← The PM Podcast
Loading summary
Transcript158 lines
- [00:00]
Dr. Jen Shang
That's this tricky space that we're entering into where it is not just about the introduction of a second vocabulary, but the creation of a space where the vocabulary are invited and welcome to be used so that the vocabulary can take roots. And I think that's the value of a podcast like this. Right? It's part of creating that space where, okay, we know there's a set of language about love now. We know there are different categories and different definitions. We know they can potentially help increase giving by about 16% with only six emails. We know those things now, but do we feel comfortable talking about it?
- [00:38]
Jay Frost
Welcome to the PM Podcast, brought to you by Donor Search, the show that takes you inside the lives of thought leaders, innovators and change makers in fundraising, philanthropy and civil society. I'm your host, Jay Frost. Professor Jen Shang is co founder and director of the Institute for Sustainable Philanthropy and the world's only philanthropic psychologist. She was the first person to earn a PhD in philanthropy, and her research on donor identity and meaning has been featured in the New York Times, BBC, the Chronicle of Philanthropy, and many other publications. In 2025, she received AFP's prestigious Skystone Prize for Meaningful Philanthropy, co authored with Dr. Adrienne Sargent, a book exploring how giving shapes the lives of high net worth donors. We spoke with her live at AFP Icon, the association's international conference in Seattle.
- [01:33]
Dr. Jen Shang
Just talk about love.
- [01:34]
Unknown
Let's just talk about love. So where does that whole love journey start for you? Seriously, where did that come from?
- [01:41]
Dr. Jen Shang
Sorry, how long is the podcast?
- [01:43]
Unknown
This is sort of as long as you want it to be. I've talked with people for 20 minutes, 18 minutes, and some people as long as an hour and a half.
- [01:49]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah, because with love, we can just sit here for the rest of our life. Yeah, exactly.
- [01:53]
Unknown
Right. All right, all right. Language of love. Where did that start? Where did that start?
- [02:02]
Dr. Jen Shang
The language of love? It started after we felt like we have learned everything there is to learn about relationship fundraising from anything that we have read and we have done and we have seen. It's just like, yes, there's satisfaction, trust and commitment, and there's even psychological well being, competence, connectedness and autonomy. But then where else do we go?
- [02:32]
Unknown
Was that absent from the discussion? Largely absent, Absolutely.
- [02:37]
Dr. Jen Shang
It's like, yeah, we can talk about anything else, but just not talk about love.
- [02:40]
Unknown
Why?
- [02:42]
Dr. Jen Shang
Because it's not appropriate. We are all professionals. We can't possibly talk about love when we are working.
- [02:57]
Unknown
What was the danger, though?
- [02:59]
Dr. Jen Shang
Because being persistent, perceived as being unprofessional, not specialized don't have knowledge without evidence. You know, is there anything else that I need to add to the list?
- [03:12]
Unknown
I mean, in my practical fundraising experience, if there's no love, there's no. There's no giving. I mean, there's no real substantive giving.
- [03:21]
Dr. Jen Shang
Isn't that the strangest thing? It's like, yeah, that is the. The thing, but, oh, let's not talk about it.
- [03:33]
Unknown
So where did this whole thing start for you? I mean, take us way back.
- [03:37]
Dr. Jen Shang
We have to find a way to talk about it. So how can we talk about love? Well, how about. Let's start by defining it.
- [03:45]
Unknown
Okay.
- [03:45]
Dr. Jen Shang
And defining different types and differentiate them. Because if you have to have, like, compassionate love companions, love, Matanoia love, playful love, passionate love, at least there is a vocabulary.
- [03:58]
Unknown
It's true.
- [03:59]
Dr. Jen Shang
So when you talk about love, it's not, oh, no, let's not talk about love, because romantic love is about the only love that the word love associated with. That's just plain wrong, isn't it?
- [04:09]
Unknown
Well, I'm also thinking, I wonder how much of this is restricted by not just our professional life, but kind of our culture and maybe even our language. I mean, literally the English language. So I don't know. I'm a monolingual person, but I am familiar with other languages, and I know that English sometimes is expansive. It's really a great way to say a lot of nasty things, but it's not necessarily always the best way to express the range of color and love. So is this.
