A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Glossary H < back to glossary menu hyper-individualism (n. ) - DEFUNCTION [not a neologism] The defunction that exists as "an extreme focus on personal autonomy, desires, and self-interest, to the point where it neglects or actively disregards the needs of the community, collective well-being, and shared responsibilities . It's an intensified version of individualism where people see themselves as isolated agents, responsible only for their own success, often leading to social disengagement, loneliness, and reduced civic participation." Key characteristics : Extreme self-reliance : Prioritizing personal goals above all, even when it harms the group. Disregard for society : Acting without regard for societal norms, rules, or the common good. Focus on "me" : A "me, me, me" mentality where individual satisfaction supersedes collective needs. Erosion of social bonds : Weakening community ties and shared responsibility, as seen in declining civic engagement and increased loneliness. Examples in action : Ignoring shared rules : Disregarding traffic laws like stop signs or running red lights. Environmental issues : Prioritizing personal consumption over collective sustainability efforts. Social interactions : A lack of basic courtesy or a sense of obligation to others in social settings. Contrast with healthy individualism : Healthy individualism : Encourages personal growth, self-mastery, and achieving potential, often benefiting society. Hyper-individualism : An excessive, detrimental form where self-interest harms the collective, creating a breakdown in social cohesion. [This definition comes from Google's Gemini AI ] A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z < back to glossary menu

Pain is perhaps nature’s least appreciated gift. < Back D03 Pain Principle List of all principles Pain is perhaps nature’s least appreciated gift. Image: Pixabay - Yeskay1211 (click on meme to see source image) Summary The more open you keep yourself to enduring evoked discomfort, the more you can resolve the underlying needs. The more you embrace the natural warning signs of threats to be removed, and you promptly remove them, the quicker you can move beyond the pain and remove its source. The more fully you can function. The better you can function because of pain, the more you can value it. Description Which do you think is more likely? Only a masochist or deranged person would ever appreciate feeling their pain. OR The more you appreciate the role of pain then the less of pain you must endure. Anankelogy Have you ever thanked your pain for alerting you to trouble? “Thank you, anxiety, for warning me that I may not be fully ready to handle this.” With this positive attitude, I am more likely to face a little more of it so I can build the courage to face even more—instead of reacting by retreating from what I fear. With my open appreciation for my anxiety, I make my fears serve me instead of me serving my fears . How do think your life would be if you had no warning system alarming you to respond to each threat? Wouldn’t you react more to trouble, as it springs up all of a sudden? The more I repress or suppress my uncomfortable feelings, the more threatening troubles spring up on me. “I tried to warn you,” my unpleasant feelings would say. Instead of avoiding my painful feelings, I could orient myself to more fully feel and process the pain. I could appreciate what it’s trying to warn me about. Then act upon that helpful information. Anankelogy explains how we each orient ourselves to the pain we face. The more we appreciate that pain exists to serve us, the more we can orient ourselves to make that pain serve us. And not let it compel us to serve it. That’s the problem with modern messages about the easy life. Buy this item and you will supposedly be happy. Take more of those and you will finally make it in life. Present just the right image and all will be okay. Such popular generalizations suck us into a life of more pain. There must be a better way. And there is! Need-response Perhaps it would be easier to appreciate your pain if there wasn’t so much of it. Need-response aims to both improve your natural tolerance for enduring pain and to remove cause for pain, especially the kind resulting from powerful others. Reactive Problem Despite the promise of modern conveniences to make life easier, we find ourselves struggling with a mounting load of emotional pain. Then we too easily blame ourselves, which takes our eyes off the real problem: social structures that coerce us to prioritize pain relief over need resolution. Here’s the thing. The more we avoid natural pain by taking comfort in material things, the less our needs resolve. The less those needs resolve, the more they grab our attention with increasing pain. Perhaps only a dull pain at first, but enough to hold you back from your life’s full potential. Anankelogy calls this “symfunctional strain ”. Symfunction refers to a less than optimal level of life. Instead of living up to our full potential, we get by with impersonal support from others. We put up with growing dependence on other who don’t know us. We rely on impersonal laws to make sure our basic needs get respected. Or higher needs typically go unheeded. Over time, we reach less and less of our full potential. This strain on our ability to fully function gradually builds. At first, it’s typically tolerable. Then it creates a growing level of manageable pain. Well, manageable for now. Eventually, symfunctional strain can become more painful than the originally avoided pain. Responsive Solution Need-response gets to the sources of your pain. There is no such thing as pain apart from unheeded warnings about apparent threats . The more we address those threats, the less cause for pain. Need-response identifies four levels of human problems provoking our pain. Think of any problem as a situation of persistently unresolved needs. The more you can resolve such needs, the more your pain slips away. 1. A personal problem : any problem you can resolve fully on your own. E.g., you could create more value on your job simply by being more engaged with your coworkers. You can remove any cause for pain on your own. 2. An interpersonal problem : any problem that can be resolved with someone of equal social power. E.g., you have a dispute with a coworker that you could settle with mutual cooperation. You can remove cause for pain by addressing those needs together. 3. A power problem : a problem resolved only by someone of higher social power. E.g., you settle for less-than-optimal work conditions to avoid losing your primary means to pay your bills. You can remove cause for pain by incentivizing those in power to respond better to your affected needs. 4. A structural problem : a problem resolved by transforming cultural norms like laws. E.g., your employer reports there is little if anything they can do about your situation as they are bound by law. You can remove cause for pain by supporting leaders to change problematic norms so they can better serve your needs and the needs of others similarly situated. Need-response addresses all four sources of your pain. It can help us all to stop habitually avoiding our body’s warning system of possible threats. It can help us all to relate better to those likely threats. It can help us all to stop causing so much pain in others. Need-response can help reorient you to embrace your naturally occurring pain while severely reducing others types of pain. It can help you to appreciate your own naturally occurring pain as nature’s lease appreciated gift. The more you appreciate this natural gift, the less of it you will face in life. Responding to your needs How does this principle speak to your experience of needs? Post in our Engagement forum your thoughtful response to one of these: I can’t imagine myself appreciating any of the pain I am suffering now. It would help to hear from others how they appreciate