Perfectionism is not, in and of itself, a negative trait. Perfectionists are often conscientious high achievers; our greatest weakness is also our greatest strength. But those trying to be constantly perfect can find that every task feels like an unconquerable burden and every essay a path to failure, however unlikely our friends and family might find our doom-laden predictions. Here are three thoughts to use to beat the unrealistic idealism that may currently be beating you.
What is perfect, anyway? Maybe you could decide. Perhaps perfection could simply mean sitting down at your messy desk, ignoring the clothes on the floor, and spending 10 minutes planning the first half of your essay. In this deeply imperfect and challenging world, if you were to be reasonable with yourself, your definition of perfect should, and could, be different. Redefine perfection: make it doable and make it your own.
A to-do list is a depressing sight, if, at every item, we are telling ourselves that we ‘have to’ or ‘must’ do this or that. But turn ‘have to’ into ‘get to’ and suddenly life seems more joyful. Perhaps it is an irritating piece of advice, an unwelcome call to simply have more gratitude, but studying is essentially an overwhelmingly positive thing. You are learning and growing, and you have access to great materials and educated teachers; you are lucky. And so, even if it feels at first like you are lying to yourself, tell yourself, next time you inspect your to-do list: “I get to plan my essay today”.
We will do it, but we are waiting for the perfect time when we are in the mood. Because we know we can do it well, and not just well but REALLY well. And so that is the aim. This isn’t laziness, for the fear is real: we cannot bear to submit anything less than our best; we cannot tolerate failure; and we want to be proud of what we have achieved. We have visualised (or we think we have) the perfect essay or assignment. But the truth is that you have a deadline. Perhaps you could achieve perfection if you had eternity to complete it. But you don’t. Most tasks have a timeline, whether it is 6 years to complete a part-time PhD, or one night to finish an essay. And the test is not what you can achieve, but what you can achieve in the time you have to complete it. The definition of perfect might simply be this: finished.
We hear the word culture mentioned a lot in the media. But what does it mean? Culture is a broad term that encompasses beliefs, values, norms, behaviours, and overall can be understood as our “way of being.”
The term Cultural diversity is recognised as multiculturalism. Encyclopedia Britannica defines this as “the view that cultures, races, and ethnicities, particularly those of minority groups, deserves special acknowledgement of their differences within a dominant political culture.”
• Knowing that there are a large number of cultures that exist globally
• Acknowledging that all cultural expressions are valid
• Being respectful towards each other’s differences and values
• Valuing what other cultures offer
• Providing empowerment to encourage diverse groups to contribute to society
• Celebrating cultural differences, rather than simply tolerating them
Britain has long been a mixed-race society; we were invaded by the Romans of Italy (55 BC), the Saxons of Germany and central Europe (410-1066AD), the Vikings of Scandanavia (AD 793 – 1066) and the Normans of France (1066). Africans were also brought into the country in the 17th and 18th centuries, albeit unfortunately largely as servants or slaves.
In the UK, the Scots have their own culture, likewise the Welsh and Northern Irish, and of course we English too. It all means that despite being a relatively small country, we possess a large array of different dialects, customs, music, and languages. We live in a country where many different cultures live together, with over 20% of Britain’s population now of minority ethnic background, and 25% of school age population of black or minority ethnic heritage.
However, does the UK truly embrace this cultural diversity? It seems so, as Global Future’s July 2019 survey of 2,000 UK adults suggests nearly seven in 10 of us agree that diversity has improved our culture, against 15% who disagree. According to the report, nearly 40% of our leading cultural figures are from migrant or minority ethnic backgrounds. Art, dance, fashion and music are cited as our most diverse cultural industries – while TV is a notable outlier. The Creative Diversity Network’s Diamond report has shown that diversity in British TV actually fell in 2020.
It is important to embrace multiculturalism. By learning about other cultures we can develop knowledge, understanding and critical thinking skills. This helps to ultimately lead to a more cohesive, welcoming and tolerant society for everyone.
