Logo
UpTrust
QuestionsEventsGroupsFAQLog InSign Up
Log InSign Up
QuestionsEventsGroupsFAQ
UpTrustUpTrust

Social media built on trust and credibility. Where thoughtful contributions rise to the top.

Get Started

Sign UpLog In

Legal

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceDMCA
© 2026 UpTrust. All rights reserved.

communication studies

  • jordan avatar

    Left Media Bias bigger than i realized. No matter how you measure (print media, online, page views, paid subscribers, followers, etc) US media leans heavily left, to an extent that surprised me. Most ways I tried back-of-the napkin math have right + right-leaning news sources being below 10%… and even the most generous assessments that include lost of neutral/other outlets still have left + left-leaning above 50% (meaning 5:1 liberal to conservative is the lowest estimate i could find).

    Context

    The US is pretty evenly split in terms of the two major parties:
    > 45% of U.S. adults Republican-ish, 44% Democrat-ish Gallup 2022

    Some sources

    • Allsides Here’s Allsides review
      their media bias on Allsides.com here’s the site’s own assessment of its own bias
    • Googling the top 25 most-subscribed news channels in the United States, and
    • Even the more left leaning LLMS can’t help but point out this as a fact of modern media.

    Takeaways

    • First, this gives me empathy for Republicans. Many American conservatives feel like the underdog, regardless of how much power or influence they yield, because in a very real way, they’re not represented in a substantial part of the public narrative making machine—the media—proportionally. The perception of bias is true despite their being popular conservative outlets with sizable audiences, and as a result the left has influence on public opinion.Impact on Public Trust (but also how come Republicans aren’t better at getting media subscribers?)

    • Second, how come Republicans, who are stereotypically thought of us as having more business acumen or money or something, are getting so handily beaten in the media?

    • Third, I try not to get involved in politics because I’m scared of loosing connection or turning people off of the value of relatefulness because of my takes, even if they’re nuanced. We’re very good at otherizing people and forgetting to look at nuances. I’m certain I lack nuance. I don’t want a difference of political opinion to get in the way of our connecting. I started writing up this for the TTT email (which I ended up deciding not to send) but I realized others are deeply esconced in politics and way smarter and more educated in the field than I, so I decided to not go there. But here on uptrusting.com I think it’s a cool opporutnity to test; could also be a nice road to empathy, or self-empathy, depending on our identifications.

     

    jordanSA•...
    This is part of what surprised me, the numbers didn't back this up. From my (admittedly very crappy research), Fox was #1 in cable news for the past 24 years with average of ~2 million primetime views, but CNN and MSNBC combined were roughly equal to it (and also 24/7), and that...
    political science
    communication studies
    media studies
    Comments
    0
  • A
    An Open Letter to the Men and Women of ICE and DHS
    To the agents, officers, and staff serving under Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security:
    We write not in accusation, but in concern.
    Not to question your dedication to service, but to ask you to look inward — to reflect on the true cost of the mission you’ve been given, and what it may be asking of you, personally and morally.
    Every day, you are asked to enforce some of the most difficult policies in this country. You operate in tense communities and unpredictable conditions. The work is dangerous, emotionally draining, and often deeply misunderstood by the public. But beyond the tactical hardships, there lies a quieter, more personal burden — one that reaches into homes, families, and hearts.
    If you are honest with yourselves, many of you have felt that burden. You’ve seen how your role affects those closest to you: conversations at the dinner table that turn painful, friendships that grow distant, a child’s uneasy question about what you do and why. These are not just personal experiences — they are reflections of a deeper national struggle over identity, justice, and humanity.
    It’s worth asking: what happens to a person when duty and conscience come into conflict? What does it do to a family, when pride in service begins to mix with doubt or shame? These are hard questions, but they are the questions that define moral courage.
    Right now, tensions across our nation are growing. Communities are polarized, anger builds easily, and violence feels closer with each passing week. You are on the front lines of that volatility, and history tells us where unchecked division can lead. The last century bore witness to how ordinary men and women, loyal to their governments and trying simply to provide for their families, became instruments of suffering — sometimes without realizing it until it was too late. The scars of those choices led humanity into two devastating world wars.
    It is not unpatriotic to recognize the danger of repeating history. In fact, it is among the most patriotic acts you can take: to defend not just a flag or an order, but the moral foundation that flag is meant to represent — liberty, justice, and compassion.
    You have the power to shape how this moment in our history will be remembered. Your choices matter more than you may ever know. Within every one of you lies the ability to temper enforcement with empathy, authority with restraint, and fear with understanding. These are not acts of defiance — they are acts of strength.
    Do your duty, but do it with conscience. Protect your country, but defend its soul as well.
    History will not only ask what orders you followed — it will ask who you were when you followed them.
    With hope and respect, The citizens of The United States of America.
    akabigD•...
    You miss the whole point. Holocaust? Huh? I think you're confusing this post for something it's not. Your obviously have some issues. Nobody said anything about The Holocaust, Why would you even inject that into the conversation....
    communication studies
    argumentation
    online etiquette
    Comments
    0
  • annabeth avatar