their pain. How does appreciating my pain result in less of it? If I had to appreciate my fear, I could perhaps be grateful that it _________. Instead of selecting one of these, post your own engagement feedback about your experience with the subject of this principle. Remember the aim is to improve our responsiveness to each other’s needs, toward their full resolution. If you’re new at posting here, first check the guide below. Engage this principle in our forum Engagement guide Any visitor to the Engagement forum can view all posts. So do keep that in mind when posting. Sign up or sign in to comment on these posts and to create your own posts. Using this platform assumes you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . Remember to keep the following in mind: Quote the principle you are responding to, and its identifier letter & number. Let’s be specific. Demonstrate need-responsiveness in your interactions here. Let’s respect each other. Engage supportive feedback from others on this platform. Let’s grow together. Together, let’s improve our need-responsiveness . Together, let’s spread some love . See other principles in this category - Foundational - Basic - General - Pain - Conflict - Authority - Law - Love - Previous Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link Next

< Back AZ Justice Project not yet a parter Once a partner, find more information here about their case criteria, how to request for legal aid, along with any services. Previous Next

Power Problems Power problems occur when impactors impede impactees trying to properly resolve needs . power problems & power-impacted needs properly resolving needs Power problem ID: A05 Universal Cultural Incompetence Insensitive to valuable differences cultural incompetence cultural competency < previous next > Cultural Incompetence Neglecting the impactee’s culturally different values or perspectives, where the impactor potentially pressures the impactee to fit into their cookie cutter cultural norms. The impactee may rightly fear some form of retribution for not fitting into the impactor’s cultural expectation. Or feel their full value remains overlooked and their contributions routinely neglected. cultural competency The further along the cultural competence continuum , the more trustworthy the impactor to those vulnerable impactees who valuably exist and properly act outside of mainstream cultural norms. Whether a healthcare provider or a different impactor, the impactor's responsiveness to impactee cultural differences fall along a recognized continuum: Stage 1. Cultural Destructiveness Stage 2. Cultural Incapacity Stage 3. Cultural Blindness Stage 4. Cultural Precompetence Stage 5. Cultural Competence and Proficiency Need-response can guide the targeted impactor to improve their cultural competency by walking them through the need-response process with an impactee. The impactor learns to appreciate the impactee's hidden value and how to properly address anything that is not appropriate simply because it is culturally different. The impactee can then contribute more of their full value when free to be their authentic selves. And their differentness can invite the impactor to inquire if the impactee sees something that the impactor cannot through the lens of their own familiarity bias. The impactor then earns legitimacy to reliably impact impactees who are culturally different from oneself. And gain competitive legitimacy when tapping into impactees' unique perspectives. Cultural Incompetence Corrupting Influence Cognitive Contraction Coercive Compliance Coerced Poor Options Dependence

You don’t choose your needs; your needs choose you. < Back C04 General Principle List of all principles You don’t choose your needs; your needs choose you. Image: Pixabay – SplitShire (click on meme to see source image) Summary The more you lack something your life requires, the more you will feel yourself compelled to do something about it. Your objective requirement to function or objective prioritized need will overrule your choices to do otherwise. The more pressing your needs, the harder to swim against the tide to choose a different course. All your choices ultimately serve your demanding needs. Description Which do you think is more likely? You can control what you need by making better choices. OR Choices only impact when you feel a need or what to do about it, and never the need itself. Anankelogy We often assume more control over our experiences than can be delivered. We may expect to have the self-control to not act on a feeling. We may even believe we chose to need what we feel we must have. Life doesn’t work that way. Whatever you naturally require to function exists independent of your beliefs, feelings and actions. Sure, your belief-informed behaviors could trigger a need in the moment. But that need conveys something necessary for your function despite your beliefs, feelings or actions. You cannot choose to not require something to function and not suffer from a lack of functionality. Your innate priority to continue your own existence, in order to have the option of choices, compels you to serve your needs. Your moral agency speaks to your actions and not to the needs prompting your actions. Your need for water is amoral. Requiring a friend to talk to is amoral. The necessity to be alone for a while is amoral. The less you respect these needs, the more they compel you to respond or to react to them. You don’t choose to require whatever your life requires, but they sure do choose you to respond to them promptly. Need-response Need-response is unique in how it distinguishes between unchosen needs and chosen responses . Failing to recognize or make this distinction is called response conflation or moral conflation . That unnecessary provokes many of our conflicts. If the one you oppose did not choose whatever need they are acting upon, then why oppose that need? Keep your disagreement to their actions. As stated in the Serentiy Prayer , accept the things you cannot change, then find the courage to change the things you can. No one can change their needs to suit you, only their response to such needs. Reactive Problem Too many conflicts erupt when expecting the other to be able to choose what serves your affected need. Consider the times when someone expected you to change some need. Look at the conflicts in the Middle East. Israelis do not choose to require security in their ancient homeland, or to require the self-determination to run their own lives according to their own Jewish values, free of other religious or ethnic influences. Palestinians also never chose to require security in their long-time homeland, or to require the self-determination to run their own lives according to their own religious or ethnically influenced values. If you pick a side in this fight, and slip into moral conflation of opposing either side’s unchosen needs , you risk doing more to enflame the problem than extinguish it . Indulgent side-taking does more to make problems worse. Instead of resolving needs to solve problems, ignoring the needs to relieve their pain promises to keep such painful problems in place . Sometimes a choice, especially a poor choice, needlessly provokes a problem. You may choose a course of action that results in prompting a certain need. Once triggered, you can hardly choose to ignore it without repercussions. You can either passively react by expecting others to choose something they cannot choose, or learn to be more responsive to your own and other’s unchosen needs . Responsive Solution Responsivism provides a simple three-step process to deescalate a conflict. When you find yourself at odds with another, quick apply these ABCs. A. A ffirm the natural needs they cannot change. B. B ring up the responses that can be changed. C. C ultivate mutual understanding and respect. We can steer clear of plenty of problems if we just first affirm each other’s unchosen needs before questioning their chosen response