“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.” — Viktor Frankl
Recognize the Delay—step 2 of your suggested 3 steps. Can you notice the gap between the event and your reaction?
It is easier to notice the gap - when the gap is longer - resisting the habits that seem locked in place by years of my cyclic behavior.
Today , my bday, i am celebrating progress on step 1 as I am CHOOSING to press PAUSE and witness what is outside me - BEFORE internalizing and assuming everything was meant as a personal ATTACK. This has freed me to Wonder and even BE curious about other perceptions-- and then notice what sensations those other perceptions awaken within me.
Thank you for this reflection—and happy birthday! What a meaningful gift to give yourself: the power to pause and create space between stimulus and interpretation. That moment of noticing—before assuming, before personalizing—is the very birthplace of freedom.
And, yes, the longer the gap, the easier it is to recognize. But what you’re doing is choosing to create the gap, even when old habits want to close it. That’s not just awareness—that’s agency.
And I love what you said about curiosity. When we stop assuming everything is a personal attack, we make room for wonder. We open the door to other perceptions, and in doing so, we learn more about what’s moving within us. That’s the real work, and it’s beautiful to witness you doing it.
Thanks for sharing your progress—it’s encouraging, not just for you, but for all of us.
Thanks for pointing out my individual "growth" as AGENCY . Honestly The word /concept of agency is uncomfortable turf for me - especially the concept of me deciding whats best for myself . 6 months ago It was completely as "foreign " term in my vocabulary and was an odd one I figured the younger generation had "made up".
My quest in mindfulness , philosophy and theology readings combined with Somatic practices has me bumping up on the "Agency" term again and again.
Funny - i hadn't thought i was "doing it " yet. Thanks for encouraging me on this Work.
Thank you Jake. I appreciate this greatly. So I'm pondering...
When someone insult us...the insult can only come from our identity being threatened. If I'm secure in my identity, I can't be insulted.
When we are "triggered" or having a negative emotion of any kind...look in the mirror.
I'm following and with you with this statement, "We stop giving power to external forces—and to other people—who were never in control to begin with." And also aware of how controversial this can be in our culture, where the belief is that many people are suffering under the power of...others. If you search for "United States Most Marginalized", AI gives the following list. And I am aware of people in these groups who feel external forces are objectively controlling their circumstances and they are enduring negative consequences.
Racial and Ethnic Minorities
LGBTQ+ Individuals
People with Disabilities
Low-Income Individuals
Homeless Individuals
Immigrants and Refugees
Women
Rural Communities
Veterans
Do you just come back to concepts such as from Frankl, that even with great oppression, we can still have agency to interpret...constructively, or not?
I believe people in marginalized groups do experience more "objectively awful" circumstances and negative consequences due to the actions and inactions of others. (Perhaps we can agree there exists some degree of physical pain, hunger, cold, or illness that could objectively constitute a negative experience?) This is adjacent to the proposal that we could have some control over the psychic pain of suffering we inflict on ourselves with the interpretations we choose and the stories we tell ourselves or hear and believe to be true.
It occurs to me that the grief of losing a loved one may be a special case. Physical death is objective and thus far inevitable. Yet even supposing the grief of lost relationship is entirely our own doing, it is no less poignant or "real." It seems fair to say grief is a natural consequence of choosing love, and yet who would argue with Tennyson?
Kerry, thank you, I appreciate the feedback. I am totally in agreement that we do not experience reality, but we only experience our interpretation of reality.
That said, and Jake and I have talked plenty...the reality does...matter. It can matter greatly! Our interpretation going forward is still up to us.
I find myself wanting to have compassion and understanding for people who suffer great trauma's and tragedies, and the pain I feel any of us would feel as a result of harsh realities.
And then also, that some, depending on their life experience and exposure, will have a much easier time than others...to embrace the agency of creating more constructive interpretations.
I've had a life of privilege. Of love and relationship. Of acceptance and belonging. When trials hit, I feel I was given faith on a silver platter. And I've also experienced others who have had a life of great, great deficits. And their ability to embrace agency and faith seems...more difficult.
No different than if you want to play basketball, it's a privilege and benefit to be 7 feet tall rather than 5'3". Being shorter adds some extra challenge. Even though both can still play in the NBA.
Thank you both, Kevin and Kerry, for these thoughtful reflections. You each point to something profoundly important—the tension between lived hardship and interpretive freedom. Rather than trying to resolve the tension, I want to acknowledge it.
