Quotes from the Top of the Mind‪™‬ Bill Crawford, Ph.D.

Quote: ""There are two ways to make someone important in our lives . . . we can either love them or hate them.” - Bill Crawford, Ph.D.

Comment: This perspective has come to me from the work I do with individuals and organizations around stress and dealing with difficult people. For example, it never seems to fail that in my presentations, when I ask the participants to describe the problems they encounter on a daily basis, many will speak to the challenges of dealing with a particular person. The stories they tell about these people are very convincing, and I have no doubt that the person or persons that they are describing are indeed hard to live and/or work with. And yet, I wonder if our tendency to focus so intently on these problematic individuals is truly serving us? In other words, by continually thinking about all the ways they drive us crazy and make us nuts, aren't we really making them more important and even more powerful than they really deserve to be?

To find the answer, after the participants have identified the difficult people who are "stressing them out," I ask . . . . "OK, on a scale of one to ten, how important do you want this person to be in your life?" Most people will then respond with "zero" and it is then that we begin to discuss the concept behind this week's quote. For you see, while I can certainly understand how we might experience difficult people as frustrating, stressful, problematic etc., I’m concerned that our tendency to hold them in our thoughts, and make them the focus of our conversations might be making this person much more powerful that we want them to be. This is especially true when we use phrases such as, "so and so just drives me crazy!" or "he or she just makes me so angry!" because in describing these problematic individuals in this way, we are actually giving them the power to "make us" feel a certain way or control us!

If you have determined that you no longer want this person (or people like them) to have that sort of power in your life, then you must be willing to take on that power yourself. In order to do this you must first, move from a vision of the problem (them, and how they have "made you feel") to the solution. In other words, if you have decided that you truly want them to have zero effect on how you feel, then you must create a vision of what this looks like and feels like in your mind before you can make it a reality in your life.

This means creating an image or imaginary movie where the difficult person is being their old predictable difficult self, and you are responding in a way that has you in control of your emotions and experience of life. You might choose to see them as frightened versus frightening, You might choose to smile, nod, and go on your way, you might choose to say something non-inflammatory such as "How interesting" and move into some aspect of your life that you enjoy.

Whatever you decide, you will be choosing to deal with them "on purpose" and in such a way that neither requires them to change nor makes them the focus of your life.

Of course, this new perspective will take practice. However, given that we are always practicing something (meaning that, up to this point, we have been unwittingly practicing giving them more power than we really want) then practicing reducing their ability to effect our lives while increasing our own power and influence would seem to be worth the effort.

Therefore, once you have decided what you want to practice with respect to difficult people, then you can begin to use them (to practice with) versus them using you or being able to “make you” feel one thing or another. And, given that any anything we practice will eventually become a skill, we can feel good in the knowledge that at some point in the future, we will be totally in charge of the effect others have on us and our lives. Not a bad skill to have, and even pass on to future generations, don't you think?

Quote: "Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal while blaming our misery on the person who started the fire." - Bill Crawford

Comment: I have chosen this bit of prose as this week's quote because of its insight into the advisability of holding on to anger. Of course, there are very few who would say that harboring feelings of anger for any length of time is a good idea. However, I feel certain that most people would acknowledge that this tendency to hold on to resentment and frustration or run the images of being "wronged" over and over in our mind is quite common.

Therefore, maybe the first question we should address is "why?" In other words, why do we tend to hold on to our anger when "logically" this doesn't make any sense? Certainly we were not born this way. Could it be that early on, we saw the powerful people in our lives use anger to enforce their will, and learned that anger makes one powerful? Could it be that we saw people take advantage of others until finally they got so angry that they stopped the abuse, and learned that anger can keep us safe? Could it be that we were told that we shouldn't be angry by people who were angry at us, and thus learned that our anger was wrong while theirs was righteous? Could it be that we feel vulnerable or powerless without our anger, or that no one pays attention to us until we get really mad? Regardless, what all of these suggestions have in common is that however we find ourselves dealing with anger, it is a learned reaction. Therefore, maybe the real question we should be asking isn't, "Why?" but instead, is this learned perspective on anger really serving us? Is it helping us create the life we want, or is it hindering this creative effort?

