Mindfulness is a big thing just now. It is a welcome shift in focus, from the continuous stress on performance and outcomes. In fact the words I have just written all carry a lot of significance. A shift in focus: mindfulness invites just that, stopping and allowing yourself simply to be, to pay attention to where you are and how you are, in feelings and in body, in relationship with others and with self. This is such a valuable thing to do, every day, whether it is in meditation, in prayer, in reflective exercises. It’s important to note that this too is an activity—it requires intentionality and in some sense effort or skill, to let go and to pay attention, differently.
One important thing to add, however, is that mindfulness draws us inevitably towards relationships. It is not simply about our private self, for that can never be entirely at peace without attending to where we are with others, especially those with whom we live, work and relate on a daily basis.
The Christian traditions have always encouraged such reflection. One aspect of this is the encouragement of the Epistle of Paul to the Philippian church to ‘let this mind be in you, which was in Christ’—an encouragement to follow the vision of one who chose to serve others rather than seek self-aggrandisement (Philippians 2. 5 – 11). This passage, which is thought to involve elements of an ancient hymn or poem exalting Christ, presents very significant challenges, not simply because the ideal is difficult but because it appeals to the idea of a collective mind. It is not just the idea of an individual mind-set or ethic. It is actually a communal mind-set. ‘Let this be your common mind’—clearly not possible without individual commitment as well, but the collective is the purpose. It is on this basis that groups such as Baptists and other congregationalists spoke of meeting together to seek and know ‘the mind of Christ’. Through discussion, reflection and prayer together, the group hopes to move to a shared state of mind, knowing the way and purpose of Christ in and for their current situation. (If only more ‘meetings’ had such a purpose and approach!)
I was recently challenged by the ideas of a Harvard Professor of Psychology, Howard Gardner, whose book Five Minds for the Future was discussed on the ABC Radio program ‘Occam’s Razor’. Many people are concerned that ‘artificial intelligence’ will replace human work, but the presenter argued that there are so many things the human mind is able to do which require forms of intelligence no robot has. Comfort can be gained from knowing ourselves better. Yes, there are many repetitive and straightforward tasks that robots can do for us. But our minds are capable of so much more. Gardner describes five ‘minds’ or forms of intelligence. Briefly, these are: the disciplined mind, the creative mind, the synthesising mind, the respectful mind and the ethical mind.
Each of these forms of intelligence requires effort and is capable of development. The disciplined mind involves learning to grasp data and information, how to manage and organise it—and thus to theorise and analyse and understand. The creative mind is that form of knowledge that can move beyond the known, to the ‘what if’ of possibilities and new ways of organising information or doing what was previously thought not possible. Invention, exploration and artistic endeavour are just some of the activities of the creative mind. The synthesising mind is that ability to hold together what may seem quite disparate aspects of life, information and activity, and find that in fact there is a greater whole to which it all belongs. Finding meaning is the activity of this form of knowing.
All of these forms of knowing can, however, feed the idea that our knowing is about control, even exploitation and domination. This has been one of the great weaknesses of the Western culture, with regard to the earth and indeed to many other people. All too often, colonising has been part of the mind-set. In contrast, Gardner presents the idea of the respectful mind, where we begin from a position of humility and regard for the inherent value of all we encounter, both human beings and all other creatures, in which I include the rivers and mountains and land, trees and plains. The respectful mind seeks to learn from and not merely to ‘grasp’. Comprehension may arise, in the sense of understanding, but it never means complete possession. It is important that in Gardner’s schema the ethical mind follows the respectful mind. Ethical action and management of information, use of our knowledge and power presuppose that respect.
These are very helpful insights. Interestingly, there is much in common with these insights and the currently popular book, The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A counter-intuitive approach to living a good life, (Mark Manson, HarperCollins 2016). Manson argues for the value of failure, recognizing how important it is to know that we are probably wrong about a lot of things. Humility is everything. Thus, ‘We shouldn’t seek to find the “right” answer for ourselves, but rather, we should chip away at the ways we’re wrong today so we can be a little less wrong tomorrow.’ (p.119) The objective is not to belittle ourselves and what we have learned in life, but rather to be realistic enough to trust what we do know, and yet also to know that it is never the whole picture and never the reality for all times and situations. Failure, then, is only for now, but it is a valuable base from which to build. As also is success, seen in the same light.
I am reminded by these insights of another of the Apostle’s injunctions, to ‘make a sober estimate of yourself’—not thinking too highly or lowly, but recognizing that each of us has something to contribute, a ‘grace’ or gift, as it is described, while others too have their contribution from which we may receive and learn. (Romans 12. 3 f.) It is on this basis that Paul thinks love can be genuine and a community can share mutual affection. Here is the humility to ‘not give a f*ck’’, to not take ourselves too seriously nor to be too shallow to care, to contribute and to allow others to contribute to us.
“Let this mind be among you’: which mind? Surely all of the above, among you. We cannot be all of these things, and certainly not all at once. It is foolish to imagine or to pretend that any of us can be. We, together, need all these minds and all this humility and all this mindfulness. Together, we will achieve far more than our robots can do for us. We can be a human community, alive with the mind of our creator, none of us with it all but all of us with something to share and celebrate.