    Like is different than trust. I think Jordan said at an uptrust session that he misses the like button. I’m having the same feeling lately, there are posts I like that I wouldn’t necessarily say I trust. Or I want to give it some sort of that was cool but I don’t want that statement in my trust algorithm.

    But maybe that’s all for the best? Surely some not-insignificant portion of my trust isn’t in my conscious awareness, maybe feeling a sense of yes to something is functionally the same as trust.

    chauncedog60•...
    Perhaps it could be emphasized that trust, in context of posts, would be applicable and limited to the message itself, and so not to imply any further scope, which can't honestly be qualified anyway!...
    communication studies
    media studies
    Comments
    0
  • UpTrust Admin avatar

    AMA with Hannah Aline Taylor. Wednesday 2/4 at 4:00 PM CT

    love, boundaries, and mistakes in relating, community, and peopling together (+ thank god love doesn’t look like you expect it to)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNYNL05PRBQ
    Mariya•...

    YES to the blame issue. It's such a tricky nuance.

    psychology
    communication studies
    Comments
    0
  • F

    Engage or Enrage. It is likely that we have family members or friends that we differ with greatly when it comes to politics, healthcare, etc.  I am no different.  When the inevitable hot topic arises, do you recommend flight or fight, engage or enrage?  How do you respond when this occurs?

    Eric Stevens•...
    Repetition does matter, but what is being repeated matters more than how often. Propaganda does not work primarily because it is repeated. It works because it attaches logic to emotion first, not the other way around....
    psychology
    sociology
    political science
    communication studies
    Comments
    0
  • F

    Engage or Enrage. It is likely that we have family members or friends that we differ with greatly when it comes to politics, healthcare, etc.  I am no different.  When the inevitable hot topic arises, do you recommend flight or fight, engage or enrage?  How do you respond when this occurs?

    FrankieBoy•...

    What do they say, repeat it three times and a lie becomes truth

    psychology
    sociology
    communication studies
    Comments
    0
  • F

    Engage or Enrage. It is likely that we have family members or friends that we differ with greatly when it comes to politics, healthcare, etc.  I am no different.  When the inevitable hot topic arises, do you recommend flight or fight, engage or enrage?  How do you respond when this occurs?

    Snoonan08•...
    Someone has to hear the logic and data many times for it to try and stick. This is how a lot of propaganda is working, it's getting repeated and then becomes sticky in the brain. Wouldn't the answer be to keep trying calm logic and data for repetition? Try again vs. leave?...
    psychology
    communication studies
    media studies
    cognitive science
    Comments
    0
  • UpTrust Admin avatar

    AMA with Jordan Myska Allen. Wednesday 2/4 at 12:30pm CST

    Founder and CEO of UpTrust, founder of Relatefulness... solving seemingly impossible social problems and having fun doing it

    #heywait 

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hH8D9l1s2Bs
    joshuaSA•...