Of course, anger in and of itself isn't a problem. The chemical reaction we call anger is actually a survival instinct designed to motivate us to action when we are faced with a fight-or-flight situation. No, the problem isn't that we feel anger, it's that we then try to use that anger to resolve the problem! This is why I like drawing the analogy of the similarity between anger and a hot coal, because we all know that if we were to grasp a hot coal, we would not hold on to it for very long. In this case, the pain we felt would be good information!

The problem with anger, of course, is that we don't see it as good information, we see it as what someone or something else is doing to us. ("He/She/It makes me so angry I could just _________") Given this belief, we must then change "them" or "it" before we can let go of our anger. How's that working for you? Tired of getting "burned" when all you really want to do is stop the pain? If so, I suggest we begin to use our anger for what it is, a signal that something needs our attention.

This means we bring our best thinking to the situation and deal with the problem in a very purposeful way.In this way, rather than grasping a hot coal and blaming the person who started the fire for our misery, we can notice the "heat" of an issue before it becomes a destructive flame, and respond to this signal as if it is indeed good information. Maybe a misunderstanding is causing some problems. Maybe there are some agreements that need to be clarified or discussed. Or, maybe we just have different visions of what is appropriate here and if these differences are significant enough, we may choose to go create our personal and professional relationships with those who share our visions.

Bottom line, when we hold on to our anger with the intent of using it to solve the problem, we often wind up just fanning our internal flames of resentment and rage, and we are the ones who get burned. If, however, we catch this signal when it is very small, we just might be able to use it to light a lamp of awareness and actually shed some light on the situation, or at the very least, create a fire that is used for warmth and to "cook up" new possibilities versus burning ourselves or others.

Quote: "You don't have to attend every argument to which you are invited."
- Unknown

Comment: A participant in one of my workshops gave me this quote, and I am impressed with how it reminds us that we have choices about how we interact with those around us. While this seems somewhat obvious, I would imagine that many of us find these interactions almost automatic (especially around arguments). In other words, when someone "invites us to an argument" by criticizing some aspect of our lives, most of us find ourselves reacting in one of several very predictable ways. We either fight back, defend ourselves, or withdraw.

For those of you who are aware of my Top of the Mind philosophy, you know that this fight or flight tendency is driven by the lower, reactive 20% of the brain. And further, when we are coming from this lower reactive brainstem, we don't have access to the clarity, confidence, and creativity of the "Top of the Mind" that we need to be successful in life. This is especially true when trying to be influential with others because if we are not clear about the value of our position, we won't be able to deal with conflict from a place of confidence and creativity.

Of course, even if you are not familiar with how the brain influences communication, we all know that these fight-or-flight reactions rarely produce very satisfying results. If we fight back, we have then matched their energy, and are now part of an ever-escalating cycle of conflict that can actually result in them becoming more argumentative. If we defend ourselves, they will very likely attack our defense because they are generally not looking to understand our position, they are just trying to convince us of something. If we withdraw, they will either chase after us (trying to engage us in the argument) or believe that they have "won," which only goes to reinforce their belief that attacking others is the way to get what they want.
Now, I am not saying that one should never fight back or withdraw. In fact, if someone is unable to fight back or stand up for their rights in a situation, then learning this skill may be exactly what is called for. Similarly, if one always "has to" fight back and doesn't have the ability to just walk away from a confrontation, then this skill might be worth developing. What we are talking about here is not what one "should" do, but what one chooses to do. It's all about choice.