- [04:38]
Dr. Jen Shang
Absolutely. That's exactly where the language of love comes from. It's like if we all, as fundraising professionals, know or love is the thing you have to do love, but then, yet nobody's allowed to say the L word. No, there's got to be a way, something that we can do to kind of open a door for the L word to legitimately enter the conversations.
- [05:12]
Unknown
So what. What is that? Or what are those things? Things that enable us to open that.
- [05:16]
Dr. Jen Shang
Door, to properly define it with precise descriptions and definable categories, so then the word love doesn't have to be automatically equip. Equated to romantic love. And there's absolutely no other vocabulary to enable people to carry forward that conversation in any way. So to start with, we felt like to be able to differentiate love, name different types of love is the very first step in allowing us to have a more constructive conversation about love. That's where this project of language comes from.
- [06:13]
Unknown
When. When did it start for you? This. This project of language was this five years ago, ten years ago? Or is this something you've been working on, in a way, your whole life?
- [06:28]
Dr. Jen Shang
Do you want an 18 minutes podcaster? Do you want to do. Because.
- [06:35]
Unknown
Well, we could. Yes, this could be like, what was that movie recently where it's just one shot and then they looked at everything from the dinosaurs here. So I guess, yes, it's a hard question, but no, take. Take your time. Yes. When was this the discussion for you?
- [06:51]
Dr. Jen Shang
From the moment of conception.
- [06:55]
Unknown
But you. But not philanthropy, because philanthropy is another one of these things that. It seems like people outside the academic world have a tough time even saying the word, let alone defining what it means. Even though the word is rooted in love.
- [07:09]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah. I mean, if you take the word as the love of humankind, it starts from conception. Let's hope that's for everyone, shall we?
- [07:20]
Unknown
Well, I would hope so. Well, there are lots of reasons why people give and I suppose why people ask for people to participate in things, but it's not always necessarily about love. I wonder if that's one of the reasons why there's so much stumbling over it.
- [07:35]
Dr. Jen Shang
But the thing is, it could always, always be about love. That's the beauty of it, right? If we always say, oh, it can be, but it's not, then we're always spending too much time on the note not. But if we always say it can be, it could be, and let's make it that, then you spend a lot less time thinking about the not part. Yeah, a lot of time can be saved talking about the part.
- [08:08]
Unknown
So are we putting the wrong things in the equation? Is that part of the problem and that we're introducing ingredients? I don't want to get near cooking, but are we introducing ingredients that really don't have any place in the conversation with love?
- [08:20]
Dr. Jen Shang
Absolutely. Anything else?
- [08:22]
Unknown
Why are we doing that? I'm a very simple person. I think that's the why questions. Why are we doing that to ourselves if it's blocking us from really having meaningful connection to people?
- [08:34]
Dr. Jen Shang
Because love, the word has been tainted into romantic love alone.
- [08:39]
Unknown
And why is that a problem, a hindrance?
- [08:43]
Dr. Jen Shang
Because whenever you say the word love, it's always about romantic love. And very often romantic love is possessive and obsessive, and all the negative part of love comes in instead. I mean, if I ask you, so what are all the adjectives you can use to positively describe love?
- [09:01]
Unknown
Wow. No, I switch mean. The word ends up meaning all those things and it doesn't mean anything.
- [09:10]
Dr. Jen Shang
Exactly.
- [09:11]
Unknown
In fact, my wife does say this. She'll say that these are not the way not the way she would say it. But she talks about how Americans use the word love all the time, and then it doesn't have any meaning.
- [09:25]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah, absolutely.
- [09:26]
Unknown
And it's used where she's from. It's not used a great deal. In fact, there's. It's more common to use a word that would be translated is like.
- [09:36]
Dr. Jen Shang
Or compassion, caring, kind. All of those words can be expression of love in other cultures and in our culture, intimacy, closeness, belonging. For some reason, all of those words are more acceptable than the word love.
