What if THIS were true - What would it mean to you?

10-14-24.

• What if the mind, whether material or ethereal, is not a noun. What if it was more accurately considered a verb?

• What if the verb of minding was defined as the regulation of energy and information?

• What if the process of minding was emergent, self-organizing, embodied, and transpersonal?

In a recent conversation with friends, I shared this preceding thesis. The only credit I took, was that I stumbled across this set of ideas after psychologist Dan J. Siegel started publishing his research at the turn of the millennium. He created this definition in order to conduct quantifiable, scientific research for his therapy practice at UCLA. I'll paraphrase two stories that Siegel shares:

In a meeting, the Dalai Lama said to him, "You people of science must take the scepter and run with it for the sake of human kind. We, in the spirit field, have failed to teach what is necessary to exist in harmony. Science must provide the convincing proofs."

After a presentation, a Buddhist monk came up to Dan Siegel to say, "Thank you for describing what we do in such clear and useful terms."

Siegel's many books describe his research, the many resulting implications, and models in therapy and behavior. Yet he's careful not to stray too far into the "spiritual" corners of the mindfulness field, where popular notions can become distorted and exploited.

But what if we take his definition as a basis for a lifetime of self-exploration? For example, I make no distinctions between science and spirit in my own thinking, which results in a curiously creative, and fluid dynamic. Such a dynamic allows me to improvise a path to both center myself, and, at the same time, take advantage of opportunities. To me, it feels like growing towards the light. It allows me to embrace the paradox of knowing about "Rules of the Road" at the same time as listening for the heartbeat of essential energy.

As a result of adopting Siegel's definition as a guiding framework, here are a few of my observations:

1. Women seem to have have a more natural understanding and practice of "minding." Some cultural examples are: We learn to mind our business, sometimes we mind the business of others, and we learn to mind children. We seem to embody the interplay of observing and internalizing without debating the merits. We grasp the implications of context and formative conditions to understand behavior. We recognize the strength in qualitative research, as described eloquently in the 1997 book Women's Ways of Knowing. We also have a sense of the natural wave patterns embedded in life. We use a more conditional language that permits nuance - and possibility, as Emily Dickinson once described in her poem, "I dwell in Possibility."

2.  Men appear to have a more natural tendency towards dichotomy. Not necessarily a bad thing, just different. That is to say, that men tend to codify into "1 and 0," right and wrong, matter vs. energy. Men have been the dominant voice in the philosophy of "mind vs matter," objective truth vs. subjective truth, quantitative vs qualitative research. This tendency has created a vortex of debate throughout recorded history. A collection of thought silos that separates even the most complex sciences of classic and quantum physics. In literature, for example, one encounters W.C. William's declaration: "No ideas but in things." in this manner, men seem to have tendencies toward more rule-based conduct, regulations, and manifestos.

3. Both items 1 and 2 are distinct –– and necessary. In fact, Siegel's theory provides the framework for recognizing the analog "energy" and the digital "information." The process of "minding," then, becomes the way we learn to regulate those two elements within our own lives. I sometimes think of information as flattened energy. Information makes our choices distinct and more efficient for behavior choices. But it is also wise to pay attention to the nuances of energetic changes in context. If we taught this framework, with both elements, much earlier in life, we would recognize regulation as a skill that we can learn. Like a muscle that can be strengthened. Like an exercise program that would improve our mental health. Minding, then, becomes a way to navigate both obstacles and changes.

4. Emergent is a relatively new word and concept in culture. It means a newly created result that can't be predicted by merely dissecting the combined elements. In other words, reverse engineering doesn't always disclose the transformative interplay. This concept flies in the face of traditional psychology, which has tried to explain and predict behaviors based on mechanistic traits, principles, stages, or models. It also gives me hope for possibilities in future education. In literary terms, it means that every moment presents a metaphor for how to conduct or change our lives for better outcomes. Our transformation can be like a constantly changing chrysalis. This observation places me in fierce opposition to another dear friend who believes that all events are a deterministic unfolding. I argue that this latter belief leads to a somewhat unfortunate reduced sense of self-responsibility.

5. Self-Organizing is also a radical concept. As far back as Aristotle, we have a model for logical categories of reality, as if those categories exist outside of us. But now, we can imagine that formative and modern conditions inform us of connections not consistent with classic logic. For example, I first read about Phenomenology in college, a field that understands the mutually dynamic relationship between internal and external landscapes. Moreover, it explains that our process of minding also filters information. As a result, our limited experience creates gaps we fill with an internal logic.

6. Embodied is a word that frees us from the "brain as mind" problem. We now understand that there are multiple sensory and processing channels for energy and information. Our gut has it's own brain. Our organs have the capability to respond to non-brain signals. Even our individual cells have metabolic systems that operate independently yet contribute to our well-being.

7. Transpersonal was a term originally used by Siegel, then in later writings, his books shifted to the term interpersonal. His discussions changed to stress attachment theory as systemic or social support. But, I first heard him use the word transpersonal in a video he did with Jack Kornfield, who was one of the practitioners of the meditation center, Spirit Rock. The DVD presentation implied that there was, in fact, a spiritual component to one's sense of well-being. This would be consistent with psychologies Abraham Maslow's seminal essay titled Theory Z, which described the ability of certain people to remain tranquil and transcend obstacles or problems in life. I've experienced such ability as a result of a combination of knowledge in philosophy, psychology, meditation, and yoga as centering practices. Part of those practices calls for awareness of my relationship to pain and, ultimately, death. Perhaps it's useful to consider both elements: transpersonal and interpersonal.

The effect of thinking this way has had some potent results to keep me balanced:

1. It helps me see money as merely a storage device for energy. It's energy I need to survive and thrive, but there are also many other non-monetary assets and sources of energy that are equally important.

2. I also perceive that emotions have evolved in our mammalian systems to provide extra energy to survive. Such emotions, known to be part of the "amygdala" areas of the brain and other organs allow us to boost ourselves in situations that require flight, fight, or freeze. Emotions promote social connection for love or solace. But, when I'm aware of my emotions, I feel more power to regulate them. I recognize that they can be a misleading as a source of information.

3. The term energy allows me to understand the wave patterns in my experience. From my successes, to failures, to the inevitability of changes in everything from the stock market to emotional moods, and even to the rise and fall of civilizations. When I'm aware of this pattern of change, I avoid expectations that lead to disappointment. I take everything with a grain of salt. I take things less personally. I forgive, apologize, and feel compassion more easily..

4. Using Siegel's definition of minding has allowed me to separate aspects of energy and information. When regulated in this way, it's led to faith in my ability to improvise when faced with problems: A faith that creativity conquers crisis.

By training myself to be aware of how I "mind" events, situations, and things in my life, I feel empowered to make choices that make me feel safe, healthy, joyful and free. That's the substance of a Zen/Buddhist Mettā Sutta I learned in a Naropa class with Robert Spellman. It's a wish for myself –– and all other beings with which I conclude my practices. To me, this is not only a personal practice, but it is a global gesture for all living creatures.

I'm sharing Siegel's definitional shift from noun to verb here. This shift is subtle, yet might provide an explanation of how humans have evolved to advance past other creatures: Minding gives us the capability to choose, not merely react to our environment. I would be curious to hear what it might mean to you.