Search Results

This is just the first rough draft of the episode zero. Not bad, I think. We can improve upon it next time. Episode Zero Script for introducing the Need-Response podcast to the world. Gustavo:         Disappointed in the legal process? Steph:              Disgusted with politics? Gustavo:         Disenchanted with psychotherapy? Steph:              What if there was an alternative to these institutions? Now there is: Both:                Need-response . [cue branding music] Steph:              Welcome aboard to Need-Response, cohosted by me, Steph Turner of Michigan, Gustavo:         and me, Gustavo, of Sao Paulo. Steph is the author of the book You NEED This, introducing anankelogy, the study of need . I was the first to read it when published in 2021. And to learn about need-response , for solving problems like never before. [fade out branding music] Steph:              Each week these last three years, we’ve applied this new understanding of need to illuminate current events. Like the political winds in Brazil, in the United States, and around the world. Gustavo:         And to unpack the conflicts behind the wars in Ukraine and in Israel. Once we viewed conflicts through the lens of affected needs, whole new worlds and possibilities began to open up to us. Steph:              Now we welcome you into this conversation…in the form of this podcast. Gustavo:         Steph’s book applies this fresh understanding of need to this proposed new service of need-response . This service focuses on your needs, to fill the many gaps left wide open in our current disappointing institutions. We’ll explore how it can serve your needs. Steph:              Starting April 30th, 2025, we bring you inside this budding professional service that prioritizes your needs, your wellness. Gustavo:         We’ll introduce you to this field with a whole new set of illuminating  concepts and fresh vocabulary. We’ll radically  solve problems you cannot solve any other way. Steph:              Each episode features short clips to introduce you to this new world of understanding and serving your needs. To enable you to speak truth to power in a way they will be incentivized to listen. Gustavo:         Not filtered through laws. Steph:              Or policies. Gustavo:         Or diagnoses . Steph:              It puts your needs first. Gustavo:         Only need-response respects your needs as objective facts, independent of feelings or beliefs or behaviors. Steph:              We'll apply this to your relationship with your boss, Gustavo:         to your politicized needs, Steph:              to your underserved justice needs, Gustavo:         to your wellness needs, Steph:              and much more. Gustavo:         We’ll introduce you to some steps to improve your rapport with your boss. Steph:              We'll unpack politics to affirm your politicized needs, to better understand all ideological  sides. Gustavo:         We'll show you a better way to counter wrongful convictions, beyond toxic legalism, that holds lawyers and prosecutors to a higher standard of accountability. Steph:              We'll offer you a compelling alternative to psychotherapy, to address external threats to your wellbeing. Gustavo:         And much more. Along the way, you will gain a much deeper understanding of your pain, and your needs. Steph:              Isn't it time you had the option to serve your needs directly, over serving laws, over squeezing yourself into ideological norms, over fitting into psychological categories? Gustavo:         Isn't it time we had a professional service that incentivizes  our potential to love each other more? Steph:              Now there is. Gustavo:         And you can help build it. Steph:              Listen each Wednesday morning, as we take you through this new visionary service. Follow along as we market test this pioneering approach. Gustavo:         We’ll explore a new way to speak truth to power, in a way that incentivizes them to listen to those they impact . To measurably improve our wellness. Steph:              We’ll interview those powerholders who welcome this refreshing alternative. We’ll incentivize them to replace antagonistic legalism with mutual regard for each other's needs. Gustavo:         Then invite them to share the experience with you. Steph:              Together, we’ll honor their needs to incentivize honoring our needs, as an act of inspiring love. Such is the unique potential of need-response , untried and waiting for you to help us test it. We may even invite you onto this podcast. Gustavo:         You are invited to help shape it, to tweak it, so it can best serve your underserved  needs. So join us in transforming our world with this more loving approach. Steph:              We’ll explore the untapped market of solving problems by resolving needs, in a more loving way. Gustavo:         Learn more at AnankelogyFoundation.org . Steph:              Subscribe now [wherever you get your podcasts]. Catch the first episode on Wednesday, April 30th, 2025. Be among the first to start rejuvenating the world with this targeted… Both:                power of love. [cue outro music] TEXT HILIGHTED IN YELLOW: CHALLENGING TO PRONOUNCE

Appreciating the difference Which is best for you and your situation? Which could best serve you? A highly organized campaign designed to ensure your success? OR A loosely assembled initiative that makes it easy to get started? I designed the wellness campaign first. I intentionally designed it as a group project, to bring people together to address each other's needs. Then I realized few if anyone would commit to its rigorous demands. At least not until after gaining some traction with one of the interactive spreadsheet tools (later to become apps). So I designed a wellness initiative that anyone can start on their own. I recognize this could confuse visitors when browsing through the site. This articles tries to explain the differences. Think of responsivism as something within the larger scope of need-response. But consider a wellness campaign and a wellness initiative as two distinctly different things. Let's compare and contrast the two in these seven ways. Group project or individual effort Planned process or self-guided Wellness warmup or downloaded tool Weekly commitment or flexible support INVITE others or ALERT others Shift to an initiative or to a campaign High investment, low risk or low investment, high risk Let this help you decide which approach best fits your situation and need. 1. Group project or individual effort A wellness campaign is a demanding group project. After completing the wellness warmup exercise , you commit yourself to four or five progressing campaign phases. Each one builds on your development from earlier phases. The process coordinates almost every step along the way. You build social capital to grow support for your noble wellness goal. You share control of this group project to expand its value to others. A wellness initiative moves forward as your individual effort. You start without any commitments. You simply download one of the responsive interactive spreadsheet tools. You mostly use dropdown lists to utilize its features. And let it direct you to proactively engage others, to offer to respect their needs as you assert your affected needs.   Each tool can be used as a one-off. Or recycled and used over and over again. Use of one tool may inspire you to download and use another. These are all free, without email capture. You can find more detailed instructions here at Anankelogy Foundation. 2. Planned process or self-guided A wellness campaign unfolds as an online scheduled course. You sign up to attend weekly online sessions. Initially, you only meet with the professional need-responder.   Each successive phase adds more to that online session. All must agree when everyone can meet, or most can be available. A wellness initiative proceeds at your own self-guided pace. You go through the downloaded interactive tool at your own pace. If you need some support, you can post your questions at Anankelogy Foundation’s online forum.   Or seek direct one-on-one support from me, for a reasonable price—the first session is free. That’s the closest the initiative comes to committing to a schedule. 3. Wellness warmup or downloaded tool A wellness campaign starts with a wellness warmup exercise . You begin humbly enough offering to do little acts of kindness for others. You assert the higher ground of honoring the needs of others to inspire them to honor yours. This lets you practice speaking truth to power with those more forgiving of you. You grow relationships you will find necessary to commit to a full wellness campaign. A wellness initiative starts with a downloaded interactive tool . You can start with any responsive tool. The basic Personally Responsive tool mirrors the wellness warmup. It guides you to offer acts of kindness to others you know.   If you start with one of the other responsivism tools, the recipient could recommend that you go back to Personally Responsive to demonstrate your good faith intention. Or use one of the developmental responsive tools to improve your trustworthiness. 4. Weekly commitment or flexible support A wellness campaign requires an ongoing commitment. You could cancel or reschedule an online session early in the campaign. The more people join your campaign, the more any cancellation could have a damaging ripple effect that may cause you to lose momentum. You must hold down the fort for several months. A wellness initiative offers flexible support options. You could mix up these support options. After you sign up and receive direct online support from me, in a Zoom session, you can easily go back to using the no expense forum to get answers. You guide yourself and save a lot of money. 5. INVITE others or ALERT others A wellness campaign onboards others with your INVITE . When ready to attract interest in your campaign, you invite them with a specialized INVITE card. It provides the invitees three options for joining the campaign: follow for free, support for moderate engagement for a modest subscription, or go all in as your patron. A wellness initiative onboards others with your ALERT . You’re given a generic message for you to announce to those in your social circles that you are embarking on a wellness initiative. You notify them you will soon be sending more, much more. You alert them to this significant adjustment in your life. 6. Shift to an initiative or to a campaign A wellness campaign could revert to wellness initiative. If overwhelmed by the demands of a campaign, the need-responder may suggest or recommend that you suspend the campaign. Then find the proper responsivism tools to regain your footing. A wellness initiative could segue to a wellness campaign. Responsivism lets you attract powerholder’s interest before you commit to any campaign. Once you gain sufficient traction, then you may find a campaign worth the commitment. 7. High investment, low risk or low investment, high risk A wellness campaign requires much commitment, increasing your chance for success. You surround yourself with all kinds of people with all kinds of talent. Your campaign runs on both crowdfunding and crowdsourcing support.   You gain access to the resources increasing your chance to reach your wellness goal. And receive the resources to pursue your meaningful purpose in life . A wellness initiative asks little of you, but that can decrease your chance for success. You’re basically on your own. Your freedom to try this on your terms comes with the freedom to fail drastically.   You may need to segue to a full campaign to improve your chances to reach your goal or goals. Contact me or your professional need-responder to explore and then decide what is the best path for you. Your responsiveness to need-response or responsivism Your turn. Consider one or more of these options to respond to this need-responsive content. Check our Engaging Forum to FOLLOW discussions on this post and others. JOIN us as a site member to interact others and create your forum comments. Explore similar content by clicking on the tags below. Find similar content under this applied anankelogy category. Share this content with others on social media. Share the link to share the love. Check out recent posts of interest to you. Add a rating to let others know how much of a good read this was for you. Write a comment to give others an independent perspective on this content. Recommend this on Facebook. Introduce anankelogy to your social media contacts. Lastly, support us in building this new love-nurturing alternative to our hate-enabling institutions. You can help us spread some love. back-to-top

Engage. Instead of ignoring or even opposing the needs of the other side in a conflict, try to find out what those needs are. Relate to those needs as the other side experiences them. Support resolving their inflexible needs in ways that do not prevent you from resolving yours, in ways you would have them support resolving your affected needs. Model to them how to respect your unchosen needs by first affirming theirs. Which do you think could produce better results? Challenging others to a debate to see who's right or wrong. OR Engaging the affected needs driving our entrenched differences. "I'm exhausted." "I disagree." "I need to lay down." "I disagree." "I need to take a nap." "I disagree." "Opposing my need sounds ridiculous!" "I agree." CONTENTS Start first with their unshakeable needs . Then say what you can and cannot do about them . Finally, link them together . To be continued . We're keeping score . Let's understand each other . Engage ! If you enjoy spreading hostilities and locking us in problems and pain, this is not for you. If you truly seek peace and eager to pursue lasting solutions to our ongoing conflicts, this is especially for you. 1. Start first with their unshakeable needs. When was the last time you chose to be thirsty? Or chose to need a friend? Or chose to need solitude? Do any of your foes choose to be thirsty? Or choose to require a friend? Or choose to require solitude? Or do you choose not to engage the messy details of each other's needs? Engage the needs anyways .   It’s critical we keep separate the natural needs of others and what they insist we do about them. While we can change what we do about them, we cannot change the needs themselves.   Affirm their needs. Affirm the unshakeable needs on both sides to any argument. YOUR NATURAL NEEDS THEIR NATURAL NEEDS Before you object to any social pressures to respect their need, and before you insist that they first respect your affected needs, affirm their conveyed need first. You can do that, can't you? I believe it's called love . Let the limited speech activist LOVE the free speech advocate: Let the free speech advocate LOVE the limited speech activist: “I fully support you addressing your need for free speech so you can more fully function.” “I fully support you addressing your need for limiting speech so you can more fully function.”   Only after you confirmed their unshakeable need do you raise your legitimate concern about how they expect you to honor that need. 2.  Then say what you can or cannot do about them. However, I cannot guarantee that I can do exactly what you expect.” Then state your respectable concern for why you cannot go along with their generalized solution. If concerned about hate speech, you could say, If concerned about free speech, you could say, “The more you freely express your antagonistic views to a public audience, I’m rightly concerned some who agree with you will take it to extremes that could threaten my wellbeing." “The more you constrain everyone’s ability to publicly air their thoughts about sensitive topics, I’m rightly concerned the public discourse will sink into irrational beliefs and then some will act less appropriately.” You only challenge their expectations of how you’re to respond to their politicized need. You never challenge the unchosen need itself.   That’s engagement. That’s what we mean by “engage!” 3.  