- [09:58]
Unknown
So as you've explored this and you've done it in various ways, which I would like to explore, how has the response been to the general discussion at all? Because you are talking about something that it makes people, I guess, by its nature, uncomfortable. Maybe because they don't have the language for it, maybe because they haven't thought, had to think about it before. How are people responding to the general discussion before the nuts and bolts of it?
- [10:23]
Dr. Jen Shang
Uncomfortable. A lot of people are uncomfortable, but they don't want to say that they're uncomfortable. They say other people are uncomfortable.
- [10:36]
Unknown
Wow, that's interesting. Yeah.
- [10:40]
Dr. Jen Shang
Like, I agree with what you say, but my balls. Blah, blah, blah. I agree what we say.
- [10:46]
Unknown
I have a feeling this is a whole bunch of why questions. But why is that? Why do people do that? Why?
- [10:51]
Dr. Jen Shang
Because it's. It's, again, not culturally accepted to not to talk about love.
- [10:56]
Unknown
But people talk about all these other things. I mean, you. You've mentioned love in a lot of contexts, especially romantic love. You haven't mentioned sexual love.
- [11:03]
Dr. Jen Shang
It's not part of the program is about. No, it's not part of philanthropy. It's love. It's never mentioned.
- [11:07]
Unknown
Right. But in each of these cases, the words. The words are so meaningful. The words we choose to use and the words we choose to exclude are so meaningful that I can imagine when we then decide whether or not to associate not just ourselves with the words, but we attribute those feelings to others, that also takes on a certain power. It also removes a certain power from ourselves.
- [11:33]
Dr. Jen Shang
Absolutely. And that's this tricky space that we're entering into where it is not just about the introduction of aesthetic, but the creation of a space where the vocabulary are invited and welcome to be used so that the vocabulary can take roots. And I think that's the value of a podcast like this. Right. It's part of creating that space where, okay, we know there's a set of language about love now. We know there are different categories and different definitions. We know they can potentially help increase giving by about 16% with only six emails. We know those things now. But do we feel comfortable talking about it?
- [12:14]
Unknown
Do people get more comfortable talking about it when you do introduce the numbers? Because I can imagine that if. If the barrier to what we're going to talk about love and philanthropy is. Ah, I don't want to talk about that. But my boss will never buy it that it that once you start saying, well, yes, but it increases by 60x percent when you do this, that the barrier must start to fall at some level, doesn't it? I mean, what information do you or do others need to introduce in order for people to embrace funny words in this context? Embrace the idea of love in philanthropy.
- [12:53]
Dr. Jen Shang
See, that's an interesting question, Jay. When I have conversations with people and if they're not buying love, I don't tell them the number.
- [13:06]
Unknown
So. Okay. And is that because convincing, trying to convince them is fruitless or because they're not ready, or is it something else entirely?
- [13:21]
Dr. Jen Shang
Because even if I convince them with number, what they're buying is not love.
- [13:29]
Unknown
I wonder what they're buying at that point.
- [13:31]
Dr. Jen Shang
The number.
- [13:32]
Unknown
Because we use numbers all the time in order to get people to do things.
- [13:36]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah. And that's not philanthropic psychology. Philanthropic psychology is not behavioral science. It doesn't get people to do things.
- [13:45]
Unknown
Let's talk about that for a moment and define those terms. The difference between behavioral philanthropic psychology is about love.
- [13:52]
Dr. Jen Shang
Love is a feeling. It's not a behavior. It's not only a behavior. It's not primarily a behavior. Love is a feeling that is associated with behavior. The behavior is never the goal of philanthropic psychology. And for anybody who doesn't understand that, they would either put philanthropic psychology under behavioral science or they would use them.
- [14:19]
Unknown
Along each other, almost enslaving it.
- [14:22]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah.
- [14:23]
Unknown
Which is. That's fascinating.
- [14:24]
Dr. Jen Shang
Absolutely. It's absolutely fascinating to me.
- [14:29]
Unknown
Well, I. And because if it's at the service of something, it's just dollars here. Dollars.
- [14:35]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah.