Image: The New Union Flag, representing cultural diversity in the UK, by artist Gil Mualem-Doron https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en
The NHS, or National Health Service, was established on the 5th July 1948. To mark its birthday, we take a brief look at the establishment of this remarkable institution.
Before the existence of a national, or even local, health service people were required to pay for their medical treatment, leading to an incredibly unfair system of healthcare. During the Victorian period, wealthy upper-class patrons, who would usually receive necessary medical treatment in the privacy of their homes, began to establish and fund local hospitals that could attend to the medical needs of the poor for free. But as hospitals became increasingly expensive to run, it was decided that some patients would have to pay for treatment. This led to the appointment of almoners who would assess the financial situations of patients before deciding how much they should pay to access medical treatment. This system of payment led to increased social segregation within healthcare systems with wealthier middle-class patients receiving better care in private rooms, or sometimes even separate buildings, away from poorer working-class people whose treatment was often of lesser quality.
In 1911, a health insurance element of the National Insurance payment was introduced. This compulsory insurance for workers in particular industries granted access to a doctor, though it didn’t usually cover hospital treatment. A similar scheme of community-owned funds and medical clubs allowed workers to make payments towards their healthcare when they could afford to do so and subsequently have access to doctors, medicines and hospital treatment when needed. Whilst these schemes made accessing healthcare more affordable for workers, they often did not cover dependents such as their wives and children.
By the turn of the century, whilst most people were still required to pay for medical treatment, some local authorities had established healthcare services which local taxpayers could access for free, and the Local Government Act of 1929 allowed local authorities to take control over hospitals within their area – on 1st April 1930, the London County Council took over 140 hospitals and medical schools and by the start of World War II the council was running the largest public healthcare service of its kind.
The Second World War created a need for an emergency hospital service, a service which was dependent on the government for funding, and the early 1940s saw the Ministry of Health devise plans for a national health service which would be funded through general taxation and not national insurance contributions. It wasn’t until a Labour victory at the 1945 general election, and the appointment of Aneurin Bevan to Health Minister that these initial plans became solidified and the NHS started to take shape. Bevan launched his new National Health Service on the 5th July 1948, stating that the project had three essential values: that the services helped everyone; that healthcare was free; and that care would be provided based on need and not an ability to pay.
Since then, the NHS has undergone much change, particularly regarding the management of services, but Bevan’s three principles remain true. For more information on the history of the NHS read Dr Geoffrey Rivett’s online book, The History of the NHS, maintained by The Nuffield Trust: www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk
Neurodiversity, or ND, refers to variations in the human brain regarding attention, learning, mood, sociability and other mental functions in a non-pathological sense. The term was created in 1998 by sociologist Judy Singer, who helped popularise the concept along with journalist Harvey Blume. Singer is an Australian sociologist who first used the term Neurodiversity in her Sociology honours thesis in 1996-1998. Her work on autism and neurodiversity became widely known as a result of her chapter “Why Can’t You be Normal for Once in Your Life?” based on her thesis which was published in the UK in 1999.
Neurodiversity is the concept that all human beings have variances in terms of our neurocognitive abilities. This relates to the ability to think and reason, and includes the ability to remember things, to concentrate, process information, learn, speak, and understand things. The term acknowledges that we each have talents as well as things we struggle with. For some people, this variation between strengths and weaknesses is more obvious, which can bring positives as well as negatives. The term Neurodiversity also describes the idea that people experience and interact with the world around them in many different ways. There is no one “right” way of thinking, learning, and behaving, and differences are not viewed as deficits.
It is believed that around 1 in 7 people has a neurodivergent condition. Neurodiverse conditions include Dyslexia (approximately 10% of the global adult population), Dyspraxia (approx. 5%), ADHD (approx. 4%), Autism (approx. 1-2%) and Asperger’s (approx. 0.5% ) and Tourette Syndrome (1 to 10 in 1000 children). There are also conditions including Acquired Brain Injury, Mental Health Conditions and health conditions such as Chronic Fatigue.
