. "

We held to discussions of application, experience, reaction rather than criticism of Jung. And there was a time and place for such things. But people were sometimes asked to leave. I think Alice has learned us ways around that. And we can take it with us. 

[Guest guest]

Exactly. It can be about sharing. Enjoy it. Just know what it is. Its limitations. People who watch only Fox news think it's fab gear. I'm glad they enjoy. But they don't know what they don't know. Worse, they don't know they don't know. We're ll here to open each other. Painful as that might be.  

 

Hi Deb:

 

and facebook is also the source of correcting all those things that are wrong with our society; it is the source of hope and friendship that encouraged millions of young people around the world to believe in their right to fight injustice and stand up to repression, it is a source of global sharing of music and art and intellectual thought; it is a source of a genuine sense of connection and belonging for millions of people who are may otherwise be isolated, elderly, alone, and most importantly it is a source of spreading love and light around the world. There is so much possibility that comes from social networking and instant sharing....

 

Suzanne

 

 

One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious. " – Carl Gustav Jung  

Facebook is a major symptom of what's wrong with the internet, media,and a consumer society. If you missed this, please watch:

[Guest guest]

Feel free to ignore me. I do.

[Guest guest]

Deb,

I was sharing my experience and responding to Alice's comments and her dilemma about face book, when you joined in to disagree with my experience. I understand that you are not a fan of face book and being inclusive might mean you allowing space for other opinions. So, I'm not sure what your point is by posting the history of Jung Circle..Are you saying you find this topic inappropriate for Jungfire and if so who gets to decide?

At any rate, I did enjoy the TED talk but really don't have the time nor the interest in reading his book. It isn't an issue that concerns me very much. I think our news, the food we eat, the books we read, the clothes we wear, everything has long been filtered for us by a kind of market research and this is just more of the same....we make our choices within those filters unless we want to take the trouble to search for and create something outside of them. We are free to do that and exploring how social media affects the collective experience is an interesting topic.

Suzanne

One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious." – Carl Gustav Jung

You might want to read his book. We can't assume what anyone else's experience is. It's technical. One of things important to Alice with Jung Fire was that it was inclusive. As pointed out, going back to Jung Circle, this wasn't always the case. Everyone was welcome, but there was a statement we adhered to, formulated by Maureen: " Jung Circle began (in November 1997) in response to what I felt as a need and desire to offer an alternative to certain Jungian discussion lists that were - at least in my experience and perception of them - all too often dominated by cerebral, or purely theoretical input, reductionist assumptions, and/or shadow-fuelled aggression, hence lacking in the sense of personal sharing which can thrive only when grounded in the mutual respect and encouragement of contributors' individually unique gifts, experiences, typologies and visions. Jung Circle, I hoped, would offer folk an opportunity to share Jung's vision and their own dreams and reflections in a more soulful and imaginative atmosphere that, again in my view, is more in keeping with the spirit of Jung's own humility, generosity of heart and mind, and overwhelming emphasis on the immediate experience of the Tao of Nature, to which the unconscious and the psyche in general belong."

We held to discussions of application, experience, reaction rather than criticism of Jung. And there was a time and place for such things. But people were sometimes asked to leave. I think Alice has learned us ways around that. And we can take it with us.

[Guest guest]

Hi Deb:

Some people who watch Fox News are choosing to watch only one news channel. On face book we have easy access to every source of news on the planet, from every country and every conceivable point of view; it is all there, you only have to look for it. On face book often people are creating the news that the mainstream media goes to fill it's nightly half hour of news. It is up to you to choose a broad and interesting source of friends, groups and organizations, from which to connect and get information. Your information is only filtered for you if you sit back and let it be served up for you. There aren't any limitations on face book that people themselves aren't creating.

Suzanne

One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious." – Carl Gustav Jung

Exactly. It can be about sharing. Enjoy it. Just know what it is. Its limitations. People who watch only Fox news think it's fab gear. I'm glad they enjoy. But they don't know what they don't know. Worse, they don't know they don't know. We're ll here to open each other. Painful as that might be.