Finally, link them together. First, you engage each other’s core needs. Second, you engage each other’s expectations. Finally, you continue to engage each other to cultivate a deeper connection. From the Left, you connect deeper with those on the Right. From the Right, you connect deep with those on the Left. “The more you can appreciate my concerns about the risks of being retraumatized by extremists acting on your free speech, who take comfort in your moderate position but then takes it to a frightening extreme that threatens our wellbeing, the easier I can appreciate your concerns of the public discourse sinking into unchallenged views.” “The more you can appreciate my concerns about the public discourse sinking into undiscussed, unexplored, and unchallenged irrational beliefs, some acted violently upon in the darkness of limited speech, the easier I can appreciate your concerns about someone acting on exaggerated interpretations of my openly discussed views.” Not exactly a quid pro quo . Just keeping honest that putting their needs ahead of your own only works as long as you eventually can resolve your needs. After all, you must maintain a level of functioning to be able to give so generously. 4.  To be continued. Treat this as an ongoing conversation. Nurture empathy both ways. Endure the discomfort it takes. Resolving needs will remove that discomfort faster than avoiding the needs in the name of debate. Grant each other the space to better appreciate the merits of the other. Observe how they can now empathize with your experience of traumatizing public speech. Observe how they can now empathize with your experience of constrained public speech. As the free speech advocate acknowledges incidents of extremists exaggerating their good points that led to traumatizing the more vulnerable, the more they can empathize with your limited speech priorities. As the limited speech advocate acknowledges cases where a lack of free and open dialogue arguably contributed in some way to a violent act, the more they can empathize with your free speech priorities. Allow yourself to raise the bar. From easing the discomfort of your underserved needs to mutually supporting the full resolution of each other's affected needs . Build a reputation from being predictably mutually defensive to being predictably mutually responsive to each other's unchosen needs. 5. We're keeping score. When invited to engage , to affirm your opponent's unchosen natural needs , we'll give you credit. We will publicly honor your demonstrated trustworthiness to put love over hate. You're invited to regard us in the same light. We each seek to build up our response reputation . We each seek to earn your trust, as we seek to affirm your trustworthiness. We recognize your level of trust in someone tends to fall into one of these five levels. We apply this to powerholders as well. We affirm the unchosen needs of those in positions of authority over us. We replace "responsiveness" with "legitimacy" to specifically apply this to powerholders. This goes both ways. If I do anything to earn your distrust, my responsive rating can go down. If a powerholder does anything to earn your distrust, their earned legitimacy can do down. You can join us a need-responders qualified to empirically evaluate their responsiveness to our needs, and their legitimacy as our authority figures. 6. Let's understand each other. Apply this to any contested issue. Start with these eight hot button politicized needs. Look first for the unchosen needs on each side. Start by affirming their unchosen needs. Replace arguing with listening for their unchosen needs. Replace rejection with affirmation of the unchosen needs. Replace demanding with offering respect for each other's unchosen needs. Go ahead and apply this to any contested issue. Affirm the unchosen needs that first get expressed as what you're supposed to do about them. But don't take the bait. Don't confuse each other's flexible responses with each other's inflexible needs. You don't have to prematurely oppose others whose needs you've yet to understand. Nor they should anyone prematurely oppose yours. Show them how to affirm your unchosen needs by first affirming their unchosen needs. 7. Engage! Affirm unchosen needs. Let's step it up! We can cease fueling our differences. We can break the hold of elites over us. We can engage each other’s unchosen inflexible needs . Unconditionally affirm them, as you would have them affirm yours. Stop encouraging hostilities to the needs no one can change. Engage! No more indulgent side-taking excuses. "What about the myth of moral neutrality ?" "What about bothsidesism ?" "What about whataboutism ?" These objections aptly apply to what we do about our needs, and never applicable to the unchosen needs themselves. It's not helpful when such misapplied objections react more than respond . We need you to thoughtfully respond to everyone's unchosen needs. Become more need-responsive  than feel-reactive . Those you dismiss as apolitical may be more intuitively aware of each other’s unchosen needs. If you can’t change your needs for them, then why expect them to change their needs for you? Your political opponent didn't choose to need differently than you. Just as you didn't choose to need differently than them. So why remain alienated from each other over what neither of you can change? Engage! Affirm their unchosen needs. As you would have them affirm your unchosen needs. Engage! Spread the love of understanding, of peace building, of conflict resolution. By affirming unchosen needs. Engage! THIS IS ONE IN A SERIES TO ENGAGE OTHERS AMIDST CONFLICTS WITH A BETTER WAY Engage . Engage! ENGAGE! reaching standard responsiveness cultivating competitive responsiveness creating transformative responsiveness Engage! Affirm their unchosen needs . Your responsiveness to affirming unchosen needs Your turn. Consider one or more of these options to respond to this need-responsive content. Check our Engaging Forum to FOLLOW discussions on this post and others. JOIN us as a site member to interact others and create your forum comments. Explore similar content by clicking on the tags below. Find similar content under this engage category. Share this content with others on social media. Share the link to share the love. Check out recent posts of interest to you. Add a rating to let others know how much of a good read this was for you. Write a comment to give others an independent perspective on this content. Recommend this on Facebook. Introduce anankelogy to your social media contacts. Lastly, support us in building this new love-nurturing alternative to our hate-enabling institutions. You can help us spread some love. back-to-top

What in the world is anankelogy , and why should I care? All the social sciences seek answers to serve our many needs. Anankelogy is a new social science, to understand the needs themselves. Anankelogy recognizes how a core need—like water, friendship or solitude—exist as an objective fact. We subjectively experience them after  the objective fact of independently requiring it to function. That means each core need can be empirically observed, much the way we use empirical measures in the other social sciences. And it means we can apply the discipline of science to address our many problems. Which do you find preferable? Our current social sciences sufficiently finds answers for our needs. OR Create a social science that understands the needs themselves. Need some answers to your stubborn problems? All the social sciences seek answers to our many needs. Anankelogy  is the new social science for understanding the needs themselves.   Just as Émile Durkheim help validate sociology by identifying social facts   a s empirical phenomena , anankelogy identifies each core need as an objective fact . You subjectively experience your needs only after the objective fact of your body requiring something to objectively function. This opens our needs to empirical observation and scientific inquiry . And can clear up a lot of problems! Learn more from my book You NEED This, introducing anankelogy, the study of need . Available on Amazon . As an eBook or paperback. Or go to Anankelogy Foundation .org #short version academic anankelogy applied anankelogy accessible anankelogy Your responsiveness to this brief introduction to anankelogy Your turn. Consider one or more of these options to respond to this need-responsive content. Check our Engaging Forum to FOLLOW discussions on this post and others. JOIN us as a site member to interact with others and to create your own forum comments. Explore similar content by clicking on the tags below. Find similar content under this anankelogy category. Share this content with others on social media. Share the link to share the love. Check out recent posts of interest to you. Add a rating below to let others know how much of a good read this was for you. Write a comment below to give others an independent perspective on this content. Recommend this on Facebook. Introduce anankelogy to your social media contacts. Lastly, support us in building this new love-nurturing alternative to our hate-enabling institutions. You can help us spread some love. back-to-top

“Love is the answer” they promised us back in the 1960s. What happened to that inspiring vision? Has our love —our honor for others as we would have them honor us—grown hopelessly cold? Is there still room to revitalize our potential to “love thy neighbor”? Listen to this speech and read its text to spark enduring hope that, yes, we shall love. Which makes the most sense to you? The ideal of loving one another is mere aspiration, yet we must remain pragmatic. OR Love is the chief immovable standard for guiding our responsiveness to each other. C onsider this a call to return to our moral bearings, to once again put love for one another ahead of differing beliefs, differing ideologies, differing priorities. If there is any hope to turn society around from its many types of problems , it's the power of love to inspire us to respond more effectively to the many underserved needs fueling our problems. Although this speech flows in one continuous presentation, it can be orgnized into the following segments. Elusive Golden Rule 0:01 Give love to attract love 1:23 Channel love from being loved 2:27 Let love melt each other’s pain 3:57 Distinguish between resolving needs and relieving pain 5:11 Distinguish between staying open and staying closed 6:48 Distinguish between unchosen needs and chosen responses 8:35 Recognize how anyone can love 1 0:45 You shall love! 12:30 NOTE: This was first posted on 2024-03-10 as a preliminary video. A more visually engaging version is still in development. But I wanted to have it up right away. Until then, I will let this rousing text speak for itself. 1. Elusive Golden Rule Imagine a world where no one lives by the Golden Rule . No one reciprocates kindness or generosity or empathy . Instead, everyone strives only for their own self-interests. Everyone mostly ignores the needs of others around them. Everyone suffers some harm from this, and does little to alleviate such harm in others. Worst, almost everyone accepts this as normal. How far are we from this already?   We’re in the midst of a global   epidemic of loneliness . Do you have anyone you can call upon right now if you find yourself in an emotional crisis? Who are you going to call? Are you only surrounded by people all day who don’t accurately know you, nor do you know them? We all crave social connection. While in a sea of countless people, we’re all drowning of thirst.   Who here doesn’t feel lonely at times? Who among us doesn’t feel lonely most of the time? These are fortunate compared to those of us who suffer loneliness all of the time. Is that you? 2. Give love to attract love Here’s the key to break the chains of despairing loneliness: Find a way to break the chains of loneliness in someone else in need. Someone who needs a warm smile. Someone who simply could use a kind hug. Someone who needs to know that they actually do matter. Is that you?   Here is love: To honor their needs as your healthiest self would have them honor your similar needs. Give others opportunity to know what you need by first serving the needs of others. Start small, planting seeds of kindness that potentially takes root in someone, and then can grow into something much deeper.   Smile more at others, and you will receive more smiles. Offer appropriate hugs to others, and you will receive more hugs. Let others know how much they matter to you, and others will affirm you more. 3. Channel love from being loved You shall love , and then you receive love. The more you step outside of yourself to serve the needs of others, the more others begin to step outside of their shell to do something for your needs. The more you love, the more you will be loved.   Maybe you find it impossible to muster up the means to give such service first. Maybe your potential for love requires some kind of kickstart. Maybe you crave a spark of love from somewhere, to light up your pilot of a flickering flame of delicate love.   I found that spark of love which I craved after crying out to God—whom I wasn’t even sure existed—that if you are the creator and ultimate source of love, please bring some of that into me. Immediately after that cry, that blind trust, I found myself overcome with a powerful wave of deeply meaningful love. Tears of joy ran down my cheek. That moment became the turning point in my life. My emotional tank filled up enough to be more giving. I started to smile more often as I finally found deep reason to smile.   Is that right for you? Maybe not. Where do you go to find love? 4. Let love melt each other’s pain I can tell you as a matter of universal principle, that you find more love the more you are generous and giving to others in need. When you can take a glimpse past your own pain and see the pain in others, and then try something to alleviate that pain. Even if that’s only a caring smile. Or only a warm hug. Or some small assurance that they do indeed matter to you.   You shall give, and then more of what you require shall be given to you. You shall listen more, and then be more fully heard. You shall better understand others, and then others will better understand you.   Or you shall squander your potential for love and meaningful living. And stay trapped in misery. Is that you?   Anankelogy , the new social science for understanding your needs, shows how you can grow your potential for love by making three overlooked distinctions . Each one upends conventional thinking that repeatedly gets us in trouble. 5. Distinguish between resolving needs and relieving pain First : To grow your potential to love one another—to honor their needs as your own—distinguish between  resolving needs  and relieving pain .   The more you ease your pain, the less you respond to the need prompting that pain. Pain is not the problem as much as the threats your pain reports . The more you suppress or ignore your pain, the more those threats persist to cause you more pain later. You then waste more precious energy trying to hold down your natural warning system.   There is no such thing as pain apart from unresolved needs . Sure, sometimes it’s prudent to ease the pressure so you can restore some focus. But the more you react to your pain, the more pain you get . Resolving needs removes cause for pain. Helping or supporting others to resolve their needs removes far more pain than reasoning alone.   Too often, we provoke one another’s pain amidst some conflict. We vainly expect the other side to honor our affected needs while ignoring any negative impact we have on their needs. We provoke mutual defensiveness, which clouds our reasoning. We then rationalize our destructive biases. We diminish our potential for liberating love in the name of self-interest. 6. Distinguish between staying open and staying closed Second : To grow your potential to love one another—to honor their needs as your own—distinguish between  open mutuality  and guarded adversarialism amidst conflict .   The more defensive you get, the more likely you provoke the other side’s defensiveness. The more you resist their unchosen needs, the more compelled they are to dig in their heels. Whatever you reactively resist you tend to reflexively reinforce . You then easily get more of what you claim to oppose, and find this comfortingly familiar. You can then easily blame others for the pain you originally cause.   