This is from Scott Berkun's excellent blog - scottberkun.com. His observations can be generalized to so many situations in life!
Focus quotation:
"No man can attain his true station except through his justice. No power can exist except through unity. No welfare and no well-being can be attained except through consultation." - Bahá'u'lláh, quoted in The Prosperity of Mankind, p. 8
Excerpt:
As a program manager (glorified title for project manager), all of my power actually came from the programmers. I only had a job because of the programmers. No programmers means no code, no product, no revenue. End of story. My power was an extension of theirs. I had to treat them with respect and go out of my way to earn their trust over time.
This meant first and foremost I had to earn their respect. Help them make decisions. Bulldoze organizational road blocks out of their way. Prove I was smart, that I could help them make tough decisions, and could make the product much better even though I couldn't write code as well as they could. And only after establishing that value could I be a team leader and be of true use to the project.
I remember the day I started working as a program manager on the Internet explorer team. On my second day, Joe Belfiore, my boss, came to my office, closed the door, and told me two things:
1. Your relationship with programmers is everything 2. There are only two teams at Microsoft to care about, Windows and Office.
Forget for a moment these specific points. Joe did the most important thing in the world as a boss. He gave me clear priorities. Even if they were wrong, from day one (ok, it was day two) he imparted his private view of how to succeed and how to make sense of things. It was amazingly empowering. I could slice through all of the work being thrown at me from across the team and the company, and divide into two neat piles: a) things to care about, b) things not to care about. Joe was a great boss and provided this kind of clarity all the time.
It turns out both bits of advice were right.
Your relationship with programmers is everything
As a program manager (glorified title for project manager), all of my power actually came from the programmers. I only had a job because of the programmers. No programmers means no code, no product, no revenue. End of story. My power was an extension of theirs. I had to treat them with respect and go out of my way to earn their trust over time.
This meant first and foremost I had to earn their respect. Help them make decisions. Bulldoze organizational road blocks out of their way. Prove I was smart, that I could help them make tough decisions, and could make the product much better even though I couldn't write code as well as they could. And only after establishing that value could I be a team leader and be of true use to the project. With programmers as allies, working with marketers, testers, executives, or leaders of other teams, became easier, and my role as a team leader became possible.
When I visit companies or talk to people, and they tell me they rarely talk to the programmers, a red flashing light goes off in my head. How on earth do you have any power? I wonder. You don't know the people who actually make the thing you are managing! You have no idea if they believe in what they are doing or not, or if they have better ideas than yours. Something critical is broken if project managers don't have collaborative and trusting relationships with programmers. If there is a problem between PMs and programmers, it's the PMs job to fix it. Odds are they're better at communication, conflict resolution and have more perspective, all of the key skills for resolving differences and building relationships. Put another way: if you're a PM and your team hates you, what else do you have? Your relationship with your team is everything.
There are only two teams at Microsoft to care about, Windows and Office.
Back in 1995 when Joe gave me this advice, it was true. There were only two groups at Microsoft that were successful and brining in sizable revenue. The problem was working on Internet Explorer during the browser wars, every one of the 100 teams in the company wanted something from me, and every other PM on the team. They wanted us to add features to help promote their work, code changes to fix bugs that bothered them, etc. There was a huge pile of people who wanted to influence the work I managed. My phone rang all the time and my inbox was always full. If I treated everyone equally I'd be doomed. Couldn't be done. I had to ignore, or say no to, most of the people who wanted something from me. With Joe's advice I had a rough guide for sorting it out. Tons of exceptions of course, but the baseline advice was right and useful.
Good managers give these little bits of power insight all the time. Dividing up the complex, stressful working world of projects into two piles. A project manager derives his power from this kind of clarity, especially if he can articuate it to others like Joe did to me.
Nothing great or lasting was ever created by pursuing money for money's sake. Momentous innovations and companies emerge from visionary goals...
--Take the Long View
Tim calls it "taking the long view." I call it "systems thinking." In both cases, we mean understanding how your work fits into a larger context and set of outcomes. In business, as in life, we often make local, fragmented choices that promise us an immediate benefit while ignoring the long-term costs...Even though it's hard, taking the long view is a key not only to business success but to planetary survival.
Consultants are the honeybees of the business ecology. We spread the good pollen around in the form of insight, methodology and best practices. So the question for consultants is this: Am I helping a company with ethics and an impact on the world which I support?