    I see you!

    communication studies
    Comments
    0
  • UpTrust Admin avatar

    AMA with Nate Soares. Wednesday 2/4 at 10am CT

    Author of If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies answers questions about why superhuman AI would kill us all.

    blakeSA•...

    Looks like this one purposefully has no video portion, just the text discussion here

    communication studies
    media studies
    Comments
    0
  • UpTrust Admin avatar

    What is the 'Metacrisis' and How Do We Solve It? (AMA). Rewatch the live AMA conversation with Layman Pascal 

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyq_ZfdtTmg
    laymanpascal•...
    I agree (sic).  Dis/agreement is a good general framing.  Coherence and alignment are high-level strategies for dealing with the proliferating effects of fragmentation....
    psychology
    philosophy
    sociology
    communication studies
    Comments
    0
  • J

    What's in a question...". Here's a scenario...
    I say something. It could be anything but for the sake of argument, "I hope Trump runs for a third term."

    People in hearing range are heard to ask (examples):
       - What do you mean by that?
       - Umm, have you read the Constitution?
       - Why?
       - How do you think that benefits the country?

    My interest... Which, if any, of those questions might be considered an invitation to dialogue? Which might elicit a defensive or angry response? If we accept a premise that Our country is being damaged by polarization and hostility, how do we engage with one another to explore the why's behind opinions held? What is your base response when someone asks you a question?

    I have observed what I think is shift in definition (or perception) regarding the purpose of a question. To some extent, I think the use and nature of questions has been placed in a negative light. And, that is hazardous to Our ability to gather and analyze information as well as Our opportunities communicate about important societal issues.

    At a base level, how much does tone of voice matter? Does who asked -how they look- matter? Does the choice of words affect your response? The time or place? How much of your response is determined primarily by how you interpret the question versus how the questioner might have intended it?

    Additional circumstances where I wonder about questions and what they mean or do...
       - How often does a politician who represents you ask your opinion before voting on a matter?
       - Are public polls and surveys able to collect opinion fairly? (I.E., Shouldn't there generally be a "None of the above" option for almost everything you've ever been asked? Or, data about who is taking the poll and for what purpose? I am tired of being forced to answer in a way that defines my 'social box' incorrectly.)
       - Particularly with regard to evaluation of programs, we are asked to place ourselves in various classifications. Income, race, faith, address, age - you know what I mean. These "metrics" are quantitative and objective but... Who decides on the ranges?; Who decides on definitions? When we are measuring whether the quality of someones life has improved, do we need more 'humetrics'?

    Have I perhaps managed to kindle curiosity in a dark corner ? :-) It seems to me that this is worth thinking and talking about. It may be part of healing and finding our individual agency to affect the world. It might also be a part of solving problems in a way that promotes positive-sum outcomes. 

    TRG•...
    I'll be honest, think you could say that to hundreds of people and not get a question in response.  You will get agreement from some, and hostility from others.  Violence I suspect from a few. But I wouldn't expect you to get questions or dialogue.  Battle lines are drawn....
    communication studies
    social dynamics
    politics
    Comments
    0
  • J

    What's in a question...". Here's a scenario...
    I say something. It could be anything but for the sake of argument, "I hope Trump runs for a third term."

    People in hearing range are heard to ask (examples):
       - What do you mean by that?
       - Umm, have you read the Constitution?
       - Why?
       - How do you think that benefits the country?

    My interest... Which, if any, of those questions might be considered an invitation to dialogue? Which might elicit a defensive or angry response? If we accept a premise that Our country is being damaged by polarization and hostility, how do we engage with one another to explore the why's behind opinions held? What is your base response when someone asks you a question?

    I have observed what I think is shift in definition (or perception) regarding the purpose of a question. To some extent, I think the use and nature of questions has been placed in a negative light. And, that is hazardous to Our ability to gather and analyze information as well as Our opportunities communicate about important societal issues.

    At a base level, how much does tone of voice matter? Does who asked -how they look- matter? Does the choice of words affect your response? The time or place? How much of your response is determined primarily by how you interpret the question versus how the questioner might have intended it?

