Skip to content
May 9, 2013 / compassioninpolitics

Cynicism Bad Turns–Answers to Skepticism

Your framework is flawed at a fundamental level & a self-fulling prophesy. Hope instead of cynicism makes the world better–creates the possibility of change. Boyatzis and McKee in 2005.
(Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee, Professor, Psychology, and Leadership expert, Resonant Leadership: Renewing Yourself and Connecting with Others Through Mindfulness, Hope, and Compassion, p. 151)

Hope acts as a magnet–an “attractor” in the terminology of complexity theory. Like other positive emotions such as excitement, amusement, elation, and happiness, hope has a positive impact on our brains and hormones. It affects our perceptions of the events around us, so that we tend to see things in general more positively. In this way, the attractor catalyzes a self-perpetuating sequence, or self-organizing system. As the positive emotional attractor, then, hope allows you to consider your strengths, your dreams, and desired vision for the future. Such contemplation then slows your breathing, lowers your blood pressure, strengthens your immune system, and engages your parasympathetic nervous system. You feel calm, elated, happy, amused, and optimistic. You are up for the challenges ahead, energized, and prepared to act on your strengths to make your vision become reality.”

“At work, the stress response often shows up as abrupt, thoughtless treatment of people, “ready-aim-fire” decisions, and cynicism. Cynicism is one of the most destructive manifestations of negativity and dissonance. It causes people to focus solely on what is most wrong with a person, group, or organization, so little or no call on individuals to take responsibility for making positive change. Cynicism is self-perpetuating, breeding frustration and despair–even hopelessness--which in turn breed more cynicism. In this state, there can be little, if any, movement toward a constructive vision of the future.

[Multiple perspectives and research concludes] Your framework is flawed at a fundamental level & a self-fulling prophesy. Hope instead of cynicism makes the world better–creates the possibility of change. Boyatzis and McKee in 2005.
(Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee, Professor, Psychology, and Leadership expert, Resonant Leadership: Renewing Yourself and Connecting with Others Through Mindfulness, Hope, and Compassion, p. 157)

“Our argument: research in the fields of neurophysiology, psychology, sociology, and management indicates clearly and quite conclusively that it is precisely in engaging in the soft stuff–rather than maintaining a negative orientation and focus–that leads to positive expectations, positive emotions, and hope, and thus the ability to envision and achieve goals.”

* This might work in conjunction with another card. The soft stuff is a little vague, although it references negativity very clearly.

Your framework is flawed at a fundamental level & a self-fulling prophesy. Hope instead of cynicism makes the world better–creates the possibility of change. Boyatzis and McKee in 2005.
(Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee, Professor, Psychology, and Leadership expert, Resonant Leadership: Renewing Yourself and Connecting with Others Through Mindfulness, Hope, and Compassion, p. 151)
“Indeed hope has been shown to lead to other positive emotions, more positive thoughts, superior coping abilities, and less depression–even in people with serious physical conditions such as spinal cord injuries. To use another example: adolescent burn survivors who report feelings exhibit less harmful behaviors to themselves and others and more positive interactions with caregivers and friends. Hope has also been shown to predict higher grades in college students, as well as account for 56 precent of actual track performance in college athletes.
These examples are part of a growing body of literature on the impact of positive emotions on our behavior, including how effectively we reason and think, how we interact with other people, and what we are capable of doing. Specifically positive emotions impact our openness and cognitive flexibility, problem-solving abilities, empathy, willingness to seek variety, and persistence.”

Your framework is flawed at a fundamental level & a self-fulling prophesy. Hope instead of cynicism makes the world better–creates the possibility of change. Boyatzis and McKee in 2005.
(Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee, Professor, Psychology, and Leadership expert, Resonant Leadership: Renewing Yourself and Connecting with Others Through Mindfulness, Hope, and Compassion, p. 165)

Optimism is a way of looking at life. We all know people who truly see the glass as half full most of the time. Maybe you are one of those people. This outlook actually influences how you feel and what you think about things that happen to you and around you. Optimistic people tend to believe that good things will happen, and when bad things happen, that the situation is bound to change for the better fairly quickly.