Or you can absorb the displeasure when feeling confronted. You don’t have to agree that you’re totally wrong as you allow these critics to illuminate your blind spots. You can skip the debate the more you vulnerably relate to the deeper points they try to make. You model how they best respond to your critiques of their position. You can do this by following the simple format of the praise sandwich. Your first affirm their unchosen needs, a positive. You then kindly report how they impact your needs, which is the unpleasant negative sandwiched between two positives. You finally clarify how they can respect your needs as you indicate how you aim to continue to respect their needs. You turn the challenge of a conflict into an opportunity for mutual support and interpersonal and personal growth. 7. Distinguish between unchosen needs and chosen responses Third : To grow your potential to love one another—to honor their needs as your own—distinguish between  unchosen needs  and chosen responses .   The more you expect others to change what their lives require to fit what you prefer, the more you alienate yourself from reality. Anankelogy recognizes natural needs—like water and meaningful friendship and personal freedom—as objective facts. As unchosen needs. You don't choose your needs; your needs choose you . These exist prior to your awareness of them, before you feel them, ahead of any chosen response to them. The less such needs resolve, the less you objectively can function.   While no one sits above the law, no law sits above these unchosen natural needs . Your innate need to breathe oxygen is above the law. Your innate need for social connection is above the law. Your innate need to freely do things for yourself exists above the law. No law nor authority can change such needs. Laws or policies don’t resolve needs, we do .   We cannot fully resolve our needs if relying solely upon impersonal laws and unwritten norms. As general standards for general situations, it is against the grain of law to fully resolve specific needs . We cannot solve our specific problems from the level of generalizing that created them . We cannot live up to our full potential for love while too alienated from each other to relate honestly toward each other’s overlooked specific needs. 8. Recognize how anyone can love Need-response  exists to grow your potential for honoring each other’s needs as your own. But anyone can cultivate this potential. Anyone can take initiative to resolve more needs in each other. Anyone can love. It doesn’t require intellect as much as responsiveness. Just about everyone can be more responsive to each other’s needs.   Nobody can deny love  as the highest standard for how we treat each other. The more you rely on the minimal standards of the law, the less you honor the needs of others. The less you honor the needs of others, the less others will likely honor your needs beyond minimal standards. The more you honor the needs of others, the more inclined others of any level of capacity will more likely honor your needs. And go beyond requirements of law.   Nobody is smart enough to know exactly what everyone needs at each moment. Almost anyone can ask. Almost anyone can try to offer something others may need. Almost anyone can humbly learn from each other.   We can resolve only so much of our needs solely on our own without any help. We can resolve far more needs with support from each other. We can resolve almost every need with the power of love . Or we shall continue to sink deeper into this agonizing abyss of despair from our normalized lack of love . 9. You shall love! You shall love , or you shall suffer. You shall honor the unchosen needs of others as your healthiest self would have them honor your unchosen needs. Or you shall most certainly provoke the demise of each other. You shall love , or you shall die.   It’s now your time. Not to entertain false expectations of what others cannot change about their needs. It ’s now your time. Not to indulge in outrage when things don’t go your way. It’s now your time. Not to insist upon social reforms or better policies or social change, but to respond more personably to what we specifically need of each other. It ’s now your time, not to further any hate but to spread love .   Not when you can find the time, not when it’s convenient for you, not waiting for others to give to you first. But in this very moment, when opportunity still exists to honor others as you would have them honor you. You SHALL love . Now! Your responsiveness to this inspiring call to love, love, love Your turn. Consider one or more of these options to respond to this need-responsive content. Check our Engaging Forum to FOLLOW discussions on this post and others. JOIN us as a site member to interact others and create your forum comments. Explore similar content by clicking on the tags below. Find similar content under this engage category. Share this content with others on social media. Share the link to share the love. Check out recent posts of interest to you. Add a rating to let others know how much of a good read this was for you. Write a comment to give others an independent perspective on this content. Recommend this on Facebook. Introduce anankelogy to your social media contacts. Lastly, support us in building this new love-nurturing alternative to our hate-enabling institutions. You can help us spread some love. back-to-top

Need-response backs up any consensus avowal with a thoroughly coordinated enforcement operation. A response team assembles to enforce need-responder commitments to properly resolve needs by any legitimate means necessary. This can work with or at odds with any law enforcement. It holds all accountable to the higher standard of producing improved wellness outcomes of all impacted. Once a path toward improving wellness has been established that will not cost the wellness of others, it shall be enforced with due force.

“Take responsibility. Be rational. Keep it simple. Relieve your pain. Take a stand.” What’s wrong with these? Everything!   These snippets all point to the problem of “toxic legalism”. Toxic legalism is when you put flexible laws ahead of the inflexible needs , which such laws exist to serve. This occurs in at least five dimensions, covered below. Which do you believe as more accurate? No one is literally above the law. OR No one's impactful actions are beyond the reach of agreed upon responses to our needs, but the needs themselves sit above laws as they occur before any law was ever codified. Anankelogy establishes a natural need as an objective fact . The less your needs resolve, the less you can objectively function. And the more predictably you will suffer pain . Objective needs are inflexible needs; they cannot be readily changed to fit the demands of laws . By contrast, anankelogy recognizes human laws as arbitrary legal fictions. The more we obey laws more than respond to needs out of love , the more our wellness suffers. Arbitrary laws are flexible laws; they can be readily changed to fit our inflexible needs. There are at least five ways the original purpose of laws can slip into toxic legalism. Slipping from personal accountability  to hyper-individualism Slipping from rational authority  to hyperrationality Slipping from vagueness to overgeneralizing Slipping from impartiality to alienating avoidance Slipping from punitive enforcement  to hostile adversarialism Toxic legalism can be defined as prioritizing subservience to laws or to social norms over serving the needs for which they exist. Anankelogy recognizes each of these elements as a level of functioning, or of your level of wellness. MORAL DEFUNCTIONS MORAL REFUNCTIONS hyper-individualism psychosocial holism hyperrationality vulnerable honesty overgeneralizing relevant nuance discomfort avoidance discomfort embrace hostile adversarialism supportive mutuality The law exists to impersonally convey each other’s needs. Taken to extremes, it devolves into something ignoring our needs, or worst. Too much law sinks into what anankelogy recognizes as toxic legalism .     Each toxic element starts out innocent enough, trying to address some need. Then slips into problems when misapplied. Instead of helping our needs, it dangerously undermines our needs.   Anankelogy considers such hindrances to our needs as defunctions . Which gets corrected by what anankelogy calls refunctions .   Need-response exists as a new profession to help us restore our functioning. Need-response gets us back to resolving needs to improve each other’s wellness. Laws do not resolve needs; properly motivated people do.   In short, toxic legalism presents these five dangers. Need-response counters each one in ways no one else even tries. 1. Slipping from personal accountability  to hyper-individualism This starts with something good. The law  emphasizes personal responsibility to act appropriately. Authority compels your responsibility toward the rights of others.   Too personalized , and we slip into overlooking the external limits constraining compliance. That easily morphs into toxic legalism . Taken to extremes, this actually undermines our personal and shared responsibilities.   Toxic legalism tends to overemphasize personal responsibility at the neglect of other’s responsibility toward you. This tends to leave your needs unaddressed. You might solely blame yourself for the resulting pain, which risks trapping you in more pain. This affects your psychosocial orientation (PO). Anankelogy recognizes how everyone has a relatively fixed approach to address their self-needs and their social needs. The more your self-needs resolve relative to your social needs, or the more your social needs resolve more than your self-needs, the more you experience a disturbing tension. You outwardly express this tension in your political views.   Nature compels you to integrate your inward self-needs with your outward social needs. You find wellness with psychosocial holism —resolving your self-needs (like personal autonomy and self-initiative) on par with your social needs (like acceptance from others and group supports). Unresolved needs can pull you into hyper-individualism . To understand how how so many of us can slip into hyper-individualism  can be explained by the phenomenon of symfunction capture . It pulls us from the benign purpose of law into its toxic legalistic elements. From peakfunction   to symfunction creep , then into symfunction strain , onto symfunction trap , and into painful dysfunction . Slipping from peakfunction into symfunction creep From a norm of effectively holding individuals personally accountable for their impactful behavior to normalizing the blaming of individuals for some things beyond their personal control.   Slipping from symfunction creep into symfunction strain From a norm of blaming individuals for some things beyond their personal control to normalizing the exaggeration that you can be held responsible for an increasing load of items beyond your personal control (i.e., locus of control  from internal  to external ).   Slipping from symfunction strain into symfunction trap From the norm of being held responsible for a growing list of items beyond your personal control (which others who can effectively maintain an internal locus of control and intrinsic motivation poorly assume others should be able to do likewise without knowing their specific situations) to normalizing the generaliza­tion that you are solely responsible for all of your actions regardless of the sociocultural limitations to effectively address your inflexible needs.   Slipping from symfunction trap into temporal dysfunction From a norm of generalizing of being solely responsible for everything that befalls you to normalizing the resulting as something you solely must cope with on your own.   TLDR From a norm of holding individuals personally accountable for their behavior to normalizing being solely responsible for all that happens to you. Need-response can restore your wellness with psychosocial holism . Need-response balances internal and external factors affecting our needs. Sometimes you can resolve your needs with individual merit. Other needs run into systemic structural barriers.   Anankelogy recognizes our problems occur on at least four levels . Personal problems . You can easily solve on your own. Interpersonal problems . You solve with cooperation with your peers. Power problems . You solve with cooperation with those in authority over you. Structural problems . Solving such problems calls for systemic changes.   Anankelogy recognizes how each problems level differently affects our self-needs (like autonomy and personal freedom) and our social needs (like acceptance and group support). Easing our self-needs more than your social needs, or easing your social needs more than your self-needs, leaves you with uncomfortable tension.   That tension is “psychosocial imbalance”. This informs our political views . How these sets of needs resolve relative to each other shapes your psychosocial orientation . You externally express this internal inflexible priority of needs with your flexible political views. The more you can resolve your self-needs and social needs on par with each other, the less politically passionate and more responsive to each other’s needs.   Need-response cultivates each other’s psychosocial orientation  from ignoble psychosocial imbalance  to noble psychosocial balance  by addressing and even resolving self-needs and social needs on par with each other. In short, we proactively transition from hyper-individualism to psychosocial holism . 2. Slipping from rational authority  to hyperrationality This starts with something good. The law  checks your irrational behaviors if reacting on your feelings. Rational-legal authority checks your impulses toward others.   Too rational , and we slip into guarding our vulnerabilities even from ourselves. That easily sinks into toxic legalism . Taken to extremes, this actually undermines rationality.   Toxic legalism bends toward rationalizing in ways that enable you to hide your vulnerable feelings. You expect your rational arguments to be socially safer than exposing your less defensible emotions. So you cover your emotions with slick sounding arguments. This points to your vulnerability orientation  (VO). Anankelogy recognizes how everyone has a relatively fixed approach to interacting with others. You typically keep yourself defensively guarded from those you do not know, and likely do not know you. You are more inclined to drop your guard and be more vulnerably honest to those you feel you can trust.   You mature better the more you can be vulnerably honest  to all of those around you. Hyperrationality  provokes defensiveness. Daring to drop your guard invites others to do likewise. Which opens the door to mutually understand each other on a deeper level. Unresolved needs can pull you into hyperrationality . To understand how so many of us can slip into hyperrationality  or even pseudo-rationality can be explained by the phenomenon of symfunction capture . It pulls us from the benign purpose of law into its toxic legalistic elements. From peakfunction   to symfunction creep , then into symfunction strain , onto symfunction trap , and into painful dysfunction . Slipping from peakfunction into symfunction creep From a norm of checking our emotional overreactions, that can lead to inappropriate behaviors, to normalizing the disparaging of intense emotions as automatically dangerously irrational.   Slipping from symfunction creep into symfunction strain From a norm of disparaging intense emotions as dangerously irrational to normalizing the attitude that all intense emotions are dangerously irrational and must be rationally suppressed, increasingly leading to guarding own emotions from other’s reasoning.   Slipping from symfunction strain into symfunction trap From normalizing the attitude that all intense emotions are dangerously irrational and must be rationally suppressed to defensively hiding one’s own emotions behind “reasoned arguments” that easily blind us from our vulnerable needs.   Slipping from symfunction trap into temporal dysfunction From a norm of remaining ignorant of our own emotionally fueled needs with “reasoned arguments” to a norm of repressing emotions to the point of overlooking the underlying needs, which increases the likelihood of more intense emotions as those needs scream with emotional pain for prompt relief.   TLDR From a norm of keeping our emotions in check to routinely denying our emotions to the point of neglecting the underlying needs, which ensures our “irrational emotions” shall persist.   