    Additional circumstances where I wonder about questions and what they mean or do...
       - How often does a politician who represents you ask your opinion before voting on a matter?
       - Are public polls and surveys able to collect opinion fairly? (I.E., Shouldn't there generally be a "None of the above" option for almost everything you've ever been asked? Or, data about who is taking the poll and for what purpose? I am tired of being forced to answer in a way that defines my 'social box' incorrectly.)
       - Particularly with regard to evaluation of programs, we are asked to place ourselves in various classifications. Income, race, faith, address, age - you know what I mean. These "metrics" are quantitative and objective but... Who decides on the ranges?; Who decides on definitions? When we are measuring whether the quality of someones life has improved, do we need more 'humetrics'?

    Have I perhaps managed to kindle curiosity in a dark corner ? :-) It seems to me that this is worth thinking and talking about. It may be part of healing and finding our individual agency to affect the world. It might also be a part of solving problems in a way that promotes positive-sum outcomes. 

    kmitcham•...
    An interesting question! In the world of the internet, gender, appearance, race, and tone of voice may not be readily apparent. But, they all could be powerful in face to face communication.  Have you looked at the theories behind the Socratic method of asking questions?...
    philosophy
    sociology
    communication studies
    Comments
    0
  • JulieI•...

    What's in a question..."

    Here's a scenario... I say something. It could be anything but for the sake of argument, "I hope Trump runs for a third term." People in hearing range are heard to ask (examples):    - What do you mean by that?    - Umm, have you read the Constitution?    - Why?...
    psychology
    sociology
    political science
    communication studies
    Comments
    17
  • laymanpascal avatar

    Non-Conscious Circling . "Non-Conscious" and "Circling" suggestive play words.  I'm following up on a previous post to say that Dechen and I held a more "shamanic" variation of intersubjective group praxis on the final day at MSL in Vermont. The results were both continuous and distinct from the earlier experiments.  Unexpected emotional intensity, head pressure, feeling of exposure to nonhuman elements, rough coincidences, and the brightening of those most temperamentally allied with the so-called shamanic variants of the process. 

    jordanSA•...
    very cool. i feel like this is such a rich open and varied field, and as a civilization (at least the one we can commune with) we've barely scratched the surface here....
    philosophy
    sociology
    communication studies
    Comments
    0
  • X

    How to make skills of depth/presence/development legible to others? I've had this fantasy for the past year of creating a YT live stream show that features different teachers, facilitators, healers of different modalities and somehow make legible what they're doing to a larger audience.

    Often, my experience is people enter the spiritual/healing/relational arts world from a really intellectual place and work down.

    For example, 
    - Read a book about the topic (NVC, IFS, meditation, etc)
    - Practice it mainly from their head (sentence stems)
    - Do a milllion reps and somewhere realize, this is also an embodied awareness practice
    - Start getting into the weird woo territories of energy, spirits, intuition, etc

    But to a beginner, there's a pre-/post- issue where you can't really tell the difference between a really deep facilitator and a really confident charlatan.

    Furthermore, you aren't really that interested in the really deep people. A lot of my friends have been practicing for 15+ years and won't seem impressive on a podcast or a stage like the big head intellectuals and academia folk (Brene Brown, Lex Friedman, Huberman, etc) but they are geniuses in their own craft.

    So, how to illustrate these skills that don't translate as well into written or spoken existing mediums?

    hope that's legible what the q here even is

    peteSA•...
    I feel like the heart of speaking their language while saying more, and not being captured by one's audience is in the Trickster. I can certainly unpack this more, but just the simple statement of it seems valuable right now....
    communication studies
    linguistics
    Comments
    0
  • R

    Trust scores. Brand new, but the onboarding info suggests Trust Scores reflect how much a post's source "reflects my worldviews"?  I'm not really looking for an echo chamber platform and had assumed these scores would focus more on good faith, or even veracity, as opposed to viewpoint alignment.  I could totally see upvoting something/one I completely disagree with as long as I see them as using logic and rationality to support their good faith views.  Am I misinterpreting?