to them. We can replace our hateful alienating norms to impersonally argue our differences with a love-encouraging process to better understand one another’s actions springing from their inflexible needs . It is better, for example, to affirm the new mother’s inflexible need to assert autonomy over her exploited body when considering the option of terminating a pregnancy forced upon her. It is better to empathize with her situation, and recognize her limited options, to better understand her behavior. She cannot simply choose not to prioritize her unchosen need for bodily autonomy that ensures your continued ability to fully function. Likewise, it is better to affirm the inflexible need of some to speak up for the voiceless unborn. It is better to empathize with their priority to protect what they hold as the sanctity of life. They cannot simply choose to not prioritizes their unchosen need to preserve the life of the unborn. They cannot choose to not require how this ensures their continued ability to fully function. The needs themselves do not clash . They exist within each person. The conflict remains in how we choose to respond to these inflexible needs . You can’t choose your needs, so why try? Let your needs choose you to keep you optimally functioning. And then maintain the moral agency of responding to your natural needs with an aim to resolve them with minimal impact on others. That will take you much farther than presuming anyone can change the needs themselves. Responding to your needs How does this principle speak to your experience of needs? Post in our Engagement forum your thoughtful response to one of these: How does this speak to existentialism assertion of our freedoms of choice? Personal responsibility depends on choice, so hopefully this does not rationalize any irresponsibility. Choices depend on options, and too often I am faced with terrible options. That ABCs process seems easier said than done. Instead of selecting one of these, post your own engagement feedback about your experience with the subject of this principle. Remember the aim is to improve our responsiveness to each other’s needs, toward their full resolution. If you’re new at posting here, first check the guide below. Engage this principle in our forum Engagement guide Any visitor to the Engagement forum can view all posts. So do keep that in mind when posting. Sign up or sign in to comment on these posts and to create your own posts. Using this platform assumes you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . Remember to keep the following in mind: Quote the principle you are responding to, and its identifier letter & number. Let’s be specific. Demonstrate need-responsiveness in your interactions here. Let’s respect each other. Engage supportive feedback from others on this platform. Let’s grow together. Together, let’s improve our need-responsiveness . Together, let’s spread some love . See other principles in this category - Foundational - Basic - General - Pain - Conflict - Authority - Law - Love - Previous Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Pinterest Copy link Next

< Back Michael Johnson Law enforcement has recognized the need to address injustices faced by underserved communities, resulting in improved legal outcomes. Michael Johnson was wrongfully convicted in 2005 and has now been publicly exonerated after new evidence proved his innocence. text Brief Announcement Publicly Exonerating Michael Johnson text text text Hardcopy PDF Executive Summary Public Exoneration of Michael Johnson text 1 Hardcopy PDF Comprehensive Engagement Michael Johnson Public Exoneration of text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text Hardcopy PDF Interactions Give us your feedback We’d love to know what you think about this innocence claim. First name* Last name Email* How convinced of their innocence? What do see as this case's strong points? What do see as this case's weak points? What do you see missing that we should address? Send Feedback "Testimonials are a great way to showcase positive feedback you've received. Click to edit and add yours." Simone Woods "Testimonials are a great way to showcase positive feedback you've received. Click to edit and add yours." Nicole Yang "Testimonials are a great way to showcase positive feedback you've received. Click to edit and add yours." Calvin Smith "Testimonials are a great way to showcase positive feedback you've received. Click to edit and add yours." Suzanne Levis Previous Next

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Glossary L < back to glossary menu law-fit (n. & v. ) - REFUNCTION Law-fit identifies the need or needs a law ostensibly exists to serve, and how the application of such law impacts such need. Anankelogy recognizes the inflexibility of needs and the relative flexibility of laws, so prioritizes such needs over laws, in a prosocial responsive process to unwind the unhealthy attachments to what is called toxic legalism . A more thorough examination of the role of law with needs is addressed by the more detailed process of citationization . leadback (n. ) Insufficient responsiveness to another’s vulnerable need due to other’s insufficient responses to own vulnerable needs (i.e., wellness is psychosocial). See coerced poor options dependence (AKA CoPOD ). leadback denial (n. ) Insisting consequential decisions from limited options result mainly or only from personal irresponsibility, and not from externalities. leadback exaggeration (n. ) Insisting consequential decisions from limited options result mainly or only from externalities, devoid of personal agency or responsibility. legalism (n. ) - DEFUNCTION The shorter name for the defunction of civic legalism (i.e., nomoscentricity ). Corrected by the refunction of law-fit (AKA citationization ). legitimacy (n. ) Trustworthiness to affect the exposed needs of others, especially the public. Anankelogy distinquishes between status quo "ascribed legitimacy " and need-responsive "earned legitimacy ". A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z < back to glossary menu

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Glossary P < back to glossary menu pain (n. ) Your body warning you—with an unpleasant experience to compel your awareness—of a likely threat to your ability to function. Prompts you to remove the threat or remove yourself from the threat, so you can continue functioning unabated. The greater the threat to your ability to function, typically the more intense the pain. If managing the presenting threat without fully removing it, the result is typically experienced as a dull yet tolerable level of pain or bearable discomfort. You either respond to the needs your pain reports or you react to your pain by prioritizing relief. Effectively responding to the underlying needs of your pain removes cause for that pain. Reacting to your pain tends to leave you in more pain , as your body persists to warn you of the persisting threat. You typically prefer the pain you feel over any pain you fear . You know how to handle the familiar discomfort of repeated disappointments from a friend who rarely arrives on time, for example, than the unfamiliar pain of confronting their lack of punctuality at the risk of losing their friendship. When the means to fully remove the threat or remove yourself from the threat remains elusive, you tend to gravitate toward pain-relieving alternatives. When such alternatives become your routine, you tend to become emotionally attached to their familiar provisions for comfort. These can increase your risk for addiction to pain-coping behaviors. (See symfunction capture .) Once your body senses all threats are satisfactorily removed enough for your life to fully function, it has no more cause to provoke painful awareness. Your pain only exists to warn you of threats to your ability to fully function. Absent of any threat, you do not experience any pain . Any persisting pain stems from your body continually trying