Underlying the power of Web 2.0 is the idea that every contribution made on the Internet--from an action to a link to a blog or any other commentary--adds value and significance to the network.
Every choice and action counts. This dynamic is true, too, in the "real world." Where we spend our money, our labor and our attention define the world we live in. It is the aggregate of our choices that brought us to this place. It is only through individual choice that we will emerge on the other side.
SEBASTOPOL, Calif. - In March 2008, two days after I joined O'Reilly Media, I found myself at ETech, O'Reilly's emerging technology conference, listening to my new boss, Tim O'Reilly, give a speech about the importance of working on "stuff that matters." His point boiled down this: "We have some really big problems facing us. Let's apply our talent to solving them."
Implicit in that call to action was its mirror opposite directive: Stop working on stuff that doesn't matter (like developing a new way to throw sheep in Facebook). The government's intervention to save Bear Stearns a few days later brought that speech into sharp relief.
Tim's "stuff that matters" theme gained clarity and focus over the year, and current events added urgency to the message. Gas climbed over $140 a barrel. Shearson Lehman collapsed the same week Tim gave a similar talk at the Web 2.0 Expo in New York.
A few weeks into 2009, the message has become simple: We cannot continue "business as usual" in the face of dwindling oil supplies, environmental degradation, climate change and a worldwide economic meltdown.
Yet Tim's call is answered by a different question: "What is the stuff that matters?"
Working on stuff that matters is a personal choice--not a project checklist. In that spirit, here are a few first principles we talk about at O'Reilly. (Tim has written about this on his blog, too.) It's just a beginning. I hope Forbes readers will add to the conversation in the comments below.
Nothing great or lasting was ever created by pursuing money for money's sake. Momentous innovations and companies emerge from visionary goals, or a "Big, Hairy, Audacious Goal."Google's (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ) BHAG was to "organize the world's information." As Paul Graham notes: "Google looked a lot like a charity in the beginning. They didn't have ads for over a year. At year one, Google was indistinguishable from a nonprofit."
Google didn't have much money, but it did have an audacious goal.
--Create More Value Than You Capture
In this era of corporate meltdowns, it is easy to see that the captains of Wall Street were guilty of pulling more out of the ecosystem than they put in. By contrast, the tech companies that have thrived are those that have built strategies where their partners are invested in building joint success. Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) began its life this way. EBay (nasdaq: EBAY - news - people ) is a model of a flourishing ecosystem; it is a platform connecting millions of buyers and sellers while keeping a small percentage of profit.
--Take the Long View
Tim calls it "taking the long view." I call it "systems thinking." In both cases, we mean understanding how your work fits into a larger context and set of outcomes. In business, as in life, we often make local, fragmented choices that promise us an immediate benefit while ignoring the long-term costs. Logic tells us this is the very definition of unsustainable growth. Even though it's hard, taking the long view is a key not only to business success but to planetary survival.
This last point is particularly critical for me in my role leading the consulting arm of O'Reilly. Consultants are the honeybees of the business ecology. We spread the good pollen around in the form of insight, methodology and best practices. So the question for consultants is this: Am I helping a company with ethics and an impact on the world which I support?
Underlying the power of Web 2.0 is the idea that every contribution made on the Internet--from an action to a link to a blog or any other commentary--adds value and significance to the network.
Every choice and action counts. This dynamic is true, too, in the "real world." Where we spend our money, our labor and our attention define the world we live in. It is the aggregate of our choices that brought us to this place. It is only through individual choice that we will emerge on the other side.
The current recession obliges us to rethink business practices. As Stanford University economist Paul Romer has said: A crisis is a terrible thing to waste. So work on Stuff That Matters.
As vice president with O'Reilly Radar, Joshua-Michéle Ross runs O'Reilly Media's consulting practice, helping clients apply Web 2.0 principles. He is also working on a video series, "The Future at Work." E-mail him at joshua.ross@oreilly.com.
From Forbes.com. Exerpt: [Creative innovation] started with interesting problems and people who wanted to solve them, exercising technology to its fullest because exploring new ideas was fun. I call these people "alpha geeks." They are smart enough to make technology do what they want rather than what its originator expected.
So don't follow the money. Follow the excitement. The people inventing the future are doing so just because it's fun.
SEBASTOPOL, Calif.--Forget Silicon Valley. Traditional wisdom is that it represents the model for American innovation: a hotbed of young entrepreneurs with easy access to capital from a large pool of savvy investors.
