The proverbs of Seneca the younger provide the title and the lesson for consideration, “The great thing is to know when to speak and when to keep quiet.” I make this statement and write on this lesson, not because I am good at knowing when to speak and when to stay silent, but in the hopes of learning more perfectly when to speak and when to talk. In reviewing my K-12 report cards, the ones my parents had to sign, the most frequent comment is knowing when to shut up, closely followed by “Does not play well with others.” The latter is a badge of honor; I have never played well with others!
But, knowing when to speak and when not to speak is a challenge, and in observing people, I find I might not be the only person afflicted with a lack of knowledge on this topic. My wife is a perfect example of someone who knows when to speak and when to stay silent. She has mastered the art of saying the exact word in season someone needs to hear and claims manners and discernment have honed her abilities.
Charles de Lint is quoted on educating children, saying in part, “Teach them to learn how to see and ask questions.” The greatest teachers I can recall easily are those who taught me to either perceive differently or how to ask questions. Long have I desired to return these lessons and remain enthusiastic about finding the opportunities to teach. I often quote and consider the lessons taught by Henry Chester, who said, “Enthusiasm is the greatest asset in the world. It beats money, power, and influence. It is nothing more or less than faith in action.” While appearing paradoxical, enthusiasm and learning when to speak and stay silent are anything but contradictory, and this is the point and the lesson for your consideration.
Why do we speak?
Of all the questions asked me in my K-12 journey, the number one question has to be an iteration of the following: “Why are you talking?” I never could understand when to shut up. Worse, there were plenty of times when my refusal to shut up would worsen the punishment, even though I considered the teacher’s actions immoral, unethical, or plain wrong. For example, in 12th grade, Mr. Moro’s class, Camden-Rockport High School, Camden, Maine. I had been a student of this school for a grand total of 1 day; this was the second class on my second day. My first meeting with Mr. Moro, who, very clearly stated, “This is his classroom, his castle, and in his castle, he was king and demanded respect. To which I firmly replied, NO! He sent me to the principal’s office and said I would not return until he had a parent/teacher conference. Being emancipated, I told him he would have to speak with me, and he could fax me! I still have no idea what a senior class advisor is or what they do, but apparently, I had to appease Mr. Moro if I wanted to graduate.
Why was I speaking in this incident; I was not going to be pushed or bullied by what I considered at the time a pompous moron. I needed to change how I perceived Mr. Moro as a person. I graduated high school, Mr. Moro never became a friend, but we did learn how to get along with each other. Yes, I ate some crow and had to chip away at my ego. After graduating and traveling to Advanced Individual Training for the US Army, I got a nice letter from Mr. Moro. One of the reasons we speak is we feel put upon and do not know how to extricate ourselves, or in my case, extricate my foot from my mouth.
Another reason we speak is a desire to say something, but how often have we opened our mouths without forming the thought entirely, and our mouth is running way faster than our brains, common sense, and self-preservation? In my case, way too often. Several comedians call this an older person’s disease, not having the brain mouth filter, common sense, or good social skills to know when to say something and when to listen. One of the reasons I love old people is explicitly derived from this truthfulness and lack of filter.
When my mother-in-law fell and had to be placed in a nursing home, long-term care facility, I made some great friends in her facility. Not a single filter anywhere to be found. One older lady, her name regrettably escapes me, had family who would come and tell her the filthiest jokes on the weekend. During the week, I would visit my mother-in-law and slip her a couple of clean jokes, dad jokes, and just plain funny jokes. One day I told her a joke about passing gas in church after a bean supper the night before. She laughed so hard; I thought I had injured her. I came back the next day and learned she had told the entire staff this joke, and she told me she had laughed so hard so peed herself.
I apologized to the nursing staff and armed them with a few choice dad jokes. She did not want an apology, but she told me a story from her youth where the night before her church had hosted a community-wide bean supper, chili cookoff, raffle/silent auction, and how the next day’s sermon was cut short because the pastor could not stand the air in his church, which is when I began laughing hard enough to make me wonder if I was going to pee myself! Worse, this was the day after serving baked beans for supper, and she and I listened to the chorus of frogs from the patients and kept falling out of our chairs laughing.
Betty Eadie eloquently provides a caution for our words, “If we understood the power of our thoughts, we would guard them more closely. If we understood the awesome power of our words, we would prefer silence to almost anything negative. In our thoughts and words, we create our own weaknesses and our own strengths. Our limitations and joys begin in our hearts. We can always replace negative with positive.” The next lesson on why we speak is that our brains are too full of words and need an outlet. Yet, how much better would the world be if we filtered our thoughts, slowed our thinking, and kept our mouths shut?
