What are You Looking At?
I have been very addicted to the whole election period over the last year, first the UK and then the US, in particular. It has been quite stressful to watch the US election and I cannot say that I am pleased about the result. I am not, however, going to dwell on any personalities here instead, I want to consider what it means for focus and the stories that we are telling and accepting.
Last year, I read a very interesting book by journalist Johann Hari called Stolen Focus, it’s subtitle being Why you Can’t Pay Attention. He explores the idea that we have an attention economy, with different businesses all vying for our attention via technology. Even while I was writing this paragraph, my phone has buzzed three times and I have looked at it each time. He points out that back in 2012, the director of Netflix spoke of his competition with our sleep. How many times have you been about to watch one episode of something and ended up watching it for hours? Lack of sleep and over stimulation add to our lack of ability to concentrate. The story, our own personal narrative and our concentration on our purpose and values is being interrupted all of the time. There are many businesses vying for our attention for their own gain and some politicians also trying to distract us.
Hari presents a blend of research and storytelling, suggesting how societal factors like social media algorithms, excessive multitasking, sleep deprivation, and even modern work practices contribute to a collective inability to focus deeply. The impact on this is considerable; everything from personal productivity to mental health and cognitive capacity. If you need any persuasion on the importance of sleep, read Michael Walkers ‘Why we Sleep’ Hari explores potential solutions, urging individuals to take steps to reclaim their attention and suggesting ways society could support focus, such as regulating tech companies and prioritizing meaningful rest.
Hari’s main message is that, while individual strategies can help, real change requires broader societal shifts to create an environment where people can think deeply and live more fulfilling lives. His approach goes along with my own personal view on positive psychology, that it is all very well providing people with individual tools to help them to thrive but that we should be more ambitious than this, we should be structuring our society to tell a better story.
Back to the US election. I do not want to dwell on it too much as I do not want it to steal my focus, however, during the extensive campaigning, all sorts of silly stunts and crazy things were said by the right and I suggest that these could have been deliberately to attract attention and get people talking in order to take their focus away from something else. I am not going to speculate on what that is, it does not take much research to see that there is a lot of suggestion that there is a darker agenda going on.
One of the problems in creating a cynical, selfish, story in which people are described as ‘losers’ and that there are good people and bad people is that not only does it reduce compassion to others but also to ourselves. Instead of creating a story in which we strive for authentic lives driven by meaning and purpose, it creates a shallower, more chaotic and confusing world. Who benefits?
The idea of doing things quickly, rushing through, complying with what others want from us, flitting from one thing to another might appear to be productive and efficient but is it really?
A completely alternative approach to life from one of competition and cynicism is that of Carl Rogers, the humanistic psychologist who introduced the concept of ‘unconditional positive regard’ as a crucial element for healthy personal growth and therapeutic success. In his approach, Rogers described unconditional positive regard as a therapist’s ability to accept and value a client without judgment, regardless of their behaviour, emotions, or perceived shortcomings. He used it with clients in order to create a safe space where clients feel genuinely valued and are more likely to explore and confront difficult emotions or parts of themselves without fear of rejection. Unconditional positive regard can be applied to oneself, to others and to ideas - to consider the good, the meaningful and the important and give it suitable time and space. It does not need to be contained to a therapeutic context.
This approach could be applied much more widely than in a therapeutic capacity to a more general way of life within all our major systems and organisations - to be accepting of people and their place in the world and in society. Given that we work in teams, as a hive, on a social level, this idea of accepting others without seeking to change them because they are ‘wrong’ or should comply could instead encourage them to develop the most valuable parts of who they are. As John Lennon said, you may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one. Positive psychology advocates for focusing on strengths so that ‘weaknesses’ become nearly irrelevant.
This is not a call for acceptance of poor or criminal or dangerous behaviour - but of acceptance of the way that people are all different, have different needs and bring different gifts to the party. Systems that acknowledge difference and appreciate it and consider how to make use of it; our education system, businesses, politics and other social structures could allow for talents of all kinds to flourish, making space for a range of different approaches and perspectives.
More recently Kristin Neff has done some really interesting work on Self-Compassion and Stephen Joseph on Authenticity and I will write more about these in coming months. As with so many concepts in Positive Psychology, the crossover is very noticeable and, I would argue, as I always do, that this comes back to the story that we are telling ourselves. Tell the right story for you, for others and collectively and we can all live much better lives. Returning to Hari, it is what we focus on, what we pay attention to that is going to make the difference.
This is a story from ACT, Acceptance Commitment Therapy, it comes from Steven Pressfield in The War of Art and like much of ACT, it uses a metaphor, yes, a story. In this, you imagine "perfect island" which represents your idea of your most perfect life—your highest potential. You are sailing towards it but whenever you get close, demons appear in your boat. They are very scary, they will not touch you or hurt you but they are terrifying. Pressfield describes this as ‘resistance’ and it is what stops us from being true to ourselves and developing into the fullest, most authentic version of ourselves. It prevents us from growth and creativity. It is easier to pay attention to the demons, turn away and then they disappear. What ACT encourages is that you detach from them, you notice your fear and you sit with it. You keep sailing towards your values, your perfect island. Now, whether you can do that or not, whether you can retain that focus depends on the story that you are telling yourself and what you pay attention to. It suits other people, sometimes, to stoke those fears, to make you afraid. But we often do it to ourselves. Once again, it is story, attention and focus. It is up to us what we pay attention to. This is the importance of having awareness of and some control over our focus.
Hari concludes his book explaining that he is not writing a self-help book in which he has identified a problem and is now going to present you with the solution. Spoiler alert, I am about to write about what he does conclude and it is based on advice from a former Google strategist, James WIlliams who had spent years studying focus, so if you do not want to know and want to read the book yourself first, look away now. He suggests that there are three layers of focus: the spotlight (immediate actions), the starlight (your longer-term goals), your daylight (the form of focus that allows you to know what your longer term goals are at all).The last one is really the question - how do you know? So, suppose you want to be a rugby player - how do you know? You want to write - how do you know? The idea is that if you lose your daylight due to petty distractions and short term concerns, you lose your daylight, your overview. His argument is then that in order to retain your daylight, you need periods of reflection and deep thought. It is now that I am going to quote from a story:
“I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.
"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring
And there we have it, not only does this work of fiction, like so many others, contain truth in story. In taking time out of our days to read and write, it can help as an act of resistance against the stealing of our daylight. Reading and writing is an act of resistance and focus. It gives you time and space to retain your daylight, to explore ideas in your own context and in doing so, show compassion towards yourself and others and maybe further develop your own authentic self.
And maybe turn your phone off sometimes.
Buzz.