i ponder the idea of how we see quite a lot. being a photographer, i am focused, among other things, on seeing what is evident as much as what is not evident. i often bear in mind that what i might be focusing on as the shot might not be as interesting as the shot looking in the opposite direction. for example, shooting images of a baby's face are indeed valid portrait images to capture. but just as telling and touching could be images of the mother's face as she gazes at her child. if i only focused on the baby, i would not turn my camera and i would miss the mom's expression.
i share this example to illustrate the value of seeing, understanding, even having compassion for opposite angles of a situation. of twisting to get an alternate vantage to ensure we comprehend the entire spectrum instead of limiting ourselves to partial information. ultimately... this practice is necessary in living our best life. indulge me to expound a bit more.
it seems in the animal kingdom and in mommy and me classes, one can observe two types of us: sitters and rovers. apparently in the wilds and in "civilization" 15-20% of us are watchful observers, introverts, sitters... assessing a situation, taking in subtle information about associations and relationships before we decide on a course of action. the other 80% of us are rovers who act before observing, exploring their surroundings by interacting with them.
an extrovert professionally when producing, but an introvert at heart and when writing, i have been gifted with various comments from rovers who perhaps were frustrated by my comfort in observing rather than being a social butterfly, and by my comfort in working solo. and indeed, in a new york times opinion piece this weekend, susan cain wrote that many of our anti-anxiety and anti-depression meds over-prescribed to our culture today, are doled out to sitters because our behavior is seen as an affliction instead of a gift.
while there seems to be no difference in IQ between sitters and rovers, each has their own strengths. rovers make friends easily, take risks, are more likely to be hospitalized from injury and are more likely to have affairs. sitters stay on task, work accurately and are more likely to be the creatives in their fields. as leaders, we introverts are also more likely to listen to and implement ideas of others.
cain concludes with a question our culture MUST consider for its own health. medical treatments focus on what is considered to be wrong with people. what if we focused instead on what is right? sitters are not necessarily anxious or depressed, but by contrast to rovers and certainly in comparison with those on anti-anxiety or anti-depression meds (which are now inducing extroversion), we are behaviorally different. but there are positive strengths in those differences. our culture needs us both, rovers and sitters. we need the yin and the yang. as cain warns, what if we are a society who is as comfortable changing our psyches as we are our hair color?
i submit that our fundamental nature holds more wisdom than our prescription practices. and that shyness is not a pathology. what if we were bold enough to make a paradigm shift in our thinking and focus on what is right about us, instead of looking for what might be considered "wrong."
twist to see all sides. look to see what is right, instead of jumping to what we think is wrong. trust our inner guide. live in balance. all conspire to help us live our best lives.
liz
Stumble It!