Reciprocity

           The notion of Reciprocity builds upon the same state of mind required for ideas like Plus One. While the latter focuses on the spread of positivity through random kindness, Reciprocity moves one step further to build a system of equals and awareness, treating kindness with kindness. Plus, one, plus many- and while keeping score was part of the ‘fun’ and a source of encouragement for Plus One, there is no such thing as tallying points when it comes to doing the right thing.
            Reciprocity, put simply, is the golden rule. It’s been said before. Treat others as you wish to be treated. Individuals should strive to stand by their own words, and their actions should follow their code; at the very least, doing right by themselves and acknowledging the kindnesses they receive.  Establishing such a code helps us to be aware of ourselves; monitoring our ability to follow that code, and treat others accordingly with it is what helps us to be aware of others. This awareness is a crucial step in allowing us to see other people as people, instead of just entities of no concern(or worse) simply existing in ‘our’ world.
            Much of the strife in the world, all of the suffering, be it from want of resources, warfare, anything that stifles the people physically, emotionally, spiritually, economically and so on- all of such ills can be traced back to a situation where someone does not care enough about an ‘other’ in order to ensure their needs are met. This is a truth in both ‘polite’ and ‘third world’ society, where individuals are encouraged to be self-first, and while we are taught the golden rule as children, such a value is discarded in the adult world, replaced by selfishness disguised as ‘ambition’ or  exploitation disguised as ‘cleverness’.  Oftentimes, we pay little mind to how our actions are perceived by others, and yet when someone steps on our toes, literally or figuratively, we immediately take offense and ponder how they could be so careless as to not consider us.
            Suffice to say, practicing Reciprocity in a positive manner, like many other things, it is a tool for connection; by associating ourselves with our character(the way we want to be treated) and our actions(the way we treat others), we can thereby associate ourselves with those others as people worthy of being treated kindly. And, much like the endgame of Plus One, the kindness and consideration we put out in the world can help encourage others to do the same; in this world where we do not consider one another, there are brief moments, when we, considered, find a space of peace, relief, and gratitude. Imagine if everyone could feel that way all the time when dealing with others.
            If we are to reach such contentment, this is the way. Constant reminders from ourselves, to ourselves, to be mindful of our behavior. The acknowledgement of the kind behavior others perform. We must make this a natural frame of mind. We allow ourselves to see the good in ourselves and other people, and this brings us to interacting with them more often, and learning truthfully about them, instead of allowing our preconceived notions rule the day. These acts of kindness, and the communication that follows in their wake make it clear that we are willing to overcome artificial boundaries and limitations in favor of connection, which is what Acceptance Theory is all about.

Cause and Effect - (The Nature of Circumstances)

                Causes are the things that we perceive and respond to.(RE:Why we are the way that we are) Effects are the nature of our response (RE:We are, We do, We think, We feel). Causes can also be effects, and effects can also be causes, because nothing is isolated.  This is relevant, because like cause and effect, and through cause and effect, Acceptance Theory is connection. As individuals and as groups we have things that have caused our various traits, qualities, practices, and behaviors. The way we operate under these causes is an effect that we then pass on to those with whom we interact. We are connected.

                Identifying causes and the associated effects allows us as people to make sense of this world and all of the details in it. It allows for logic, higher understanding, and communication. When we identify the source(cause) of one thing, that provides us the means to identify a solution, or perhaps a better use of that which is produced.  This is true of natural phenomena, but also people and their groups, cultures. The actions of various groups provoke reactions in other groups. Sometimes these reactions are neutral or positive, but oftentimes they are negative.

                By taking a thorough look at causes and working to truly identify them, one can come to understand a situation(or a person) much more clearly. As mentioned earlier, this clarity allows for the solution of problems, the understanding of differences, the keys to communication, collaboration, and prosperity. Between groups, an understanding of cause in effect not only educates us about a given other, but it allows us to act accordingly to provoke a positive response, and perhaps provides a newfound respect for that group and their causes.
                An incomplete or altogether lacking knowledge of cause and effect. Perhaps more accurately, the overlooking of the true causes associated with a given group… these can cause strife and generally decrease the quality of living. This is pertinent especially when people focus so much on the effects that they fail to see the causes responsible; They may identify a reason that benefits their feelings or attitudes about the person or group(confirmation bias) without considering all of the details.
                Furthermore, the inability to see that a situation can be both the cause of a future circumstance, and yet an effect of the previous circumstance is another thing that limits our ability to come together. We witness the actions of a group, and may correctly identify the causes of such behavior, but do not find how those causes came about, namely the causes of the causes(effects) that result in the group’s traits and behaviors. We are led, by our own perceptions, and those of others, to disregard such things and not dig so deeply, perhaps because one effect from other groups and our distaste of them is the desire to avoid understanding them properly, so we can continue to dislike, disregard, and forget about them.