to warn you of some apparent threat or threats to remove, so you can return to full functioning. Each painful emotion brings you awareness of a particular threat. Outside of that threat, you cannot feel that particular emotional pain unless eliciting it from memory of a threat-provoking situation (i.e., vicariously). alienation - Outside of a felt need to connect more deeply with others, you feel no alienation . anger - Outside of a felt need to reject some apparent threat, you feel no anger . confusion - Outside of a felt need to make sense of something, you feel no confusion . depression - Outside of a felt need to redirect your energies, you feel no depression . disappointment - Outside of a felt need for others to be trustworthy, you feel no disappointment . disgust - Outside of a felt need to remove something offensive, you feel no disgust . embarrassment - Outside of a felt need to cover something exposed, you feel no embarrassment . fear - Outside of a felt need to handle something menacing, you feel no fear . frustration - Outside of a felt need to have things go as planned, you feel no frustration . grief - Outside of a felt need to adjust to a deep loss, you feel no grief . guilt - Outside of a felt need to restore your respect for others, you feel no guilt . insecure - Outside of a felt need to avoid any risk of harm, you feel no insecurity . jealousy - Outside of a felt need to enjoy what another enjoys, you feel no jealousy . loneliness - Outside of a felt need to connect with someone, you feel no loneliness . powerlessness - Outside of a felt need to control your situation, you feel no powerlessness . regret - Outside of a felt need to reconsider your actions, you feel no regret . restlessness - Outside of a felt need to promptly get something done, you feel no restlessness . sadness - Outside of a felt need to deal with some loss, you feel no sadness . shame - Outside of a felt need to guard your social image, you feel no shame . stress - Outside of a felt need to meet some high expectation, you feel no stress . You cannot fully function when such threats persist. There is no such thing as pain apart from unresolved needs . Your pain serves your need for awareness to do something about such threats. Pain is not the problem as much as the threats your pain tries to report . You either let your emotional pain serve you, or you may find yourself serving your pain . passive-aggressive pain relief (n. ) - DEFUNCTION A defunction of reacting to the discomfort of unresolved needs by immediately trying to ease its discomfort in both unassertive and hostile ways. Similar to the defunction of reactive pain relief and in contrast to the strategic pain relief and discomfort embrace . pathological pragmatism (n. ) - DEFUNCTION (or patho-pragmatism for short) [see pragatism creep below] The defunction of emphasizing what seems more practical or easier to achieve in the moment, permissively lowering standards in ways that risk perpetuating painful problems. Distinct from the grace of affirming progressive steps towards reaching a standard for resolving needs. Correlates with symfunctionality . pathology (n. ) - DEFUNCTION Condition of diminished wellness that prevents continued functioning at a level necessary to effectively respond to needs, both to your own needs and to the needs of others. Typically results in sustained pain as the body continually warns of the perceived diminishment of functioning. Too often, one feels compelled to relieve the pain instead of removing cause for this pain, which tends to create a vicious cycle that can reinforce the pathology. Such compulsion to prioritize relief may correlate with a sense of powerless to do much if anything to resolve the affected needs, such as those needs constrained by power problems and more acutely with structural problems . The more powerholders or others benefit in any way from such pathology, the less inclined they are to support resolving the affected needs, which anankelogy defines as evil . peakfunction (n. ) Highest level of a person's or entity's ability to function focused on promptly resolving all needs. Sits just above symfunction in the function array. pistiscentricity (n. ) DEFUNCTION Clinging to what one thinks is true or untrue, guarding themself from critique of such views. Contrasts with continually interacting with sources of information, to remain dynamically open to checking assumptions and keeping accountable to impactful objective reality. Anankelogy posits such centering upon beliefs as the immature portion of three reliance levels that mirror Lawrence Kohlberg's moral development levels. Beliefer - Guards what one thinks as true or untrue, and typically defensive toward any challenge of such views. It too tends to be egocentric. “Beliefer ”. Mirrors preconventional moral develpment: Moral reasoning relies on avoidance of punishment and seeking rewards. It tends to be egocentric. Faither - Accepts as true or untrue based largely on social cues, such as what one’s group accepts as true and untrue. Also tends toward social conformity. “Faither ”. Mirrors conventional moral develpment: Moral reasoning relies on social norms, as agreed upon by the collective of one’s social universe. It tends toward social conformity. Truster - Vulnerably relying on the most dependable over which one has no control, such as a Supreme Being, while ready to question whatever can be found as not fully dependable. It likewise points toward human flourishing. “Truster ”. Mirrors postconventional moral develpment: Moral reasoning relies on universal principles that can transcend individuals and cultures. It tends to lead toward human flourishing. politics (n. ) The art of generalizing how to agreeably address needs in different social situations. This anankelogically-inspired definition presents three components that are easily compounded in conventional politics: Generalizing over specifics . Generalizing to as many as possible to build coalitions typically includes generalizing in the sense of avoiding specifics that risk undercutting such widely cultivated agreements. The less your specific needs resolve, the more pulled into political overgeneralizing offering you some relief that keeps your needs less resolved. Here is where conventional politics manifests avoidance culture . Relieving pain over resolving needs . Appealing to the majority who experience normalized pain risks adopting policies perpetuating that pain. The more emotionally attached to familiar politically shaped relief, the less open to engaging more disciplined solutions that could remove cause for pain. Here is where conventional politics also manifests avoidance culture with such defunctions as normative alienation and mutual defensiveness . One's own versus another's situation . Selfishly prioritizing own interests at the expense of respecting the needs of others fuels conflicts and reinforces polarization. The more you push against other's inflexible needs , the more their inflexible needs push back . Here is where conventional politics manifests oppo culture with such defunctions as psychosocial imbalance , indulgent side-taking and conflict porn . popgen (n. & adj. ) - DEFUNCTION Short for "popular generalization" or "popular generalizing" that privileges (with social norms) overlooking many specifics necessary to resolve the relevant needs. Akin to the notion of a "lay" version of something. See relief-gen . Also a type of defunction , such as a popgen version . popgen version (n. ) - DEFUNCTION A popularly generalized watered down form of an accepted theory or philosophy, presenting with generalizations that are typically more politically normative than academically descriptive , and often discounted by opponents as too ideological. Opposite of critical version . EXAMPLES : popgen liberalism (see hyper-individualism ) popgen existentialism & popgen rational choice theory popgen postmodernism popgen microaggression popgen race theory popgen identity