by Tyler Cowen
on February 9, 2016 at 3:11 am
in Economics, Philosophy, Religion
McMindfulness is the commodified, marketised and reductionist version of mindfulness practice which consists in the construction of courses, “apps”, books, and other items for sale to the public.
There is more here, via the excellent Mark Thorson.
Cottage-industry witch doctoring good; Factory-produced witch doctoring bad?
I am inclined to agree. I am a traditionalist. I think irrational superstitions ought to be produced Artisanally.
That sounds like a cryptic disparagement of the Roman Catholic church.
How and why is mindfulness “witch doctoring?” Or an “irrational superstition?” There is significant empirical evidence that it improves people’s well being in a number of ways.
If it worked it would not matter if it was produced en masse or not. Aspirin does not work less well than willow bark because it comes from a factory.
This is just middle class status signalling.
Mindfulness is not a superstition or irrational. There is no supernatural element. It is simply observing your own mind. It is very consistent with the enlightenment tradition.
The only thing irrational about mindfulness is that people don’t practice it more. The empirical evidence indeed supports it, and when I tried doing it regularly, I really saw benefits – but somehow, with all the time I waste each day, I haven’t managed to get back into the habit. Oh, well, next lifetime…
“… in order to protect vulnerable people”. I’d really like to ask this guy to describe vulnerable people because I just see adults buying self-help books.
From another point of view this is just an intellectual property issue. If you don’t like other people using your brand, register it. If you can’t register it means it isn’t yours, end of the problem. A nice example of this Tux, the Linux penguin. Linux is basically an non-profit NGO, but if you want to sell t-shirts with Tux on them…..you need to ask a trademark license to the Linux Foundation.
Of course, mindfulness is just another iteration of status, like the $4 cup of coffee or the $600 smart phone. I’m reminded of the dictum that it’s getting more and more expensive to maintain a rich lifestyle, but not much more expensive to maintain a working-class lifestyle. Mindfulness, like the $4 cup of coffee and the $600 smart phone, is the intersection of the two and provides the illusion of equality.
Yep, just another weapon in the “status” war. Thank god we live in such an “Authentic” Culture.
Certainly that may be people’s initial draw to it. But with continued practice it will undermine their need for status.
Mindfulness is a process of dis-identification that allows people to disentangle their social conditioning from their preferred, valued, behaviors. It needs to go beyond mere “McMindfulness” and be implemented and taught in high schools (along with other psychological training.) Such training will end “microaggressions” and other such liberal psychoses* sweeping the country.
*I mean psychoses quite explicitly. Go read Albert Ellis or the DMV and then look at all the insanity these kids and their liberal are expressing. Narcissism, anxiety, depression, etc.
(Note: conservatives do have many of the same issues, their social structures are typically in place to mitigate the damage versus accentuate it. E.g. “man up” type philosophies.)
Look, if you’re going to bullshit about psychology, at least get the name right. It’s the DSM, not DMV
This sounds like “true communism” instead of the fake communism the Soviet Union had. Mind you, I don’t disagree WRT the benefits of mindfulness: observing your mind as an independent agent instead of letting oneself be swept away in juvenile emotions is unhealthy.
However, I doubt most will ever experience “mindfulness” as anything besides an exercise on a Ted Talk. Much like “Authenticity” is Elevated Fraud for most of the UMC.
Narcissism, anxiety, depression, etc., of course, being completely modern and new things. The Greeks, for example, never would have encountered such “psychoses”.
What is today mindfulness practice that is not highly commodified and marketised.
The author merely repeats the common complaints of early adopters of cultural trends that become increasingly popular. “I was into it before it was popular. What is popular now is inferior to the pure activity in which I have long been engaged.” This allows the author or speaker to both feel good about him- or herself and to appear to be cutting-edge, yet it neglects the welfare improvements of the masses who were late adopters.
