A jury wouldn’t find someone guilty of laziness because that’s a perception, not a fact.
Suppose a young man, James Littleton, is accused of being lazy, and it’s his day in court. The prosecution and defense are each going to have their turn to present their case, and then the jury will reach a verdict.
But guess what? The prosecution has no chance of winning a conviction. That’s because laziness is only a perception: Someone else deems that another person has not demonstrated the same level of work ethic or commitment to (whatever) the accuser believes is “appropriate.”
However, perception and fact are not the same. Not only are there varying interpretations as to what constitutes enough work (so that someone is not viewed as “lazy”), but there are other variables that aren’t even likely considered when people pass such judgment.
Namely, people with incomplete lower brain development are always working much, much harder than what the rest of us can know. That’s because we can’t see how their brains are working overtime to compensate for one or more missing automatic brain functions.
People’s motivation to perform is also often linked to what they believe to be important. Here, it may be as simple as someone doesn’t share the same degree of interest as the person “accusing” him or her of being lazy and, therefore, puts forth less effort.
Or, perhaps the accuser doesn’t know how to motivate others to do more. For example, there are some people who are never satisfied with any outcome (they’re always critical—no matter what work has already been completed). In such case, those who interact with these individuals often conclude, “Why bother to even show any effort?”
Yet, people keep tagging others as “lazy” as though none of these variables ever come into play.
That’s why the case against James Littleton has no merit. The prosecution cannot prove (let alone beyond a shadow of a doubt) that he—or anyone else—is guilty of being lazy. We simply cannot convict others based on our own perceptions.
Note that this line of thinking applies to other accusations, as well. For example, annoying is just as much of a perception as lazy. Yes, some people may act in a way that’s not in sync with others’ expectations or desires—but that doesn’t mean those people are annoying.
Interestingly, there are those who continue to tangle perceptions with fact and insist that people truly are lazy, annoying, manipulative (the list goes on). So why might that be?
Well, when we label people with such undesirable terms, we cleverly shift the spotlight away from ourselves and now inadvertently shine it on everyone else. In other words, we believe it’s up to the other person to change. However, so long as we’re waiting for someone else to transform, we’re not likely to move forward.
So, since our perceptions are intricately linked to our actions, we may need to first ask ourselves: Are we making accusations about others . . . that would never hold up in court?
And if we’re the ones being accused, we may want to remind ourselves of the big difference between perception and fact—and that other people’s opinions do not really render us guilty of anything. In fact, we can throw their case out of court any time we choose.
Sometimes, we have to challenge the brain to see more than what it initially recognizes.
The brain loves to put “things” in categories. So, when we see something similar, our brain is wired to associate it with something it already recognizes. For the most part, that’s a great plan.
But there are two major downsides to this natural tendency of the brain. First, labeling people to be “things” is limiting in that it negates the possibility that another perspective is equally possible. Here are some examples:
So, why do we tend to go with the first, more negative perceptions of such people? Well, the brain also has a natural tendency to shine a spotlight on someone else, rather than on ourselves.
For example, it may be easier to view Tiffany as a liar than to reflect on how we respond to mistakes. It may be easier to view Luke as selfish or manipulative than to model and teach him how to respond in ways that consider everyone’s needs. It may be easier to view Evan as lazy or hyperactive or immature than to explore what parts of brain development are incomplete and learn how to facilitate such changes.
Second, we may be limiting our own creativity when we don’t challenge ourselves to see beyond the “thing” that our brain initially recognizes. Yet, the art of invention is based on envisioning something ordinary in a new and different way.
For example, my memory of a Cambodian refugee still rates as one of my favorite examples of doing just that. After hearing this gentleman play incredible music from an instrument I did not recognize, I asked where he had bought it. He smiled and explained that while it was a common instrument in Cambodia, once here, he couldn’t find the right kind of wood he needed to make it.