Research has found that people who are neurodiverse — and specifically those with ADHD — show better performance on a divergent thinking task (a measure of creative potential) and have more creative achievements compared to the general population (White and Shah, 2011). Additionally, a study published in The Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders found a strong link between autism and creativity.
A growing recognition of neurodiversity has created a greater level of awareness. Progress has been made in organisations and educational institutions recognising and supporting neurodiversity, and this is helping to create a more diverse and inclusive workforce and education system. As always though, there is still room for further understanding, awareness, and embracing of neurodiversity in our society.
Image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:MissLunaRose12
Whatever subject you are studying or qualification you are studying for, contact with your teacher or tutor – even when remote – is an invaluable part of that process. They are usually the subject experts, have a full understanding of the assessment process and have, more often than not, supported many other students who felt exactly the same as you do now about their learning. Whether you are confident in your subject knowledge and looking for ways to stretch yourself in order to achieve the very best results or are still a little uncertain and unsure how you might secure the grade you need, your tutors can provide you with the support you require. Here are a few simple strategies every student should try in order to boost the benefits of the contact they have.
Put simply, meet their expectations! If they provide a task, complete it. If they set a deadline, meet it. If you have a meeting, be there. Programmes of study and assessment schedules are in place to meet the needs of everyone; ensuring that there is adequate time for covering all of the content, assessing progress and providing feedback. A tutor works with many students and if you don’t adhere to the plan then you are unlikely to get the time you deserve. If there is a problem with the schedule set out for you, talk to your tutor in advance so that they can make any amendment they possibly can in order to make sure that everyone’s needs are met. If a tutor sees you are committed to your learning and doing what is required they are likely to go above and beyond in the ways in which they support you.
As already mentioned, the tutor is the subject expert. They have the knowledge of the subject but also the ways it is assessed and how to ensure you can demonstrate it when required to do so. Listen to their advice. Take notes where required. Follow their suggestions. However, if there is something you are unsure about, don’t be afraid to ask! Questioning is key to developing a deeper understanding and mastery of a subject but is also a great tool in ensuring there have been no miscommunications or misunderstandings. Your tutor will respect your ability to really engage with the content you are covering together and look for ways to address your questions in more detail.
Receiving feedback is one of the most important parts of the learning journey. However, many of us find getting feedback something that is really, really hard! Instead of thinking about what is said by your tutor as being ‘good’ or ‘bad’, try to consider what you can learn from it instead. If you are given praise for a certain aspect of your work, think about what you did that made this so effective. If there are comments relating to something that hasn’t worked out so well then think about what you might do differently next time. Reflection is key to making progress. Also, apply the same thought process when it comes to your attitude to learning. If a tutor comments on this, avoid taking it personally and think of how you might use what they have said to become a more effective learner.
Don’t forget that any contact that you have with your tutor is designed to benefit YOU. If you are in need of something specific from that contact then, again, do not be afraid to ask! In reality, this involves planning and preparing for any contact you have before you have it. Make a note of any questions you have when studying independently. If you need to revisit any material with them, ask in advance. If you have found a subject area particularly easy or hard, let them know. Remember, your tutor will be looking to support you in a way that is personalised to meet your needs too, so the more effectively you’re able to communicate these, the better they will be able to do this.
What does democracy mean to you? Perhaps it is something that only happens when you vote. Or maybe it’s something to strive for; a culture where all voices count toward change, championing transparency and equality. It’s a much-used word, but where did it derive from and what does it mean for society at large?
