Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining

A S e cu l a r Ethic s Appr oa c h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

LIFE UNIVERSITY
CENTER FOR
COMPASSION
INTEGRITY &
SECULAR ETHICS

Compa ssionat e Int e g ri t y Tr aining

A S e c u l ar E t hic s A ppr oach to Cultivating
Pe rs on al , S oc i al and E n v ir onmental Flo uri shing
Ce n t e r for Compa s sion, I n teg r i t y a nd S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s Appr oa c h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion, I n teg r i t y a nd S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 2 -
 Compassionate
Integrity
Training

By:

Dr. Brendan Ozawa-de Silva and Dr. Michael Karlin

Copyright © 2017 Brendan Ozawa-de Silva, Michael Karlin and Life University

Revised 06/22/2018

- i -
 Acknowledgments

Compassionate Integrity Training was first developed by Drs. Michael Karlin

and Brendan Ozawa-de Silva under the auspices of the Center for Compassion,

Integrity and Secular Ethics (CCISE) at Life University.

The program was expanded and refined with the help of a working group

of scholars and practitioners from Life University and other organizations

brought together by CCISE, and has also benefited from consultation with

the participants and fellows of the Octagon conference at Life University.

The authors would like to thank especially Dr. Guy Riekeman,

Dr. Gerry Clum, Dr. Corey Keyes, Dr. Tom Pruzinsky, Dr. Tom Flores

and Dr. Lobsang Tenzin Negi. The writing of this manuscript was greatly aided

by the work of Avital Abraham, Program and Research Coordinator at CCISE.

- ii -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s Appr oa c h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

Series II: Relating to Others

Based on the skills in Series I, which focused on developing an awareness of oneself

and the cultivation of genuine compassion for oneself, Series II turns to focus outward in
order to improve relationships with others. This involves examining how we interact
with others so that we avoid actions and attitudes that may cause harm and cultivate
the actions and attitudes that help others.

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion, I n teg r i t y a nd S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s A ppr oac h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

Series II: Relating to Others

Skill 5: Impartiality and

Common Humanity
Learning Outcomes
Series II shifts from a focus on ourselves to a focus on others
and how we relate to them. We already tend to exhibit
compassion, empathy, generosity and tolerance toward Content
those we love. This comes naturally. To extend these emotions
● Participants will explore explicit and implicit
and attitudes toward strangers and those we feel distant
bias and methods for weakening them.
from, we need to recognize common humanity and cultivate a
degree of impartiality. Without a degree of impartiality, bias ● Participants will explore what we all have in
can distort our compassion such that we could even treat common as human beings, such as wanting
others unethically or harmfully out of preference for those we happiness and wanting to avoid harm and
like. Too much preferential treatment and excessive loyalty, suffering.
however, actually harms ourselves, our society and even our
● Participants will learn that psychological
loved ones, because it is out of step with our interdependence,
essentialism (relating to categories as if they
our sense of justice and our common humanity. By cultivating
had real, fixed essences) can have harmful
impartiality and recognizing that all human beings seek
effects and perpetuate injustice and division.
more happiness and less suffering, we see that we are equal
in a fundamental way. If we think deeply about this equality
as we develop pro-social attitudes and skills, we can learn Practice
to direct them toward all people impartially.
● Participants will learn to reduce partiality and
bias and increase a sense of common humanity
by reflecting on the superficial nature of the
categories of friend, enemy and stranger in light
of the deeper commonalities shared by all people.

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion , I nteg r i t y and S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 78 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s Appr oa c h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

relationships and our society. If these qualities were to

increase among family members, would the family be
happier? If they were to increase in our society, in our work
places, or in our justice system, what would happen?
Moreover, we can look at places in the world where bias
and prejudice is especially strong between different
groups. In such places, as an outsider, we can clearly see
that such views lead to protracted conflict, often violent
conflict, that only harms the entire community and
people on both sides in the long run.