politics & popgen intersectionality popgen transgenderism popgen libertarianism popgen gun rights popgen free market dynamics Each of these grew out of a critical version with some merit, but then watered down to relieve some felt need with little to attention to the affected needs of others. Opponents to these watered down normative versions who seldom or never acknowledge the merit of its original critical version readily indulge in oppo culture and avoidance culture as part of the power delusion . See relief-gen . power delusion (n. ) - DEFUNCTION Rigid belief in holding socially privileged influence over others and calling it power, or rigid belief in others holding socially privileged influence over you, contrary to all evidence that such coercive-leaning influence typically detracts from resolving needs, which mostly perpetuates pain and problems. Can also refer to conflating the lesser "power" of privileged social influence with the greater power of nature that shapes the needs that in turn prompt widespread desire for this lesser power. See power types below. power problem need (n. ) A need that cannot be resolved on one's own because it requires the cooperation of one or more persons in positions of power in order to enable its full resolution. See power problem and structural problem need . power types (n. ) Anankelogy distinguishes between two main types of social influence, commonly referred to as "power ". weak power : social influence, including official authority, that does not result in properly resolving needs . Which tends to lead to symfunction or dysfunction , as the unresolved needs compromise wellness and prompts pain. strong power : social influence, espeecially official authority, that does result in properly resolving needs. Which tends to lead to, and sustain, peakfunction . And that enables human flourishing with psychological "flow". There could be a nuanced type of power in between these two primary modalities of social influence. pragmatism creep (n.) DEFUNCTION [dynamic for patho-pragmatism ] Gravitating toward what can be more easily accomplished, personally or collectively, which increases the risk of normalizing unresolved needs. As such needs persist unresolved, they typically alert attention to compromised capacity to fully function. In other words, this produces more pain. To cope with such pain, we tend to seek practical alternatives. Which risks pulling us into a downward cycle of decreasing levels of functionality. When primary resources seem or actually remain inaccessible to resolve needs, readily available alternative resources often fill the gap. Symfunctionality emerges as a pragmatic alternative to unattainable peakfunctionality . Once normalized, full wellbeing of peakfunctionality may appear so unfamiliar as to be regarded as impractical, and a potential threat to reliably sustainable symfunctionality. When alternative resources seem or actually remain inaccessible to ease needs, easier to attain substitute resources help to relieve the consequential mounting pain. Dysfunctionality emerges as a pragmatic substitute to unattainable symfunctionality . Once normalized in pain coping mechanisms of addiction, the steadiness of symunctionality may appear so unfamiliar as to be regarded as impractical, and a potential threat to easier to reach pain-coping dysfunctionality. When substitute resources seem or actually remain unaccessible to resolve needs, pain overcomes as one can barely stay alive. Misfunctionality emerges as a pragmatic consequence to unattainable pain-coping of dysfunctionality . Once normalized as an overwhelmingly painful and desperate condition undermining one's existential reason to keep living, what may seem most pragmatic is active or passive suicide. A more general term for this is drift . praise sandwich (n. ) A more effective communication format that delivers a piece of bad news between two slices of good news. GOOD NEWS - positive: such as affirming another's affected needs. BAD NEWS - negative: such as bringing up one's own affected needs. GOOD NEWS - positive: such as inviting a continued diagogue covering each other's affected needs. Serves to build rapport for mutual regard, and to soften the risk for defensiveness. See image here and here . premature opposition (n. ) prematurely oppose (v. ) - DEFUNCTION The defunction of asserting one’s difference of flexible beliefs or flexible actions in contrast with another’s flexible beliefs or flexible actions without first relating to the inflexible needs behind such beliefs and actions. In other words, reacting to a difference in opinion in such a way that predictably provokes defensiveness. While trapped in mutual defensiveness, the affected needs remain painfully unresolved. That opinion typically serves as an outwardly less vulnerable and safer expression for an inwardly vulnerable need that cannot be easily changed. This could include instances of being needlessly confrontational, which may feed one's conflict porn . This defunction exists as part of the power delusion , and manifested in avoidance culture and oppo culture at odds with resolving needs and at odds with sustainable wellness. See indulgent side-taking . privileged avoidance (n. ) DEFUNCTION Having the social influence to effectively evade something uncomfortable to face. This primarily applies to impactor powerholders when overlooking their negative impact upon the relatively powerless impactee. For example, judicial authorities citing the "finality of convictions" to avoid having to face costly mistakes of wrongly convicting the innocent. Or asserting the authority of law enforcement when neglecting the rights of crime victims. Serves as an integral part of avoidance culture . proactive contentment (n. ) REFUNCTION Deliberate satisfaction in what one already has to resolve their needs. Leaving little to no room for distractions from fully resolving needs. Practicing gratitude for what one has can cultivate the spiritual environment to maintain and improve access to meaningful resources. Leveraging satisfaction in what one has can attract other's investment in receiving more. Includes maximizing effort to secure access to primary resources while cautious not to rely on more accessible alternate or substitute resources . Sticking with how needs evolved to rely on specific primary resource leaves less room for conflict with others. Our core needs never clash with each other . Contentment with equanimity results in more wellness than chasing after relief or buying more stuff. Counters the defunction of excessive resourcing . project wellness campaign (n. ) The second type of wellness campaign focused on resolving not only the identified wellness need(s) of the RI client but also those of the similarly situated. The other types are case and movement campaigns. proper adversarialism (n. ) Opposing other's beliefs and actions to critique their impact without opposing or resisting their inflexible needs ; most effective when also affirming their good points and appreciating their helpful behaviors (see "praise sandwich "). Contrasts with toxic adversarialism , to differentiate different types of adversarialism . proper authorization (n. ) REFUNCTION properly authorize (v. ); properly authorized (adj. ) Basing any power or influence upon others on whether the results can properly resolve needs with measurably improved wellness outcomes . See earned legitimacy and strong power . properly resolve needs (v. ) To fully resolve needs in ways that do not prevent others from keeping their needs resolved. This ranges from inconsequential inconvenience to the needs of others to positively impacting the needs of others, as identified by noting these four metallic standards. Bronz standard - mildly inconveniences others Silver standard - no impact on others Gold standard - helps others Platinum standard - helps everyone In contrast to improperly resolving needs, you properly resolve your needs when you can restore yourself