So what did he finally use? A baseball bat. Yes, he created that amazing sound from what was originally an old bat that likely spent much of its prior life lying in the dirt. To this day, I’m probably one of the very few people who think of beautiful Cambodian music when watching a ballgame.
But while the brain has a tendency to classify, we don’t have to just accept every first perception and every “thing” as absolute. We can sometimes challenge ourselves to think beyond the traditional viewpoint, the expected, the obvious.
And in doing so, who knows what kind of incredible changes we may then experience?
If feels good to “take care of business.”
What is Taking Care of Business?
It’s a cortex way of getting everyone’s needs met. When using this approach, we:
Quiz Directions
So, how well do you “take care of business?”
To find out, encourage your kids and other family members to take the quiz. Read each situation listed in the quiz and the possible ways to respond. Choose the answer that is most similar to what you’d likely do if you were in that circumstance.
When you’re finished, read the answers and explanations to learn which do and do not reflect taking care of business and why.
To note: This quiz includes problems that both kids and adults often face. So, if a situation seems more applicable for a child or vice-versa, just modify it. For example, a child who does not want to take out the trash can be easily changed to be an adult who does not want to do a particular assignment at work.
Last, it’s important to remember: Taking care of business doesn’t mean that we automatically get the outcome we desire. But, hands-down, it’s still the most likely way we’ll move forward.
The Quiz
Situation 1: You’ve heard that someone is spreading gossip about you that is not true.
a) You bad-mouth that person, as well.
b) You do nothing, and try to avoid that person as much as possible.
c) You call that person out in front of others, demanding an apology.
d) You approach the person and say that you’re thinking she may have some misinformation and would like to clarify (and then do that).
Situation 2: You’re informed of a new rule when you take your father to his health clinic. Starting today, all patients must show a photo ID. However, your father did not bring any ID with him.
a) You reschedule another appointment (and ensure your father brings his ID).
b) You firmly point out that this rule is new, and you were not informed of it previously—so it should not apply today.
c) You acknowledge that you don’t want the person checking patients in to get in trouble by sidestepping the rule, but you’re frustrated since you’ve driven a long way and your father needs this appointment. So, you ask if there are other ways to verify that’s him (e.g. confirm his address, phone number, social security number) that’s already in the computer and . . . with a twinkle in your eye, use your hands to frame his face and say, “And this could be the photo ID.”
d) You tell the person checking patients in (who knows your father) that it’s silly to ask him for an ID since he already greeted him by name.
Situation 3: You’re sitting on the sidelines during the tournament, and it doesn’t appear that you’re ever going to get to play.
a) You sit stoically, but then break down (i.e. become upset) once you’re alone with your parents.
b) You act as though you don’t care while everyone else is being subbed in the game (don’t even watch all of the game).
c) You get up and demand that the coach gives you a chance to play, pointing out that you paid your money to be in this tournament, too.
d) You are fully engaged from the sidelines, watching what players on the field do that may have earned them time on the field. After the game is over, you ask the coach to give you three specifics to work on that may result in more playing time for you.
Situation 4: Someone has just criticized you in front of others.
a) You defend yourself.
b) You say something that is critical of that person.
c) You say nothing.
d) You respond by shining the spotlight back on that person and saying, “What were you hoping I’d do with that information?”
Situation 5: You don’t like the chore of taking out the trash, but that’s the job you’ve been assigned.
a) You whine whenever you have to do this.
b) You approach your parents and say: I know that we all need to pitch in to help around the house, but you may not know . . .I really don’t like taking out the trash. Is there another chore I could do instead of that one?
c) You do a terrible job (e.g. spill trash), hoping that your parents will think they need to assign this chore to someone else.
d) You do it, but you scowl to make it clear that you don’t like this job.