Common Humanity

I
n thinking about how we want to relate to others, Fortunately, it is not hard to use common sense, common
we can consider how we’d like them to relate to us: experience and science to arrive at our common humanity.
with kindness, understanding, empathy, forgiveness, The principle of “common humanity” is based on what
generosity and compassion. If we want these things for all human beings have in common. For example, we all
ourselves, integrity and consistency demand that we seek happiness and wish to avoid suffering. Even when
should extend them to others also – otherwise we would we engage in actions that appear to lead to pain or suf-
have a double standard for ourselves and others. fering, the motivation underlying them always seems to
Unfortunately when it comes to relationships between be seeking a greater well-being.54 This isn’t just something
individuals and groups, we find that there often is a we share on a mental or emotional level; it is even
double standard. We have a common tendency to privilege embodied in our nervous system. As seen in the skill
our own well-being and the well-being of those of our on Calming the Body and Mind, we all have a central
“in-group” (our family, our friends, our religion, our racial nervous system that reacts to perceived danger and
or ethnic group, our nation) over others who we consider safety in order to keep us safe and alive. In fact, we
strangers or enemies. While this is so common that it may even have this in common with non-human animals.
be hard to even question the correctness of such a view,
Once we recognize aspects of our common humanity,
we can see that it is a problem if we step outside our
we begin to see other people more and more as equal to
own situation and think more broadly. Between any
and the same as ourselves in a fundamental way, despite
two individuals or human groups, can we say which one
our various differences. Gradually, we can even see that
deserves happiness more than the other? Even if we were
others’ lives are as important as our own. We begin to
to think we could determine this, would both sides agree
see that the categories we create to differentiate groups
with our conclusion?
are superficial and changeable when compared to our
Furthermore, we can see how bias, prejudice and unfair common humanity. While these categories can be useful
preferential treatment cause a number of ills in our and must be acknowledged, when we lose sight of our

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion, I n teg r i t y a nd S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 79 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s A ppr oac h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

without any intention of favoring one person or group

over any other, yet which naturally shines its light more
strongly on those who are closer to it. Similarly, even
though the people closest to us will experience more of
our compassion and kindness, this need not be because
of our strong bias toward them or a thought that they
somehow deserve more happiness and others deserve less.

The Negative Consequences of Bias

We will not be motivated to cultivate impartiality and a
sense of common humanity if we do not recognize the harm
caused to ourselves, our loved ones and our communities
by bias and prejudice. We can easily see how people do not
common humanity and only see our differences, we
appreciate other people who have a lot of bias or partiality.
are moving toward the possibility of hardened divisions
For example, we do not value judges who exhibit strong
that then justify unfair and unethical treatment of
bias toward one person or group over another. We do not
one another.
appreciate it when our supervisor at our workplace exhibits
strong bias toward a colleague over ourselves. No one
Impartiality would want to lose a job opportunity, for example, because
CIT uses the term “impartiality” to refer to the dimin- a hiring manager is friends with the parents of another
ishment of strong prejudice or bias (partiality) in favor candidate. In contrast, we do appreciate people who find
of one group over another. This does not mean, however, a way to rise above bias and extend their sense of caring
that we become neutral or apathetic toward everyone. beyond their in-group.
Nor does it mean reducing the positive feelings we have A key step in this skill, therefore, is spending time to reflect
for our loved ones. Rather, impartiality in CIT means on the negative effects of bias, partiality and prejudice. We
elevating how we appreciate and value others who we can ask ourselves, “What happens to an individual if their
once saw as unrelated to us (strangers and those in bias and prejudice grows? What effect does this have on their
so-called “out-groups”) to a similar degree of closeness happiness and their relationships with others?” Similarly,
through focusing on our common humanity. we can ask, “What happens in a society when prejudice
Because of our proximity and familiarity with our near and bias increase? What happens if bias increases between
and dear ones, we may still have a different and special two different groups, where they start to develop stronger
relationship with them, and this in no way stands in prejudices about each other?” Lastly we can make it personal
opposition to impartiality. A useful metaphor here is and ask, “What if bias and prejudice were to increase in
the sun, which radiates light and energy in all directions my life?” Then we can go on to ask the reverse of these