Need-response can restore your wellness with vulnerable honesty . Need-response incentivizes us to let go of our rational arguments long enough to drop our guard to expose our indefensible and inflexible needs. We nurture trustworthiness to courageously reveal our vulnerabilities.   There is less reason to DEBATE when you can vulnerably RELATE . When we first address what both realize cannot be changed—our inflexible needs—we put ourselves in a better position to address areas that can be changed. We reward honestly admitting how our flexible response to our needs can unintentionally hinder others from resolving their own inflexible needs.   Emphasis on rational arguments easily discourages humble admissions. We make it safe to expose our imperfections when shifting from rationality to safer vulnerability. We honor the knowledge of our internal needs over knowledge of merely external things. That stuff is important, but never as important as the needs requiring to be resolve so you can function well enough to contemplate on those external things.   Hiding your vulnerabilities behind reasoned arguments often becomes counterproductive. The more you rely on rationalizations to avoid your vulnerabilities, the less likely you can fully resolve those affected needs. Especially if kept hidden from everyone. The less your needs resolve, the more intense the resulting emotions. Which you likely seek to cover with more motivated reasoning  as you keep your guard raised to avoid feeling hurt.   Need-response cultivates an environment to safely drop your guard to each other. To cultivate the vulnerability to be better known and appreciated by each other. Instead of constantly trying to prove something to others, you welcome knowing each other as you truly are.   You can then recognize we each are doing the best we can with the challenges facing us. You help each other to make it easier to honestly face our own needs, and our imperfect responses to them. You appreciate rational arguments as a tool, and never as a panacea to guard your vulnerabilities.   Need-response cultivates each other’s vulnerability orientation  from ignoble self-protective rationalizing to noble self-disclosed needs  that posits inflexible needs over flexible reasoning that often avoids the vulnerability of inexplicable and inflexible needs. In short, we proactively transition from hyperrationality to vulnerable honesty . “To understand people, I must try to hear what they are not saying, what they perhaps will never be able to say.” - John Powell, Why Am I Afraid to Tell You Who I Am? 3. Slipping from vagueness to overgeneralizing This starts with something good. The law tends to be vague to apply to various situations. Laws remain flexible to apply to a wide array of situations.   Too vague , and we slip into overgeneralizing that overlooks relevant specifics of our affected needs. That easily slides into toxic legalism . Taken to extremes, this actually undermines the intended flexibility of the law’s vagueness.   Toxic legalism persuades you avoid any details that risk rejection. Coalitions stick around widely agreed upon generalizations. You also might prefer to avoid uncomfortable specifics. You perhaps generalize for relief from pain. This affects your relational orientation  (RO). Anankelogy recognizes how everyone has a relatively fixed approach to relating to the world around them. You either generalize about those things that matter little to you or your needs. And you tend to seek specifics to address the details of your life.   You enjoy more wellness the more you engage the relevant nuance affecting your life. And the more you engage such specifics in the lives of others, the trust you engender. Let every generalization serve as a temporary pit stop on your way to delving into it a little deeper. Unresolved needs can pull you into overgeneralizing . To understand how so many of us can slip into overgeneralizing  can be explained by the phenomenon of symfunction capture . It pulls us from the benign purpose of law into its toxic legalistic elements. From peakfunction   to symfunction creep , then into symfunction strain , onto symfunction trap , and into painful dysfunction . Slipping from peakfunction into symfunction creep From a norm of leaving written rules vague enough to apply to various situations to a norm of overlooking relevant specifics not addressed by laws.   Slipping from symfunction creep into symfunction strain From a norm of overlooking relevant specifics to an emerging norm of evading specifics that may risk disagreement from others whose support is counted on.   Slipping from symfunction strain into symfunction trap From the norm of avoiding potentially controversial specifics to a norm of neglecting the reality of relevant specifics, trusting generalizations to offer reliable answers for all.   Slipping from symfunction trap into temporal dysfunction From a norm of sidestepping specifics to latch onto comforting generalizations to blindly trusting one’s generalizations to somehow effectively lead to satisfying results.   TLDR From a norm of keeping rules vague for wide applicability to the norm of overgeneralizing to the point of neglecting relevant specifics, which keeps needs from being fully resolved. Need-response can restore your wellness with relevant nuance . Need-response encourages us to utilize our trusted generalizations as mere stepping stones. Behind everything we learn, we can always dig a little deeper. Anything we learn can serve as a bridge to explore the finer details affecting our many complicated needs.   We graciously invite better awareness of our needs. No more hiding behind sweet sounding generalizations that offers more comfort than sustainable solutions. Too much hyperbole and exaggerations easily pull us away from resolving needs, which easily traps us in pain.   First, we distinguish between needs we cannot change and our responses that can be changed. We cannot solve our problems by provoking other’s defenses when triggered to guard their inflexible needs with our rational sounding generalizations. We melt defensiveness when explore missed specifics behind their needs. Which models how they can be more specific about our exposed needs.   We let go of generalizations that no longer serve. We replace oversimplifying rationalities with relevant nuance. We get down the nitty gritty of what each other specifically needs. And explore the details of how to address those needs with minimal negative impacts on others (i.e., externalities).   Need-response cultivates each other’s relational orientation  from ignoble exaggerations  to nobly addressing specifics  to address what often gets overlooked. In short, we proactively transition from overgeneralizing to relevant nuance . 4. Slipping from impartiality to alienating avoidance This starts with something good. The law  tends to be impersonal to avoid favoritism. Laws are best kept impartial, to treat all equally.   Too impersonal , and we slip in avoidance of the natural discomfort of our bodies warning us of real threats. That easily devolves into toxic legalism . Taken to extremes, this actually undermines impartiality.   Toxic legalism has you avoiding discomfort and avoiding others, to the point of remaining painfully alienated. You slip into isolation to avoid having to deal with others. Until you find your seclusion painfully lonely. This impacts your easement orientation (EO). Anankelogy recognizes how everyone has a relatively fixed approach to discomfort. You either habitually avoid just about every level of pain. Or you routinely endure life’s natural discomforts.   You only experience pain when your body reports some threat to remove. The more you embrace this discomfort, the more aware of those threats and what to do about them. Let such discomfort embrace serve you well. Unresolved needs can pull you into alienating avoidance . To understand how so many of us can slip into alienating avoidance  can be explained by the phenomenon of symfunction capture . It pulls us from the benign purpose of law into its toxic legalistic elements. From peakfunction   to symfunction creep , then into symfunction strain , onto symfunction trap , and into painful dysfunction . Slipping from peakfunction into symfunction creep From a norm of striving for impartiality by keeping enforcement as impersonal as possible to a norm of keeping “professionally” yet coldly distant from those targeted for enforcement.   Slipping from symfunction creep into symfunction strain From a norm of keeping coldly distant from those targeted for enforcement to a norm of formalized estrangement toward those affected by enforced social norms.   Slipping from symfunction strain into symfunction trap From a norm of remaining alienated toward those affected by enforced norms to objectifying those targeted for enforcement while avoiding their actual experiences.   Slipping from symfunction trap into temporal dysfunction From a norm of objectifying those targeted for enforcement that avoids their actual experiences to normalizing the avoidance of uncomfortable awareness of negatively impacted painful needs.   TLDR From a norm of trying to stay impartial to norm enforcers standardizing avoidance of the underlying needs, and of any pain resulting when those needs are kept from being fully resolved. Need-response can restore your wellness with discomfort embrace . Need-response seeks to inspire our neglected capacity for greater resilience and audacious engagement of each other. Instead of dodging what’s unpleasant about ourselves or each other, we stretch our resilience.   Anankelogy recognizes how you only experience pain when your body warns you of a threat to be removed. Pain is not the problem as much as the threat your pain exists to report . Instead of settling for pain relief that never completely goes away (because the need persists to prompt more pain), need-response helps you remove pain by helping each other to remove threats.   The more you address the needs you affect in others, the easier for others to address your needs that they affect. You cultivate an affinity for each other’s welfare. You nurture trustworthiness, to express and engage each other’s vulnerable needs. You ultimately replace alienating avoidance with mutual resilient engagement of each other’s affected needs.   Need-response nurtures each other’s easement orientation  from ignoble pain relief  to noble pain removal  by resolving the needs prompting pain. In short, we proactively transition from alienating discomfort avoidance to engaging   discomfort embrace . 5. Slipping from punitive enforcement  to adversarialism This starts with something good. The law opposes lawbreakers to ensure respect for others. Facing social sanctions for disrespecting others proves a powerful motivator.   Too adversarial , and we slip in mutual hostilities and defensiveness that shuts down needful cooperation. That easily shrinks into toxic legalism and fuels problematic oppo culture . Taken to extremes, this actually undermines critical opposition to questionable actions or ideas.   Toxic legalism normalizes premature opposition to others. Slight disagreements expand into mutual hostilities. Common ground gets overlooked to indulge in side-taking . You oppose another’s needs who oppose yours, locking you into mutual adversarialism. This shapes your conflict orientation (CO). Anankelogy recognizes how everyone has a relatively fixed approach to conflicts. You either get defensive and close down or remain open to learn what each other needs. You either let yourself get pulled into the darkness of mutual defensiveness, or hold out for the light of mutual understanding.   You will reach more your life’s rich potential the more you favor mutuality over adversarialism. Fight to properly resolve needs, not fight each other. Challenge what others do, but never oppose the inflexible needs of others. Or they will oppose your needs which you can never change. Unresolved needs can pull you into hostile adversarialism . To understand how so many of us can slip into adversarialism  can be explained by the phenomenon of symfunction capture . It pulls us from the benign purpose of law into its toxic legalistic elements. From peakfunction   to symfunction creep , then into symfunction strain , onto symfunction trap , and into painful dysfunction . Slipping from peakfunction into symfunction creep From a norm of incentivizing compliance to social standards to a norm of assuming violations of norms call for some kind of punishing coercion, even if some benign social faux pas.   Slipping from symfunction creep into symfunction strain From a norm of assuming violations of norms should prompt some kind of punishing coercion to a norm of assuming each of us are selfish actors kept in check only by external authorities.   Slipping from symfunction strain into symfunction trap From the norm of assuming each of us are selfish actors kept in check only by external authorities to a norm of pitting “selfish actors” against each other in some adjudication process by “impartial” authorities largely biased against the accused.   Slipping from symfunction trap into temporal dysfunction From a norm of pitting violators of social norms against each other in an adjudication process to a norm of institutionalized adversarialism that systemically discounts our potential for mutual understanding or cooperation, which regularly impedes opportunity to mutually support and resolve each other’s affected needs.   TLDR From a norm of motivating compliance with threats of punishing rule violators to a norm of widespread adversarialism that leaves little if any room for mutual understanding or support, which effectively normalizes unresolved needs. This positions enforcement regimes as the only means to address the resulting problems of unresolved needs, which benefits from keeping needs from being fully resolved. Need-response can restore your wellness with supportive mutuality . Need-response incentivizes all sides to a conflict to engage each other’s affected needs with a simple format: A ) A ffirm each other’s objectively existing needs ; B ) B ring up how the other ostensibly affects own inflexible needs; and C ) C ontinue to mutually understand and support each other’s good faith attempts to properly address those mutually conveyed needs.   Instead of indulging in taking a side  against each other’s outwardly stated stance on some issue, we invite them to express their inwardly inflexible needs. We distinguish between inflexible needs and our flexible responses to them. We mutually affirm each other’s indisputable needs before questioning impactful responses to them.   We cultivate mutual understanding by graciously expressing how one’s own views and behaviors affect those needs. We only oppose those who refuse to engage each other’s inflexible needs in good faith, not those who cannot change what they inflexibly need to suit what we ourselves flexibly prefer.   We shift from mutual defensiveness to mutual openness and understanding, and then from mutual hostilities to mutual support. We shift from indulgent side-taking , which favors relieving pain over resolving needs , to the discipline of knowing and respecting each other’s inflexible needs.   Need-response cultivates each other’s conflict orientation  from ignoble adversarialism  to noble mutuality . In short, we proactively transition from antagonism and hate to mutuality and love . Law-based institutions compound toxic legalism Sociology has long recognized how every institution and authority tends to drift from its founding purpose to serve a public need to serving itself  to ensure its own continuance. Beyond these five key elements, other factors emerge that pull authorities from serving the law's original purpose—to address our needs—to serving mostly themselves. Reification of "power". When we speak of those in power or having power, then believe they literally have actual power over us, we slip further into toxic legalism. They have significant social influence that we label as "power". Without the real power of nature compelling our needs, they have no social influence. Power isn't power unless it resolves needs . Otherwise, it is only coercive force that pulls into toxic legalism. Reification of "self-interest" . Modern philosophy and economics emphasize how we function largely from pursuing our self-interests in a system largely complementing each other's self-interests. When watered down into a palatable " popgen version ", many rationalize their selfishness and even their self-righteousness. These easily harden into hyper-individualism  that politically excuses our lapse into toxic legalism. "No one above the law" myth . Teddy Roosevelt rightly asserted that no one's impactful actions sit outside the reach of the law. That doesn't mean the law itself is literally above your existence, or above your inflexible needs. While no one sits above the law, no law sits above the needs it exists to serve . The inflexible needs evolved first; laws flexibly arrived later as social constructions. To forgo what you need to suit some demanding authority robs you of wellness, fueling another form of toxic legalism. More of these toxic elements exist that compromise our wellness in the name of the law. For now, consider how the five key elements emerge in the adversarial justice system. Hyper-individual : When confronted by law enforcement, externalities get patently ignored. Hyperrational : Authority patently ignores your vulnerably felt needs. Overgeneralizing : Adjudication easily neglects the many specifics involved in a situation. Avoidant : Adjudication offers relief for the winning side, not a path toward removing pain. Adversarialist : You are pitted against another, with little if any effort to identify or address the needs on all sides.   