to full functioning without hindering others from resolving their needs toward restored functioning. This can occur along four levels, each identified with a precious medal to make it easier for anyone to recognize. Bronz standard. Resolving one’s own needs in ways that mildly inconveniences others . For example, when in the winter you shovel out the snow in your driveway, you enable everyone in your family with a car to get in and out. But you inconvenience your neighbor who has to walk around the piles of snow you shoved aside near their yard. Silver standard. Resolving one’s own needs in a way that leaves no impact on others . For example, when you invest twenty minutes each day this week to stay in shape, you resolve your health need to stay fit. But your actions have not immediate impact upon others around you. Gold standard. Resolving one’s own needs in ways that actually helps others resolve their needs . For example, when you get your car fixed, you help your family members dependent on you for rides. And you help the mechanic make a living. Platinum standard. Resolving one’s own needs in ways that helps everyone resolve their needs . For example, when you keep a positive attitude and smile pleasantly at everyone you meet, you not only resolve your need to maintain wellbeing but also contribute a little something to their wellbeing. properly resolving needs (v. ); properly resolved needs (n. ); opposite to improperly resolving needs proxy (n. ) [wellness campaign terminology] Someone serving on behalf of a campaigner, who subscribes as the campaigner but is not the person with the targeted wellness need. psychosocial balancing (n. & v. ) - REFUNCTION The refunction of cultivating an equilibrium between your pressing social-needs and pressing self-needs . Nature automatically pulls you to balance both through a process of psychosocial oscillation —compelling you to focus on seasons of self-needs and seasons on social-needs . See image here . Your spring : when your less resolved social needs emerge and demand your attention. Your summer : when your social needs dominate more than your self-needs . Your autumn : when your less resolved self-needs emerge and demand your attention. Your winter: when your self-needs dominate more than your social needs . The more your self-needs resolve and social needs resolve on par with each other, the more your natural needs can resolve, the more pain you can remove, and the more potential you can reach. The more you can match what you can do for yourself with what you can rely on others to provide what you cannot reliably do for yourself, the more psychosocial flow you experience. The less your self-needs resolve and social needs resolve on par with each other, the less your natural needs can resolve, the less pain you can remove, and the less potential you can reach. You experience this as the defunction of psychosocial imbalance . psychosocial blind spot (n. ) - DEFUNCTION Attention drawn to one's own psychosocial priority of needs tends to impede awareness of a viably different psychosocial priority of needs. For example, one's own dependence upon government services (presenting a psychosocial wide orientation) can blind oneself from appreciating the necessity of a small business owner to grow their business with less government interference (presenting a psychosocial deep orientation). See psychosocial orientation below. psychosocial flow (n. ) - REFUNCTION The refunction of unleashing your natural energy to resolve needs, to remove pain and to raise functioning, by syncing your internal potential with external supports. See psychosocial balancing . psychosocial imbalance (n. ) - DEFUNCTION The defunction of self-needs and social needs not resolving on par with each other. You either ease your self-needs more than your social needs , or you ease your social needs more than your self-needs . As this limits your ability to function fully, your body warns you with some form of emotional pain. If reacting to this pain instead of addressing your psychosocial needs evenly, you tend to reinforce such imbalance. And continue to suffer in pain . The degree of balance to imbalance correlates to the functionality array . See image here . Psychosocial oscillation : natural transitioning between addressing self-needs and addressing to social-needs , for sustaining psychosocial balancing . Correlates with peakfunctionality . Psychosocial vacillation : intense shifts between self-needs and social-needs , leading toward psychosocial imbalance . Can explain some political extremism; see psychosocial orientation . Correlates with symfunctionality . Psychosocial crystallization : settling into the familiar painful pattern of more severe psychosocial imbalance . Correlates with dysfunctionality . Psychosocial disintegration : neither self-needs nor social-needs adequately resolve, resulting in swings into violent psychosocial extremes. Correlates with misfunctionality . psychosocial orientation (n. ) The routine or regularly situated experience of psychosocial imbalance , manifested in one of two directions (i.e., two dominate orientations): WIDE-focused : less resolved social needs than self-needs ; tends to generalize how to ease unmet social needs while guarding one's relatively more resolved self-needs . DEEP-focused : less resolved self-needs than social needs ; tends to generalize how to ease unmet self-needs while guarding one's relatively more resolved social needs . See image here and here . When your self-needs continually resolve more than your social needs , you become predisposed toward liberal or progressive values. Politically left ideas provide outward expression for your inward psychosocial priority to ease (with public support) your less resolved social needs while guarding your more resolved self-needs from public pressures. For example, if your self-need for unique self-expression as a sexual or religious or ethnic minority is more resolved than your social need for inclusion as one of these historically marginalized minorities, you tend to find more support from left leaning supporters who rely on public policies to protect both their negative right (what the government must not do) to freely be their unique selves, and their positive right (what the government must do) for greater social inclusion against patterns of historical discrimination. When your social needs continually resolve more than your self-needs , you become predisposed toward conservative values. Politically right ideas provide outward expression for your inward psychosocial priority to ease (with public support) your less resolved self-needs while guarding your more resolved social needs from public pressures. For example, if your social need for family cohesion in a local community is more resolved than your self-need for personal freedom to explore your life’s potential, you tend to find more support from right leaning supporters who rely on public policies to protect both their negative right (what the government must not do) to never infringe on their gun rights to protect their own families, and their positive right (what the government must do) provide security with a professional police force so they can be in public to explore their personal potential without fear. You gravitate towards others who experience the same or similar unchosen priority of similar psychosocial needs as you, in contrast to others experiencing a different priority of needs . This provides the seeds for partisanship affiliation. The rational choice myth of debating which side presents the better idea for shaping public policy overlooks this dynamic of unchosen needs . The more you can resolve one set of needs closer on par with the other set, the more open to gravitate toward the other political side. The less you can resolve one set of needs relative to the other set, the further you tend to shift to a political extreme. This illuminates why there can be tension within each political side. See image here . Need-response offers to replace the mutual defensiveness of conventional politics with mutual regard and social love . Instead of emphasizing each other's different yet unchosen priorities , which prioritizes easing the pain of psychosocial imbalance , need-response provides a disciplined path toward mutually resolving each other's affected psychosocial needs . The process aims to remove the pain of psychosocial imbalance by cultivating more psychosocial balancing . A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z < back to glossary menu