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion , I nteg r i t y and S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 80 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s Appr oa c h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

questions: “What would happen if bias and prejudice were online at Harvard University. This test uses reaction times
to decrease in a person, in society, between two groups to see whether those who take it associate white names
that are often in conflict or in myself?” This method of and faces with good things as quickly as they associate
questioning can be used for all the CIT skills and can black names or black faces with good things, and the same
be accomplished through quiet reflection, journaling or for bad things.56 If there is a clear discrepancy in reaction
dialogue. The more we contemplate such questions, the times, this may suggest an implicit bias. This test can
more we will develop critical insight into the harmful be used to judge a variety of types of bias, and often the
effects of bias. Then on the basis of that critical insight, we results are surprising to those who take it.
can cultivate an embodied understanding of impartiality
Implicit bias appears to be reflected in many situations in
and common humanity, which will undermine and weaken
today’s world.57 Recently, police departments in the U.S.
bias in our minds. Going through this process will also
have been under greater scrutiny for potential implicit
enhance our ability to share our understanding of bias
bias against African-Americans after a number of tragic
and impartiality with others in a compelling way.
shooting deaths. Studies have shown that bias may
impact individuals’ decisions on how long of a prison
sentence someone deserves, and that even in split-second
Implicit Bias
decisions, such as whether to shoot or not, reaction times
It is easy to see the harmful effects of bias when
may differ based on the perceived race of the person
considering racism, sexism and the enemy images
whose image is presented.58 Fortunately, studies have also
created in violent conflicts. It is easy to think of people
emerged suggesting that intentional training methods,
who exemplify bias and prejudice. In general, most of
such as the cultivation of lovingkindness, can reduce im-
us do not see ourselves as very biased or prejudiced, but
plicit bias across groups.59
surprisingly, even those we consider biased or prejudiced
will often say they are not. What we see as their bias,
they may see as views based on fact. This suggests that
we may not actually recognize many of our own biases,
instead mistaking them for fact or simply taking them
for granted as “the way things are.”

Recent research in psychology supports the notion that

we can have biases that are unrecognized. This is called
“implicit bias,” which may be based on norms that we have
been exposed to in society and in our culture. Even if we
may not be consciously biased against a particular group,
we may still harbor negative associations with that group.55
For example, one tool developed by psychologists is the
Implicit Association Test, which can be taken for free

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion, I n teg r i t y a nd S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 81 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s A ppr oac h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

The problem lies not in our ability to categorize, which

is essential for our survival and indeed for all conceptual
thought. The problems arise when we mistake our cate-
gories for absolutes and then use these to justify treating
one group of people as lesser than another group. This
process is called “psychological essentialism,” because
we “essentialize” a group as a fixed category with set
characteristics. Explicit bias, such as racism, sexism and
anti-semitism, continues to be a serious problem, but we
should also be aware of the potential for implicit bias.

In some cases, learning about implicit bias makes people

feel somewhat hopeless, especially people who care about
others and are shocked to find that they harbor implicit Cultivating Impartiality
associations that are negative toward one group of people. We have already examined one way to cultivate
It is important to remember that recognizing bias is the impartiality, and that is by focusing on our common
first step to overcoming it, and that we have every reason humanity. The more we see all human beings as sharing
to believe that bias – even implicit bias – can be overcome basic qualities, the more we will contextualize our
with time, reflection and practice. Furthermore, while differences appropriately. Another powerful method is
it may not be possible to eliminate all elements of bias, to examine the superficiality of our categories, such as
this is not necessary. The most dangerous aspect of bias – the categories of “friends,” “enemies” and “strangers.”
explicit or implicit – is when we see a person or group of Consciously and unconsciously, these categories
people as less deserving, less human, less valuable, less equal significantly affect how we relate to others. In general,
than ourselves and others like us. That is the type of bias we are very nice to our friends and want them to have
that leads to conflict, violence and dehumanization, and happiness. Enemies on the other hand, we may want to
that prevents compassion and our ability to act with see suffer. For strangers, we tend not to care too much
integrity. Recognizing that we have biases may make us one way or the other.
feel uncomfortable at first, but reflecting on the fact that
There is a reflective practice drawn from the Tibetan
we can impact our biases directly through effort should
Lojong tradition that can lead to deeper critical insight
increase our motivation and determination to relate to all
into this. Choose and then picture in your mind three
individuals from the more stable basis of our common
people: a close friend or loved one, a stranger to whom
humanity, equality and fundamental sameness.
you feel somewhat indifferent, and a person who you
find difficult or who you somewhat dislike. (It is
advised not to begin with your worst enemy for the

