Sometimes a dear friend of mine is really hard on himself.  Like anybody who is human and who lives amongst his fellow men, Terry from time to time screws up.  So often it’s in the name of doing good works – since Terry has both a regular job and his non-paying good work job.  He’s strung out – meeting the commitments he makes to the many.

And when Terry screws up, in my experience, it’s only a worry in Terry’s own mind.  Most people appreciate the work he does selflessly and with admirable dedication and energy.  Nobody judges Terry like he judges himself.

I’ve encountered him from time to time, deeply depressed because of a missed deadline – that only HE was worried about.  I think Terry thinks that people judge him by the standards he applies to only himself.  He has higher standards than most people – and nobody I know would even notice his failures let along judge him harshly for them.

So I went with him one time to visit his psychologist.  This bloke has been practicing for almost 30 years and is a very seasoned professional.  His words, verbatim were “Listen, sport, you are absolutely known by everyone you encounter – as being the most loving and forgiving man any of us has ever met.  You forgive everyone – except one person.  And you are kind to everyone – everyone except one person, present here today.  YOU !”

His advice was for Terry to forgive himself his sins – real and perceived and rejoice in his good works.

He added “ Be a lot kinder to yourself:.

I think the advice was sound and I use it on Terry every chance I get.  Re-enforcement IS necessary because Terry works for a brilliant man – who for all his intelligence in his somewhat narrow but complex field, is almost completely oblivious to the need for kindness in his dealings with others – especially his faithful and long-suffering staff.  He is a truth first, foremost and in every way sort of professional.

This chap has never heard of kindness and he will argue an iron pot’s legs off in pursuit of truth.

I was wondering  (Sumner Miller style) why this is so.

I think that (let’s call him) Professor Smith, while richly-endowed with intellect is rather deficient in perception of the emotions of other human beings – including intelligent co-workers.  If I was guessing, I’d say his behaviour was typical of someone on the autistic spectrum.  Like a person with Asperger’s condition.  He is obsessed with his field to the exclusion of just about everything else – including missing the minute clues that his partners in discourse are looking for the shortcuts to the exit.

In fact, I’d speculate that the reason he’s so obsessed with “truth” is because he sees it as “HIS TRUTH”, and he is driven by an ego that needs to win intellectual arguments rather than use the vehicle of an argument as a means to reach an ‘absolute’ truth – or one that is shared by the cognoscenti as being self-evident and not in need of dispute.  His truth is understood by himself as an absolute and an unarguable truth.  “Kindness” does not come into his lexicon – he thinks of it as a synonym for intellectual weakness.

So Professor Smith is not going to take Terry’s psychologist’s advice and apply a bit of kindness – first because he doesn’t know what it is to be kind, and second – if he DID know, he would regard it with contempt for being a mark of intellectual feebleness.

It is very much his loss as well as Terry’s loss working with and for him.

Whereas “truth” might be relative – that is, it is someone’s perspective of what is true, can there be some kind of universal understanding (by people – shall we call them neurotypical as opposed to the non-PC term of “normal” ?) of what is meant by “kindness”?

I would argue that “kindness” is a universal human good.  We see it expressed through “giving” actions – forgiving others their trespasses on oneself, allowing people the space to express their own opinions no matter how badly they diverge from our own, treating others with respect, regardless of whether we feel they have earned it or not.  Seeing the fundamental good in one another.  Giving without the expectation of also receiving.

When we raise children, it is wise to focus on praising their excellence as opposed to punishing them for their perceived failings.  As adults we show children the forgiveness and the kindness they so deserve, but many of us are prepared to draw the line at family or perhaps at adolescents – or adults who for some reason do not meet our expectations.

It’s surprising that those old chestnut Ten Commandments DO exhort (apart from some Old Testy tripe about worshipping one God and hang the rest – OR ELSE), the useful code of doing unto others as we would have them do unto us.  Unfortunately this often gets re-interpreted in modern times not as an exhortation to kindness, but moreover the other Old Testy notion of ‘an eye for an eye’ – that is, if this person is a bastard to me, that justifies me coming out of my corner with fists flying.  I know there’s some “turn the other cheek” residue, but I’m fairly sure that its application went out with open toed shoes and white wall tyres.  Perhaps it’s time to amend the first Ten – or some at least – could we just say instead ….. Do unto others by showing only kindness.  And leave it at that.

Do be kind unto one’s self.  And to others.  Terry, towel not thy self nor thy neighbour up.

And the people saw that it was a good approach and there was rejoicing at the pub.