Hi Deb:

and facebook is also the source of correcting all those things that are wrong with our society; it is the source of hope and friendship that encouraged millions of young people around the world to believe in their right to fight injustice and stand up to repression, it is a source of global sharing of music and art and intellectual thought; it is a source of a genuine sense of connection and belonging for millions of people who are may otherwise be isolated, elderly, alone, and most importantly it is a source of spreading love and light around the world. There is so much possibility that comes from social networking and instant sharing....

Suzanne

One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious." – Carl Gustav Jung

Facebook is a major symptom of what's wrong with the internet, media,and a consumer society. If you missed this, please watch:

[Guest guest]

Here again the limits of the internet, the lack of body language, smell even, all the ways we read one another. The big lesson is that misunderstandings are also clues about oneself. A good sort of revelation, one we can use.   

Alice bringing this up (I understand her perfectly being an email person) was a reminder to me to say something about this. Nothing personal meant. I recommend Eli's book because it's much bigger and beyond Facebook.

Yes, filters frame our life. Always have. We try to see them, know them. Understand them in self and in each other. Didn't mean to touch a nerve. My comments about Jung Circle were just my thinking of what wrote, and thinking back to my own experience. 

 My personal beef with Facebook was being sent a trojan by someone posing as Mike, " my friend from Facebook. " Happens. Be careful. 

 

Deb,

 

I was sharing my experience and responding to Alice's comments and her dilemma about face book, when you joined in to disagree with my experience.   I understand that you are not a fan of face book and being inclusive might mean you allowing space for other opinions.  So, I'm not sure what your point is by posting the history of Jung Circle..Are you saying you find this topic inappropriate for Jungfire and if so who gets to decide? 

 

 

At any rate, I did enjoy the TED talk but really don't have the time nor the interest in reading his book.  It isn't an issue that concerns me very much.  I think our news, the food we eat, the books we read,  the clothes we wear, everything has long been filtered for us by a kind of market research and this is just more of the same....we make our choices within those filters unless we want to take the trouble to search for and create something outside of them.  We are free to do that and exploring how social media affects the collective experience is an interesting topic.

 

Suzanne 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious. " – Carl Gustav Jung

 

 

You might want to read his book. We can't assume what anyone else's experience is. It's technical.  One of things important to Alice with Jung Fire was that it was inclusive. As pointed out, going back to Jung Circle, this wasn't always the case. Everyone was welcome, but there was a statement we adhered to, formulated by Maureen:      " Jung Circle began (in November 1997) in response to what I felt as a need and desire to offer an alternative to certain Jungian discussion lists that were - at least in my experience and perception of them - all too often dominated by cerebral, or purely theoretical input, reductionist assumptions, and/or shadow-fuelled aggression, hence lacking in the sense of personal sharing which can thrive only when grounded in the mutual respect and encouragement of contributors' individually unique gifts, experiences, typologies and visions. Jung Circle, I hoped, would offer folk an opportunity to share Jung's vision and their own dreams and reflections in a more soulful and imaginative atmosphere that, again in my view, is more in keeping with the spirit of Jung's own humility, generosity of heart and mind, and overwhelming emphasis on the immediate experience of the Tao of Nature, to which the unconscious and the psyche in general belong. "

We held to discussions of application, experience, reaction rather than criticism of Jung. And there was a time and place for such things. But people were sometimes asked to leave. I think Alice has learned us ways around that. And we can take it with us. 

[Guest guest]

Eli's point is that it is being filtered. That's the point. It isn't up to you. Visit many watering holes is all. 

[Guest guest]

Deb,

It's much more complicated than that and he overstates his view. Many things in life aren't up to us but we can have wonderful relationships and rich and meaningful connections just the same.

His opinion is only one among many. There are many theories and critiques of face book and social networking and we often discuss them right here on face book. Nobody would hear his Ted Talk or read his book if it wasn't available on face book. Face book is a collection of many watering holes, not one of them. I don't think you get the enormity of face book and social networking. It's increasingly a conduit for almost all information that is available on the planet. Everybody and everything is available on face book and it's the main way that people communicate, sell their products, their books, their music and films, share their thoughts, spiritual experiences, discuss philosophy, science, history...everything is accessible on face book and few things make it out in the world without it. Most people don't even communicate through regular e-mail any more. It isn't perfect and as all works in progress it is constantly changing and some of Zuckerberg's changes are annoying. Nevertheless, face book has become the mother of all watering holes... This is where people go to interact, connect and find most everything they need. It's a shame that you had that negative experience and gave up on it because you of all people would find kindred spirits and a home for your writing and interests here.