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion , I nteg r i t y and S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 82 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s Appr oa c h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

third person.) Think for a moment about how you would but also from our own perception of them. In other
really feel if something wonderful happened to your close words, we see certain people as lovely (such as our
friend or loved one. Imagine it and picture it in your head. family and children) because they are close to us, but are
Likely, you would rejoice in their good fortune and feel they objectively more lovely than other people (such as
happy. Now picture the same or a similar wonderful others’ families and children)? Or do they appear that
thing happening to the stranger. As you imagine this, it way because of our close feelings for them? Similarly,
is likely you will feel less joy. Finally, picture a similarly we tend to think that people we dislike have negative
wonderful thing happening to the person you dislike or qualities that come completely from their side. But we
find difficult. You will likely feel even less joy, perhaps no can see that they do not appear as objectionable and
joy at all, or you may even feel disturbed at the thought. horrible to their own loved ones and friends. So how
much of those negative qualities is in fact our own
Now we can spend some time to reflect: What justifies
projection, based on our feelings, and not objective? The
these three different reactions to the same event? We
psychologist Aaron Beck, father of Cognitive Therapy,
seem to care more about the happiness of those we are
has famously said that when we are angry with someone,
close to and not much about the happiness of those we
90% of the negative qualities we attribute to them are
dislike. Is this because they actually deserve happiness to
nothing more than our own projection. Dr. Beck sees
different degrees, or is it a result of our own preference
the root of anger and hostility among people as largely
and bias toward them? Upon examination, we can easily
coming from these exaggerated beliefs.60 This has clear
see from our own experience how friends can become
implications for understanding both small-scale interper-
enemies, enemies become friends, and strangers become
sonal conflicts as well as large scale conflicts that are
both enemies and friends. Although the individuals we
supported by enemy images.61
place in these categories change throughout our life,
their placement completely affects how we relate to them. While reducing bias is essential for allowing our
These categories are no different than any category of compassion to extend outward in ever-increasing circles,
people we create, whether it is based on race, ethnicity, we are in fact the first to benefit from this practice.
political views, gender, etc. These categories are superficial Reducing bias and recognizing common humanity
and changeable and do not define any particular essence makes us feel closer to others and a part of the whole
of all members of that category. The categories may be human community. We gradually recognize that the
relevant (it could be problematic to mistake an enemy superficial differences that made others feel so different
for a friend), but the key point here is that the differences to ourselves are in fact minor compared to what we
need not lead to a bias that sees a person or group of have in common. This paves the way for empathizing
people as lesser than others. with others and experiencing solidarity with people
around the world and those who may be living next
Two critical insights that may emerge from doing this
door. That sense of connection, which is the very
practice are as follows. First, we may come to realize
opposite of loneliness and isolation, is a great contributor
that the qualities we attribute to others – both positive
to our well-being and happiness.
and negative – come not entirely from their own side,

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion, I n teg r i t y a nd S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 83 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s A ppr oac h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

Notes

Skill 5: Impartiality and Common Humanity

Impartiality

- Tilling the Soil

- The Sunshine Metaphor

In-Group vs. Out-Group

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion , I nteg r i t y and S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 102 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s Appr oa c h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

Notes

Skill 5: Impartiality and Common Humanity

Implicit Bias

Common Humanity

Cultivating Impartiality

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion, I n teg r i t y a nd S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 103 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s A ppr oac h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

Reflective Writing Exercise

Skill 5: Impartiality and Common Humanity

Instructions: Answer the following questions as freely and openly as possible. Your answers are for you only and are
not meant to be shared. As such, do not worry about the quality of your prose or grammar. There’s no need to think
much before you write; you can just write.

