I think of the things that I have been wrong about; it is a list that is longer than I care to admit. But let me list a few. I was wrong when I thought that me and my best friend in second grade would be friends forever, we are not even Facebook friends. I was wrong when I believed that I would one day marry Ralph Tresvant from the group New Edition. I was wrong when I thought that by the year 2000 that we would have flying cars. And I was wrong when I thought that I would be 5 7\u2019. I know that these are not major things, but at the time (before I knew better), they were serious beliefs that I held. Although these were pretty benign beliefs (they had no potential to harm anyone) there were some that weren\u2019t so innocent. I grew up in Nashville, Tennessee in the 70\u2019s and 80\u2019s and it was a very segregated city, in some ways very different from the Nashville of today. While Black businesses were thriving, the city had very distant racial and socio-economic lines. If it weren\u2019t for Father Carroll (the Priest assigned to St. Vincent De Paul Church and School) and Nuns at my school, I could have gone days without seeing someone outside of my race. It was a very different time. And I can recall the interactions that I did have were unpleasant. It is difficult to remain objective about things when what you have been told and experienced is negative. \u201cOur brains handle negative information differently and store it more readily and accessibly\u201d (1) consequently, I carried some \u201cbeliefs\u201d for years that were not true, yet they were a primary context for me. It took exposure and new experiences for my beliefs to change, and it was not any easy process. It is true that \u201cwe can all be very resistant to changing our opinions once they\u2019ve stuck.\u201d
\nIn Why We\u2019re Wrong About Nearly Everything, Bobby Duffy offers solutions. I am able to apply the information more effectively when an author takes the writing a step further and gives some practical ways to address the issues that they present. When I am left with only information from well-researched problems, I am less likely to retain the information or recommend the book. As I approach my NPO, I look for tools and solutions that will assist in my research. I have concerns about how to approach stakeholders that have held views that cause them to reject my work. Duffy offers, \u201cbecause our weighting of positive and negative information is unbalanced, we need more positive than negative signals in successful personal relationships: 50:50 doesn\u2019t work.”(2) He continues, \u201cindeed, researchers have shown that the perfect ratio needed for partners to be happy together is 5:1- five times as much positive feeling and interaction as negative.”(3) The process for creating new positive signals is to expose people to five times more positive information than negative. This gives me something to work with!
\nThere are times when I am reading and there is something that stands out, a statement that I take and put in my \u201cI may need this one day\u201d file. I found a few of these statements in Why We\u2019re Wrong About Nearly Everything. Duffy says, \u201cFair representation of women is not just about sending a signal of world\u2019s population is an equal part of society: it also changes policies and practices in business and government, by uncovering often unconscious gender bias decision.\u201d (4) As I am working to create positive signals, I must also be working to change policies and practices that have allowed unfair business\/church cultures to continue. It is not enough to talk about it, identify the root issue, and create a plan, change will only happen when the system that has allowed biases to govern decisions is dismantled. I still have questions about how to effectively create change among Church Leaders. Is this possible?
\n I appreciate that Duffy presented ten ideas of how we can form more accurate views of the world. I found two of them to be especially helpful to my research. They are:
\n2.\u201cAccept the emotion but challenge the thought\u2026Denying that we have an emotional reaction\u2026is pointless and impossible, but accepting these emotions and trying to understand then is not.\u201d (5)
\nAND
\n9.\u201cWe also need to tell the story\u2026there is no contradiction between facts and stories: you don\u2019t need to choose only one to make your point. The power of stories over us means we need to engage people with both.\u201d (6)
\nThese two ideas are extremely useful as I construct my next workshop. Acknowledging that emotions will play a major role in my work and that there is value in every story is really important. I want to remain mindful of how these factors impact my stakeholder\u2019s ability to feel safe, heard and valued. This can be challenging when beliefs arise from my stakeholders could contradict the beliefs that I know to be true.
\nI can\u2019t end this blog without acknowledging what a good feeling it was to read a book that references the work of an author that I\u2019ve actually read. I was thrilled and honestly, I felt so well read when Duffy introduces Daniel Kahneman\u2019s \u201cexperiencing self\u201d and \u201cremembering self.\u201d I was reading and nodding my head as if the three of us were in a dialogue together. We are making progress, Loved Ones.<\/p>\n
Bobby Duffy, Why We’re Wrong About Nearly Everything: A Theory of Human Misunderstanding (New York, NY: Basic Books, 2019), 111.
\n Ibid., 61.
\n Ibid., 61.
\n Ibid., 138.
\n Ibid.,231.
\n Ibid., 239.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
I think of the things that I have been wrong about; it is a list that is longer than I care to admit. But let me list a few. I was wrong when I thought that me and my best friend in second grade would be friends forever, we are not even Facebook friends. I […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":174,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2310],"tags":[2489,2640],"class_list":["post-31971","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-doctor-of-leadership-3","tag-dlgp02","tag-duffy","cohort-dlgp02"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31971","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/174"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=31971"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31971\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":31972,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31971\/revisions\/31972"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31971"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31971"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31971"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}