Literally translated, the word democracy comes from the Greek words ‘demos’, meaning people, and ‘kratos’ meaning power, so democracy can be thought of as ‘power of the people’. It is also sometimes referred to as ‘rule of the majority’. The first known democracy in the world was in Athens, Greece, where Athenian democracy developed around the fifth century B.C.E. In the year 507 B.C., the Athenian leader Cleisthenes introduced a system of political reforms that he called demokratia, meaning “rule by the people”.
Democracy, then, is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body, such as a parliament. However, the Greek idea of democracy differed from that which we have now, given that in Athens all adult citizens were required to take an active part in the government.
In present day, there are four main types of democracies. These are:
Direct – sometimes called “pure democracy”, this is a form of democracy where the people decide on policy initiatives. Voters are able to directly impact specific issues and policies, rather than voting to give a representative or party the mandate to decide upon them.
Representative – founded on the principle of elected persons representing a group of people, such as in the UK. This is the most commonly found democracy in the world today.
Constitutional – the authority of the majority is limited by legal and institutional means so that the rights of individuals and minorities are respected.
Monitory – a phase of democracy characterised by instruments of public monitoring and scrutinising of government power.
A report in 2020 highlighted that across the previous year almost 70% of countries had recorded a decline in their overall democratic rating score, as covered by The Economist Intelligence Democracy Rating Index; this was largely due to country after country locking down to protect lives from Covid-19. Globally, the average score fell to its lowest level since the index was initiated in 2006.
A 2020 YouGov survey showed that three-quarters of Britons (75%) describe the UK as a democratic country, yet six in ten (60%) complain that they cannot freely say what they think, and a third (34%) feel they have absolutely no say when it comes to how things are run.
In 2020, the top three most democratic nations were an all Nordic trio of Norway, Iceland and Sweden. According to the Sustainable Governance Indicators project which rates the quality of democracy, Norway also falls into the top group worldwide (rank 3) . Interestingly, the two other Nordic nations of Denmark and Finland also rank in the top 10. The UK is currently 16th.
‘The man’s power is active, progressive, defensive. He is eminently the doer, the creator, the discoverer, the defender. His intellect is for speculation, and invention; his energy for adventure war, and for conquest.. but the woman’s power is for rule, not for battle – and her intellect is not for invention or creation, but for sweet ordering, arrangement, and decision… she must be enduringly, incorruptibly good; instinctively, infallibly wise, wise not for self development, but for self-renunciation: wise, not that she may set herself above her husband, but that she man never fail from his side.’
(John Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies, 1865, part II)
In this quote, John Ruskin, an art critic and prominent social thinker, highlights how men and women were situated within society during the 19th century. The Victorian era can be attributed to the forming of strict gender ideals and stereotypes. Men and women were allocated specific roles which led men to hold more power over women, and therefore significantly disadvantaged during this era.
Historians call this ‘separate spheres,’ and it means that a man’s place was in the world of economics and business while a woman was a trophy of the home. Separate spheres worked alongside Darwin’s theory, the ‘Survival of the Fittest’ which placed men higher on the evolutionary ladder.
These constructions on gender meant that all aspects of society became gendered, including the world of work. In 1830, wives often assisted husbands in small businesses, but by the 1890s work and home were commonly separated. Men left domestic service, largely down to the shift from agricultural to heavy industrial work. It is calculated that whilst most men worked, only one third of all women were in employment at any time in the 19th century. Compare this with 1978 when two-thirds of women were in employment.
So, whilst women had no rights to sue, vote or own property, they were able to work. But for the upper-middle class, many women never worked outside the home. Women were expected to live up to the image of ‘the angel in the house.’ In other words, be the perfect wife and mother.
Despite the strict stereotypes set in Victorian society, the first signs of a feminist political movement began in this era. By the 1850s, this first feminist movement focused on equality in education, work and having electoral rights, like the right to vote.
However, Queen Victoria did not support the feminist movement – despite being a powerful monarch in her own right. She called feminism a ‘wicked folly,’ suggesting that ‘God created men and women differently- then let them remain each in their own position.’