1. Have you ever had an enemy become a friend, or a friend become an enemy or stranger? How did it happen?

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. Do you think there are any negative consequences of bias to a person or to a society? Conversely, are there benefits
to having an unbiased, impartial attitude?

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. Would your life be different if people were less biased to you or around you? How?

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion , I nteg r i t y and S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 104 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s Appr oa c h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

Mindful Dialogue Exercise

Skill 5: Impartiality and Common Humanity

Instructions: Each participant will select a partner with whom to have a mindful conversation. Take turns answering
the following questions. The partner whose turn it is to listen should follow these rules:

1. Be totally present for the other person.

2. Avoid asking questions.

3. Avoid giving advice.

4. Maintain total confidentiality: anything that your conversation partner decides to share must be held in strict confidence.

Question 1: Can you describe an experience you’ve had where you were negatively impacted by bias?

Question 2: Are there stereotypes or fixed categories that you or others around you have experienced that
are problematic?

Question 3: Would you like to share any insights that emerged for you during the meditation or writing exercise?

Final Reflections

Use this space to capture any insights or ideas that emerged for you during this exercise.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion, I n teg r i t y a nd S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 105 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s A ppr oac h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

Contemplative Journal Questions

Skill 5: Impartiality and Common Humanity

Instructions: These journal questions are designed to help reinforce the skills you are learning in CIT. The greatest
benefit will come from repeated consideration of these questions over time. They can be used in connection with, or in
place of, the Contemplative Practice recordings found on the CIT website. Since space in this book is limited, you may
wish to answer these questions in your personal journal.

Exercise #1: Common Humanity

Start with bringing to mind a resource or focus on the contact of your body with a surface, object or another body part,
and allow yourself to notice any neutral or pleasant sensations that arise in your body.

1. Bring to mind three people:

a. someone you consider a friend or loved one.
b. someone who you find difficult (start with someone who is only slightly difficult).
c. someone who is a stranger (someone to whom you feel neither close nor distant).

2. Write the name of the person or how you know them and three physical details or characteristics about each person.
Try to imagine them in your mind as vividly as possible.

3. List five meaningful things that each person has in common with you. (This may be difficult at first for someone who
is difficult or a stranger, but try your best.)

4. Do any insights arise as you think about what you have in common with each of these people?

5. Thinking of the difficult person and stranger, do you think each has ever experienced disappointment, loneliness, loss of
a loved one, or some other difficulties?

6. As you think about their challenges, do any insights arise?

7. Do each of these people want genuine happiness and to avoid suffering?

8. Looking back at the list you created in question 3, is there anything you want to add?

9. Did you gain any insights from today’s journal entries? If so, explain what insights you gained and why they
might be valuable.

10. If you are engaging in concrete steps or practices to increase your impartiality and sense of common humanity, how
has that been progressing, or what have you been learning?

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion , I nteg r i t y and S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 106 -
 Compa ssionate Integrit y Tr a ining
A S e cu l a r Ethic s Appr oa c h to C ulti vat ing Pe rs on al, S o ci al and E n vir on me n tal F lo u r i shing

Contemplative Journal Questions

Skill 5: Impartiality and Common Humanity

Instructions: These journal questions are designed to help reinforce the skills you are learning in CIT. The greatest
benefit will come from repeated consideration of these questions over time. They can be used in connection with, or in
place of, the Contemplative Practice recordings found on the CIT website. Since space in this book is limited, you may
wish to answer these questions in your personal journal.

Exercise #2: Impartiality

Start with bringing to mind a resource or focus on the contact of your body with a surface, object or another body part,
and allow yourself to notice any neutral or pleasant sensations that arise in your body.

1. Describe a time when something good happened to someone you find difficult, and it made you uncomfortable
or unhappy.

2. Bring to mind someone you consider a friend or loved one, and try to imagine as vividly as possible this same good thing
happening to this person. Write down the thoughts, emotions and sensations you notice as you imagine this good event
happening to your friend or loved one.

3. Did you react differently to the beneficial thing occurring to your friend than to the difficult person? If so, why do you
think that is?

4. Is it possible that some of the reason for the difference is simply based on the different way you relate to each person,
rather than to the event itself?