    jordanSA•...
    Super helpful feedback, thanks ron62. We're still figuring out how to help people get a sense of what's different here, and it seems like the language of "reflects my worldview" is actively against what we mean to convey....
    communication studies
    social media
    technology
    online trust
    Comments
    0
  • laymanpascal•...

    casre

    The article here on Relatefulness vs Circling, and numerous instances of listening to people try to nuance intriguing distinctions between various tweaks of intersubjective practice, turns my mind back to the shamanic....
    psychology
    spirituality
    communication studies
    Comments
    5
  • jordan avatar

    Seeing ourselves and our culture in Charlie Kirk. When I first heard about the murder I didn't know how big of a lightning rod it was going to be. Then my friend Kageni challenged me to write about the Charlie Kirk event “from an integral perspective,”* and I’ve learned to listen to her challenges, even when I'm feeling scared or inadequate (like this one). (For those who don't have the context, I apologize).

    Also, in writing about this human being as an object of our cultural fascination, I've necessarily moved past the well of human grief and empathy. Forgive my insensitivities, oversimplifications (mapping rather than territory-ing), many omissions, forgive if I strayed from my lane, and may we continuously reclaim our shadows to create a more loving world.

    I. We are projecting so much onto Charlie Kirk that says more about us than the real tragedies. This is normal—to quote Valerie Daniel “You can't breathe without getting projected on.” But it keeps us from confronting the raw realities of grief, powerlessness, the horror and unpredictability of life, the darkness and violence in humanity. And the irony—cruel or helpful, depending on your view—is that whatever we’re unwilling to face in ourselves is destined to repeat itself.

    So let’s reclaim these projections, for our personal peace, and to prevent future tragedies. All the negative and positive stuff we project onto Kirk, onto culture, onto whoever we deem the other. Eg: If I can’t stand the celebrations, I’m probably hiding from my own schadenfreude, likely hiding how deeply I’m ashamed of my desire for power and holding others accountable. Or I’m unwilling to be tender with myself when I think I'm a victim, leading to over-responsibility: exhausting for me and enabling to others.

    Loving like this is fierce. I call it forgiveness. It demands the courage to challenge deep rooted beliefs we use to orient to the world, and stay present in the resistance.

    II. There are at least three distinct conversations happening at once:

    1. Murder is always a tragedy, including Kirk’s.

    2. Kirk's complicated character. His views are taken out of context but even so were offensive and scary to many people.

      How do we stay present with that fear and offense? But also the way he inspired so many good things in people, including the kind of integrity and service in young men this his murderer lacked? How do we wrestle with views that appear to span the gamut from traditional christian conservative (amber) to modern defenses of free speech (orange) to post-conventional institutional critiques (green)?

    3. Celebrations of his murder are vastly overrepresented online, but are part of a feedback loop that leads to more fracturing, which leads to individuals like Kirk’s killer making specific horrific unethical choices, which keeps the loop going.

      (Eg: his success was somewhat a reaction to the increasing cultural power of the radical left (operating from amber/ethnocentric structure despite progressive (Green) language), which is now getting amplified, which will amplify another conservative voice, which will lead to more assassinations).

      How can we re-align the system if we don't see we are it? Reclaiming our projections is a necessary first step if we’re highly triggered, because (a) systematically reconstructing our intersubjective meaning-making capacity demands intertribal coordination, and (b) it shows us where our actual power lies.

    III. Reclaiming our projections through collective dream analysis (sociosomnia).

    What if we see America’s reaction to him like a dream that we can interpret? Here’s one view: our culture is in a tizzy around free speech. We seem to both love it and be so terrified of it that we want to cancel and “kill” it. We’re trying to find orientation and values in the chaos of a post-truth world but we don’t yet know how to say “yes, all these points of view are valid (green) but some are more valuable, relevant, and true in this context than others (teal)."