This movement did not make significant legal gains for women, but things had heated up by the first decades of the 20th century. But we must not forget that stereotypes established in the Victorian era lasted longer than the era itself – and many are still visible within some aspects of modern society.
In Part 1, I discussed how we artificially divide up areas of human knowledge to our own detriment. In Part 2, I will look at ways in which we can create a society that looks beyond these classifications towards a multidisciplinary world.
Perhaps the logical place to begin this epic untangling of divisions is in the education system. Schools are a place where subjects exist, almost pathologically, in isolation from each other. An expert who is educated only in their own subject explains their knowledge, before children are passed to the next expert. Physics, biology and chemistry are often separate subjects. Children are not often challenged to explain natural processes from multiple perspectives simultaneously. Maybe if they start to explain things in terms of atoms, chemicals and biological systems from the beginning it will yield huge breakthroughs in the future.
Science is increasingly moving towards enormous datasets that will be processed by artificial intelligence. Fortunately, artificial intelligence does not just adopt one perspective when analysing data, like a person does.
However, perhaps the easiest, most human solution to the segregation of the sciences is to encourage more time in the same rooms. Of course, there are many interdisciplinary conferences, and many subjects are closely aligned, but that could be made far more commonplace. It is challenging to do so as we are moving into an age of such complexity that within even a single science there are hundreds of lifetime’s worth of subspecialisms. How can any inter-disciplinary dialogue be created effectively when they all almost speak in different languages?
Such is the barriers that must be overcome, whether through a change in mindset or the intelligent reorganisation of existing systems.
Our tribal ancestry has never completely left us. We still love to linger in “in-group, out-group” psychology. Look at our political parties, not permitted to be in agreement with each other even if they are. This is evidenced in literally every discipline, workplace, and academic circle. “Why doesn’t [insert other group’s name] understand that this is the way it works?!”.
I’m not advocating intellectual relativism. There is a right and wrong in some cases. But we need to tell people from the earliest age that there is no black and white. For example, Music contains Science; when strings vibrate at frequencies that are pleasing to the ear, and when these frequencies are doubled, the same note is produced. We evolved to appreciate these frequencies as a way of bonding in human communities. All subjects exist on a continuum.
There is no telling where this will take us if we are able to emancipate ourselves from the separate rooms we have put ourselves in. Perhaps this is the next step in our social and psychological evolution.
To read the news you may think all those who work in politics are Oxbridge Politics, Philosophy and Economics graduates but — while there certainly are a few of them in the halls of Westminster — it’s not the whole story.
A political career is open to a wide variety of academic backgrounds. After all, Margaret Thatcher was a chemist and it didn’t stop her winning three general elections handsomely. But it’s undeniable that certain skill sets do come in handy.
Being a politician’s advisor demands boning up on technical policy swiftly, distilling it down to key facts, and briefing your time-poor boss sufficiently so they don’t make a fool of themselves. Arts subjects such as English, History and Philosophy, where you are trained to digest, recount and analyse complicated concepts, are therefore a real boon. Alternatively, if you want to develop policy, expertise in a specific area (although it’s far from essential) can allow you to hit the ground running. This is where social sciences including Geography, Environmental Sciences and Development Studies can give you the edge.
A surprising fact about the political class is how few have studied Communications and Marketing. Indeed, there’s a little too many electioneering decisions that are down to gut rather than science. This should, and probably will, change as campaigning evolves. So it might be a good idea to get the jump on other candidates now.
That’s not to say politics hasn’t moved with the times, even if it doesn’t look that way when you watch Westminster on TV. Like all ‘industries’, politics has entered the digital revolution and is in desperate need of the graduates to match. With Obama’s data-driven campaigns inspiring parties to modernise, some of my most successful colleagues are those who can code or know their way around a database. Computer Science and Statistics degrees are in high demand, especially if you also happen to be a political geek.
