BY EDISON MARTE SICAD
DISCUSSING about emotional intelligence, a lawyer-friend of mine shared a story about a trainee who cried because he was corrected of a minor grammatical error. Instead of “their”, he wrote “there”. My lawyer-friend was shocked of such a reaction, taking into consideration that the trainee was a cum laude graduate.
Our concern did not dwell into the expectation that since he is a cum laude, he should have at least known the basics (it could be a mere oversight on his part). Forgivable. But the fact that he cried because he was (gently) corrected, made us more worried.
On the positive side, maybe this is one of the benefits of OJTs: to prepare the person how it is in the real world—for the school setup is now mandated to be “student-friendly”: an ironic approach since employers, as well as colleagues, in a work environment can be ruthless.
A writer once advised that if a person aims for continuous improvement, he must consider all criticisms—good and bad—as feedback: an information that must be treated as a learning experience. But for one reason or another—maybe mostly out of ego, pride, or superiority complex—there are those who are just all-knowing. And naturally, we all feel a bit of hurt when our mistakes are being criticized.
In a related note, we also tend to react if another person has a different set of beliefs or is just plain contrarian.
What is your opinion about the following ideas or beliefs? (Warning: I will use the pronoun “you” and might trigger defense mechanisms.)
1. There is no such thing as work-life balance.
The motto “Thank God It’s Friday” is a lazy mindset. It is a disservice to a man of passion: who works because of personal goals and standards. But well, if you don’t have the lucky chance of working on your passion; or being hired in relation to your so-called “ikigai”, then TGIF all you want. You might as well include TGIH (Thank Government It’s Holiday) or blame the mayor for not immediately declaring no class or no office in times of bad weather.
This is also connected to the solemn advice, “Don’t work on weekends.” or “Don’t bring your work home.” But then, the norm is to separate daily work from a good life. To detach our work outputs from our inner true self.
Karl Marx could be right.
2. Depression is only an excuse to avoid responsibility and accountability.
“Safe space” could be a dangerous concept. There are now places in the working area where a person can go if he feels overwhelmed or just plain scared by the daily demands of work. A bully can say, “You can run crying and call your mommy!”
What I am trying to point out here is the notion that protection from harm is mostly good for the growth of a child; that safety and comfort are the manifestations of true love and service.
Again, I am not saying that we put people in harm’s way. But to intentionally create a bubble of comfort to make your loved ones happy and safe, is to make them dependent on you. And that is not entirely their fault. You have taught them to depend on you. Consequently, they were not able to create a mentality of solving a problem on their own: a skill that cannot be taught in a standardized test.
We have already destroyed our children’s future by babysitting them in their growth. Which means, they didn’t grow at all. We have brought up a “man-child.”
3. Giving a reward can be a punishment.
We may have unintentionally taught this to our children: Everything—all good actions or results—must be broadcasted and rewarded. But we all know that in real life, that’s not how things work: that despite doing your best, you can still be rejected or outmaneuvered.
That despite winning a competition, you won’t immediately be rewarded.
And like the Biblical Job, that despite being a good and devout person, you can still be punished.
IN CONCLUSION, as mentioned in his book The Road Less Traveled: A New Psychology of Love, Traditional Values and Spiritual Growth, Scott Peck believes that it is only through suffering and agonizing using the four aspects of discipline (delaying gratification, acceptance of responsibility, dedication to truth, and balancing) that we can resolve the many puzzles and conflicts that we face. This is what he calls undertaking legitimate suffering./PN