5. See if you can list three or four people in your life who have moved between the categories of friend, difficult person,
and stranger – for example, an adversary who became a friend, or a friend who became a stranger. Do you think these
categories are fixed or changeable?

6. Did you gain any insights from today’s journal entries? If so, explain what insights you gained and why they might be
valuable.

7. If you are engaging in concrete steps or practices to increase your impartiality and sense of common humanity, how has
that been progressing or what have you been learning?

Ce n t e r for Compa s sion, I n teg r i t y a nd S e cu l ar E t hics | L ife Uni ve rsi t y | M ar ie t ta, G e or g i a

- 107 -
Series II: Relating to OtherS
Citations

54 64
For example, it seems that even extreme behaviors like self-cutting Moore, R. (2011). Can I give him my eyes? Long Preston: Magna.
are often done in order to relieve intense emotional pain and even 65
See the short documentary on Richard Moore, entitled “The Dalai
attempts at suicide are often attempts to free oneself from a situation
Lama’s Hero,” available on YouTube.
perceived as very painful and/or hopeless. See Nock, Matthew K.
66
“Why do people hurt themselves? New insights into the nature and Watkins, Philip C., Van Gelder, Michael, and Frias, Araceli. “Furthering
functions of self-injury.” Current directions in psychological science the Science of Gratitude.” The Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology.
18.2 (2009): 78-83. 2011. pp.437-446. Oxford University Press.
55 67
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. (1998). Measuring Emmons, et.al., “Counting Blessings Versus Burdens: An Experimental
individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association Investigation of Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being in Daily Life.”
test. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74(6), 1464. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2003, Vol. 84, No. 2,
56
377–389.
You can take this test online by visiting
68
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html or searching for Baumeister, et. al., “Bad is Stronger Than Good”, Review of General
“Harvard Implicit Association Test.” Psychology. 2001. Vol. 5. No. 4. 323-370.
57 69
Amodio, D. M. (2014). The neuroscience of prejudice and stereotyping. Ozawa-de Silva, C. (2006). Psychotherapy and religion in Japan: The
Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(10), 670-682. Japanese introspection practice of Naikan. Routledge.
58 70
Payne, B. K. (2001). Prejudice and perception: the role of automatic and Ozawa-de Silva, C. (2006). Psychotherapy and religion in Japan:
controlled processes in misperceiving a weapon. Journal of personality The Japanese introspection practice of Naikan. Routledge.
and social psychology, 81(2), 181. 71
Bono, G., & McCullough, M. E. (2006). Positive responses to
59
Kang, Y., Gray, J. R., & Dovidio, J. F. (2014). The nondiscriminating benefit and harm: Bringing forgiveness and gratitude into cognitive
heart: Lovingkindness meditation training decreases implicit intergroup psychotherapy. Journal of cognitive psychotherapy, 20(2), 147-158.
bias. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(3), 1306. Ozawa-de Silva, C., & Ozawa-de Silva, B. (2010). Secularizing religious
60
practices: A study of subjectivity and existential transformation in
See Aaron Beck’s dialogue with the Dalai Lama on this issue, available
Naikan therapy. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 49(1),
at: https://www.beckinstitute.org/a-cognitive-explanation-for-anger-
147-161.
and-hostility/
72
61
Ted. (2015, January 20). Matthieu Ricard: How to let altruism
Flores, T. V., Ozawa-de Silva, B., & Murphy, C. Peace Studies and
be your guide [Video file]. Retrieved from
the Dalai Lama’s Approach of Secular Ethics: Towards a Positive,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_p_GKCr8rq8
Multidimensional Model of Health and Flourishing. Journal of
73
Healthcare, Science and the Humanities, vol 4, no 2. Moore, R. (2011). Can I give him my eyes? Long Preston: Magna.
62
Ozawa-de Silva, C. (2006). Psychotherapy and religion in Japan:
Bono, et. al. “Forgiveness, Feeling Connected to Others, and Well-Being:
The Japanese introspection practice of Naikan. Routledge.
Two Longitudinal Studies.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
74
2007. 1-14; Lawler, et. al. “The Unique Effects of Forgiveness on De Waal, F. (2009). The age of empathy. New York: Harmony.; Rochat,
Health: An Exploration of Pathways.” Journal of Behavioral Medicine, P. (2009). Others in mind: Social origins of self-consciousness. Cambridge
Vol. 28, No. 2, April 2005; Worthington, et. al., “Forgiveness is an University Press.
emotion-focused coping strategy that can reduce health risks and 75
De Waal, F. B., & Suchak, M. (2010). Prosocial primates: selfish and
promote health resilience: theory, review, and hypotheses.” Psychology
unselfish motivations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of
& Health, 19:3, 385-405.
London B: Biological Sciences, 365(1553), 2711-2722.; Byrne, R., Lee, P.
63
McCullough, M. E., Root, L. M., Tabak, B., & Witvliet, C. v. O. (2009). C., Njiraini, N., Poole, J. H., Sayialel, K., Sayialel, S., ... & Moss, C. J.
Forgiveness. In S. J. Lopez (Ed.), Handbook of Positive Psychology (2nd (2008). Do elephants show empathy? Journal of Consciousness Studies,
ed.). (pp. 427-435). New York: Oxford. 15(10-1), 204-225.