    #TTT
    ---
    *The spirit of "from an integral perspective" in this context is making sense of competing claims to truth without demonizing anyone, but being willing to take a stand for goodness and values. To paraphrase integral grandpappa Ken Wilber, if we assume no one is smart enough to be 100% wrong, then how to we stitch together a coherent sense of what’s happening from all the partial truths and fragmented perspectives? In this particular post I’m relying a lot on adult developmental psychology, but the overall theory has a variety of other helpful meta-frames for understanding how seemingly totally different values relate.

    jordanSA•...
    is free speech a constitutional law concept? I'm ignorant on these matters, maybe bc I'm from the USA, I really thought it was just a common idea.   Sorry, I really don't see the thing you're trying to point at; maybe I could better if I were hearing you or seeing your face...
    philosophy
    communication studies
    constitutional law
    Comments
    0
  • J

    Creative thinking vs winning an argument. Creative thinking needs to be taught and valued as highly as smart thinking, right thinking, and ethical thinking.  

    I wonder if we've been trained - consciously and unconsciously - to converse in formats that can be intimidating and arguable ... inviting responses that are judging, which can then be judged back and forth:  smart or stupid, right or wrong, ethical or corrupt ... that binary thing we do.  I propose that this creates anxiety and intimidates creative brainstorming, mutually respectful musing, generous listening, genuine questioning, seeking connection and curious questions?  

    I can be as guilty as the next person - fishing for affirmation by winning a point in conversation ...   

    #DeepTakes

    Ralph•...
    I was an exchange student to the US in 1980/81 — i know, different times. I enjoyed debates, but I have come to notice later that what they taught was dangerous. The term "debate" comes from "debattare", to fight it out. Our language shows our intent....
    sociology
    cultural studies
    communication studies
    Comments
    0
  • jordan avatar

    Ordinary Love. An invitation to true wellness culture

    Postmodernity is too egocentric. This includes current “spiritual” trends.

    Here’s what an alternative can look like: Yesterday Dara asked Jason to install a window A/C unit in Val’s room; he came over and did it. Last night a participant shared struggling with a contract at work, and a lawyer in the session volunteered to help her redline it. My sister watches the kids while I help my brother-in-law move their furniture to make room for the new baby. If this doesn’t sound special, that’s the point. You’re already doing this, that’s also the point.

    I’m not writing to admonish us to “get rid” of the “ego”—a particular self-identity*. I think it’s too hard for modern Americans, steeped in a culture of individualism. I love life, people, experience, and I think a good life includes a sense of “me.” Instead, I want to expand the sense of self to go much beyond the concept of “my body, my history” to see the larger whole these are part of. One upshot of this is gratitude, even for what I usually think of as “Jordan’s”—like these thoughts thunk in English. I needed English to think ‘em, so how much are they ‘mine’? 

    Automated & consensual narrative lock-in

    We know that social media exacerbated this. Many studies show narcissism and loneliness increasing faster with mass adoption of social media, especially after 2012. Young kids don’t want to serve as a fireman or doctor anymore, they want to be adored as an influencer (We’re working on this social media problem by launching UpTrust). 

    Now I worry that AI is exponentiating this self-reification trend to unprecedented levels.

    Last week I met four people who were convinced that their personal ChatGPT interface, molding its “personality” to respond based on their unique interactions, was a sentient being. If you think our filter bubbles are bad now, imagine what it’s like when we have 8 billion of them? Each individual’s personal collection of bots reinforcing whatever identity feels special, safe, and comfortable, no matter how limited and delusional?

    There’s nothing wrong with specialness, safety, and comfort, but neither is there anything wrong with ordinariness, risk, and discomfort. Transformation, life, intimacy, and play all demand both. Are we bleaching the color of life in pursuit of maintaining a self? What are we so afraid of that we hide from becoming? Life is transformation. Relating requires and changes our uniqueness. Other people providing friction and challenge—that’s a service, freely given to all at birth.

    Perhaps the trap isn’t narcissism. It’s any reification of identity via any narrative frame, especially spiritual ones, designed to parade as if they’re narrative-free. And the cost is ordinary love.

