the paradox of church and state in the u.k. versus the u.s.

another interesting point alain de botton made in his recent on being interview was about church and state in the u.s. versus in the u.k. there is a quite a curious paradox when you take a step back and really analyze what’s going on. 

in legal terms, the u.k., church and state are literally joined. every citizen of england is a member of the national church of england. in america, church and state are cleaved.

in practice, churches and religion in england are miniscule. few people are religious and never do politicians discuss or invoke their faith. in america, it’s hard to imagine a politician not being explicit about their religion. religion is a major social and political issue.

now here’s the irony.

in impact, the u.k., the public services are amazing. they actually care for their poor. for example, check out this data discussing how the number of poor households is going down in england. or here’s an interesting snippet taken from an actual u.k. government website:

Poverty, as measured by a household’s income relative to the national average, is often a symptom of deeper, more complex problems. Many of these problems are passed on from one generation to the next… We want to make a real and lasting difference, to help people change the course of their lives. To do this, we need to deal with the problems that cause people to end up living in poverty, rather than dealing with people’s incomes in isolation.

in america, in spite of our individually “strong” religious piety, our public services are terrible. our economic inequality is rising. we hardly have any services to truly take care of the poor. in fact, more often than not, we discriminate against and penalize the poor just for being poor.

so what does this mean? does the atomization of faith in america actually weaken it (something i’ve written about before)? does this have to do with the age of the countries? maybe england has just had more time to develop socially just services and such. or maybe it’s random?

who knows, but it’s definitely interesting. especially from an institution-building perspective… maybe embedded religion/faith/spirituality in the bones of an institution is better than leaving it up to the individuals in the system to implement on their own. and in the case of england, that can happen while not forcing the religion on the individual people.

pomodoro brilliance: part 2 (maximum value)

now that part 1 has explained how and why pomodoros work, here’s part 2.

pomodoros are absolutely the most helpful when you have a consistent/constant type of work to power through. for many knowledge workers, the expectation is to switch between different types of tasks often. in those cases, pomodoros are still helpful for focus. but in the case where the work is consistent, pomodoros gain an additional value.

i’ve written several times about how the process of writing my master’s thesis changed my life. it’s a perfect example (writing a long document) of the type of work for which pomodoros deliver the most value. other types of work like this include ideating, doing graphic design, reading, thinking, etc.

anyway, here are the layers of value that pomodoros provided during my thesis process (of course, in addition to the things listed in part 1).

• writing in pomodoros helped make clear how much work i could do in a given time. after a few weeks, it became clear to me that i could write 300-500 words in 25 minutes. more and better sleep meant more words, as did having exercised and having coffee.
• knowing my writing pace helped me created a writing schedule. once i knew i could consistently plan on 300 words per 25 minutes, i knew i could get 600 words/hr. that’s about two (double spaced) pages/hr. i could then make predictions like “if i need ten pages by the end of the week so i need five hours of pomodoroing.“
• over time, i learned how long i could pomodoro before losing steam. near the end of our sessions, annemarie and i would notice increased difficulty focusing and a diminished word count. eventually, we discovered that we could write for about 3 hours before needing to tap out.
  
• knowing how much i could write in a given span of time before reaching fatigue helped me (imperfectly) plan out my entire thesis process. ex: if i knew i had a full draft (80 pages) due on april 30th, i could say “at 3h a day i can, conservatively, write 1800 words a day which is 7 pages. if i need 80 pages, i should give myself 11 days.” i rearranged my schedule to make sure i could hit my deadline (i gave myself a few days of cushion, too).
  

the dope thing was that i actually finished EARLY based on this planning and data (which 100% came from me). none of this included my editing process (which ended up being longer and harder than i expected), but still, finishing early felt dope. it also gave me some time to design the document for my final client.

the dream is real!

pomodoro brilliance: part 1 (why it works)

working in pomodoros has provided and continues to provide me with a ton of value. there are a couple of different levels of this and it’s evolved over time, but before getting to that, here’s how/why they work. if you’re unsure of what a pomodoro is check out this 2.5 minute video before reading on.