Think again: The World Wide Web was started by Englishman Tim Berners-Lee because he was frustrated with how hard it was to share information at CERN, the huge physics lab in Switzerland where he worked. Linux was developed by a Finnish college student who wrote the operating system "just for fun" and is only one example of thousands of open-source software projects begun around the world by people who were writing software to "scratch their own itch" and giving it away for free. Even the personal computer revolution, which took root in Silicon Valley, began with a bunch of hobbyists at the Homebrew Computer Club.
It turns out that many of the great waves of creative destruction that have reinvented Silicon Valley didn't start there. More important, they didn't even start with the profit motive.
Rather, they started with interesting problems and people who wanted to solve them, exercising technology to its fullest because exploring new ideas was fun.
I call these people "alpha geeks." They are smart enough to make technology do what they want rather than what its originator expected. The alpha geeks exercise an idea or a gadget, pushing it past its current limits, reinventing it and eventually paving the way for entrepreneurs who figure out how to create mainstream versions of their novel ideas.
I've watched this process now for better than 30 years as a computer book publisher, conference producer, technology activist and early-stage investor. I learned early on that many of the innovations behind my best-selling books weren't coming from companies but from individuals. Their ideas spread through a grassroots network of early adopters and tinkerers long before entrepreneurs and investors appeared on the scene to figure out how to make money from the idea.
The Internet developed in this early adopter Petri dish for more than 15 years before entrepreneurs and venture capitalists clicked on their first e-mail. I was publishing books on free and open-source software in the mid-1980s; Silicon Valley didn't get the open-source message till 1998.
Even recent venture booms, like the one around Web 2.0, a concept that my company popularized in 2004 to remind people that the Web had continued to evolve after the dot-com bust of 2001, missed the story till it was well underway. Key ideas and projects were born during the years when investors had given up on the Web. Only developers driven by a strong personal vision kept at it.
So where's the alpha-geek innovation happening today?
I see it bubbling up in areas like manufacturing, open-source hardware, sensor networks and robotics.
Yes, there are start-ups in these areas, but, more important, there's an enthusiast boom. The Maker Faire, an event O'Reilly Media launched in 2006 to celebrate the people playing at the interface of digital technology and the physical world, last year drew 65,000 attendees, including many families, to view the work of the 500 exhibiting "makers."
Or consider synthetic biology, where high school students are exploring the frontiers through events like the International Genetically Engineered Machines competition. When high-schoolers are doing genetic engineering, you know the future holds some big surprises!
We see innovators working from the outside to put flesh on the vision of government transparency articulated by the Obama administration. Software "hacks," like chicagocrime.org, one of the first Google Maps mash-ups, are becoming a prototype for how government data can be turned into new consumer services by start-ups like everyblock.com.
Tools for investigative journalism put together by nonprofits like the Sunlight Foundation presage the work of start-ups like Apture and Evri. And of course it's hard to ignore the fact that tools for grassroots activism, born out of political enthusiasm by a few "hackers" working for Howard Dean in 2004, turned into real products that helped win the national election only four years later.
How about the energy crisis? Yes, some of Silicon Valley's biggest investors are going after this opportunity. But even here, serendipity and personal curiosity play an unexpected role.
Consider Greenbox, a start-up founded by Jonathan Gay, one of the creators of the ubiquitous Flash technology for online video and animation. After retiring following the acquisition of Macromedia by Adobe (nasdaq: ADBE - news - people ), he built an "off the grid" house (mainly because it was too expensive to bring power to his remote location). He designed some tools to visualize and manage his home power consumption--then realized that they could become the basis of a new business.
So don't follow the money. Follow the excitement. The people inventing the future are doing so just because it's fun.
Tim O'Reilly is the founder and CEO of O'Reilly Media, thought by many to be the best computer book publisher in the world. O'Reilly Media also hosts conferences on technology topics. Tim's blog, the O'Reilly Radar, "watches the alpha geeks" and serves as a platform for advocacy about issues of importance to the technical community. He can also be found as @timoreilly on Twitter.
Innovation does not require technology. One of the teachers I observed created a game to broadly review the concepts of work and energy. Most students were absent because state testing was going on for the previous three school days, so the class was split (seemingly strategically with regard to expected behavior issues) into three teams of two. They had time to write down in their team as many things about work, energy, or work&energy as they could. Then they had several minutes to write these things on the board with different color dry erase markers. Every unique item earned a point. Every false item lost a point. Every irrelevant item was just erased. The teacher went through each item, attempting to engage the students in considering whether each item was valid. This game was educational and built community.