Yes, we live in a world where real trauma occurs. People experience hunger, abuse, systemic discrimination, and loss. There are undeniably harsh conditions—some of them ongoing, some sudden and life-altering. I don’t believe in denying these realities nor in suggesting that all pain is illusory or avoidable. The mirror in the shop didn’t show me that life’s challenges aren’t real; it showed me that how I experience those challenges is never immediate or purely objective—it’s shaped, always, by how I interpret them.
That doesn’t mean interpretation is easy. As you both noted, it’s harder to choose constructive meaning when you’ve been repeatedly harmed, neglected, or deprived of resources—emotional or otherwise. And so, compassion becomes essential. Not pity, not dismissal—but genuine compassion for the fact that while agency is available to all, the path to experiencing it is not equally smooth.
Kevin, I appreciate you bringing up Viktor Frankl—because, yes, even under extreme oppression, the capacity to shape meaning remains. At the same time, some of us are more resourced—emotionally, relationally, culturally—and therefore have an easier time accessing that capacity. But that’s not an argument against agency. It’s an argument for two things: first, compassion for those who face greater challenges; and second, the responsibility to model agency with humility, not as a way to prove strength, but as a way to extend possibility.
Kerry, your mention of grief is such a poignant example. Yes, death is inevitable, and grief may feel equally so. And still, the way we grieve—the meanings we make, the stories we carry forward—can either deepen our love or anchor us in despair. Grief, like all emotional experiences, is both real and interpretive. It’s not fake because we create it. It’s real because we create it. That is the paradox.
To both of you: I'm not suggesting that pain isn’t real. Rather, the pain we feel—whether caused by oppression or loss—isn’t only about what happens. It’s also about what it means to us. And that meaning, though shaped by many forces, can be reclaimed.
Thanks again for being in this conversation with me. The mirror keeps teaching me.
Jake, I think this gets to what I'm grappling with, "that’s not an argument against agency." Yes. We all have agency. Just as we can all play basketball. The hoop is at 10'. That won't change. So it's more easily accessible if you're 7' tall. But we can all play. We all have agency. It may be easier for some to readily embrace. And of course we've seen many of those who had the absolute worst of circumstances, embrace agency the most.
Recognize the Delay—step 2 of your suggested 3 steps. Can you notice the gap between the event and your reaction?
It is easier to notice the gap - when the gap is longer - resisting the habits that seem locked in place by years of my cyclic behavior.
Today , my bday, i am celebrating progress on step 1 as I am CHOOSING to press PAUSE and witness what is outside me - BEFORE internalizing and assuming everything was meant as a personal ATTACK. This has freed me to Wonder and even BE curious about other perceptions-- and then notice what sensations those other perceptions awaken within me.
Thank you for this reflection—and happy birthday! What a meaningful gift to give yourself: the power to pause and create space between stimulus and interpretation. That moment of noticing—before assuming, before personalizing—is the very birthplace of freedom.
And, yes, the longer the gap, the easier it is to recognize. But what you’re doing is choosing to create the gap, even when old habits want to close it. That’s not just awareness—that’s agency.
And I love what you said about curiosity. When we stop assuming everything is a personal attack, we make room for wonder. We open the door to other perceptions, and in doing so, we learn more about what’s moving within us. That’s the real work, and it’s beautiful to witness you doing it.
Thanks for sharing your progress—it’s encouraging, not just for you, but for all of us.
Thanks for pointing out my individual "growth" as AGENCY . Honestly The word /concept of agency is uncomfortable turf for me - especially the concept of me deciding whats best for myself . 6 months ago It was completely as "foreign " term in my vocabulary and was an odd one I figured the younger generation had "made up".
My quest in mindfulness , philosophy and theology readings combined with Somatic practices has me bumping up on the "Agency" term again and again.
Funny - i hadn't thought i was "doing it " yet. Thanks for encouraging me on this Work.
Thank you Jake. I appreciate this greatly. So I'm pondering...
When someone insult us...the insult can only come from our identity being threatened. If I'm secure in my identity, I can't be insulted.
When we are "triggered" or having a negative emotion of any kind...look in the mirror.
I'm following and with you with this statement, "We stop giving power to external forces—and to other people—who were never in control to begin with." And also aware of how controversial this can be in our culture, where the belief is that many people are suffering under the power of...others. If you search for "United States Most Marginalized", AI gives the following list. And I am aware of people in these groups who feel external forces are objectively controlling their circumstances and they are enduring negative consequences.