Now consider the makeup of polarizing politics. Hyper-individual : Politics reduces you to an atomized rational decisionmaker, blaming you for poor ballot options. Hyperrational : You’re supposed to rationally find answers, rationalizing unresponsiveness. Overgeneralizing : Coalitions rely on avoiding specifics that could evoke disagreement. Avoidant : Politics tend to keep you alienated from each other, to avoid relating with each other on a more personal level. Adversarialist : You are pitted against another, with little if any effort to identify or address the needs on all sides. The more judicial and political authorities benefit from these toxic elements, the less they are aware of its cost to our wellness. Ironically, the more you submit to toxic legalism, the less well enough you will be to faithfully comply with every legal requirement. Authorities then position themselves as the solution, despite fueling the problem. Love over law Need-response calls out this conflict of interest as a form of empirical evil . It is measurable, independent of personal biases or religious beliefs. Need-response then offers to replace it with empirical uprightness . Need-response helps you to measurably improve wellness by directly addressing the needs that laws exist to serve. After all, you don't exist for human authority; such authority exists for you . Need-response counters all of these elements, with the refunctions listed above. And by prioritizing inflexible needs over flexible laws, with what it calls citationization or " law-fit ". Which calls for citing the needs to be served by any cited social norm. Need-response raises the standard with universal principles, or “ character refunctions ” including love . Moreover, need-response raises the standard from the law’s harm reduction norm to loving one another —to properly honoring the needs of others as you would have them honor your own. Which can more easily result in more resolved needs, less pain to suffer, and greater overall wellness . Your responsiveness to toxic legalism Your turn. Does this speak to you? Share your thoughts about this in the forum. Check our Engaging Forum to FOLLOW discussions on this post and others. JOIN us as a site member to interact with others and to create your own forum comments. Explore similar content by clicking on the tags below. Find similar content under this applied anankelogy category. Share this content with others on social media. Share the link to share the love. Check out recent posts of interest to you. Add a rating to let others know how much of a good read this was for you. Write a comment to give others an independent perspective on this content. Recommend this on Facebook. Introduce anankelogy to your social media contacts. Lastly, support us in building this new love-nurturing alternative to our hate-enabling institutions. You can help us spread some love. back-to-top

Problems persist when expecting reality to fit into our convenient binary categories. Take the sick-well binary. Or the right-wrong binary. Or the politically left-right binary. Until we honestly acknowledge the continuum that naturally exists beyond these oversimplifying categories, we will continue to suffer pain, trouble and problems. Anankelogy provides you the nuance overlooked by our many failing institutions. Which do you think is more likely? You are either well or sick with little room in between. OR Wellness is a matter of degree between full wellness and full illness. Functionality array overview Peakfunctionality - prioritizing resolving needs Symfunctionality - prioritizing easing needs Dysfunctionality - prioritizing relieving pain Misfunctionality - prioritizing survival Functionality array nuance Peakfunction spectrum Symfunction spectrum Dysfunction spectrum Misfunction spectrum Moving from one functional level to another Functionality array overview Every need you experience only exists so you can function in life. Apart from functioning, there are no needs. The less your needs resolve, the less you can function and the more pain you will suffer. The more your needs resolve, the better you can function and reach more of your potential. Your nuanced needs could care less about those convenient categories and labels heavily trusted by medical professionals. Psychiatry traditionally relied on the medical model . It categorizes you as either sick or not sick. Its disease model threshold between sickness and wellness gets easily muddied. Letting these conventional categories reify , into something we take literally, can ironically contribute to our sickness. If what we need to effectively address dysfunctions like addiction remains overlooked by our conventional categories, then let's replace our black-and-white thinking with something that better appreciates the gradient nature of reality. Anankelogy recognizes a range between full wellness and a lack of wellness. It sees wellness as a level of your ability to function. The more you can function, the more well you are. The less you can function, then the less well you are. Or the sicker you become. Anankelogy identifies four key levels of your ability to function. This illuminates the overlap between full wellness and slipping into a lack of wellness. With this functionality array , anankelogy recognizes four dominant levels of your ability to function in life. Each presents a distinctly different priority. Peakfunctionality - prioritizing the full resolution of needs to fully function. Symfunctionality - prioritizing easing needs with help from others. Dysfunctionality - prioritizing relieving pain from unresolved needs. Misfunctionality - prioritizing survival while overwhelmed with pain. 1. Peakfunctionality You prioritize resolving needs. Your needs fully resolve so you can fully function. You embrace the sharp pain of each alerted need, then that pain fades promptly as such needs fully resolve. This touches on peak experiences and a flow state , and speaks to concepts like wu wei and samādhi . You function at your best, or even better as you stretch your expanding capacities. You reach more and more of your full potential. You thrive. You function in life by sustaining equilibrium. Any causes of pain or desire get promptly answered. Any threats are promptly removed. Depletions get promptly replenished. You can freely focus. All your present needs fully resolve. No pain or desire persists long to distract you. Your mind sits at-rest . You react where appropriate, to promptly resolve needs in routine incidents. You respond properly in novel situations unfamiliar to you, to reflect and learn how best to respect all needs. You quickly recognize what you need to resolve each need. You do not get stuck on oversimplified options. You intuitively resolve needs with the right resources and move on. You function at your peak capacity. For example: Your physical wellbeing . You maintain good eating and exercise habits. You eat to live instead of living to eat. You keep fit. You take good care of your body. You promptly address any ailments. You guard your health from intolerable risks. Your social wellbeing . You feel deeply connected to at least one other person, who knows almost all of your secrets and still loves you. You enjoy knowing that you provide deep meaning for them. You can trust them to support you through any crisis. Your vocational wellbeing . You love what you do and get paid well to do it. Your career provides rich meaning to your purposeful existence. Instead of exhausting you, your work energizes you. You look forward to serving others through your vocation. 2. Symfunctionality You prioritize easing needs. Your needs partially resolve so you can adequately function. You endure the dull pain of your partially resolved needs, which alert you of this ongoing threat to your ability to fully function. This touches on group conformity, herd behavior, and herd mentality. You function at the level your group enables you to function. Your life settles close to equilibrium. Your daily causes of pain or desire are eventually answered. Any threats get slowly removed. Depletions are gradually replenished. You can adequately focus. Some or all your needs do not completely resolve. A minimal level of pain or desire may distract you, but not much. Your mind remains aware . You react to situations the way you learned from others. You respond as others model a response. You usually take your cues from what is socially acceptable. You rely on others to help ease your needs. You risk getting drawn into over­simplified options. At times, you settle for less-than-ideal resources to address your needs. You make it work. You function at a practical level in accordance with others. For example: Your physical wellbeing . You eat what you find reliably accessible. You exercise when you can. You gain some weight and work it off. You easily find whatever weight you lose. You rely increasingly on meds. You’re generally doing okay. Your social wellbeing . You get along with others quite well. You trust your friends accept most things about you. Some secrets you hold as unsafe to share. You rely more on social norms than personal encounters to inform how to respect others. Your vocational wellbeing . You are generally successful on your job. You do what’s expected most of the time. You get along with your coworkers. Your boss can always count on you. You may not love your job but you do value the steady income. 3. Dysfunctionality You prioritize relieving pain. Your needs hardly resolve so you can barely function. You repeatedly suffer the pain of your unresolved needs, since your emotions persist in warning you of threats to your ability to fully or even adequately function. This fits closely to the sociological construct of dysfunction. You cannot fully function if too many of your essential needs remain unresolved. Your life falls into a rut of constant disequilibrium. Threats overwhelm you. Cravings consume you. Pain builds up to intolerable levels. You increasingly feel emotionally paralyzed. You cannot freely focus. Too many disruptions. Too many of your needs remain unresolved. Mounting pain distracts you. You obsess how to escape all this pain. Your mind remains vigilantly alert . You easily overreact. You find it practically impossible to reflectively respond where appropriate. Not while you remain buried in so much pain. You constantly seek what can relieve your pain. Concrete black-and-white thinking becomes your norm. You easily get stuck on oversimplified options. You likely accept any alternative resource, to ease your pain. You function at a significantly diminished level. For example: Your physical wellbeing . You tend to overeat and indulge in a lot of junk food. You likely drink a lot of alcohol. You’ve got more important concerns than whether you’re in shape or not. You look forward to getting high to cope with life’s pain. Your social wellbeing . You get easily angry at others. You seek out friends and family who tolerate your emotional ups and downs. You gravitate toward those also in much pain and like getting high all the time. You generally take more than you give. Your vocational wellbeing . You struggle to find and hold down a job. You hustle to get what you can. Maybe you sell drugs or something you know desired by the kind of company you seek. You’re classified as disabled, and rely on public assistance. 4. Misfunctionality You prioritize survival. Your needs rarely resolve enough for you to function at all. Your emotions warn you that your basic needs remain so unresolved as to severely threaten even your minimal capacity to function in life. This equates closely to pathology, but without the reductive medical model that presumes your problems are primarily internal. Basically, you enter a threshold where you, or part of you, cannot function at all. Your life falls out of balance, where you risk being stuck imbalanced. You may even grow numb to much of your pain. Short of resolving some needs, you cannot escape the overwhelming pain. You reduce it the best you can. You can barely focus. You obsess in survival mode. You feel at risk of permanent and severe damage, even death. Your mind goes into high alarm . You react instantly when triggered. You must. Survival leaves you little if any room for any reflective responses. You must wait for others to respect your intense needs before you can give any sustainable thought to theirs. You feel helpless, and you likely are. Urgency overwhelms you. Any saving option will do. Perhaps even violence. Anything to get you out of this hellhole. If you haven’t already given up hope. You barely can function at all. For example: Your physical wellbeing . You slip into poor eating and drinking habits. You eat and drink mostly to cope with your overwhelming pain. You have no room to even think about your physical health. Especially if you think about ending your life. Your social wellbeing . You likely don’t have any meaningful friends. The closest thing to a reliable friend is a professional counselor. If emotionally volatile, you probably lost connection with most or all of your family and friends. Your vocational wellbeing . You most likely have no job, no career, no vision for your immediate future. Your only job is how you will be able to manage day by day, or hour by hour, or minute by minute. Your number one job is to somehow survive. Functional array nuance We can take this gradient perspective a step further. Each level can be subdivided into its highest, middle and lowest version of itself. Peakfunction spectrum Prioritizing the resolution of needs can mean your own or out of love the prioritizing of other's needs to be resolved. Apex peakfunctionality The top functionality level possible, when promptly resolving needs to optimize life in ways that also maximize other’s ability to resolve their needs, enabling them to also live optimally. Enabling others to more fully function tends to bring returns to your ability to more fully function. Let’s call this love . Mid peakfunctionality A high functionality level when promptly resolving needs to optimize own life in ways that potentially has a positive impact upon the needs of others. Assisting others to function can cultivate some returns to your ability to function. Least peakfunctionality A high functionality level when promptly resolving needs to optimize own life in ways not negatively impacting the needs of others. If slipping into isolation, and rarely contributing to another's ability to function, you risk sliding into the impersonal dependency of symfunctionality . Symfunction spectrum Prioritizing to ease needs with others can have different results. The highest result could fall under "wellness" but not so much the lowest symfunctionality level. Threshold symfunctionality The top functionality level when actions done humanly together contribute to easing human needs without hindering other human needs. For example, driving on the right side of the road in the U.S. Mid symfunctionality A pragmatic functionality level when arbitrary actions done humanly together contribute to easing human needs with some hindrance to other human needs. For example, a terse manager ordering staff to serve a customer.