“Those who are free of resentful thoughts surely find peace.” – Buddha
“The nearer a man comes to a calm mind, the closer he is to strength.” – Marcus Aurelius
“If you want peace, stop fighting. If you want peace of mind, stop fighting with your thoughts.” – Peter McWilliams
Three people from different periods of human history, all messaging a truth, thoughts do become things, and often the things our thoughts become are not what we wanted or desired. More specifically, the thoughts became things because we expressed the thoughts that should have stayed silent in words. In learning to control the post-traumatic stress disorder I suffer, the words of Peter McWilliams became the answer I needed and the balm in Gilead I sought. I had to stop fighting my thoughts to be able to control the pernicious and repeated images, feelings, and constant reminiscing over a terrible incident from my service in the US Navy. Every day remains a challenge to acknowledge the thoughts and let them go. Every day it becomes easier to achieve. There is hope!
Why do we listen?
Of all the questions I have never been asked, I hope to learn the lesson of controlling my thoughts so I may hear better. I suffer from tinnitus, many times though the ability to listen does not reside in my ear where the tinnitus rings, but in my brain that is a ravaged wasteland of competing ideas, factions, and imaginations. When the voices in my head go silent, I hear the birds in the trees, I hear voices of people around me, and I experience hearing. The moment I begin speaking, I lose the ability to hear.
Ken Kesey is quoted as saying, “See with your ears and hear with your eyes.” What a remarkable idea. One of the most momentous times I can ever recall occurred while onboard my ship, deep dark of night. You know how dark night can get if you have ever been beyond the hundred-fathom curve. I was an engineer on the mid-watch (0000-0400) and was roaming around topside between rounds, something I should not have been doing, but I needed fresh air and wanted to see if the stars really were more brilliant at sea. On a night with no moon, deep dark, I saw the ship passing through the water with my ears. I heard the waves; I heard the wind whistling through the ship’s rigging; I saw with my ears the stumbling of smokers going to and from the smoke deck—an experience like no other. Why do we listen; to learn, to experience, and if we choose, to marvel!
In the 1990’s I had a screen saver called psychedelic. When music was played, it changed colors according to the beat, and you had user interfaces where you could pick specific interpretations to display on the screen in colors, lines, and contrasts. This was the first time I can remember visualizing sounds. I had previously turned the stereo speakers to maximum and watched sound interface with the water in a fish tank, but this screen saver was the first time I can remember seeing sound displayed by a computer. Since this screensaver, I have watched sound played in flames (SUPER COOL), watched water falling display shapes as heard through a computer, and synthesized (unique experience indeed). I have used several computer programs that took that old screensaver’s concept and improved the display and synthesization. Yet, I am still want to hear with my eyes and see if I can improve how I listen.
Something was pointed out to me, the word silent has precisely the same letters as listen, but in the arrangement of those letters, the ability of one is lost or found. I have learned that a silent mouth precedes a silent mind, and you need both to listen. Yet, it is a rare moment indeed when my brain is silent. My brain runs lyrics to songs, words I think I should have said, words I am preparing to speak, responses to questions, responses to other people’s opinions, facts, figures, fights, and the list goes on ad nauseum ad infinitum! A book by Stephen Covey mentioned, “Most people do not listen with the intent to understand. Most people listen with the intent to reply.” Why do we listen; this is a valuable question to consider!
I have mentioned this previously and repeat myself only for emphasis; all the musical talent, knowledge, and skill I possess can be poured into a thimble and never moisten the bottom. I mention this because Linda Ronstadt said, “Ninety-Nine present of singing is listening and hearing, and so then one percent of it is singing.” A thought I had never previously considered. I love music and have an eclectic taste in music, but I hear not listen to music. Music has never been an escape from reality but has often been a balm to my world-weary soul. Music has been a tool, a weapon, and a shield, in the battles for knowledge, learning, and protecting myself from the words of others. In the US Army, Basic Training music was the key to getting me to relax and shoot the M-16A2 sufficiently to qualify and eventually graduate basic training. But, only now, when considering Lind Ronstadt’s quote, I realized I hear music, not listen to music.
Funny story, while my parents are hippies, my father is a professional musician but not a music teacher. As a kid, music in our house was how food made it to the table, how my father retreated from the world’s cares, and often a weapon against my mother. Yet, even coming from a home where music was a major part of daily life, I never learned to listen to music. Have you ever heard reveille played on a tuba, French horn, clarinet, trombone, guitar, recorder, or flute? If so, you know a little of what growing up in our house was like. When 0400 came, whatever instrument my father was playing at the time became the instrument upon which reveille was played.