                If we are to overcome such pitfalls, we must work to cure diseases, rather than symptoms. Instead of looking at groups and judging them out of hand, or even judging them for things that genuinely are disagreeable or problematic, it pays to look deeper and determine why things are as they are. After all, a lot that is attributed to choice is actually not so- the result of circumstances. If we look deeper, we become able to separate groups from situations, and even insert other groups(hypothetically) in order to clarify the relationships that we have with each other and the situations we find ourselves in.

Community

            Groups are to communities as individuals are to groups.  The community, therefore, is the group on a larger scale, with each group serving a role, as an individual might. Communities are what we are- all the people together. A community requires some measure of acceptance to even exist; therefore, we should build on this. When we move beyond the group, we reach the community, though in some instances the two are interchangeable. The difference is the matter of choice. That is to say, In regards to groups, individuals within them may be defined by their appearance or their belief. However, in terms of communities, groups tend to be defined by what they do.

            For the sake of simplicity in regards to Acceptance Theory, the community is an accumulation of individuals who have(perhaps tentatively) agreed to come together for the common goals of survival.

            When employed correctly, community is a relationship, a system that (ideally) allows everyone to survive and contribute, though the definitions of survival and contribution definitely vary between communities and the minds within them. By coming together, the needs of many may be met where such would otherwise be impossible. People can specialize in one aspect of a process in order to meet a survival need, and working together with others, complete the process in its entirety so that everyone survives. This is particularly sound in situations where resources are scarce, or difficult to procure for some groups, while processing or manufacturing techniques are difficult for others- working together allows both groups to thrive.
            When employed incorrectly, community may also bring oppression, if one’s needs differ significantly from the populace; if there are moral concerns for this difference, calamity may result. Community gives people a sense of pride and purpose, a sense of direction for those who may not know how they wish to spend their time. However, this can also be restrictive if the people are not educated in regards to possibilities, or are told by others that they must mind a certain place. ‘Practicality’ and ‘plausibility’ can hold the community together and keep those within it alive, but taken too far (or embellished) these things may also keep people within the community from reaching their full potential.
            Furthermore, in this world of perception(particularly when aspects that do not match the truth are magnified) people are encouraged to focus only on the self, and therefore they forget the strengths of working together. This makes it easy to discount others, trivialize their importance as people, their contributions to our lives and our communities. Worse, we may alienate them from our communities altogether; this may result in the hate and fear we associate with that we do not understand.
            The ideal community will be balanced in the sense that it is receptive to the needs of all its people, and does not tread upon the freedoms of some for the sake of others- this means allowing people to pursue their desires and their goals(freedom) , but also ensuring everyone has the opportunity to do so. As we are all inherently part of groups, by birth, and again by choice, we are all also part of communities in some sense. If we seek to understand others, we must recognize that we all seek the same things, and acknowledge that the best way to reach these is through a community- so that everyone’s needs are met and we and devote our focus to understanding and treasuring one another.

Grouping

            At the heart of a thing like Acceptance theory is interaction. Interaction exists not only within the self, but within the people, and between them and other people, and the endgame of Acceptance theory includes a look at (and a change of) how we interact with ourselves and the people we share this world with. Our interactions typically relate to those whom we are near, and with whom we have things in common. Though we are all individuals, made up of our trivial, yet interesting, details, naturally, the things that make us create a reality where we have a little more in common with some people, and a little less in common with others, and so we are all part of groups of some kind, superficially at least.
            Groups, put simply, define us in an incomplete, yet often convenient manner. One trait, or a small number of (seemingly) related traits are presented as representative of the subject matter and together, those individuals who possess such traits are then classified as a group. Defining features may include skin color, gender, sexuality, appearance, habits, professions. Grouping is not inherently harmful; it is a way for us as people to quickly organize and process the vast information in this world today. This categorization may range from a general guideline to how one from a given group might carry themselves, to a focused(and oftentimes ignorant) declaration of key, unwavering, qualities of certain individuals, for better or worse.
            Grouping allows us to make assumptions about others, and therefore interact with them accordingly. It allows us some small measure of learning and understanding in that if we can recognize that two individuals are related(part of the same group) then there is likely some overlap in their individual mannerisms as they pertain to what is typical(defining) of the group. Put simply, understanding the individual may give us perspective on the group, and vice versa.
            However, grouping can be harmful when the associated information is inaccurate, incomplete, or misunderstood. When false things are assumed about a group, and then processed as other information would be, such misconceptions may be taken as defining features of a group they have nothing to do with. This is related intimately with perception, as there is no guarantee that the qualities we associate with individuals and their groups are actually representative of that individual or their group. Oftentimes, the problem at hand is that an individual who is of the group for one reason or another(race, appearance) may express a quality or trait(behavior)  unique to them, and others, observing this behavior, move beyond it to apply it to all members of the group based on the other associated traits.
            Sometimes, the basis for group labeling is even less rooted in fact. Perhaps the trait ascribed to the group is one where an outsider witnessed part of an activity, or misunderstood the reasons and circumstances behind such behavior, and then carried on to communicate their misunderstanding as fact without approaching the group now incorrectly labeled.
            As people, we need to better understand just how well, or how far qualities go in defining us. We need to recognize the extent of the ‘defining’ and ‘typical’ features of groups. If we can determine what actually plays a part in classifying the group, and separate that from the qualities present in members of the group, and further still, the reasons for those qualities, we can move closer to understanding one another. Once we accept the limitations of such small pieces of information, we can actually take the time to get to know those groups in detail, and more importantly, the individuals that fall within them. Put simply, we must recognize the difference between what we perceive in the group, and the actual traits or features that define it.