Peace,

Suzanne

One does not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by making the darkness conscious." – Carl Gustav Jung

Eli's point is that it is being filtered. That's the point. It isn't up to you.

Visit many watering holes is all.

[Guest guest]

Once more, it's not about me. Hell, I'm an INFP!  

[Guest guest]

Where do you get the'wolf' from, Alice? It's Greek. Means a steersman, pilot, helmsman; to steer, guide, govern; a governor.

--

Take more time, cover less ground.

~ Merton - Dancing In The Waters of LifeAbove all, don't wish to become a future Buddha.

Your only concernas thought follows thought,should be to avoid clinging to any of them.

~Dogen Zenji (1200 - 1253) 

To

practice self-liberating thoughts, whatever thought arises in your mind, just look at it and let go and relax. Look straight at its essential nature and let go and relax; it will be self-liberated. Do not

concern yourself with what you are thinking about. Do not concern yourself with the object of your thoughts, whether it is a person or a thing. Just look at the essence of the thought itself.

~From The Melody of Dharmata: Verses on the Profound View of the Middle Way, by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche, translated by Ari Goldfield & Jim , P.47.

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

[Guest guest]

I'm sorry you can't read the link. I do think that the stories and articles that come into our collective world are useful on forums because they provide information and stimulate discussion. What I've sent are relevant to Jung. Maybe not personal, but as an INFP, they help shape my world. My own words are not read or responded to. I was trying to keep the list alive. 

Also you could write me this privately. I feel shamed often when I come into this space. It's why I leave. But I will suggest strongly that people read the book about the internet bubble. Carl Jung would have much to say about what's happening to us.  

 

Dear ones, as yr " Motherator " I strongly suggest your sending your own words and not " blue-lining " links to this group. If you think about it, if something is worth keeping, it is useless when printed out and not all of us are able to access the matter at hand!

    So, please state your opinions or quotes and use the link at the end of yr post, if need be. This group is basically interested in the creative contributions of its members rather than the impersonal technology of the Internet...........

 

    Our regional Internet crashed for several days.

 

lovingly and not a cyberphobe!

 

ao

 

ps I believe cyber means 'wolf'? thus I am not really afraid of the BIG BAD one!

 

 

[Guest guest]

and thanks to both of you for this.

 

Advertise on NYTimes.com

Opinion

Shyness: Evolutionary Tactic?

By SUSAN CAIN

Published: June 25, 2011  A BEAUTIFUL woman lowers her eyes demurely beneath a hat. In an earlier era, her gaze might have signaled a mysterious allure. But this is a 2003 advertisement for Zoloft, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (S.S.R.I.) approved by the F.D.A. to treat social anxiety disorder. “Is she just shy? Or is it Social Anxiety Disorder?” reads the caption, suggesting that the young woman is not alluring at all. She is sick.

Enlarge This Image

Grant Shaffer

But is she?

It is possible that the lovely young woman has a life-wrecking form of social anxiety. There are people too afraid of disapproval to venture out for a job interview, a date or even a meal in public. Despite the risk of serious side effects — nausea, loss of sex drive, seizures — drugs like Zoloft can be a godsend for this group.

But the ad’s insinuation aside, it’s also possible the young woman is “just shy,” or introverted — traits our society disfavors. One way we manifest this bias is by encouraging perfectly healthy shy people to see

themselves as ill.

This does us all a grave disservice, because shyness and introversion — or more precisely, the careful, sensitive temperament from which both often spring — are not just normal. They are valuable. And they may be essential to the survival of our species.

Theoretically, shyness and social anxiety disorder are easily distinguishable. But a blurry line divides the two. Imagine that the woman in the ad enjoys a steady paycheck, a strong marriage and a small circle of close friends — a good life by most measures — except that she

avoids a needed promotion because she’s nervous about leading meetings.