​ Worst symfunctionality A minimal functionality level where arbitrary actions done humanly together contribute to easing human needs mostly by stalling resolution of such needs. For example, structural problems. This can become a gateway to dysfunctionality . Applied anankelogy breaks these down into three stages of "symfunction capture" . Symfunction creep : when you drift into only partially resolving your needs. Symfunction strain : when you feel a mounting strain of needs not fully resolved. Symfunction trap : when getting stuck in the mediocrity of partially eased needs. Dysfunction spectrum Prioritizing pain relief could have little to no impact on others nearby, or could have major impacts on others. Threshold dysfunctionality A moderately painfilled functionality level when you start prioritizing relief of unresolved needs in ways that actually limit resolution of such needs. For example, a steady junk food diet. Mid dysfunctionality A significantly painfilled functionality level when you prioritize relieving your pain from unresolved needs with minimal or no negative impact on the needs of others. For example, binge eating junk food. Worst dysfunctionality A severely painfilled functionality level when you prioritize pain relief over resolving anyone’s needs, resulting in significant negative impacts on the needs of others. For example, alcoholism. Misfunction spectrum Prioritizing survival may come with minimal impacts on others, or risk hurting others in some significantly damaging ways. Threshold misfunctionality When unresolved needs result in temporary damage of oneself, with likely negative impacts on others. For example, trauma. Mid misfunctionality When unresolved needs result in long-term or perma­nent damage, lowering ability to function. For example, CPTSD. Worst misfunctionality When unresolved needs result in imminent or imme­diate death, termination of all functioning. For example, suicide ideation. Moving from one functional level to another Sometimes you grow sicker. Other times you get better. Sometimes you cry in pain. Other times you grin with joy. Sometimes you can hardly get out of bed. Other times you find your second wind to perform some amazing feats. Anankelogy provides a window for you to better understand these functional changes you're experiencing. Just when you learned some new terminology, get ready for some more. Anankelogy offers a fresh new understanding largely by labeling what often gets overlooked. Defunctioning is what anankelogy labels when slipping down to a lower functioning level. Refunctioning is what anankelogy labels when rising up to a higher functioning level. Dynamism is the primary word for refunctioning upward, to restore yourself to wellness. Defunctioning depends on which level you slide down to: drift , deviate , or depart . This chart can help explain it best. Dynamism to sustain fuller functioning A cognitive lens for prioritizing the resolution of needs for optimal functioning. This utilizes testable hypotheses of relational knowing . Dynamism seeks better questions to test to replace outmoded assumptions. It embraces ambiguity, welcomes juxtapositions, sees life rich with meaningful paradoxes, remains suspicious of certainty, integrates relevant nuances, embraces life's natural discomforts while experiencing needs, and keeps open a path to fully resolve needs. Dynamism is a key ‘how’ for refunctioning . Peakfunctionality You function at your peak potential, as your fully resolved needs sit at-rest . When peakfunctional , you prioritize resolving needs. Drift from peakfunctionality into symfunctionality A cognitive bias of prioritizing the easing of unresolved needs. The more you compromise for the group, moving toward symfunctional cooperation, the more your unresolved needs compel you to see primarily or only what your unmet needs require you to see. Drift is the initial threshold of defunc­tioning . Symfunctionality You function suitably with others, as your partially resolved needs remain aware . When symfunctional , you prioritize easing needs. Deviation from symfunctionality into dysfunctionality A cognitive distortion for prioritizing relief from grinding pain. The longer your unresolved needs keep you locked in pain, the more you must see what can promise you relief from your mounting pain—even if not quite accurate. Deviation is a more significant form of defunctioning . Dysfunctionality You function painfully, as your chronically unresolved needs shout in alert . When dysfunctional , you prioritize relieving pain. ​ Departure from dysfunctionality into misfunctionality A cognitive delusion for prioritizing survival amidst severe damage. The further you sink into survival mode, the more your mind invents possibilities for you to escape painful damage, and to somehow avoid the likelihood of your imminent demise. Departure is the most severe form of defunctioning . Misfunctionality You barely function, as your persistently unmet needs scream continually at alarm . When misfunctional , you prioritize survival . This chart lays out functionality in largely academic anankelogy terms. Later posts aim to illustrate, in more accessible anankelogy language, how you could stray from optimal peakfunctionality into symfunction and onto dysfunction and ultimately misfunction . And the risk stems less from you making poor personal choices, and more from the creeping normality of our many societal imperfections. Your responsiveness to these levels of your functionality Your turn. Consider one or more of these options to respond to this need-responsive content. Check our Engaging Forum to FOLLOW discussions on this post and others. JOIN us as a site member to interact with others and to create your own forum comments. Explore similar content by clicking on the tags below. Find similar content under this anankelogy category. Share this content with others on social media. Share the link to share the love. Check out recent posts of interest to you. Add a rating below to let others know how much of a good read this was for you. Write a comment below to give others an independent perspective on this content. Recommend this on Facebook. Introduce anankelogy to your social media contacts. Lastly, support us in building this new love-nurturing alternative to our hate-enabling institutions. You can help us spread some love. back-to-top

Use this spreadsheet tool to practice for an initial HR job interview. Work at your own pace. It provides twelve of the most common interview questions. The second page provides you with instructions for utilizing this interactive tool. Each question comes with insight into what the interviewer likely seeks with each question. Click the arrow at the left to see that item's insight and tip into that interview item. 1. Tell me about yourself. Key insight into this question Your self-introduction serves as an icebreaker. It's also a good opportunity to create a strong first impression that you really are the best fit for what they seek. What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question The interviewer gets to see if your personality is a good fit for the role, for the team, and for the company. The interviewer typically determines in the first 90 seconds if you will be a good candidate to forward onto the next step in the process. 2. What is your greatest strength? Key insight into this question What soft skill implied in the job description can you demonsrate in an example? That just became your greatest strength to qualify for this job. What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question Are they asking for only one or for several strengths? Typically just one. Look for a soft skill that exemplifies what the job description requires. Then give a brief example of you expressing that soft skill as applied to the job description qualification. 3. What is your greatest weakness? Key insight into this question This question is asking you to humbly be honest and admit to something you are still improving. Quickly state the shortcoming then focus more on your progress in this area. What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question The interviewer assumes that we all have many imperfections, but choose the one that can demonstrate how you are actively improving yourself. This can demonstrate your problem-solving and other skills. Just be sure not to pick something critical to the job description. 4. What do you know about our company? Key insight into this question The less you know about their product and services, the less reason they have to hire you. Find out as much as you can beforehand. What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question They will not be impressed if citing only the basic facts about them. Tell not only what you know but what you like about them. Do you use any of their offerings? Do you love what they are about? Let your passion for them shine through. 5. Where do you see yourself in 3 to 5 years? Key insight into this question This looks at how strong and clear is your vision for your career. The better your career vision, the more likely you will be a good fit for this team. What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question Avoid overpromising them your commitment to a future no one can know. Of course, you don't want to say you expect to be working elsewhere in five years, or starting your own business, even if that is likely. Assure them they are central to your current career trajectory. 6. Tell me about your greatest career success. Key insight into this question Share something you have accomplished that the job description particularly seeks. Prioritize what is important to them over what you are most proud of achieving. What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question What is something in the job description you have achieved? Share it as a short story. What was the workplace challenge you met? How did you succeed in resolving it? How does it make you a perfect candidate for this position? 7. Tell me about a mistake you made at work and what you learned. Key insight into this question When you learn from your mistakes, you become a better team member. Like a healed bone getting stronger than before, show your strengths through recovering from a mistake. What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question The more you drop your guard and show you humanly make mistakes, you build more trust. The more valuable what you learn from the mistake, the better your fit for this new team. Remember to end your example on a positive note. 8. Tell me about a disagreement you had with a colleague and how you handled it. Key insight into this question This looks for your teamwork skills. Everyone has a different opinion sometime, so how do you contribute your unique perspective to the team? What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question This doesn't assume you argued with a coworker. Tell about how you get along with your teammates even when you have a different point of view. Hopefully you are not so "harmonious" that you never contribute your unique perspective. 9. How would your coworkers describe you? Key insight into this question This puts in the third person paraphrasing or quoting your teammates' views of you. It can sound less partial and not risk sounding like you're boasting. What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question TIP: Ask your current coworkers for feedback to your current work, then use it to answer this question. They never have to know you are seeking another job. You will sound more certain when quoting their actual words than trying to paraphrase what you think they might say. 10. Why should we hire you? Key insight into this question If you are equally qualified as all the other candidates, what sets you apart as the best pick? What can you offer the others likely cannot? What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question Think about what you offer that other candidates can unlikely offer. What particular experience or qualifications others are not likely to have. Emphasize these qualities with your passion for the opportunity to join this team, this company. You're almost there! 11. Tell me something we should know about you that we didn't think to ask. Key insight into this question Before the interview ends, the interviewer wants you to suggest anything they may have overlooked. Here is your opportunity to shine. What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question Standard HR questions could overlook something that makes you especially qualified for this job. HR recognizes it may miss this, so this is an open-ended question for you to share some unique story that can help them decide you are just right for the job. 12. Do you have any questions for me? Key insight into this question Good questions demonstrate how interested you are in the job. You never want to say you have no questions. Let the time run out on the questions you could ask. What the interviewer typically looks for in your answer to this question Prepare at least 3 to 4 questions to ask the interviewer to show your interest. If you only prepare one or two and they answer each in the course of the interview, you do not want to say you have no more questions. Go back to the top and select " Qs to ask interviewer " for some ideas. You then practice your answers in the provided space. Then rate the quality of your answer. First by relevance to the job description. Speak to their needs. Second by authenticity of your answer. Avoid embellishing. Third by how specific is your answer. Generalizations don't sell yourself. Select from the dropdown list to get feedback to the quality of your response. Best : Feedback to an excellent response to this question. Good : Feedback to an acceptable response to this question. Okay : Feedback to a minimal response to this question. Poor : Feedback to an unacceptable response to this question. See this unfold for question 4: Then it provides examples of different quality level response you select from a dropdown list. Best : What an excellent response would look like for that question. Good : What an acceptable response would look like for that question. Okay : What a minimal response would look like for that question. Poor : What an unacceptable response would look like for that question. See here all four example quality levels to a response to question 4: The tool also comes with many other useful tips. This tool features how to use the CAR method for answer behavioral interview questions. You likely are familiar with the STAR method: Situation, Task, Actions, Results. The CAR method keeps it simpler. Every story has a beginning ( C hallenge to set up the story), middle ( A ctions where you're the hero), and satisfying conclusion ( R esults you created). Your short stories can be more compelling when focusing on that middle part, instead of getting bogged down an unnecessary details in the beginning. See an example CAR story on page 6 for each of these 12 in-demand soft skills: leadership skills teamwork skills problem-solving skills customer service skills communication skills interpersonal skills emotional intelligence adaptability skills organizational skills creativity attention to detail work ethic I help my student-clients practice their CAR stories to demonstrate their potential value to the interviewer. The more you practice and finetune your CAR stories, the more you can emotionally impact the interviewer to trust you as the best candidate. You can practice with me in person if you have a Cambly account. I have served hundreds of interviewees on Cambly. Here are some of their testimonials, vouching for how this tool and its emphasis on using their CAR stories has helped them. Perhaps I can help you sell your qualifications to an employer of your choice. Download this tool and see for yourself how you can improve your job interviewing skills. When you cannot find someone to help you practice, this could be your next best thing.

Use the Professionally Responsive messaging tool to start speaking truth to power. Incentivize professionals to listen to those impacted. Cultivate the wellness of all. Replace failed legal options with these more responsive options. Let this guide help you optimize this unique new tool.

As a professional with countless responsibilities, you impact others vulnerable to you in subtle ways. You easily overlook negative impacts you have upon them.