A song covered by a multitude of musicians originates with Paul Simon, “The Sound of Silence.” The second link is to Disturbed’s cover of the Paul Simon song; I think this is the best version. What are the sounds of silence? Are they different for each person? Does the sound of silence change with the environment, the weather, or humanity’s influence? I once read a research report regarding the negative impact of listening to the sounds of New York City and how the city’s sound shortened the lives of those who constantly heard the city. As we consider the lesson on learning when to speak and to discern when to stay silent, may we consider how to improve listening, moving from hearing to listening, and find joy in seeing with our ears and hearing with our eyes.
© Copyright 2022 – M. Dave Salisbury
The author holds no claims for the art used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the images. Quoted materials remain the property of the original author.
What a unique creation the woman is. Paradoxical in all things, a woman is soft and strong, inflexible and flexile, independent, and a great team member. What family is complete without a woman and a man? One of the great truths in life is that man and woman were created separate and dependent, and gender is an eternal construct. Each person is born male and female, with their creator’s traits, personalities, and intelligence. Yet what do we see in all modern societies; the continued blurring of lines, roles, and dehumanization of the grandeur of man and woman, but of the two woman, has been taking the worst hits.
Estrogen and testosterone, hormones, and chemicals would not need to be supplemented, and the mental processes separating a man and a woman would not need to be fought so assiduously by those having their sex surgically or chemically altered. Again, supporting the fact that it is psychology and not biology, establishing the difference between biological men and women, and the sum of their sexual parts is a non-issue.
Under the role of woman, there is a title worthy of acknowledgment, and the title is lady. Like gender, being a lady is a choice, a lifestyle, and contains social obligations, societal expectations, and requires significant effort on the part of the woman to obtain the title lady. For example, Nancy Reagan was a lady, Hilary Clinton is merely a woman. What separates these two women is class, respect, dignity, and more, not politics, not personality, and definitely not lifestyles and social circles. Being a lady requires sacrifice, making choices over long periods of time, and it demands total commitment to achieve. Females become women through growth, females become ladies by choice and sacrifice, and are granted this title by others.
There is a principle in life, “If you are not whole without something, you will never be whole with it.” Modern psychology will not teach restraint to gain freedom. It will often try to encourage a person to continue to do self-harm through their lifestyle while at the same time trying to find inner peace through the same lifestyle causing inner turmoil. Yet, natural law and common sense declare if what you are currently doing is causing you distress, stop what you are presently doing first.
Believe it or not, appetite control is a choice and begins with a desire to learn. The paradox in training is that when the desire to learn is stronger than the appetite to remain ignorant, the learner will produce the effort to change through learning. This is why appetite control is such a critical and fundamental topic for understanding. Desire is appetite, an appetite is a tool for good or ill, and bridling an appetite is every person’s job if they choose self-mastery as a means of self-regulation and self-improvement. When we choose self-mastery, we choose to become free!
How are the best racehorses made? Sure, breeding helps. But, training is as, if not more, crucial. A good animal does not become a great animal until they are placed into the hands of a good trainer who puts restraints upon the animal. A bridle, a harness, a saddle, wrap their legs to protect against ligament strain, shoes on their feet, and much more. Then over time, the animal learns that the restraints, which at first were chafing and fought against, become the tools by which the horse achieves greatness. The same is true for humans, every human, and those who, throw the restraints, never achieve freedom, never achieve excellence, and refuse their potential for momentary happiness, all because of appetite.
My paternal grandfather died when my grandmother was relatively young, she was forced to raise her two children as a single parent, and several times I could not help wonder that she was sad that she did not have a companion to grow old with. My mother-in-law spent more than 20 years alive after her long-time spouse passed. I know for a fact she was lonely and longing for her spouse. While my mother-in-law had family and friends, they were not a spouse, and the lack of a spouse was very difficult for her to survive.
Dr. Lieberman makes the following point, “The self is more of a superhighway for social influence than it is an impenetrable private fortress.” My brain is not very malleable in social situations; I have learned to recognize social cues, usually through failure and poor social experiences. But, my sister appears to have mastered socially connecting and hiding her beliefs behind a socially acceptable mask of cheerfulness and a cherub-like demeanor. I have no idea how she does this, for my emotional state is as recognizable on my face as a red nose on a clown.
Let us consider these topics on a grander and larger scale. Is it possible for society to change how we consider social pain and award the same degree of medical attention to it as we do to physical pain relief? One aspect of social pain relief that is not as emphasized in physical pain relief is the attitudes and choices of the pain sufferer. For example, a broken leg is not dependent on the patient’s beliefs and behaviors to mend. Whereas in contrast, social pain is more dependent upon the choices and behaviors of the patient. Would this focus improve physical pain relief?