• pomodoros work because they are based on the natural patterns of the human brain. our brains are ineffective when they are expected put to work for indefinite stretches of time. my guess is that this is an evolutionary trait that has something to do with hunting for small amounts of time, which requires high focus, and gathering, which requires low focus. just a guess. turns out, our brains are most effective, and able to stay effective for longer spans of time, when we alternate between stretches of focus and non-focus (sidenote: imo, this is why the worlds of standardized tests and the knowledge work are so bad).
• additionally, pomodoros support focus by creating specific time for distractions. this allows you to really focus during the focused times. when you don’t know when you’re going to take your next break, there’s no reason to not check your texts (or facebook, instagram, email, whatever) every time one pops up. however, if you know that you’ll be checking regularly, the need to check incessantly diminishes.

now the highest value that pomodoros provided me was during my thesis process. but i’m out of time so i’ll have to write part 2 of this tomorrow!

coming soon: the burnout vs hate your job questionnaire

a week or two ago, i stumbled upon this article: are you burnt out (or do you just really hate your job)?. it’s not actually that clear about what burn out is, but i love the idea of being able to determine the different between burn out and hating your job.

so on that note, i think building a short questionnaire or quiz could be helpful for jungle. ross and i talk to people every week (maybe even everyday) who hate what they do for work. it’s unbelievable how many people feel this way. maybe 1 in 10 people that i’ve met in the two years since finishing grad school have said that they didn’t hate their work.

some hate the work itself (meaningless number crunching, pointless or destructive selling of services or unecessary/luxury goods). some hate the environment (terrible bosses, bad management, shitty organizational culture).

now on the other hand, there are some people who actually would like their work if they weren’t so burnt out. many of my nonprofit friends love what they do, but they have to do so much of it that they hate it. or they hate their lives because of the overwork. but that’s still a minority reality.

ok so why does the difference between burnout and hating your job matter?

two reasons:

1. bell hooks explains in all about love that how we feel at and about our work is a fundamental part of our well-being (see quote below). because we spend so much time doing it, it has a pervasive impact on our time outside of work. when you love your work, the time you spend there allows you to create a positive feedback loop of wellness. the converse is also true. so hating your work/job negatively impacts many parts of your life and diminishes your capacity to be well outside of work. often this is because you have to spend so much energy recovering from and steeling yourself up for work that you’re left with less energy and motivation to bring goodness into the world. this is why “loving what you do” is not a nicety.
2. i’m beginning to believe that if we can get a large enough mass of people who recognize that they don’t have to work jobs they hate, we can actually undermine the corrupt work structures that allow those shitty jobs to exist in the first place.

so. quiz coming soon.

relevant quotes

The practice of love takes time. Without a doubt, the way we work in this society leaves individuals with little time when they are not physically and emotionally tired to work on the art of loving.
—bell hooks, all about love, chapter: mutuality: the heart of love

[insert other quote about how hooks thought her friends were crazy that she wanted a loving work environment]

religion gives people structure to do things they should do, but wouldn’t otherwise get around to

i’m really into alain de botton these days. earlier this week, i listened to the on being episode in which he was interviewed. among  many brilliant things he said, one great point he made was about how organization religion gives people structure they wouldn’t have otherwise had. and that that’s a good thing. his point developed like this (generally):

people, more often than not, know what things they need to do to be well. however, left to their own devices, we simply won’t or don’t do those things. we simply just don’t get around to them. for example, most people know that forgiveness is an important part of having healthy, lasting relationships. unfortunately, those same people may just not ever get around to doing the forgiving. or, another example he gave, was that people know that celebrating the seasons is a good idea. however, without some sort of outside prompting, most of us will just flow right through the year.

religion gives people excuses (structure) to do things they otherwise wouldn’t have gotten around to. holidays, collective rituals, and spiritual calendars give us space do those things. for example, in jainism, kshamavani is the annual day of forgiveness. description from wiki:

On this sacred day, every member of the Jain community approaches everyone, irrespective of religion, and begs for forgiveness for all their faults or mistakes, committed either knowingly or unknowingly. Thus relieved of the heavy burden hanging over their head of the sins of yesteryears, they start life afresh, living in peaceful co-existence with others.

 it’s a lot easier to go out and find the person you need to forgive about something when everyone else is doing it and it has a designated day.

as much as i have rejected the organized religion of my childhood (christianity), alain does have a good point here. as he does with many other things… more posts on that on being episode coming soon.