15/04/2025
Treating every student as an end in and of themselves, not a means to an end, is embedded in the Equilibrium pedagogy that EQTutors applies for educational outcomes. If you’d like to know more, just get in touch. Here are some thoughts from one of the founders of EQTutors.
“People were created to be loved. Things were created to be used. Most of our troubles come from the fact that we love things, and use people.” Martin Buber
I remember learning the deeper meaning behind Namaste many moons ago.
It actually means “I see you”. I mean, I REALLY really see you. Like I am actually seeing you - not projecting into you, not assuming stuff about you, not hoping or fearing or any of that fog. "The divine in me recognizes the divine in you" is how I have heard it put. What a wonderful way to greet another human being - But what an incredibly hard thing to do! Particularly when working with people who are suffering, anxious, or afraid.
I think all life deserves the respect of being seen, don’t you? Objectifying animals allows us to eat them and treat them with a level of cruelty no one would countenance if they actually had a relationship with that animal. Objectifying our ideological opponents allows us to belittle and abuse them without listening or considering what useful truths might be lurking somewhere in their world. Objectifying human beings allows us to call them students, teachers, soldiers, civilians, workers, unemployed, citizens, illegals, successful, unsuccessful, smart, stupid, bosses, blue collar, white collar, democrats, republicans, the list is endless. Once assigned a category, we can more easily disassociate and assign them to a schema that relieves us of the burden of really seeing them. Really considering them. Really listening to them. It all becomes a bit lonely after while.
The quote “People were created to be loved. Things were created to be used. Most of our troubles come from the fact that we love things, and use people” is often mis-attributed to the Dalai Lama or MLK. In fact it is a paraphrase from I and Thou (1923) by philosopher and religious scholar Martin Buber. It is a reference to the way that we all define ourselves through our relationships with the world around us.
The Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy explains Burber’s concept thusly;
The “I-Thou” relation is the pure encounter of one whole unique entity with another in such a way that the other is known without being subsumed under a universal. Not yet subject to classification or limitation, the “Thou” is not reducible to spatial or temporal characteristics. In contrast to this the “I-It” relation is driven by categories of “same” and “different” and focuses on universal definition. An “I-It” relation experiences a detached thing, fixed in space and time, while an “I-Thou” relation participates in the dynamic, living process of an “other.” Buber characterizes “I-Thou” relations as “dialogical” and “I-It” relations as “monological.”
Why is this important in therapy, tutoring and mentoring?
Well fundamentally, you have the privilege of a one to one relationship which affords the luxury of really engaging with the human being in front of you. The challenge I see is that too often,professional training and perhaps even an undermining sense of our own inadequacy drives us to quickly stuff the person we dealing with into a convenient box - projecting something of a existential fixed mindset about the person, onto the person. Perhaps it manifests as perceiving failure to progress as confirmation of their inadequacy, or believing that their diagnosis or categorisation negates the need for us to really engage and problem solve with them, because our training or experience is giving us a clear path forward. Whenever we categorise, or scale, or apply general principles to a specific situation, we run the risk of treating people like things. I believe this also puts us in moral and ethical peril of treating the person in front of us as a means to an end, not an end in and of themselves. And aren’t we then just modelling the sort of behaviour we are all too often trying to help others escape from?
I say this as someone who has found themselves overwhelmed and very aware of my own inadequacy in so many situations. My own anxieties feel such relief when my research or consultations with those more qualified, experienced and wise, reveal a previously veiled well trodden path that relates to the symptoms or challenges of the person I am working with. But ultimately, I think this doesn’t just provide me with the reassurance that there is a way to progress. It also has the consequence of tempting me to disengage somewhat, and rely on that well worn path as some kind of panacea, which it rarely is. That anxiety I felt was actually forcing me to listen, and think. It was pushing me towards problem solving beyond the application of a generalised probabilistic approach, and actually deal with the person in front of me in a Socratic manner (two human beings together acknowledging an ignorance, may discover a truth). Avoiding that anxiety can be dressed up as professionalism I suppose, but it also denies me the opportunity to be a human being too. I become a “teacher” or a “tutor or a “mentor”, and now both myself and my client are alone again.
It’s super hard to balance the “I-It” which allows us to think objectively, with total rationality in even the most emotionally fraught of situations, with the “I-You” which allows us to connect as human beings, and for the person in front of you to feel compassion, build rapport and trust, experience the sensation that they are not alone, and cultivate the hope that companionship brings to all of us when our own reservoirs are empty. I worry that increasingly this equation of “I-It” and “I-You” is seen as a zero sum situation, where an increase in one, must somehow lead to a decrease in the other. Equilibrium isn’t about diminishing things. It’s about bringing things into balance, often by increasing the areas that are lacking, while also encouraging those areas that are already strong. If we go to the gym with a weak left arm, the gym instructor will not suggest we stop exercising our right arm while the left arm is built up. Or forget about sleep and exercise when focussing on building up that left arm. Life is holistic, nothing exists in isolation. So in terms of “I-It” and “I-You”, it’s about increasing one MORE than the other, without diminishing either. A win-win if you like.
Keeping that holistic perspective is something that has become more intuitive for me over the years. Initially it was a real discipline that I had to actively keep front of mind. In remedial tutoring especially, the key is to not create opportunity cost elsewhere while doing focussed work on one targeted area. In emotional work, there’s a similar pitfall. Focussing exclusively on the challenge can sometimes result in people forgetting how amazing they are in other areas, or how this particular issue is not the only thing in their lives. Perhaps more importantly, if an issue is affecting all the other areas of their lives, then logically speaking, those other areas of their lives must have consequence in the areas they are focussing on.
For me, Equilibrium is about trying to engage a pluralistic approach to progress. A bit like those jugglers who spin plates. It’s about keeping all the balls in the air when you can, and being aware of those balls you have had to drop, as at some point, they will need picking up again. In the theoretical world we have the luxury of assuming ceteris paribus, or isolating a specific challenge without worrying about the effect this has on other elements and areas. In the real world, it’s not like that is it. It’s more a game of multi dimensional Jenga played with finely balanced dominoes, that demand individual treatment while also knocking down their nearest companions, triggering long waves of collapse that tail off well over the horizon. So the idea that I can work with someone without putting their authentic subjective insight of their own experience of their own process at the front of my practise is bananas isn’t it? The idea that I can simply suggest a remedy and walk away, even more nuts. Isn’t that just using a fellow human being to prove my own hubris and support my own conveniences?
I like the Buddhist concept that all life is connected. It means that when I help you, I help me, and when I hurt you, I hurt me too. And when I see you - I see myself. After all, if, as dear old Bill Hicks put it, we are all one energy experiencing itself subjectively, it’s ok to care, and it’s ok to have someone else care for you - isn’t it?
20/01/2025
15/01/2025
09/01/2025
04/01/2025
23/06/2024
14/05/2024
14/09/2023
17/08/2023