She often criticizes herself for feeling too shy to speak up.

What do you think now? Is she ill, or does she simply need public-speaking training?

Before 1980, this would have seemed a strange question. Social anxiety disorder did not officially exist until it appeared in that year’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, the DSM-III, the psychiatrist’s bible

of mental disorders, under the name “social phobia.” It was not widely known until the 1990s, when pharmaceutical companies received F.D.A. approval to treat social anxiety with S.S.R.I.’s and poured tens of millions of dollars into advertising its existence. The current version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, the DSM-IV, acknowledges that stage fright (and shyness in social situations) is common and not necessarily a sign of illness. But it also says that diagnosis is warranted when anxiety “interferes significantly” with work performance or if the sufferer shows “marked distress” about it. According to this definition, the answer to our question is clear: the young woman in the ad is indeed sick.

The DSM inevitably reflects cultural attitudes; it used to identify homosexuality as a disease, too. Though the DSM did not set out to pathologize shyness, it risks doing so, and has twice come close to identifying introversion as a disorder, too. (Shyness and introversion are not the same thing. Shy people fear negative judgment; introverts simply prefer quiet, minimally stimulating environments.) But shyness and introversion share an undervalued status in a world that

prizes extroversion. Children’s classroom desks are now often arranged in pods, because group participation supposedly leads to better learning; in one school I visited, a sign announcing “Rules for Group Work” included, “You can’t ask a teacher for help unless everyone in your group has the same question.” Many adults work for organizations that now assign work in teams, in offices without walls, for supervisors

who value “people skills” above all. As a society, we prefer action to contemplation, risk-taking to heed-taking, certainty to doubt. Studies show that we rank fast and frequent talkers as more competent, likable and even smarter than slow ones. As the psychologists Hart and Dolores Albarracin point out, phrases like “get active,” “get moving,” “do something” and similar calls to action surface repeatedly in recent books. Yet shy and introverted people have been part of our species for a very long time, often in leadership positions. We find them in the Bible (“Who am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh? " asked Moses, whom the Book of Numbers describes as “very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth.”) We find them in recent history, in figures like

Darwin, Marcel Proust and Albert Einstein, and, in contemporary

times: think of Google’s Larry Page, or Harry Potter’s creator, J. K. Rowling.

In the science journalist Winifred Gallagher’s words: “The glory of the disposition that stops to consider stimuli rather than rushing to engage

with them is its long association with intellectual and artistic achievement. Neither E=mc2 nor ‘Paradise Lost’ was dashed off by a party

animal.”

We even find “introverts” in the animal kingdom, where 15 percent to 20 percent of many species are watchful, slow-to-warm-up types who stick to

the sidelines (sometimes called “sitters”) while the other 80 percent are “rovers” who sally forth without paying much attention to their surroundings. Sitters and rovers favor different survival strategies, which could be summed up as the sitter’s “Look before you leap” versus the rover’s inclination to “Just do it!” Each strategy reaps different rewards.

IN an illustrative experiment, Sloan , a Binghamton evolutionary biologist, dropped metal traps into a pond of pumpkinseed sunfish. The “rover” fish couldn’t help but investigate — and were immediately caught. But the “sitter” fish stayed back, making it impossible for Professor to capture them. Had Professor ’s traps posed a real threat, only the sitters would have survived. But had

the sitters taken Zoloft and become more like bold rovers, the entire family of pumpkinseed sunfish would have been wiped out. “Anxiety” about

the trap saved the fishes’ lives.

Next, Professor used fishing nets to catch both types of fish; when he carried them back to his lab, he noted that the rovers quickly acclimated to their new environment and started eating a full five days earlier than their sitter brethren. In this situation, the rovers were the likely survivors. “There is no single best ... [animal] personality,” Professor concludes in his book, “Evolution for Everyone,” “but rather a diversity of personalities maintained by natural selection.”

The same might be said of humans, 15 percent to 20 percent of whom are also born with sitter-like temperaments that predispose them to shyness and introversion. (The overall incidence of shyness and introversion is higher — 40 percent of the population for shyness, according to the psychology professor Cheek, and 50 percent for introversion. Conversely, some born sitters never become shy or introverted at all.)