< Back OAD Reinvestigation Project not yet a parter Once a partner, find more information here about their case criteria, how to request for legal aid, along with any services. Previous Next

The Unexonerated: innocence profile < Back Sabrina Williams TX Sabrina Williams Estimated innocence score: 81 % Likely innocent when compared to cases already exonerated coerced into plea deal by threats to take her kids away Highlights of this wrongful conviction - ex related to CPS official - previous wrongful conviction - witness lied to save self - threatened with life sentence Key contributing factors to this wrongful conviction not a factor - minor factor - major factor - central factor 1. Witness misidentification? 2. False confession? 3. Official misconduct? 4. Junk science? 5. Jail informant? 6. Inadequate defense? major factor central factor major factor central factor not a factor minor factor Other contributing factors How many other of 58 factors? 7 EIF version: E1.1 Click here to view more information at a separate website Click here for documentation to verify this innocence claim Wrongly convicted in TX of: child endangerment Wrongly convicted on February 20, 1998 Sentence: 12–15 years Custody status: probation Dive deeper into Sabrina's compelling innocence Dive deeper into Sabrina's compelling innocence Dive deeper into Sabrina's compelling innocence Dive deeper into Sabrina's compelling innocence Here is where the claimant admits the weak spots in their case. This is the "flip side" to their narrative. They put it out there to show they have nothing to hide. They proactively cultivate trust by being transparent. Nobody's perfect Synopsis This serves as a placeholder profile. An actual profile will have a couple of sentences here that summarizes this compelling case of innocence. This serves as a placeholder profile. An actual profile will present here in about 2000 characters the story how this wrongful conviction happened. It vies context this compelling case of overlooked innocence. And can suggest what is wrong with our current adversarial legal process to repeatedly neglect this miscarriage of justice. This serves as a placeholder profile. An actual profile will present here in about 2000 characters the story how this wrongful conviction happened. It vies context this compelling case of overlooked innocence. And can suggest what is wrong with our current adversarial legal process to repeatedly neglect this miscarriage of justice. This serves as a placeholder profile. An actual profile will present here in about 2000 characters the story how this wrongful conviction happened. It vies context this compelling case of overlooked innocence. And can suggest what is wrong with our current adversarial legal process to repeatedly neglect this miscarriage of justice. This serves as a placeholder profile. An actual profile will present here in about 2000 characters the story how this wrongful conviction happened. It vies context this compelling case of overlooked innocence. And can suggest what is wrong with our current adversarial legal process to repeatedly neglect this miscarriage of justice. This serves as a placeholder profile. An actual profile will present here in about 2000 characters the story how this wrongful conviction happened. It vies context this compelling case of overlooked innocence. And can suggest what is wrong with our current adversarial legal process to repeatedly neglect this miscarriage of justice. This serves as a placeholder profile. An actual profile will present here in about 2000 characters the story how this wrongful conviction happened. It vies context this compelling case of overlooked innocence. And can suggest what is wrong with our current adversarial legal process to repeatedly neglect this miscarriage of justice. This serves as a placeholder profile. An actual profile will present here in about 2000 characters the story how this wrongful conviction happened. It vies context this compelling case of overlooked innocence. And can suggest what is wrong with our current adversarial legal process to repeatedly neglect this miscarriage of justice. Summary Accuser's needs Other's needs See claimant's full Estimated Innocence Report Post-Conviction Journey Appeal results Every exonerated person had their case first reviewed by the judicial appeals process. Every time, the panel of judges overlooked the injustice of that miscarriage justice. The appellate process focuses on procedural standards. Is it possible to faithfully follow every procedural norm and still find an innocent person guilty? Yet, this happens much more frequently than many would like to admit. Most innocence projects remain under-resourced. Only a handful of lawyers, and often only law students or paralegals, invest hours going through case documents. They don't always find something that can be reversed in court. They tend to seek something they can trust will have a greater chance of being granted a hearing in court. And has a greater chance for success of a conviction reversal. They could risk their funding streams if championing cases with a harder, or little, chance to prevail in court. So they tend to serve those "low hanging fruit" cases of greater promise for overturning a wrongful conviction. Where does this leave the countless souls who are innocent in prison and beyond, who cannot get an innocence litigator to go to bat for them? That's what this Public Exoneration option is for. Innocence Movement Results Add your name to the petition to support exonerating Sabrina Innocence support petition What do you think about this claim of innocence? First, select the innocence claimant "With what I know of the case, I think the claimant is...* First name* Last name* Email* Submit Your first name Your last name Email Based on what I know, I think the claimant is... Submit Thank you for your support. If we get enough supporters, we may launch our own Public Exoneration campaign. Learn more below. tally count Latest tally of feedback to this innocence claim. Clearly guilty 0 Likely guilty 1 Likely innocent 21 Clearly innocent 33 Appellate Process Presents mission creep of prioritizing its institutional needs over the needs of the public. Innocence Project Replicates this mission creep when working exclusively within the adversarial legal process. Public Exoneration Corrects this mission creep by prioritizing needs over institutionalized adversarial legalism. After the adversarial options repeatedly fail, the new professional service of need-response counters with a mutual process that responsibly addresses each other's needs. When hate keeps failing to produce desired outcomes, it's time to try the power of love . Learn more "I am exploring the option to build up a campaign that takes my pursuit for overdue exoneration to the court of public opinion." of Sabrina Williams Follow my Public Exoneration campaign. Consider becoming an active supporter for as little as $4.99 per week. Invest in restoring claimant’s freedom. Invest in yourself. Proxy for innocence claimant: Carlos Ruiz Public Exoneration progress: 0 How you can help us free Sabrina The Public Exoneration campaign unfolds in five phases. We love for you to participate in this alternative approach to exonerating her. Overview PDI step 1 PDI step 2 PDI step 3 PDI step 1 Demonstrate your innocence Sets a foundation to display your innocence Introduction Preview the 