On my desk is a book, “Now Panic and Freak Out,” full of quotations about the lighter side of life. No, I am not revisiting 
Panicking and freaking out are not opposite sides of the emotion coin; they are extensions of staying calm and carrying on. I promise you cannot prove you are staying calm if you have not felt a reason to freak out. You cannot prove you are successfully carrying on if you have not experienced fear and panic. This might at first appear to be a paradox, but telling someone to stay calm who has never experienced panic, they will not know what you are talking about or what to do.
Recently, I was told that stress in the workplace was the most significant factor in how people in workplace settings can be understood. I disagreed, rather pointedly, but the bias of the person making this statement was too loud for other points of view and perspectives. Although the conversation got me thinking, I present the following as my perception of stress in the workplace.
Garcia-Izquierdo et al. (2018) researched resilience among nurses and reported connections between emotional exhaustion and cynicism and nursing professionals experiencing burnout; yet, resilience was found to have positive causal relationships to psychological health, emotional exhaustion, and cynicism. Hence, merely presuming all stress is harmful reflects an ingrained bias against stress, and the positive and healthy aspects of stress are never mentioned or researched honestly (Strutton & Tran, 2014; Vanhove, Herian, Perez, Harms, & Lester, 2016). The more resilient a person chooses to be, the more potential they have to harness stressors from the environment and produce positive results; thus, Strutton and Tran (2014) maintain that stress can be a positive force for good. The conclusions present a roadmap for businesses to follow. Leaving a question, if resilience can be learned and trained, if stress is good and through learning resilience productivity has the potential to improve, why the focus on flexible working arrangements instead of productive tasks, e.g., employee training (Strutton & Tran, 2014; Dizaho, Salleh, & Abdullah, 2017)?
Dizaho, et al. (2017) again lumped all workplace activity into the term stress, doesn’t mention employees’ resilience, or differentiated between males and females, resilient employees and less resilient employees. Dizaho, et al. (2017) labels stress as bad and promote flexibility in the workplace as an employer issue to manage through flexible schedules, job-sharing, part-time work, shift work, telecommuting, and encouraging a work/life balance arrangement. While some employees might need these tools due to personal choice regarding the onboarding of resilience training, it seems to me that the academic community is cheating businesses through the disingenuous lumping of all anxiety from the workplace into stress and overlooking the positive effects of stress and the causal relationship in resilience. Leading to several questions on this topic:
Another aspect to the flexible work environments discussion brought forth and detailed by Gloor, Li, and Puhl (2018) is the inequality of treatment between the sexes in receiving flexibility in the workplace. Females are more likely and have an easier time obtaining flexibility in working arrangements, even when García-Izquierdo (2018) reflects both male and female nurses can experience resilience, learn resilience, and all mammals can experience anxiety in some fashion or another. Why are females treated differently by policies for flexibility in the workplace (Vanhove, et al., 2016)? The same inequality is apparent between male and female disabled individuals as well. As a male disabled person, the processes are skewed to females with disabilities.
A paradox occurs when two seemingly opposing items are compared, and reality shows the articles under question are more related than different. Anxiety in the workplace is a paradox. Understanding this dichotomy while embracing the power and influence of resilience is part of the solution to leading an organization in fundamental change. An essential characteristic and work circumstance that can positively affect change-induced anxiety (stress) in the workforce will be resilience (Garcia-Izquierdo, de Pedro, Ríos-Risquez, & Sánchez, 2018; Moore, 2018; Sok, Blomme, & Tromp, 2014; Strutton & Tran, 2014; Vanhove, Herian, Perez, Harms, & Lester, (2016).
Vanhove, et al., (2016) and Sok, et al., (2014) possess the last word on organizations in fundamental change or organization-wide changes; the need to learn resilience. Resilience is learned through workplace programs that facilitate employees maintaining a healthy work/life balance and understanding that work spillover is not always a bad thing for employees. Those employees with work spillover need monitoring, but that is a leadership function at all times and seasons, not just during change initiatives. Employers and business leaders need to understand the individual nature of workplace anxiety. The leaders must not force a one-size-fits-most policy onto the employees. However, knowing the employees, and training employees, opens doors to evaluate employee actions towards stressors in the environment and potentially select new leaders post-change.
Arnulf, Larsen, Martinsen, and Bong (2014) detailed how internal bias predicts results; thus, we can discount most stress-related research as nothing more than bias magnified and personal opinion presented as research, how the research questions are formed dictates the answer that will be arrived at when the study concludes. Of all the topics I have learned and relearned, the need to question everything, ask more questions, and become ever more selective in the materials I cite has been confirmed. Interestingly, the more I think I know, the more sure I become that I do not know anything; but, I want to learn so much more.
DNC-Consulting 