Once you know about sitters and rovers, you see them everywhere, especially among young children. Drop in on your local Mommy and Me music class: there are the sitters, intently watching the action from their mothers’ laps, while the rovers march around the room banging their drums and shaking their maracas.

Relaxed and exploratory, the rovers have fun, make friends and will take

risks, both rewarding and dangerous ones, as they grow. According to Nettle, a Newcastle University evolutionary psychologist, extroverts are more likely than introverts to be hospitalized as a result of an injury, have affairs (men) and change relationships (women). One study of bus drivers even found that accidents are more likely to occur when extroverts are at the wheel. In contrast, sitter children are careful and astute, and tend to learn by observing instead of by acting. They notice scary things more than other children do, but they also notice more things in general. Studies dating all the way back to the 1960’s by the psychologists Jerome Kagan and Ellen Siegelman found that cautious, solitary children playing matching games spent more time considering all the alternatives than impulsive children did, actually using more eye movements to make decisions. Recent studies by a group of scientists at Stony Brook University and at Chinese universities using functional M.R.I. technology echoed this research, finding that adults with sitter-like temperaments looked longer at pairs of photos with subtle differences and showed more activity in brain regions that make associations between

the photos and other stored information in the brain. Once they reach school age, many sitter children use such traits to great effect. Introverts, who tend to digest information thoroughly, stay on task, and work accurately, earn disproportionate numbers of National Merit Scholarship finalist positions and Phi Beta Kappa keys, according to the Center for Applications of Psychological Type, a research arm for the Myers-Briggs personality type indicator

— even though their I.Q. scores are no higher than those of extroverts.

Another study, by the psychologists Rolfhus and Philip Ackerman, tested 141 college students’ knowledge of 20 different subjects, from art to astronomy to statistics, and found that the introverts knew more than the extroverts about 19 subjects — presumably, the researchers concluded, because the more time people spend socializing, the less time

they have for learning.

THE psychologist Feist found that many of the most creative people in a range of fields are introverts who are comfortable working in solitary conditions in which they can focus attention inward. Steve Wozniak, the engineer who founded Apple with Steve Jobs, is a prime example: Mr. Wozniak describes his creative process as an exercise in solitude. “Most inventors and engineers I’ve met are like me,” he writes

in “iWoz,” his autobiography. “They’re shy and they live in their heads. They’re almost like artists. In fact, the very best of them are artists. And artists work best alone ... Not on a committee. Not on a team.”

Sitters’ temperaments also confer more subtle advantages. Anxiety, it seems, can serve an important social purpose; for example, it plays a key role in the development of some children’s consciences. When caregivers rebuke them for acting up, they become anxious, and since anxiety is unpleasant, they tend to develop pro-social behaviors. Shy children are often easier to socialize and more conscientious, according

to the developmental psychologist Grazyna Kochanska. By 6 they’re less likely than their peers to cheat or break rules, even when they think they can’t be caught, according to one study. By 7 they’re more likely to be described by their parents as having high levels of moral traits such as empathy.

When I shared this information with the mother of a “sitter” daughter, her reaction was mixed. “That is all very nice,” she said, “but how will

it help her in the tough real world?” But sensitivity, if it is not excessive and is properly nurtured, can be a catalyst for empathy and even leadership. Eleanor Roosevelt, for example, was a courageous leader

who was very likely a sitter. Painfully shy and serious as a child, she

grew up to be a woman who could not look away from other people’s suffering — and who urged her husband, the constitutionally buoyant F.D.R., to do the same; the man who had nothing to fear but fear itself relied, paradoxically, on a woman deeply acquainted with it.

Another advantage sitters bring to leadership is a willingness to listen

to and implement other people’s ideas. A groundbreaking study led by the Wharton management professor Adam Grant, to be published this month in The Academy of Management Journal, found that introverts outperform extroverts when leading teams of proactive workers — the kinds of employees who take initiative and are disposed to dream up better ways of doing things. Professor Grant notes that business self-help guides often suggest that introverted leaders practice their communication skills and smile more. But, he told me, it may be extrovert leaders who need to change, to listen more and say less.