Talking of geekery, you could of course do worse than studying Politics itself. There’s no doubt understanding the intricacies of legislative processes, electoral systems, or the movement you now work for is useful, even in the more mundane daily grind of real-world politics.
But I suppose my overall point is this: don’t think there’s ‘one’ route to make it as a Malcum Tucker or Mat Santos. Indeed, watching how our leaders perform for the cameras, you may decide Drama and Theatre Studies wouldn’t be a bad bet.
In the end, study what you love. But I will say this: nothing impresses a politician more than a bit of hard graft, so do get stuck in with politics and campaigns locally. You never know, you may meet your new boss out canvassing.
Choosing subjects to study is an important consideration, of this there is no doubt. However, in recent years the campaign for jobs and the drive for individuals to study employment-specific STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects has left the arts, the humanities and the social sciences in an undermined position.
From Sociology to Literature, History to Psychology and Geography, these, and many more are all considered to be under the broad umbrella of the Humanities, with Psychology, Sociology, and Geography sub-grouped into social sciences.
So would anyone consider studying a course that sets you up for what some have termed as ‘career suicide’? Is it worth it? What will be achieved other than a confirmed ability to follow a prescribed syllabus and learn the required information to pass exams or produce coursework?
George Anders, in his book entitled You can do anything: The Surprising power of a ‘Useless’ Liberal Arts Education, says “curiosity, creativity, and empathy aren’t unruly traits that must be reigned in to ensure success. The job market is quietly crying out for people who can bring a humanist’s grace to our rapidly evolving high-tech future.”
Tempering the needs of a rapidly growing STEM world needs to be the humanising of The Arts, ensuring that the heart and soul of the species, as well as its stomach and head, are catered for.
So what will studying the Humanities actually, broadly, offer? Aside from all the subject-specific knowledge, ‘training’ in the Humanities and Arts offers an unparalleled depth of personal growth and mental diversification. The development of a student’s ability to critique systems of behaviour, work and politics ensures that individuals are able view their work (and life) situation with a clear and reflective, empathetic yet unflinching gaze.
Being able to hold and ‘apply’ multiple perspectives on a subject and really ‘feel’ the impact of those perspectives offers real-time, realistic views on potential impact and change in any given area. The student is working towards gaining an understanding of the historical, predictive, economic, social and cultural layers that are part of any given situation. It is far from easy, rather it is the equivalent of a mental Olympic sport, and no mean feat.
The training involved in developing these capacities and increasing the knowledge base behind them is not as simple as it is often made out to be. It is a lifelong pursuit in stretching understanding and increasing mental flexibility. To be able to juggle the range of incredible global and individual states and concepts is every bit as important a role as Einstein believed it to be when he is quoted in Phillip Frank’s book, Einstein: His life and times : “the value of an education in a liberal arts college is not the learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think of something that cannot be learnt from textbooks”.
Knowing oneself in relation to the micro of one’s own society and the macro of an increasingly globalised world can be applied to the job market as well as to the after dinner discussion.
To be able to holistically, empathically, and with humanity, understand the multiple situations and issues that humanity faces, and to be able to address them from a standpoint that is complementary with the STEM point of view will always be valuable. The Arts and Humanities offer us more than ‘just’ problem solving, they offer us the movie reel, as well as the means and the reasons for creating the necessary artefact.
Locating the human self in the midst of the need for new technology and adapted processes is a way of ensuring that the species stays positively anchored in more than just a physical, practical way. What does it mean to be human without the arts? Considering a social, economic and political world without the evolving soul of humanity is merely an existence.
So, go ahead and follow the passionate pursuit of intellectual and artistic learning and see which worlds open up for you to explore. A colourful, terrible and incredible past and future of the world awaits.
To find George Enders’ book You can do anything: The Surprising Power of a “Useless Liberal Arts Education, follow this link: https://www.georgeandersbooks.com/
Follow this link to find Phillip Franks’s Einstein: his Life and Times