The other teacher I observed did an extended problem straight from the textbook with his AP physics class and discussed elements of it during class.
Lowering the bar of expected complexity and eletronification, let's us see this game as a helpful use of technology.
Documentary offering some sublime insights into equality and the wise division of duties among the sexes.
BLOSSOMS OF FIRE
From 74 min. DVD. More info: www.maureengosling.com
BLOSSOMS OF FIRE is a dazzling, whirling dance of a film that celebrates the extraordinary lives of the Isthmus Zapotecs of southern Oaxaca, Mexico, whose strong work ethic and fierce independent streak rooted in their culture, have resulted not only in powerful women but also in the region's progressive politics and their unusual tolerance of alternative gender roles. These strong women have inspired artists and writers, from Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera, to Miguel Covarrubias.
Broadcast on HBO Latino, Spanish TV, Swedish TV Top Prizes from film festivals in Cuba, China, San Francisco, Montreal, San Antonio and many more
*Critic's Pick: "Instead of the usual endless array of talking heads, we get a truly immersive peek into the lives of these unique people." - New York Magazine
"Gosling and Osborne...bring great enthusiasm to their subject...It's easy to be seduced by this film's warm-hearted...vision." - New York Times
"¡Magnífico documental! Un fascinante viaje...Un estudio honesto y minucioso." La Reforma
"Riveting!" - San Francisco Chronicle "Gorgeous!" - Women's Channel, Canada "Very cool movie" - John Sayles, Director
Produced, Directed, Edited - Maureen Gosling Directed, Co-Produced - Ellen Osborne Co-Produced - Toni Hanna, María Teresa Garcia de la Noceda Cinematographer - Xavier Pérez Grobet
The power of giving women in poverty a VOICE. The result: EMPOWERMENT to make a change for the better.
Where the Water Meets the Sky
Narrated by Morgan Freeman, Where the Water Meets the Sky is the story of a remarkable group of women in a remote region of northern Zambia, who are given a unique opportunity: to learn how to make a film, as a way to speak out about their lives and to challenge the local traditions which have, until now, kept them silent.
Many in the group cant read or write, most are desperately poor, and few have been exposed to film or television. But with the help of two teachers, this class of 23 women learn to shoot a film that portrays a subject of their own choosing. It involves an issue that is traumatic for them all, and rarely spoken about: the plight of young women orphaned by AIDS.
Their film recounts the real-life experiences of Penelop, an 18-year-old orphan, and her struggle to provide for herself and her siblings in the wake of her parents deaths.
What begins as a workshop about filmmaking, and a quest to tell Penelops story, becomes a journey in empowerment as the women rise to the challenge of pressing their community to change.
Uplifting and poignant, Where the Water Meets the Sky is the story of an unforgettable group of women who defy long traditions of silence and who demonstrate with courage, humor and resilience that their futures are once again something of promise.
Why do people do good things? Is kindness hard-wired into the brain, or does this tendency arise via experience? Or is goodness some combination of nature and nurture? And a new science of happiness is finding that these emotions can be readily cultivated in familiar ways, bringing out the good in others and in oneself. Here are some recent empirical examples:
Meditating on a compassionate approach to others shifts resting brain activation to the left hemisphere, a region associated with happiness, and boosts immune functions.
Talking about areas of gratitude, in classrooms, at the dinner table or in the diary, boosts happiness and social well-being and health.
Experiences of reverence in nature or around morally inspiring others improves people's sense of connection to others and sense of purpose.
Laughing and playing in the face of trauma gives the person perspective upon life's inevitable difficulties, and improves resilience and adjustment.
Devoting resources to others, rather than indulging a materialist desire, brings about lasting well being.
This kind of science gives me many hopes for the future. At the broadest level, I hope that our culture shifts from a consumption-based, materialist culture to one that privileges the social joys (play, caring, touch, mirth) that are our older (in the evolutionary sense) sources of the good life.
Focus quotations:
The resuscitation or rebirth of the spirit of man is through the science of the love of God. [The principle of] the harmony of science and religion. Religion must stand the analysis of reason. It must agree with scientific fact and proof so that science will sanction religion and religion fortify science. Both are indissolubly welded and joined in reality. --`Abdu'l-Bahá, PUP 277 and Science and Religion
Forget Survival of the Fittest: It Is Kindness That Counts
A psychologist probes how altruism, Darwinism and neurobiology mean that we can succeed by not being cutthroat.