What would the world would look like if all our sitters chose to medicate themselves? The day may come when we have pills that “cure” shyness and turn introverts into social butterflies — without the side effects and other drawbacks of today’s medications. (A recent study suggests that today’s S.S.R.I.’s not only relieve social anxiety but also induce extroverted behavior.) The day may come — and might be here already — when people are as comfortable changing their psyches as the color of their hair. If we continue to confuse shyness with sickness, we

may find ourselves in a world of all rovers and no sitters, of all yang

and no yin.

As a sitter who enjoys an engaged, productive life, and a professional speaking career, but still experiences the occasional knock-kneed moment, I can understand why caring physicians prescribe available medicine and encourage effective non-pharmaceutical treatments such as cognitive-behavioral therapy.

But even non-medical treatments emphasize what is wrong with the people who use them. They don’t focus on what is right. Perhaps we need to rethink our approach to social anxiety: to address the pain, but to respect the temperament that underlies it. The act of treating shyness as an illness obscures the value of that temperament. Ridding people of social unease need not involve pathologizing their fundamental nature, but rather urging them to use its gifts.

It’s time for the young woman in the Zoloft ad to rediscover her allure.        Begin forwarded message:

--

Take more time, cover less ground.

~ Merton - Dancing In The Waters of LifeAbove all, don't wish to become a future Buddha.

Your only concernas thought follows thought,should be to avoid clinging to any of them.

~Dogen Zenji (1200 - 1253) 

To

practice self-liberating thoughts, whatever thought arises in your mind, just look at it and let go and relax. Look straight at its essential nature and let go and relax; it will be self-liberated. Do not

concern yourself with what you are thinking about. Do not concern yourself with the object of your thoughts, whether it is a person or a thing. Just look at the essence of the thought itself.

~From The Melody of Dharmata: Verses on the Profound View of the Middle Way, by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche, translated by Ari Goldfield & Jim , P.47.

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

[Guest guest]

Deb, the reason I couldn't read it is you have to be a signed in NYT subscriber. Much better to copy and paste the whole thing. At least the article is then there.

--

Take more time, cover less ground.

~ Merton - Dancing In The Waters of LifeAbove all, don't wish to become a future Buddha.

Your only concernas thought follows thought,should be to avoid clinging to any of them.

~Dogen Zenji (1200 - 1253) 

To

practice self-liberating thoughts, whatever thought arises in your mind, just look at it and let go and relax. Look straight at its essential nature and let go and relax; it will be self-liberated. Do not

concern yourself with what you are thinking about. Do not concern yourself with the object of your thoughts, whether it is a person or a thing. Just look at the essence of the thought itself.

~From The Melody of Dharmata: Verses on the Profound View of the Middle Way, by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche, translated by Ari Goldfield & Jim , P.47.

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

[Guest guest]

Thanks for posting this, Eve. Interestingly, I was discussing introversion and shyness (mine) on a writers group the day before the link to this was posted but I don't usually bother with following links, at least not without a synopsis to tell me where I'm going and what I'm going to see. Can you tell I'm a strong introvert? At least according to this article. LOL

In any event, on that other group I mentioned that even though I always test out strongly introverted (which I interpret as being self-referential, rather than other/outer-referential, like extraverts; I hope that's correct) I have no real problem striking up a conversation with a perfect stranger in the grocery store, etc. All of my life, though, I've always been very shy and very unhappy that I was. After reading this article and discovering the difference between shyness (expecting a negative reaction/response) and introversion, I'm no longer so displeased with myself. I also noted that even though I test Introverted, I've almost always been "on the lookout" to see how others respond to a situation or whatever so I know what to do, IOW, I'm apparently other-referential, too.

So, I told them, I'm apparently a shy extravert or maybe an extraverted introvert! Or an introverted extravert. ROFL (OK, that's meant to be humorous and I thought I'd better say so since humor doesn't come across well in emails.)

Blissings,SamSearch for Soulhttps://sampatron.wordpress.comJust because I believe something doesn't mean it's true.Just because I don't believe something doesn't mean it's untrue.Don't believe everything you think.

Shyness: Evolutionary Tactic?