- 127 -
Series II: Relating to OtherS
Citations (continued)

76
Smith, A. (2010). Cognitive empathy and emotional empathy in
human behavior and evolution. The Psychological Record, 56(1), 1.;
De Waal, F. (2009). The age of empathy. New York: Harmony.; Rochat,
P. (2009). Others in mind: Social origins of self-consciousness. Cambridge
University Press.
77
De Dreu, et. al., “Oxytocin promotes human ethnocentrism.”
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States.
Vol. 108, No. 4, 1262-1266.
78
Vastfjall D, Slovic P, Mayorga M, Peters E (2014) Compassion Fade: Affect
and Charity Are Greatest for a Single Child in Need. PLoS ONE 9(6).
79
Klimecki, O., & Singer, T. (2012). Empathic distress fatigue rather than
compassion fatigue? Integrating findings from empathy research in
psychology and social neuroscience. Pathological altruism, 368-383.
80
Batson, C. Daniel; Duncan, Bruce D.; Ackerman, Paula; Buckley, Terese;
Birch, Kimberly. “Is empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation?”
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 40(2), Feb 1981, 290-302.;
Schroeder, D. A., Dovidio, J. F., Sibicky, M. E., Matthews, L. L., & Allen,
J. L. (1988). Empathic concern and helping behavior: Egoism or altruism?
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24(4), 333-353.
81
Royzman, E. B., & Rozin, P. (2006). Limits of symhedonia: The
differential role of prior emotional attachment in sympathy and
sympathetic joy. Emotion, 6(1), 82.
82
Oliner, Samuel, & Oliner, Pearl (1988). The Altruistic Personality:
Rescuers of Jews in Nazi Europe. Free Press. p. 177.
83
Tenzin Gyatso (2012). Beyond religion: Ethics for a whole world. Random
House. p.45.
84
Pace, T. W., Negi, L. T., Adame, D. D., Cole, S. P., Sivilli, T. I., Brown,
T. D., ... & Raison, C. L. (2009). Effect of compassion meditation
on neuroendocrine, innate immune and behavioral responses to
psychosocial stress. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 34(1), 87-98.; Singer, T.,
& Bolz, M. (2013). Compassion: Bridging practice and science.; Kok,
B. E. (2013). The science of subjective experience: positive emotions
and social closeness influence autonomic functioning. In Compassion:
Bridging practice and science (pp. 314-324).; Bolz, M., & Singer, T. (2013).
Mind you hormones! The endocrinology of compassion. In Compassion:
Bridging practice in Science (p. 230).

- 128 -
 Com pa ssionate Integ ri t y Tr aining

A S e c u l ar E t hic s Appr oach to C ultivating Person al,

S oc i al and Envir onmental Flo uri shing

Center for Compassion, Integrity and Secular Ethics

www.CompassionateIntegrity.org
Life University | 1269 Barclay Circle | Marietta, Georgia 30060

LIFE.edu