Why do people do good things? Is kindness hard-wired into the brain, or does this tendency arise via experience? Or is goodness some combination of nature and nurture?
Dacher Keltner, director of the Berkeley Social Interaction Laboratory, investigates these questions from multiple angles, and often generates results that are both surprising and challenging. In his new book,Born to Be Good: The Science of a Meaningful Life, Keltner weaves together scientific findings with personal narrative to uncover the innate power of human emotion to connect people with each other, which he argues is the path to living the good life. Keltner was kind enough to take some time out to discuss altruism, Darwinism, neurobiology and practical applications of his findings with David DiSalvo.
DISALVO: You have a book that was just released called Born to Be Good: The Science of a Meaningful Life. What in a nutshell does the term "born to be good" mean to you, and what are you hoping people learn from reading the book?
KELTNER: "Born to be good" for me means that our mammalian and hominid evolution have crafted a species—us—with remarkable tendencies toward kindness, play, generosity, reverence and self-sacrifice, which are vital to the classic tasks of evolution—survival, gene replication and smooth functioning groups. These tendencies are felt in the wonderful realm of emotion—emotions such as compassion, gratitude, awe, embarrassment and mirth. These emotions were of interest to Darwin, and Darwin-inspired studies have revealed that our capacity for caring, for play, for reverence and modesty are built into our brains, bodies, genes and social practices. My hopes for potential readers are numerous. I hope they learn about the remarkable wisdom of Darwin and the wonders of the study of emotion. I hope they come to look at human nature in a new light, one that is more hopeful and sanguine. I hope they may see the profoundly cooperative nature of much of our daily social living.
DISALVO: You've said that one of the inspirations for your work was Charles Darwin's insights into human goodness. Because most people equate his name with "survival of the fittest," it'll probably be surprising to many that Darwin focused on goodness at all. What were a few of your take aways from Darwin's work that really inspired you?
KELTNER: What an important question. We so often assume both in the scientific community, and in our culture at large, that Darwin thought humans were violent and competitive and self-interested in their natural state. That is a misrepresentation of what Darwin actually believed, and where the evolutionary study of human goodness is going.
My take aways from Darwin are twofold, and as you suggest above, I was surprised as well in arriving at an understanding of Darwin's view of human nature. The first take away is found in Descent of Man, where Darwin argues that we are a profoundly social and caring species. This idea is reflected in the two quotes below, where Darwin argues that our tendencies toward sympathy are instinctual and evolved (and not some cultural construct as so many have assumed), and even stronger (or perhaps more ethical—see his observation about the "timid man" below) than the instinct for self-preservation:
"For firstly, the social instincts lead an animal to take pleasure in the society of his fellows, to feel a certain amount of sympathy with them, and to perform various services for them. … Such actions as the above appear to be the simple result of the greater strength of the social or maternal instincts than that of any other instinct or motive; for they are performed too instantaneously for reflection, or for pleasure or even misery might be felt. In a timid man, on the other hand, the instinct of self-preservation might be so strong, that he would be unable to force himself to run any such risk, perhaps not even for his own child."
The second take away comes from close study of Darwin's Expression of Emotion in Man and Animals, published one year after Descent of Man. There, Darwin details descriptions of emotions such as reverence, love, tenderness, laughter, embarrassment and the conceptual tools to document the evolutionary origins of these emotions. That led me to my own work on the physiology and display of these remarkable emotions, and to the science-based conclusion that these emotions lie at the core of our capacities for virtue and cooperation.
DISALVO: You recently wrote an article with the provocative title "In Defense of Teasing." Because we're ostensibly a society set against teasing in any form (school, workplace, and so on), what do you think teasing has to offer that we might be missing?
KELTNER: Teasing is the art of playful provocation, of using our playful voices and bodies to provoke others to avoid inappropriate behaviors. Marc Bekoff, a biologist at the University of Colorado, Boulder, has found in remarkable work with coyotes that they sort out leaders from aggressive types in their rough-and-tumble biting. The coyotes that bite too hard in such provocative play are relegated to low status positions. We likewise accomplish so much with the right kind of teasing.
Teasing (in the right way, which is what most people do) offers so much. It is a way to play and express affection. It is a way of negotiating conflicts at work and in the family. Teasing exchanges teach children how to use their voices in innumerable ways—such an important medium of communication. In teasing, children learn boundaries between harm and play. And children learn empathy in teasing, and how to appreciate others' feelings (for example, in going too far). And in teasing we have fun. All of this benefit is accomplished in this remarkable modality of play.
DISALVO: Your team at U.C. Berkley has done a lot of interesting research on the vagus nerve and its association with altruistic feelings. Tell us a bit about this research and its implications for better understanding the nature of altruism.
KELTNER: The vagus nerve is part of the parasympathetic autonomic nervous system. It is a bundle of nerves that originates in the top of the spinal cord, it activates different organs throughout the body (heart, lungs, liver, digestive organs). When active, it is likely to produce that feeling of warm expansion in the chest, for example when we are moved by someone's goodness or when we appreciate a beautiful piece of music. University of Illinois, Chicago, psychiatrist Steve Porges long ago argued that the vagus nerve is a care-taking organ in the body (of course, it serves many other functions as well). Several reasons justify this claim. The vagus nerve is thought to stimulate certain muscles in the vocal chamber, enabling communication. It reduces heart rate. Very new science suggests that it may be closely connected to oxytocin receptor networks. And it is unique to mammals.
Our research and that of other scientists suggests that the vagus nerve may be a physiological system that supports caretaking and altruism. We have found that activation of the vagus nerve is associated with feelings of compassion and the ethical intuition that humans from different social groups (even adversarial ones) share a common humanity. People who have high vagus nerve activation in a resting state, we have found, are prone to feeling emotions that promote altruism—compassion, gratitude, love, happiness. Arizona State University psychologist Nancy Eisenberg has found that children with elevated vagal tone (high baseline vagus nerve activity) are more cooperative and likely to give. This area of study is the beginning of a fascinating new argument about altruism—that a branch of our nervous system evolved to support such behavior.
DISALVO: Oftentimes we learn about intriguing academic work being done on emotions, morality and related areas, but are left asking, "OK, but how do we do any of this? Is there anything we can make actual use of here?" Looking down the road, what do you want the impact of your work to be out in the world?
KELTNER: I have always felt that our science is only as good as the truthful rendition of reality that it provides and the good that it brings to our species. In summarizing the new science of emotion in Born To Be Good, I was struck by how useful this science is. The ancient approaches to ethics and virtue—for example, found in Aristotle or Confucius—privileged things such as compassion, gratitude and reverence. A new science of virtue and morality is suggesting that our capacities for virtue and cooperation and our moral sense are old in evolutionary terms, and found in emotions that I write about in Born To Be Good.
And a new science of happiness is finding that these emotions can be readily cultivated in familiar ways, bringing out the good in others and in oneself. Here are some recent empirical examples:
Meditating on a compassionate approach to others shifts resting brain activation to the left hemisphere, a region associated with happiness, and boosts immune functions.
Talking about areas of gratitude, in classrooms, at the dinner table or in the diary, boosts happiness and social well-being and health.
Experiences of reverence in nature or around morally inspiring others improves people's sense of connection to others and sense of purpose.
Laughing and playing in the face of trauma gives the person perspective upon life's inevitable difficulties, and improves resilience and adjustment.
Devoting resources to others, rather than indulging a materialist desire, brings about lasting well being.
This kind of science gives me many hopes for the future. At the broadest level, I hope that our culture shifts from a consumption-based, materialist culture to one that privileges the social joys (play, caring, touch, mirth) that are our older (in the evolutionary sense) sources of the good life. In more specific terms, I see this new science informing practices in almost every realm of life. Here again are some well-founded examples. Medical doctors are now receiving training in the tools of compassion—empathetic listening, warm touch—that almost certainly improve basic health outcomes. Teachers now regularly teach the tools of empathy and respect. Executives are learning the wisdom around the country of emotional intelligence—respect, building trust—that there is more to a company's thriving than profit or the bottom line. In prisons and juvenile detention centers, meditation is being taught.
Love. Kindness. Justice. Service. The virtues are the very meaning and purpose of our lives. They are universally valued by people of all faiths and cultures...
I have a degree in the Arabic language, as well as CELTA (English teaching) certification. I teach English in Ho Chi Minh City (previously Oslo) and have been a Baha'i since 1990. Contact form: http://is.gd/5nYHY (or post a comment on the blog).
email
print
reprint
newsletter
comments (14)
del.icio.us
Digg It!
yahoo
Facebook
rss
Comment On This Story