    Transcend and exclude often means we fall back into less maturity

    I’m still trying to get my mind and language around this, so I’m going to highlight the contrast to see the phenomena more clearly. Does your coach / (AI) therapist / culture / practice help you:

    • Express more gratitude? Become more forgiving? Be more accepting of others’ flaws? “Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court”?
      Or say you should be treated a very particular way (reifying a victim identity?)

    • Build infrastructure that’s super helpful but unsexy? Do things that are good for others without recognition? Feed those who are hungry? Do mundane things for the local whole like pick up trash that’s not yours?
      Or build a marketing funnel that will help you promote yourself and perpetuate the ‘me’ ‘me’ ‘me’ cycle? 

    • Love your friends and family better? Accept being misunderstood? Show up to their events and support their successes? Take care of them when they’re sick? Be more generous? Patient, humble, respectful, loyal, temperate? Maintain commitments regardless of feelings?
      Or emphasize your in-the-moment desire above all else, calling impulsivity and self-centeredness ‘surrender’?

    • Develop boundaries as expressions of love and connection? Face challenges with grace and acceptance? Take responsibility for your pain, flaws, mistakes, shadows, and limitations?
      Or use "boundaries" to control others and force them to change according to your preferences?

    • Admit ignorance, learn from criticism, hold your beliefs lightly, speak simply about profound experiences, work steadily without needing dramatic breakthroughs, notice your defensive patterns without performatively announcing them, contribute to social understanding, love others as they are?
      Or position yourself as having rare insights to help others transcend their limitations through your techniques and advice?

    This list can go on; I wish I could speak to the connection and community side more but I’m stuck in my own bias. 

    I’m not saying it’s easy, we of course need guides, mentors, feedback–it’s so complicated! Nor am I saying its special—all of this has been said for thousands of years! I’m trying to highlight a healthy version of one pole and unhealthy versions of another on purpose to get more clarity on where we are deeply unbalanced today. This is especially true of ‘spiritual’ hotbeds like San Francisco, Boulder, Ubud, Amsterdam. Austin is somewhat counterbalanced by its Texas-ness—cowboy culture still emphasizes family, duty and sacrifice to a greater good beyond ‘you’. Plus our immigrants are a little more integrated.

    What’s up with me?

    Anyway, I ask myself: Why do I care?

    Sure, practices purported to transcend ego instead teach self-absorption. But it’s in the name— "personal growth" and “self-help.” What’s got me?

    Because I’m guilty of all of this. 

    Sometimes despite my best efforts, I’ve taught people to ignore their minds in order to stay with the sensations of their bodies (rather than integrating them); to ‘surrender’ to their feelings-in-the-moment and ignore larger consequences or agreements and the greater wholes that hold them. I’ve corrected a lot of these mistakes, made amends, even evolved the practice and training. Yet I still can’t quite escape the selfishness of ‘wellness’ culture. Prime example: a couple years ago we hosted a “Give Fest” at the Relateful Studio in Austin with a reverse silent auction, where people bid on what they wanted to give to a local nonprofit. Even my wife and I didn’t follow through on what we ‘won.’

    Let us redefine wellness and self-development. Let us change the metrics to gratitude, forgiveness, acceptance of our and others' flaws, showing up for family, friendship, and our greater communities. Let us celebrate unglamorous, unwitnessed interdependence.

    Three alternatives: what is it all for?

    Burning Man is actually a great example of a positive alternative. The economy is about gifting—and after your first year, it’s well known that to get the most out of the experience, you need to give. People camp in communities, build massive art projects and cars together, and give them freely without credit, burning them at the end. It’s all about creating for the whole, being present with each other in non-transactional relating. All of this disrupts the self-reification loops in such a way that people are consistently shaken from long held encumbrances, and come out of the desert transformed. I say this as an admirer but not a fanatic—I went to Black Rock City in 2012 and 2014, and then didn’t go again.