Becoming aware that we have these choices, and then making them "on purpose" is, in my opinion, one of the crucial components in creating successful relationships or interactions. Let's look at how this week's quote might help us with these choices. For example, we could become more purposeful about how we respond to invitations to arguments at work. We could decide whether the situation would be improved by our standing up for our position, walking away, or not attending the argument in the first place. We could make these same decisions at home, with our friends, in our extended family, and even the strangers we encounter on a daily basis.

The bottom line is regardless who is inviting us to an argument, we are responsible for how we choose to respond to that invitation. If we have concluded that arguments are not our preferred form of communication, we can either suggest a more functional way of discussing the situation or, having determined that the relationship isn't currently open to change, just choose to wait until the person is willing to create a more respectful interaction. Whatever the choice, the fact that we will be choosing "on purpose" should serve us in creating a more purposeful life. In fact, the next time someone invites you to an argument, you might just send them a note: "Sorry, I can't make it... too busy living life. Feel free to start without me."

Quote: "We've all heard that in life, when one door is closed, another is opened. Unfortunately, many of us are so focused on the darkness left by what has been lost, we never see the light coming through the newly opened door.” – Bill Crawford

Comment: By the way, while I believe that this week's quote has much to offer for those of us looking to better navigate life's ups and downs, I want to begin by making sure that this concept isn't misinterpreted to imply that grieving a loss is somehow wrong, or a failure on someone's part to "see the light." As a psychologist and someone who lost both of my parents to cancer in my early 20's, I know how important it is to allow oneself to grieve after a significant loss. If you are interested in more of my thoughts on the grieving process and its role in healing, feel free to read my two-part essay on the subject under “grief” on my website. For this discussion, however, just know that my thoughts on seeing the light versus the darkness are not a prohibition against grieving. Instead, they are an observation on our tendency to focus on the past and the problem when things don't turn out the way we had hoped, and how this perspective may very well have us missing those other more beneficial aspects of the situation that have also changed. This situation could be something we had but lost, such as the loss of a job or relationship, or sometimes our disappointment is centered around something we wanted, but didn't get, such as a promotion, a date, a new business opportunity that fell through, etc.

Regardless, the tendency for most of us is to pay a LOT of attention to the loss, or the "closed door." We find ourselves fixated on what is no longer available to us, which, of course, has us feeling dejected and deflated. Unfortunately, this then has us looking for who's to blame ("them" or us) which adds resentment and/or guilt to our list, and deepens our feelings of despair. While this is understandable, I'm going to suggest that it is not working for us, and that there is another alternative to dealing with those aspects of life that don't turn out the way we had hoped. This alternate view is wider and more encompassing than the typical myopic perspective described above, and takes in, not only what doors have closed, but also what new rays of light that might be spilling from other doors jarred open by the upheaval.

My guess is that we all have had this experience. Something is lost but eventually something else is found which often, is even better than the experienced on which we were so transfixed. . . a light spilling through some newly opened door that would have never been seen if it were not for the darkness created by the door that was closed.
In fact, maybe the question shouldn’t be "should we feel bad?" or “isn't it normal to feel disappointment when something doesn't turn out the way we had hoped?" but instead: “Given that this door is closed, how long do I want to dwell on what is lost and feel the feelings that accompany this view? A month? A week?, A day? An Hour?" Or, "If someone I loved experienced this loss, how long I would recommend they feel bad, what would I want for them?

You see, while it's true that the "normal" reaction to a loss is some degree of sadness and/or regret, the length of time that these feelings need persist is not fixed. Plus, as this week's quote suggests, the real goal here isn't to just "avoid feeling bad" or even to simply limit the amount of time that we feel bad, but to look for what else has changed, or the ray of light spilling through some newly opened door.

"A happy life is just a string of happy moments, but most people don't create the happy moments because they're so busy chasing a happy life." – Adapted from Esther Hicks

This quote was chosen for its wisdom in helping us understand what is required to create a happy life. For example, while most people would say that happiness is what they want, they also seem to believe that this illusive state lies somewhere in the future. "I will be happy when: I get the job/house/car I want, when I get married/divorced, when I have a certain amount of money, and/or when my boss/lover/son/daughter/mother /father/husband/wife/company/etc., starts treating me better! In the meantime, I've got to go to work, do the laundry, take care of the kids, and pay the bills, so get out of my way because I'm already late!"