Situation 6: Various co-workers never clean up their dishes or trash after eating in the staff lounge.
a) You complain about those who don’t clean up to those who do.
b) You send an email to all your co-workers saying, “Due to budget cuts, we’ve had to lay off the maid for the staff lounge.”
c) You send an email to everyone saying, “Due to budget cuts, we’ve had to lay off the maid for the staff lounge;) So, how about we agree to a day where each of us is in charge of making sure all dishes are washed and all trash is cleared from the tables? If you’re willing to do so, please email me which day(s) would work best for you to assume that role. Thanks.”
d) Pick up after those who leave their dishes and trash—and do not say a word.
Answers
Situation 1: You’ve heard that someone is spreading gossip about you that is not true.
Answer: d
This response does not judge the person or assume she was trying to “hurt” you by telling others false information. It also gives you a chance to clarify, without putting the other person on the defensive.
Responses “a” and “c” will only likely escalate the situation. Even if in response “c” you note what information was false, that part of the message won’t be heard since the approach is accusatory and focused on making the other person admit she was wrong.
Note that response “b” is only a possible solution if gossip truly does not bother you or whatever is being spread will not cause future problems (as a result of others hearing and acting on the misinformation) or if you can actually avoid that person. Those are a lot of variables, which is why this response may not actually take care of business.
Situation 2: You’re informed of a new rule when you take your father to his health clinic: Starting today, all patients must show a photo ID. However, your father did not bring any ID with him.
Answer: c
This response acknowledges that the person who works at the clinic needs to do his job as directed while also giving him an opportunity to meet your need (i.e. have your father keep his appointment).
Response “a” meets the need of the person checking patients in, but it does not meet your father’s need to keep his appointment that day. Responses “b” and “d” do not acknowledge that the person who works at the clinic is trying to follow the new rules and will likely put that person on the defensive.
Situation 3: You’re sitting on the sidelines during the tournament, and it doesn’t appear that you’re ever going to get to play.
Answer: d
This response allows the coach to know what you’re needing and wanting while shining the spotlight on him to give you specific ways to improve.
Responses “a,” “b,” and “c” do nothing to move you forward (i.e. get more playing time). In fact, response “c” is just likely to put the coach on the defensive.
Situation 4: Someone has just criticized you in front of others.
Answer: d
This response sidesteps a need to defend yourself, while asking the person who made the comment to clarify his intent behind sharing the comment. By doing the latter, the focus is immediately placed on the person who made the comment, rather than on you.
Responses “a” and “b” will only escalate the situation. If you say nothing (response “c”), you may still antagonize the person if he thinks you’re ignoring him (and he will then likely criticize you more).
Situation 5: You don’t like the chore of taking out the trash, but that’s the job you’ve been assigned to do.
Answer: b
This response acknowledges that all family members need to contribute and help around the house, while opening the door to explore whether there’s any flexibility in who does what job.
Response “a,” c,” and “d” do not take care of business because there is no acknowledgment as to why you might be asked to do this chore. Moreover, if continual whining or scowling or passive aggressive behavior (i.e. doing a terrible job) ultimately gets you out of doing the chore, you have not only missed an opportunity to take care of business, but your brain now also incorrectly registers that such unproductive behavior may be helpful.
Situation 6: Various coworkers never clean up their dishes or trash after eating in the staff lounge.
Answer: c
This response begins by using humor. Yet, unlike “b,” this answer also specifically notes what isn’t being cleaned in the lounge and offers a solution/doable to improve the situation. This response additionally asks, rather than tells, co-workers to take responsibility. Last, it gives yet another doable by spelling out exactly how coworkers can respond if they agree to be in charge of clean-up for a day.
In contrast, response “a” (like “b”) does nothing to improve the situation.
Yes, response “d” ensures that the staff lounge is clean. But, over time, you may start to feel as though you’re the only one being responsible and, therefore, start to judge or resent those who continue to leave their mess, as well as those who do nothing to remedy the situation.
Challenges are gifts . . . but only if we’re open to receiving them that way.
Challenges are really just opportunities to learn. With that mindset, we embrace struggles rather than fear them.
