Slashdot Mirror
Meditation in the Workplace?
prostoalex writes "Nortel, Texas Instruments, Raytheon, Google, Apple and many others are apparently finding meditation and yoga to be a very efficient way to motivate and energize the employees. BusinessWeek finds that the reasons companies are suddenly hiring the yoga experts and conducting regular classes are easily justified to the management: "increased brain-wave activity, enhanced intuition, better concentration, and the alleviation of the kinds of aches and pains that plague employees most"."
This is ridiculous. Employers would find that their employess were productive and content by treating them with respect and dignity, managing them properly, having proper time-scales, fair working hours, etc. Enforced yoga, meditation and feng-shui is childish, silly and new-age clap-trap put about my a bunch of charlatans looking to make a quick buck out of the naieve, impressionable and those with more money than sense.
Stick Men
It's not the Yoga thats helping, it's the attention. People love to feel needed!
Make money with Real Estate Investing
Frankly, that kind of thing makes me completely mad. What about paying people a decent salary?
What about not over-working them (ie: decent work hours, not permanent overtime)? This way, perhaps your employees won't need frivolous yoga classes to be productive and motivated!
What about managing companies responsibly, not in an Enronesque way?
What about day-care benefits for employees with children? You know, like having in-house day-care center for toddlers, so that moms and dads can see their kids during lunch hour, and not grow apart from their offspring?
Etc... etc... In short: decent and sensible policies? Noooo.... instead, you get these moronic "benefits".
Nothing against yoga, mind you, which I am really interested in, by the way. It's just that replacing sound management policies by yoga classes just doesn't cut it for me.
If I want yoga classes, I'll pay for them out of my own pocket, thank you very much...
(Sorry for the rant, this is the kind of Dilbert-esque "benefits" that just push me over the edge...)
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
I've nothing against this meditation idea, but I can't help wondering. Would a company support employee prayer breaks? Not that I advocate such a practice--I can pray anytime I want, without company authorization. I'm just curious, is all...
Hiawatha Bray
Tech Reporter
Boston Globe
Yoga and meditation are not inherently New Age and certainly aren't clap-trap. That doesn't mean that New Agers don't mess up the field something fierce. I was once considering selling T-Shirts that said, "Blow the New Age out your ass."
That being said you are absolutely correct. Giving people the opportunity to take a relax and stretch without harassing them about their "productivity" would certainly be one thing they could do to treat employees with respect.
This isn't what typically happens though. It gets applied just like any other buzz word compliant band-aid program that makes them feel like they're respecting their employees while actually treating them with disdain and just as much like mere productivity machines as they ever did.
Thus meditation becomes demeaning for many.
On the whole they could do more good by letting people listen to music of their choice while they work and not having a coniption fit if they walk to the watercooler a time or two.
Meditation cannot be applied as a paliative for keyboard logging.
KFG
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
As someone who meditated on a daily basis too, I wholeheartedly agree with the first poster. While meditation is useful to relieve stress and calm your mind, it pales in comparison to just being treated well. You can calm yourself as much as you want, but if somebody else keeps punching you in the face, life still sucks.
Buddha taught us that the source of human misery is attachment. In order to be free from sorrow, we must be free from attachment - and from striving.
Many people who meditate - and I suspect most Americans who meditate - do so because they hope to get something out of it, anything from relaxation, to relief from stress, enlightment or spiritual growth. But if you are striving to better yourself through meditation, you are missing the whole point. What you must free yourself from is that very striving.
The Shambhala monk Chyogyam Trungpa was instrumental in bringing Tibetan buddhism to the US and Canada in a form that could be appreciated by westerners. May I recommend a couple of his books:
-
Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism
-
The Heart of the Buddha
Spiritual materialism was particularly rampant in the United States in the late 60's and early 70's. Trungpa worked hard to teach all the navel-gazers that that was a mistake.I can teach anyone to meditate in about two minutes:
Sit comfortably but with your back straight. Focus just part of your attention on your breath. Clear your mind of thoughts. Don't beat yourself up if a though crosses your mind, just let it go. Then sit for a while. Try ten minutes to start with, then a little longer each day as you get used to it.
The most important thing is to just sit. How many Slashdotters ever allow themselves to just sit? To just clear your mind without thinking of anything?
Trungpa said there was no way out but to apply your bottom to the meditation cushion. I can promise you'll enjoy his books - he was quite a colorful character.
I think that the day that release from attachment can be sold to American business will come when Bill Gates gives his money to the poor, shaves his head, dons saffron robes, and takes The Vows of Refuge.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Why is it people are comfortable with companies sponsoring Yoga, a religious practice? Meditation is one thing, but:
_ re li_hin.php
http://www.niharonline.com/culture/religion/cul
Bhagavat-Gita, a part of the epic Mahabharata, expounds the synthesis of three yogas or ways of attaining union with the Supreme Self, Gyana-yoga (union through knowledge), Bhakti-yoga (union through devotion) and Karma-yoga (union through action).
http://www.classicalyoga.org/Page18.html
There has been and continues to be much confusion over what is religion and/or spirituality. In actuality, these two words have an identical meaning. "Religion" comes from the Latin root "religio" which means "to link-back" to the spirit. This is the identical meaning of the word "Yoga" which comes from the Sanskrit "Yuj;" i.e., "to yoke" to the spirit. Even before the word "Yoga" was used, the Vedas (Hindu scripture) use the word "Yajna" which essentially means "sacrifice." The word "sacrifice" comes from the Latin translation "sacred doing." With this understanding, one becomes aware of the inseparable nature of Yoga/Religion/Spirituality.