In other words, they seem to believe that something or someone "out there" must change in order for them to be happy, and that they have no expectation that this change is going to happen any time soon. A common belief, to be sure, however, I wonder if it's really serving us or really helping us achieve what we say we want, i.e., a happy life.

This week's quote, on the other hand, offers a different perspective. It says that the positive experience we want is not necessarily in the future, but can be created now if we are willing to see a happy life as a string of happy moments. As in Eckhart Tolle's book, "The Power of Now," and other writings on the subject, the message here is that we create our life one moment at a time and thus, the more purposeful we can be about the creation of this moment and the next, the more successful we will be in creating the sort of life (happy, meaningful, etc.) that we desire. Of course, this makes several assumptions:
That we are clear about the experience of life we want to create.
That we are willing to take 100% responsibility for the creation of this experience.
That we are willing to look at this moment (what we are doing, and how we are feeling right now) as the place to start.

Unfortunately, many people do not share this clarity and willingness, and thus find themselves chasing what they say they most want. I suggest we stop the chase and start the process of purposeful creation. For example, what are you doing right now? Reading this quote and comment, right? Is it enjoyable? If so, congratulations! You have successfully begun! If not, I would encourage you to stop reading this and start doing what you enjoy.

Bottom line: the criteria we choose to use will determine the quality of the moment-by-moment choices, which will combine to determine the quality of our life. Here's to creating as many meaningful, joyful, and happy moments as possible so that when all is said and done, we can look back at the life we have created and smile.

For those of you who are looking for new ways to create meaning and success in your lives, psychologist, Dr. Bill Crawford, offers this podcast which combines concepts from two artists from different worlds and times. William Shakespeare, of course, is famous for positing that, "All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players," which, while a much quoted perspective, and certainly one that is poetic, doesn't by itself necessarily help us create a meaningful life.

Add to this, however, the concept that this "stage" is the setting for a play, and further, that a loving or benign presence might be the playwright (which is taken from present-day composer and lyricist, David Wilcox, and his composition, "Show the Way") and you get a very interesting perspective that I believe can be used to bring meaning to our lives, and allow us to become more influential in our daily experiences.

"Show the Way" is a song from David Wilcox's album, "Big Horizon," and even though it was written over 15 years ago, it begins where many people find themselves today . . . speaking to what it's like to be frightened and having trouble holding on to hope. But then it goes on to speak of a higher purpose in the chorus when it says:

It is Love who mixed the mortar
And it’s Love who stacked these stones
And it’s Love who set the stage here
Though it looks like we’re alone.
In this scene set in shadows
Like the night is here to stay
There is evil cast around us

Not that there is evil all around us but that evil, or fear, or negative people and/or situations are cast around us . . . or that they "play a part" and are is there for a reason.

There is evil cast around us
But it’s Love that wrote the play…

Why?

For in this darkness, Love can show the way

This means again, that fear and darkness are playing their roles, which are to allow love to show the way, or guide us in our journey. The image that comes to my mind here is a series of rooms that are brightly lit, but confusing in their layout so that we don't know which way to turn. Bringing a guiding light into this situation would serve no purpose because we wouldn't be able to see what it was showing us.
However, if the rooms were dark the light could "show the way," which, of course, is the name of the song and the message David Wilcox is wanting to get across.
In order to make this work, Dr. Crawford suggests that we start small and begin to see these daily situations as scenes in a play. There could be the traffic scene, the kids scene, the work scene, the stuck at the airport scene, the spouse and/or family scene. etc.
And just as in a play, our job is to step on stage and define our character. What have we got to lose, other than a part that never fit us very well in the first place?