12 questions Solve personal problems Download & complete worksheet Learn More... PDI step 2 Declare your innocence Publicly establishes your innocence Overview Verify addresses Upload finished worksheet We distribute it to key recipients Learn More... PDI step 3 Follow up Expand awareness of your innocence Engaging responsive authorities Incentivizing authorities' responses More responsive or reactive Your final answers to the 12 questions Learn More... Overview Is this for you? Prove your innocence without lawyers Demonstrate your innocence Declare your innocence Follow up Learn More... Quickly show how you are a wrongly convicted innocent person by how you’re among the few who took your case to trial. Despite being found guilty, show how you consistently maintained innocence. In the face of certain parole denial, you faithfully stood your ground. This service works primarily for those who have already done their time. But now cannot get a meaningful job or find stable housing. All because of an undeserved felony record. For only a $49.48 one-time fee, establish your innocence with your own record of proven integrity. Let us inform the DA of your demonstrable innocence. We presort your claim of viable innocence for them. No lawyers involved. We incentivize the DA and others to recognize your demonstrated innocence. If they dare refuse, we are ready to appeal to the higher court of public opinion. Failure is not an option. Share this profile on social media to help spread the word. Thank you. Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link How you can help us free Sabrina The Public Exoneration campaign unfolds in five phases. We love for you to participate in this alternative approach to exonerating her. FIT BASE phase TEAM phase GROW phase GOAL phase BASE phase Set a firm foundation Sets a foundation to display your innocence Leverage your innocence Gain need-responsive skills Solve personal problems Invite peer supporters Learn More... Review your Estimated Innocence Report with your need-responder. Develop strategies to optimize its strengths and address any weaknesses. Together, you craft your dynamic “exoneration plan”. Learn to proactively endure discomforts, to resolve conflicts with authorities, to relate more integrally with reality, and more. Sharpen these skills to later incentivize unresponsive authorities. Get any personal problems out of the way. Improve yourself where you can. Remove any doubt that you are innocent of the conviction. Set the tone for your immanent exoneration. Invite friends and family who believe in your innocence. Learn to show them how they can back your efforts. And how they can attract more backers to support your case of compelling innocence. TEAM phase Build your support team Publicly establishes your innocence Onboard peer supporters to your team Practice your new skills Solve interpersonal problems Invite professional sponsors Learn More... Incentivize your followers to upgrade as supporters and contributors. Show them how they can personally benefit by becoming more centrally involved. Or at least by participating. Guide your contributors to develop the same need-responsive skills you recently sharpened. Invite your supporters to watch, to encourage them to develop these skills on their own. With these new skills, work on any interpersonal problems. Practice solving problems. Demonstrate your capacity to endure discomforts. Publicly validate your innocence. Introduce innocence lawyers and other innocence activists to this alternative to adversarial legalism. Invite then to sponsor your campaign to boost their legitimacy. Incentivize their involvement. GROW phase Engage innocence lawyers Expand awareness of your innocence Leverage your growing support Onboard professional sponsors Learn to solve power problems Practice speaking truth to power Learn More... Let your growing support network publicize your innocence, your testament to human endurance, your readiness to face conflict with respect for each other’s affected needs, and more. Demonstrate these skills to supportive professionals. Incentivize them to improve their responsiveness to neglected needs with such skills. Vouch for their improved responsiveness. Assess the responsiveness of professionals to your compelling case of innocence. Demonstrate how mutual regard for each other’s needs create s better results than legalistic adversarialism. Invite the most supportive professionals to practice these skills with you. Learn to speak the truth of your innocence in ways that authorities will openly listen. GOAL phase Engage the prosecutor Incentivize authorities to exonerate you Hold court of informed public opinion Replace cold adversarialism with love Effectively address structural problems Declare your avowed liberty Learn More... Give the courts every reason to process your innocence claim. Let them compete with the court of public opinion, as your team connects with media outlets to publicize your case. Upend the norms of the adversarial judicial process by demonstrating this more loving approach to solving conflicts. Let your loving character boldly exemplify your innocence. Unpack the imposing social norms that hinder just outcomes. Invite prosecutors, judges and policymakers to shift incentives. Publicly reward just outcomes over conviction rates. Declare your widely supported innocence before a candid world. Let your support network contest the legitimacy of any official resistance to exonerate you. Reward all who do the right thing. FIT Check if it’s a good fit This is a preliminary phase to prepare the way Self -assessment Invite supporters Get prepared Meet your service provider Learn More... Start by checking if this unique service is a good fit for you. Can the innocence claimant lead this effort themselves? Or should they delegate the leading role to another? Spread the costs early by inviting friends and family to back your wellness campaign. For free for them to merely follow. Or $4.99 per week for them to participate. Or $14.99 each week to get hem centrally involved. Get oriented to how this service operates. Connect with others exploring this alternative. Learn how this process takes a pioneering approach toward exoneration. Meet the professional need-responder. First through texting. Then in person online. No financial commitment for the first thirty days. I want to support Share this profile on social media to help spread the word. Thank you. Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp LinkedIn Copy link Exonerating Sabrina If the public exoneration campaign has already begun, check here at your level of support. Please note that until you join their campaign, none of these will be accessible. Followers, Supporters & Contributors Follow developments of their exoneration campaign. Progress Updates Supporters & Contributors Join the forum actively supporting their exoneration campaign. Exoneration Forum Contributors only Oversee activities contributing to their ultimate exoneration. Executive Committee sample testimonials Tanya Simpson , Claimant's cousin I was skeptical at first. I mean, how can something outside the official process help my cousin? Then I was pleasantly surprised by the amazing results. Jonathan Glenn , Claimant's coworker I always knew that Claimant was fully innocent of all charges. Now I'm glad to be a part of process that can finally help liberate my friend. Daniel Walker , Claimant's father These have been some painful years waiting for the legal process to correct this mess. Thankfully, this alternative is finally helping to bring my child home. < Back Next >

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Glossary Y < back to glossary menu no entries yet for Y A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z < back to glossary menu

< Back The Innocence Project not yet a parter Once a partner, find more information here about their case criteria, how to request for legal aid, along with any services. Previous Next