Racial and Ethnic Minorities
LGBTQ+ Individuals
People with Disabilities
Low-Income Individuals
Homeless Individuals
Immigrants and Refugees
Women
Rural Communities
Veterans
Do you just come back to concepts such as from Frankl, that even with great oppression, we can still have agency to interpret...constructively, or not?
I believe people in marginalized groups do experience more "objectively awful" circumstances and negative consequences due to the actions and inactions of others. (Perhaps we can agree there exists some degree of physical pain, hunger, cold, or illness that could objectively constitute a negative experience?) This is adjacent to the proposal that we could have some control over the psychic pain of suffering we inflict on ourselves with the interpretations we choose and the stories we tell ourselves or hear and believe to be true.
It occurs to me that the grief of losing a loved one may be a special case. Physical death is objective and thus far inevitable. Yet even supposing the grief of lost relationship is entirely our own doing, it is no less poignant or "real." It seems fair to say grief is a natural consequence of choosing love, and yet who would argue with Tennyson?
"'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all."
Kerry, thank you, I appreciate the feedback. I am totally in agreement that we do not experience reality, but we only experience our interpretation of reality.
That said, and Jake and I have talked plenty...the reality does...matter. It can matter greatly! Our interpretation going forward is still up to us.
I find myself wanting to have compassion and understanding for people who suffer great trauma's and tragedies, and the pain I feel any of us would feel as a result of harsh realities.
And then also, that some, depending on their life experience and exposure, will have a much easier time than others...to embrace the agency of creating more constructive interpretations.
I've had a life of privilege. Of love and relationship. Of acceptance and belonging. When trials hit, I feel I was given faith on a silver platter. And I've also experienced others who have had a life of great, great deficits. And their ability to embrace agency and faith seems...more difficult.
No different than if you want to play basketball, it's a privilege and benefit to be 7 feet tall rather than 5'3". Being shorter adds some extra challenge. Even though both can still play in the NBA.
Thank you both, Kevin and Kerry, for these thoughtful reflections. You each point to something profoundly important—the tension between lived hardship and interpretive freedom. Rather than trying to resolve the tension, I want to acknowledge it.
Yes, we live in a world where real trauma occurs. People experience hunger, abuse, systemic discrimination, and loss. There are undeniably harsh conditions—some of them ongoing, some sudden and life-altering. I don’t believe in denying these realities nor in suggesting that all pain is illusory or avoidable. The mirror in the shop didn’t show me that life’s challenges aren’t real; it showed me that how I experience those challenges is never immediate or purely objective—it’s shaped, always, by how I interpret them.
That doesn’t mean interpretation is easy. As you both noted, it’s harder to choose constructive meaning when you’ve been repeatedly harmed, neglected, or deprived of resources—emotional or otherwise. And so, compassion becomes essential. Not pity, not dismissal—but genuine compassion for the fact that while agency is available to all, the path to experiencing it is not equally smooth.
Kevin, I appreciate you bringing up Viktor Frankl—because, yes, even under extreme oppression, the capacity to shape meaning remains. At the same time, some of us are more resourced—emotionally, relationally, culturally—and therefore have an easier time accessing that capacity. But that’s not an argument against agency. It’s an argument for two things: first, compassion for those who face greater challenges; and second, the responsibility to model agency with humility, not as a way to prove strength, but as a way to extend possibility.
Kerry, your mention of grief is such a poignant example. Yes, death is inevitable, and grief may feel equally so. And still, the way we grieve—the meanings we make, the stories we carry forward—can either deepen our love or anchor us in despair. Grief, like all emotional experiences, is both real and interpretive. It’s not fake because we create it. It’s real because we create it. That is the paradox.
To both of you: I'm not suggesting that pain isn’t real. Rather, the pain we feel—whether caused by oppression or loss—isn’t only about what happens. It’s also about what it means to us. And that meaning, though shaped by many forces, can be reclaimed.
Thanks again for being in this conversation with me. The mirror keeps teaching me.
Jake, I think this gets to what I'm grappling with, "that’s not an argument against agency." Yes. We all have agency. Just as we can all play basketball. The hoop is at 10'. That won't change. So it's more easily accessible if you're 7' tall. But we can all play. We all have agency. It may be easier for some to readily embrace. And of course we've seen many of those who had the absolute worst of circumstances, embrace agency the most.