The interesting thing is that there are specific leadership actions associated with optimism, such as seeking opportunities and deliberately overcoming obstacles to a goal, as well as overtly expecting the best from people and situations. These actions are key to emotional intelligence, and people who are genrally optimistic are happier, more resilient, and more productive; they live longer, recover from illness faster; and are more likely to create resonances and lead effectively. Moreover, optimism contributes to a general feeling of well-being, which in turn contributes to a renewal, helping leaders cope with the challenges and disappointments inherent in their work.”

You create a self-fufilling prophesy. Only a flexible approach–which allows for positivity leads to any possibility of hope, change, or success.
Perm type card (it can be cut into the other type I believe) This card in the text leads into the multi-discipinary card which I believe is above also from 157)
(Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee, Professor, Psychology, and Leadership expert, Resonant Leadership: Renewing Yourself and Connecting with Others Through Mindfulness, Hope, and Compassion, p. 156-157)

The way you approach others also reflects which emotional attractor is pulling you. When it is the negative emotional attractor, you may fall into the negative spiral of expectations that Jean Francois Manzoni of IMD calles the “set-up-to-fail” syndrome. You see a person as falling and focus on monitoring him. IN the process of close monitoring, you make him feel threatened and pressured. He may stumble or deliver, but you see the performance as glass half empty. At that point, there is almost nothing that person can do to reverse the downward spiral of expectations and performance.

On the other hand, the positive emotional attractor such as hope allows you to move towards your aspirations while opening yourself, others, and your organization to new possibilities. In Zikhali and Bjoerndalen examples above, you can see how you–the leader–can choose to spark energy for change in other people by focusing on what they are doing right, rather than on their shortcomings.

In fact, to make sustainable change in habits or behavior, a person needs to start with the positive emotional attractor. With the energy generated from positive emotions we can move smoothly, without becoming trapped, through the negative emotional attractor. A leading conveying hope and associated positive emotions will stimulate the energy and creativity troubled employees need to deal with the real performance issues. This is because a person experiences the powerful drive of hope and excitement–and also the realistic grounding of reasonable doubt and concern–energy is mobilize in a positive direction, rather than turning into defensiveness. Moving back and forth between these poles ensures continuous energy and reasonable shifts in direction and adjustment of plans. To engage intentionally in personal change, therefore, we need to spend more time, in particular emotional time, in the positive emotional attractor.”

* Three challenges/problems:
1. The tags are the same–so they are arguably mistagged a bit
2. The real version from the book has citations. As such it seems more credible–and probably is.
3. They obviously need to be underlined better.

Also, p 54 to 56 may make a better card than the shorter versions I have above–I don’t have the time to type it out. You can grab the book used on Amazon for fairly cheap. Its actually a good read IMHO.

Also, I seem to remember a “realistic optimisim” or more balanced approach–apply it cyclically or part of a process.

Advertisements

3 Comments

Leave a Comment
  1. Nathan Ketsdever / May 9 2013 10:11 pm
  2. Nathan Ketsdever / May 9 2013 10:13 pm

    More answers to normativity here:
    https://learnpolicydebate.wordpress.com/2012/03/20/how-to-answer-the-critique-of-normative-legal-discourse-by-pierre-schlag/

    I think there is a lot of overlap between Norm and D & G. I think if you search “answers to D & G” and “Learn Policy Debate” on google you will find those as well.

  3. Nathan Ketsdever / May 9 2013 10:18 pm

    The cards in this thread almost implicityly draw on the premises of learned helplessness:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_psychology

    It may draw on self-fullfilling prophesy–a bit too.

    I’m pretty sure there have to be better cards out of that literature on:
    1. Determinism bad or deterministic frames bad
    2. Positivity good
    3. Negativity = stops growth & death & depression.

    Its a frame challenge to the negative. It also turns their assumptions of their truth/reality claims about the world.

    I think using these in addition to a more general indict of their totalizing, essentializing, and hyperbolic claims can work in tandem to answer the argument.

    They also don’t really effectively deal with subjectivity of meaning. And subjectivity of meaning means two things:
    1. multiple ways to reach the goals.
    2. Your authors probably don’t reference or experience all those ways.

    I think the card on cross-disciplinary agreement on this topic is quite compelling. Its unfortunate that it seems concessionary (ie its warrants aren’t very robust). The warrants are arguably in the other evidence.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: