I have a problem with reading and processing politics. Its
effects on me can be devastating.
I love to think about events in the outside world. I love to
discuss politics, society, and law with friends, to write about them, and to
teach about them. I tend to focus on worldviews different from my own,
especially when I write. I seek to cultivate intellectual rigor and flexibility
in my students. All this is worth my time, and I do it voraciously.
The health of the world depends on people thinking
critically, I believe—breaking down ideas, considers counterarguments, and
reaching provisional conclusions that can be amended or scrapped. Through
teaching and writing about socio-politics, I guide others through this process.
I contribute to the world by helping people learn to process ideas in ways that
open up intellectual space. New socio-political opportunities arise when people
think open-mindedly, rigorously, and creatively. I encourage students to
approach history, including current history, with humility. By respectfully
considering others’ conclusions, students fertilize their intellectual
environment. They help change the world by thinking clearly and flexibly.
I am not a casual person. I respond to everything I do with
emotional intensity. Observing politics and society is no exception.
Much as world events bring me pleasure, they also cause me
distress. Political issues elicit powerful emotions in me, as they do in many
people. Besides becoming inspired, I also become disgusted, desperate, and
enraged. These emotions have value: they motivate people to repair institutions
and achieve social justice. But, in teaching students to see beyond human
differences, tumult harms me more than helps me.
I am an observer and converser, not an activist. Desperation
interferes with humble reflection and discussion; it obstructs my ability to
teach critical thinking. My writing, which focuses on belief systems different
from mine, especially suffers when I feel enraged. Although these powerful
emotions sometimes prompt spirited discussion, they can cause me to act in ways
that hardly benefit me or the people who come into contact with me.
Moment to moment, I aim to cultivate serenity and flexibility, and my political rage drives me toward resentment and anger. Rage drives me to speak sharply and sow discord. Reading about political issues sparks my inner monster. I cannot teach effectively when I’m in monster mode.
Moment to moment, I aim to cultivate serenity and flexibility, and my political rage drives me toward resentment and anger. Rage drives me to speak sharply and sow discord. Reading about political issues sparks my inner monster. I cannot teach effectively when I’m in monster mode.
My work in the world depends not only on broadmindedness but
also on equanimity. Spiritual as well as intellectual wellbeing is paramount.
Whenever I take in national and world news, I struggle to maintain gratitude and
mindfulness.
To maintain equanimity, I periodically tune out the
socio-political world. I’m not necessarily happy about this. My line of work depends
on my reading and processing events in the outside world. But I am most
dedicated to enacting love, and I love less when I argue more. And so, at times,
I consciously remain unconscious of world events.
Still, I remain a compulsive consumer of politics. I cannot
abstain for long.
My challenge lies in integrating my primary imperatives. How
do I pursue excellence in all its aspects? How do I emotionally engage
political and social events and still teach and write about them effectively? How
do I consider national and international conflict in ways that open up space
rather than shut it down?
To be sure, I do manage to integrate these tasks. My students and readers express satisfaction. But I
could do a better job.