Freedom and Control

            Freedom is a goal to be achieved via acceptance theory, because it allows people to live their lives as they so choose and without persecution. The ability to make choices that suit one without being dissuaded, threatened or outright attacked, without the denial of opportunities, benefits, rights- this is of paramount importance to an acceptance based society. Acknowledging one’s own freedom, and that of others brings a respect, a harmony.

            Freedom, is a state of being. In a sense, it is an absence of that which might otherwise be referred to as ‘mandatory’. All that exists is possibility. A free person does not have to concern themselves with the needs and desires of others, and therefore may focus their time and energy on the things that matter most to them. Put simply, it allows one to do anything they so desire.

            When thinking of freedom, most people see it in a positive light- unless they are associating that freedom with an individual or a group with whom they are opposed. Suddenly, the blessing of freedom is inconvenient and upsetting at best, and dangerous at worst. Ironically, this fear and hatred that arises when witnessing someone else’s freedom strips one’s own ability to be free- ruled instead by turbulent, negative emotions, feelings. One might argue that expressing joy and celebration for another’s freedom is also enslavement to feelings; however, to be ruled by joy seems better than being ruled by sorrow.

            Acknowledging this duty to our desires, our emotions is to acknowledge that complete freedom is impossible; we will always have desires, and even if we do not act upon them, whatever brings us to refrain controls us instead of that which we desire, be it duty, law, or ability; after all, we are also limited by our physical bodies. However, complete freedom is impossible for another reason.

            Along with that which we do, that which we create or consume, part of freedom includes the aforementioned potential, possibility. The freedom to ‘can’, the freedom of capabilities. The very existence of others limits our freedom, for we must make room for their freedoms by corralling our own. This deals directly with the physical world. As two bodies of matter cannot occupy the same space, matters of mutual freedom become not so, shifted in favor of one or the other in terms of positioning. The same holds true for the consumption of resources. Who decides who gets to obtain positioning, resources?

            This is where control comes in. Control serves as a means to reach freedom, but in the wrong proportions, is an obstacle to it. Control allows one to make decisions regarding who gets what or goes where. There may be a system established for such directing, or it may be enacted through physical force; the specifics may differ, but the end result is the same. Just as (Self)Control allows us to dictate ourselves, control in general does the same for the world around us. By practicing self-control, we are able to strive for the things we want, and obtain possibilities and make use of opportunities that might otherwise pass us by if we are careless or less disciplined. Through the control of others, we likewise open opportunities for ourselves by closing them for those others. In effect, the more control one has over themselves and others, the more they can experience(freedom), and the more they can deny others in order to ensure that they have the first, best, or greatest experiences.
            Ideally, a balance must exist between freedom and control, as it is impossible for everyone to have complete freedom at all times. This however, does not mean that one cannot live a happy and fulfilling life. We must control ourselves to seek other pursuits and garner other qualities… patience, compassion, caring. This must be mutual in order to ensure no one’s freedom suffers greatly from another’s control. To exercise a proper balance of the two, one must realize the freedoms that all people should be entitled to, and strive not to take such away. We must control and limit the freedoms that would exert such control- the ones that cause harm or take away life, livelihood, happiness, free will.
             In short, we must ensure all can pursue happiness without denying others the capability to live out their own lives to a level of reasonable fullness.