    Relatefulness

    Relatefulness, especially in Level Up ⬆’s Leadership Program and the The Relateful Coaching Training, does not fall into these problem nearly as badly as almost every other community I’ve seen. We claim our directionality of truth + love. This means the personal can’t be number one—individual expression and growth is always in service of something greater. Of course we make mistakes. (For example, the Level Up structure highlighted individualism. We’ll be returning to a cohort-only model this Fall—more on that in a future email). But we’ve done a really good job focusing on being with what is, especially relationally and communally. 

    We don’t abandon compassion and honesty in service of making sure people feel seen, heard, cultivating a ‘safe space,’ or maintaining instagram-defined-trauma-therapy-norms. This is hard, because I not only want people to feel seen, heard, safe, and heal, I think it’s crucial for a healthy community and for the true pursuit of truth and love. It just needs to be in service of love/truth, rather than an end unto itself. It needs to come authentically from the moment, not as a script or status signal or performance. We run into generative friction embracing the seeming paradox of this polarity all the time, and it is incredibly demanding of our facilitators to walk this tight rope. It demands that we are always changing, individually as leaders, as a community, and even the practice itself. Even our coaching teaches revealing identity commitments, inherently making the self an object in a larger self that can choose “yes” or “no” to, versus reinforcing a self and an existing worldview.

    And even as we teach people how to meta-narrate as a way to witness and disembed themselves from unconscious habits that have been running them, we recognize that the compulsion to name and categorize experiences—spiritual or otherwise—often becomes a form of conceptual possession, serving self preservation rather than self-transformation.

    Frozen
    The Disney movie Frozen shows another fantastic example of a healthy alternative. (I just watched the Broadway version with my kids this weekend, so it's fresh on my mind). 

    In my view, the critical part of Elsa moving from “Conceal don’t reveal” to “Let it Go” is not about self-expression, it's about surrendering the need to control, particularly others’ reactions to her true nature. As a result she loves what she previously saw as her shame (her ice power), an identity transformation that eliminates the victim-perpetrator dynamic entirely and unlocks her ability to use her power for everyone’s benefit.

    But of course the most incredible part is reframing the trope of “true love”—not just from romantic to familial love, but about the act of loving others. The secret that ‘healed’ Anna’s frozen heart wasn’t receiving ‘true love’ from someone else, but her performing a selfless act of true love herself. Even better, she truly loved the one who accidentally caused the curse in the first place, in a show of what I like to call “true forgiveness”—there was never any threat to love’s presence in the first place. So in some real sense, nothing to forgive. Family love, particularly love that endures despite harm, represents the ordinary, unglamorous love that doesn't depend on worthiness or reciprocity (romantic love ideally is the same, but often feels like something we need to earn or could lose). 

    Oh and there’s the wonderful Olaf, as a projection of the best of Anna and Elsa’s innocence in childhood. And I love that it’s not spiritual :)
     

    True spirituality isn’t spiritual (and is definitely not about ‘me’)

    As usual, I’m writing this for myself as much as anyone. Can I experience states of fundamental wellbeing, help others, and act with virtue and integrity without any internal or external narration / validation? Without needing it to be spiritual development? Who would be accumulating spiritual experiences or qualities anyway, and what would they be good for if not to benefit the whole of existence?

    Can all of my mastery lead me to being completely ordinary? Not needing actions to be recognized as anything, even by myself, I respond to what's in front of me without overlaying (spiritual) significance.

    And can I not do that for the sake of development either? If I notice that self-referential trap, may I love myself in it and move on with the normal good stuff of living. The self-referential loop is infinite if I engage it.

    Instead, let me show up lovingly for the sake of itself, because that’s what love does.

     

    —

    *Although that is a path that can work for some people like Byron Katie or Eckhart Tolle, it’s a hard one to “do” because the will that acts needs to eventually be transcended. In both of their histories, their dissolution was more done to them.

     


    (this will be sent out to my #TTT email in a couple of days, but UpTrust gets the early exclusive ;) )

    tommySA•...
    I love this. This is the downside of having too big of a need to understand and be understood.  I’m also noticing that starting from an assumption that me and another person don’t understand each other would probably lead to more discovery and ultimately more intimacy and...
    psychology
    communication studies
    relationships
    Comments
    0
Loading related tags...