Responsivism is the belief that responding to the needs of opponents or those in position of influential power can produce more favorable results than adversarial alternatives like political activism. Activists generally seek policy changes that are expected to compel legal compliance to their favored needs. Responsivism aims to respond to the needs of everyone. Replace adversarial activism with engaging responsivism. Which would likely produce the best results? Wait for activism to motivate the right changes to improve society. OR Respond better to each to each other's needs to improve society. 1. INTRODUCTION 2. RE SOLUTION 3. ADOPTION LIST OF RESPONSIVISM TOOLS PART 1: Introduction Need-response  answers the baked-in problems of toxic legalism  failing our institutions. Responsivism  allows you to practice this new profession in y our own terms.   We apply responsivism in a set of interactive tools you can use on an individual basis. These let you benefit from the new profession of need-response on a personalized level.   We currently provide each tool as an Excel spreadsheet, to market test this bold alternative. We can then convert these pilot versions into apps.   Responsivism can either complement or potentially replace legalistic activism. Let’s question how well activism delivers.   If activism is the answer, I have four questions for you. A.   Is activism really the answer? B.  How will any policy change honestly help? C.   Why do we have laws in the first place? D.  What if laws aren’t good enough? A. Is activism really the answer? You know the score. As pushback to their inflexible need for self-determination and more, Palestinian militants killed over a thousand Israelis last fall. No law currently exists to respect those needs.   Now tens of thousands of Gazans die at the hands of IDF soldiers, in the name of self-defense. Israelis’ inflexible need for self-determination compels them to push back. Is the activism on each side helping at all?   B. How will any policy change honestly help? Both sides insist they face an existential threat from the other side. Both sides exaggerate that threat for political gain. Neither side fully empathizes with the inflexible needs of the other. What about the law?   Activism aims to shape policy in one’s favor. That tends to provoke the defensiveness of the other side? Neither side reach their full potential. Both sides expend great energy trying to hold down the other side. Inn short, activism to shape laws is shortsighted.   Laws cannot compel each side in a conflict to see through the eyes of the other. We generally expect the international rules-based order  to mediate such conflicts. Increasingly, we find the “rule of law” taking a back seat to double standards and diplomatic hypocrisies.   Without the preeminence of law, we tend to slide deeper into a morally questionable abyss of might-makes-right. Without shared agreements for how to respect each other’s affected needs, we defer to wars to somehow sort it out.   C. Why do we have laws in the first place? Laws emerge to impersonally convey needs. They incentivize us to respect each other’s easily overlooked needs. “Do not steal” serves our need to freely access our own property. “Do not slander” serves our need to maintain an unspoiled public image.   We depend on law as a metaphor for our vulnerable needs. When I say, “It’s my free speech right to speak my mind,” I am really saying, “I need to express myself without government retaliation.” With the law on my side, I can skip the vulnerabilities of uncomfortably exposing my specific need.   Apart from the needs they exist to serve, we could care less about such laws. Without the need for accessing property, you could care less about laws prohibiting theft. Apart from the need to receive other’s respect, we scarcely care about prohibitions against slander.   When was the last time you said to someone, “Please don’t steal from me”? Or “I need you to not slander me”? Likely never. We defer to legal codes to convey those needs. But how is that working?   D. What if laws aren’t good enough? The further we creep from the law’s originating purpose to serve these needs, the further we collectively (and often individually) slip into poor wellness outcomes. Increasing rates of chronic anxiety and major depression suggest we need more than just our laws to address our negatively impacted needs.   The more we ossify the role of law over its original purpose to serve needs, the further we slip into what anankelogy identifies as “toxic legalism”. That refers to established norms and enforced standards that ostensibly serve us but actually harm us in measurable ways. We can find links between rising rates of chronic anxiety and severe depression with the failing reliability of laws to serve our vulnerable needs. There is no such thing as painful anxiety or debilitating depression apart from unresolved needs. The less responsive we are to each other’s needs, under color of law, the more of us slip into pain-coping addictions and entertain suicide. PART 2: Resolution Consider the alternative of responsivism for responding directly to the needs those laws fail to fully serve. Then consider how to complement or replace activism for restoring wellness. Consider these five reasons to prefer responsivism  over activism . Each starts with an originating purposes for law. Each looks at how we’ve drifted from this original need-responsive purpose. Each points to how responsivism can restore our crumbling wellness.   Activism sparks extremism; responsivism nurtures balance Activism hides behind rationality; responsivism engages deeper feelings   Activism evades reality; responsivism engages reality Activism perpetuates pain; responsivism removes pain Activism provokes mutual defensiveness; responsivism incentivizes mutual support 1. Activism sparks extremism; responsivism nurtures balance. Activism seeks to shape laws to compel personal responsibility for how we treat each other. How much responsibility should be individualized or collectivized defers to vacillating politics.   Responsivism recognizes how you resolve more needs the better you balance what you can do for yourself and letting others serve what you cannot provide for yourself.   Originating purpose . The law holds us personally accountable. We rely on written standards to check our selfish behaviors. Without laws, we risk ignoring how our behavior may negatively impact others.   Drift from wellness . Western society’s emphasis of individualism easily oversimplifies personal responsibility. Yes, we have personal moral agency to act in ways respectful to the needs of others. But personal moral agency depends heavily upon available options.   You drift from enjoy wellness when prioritizing the individual over the collective, or the collective over the individual. That always painfully restricts wellness. Wellness is psychosocial . You can only maintain wellness when balancing personal rights with social responsibilities. Drifting into hyper-individualism is a kind of ‘ symfunction capture ’. Anankelogy recognizes a zone between wellness and illness, called symfunction . It's where you function at a less-than-optimal level. And it serves as the gateway between full wellness of peakfunction and poor wellness of dysfunction , in three stages . Slowly shifting from the ideal of taking personal responsibility for one's own actions to objectifying individualism as a kind of panacea. Your reach your peakfunction  when you fully resolve those needs you can address on your own while also receiving support from others to fully resolve those needs requiring others input. You balance personal responsibility with the social responsiveness of others. Symfunction capture  emerges when you allow others to address needs you could address on your own, and when you must opt for alternatives when dependent on others who fail their social responsiveness to you in your moment of vulnerability. Symfunction creep  begins when you must settle for only partially resolving some of your needs, after settling for alternatives or when resigning to others paternalistic interference. Symfunction strain  mounts as more of your needs resign to partial resolution of such alternatives or paternalistic impedance. Symfunction trap  sets in as most of your needs remain not fully resolved after vacillating between what you can but do not do for yourself and putting up with other’s unresponsiveness to your vulnerable needs . Dysfunction  takes over as you must cope with the continual pain of mostly unresolved needs. More of your attention goes to coping with your mounting pain than trying to fully resolve your needs, which would remove the cause of your pain. This often includes vacillating wildly between self-care and insisting on others obeying the rules you depend upon to cope with your pain. To avoid losing any further control, you latch onto overgeneralizing that taking personal responsibility will get you through this. Which distorts the true meaning of logotherapy’s principle of taking responsibility for all of your own reactions. Restoring wellness . Need-response holds institutions and social entities as equally accountable as individuals. It incentivizes powerful groups to respond faithfully to the needs of vulnerable individuals they impact. It challenges the legitimacy of those who don’t. Anankelogy sees how we prioritize self-needs and social needs with our psychosocial orientation'. When sorting out if you or others should address a problem or need, you either habitually favor the imbalance of taking a side against the other option or you routinely favor balance of blending both internal and external means for resolving a need. You’re either oriented as imbalance-over-balance  or balance-over-imbalance .   The more you’re balance-over-imbalance oriented, the greater your wellness. And less dependent upon politicized laws.   The more you’re balance-over-imbalance oriented, the worse your wellness. And prone toward toxic legalism’s politicization and legalistic polarization. Need-response holds us all personally and socially accountable. Which can improve our wellness more than laws alone. 2. Activism hides behind rationality; responsivism engages deeper feelings. Activism puts impersonal laws over personal needs. Laws impersonally convey your needs. Emotions personally convey your needs. Your intensely irrational emotions react to your painfully unresolved needs, which reasoning can never contain.   Responsivism appreciates how you resolve more needs the more you can drop your guard and let others in to vulnerably relate to the inflexible needs behind each charged emotion.   Originating purpose . The law rationally keeps our emotions in check. We rely on laws to curb our irrational tendencies. Without reasoned standards, we risk emotionally exploiting others or provoking severe psychological or physical harm.   Drift from wellness . Increasingly, we irrationally apply laws to others in ways we refuse to have applied to ourselves. We can convince ourselves we are being reasoned and rational while denying we have any distorting biases. Drifting into hyperrationality is a kind of ‘ symfunction capture ’. Anankelogy recognizes a zone between wellness and illness, called symfunction . It's where you function at  a less-than-optimal level. And it serves as the gateway between full wellness of peakfunction  and poor wellness of dysfunction , in three stages . Slowly shifting from full engagement and honest self-disclosure to resolve needs fully to staying guarded with self-protective rationalizations that rarely help you to resolve needs fully. You reach your peakfunction  when you can fully be honest with at least one person, preferably more, who can help you resolve all of your needs. You grant them the freedom to illuminate your blind spots and point out your weak spots for improvement. You never feel you must guard your actions with concocted reasons to avoid scorn. Symfunction capture  emerges when you do not find anyone to reveal your deepest secrets or who will help you process your intense emotions, leaving you stuck unable to fully resolve your needs. Symfunction creep  begins the moment you partially ease some needs from limited awareness of what’s going on, and there is no one to ask to effectively tell you. Symfunction strain  occurs as more and more of your needs cannot fully resolve from a lack of social connections that could help you. You find explanations that help you feel better about it, or keeps unwanted criticism at bay. Symfunction trap  sets in as you rely more and more on rationalizations to fill the void of self-understanding. You drift from acting rationally toward others the more you pack your “reasoning” with confirmation bias . Motivated reasoning  then blinds you from how “rational” beliefs fail to serve the need-serving purpose of law. Dysfunction  grips you the more you believe in your own rationalizations. They offer necessary comfort to the mounting pain of your unresolved needs. You remain guarded, not letting anyone get too close, lest they dig up some dirt and hurt you even more. You defend your private world as you isolate your true self from others, and even from yourself. Restoring wellness . Need-response recognizes how your objective needs exist independent of your subjective experiences of them. Instead of trying to repress your emotional tendencies, as the role of law may do, it nurtures your emotionally charged reactions to be more responsive to needs. Anankelogy realizes how we interact with others with our ‘vulnerability orientation'. When vulnerably exposed to criticism, you either habitually raise your guard or you routinely stay open, even if it could hurt, to learn as much as possible to resolve the affected needs. You’re either oriented as rationalizing-over-revealing or revealing-over-rationalizing .   The more you’re revealing-over-rationalizing oriented, the greater your wellness. And less dependent upon impersonal rationalizing laws.   The more you’re rationalizing-over-revealing oriented, the worse your wellness. And prone toward toxic legalism’s rationalized social distancing. This could result from emotional wounds and trauma, reinforcing the false security of alienation. Need-response guides subjective experiences to serve objective needs. Which can improve our wellness more than laws alone. 3. Activism evades reality; responsivism engages reali ty. Activism builds on coalitions to appeal to as many as possible. This increases the risk of overgeneralizing, of skipping over relevant details, and overlooking your specific needs.   Responsivism understands how you resolve more needs the more thoroughly you process each relevant detail and process more of the nuance in situations impacting your life.   Originating purpose . Laws are kept vague to apply to various situations. We rely on laws to fit a vast array of social situations. We keep our laws intentionally short on specifics, lest too many details prevent their applicability wherever needed.   Drift from wellness . When legalism drifts off into excessive generalizing, it tends to overlook your specific needs. The less your specific needs can resolve, the more pain you will be in—as your body warns of this continuing threat to your ability to fully function The law’s focus on harm reduction often prioritizes comforting generalizations over necessary specifics. Legalism can suck you into a vicious cycle of endlessly pursuing pain-relief without ever getting to the cause of your pain: unresolved needs. Drifting into overgeneralizing is a kind of ‘ symfunction capture ’. Anankelogy recognizes a zone between wellness and illness, called symfunction . It's where you function at  a less-than-optimal level. And it serves as the gateway between full wellness of peakfunction  and poor wellness of dysfunction , in three stages . Slowly shifting from taking a broad scope for attracting widespread support to solidifying generalizations into accepted exaggerations taken as indisputable fact. You reach your peakfunction  when your generalizing is kept provisional, ready to update. When given fresh information, you quickly adjust your views to include it to keep yourself closer to this changing reality. The more details you engage, the more your needs resolve. Symfunction capture  emerges when not updating your generalizations. You then believe or act upon incomplete information. The more nuance you miss, the less you can fully resolve your needs. Symfunction creep  begins with “popular generalizing” accepting oversimplification. Or “ popgen ” for short, it speaks to the lay version of more critically developed ideas. It tends to be devoid of cumbersome details, to keep it palatable and easier to understand. You cannot fully resolve needs while overlooking relevant minutia. Symfunction strain  occurs when “ popgen versions ” displace original critical versions. The more you act upon these watered-down popgen versions, the less you can resolve your needs fully. You then feel a mounting strain of your needs warning you how they are not fully resolved. Symfunction trap  sets when “ relief-generalizing ”, trusting exaggerations to ease needs. You go from recognizing popgen versions as incomplete to trusting generalizations to provide some relief from the emotional pain, as fewer and fewer of your needs can completely resolve. Dysfunction then traps you with a familiarity bias of generalizing for relief, in ways that ensure your needs never fully resolve. The less your needs resolve while clinging to exaggerations, the more emotional pain persists to warn you of this threat to your limited functioning. You then rely on comforting generalizations, such as “You can’t trust anybody!” and “All pain is bad and must be avoided!” These easily trap you in more grinding pain of unresolved needs. Restoring wellness . Need-response identifies your specific needs and theirs. Only by bringing all affected needs to the table can there be enduring peace among you. It raises the higher standard of properly resolving needs by cutting through legalistic generalities with relevant specifics. Anankelogy appreciates how we each negotiate matters with our ‘relating orientation'. When navigating something complicated, you either habitually rely on reassuring generalizations or you routinely delve into the nuance of details to resolve the need as best as you can. You’re either oriented as general-over-specifics or specifics-over-general .   