What do I mean? Well, suppose a child has Tourette’s Syndrome, which is characterized by uncontrollable sounds (e.g. coughing) or movement (e.g. facial twitching) which are called tics.
Okay, you may be thinking: What could possibly be the upside of that? After all, kids are just going to make fun of that child.
And you’re correct . . . there’s a high probability that child will be ridiculed at one time or another.
But while we can’t control whether our child has tics or how others treat him when they appear, we do have the power in how we teach our child to respond—and how we then respond, in kind. Those are the gifts that are waiting to be unwrapped.
For example, if our child has Tourette’s Syndrome, we can teach him to answer in a way that empowers him and leaves no room for feeling like a victim. Such a response might be, “My twitches are just a tiny, tiny part of all of me. How can I help you see all the rest of me?”
We can teach our child to appreciate and value friends who see beyond a physical impairment.
We can create opportunities where our child befriends another child with a different kind of disability, giving our child the chance to be the one who models recognizing and honoring the core of that person.
We can teach our child that another person can only hurt us to the degree that we allow.
We can model an attitude that reflects a sincere belief that challenges are opportunities to learn, reflect, and build character. Consider how that greatly contrasts with our modeling endless worry over how our child is going to feel if the dreaded scenario ever happens.
In short, worrying only amplifies a feeling of helplessness. If it actually influenced a positive outcome, then sure, we should worry all day long. But it doesn’t. It just creates more angst. In fact, the movie star Michael J. Fox says he never worries for one main reason: If the bad “thing” eventually happened, then he will have lived through whatever he dreaded twice.
So, yes, there are going to be challenges in all of our lives. Count on it. But when such struggles arrive on our doorstep, why not teach our children to ask: What gifts are wrapped inside this challenge?
Research has proven that playing is good for the brain.
I often ask kids what they like best about school. Hands down, the most common answer is . . . recess. Intuitively, kids know what science has now proven—both kids and adults need time to engage in pointless fun.
We used to call that “playing.” Yet in our current, overzealous, gotta-make-sure-our-kids-get-ahead-world, allocating time to play is often relegated to a back burner.
However, research on play shows that it makes us more adaptable, and it actually improves how our brain functions. For example, when we combine physical energy with a sense of joyfulness (i.e. when we play), we reinforce neurohormones. And when we engage in activities that free us from having a set outcome, there’s a positive effect on our mood and perceptions of time.
In fact, according to researcher Dr. Stuart Brown, we need play in our lives as much as we need sleep.
So what is Brown’s definition of play? He says real play has no purpose. We do it for its own sake. It’s voluntary. We may even lose track of time or temporarily forget who we are in real life.
What’s the purest form of play? That’s when we improvise, where we make up whatever we’re doing as we go along.
So back to recess . . . where activities have little or no structure, where nothing is measured or ranked, where kids are free to be loud and move as quickly or slowly as they choose. Is there any surprise that kids fly out the classroom door as soon at that recess bell rings?
But then, that bring us to this question: Since playing has a natural appeal and is now proven to enhance the brain, why not create family recess time in our very own homes?
Yes, why not have the whole family take a break from household chores or homework or paying the
bills. . . to now play together?
Note this is not just time for our kids to play. The idea of family recess is for us to play with them.
And guess what happens when we do? We discover that even though we’re adults, we never really lost our zest for play.
We prove that all the time at the Brain Highways Center. Here, parents enthusiastically engage in playful activities with their kids as part of our curriculum. In fact, it’s sometimes difficult to decide who’s having more fun when observing, for example, a beanbag “fight” between a father and daughter.
So for my proposal of family recess, any unscripted, joyful movement works. Here are some ideas to get you started, but be sure to ask your kids for their input, too!
Note that family recess time is not viewed as procrastination, where everyone is just putting off what needs to be done. Rather, the mindset is one that suggests less work and more play is truly productive.
In the twenty-first century, that kind of thinking may be viewed as radical and revolutionary. But in our home, we can make such perspective a way of life.