You should have been dropped to "troll", not the parent post.
How is Buddhism not a religion? What makes a religion? The suspension of rational thought?
There's nothing scientific about the Buddhist moral code in the Middle Path and this moral code is far stricter than any religion I've seen. You pay the price of your deeds in karma. That price can be pretty f'n heavy if you aren't careful. You might not get punished immediately or even in this life but you will pay. Conversely, karma rewards good deeds. You can foster your entire existence into generating good karma (/. has nothing to do with this.)
There is no eternity for your behavior. You will not suffer eternal damnation for evil nor will you enjoy eternal bliss for good. Everything can change.
Further, while the overall concepts square with science, once you start exploring the 31 states of existence, you may need to leave science at the door or at least not get upset when you hear various descriptions of these different realities.
You have to believe that the Middle Path is the right way of living and that creating excuses and rationalizations for why you deviated from it will hurt you more than just admitting that you like porn, gambling and other nonsense.
Now, what were you saying about Buddhism not being a religion? Maybe it was just your ignorance and cynicism shining through.
Laws are for people with no friends.
In any case, i've met a lot of geeks that will believe any old bullshit (atkins has really taken hold in the geek community for some reason, for example)
... who are arguably quacks of the highest order.
... certainly the theories that there are have yet to be rigorously tested. High-carb foods didn't become common until after the advent of modern agriculture, some 8-10 thousand years ago, so it really isn't unreasonable to find that our metabolisms aren't terribly well adapted to processing it. 10,000 years is nothing compared to 3,000,000, so we propbably have a while yet before our bodies evolve into more effecient processors of high-carb diets than low-carb diets.
OK, now it is my turn to call bullshit.
As much as I have always despised 'diets de jour', Atkins was preaching his take on this for 30 odd years, much to his own personal and professional derision. However, in recent years scientific studies have finally been conducted to validate or refute his findings, and in every case have validated his approach.
Now there is plenty of innuendo suggesting 'long term health effects' that are bad, but no solid studies have been performed, and the claim that the atkins diet does in fact lead to dramatic weight loss has been demonstrated and is no longer disputed even by its detractors.
OTOH we do have emperical evidence of the ill health effects of the low fat, high carb diets that dieticians have been foisting upon us over the last two decades: America has never been as obese, or as unhealthy, as it is today. Specific causes are uncertain (correlation does not prove causation, it really can only suggest it, and even then not always), but it is clear that as the American diet has embraced and increased its consumption of low-fat, high-carb products the populace has grown vastly more obese and unhealthy.
So we have only three ways of losing weight in a reaonably healthy manner: burn more calories, consume less calories, or go into ketosis by dropping your carb intake dramatically. 'Low Fat' doesn't do shit for anyone except peddlers of 'low fat' foods and diets
In any event, calling atkins "any old bullshit" flies in the face of numerous studies and, most importantly, the very real and reproducable effect it has on people's weight.
I actually did the Atkins thing, not out of any personal interest (as I said, I've always despised 'diets de jour'), but to be supportive of my girlfriend who was doing it.
I did not expect it to work and had zero faith in the approach.
After losing 45 pounds and having my waiste size shring by 6 inches I had to eat a little crow and admit that, emperically, the damn thing worked, and worked dramatically. Having my blood pressure go from marginally high to marginally low, and my cholesterol go from Very High to Medium-Low in four short months made me a believer...whatever 'long term health effects' there might be (and who knows, even pseudo-scientific innuendo can be right on occasion), the immediate health effects were dramatic and extremely positive.
However, unlike religion, I buy into the Atkins approach (though I'm no longer on the diet) because of verifiable, reproducable results.
As I said, it is possible there may be health issues with eating low-carb diets over the long term, but that certainly isn't proven, and no real long term studies have yet been done (though plenty of allegations have been made, by the same people who were pushing the low-fat, high carb disaster upon us the last several decades).
Indeed, Given that we evolved for most of our 3 million years as primates eating exactly that kind of diet, it is quite possible, perhaps even likely, that there are no such health risks
In a way it is a pity Atkins has become popular (among geeks as well as anyone else), as I absolutely hate doing anything that smacks of 'trendy,' but the simple fact is that, unlike low-fat, high-carb diets that are supposed to make you healthy and don'
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Buddhism is very much about open-minded thinking and compassion, neither of which are really compatible with the capitalist system.
You raise an interesting point. The essence of capitalism is competition, it need not be cut-throat competition, although that's often the approach that people take.
Can you imagine what the corporate world would be like if everyone was compassionate and open-minded? How about if corporate officers adopted the "do not create evil" precept? Most people would probably say that a corporation that embraced these ideals would be at a severe disadvantage in the market.
There are certain advantages to "playing dirty". But there are also certain advantages to compassion and open-mindedness. I think that a company that plays by the latter principles would gain extraordinary trust among its consumers and employees, and would probably produce more innovation with less waste.
I try to bring Buddhist ideals into every part of my life, including my business relationships. For the most part, I believe that this has helped my career rather than hindered it.