His actual complaint seems to be that certain cultural institutions are co-opting his techniques. He disagrees with these cultural institutions. For instance, if the military uses mindfulness training, it MUST be misusing it, because the military is bad people. Killing is wrong.
Agreed. Increasingly, these methods no longer associated exclusively or mainly with Buddhism. This threatens individuals who are clinging to mindfulness and meditation as ways to bolster a “Buddhist” self image.
The fact is that these are useful practices for many people, and folks who get something out of them ought to use them.
To meet him back halfway through, we might be wary of people selling thin soup.
It’s curious to me that an expert on Buddhism is so grumpy at what he sees as someone else doing mindfulness wrong, such as it were. I’m no Zen master, but my basic understanding of the religion/philosophy is that suffering is borne of desire — to make the world conform to your own feelings, thoughts, and beliefs. How very un-Buddhist of Mr. Hyland to suggest that mindfulness is being somehow “ruined” by others. McMindfulness is not good or bad, it is simply…thus.
I read the report and found the project very sensible, and believe it should be judged by its effectiveness. An acquaintance of mine, Thomas Cleary, who has translated many Buddhist, Zen, etc., texts, and who lives by them, felt that I’m a bit of a dilettante because I mix these texts with Wittgenstein, etc. No doubt he’s right, but we all doing what we can.
The obvious parallel would be how Yoga in the USA was separated from its Hindu origins. Yet cultural imports are invariably changed in the process of adaptation
What actually gets used is rarely authentic to its origins, and what remains authentic remains too foreign for adaptation. So? If it’s too authentic I’ll get accused of cultural appropriation for using it, and if it’s adapted/inauthentic I’ll get accused of inauthenticity. So, I’m supposed to care? Ultimately the the only cultures that do not borrow/steal/take from others are dead ones.
If the complaint is that mindfulness changed when it was imported, well, isn’t everything, and isn’t that what a reasonable person would expect? Or is the complaint more that he doesn’t care for the particular ways it was changed, that it could have become less authentic in a more morally superior way?
Or is this all just someone (yet again) trying to signal his superior moral virtue?
I’m sorry I didn’t see this when I posted (below). This is excellent and not just because I agree! I too think that Hyland is signalling his superior moral virtue.
The parallels with yoga are interesting. Today, very few people are authentic yogis. But so what? So what if a few suburban moms and dads do yoga “wrong”? So, yes, good points Albigensian.
A MONK came to the master Nansen and asked, “Tell me, is there
some teaching that no master has ever taught?”
Nansen said, “There is.”
The monk asked, “Can you tell me what it is?”
Nansen said, “It is not Buddha. It is not things. It is not
“New Age”-ist stuff — books, bowls, mats, trinkets, tapes — is part of a huge and lucrative industry.
Mindfulness connects up with Buddhism, the only religion / spiritual practice that progressive and mainstream North American can get behind. Indeed, people think of a kitten sitting on a lotus when they think of Buddhism.
(And frankly, who wouldn’t rather have our prison population taught Buddhism and mindfulness as opposed to Wahhabist thought?)
Terry Hyland seems worried about dilution of moral principles. As a moderate pragmatist, I would say, don’t worry about moral perfection: “if it works, don’t knock it. If it improves a few peoples’ lives, leave it alone.”
It is always great to have views from such a visionary person, I really love reading all this since it helps me greatly for performing. I am a Forex trader and for me having idea of the happening around the world can be a thing to keep me step ahead of the rest, it is also simple for me because of OctaFX broker since with them, I use swap free account and then there is no pressure on me for trading here.
Comments on this entry are closed.
Previous post: The employment to population ratio, revisited
Next post: Valentine’s Day Economics
Email Tyler Cowen
Follow Tyler on Twitter
Email Alex Tabarrok
Follow Alex on Twitter
Subscribe in a reader
Follow Us on Twitter
Marginal Revolution on Twitter Counter.com
Get smart with the Thesis WordPress Theme from DIYthemes.