The more you’re specifics-over-general oriented, the greater your wellness. And less dependent upon vague laws.   The more you’re specifics-over-general oriented, the worse your wellness. And prone toward toxic legalism’s oversimplifications. Need-response replaces neglectful overgeneralizing with relevant nuance. Which can improve our wellness more than laws alone. 4. Activism perpetuates pain; responsivism removes pain. Activism typically settles for relieving the pain of unresolved needs. Your body then insists with some form or emotional or physical pain to warn you of the persisting threat to your wellbeing.   Responsivism sees how you resolve more needs the longer you endure the associated discomfort of processing a need, long enough to fully remove the threats causing you pain.   Originating purpose . Laws are impersonal to avoid favoritism. We rely on laws to treat everyone impartially. “No one is above the law.”  We cannot trust law enforcement if enforcing standards on us but not upon those they personally know.   Drift from wellness . When legalism drifts into a kind of depersonalizing avoidance, you rightly feel objectified. Lawyers, prosecutors and police tend to talk past you. They routinely avoid the most uncomfortable aspects of your situation. It’s not their problem, they could claim.   This cold distance can fuel suspicion on neither side. From this chasm of mutual alienation, both sides can easily suspect the other side will not respect their own vulnerable needs. So legalism tends to engender mutual defensiveness. Drifting into alienating avoidance is a kind of ‘ symfunction capture ’. Anankelogy recognizes a zone between wellness and illness, called symfunction . It's where you function at  a less-than-optimal level. And it serves as the gateway between full wellness of peakfunction  and poor wellness of dysfunction , in three stages . Slowly shifting from the ideal of remaining impartial to remaining alienated to avoid the uncomfortable side of addressing needs. You reach your peakfunction  when fully process every painful feeling so you can fully resolve every need. You embrace upfront the sharp pain of your warned needs so you can then remove its cause for pain and enjoy peace. Symfunction capture  emerges when having to bear the anguish of pain longer or more intensely than you feel you capably can. You slide from enduring all discomfort to resolve all needs to avoiding almost every discomfort that leaves your needs unresolved. Symfunction creep  typically begins when you cannot fully resolve those needs that depend on the cooperation of others. These unmet “ vulnerable need s ” persist to warn you with emotional pain that you cannot fully function. Symfunction strain  mounts as your emotional pain builds to warn you how fewer and fewer of your needs are fully resolving. Your pain warns how your capacity to function steadily declines, until something is done to resolve those needs. Symfunction trap  sets in as you shift from resolving any needs fully to accepting few if any of your needs can resolve fully enough, if at all, to remove its cause for pain. Dysfunction then traps you as emotional pain builds so intensely that you increasingly prioritize how to ease your pain over addressing the needs causing such pain. You sink deeper into a painful sense of powerlessness, and hopelessness. Restoring wellness . Need-response incentivizes all sides in a legal situation to engage each other more personally. Each side gets to know how they impact each other’s needs. In the process, each side can more meaningfully resolve their overlooked need for deeper social connections. Anankelogy recognizes how we each respond to pain with our ‘easement orientation'. When faced with something uncomfortable, you either habitually avoid that pain or you routinely embrace that pain and work through it to resolve the pain-provoking need to remove its cause for pain. You’re either oriented as relieve-over-resolve  or resolve-over-relieve .   The more you’re resolve-over-relieve oriented, the greater your wellness. And less dependent upon laws.   The more you’re relieve-over-resolve oriented, the worse your wellness. And prone toward toxic legalism for relief. Need-response replaces harmful avoidance with beneficial engagement. Which can improve our wellness more than laws alone. 5. Activism provokes mutual defensiveness; responsivism incentivizes mutual support. Activism takes sides against others, to the point of opposing their needs which they cannot change. Both sides incite each other’s defenses. Neither side empathizes much with the unbendable needs of the other.   Responsivism affirms how you resolve more needs the less you provoke other's defensiveness and instead incentivize their cooperation with mutual understanding and respect.   Originating purpose . Laws are punitive to incentivize compliance. We rely on laws to punish wrongdoers. Law enforcement serves as an arm of government with exclusive privilege of force. To compel our compliance to the rules of society.   Drift from wellness . When legalism drifts into self-serving hostilities toward each other, it strays from helping us resolve our affected needs. Such “adversarialism” goads us further into mutual defensiveness. Energies we could spend to resolve needs gets wasted on divisively opposing each other. The judicial system presumes they must mediate the threat we ostensibly present to each other. Little to no effort goes to identifying and solving each other’s affected needs. Law enforcement tends to serve as a hammer of force that treats us as a nail to pound into the pavement of the expected social order. Drifting into avoidant adversarialism is a kind of ‘ symfunction capture ’. Anankelogy recognizes a zone between wellness and illness, called symfunction . It's where you function at  a less-than-optimal level. And it serves as the gateway between full wellness of peakfunction  and poor wellness of dysfunction , in three stages . You reach your peakfunction  when fully sorting out your differences with others, so you can effectively respond to your own needs while not violating the needs of others. When you can no longer fully resolve all of your needs, you slip into the symfunction of partially resolving your needs, which begins to compromise your wellness. Symfunction capture  emerges when you overreact to others who must dig in their heals to guard what they cannot change. Those championing the rights of the unborn, for example, provoke the defenses of those requiring reproductive healthcare for a painful situation beyond their personal control. Those disregarding the unsung rights of the unborn provoke the defenses of those whose lives center around such sacred principles. Symfunction creep  begins as pressure to comply with laws or any other standard slips into coercion that denies intrinsic motivations for responsiveness. Symfunction strain  occurs as mounting frustration takes hold while you increasingly comply with any social norm that overlooks its impact on your vulnerable needs. Symfunction trap  sets in as mindless compliance to laws neglecting one’s needs gets normalized and enforced, forcing a decision between the two evils: getting into trouble for asserting one’s rights or sinking into despair when your needs can no longer fully resolve. Dysfunction  takes hold when you give up resolving your needs under the tyranny of authorities, who benefit more from their sanctioned coerciveness than from accountably enabling you to resolve your needs so you can fully restore your wellness. You then shift into prioritizing relief from the disturbing increase in your emotional and physical pain. Restoring wellness . Need-response incentivizes mutual understanding of each other’s inflexible needs. Instead of normalizing hostilities, it holds each other accountable to how we affect each other’s inflexible needs. It’s a win-win approach to mutually resolve needs on all sides. Anankelogy shows how we each deal with incited differences with our ‘conflict orientation'. When challenged to take a side, you either habitually stay guarded while you oppose the other side or you routinely stay open to learn what all sides require to resolve their affected needs, even if that’s uncomfortable for a while. You’re either oriented as guarded-over-open  or open-over-guarded .   The more you’re open-over-guarded oriented, the greater your wellness. And less inclined to indulge in comforting side-taking.   The more you’re guarded-over-open oriented, the worse your wellness. And prone toward toxic legalism’s punitive emphasis. Need-response replaces destructive adversarialism with mutual support. Which can improve our wellness more than laws alone. PART 3: Adoption Who is ready to try the untried? Who is willing to test the waters because they immediately need to solve a problem overlooked by legal systems? Who is able to reprioritize love? Better than law Let's admit we're stuck in a monkey trap Need-response holds us all to a higher standard of love Better than law While no one sits above the law, no law sits above the needs it exists to serve . We can change our laws to fit our needs. We cannot change our needs to fit our laws. Laws are flexible. Needs are not.   With these responsive tools, we can replace toxic legalism  in these five ways. We can replace its hyper-individualism with psychosocial balance to improve our wellness. We can replace its hyperrationality with safer vulnerability to improve our wellness. We can replace its overgeneralizing with relevant specifics to improve our wellness. We can replace its alienating avoidance with engagement to improve our wellness. We can replace its adversarialism with love-inspiring mutuality to improve our wellness .   We can do all these to resolve more of our overlooked needs with the new professional service of need-response , which is applied anankelogy. Need-response presents an alternative to escape the monkey trap of such toxic legalism .   No longer must we vainly hope that simply following better policies will somehow produce better results. No longer shall we remain blind to the oft-overlook fact that they don’t. No longer must we suffer threats simply because they’re permitted by law.   The bottom line is the wellness outcomes of all involved. Not money. Not prestige. Not power. Only the freedom of all to resolve all needs to remove pain and restore wellness. Period.   Let’s admit we’re stuck in a monkey trap Just as the monkey refuses to let go of the tasty nut inside the coconut trap, we refuse to let go of the tasty morsel of legalism. We cling tightly to our laws to protect us from threats of violence, instead of dealing with known causes of violence. To maintain social order. To coexist with our many ingrained differences. With the rise of hyper-individualism during the decline of religion and other socially engaging institutions, we easily fall back on the rule of law. If you view our system of secular laws as the only game in town, you typically cannot see past it. You can easily overlook the five shortcomings covered above. Do you literally believe that "no one is above the law"? Properly applied, that means no one's impactful behavior is beyond the scope of law. But you as a person is above the law. Human existence predates any human laws. Everyone's inflexible needs sit above flexible laws. You cannot change your life's requirement for food to eat and clean air to breathe to fit some legal requirement. Legalism coerces us to fit our needs to serve some law or appease some authority. Wellness then declines. You don't need anyone's permission to breathe . "The Sabbath was made for humanity," Jesus clarified, "Not the Sabbath for humanity." Needs come first, then laws to serve them. Need-response, with its responsivism tools, helps us to not be so backwards. You don't exist for human authority; human authority exists for you . Or it lacks legitimacy . If you experience laws as your last hope for a civilized life, you understandably resist any suggested alternative. The tighter your grip, the less likely you would try something boldly different. Let alone adopt something that could remove your familiar pain and restore you to unfamiliar full wellness. Familiarity bias—clinging to the unhealthy stuff you know out of fear of the healthier unknown—may have you tightly in its grip. Need-response can inspire you to break free, to live more of the life you've likely been missing under legalism's suffocating grip. Responsivism puts love over law. You can be among the first to adopt this pioneering approach. Need-response holds us all to a higher standard of love You’re invited to observe this new service of need-experience unfold in practice. I shall be its first guinea pig. I will be working with a few others I personally know and who personally know me. Together, we will incentivize our employers to be more responsive to our overlooked needs.   Your needs exist as objective fact . Their needs exist as objective fact. Need-response dares to hold us all accountable to this refreshing reality. No longer can we stay vulnerable to fickle laws. Or to employers who we avoid challenging directly, lest we risk reprisals.   Moreover, need-response gives good cause for all sides to harmoniously come together to address each other’s affected needs. In ways the law can never do . My early attempts to attract my employer to this fresh approach has been positive.   I provide them a preferably alternative to a nasty legal battle, or online smear campaign, or presenteeism of only giving my minimal effort on the job. As they gain my trust as a loyal worker, my improved wellness lets them benefit from my improved productivity.   This pioneering alternative features love. We honor the needs of others as we would have them honor our own. But we make the first generous move, to demonstrate our good faith intent. To apply inspiring words ascribed to Gandhi, we become the change we wish to see in the world , by planting powerful seeds of responsive love. According to anankelogy, all natural needs sit equal before nature   and everyone's needs must fully resolve to realize their full potential. With its mutuality approach, these responsivism tools can nurture far more wellness than adversarial activism. Responsivism tools to personally apply need-response in your life : Wellness Initiative tools These tools can prepare you for a wellness campaign. Or you can opt to simply use it once. Personally Responsive  – for those close to you, to melt alienation with kindness Properly Responsive – for colleagues in your life, to respect your overlooked needs Professionally Responsive  – for professionals in your life, to support your wellness Powerfully Responsive – for authorities over your life, to speak truth to power   Wellness Development tools These tools establish your credentials as need-responsive enough to resolve needs. Holistically Responsive – to counter reactive vacillation Vulnerably Responsive – to counter reactive defensiveness Specifically Responsive – to counter reactive generalizing Resiliently Responsive – to counter reactive avoidance Mutually Responsive – to counter reactive hostilities   Specialized tools These tools focus on a particular set of needs not effectively addressed elsewhere. Relationally Responsive  – understand why you fall in and out of love Responsive Innocence  [Exoneration] – picking up where innocence lawyers drop the ball Responsive Interviewing – preparing for a job or similar interview Responsive Depolarization – understanding the needs behind all sides of a political issue   Your responsiveness to contrasting responsiveness with activism Your turn. Consider one or more of these options to respond to this need-responsive content. Check our Engaging Forum to FOLLOW discussions on this post and others. JOIN us as a site member to interact others and create your forum comments. Explore similar content by clicking on the tags below. Find similar content under this responsivism category. Share this content with others on social media. Share the link to share the love. Check out recent posts of interest to you. Add a rating to let others know how much of a good read this was for you. Write a comment to give others an independent perspective on this content. Recommend this on Facebook. Introduce anankelogy to your social media contacts. Lastly, support us in building this new love-nurturing alternative to our hate-enabling institutions. You can help us spread some love. back-to-top