- [14:36]
Unknown
What does that do to. What does that do to love?
- [14:39]
Dr. Jen Shang
I know.
- [14:41]
Unknown
And then.
- [14:41]
Dr. Jen Shang
And so anybody who used those terms right next to each other or call philanthropic psychology behavior of science, they just don't know what philanthropic psychology is.
- [14:49]
Unknown
So when you're having that conversation with people and you're trying to interest them in the concept of let's putting love aside because they're clearly not ready for that, of philanthropic psychology. How do you. How do you intrigue them without manipulating them into it? Because you're not going to use data to do it. As you just said, you're not going to try to convince them with this old language to do something new because they'll just keep doing the same thing, using now bastardizing this language. But how do you interest them so they'll open their mind, not just pry it open for them, but so they'll be opening their own minds.
- [15:24]
Dr. Jen Shang
I show them examples after examples after examples after examples of love in fundraising communications.
- [15:30]
Unknown
Can you just share an idea about one of those? Because I know we can't see it here in a podcast, but the kind of example you might use as an illustration to help them start to see the picture.
- [15:41]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah, it's like you can have a donor letter where you tell people, oh, you know, like this, like in this orphanage, kids don't get food and kids don't trust they will have food. And with your donation now, kids have food, food. And not only they have food, they can trust there's always food. And that's fine. He's got food. You get money, you give money and they get food, and they get food and you get money, and that's like perfectly fine. So thank you, you know, thank you for giving money. They've got food, blah, blah, blah. Versus but the love you give them, the love you give them taste like sweet mango and chicken soup. Does it feel the same?
- [16:37]
Unknown
No. I have to say, to me, what you're describing is poetry. And the difference between poetry and prose. I know that's my bias, but that's the language of poetry. Poetry, which is a good. For me, that's. That's a good elevate. That's a higher plane of.
- [16:53]
Dr. Jen Shang
So poetry, like in your language. In philanthropic psychology, language is the language of sensory details.
- [17:00]
Unknown
Yes. Which Imagism is my language of poetry as well.
- [17:04]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah. So we can connect at the sensory level. When we connect at the sensory level, we connect in feelings. Feelings is love. Love is not something that we tell people. People in our head. Love is something that we invite people to experience, and we use sensory language to invite people to experience the love. So I just show them kitchen soup after kitchen soup and sweet mango after sweet mango.
- [17:34]
Unknown
Well, that's interesting too, because. And now we're talking about food again. You keep bringing up food. I'm not doing it.
- [17:41]
Dr. Jen Shang
I am not cooking, making it, for sure.
- [17:43]
Unknown
But you don't even make it chicken soup.
- [17:46]
Dr. Jen Shang
No.
- [17:46]
Unknown
Okay. But when I think about images in poetry, and by that I don't just mean visual images, but all the senses, it is an entry pathway not just to the thing that I want people to see, but to the thing that they can see and that. That's what I think of is that similar when we're trying to get people to open the door to love.
- [18:14]
Dr. Jen Shang
Absolutely.
- [18:16]
Unknown
So, you know, chicken soup works for one crowd, mango for another. I mean, some people can work in both, but not everyone. Yeah. So when it comes to. Then again, talking in the peanut with the peanut crunching crowd, I guess is the. What? Shakespeare. But if we're doing that and we're trying to get people to understand these concepts, and the illustration is speaking a language that's evocative rather than declarative, if that's really what we're doing, is there a kind of an ab testing logic to that as well?
- [18:56]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah, absolutely.
- [18:59]
Unknown
So how does that play out in an environment, especially where it has been declarative, where people say, no, you have to do this, this, and this in order to achieve that. And our objective is just that. It's not transformation, it's cash register.
- [19:16]
Dr. Jen Shang
Don't test with them. We tend to really only stay with people who believe in love. Why would you go anywhere else?
- [19:29]
Unknown
Yeah, well, I guess that's the question, because you said it before with the. The discussion about children. You know, you give money and they eat and they eat, and then you get money and you get money and they eat. And if, if done in a way that is truly empathetic, then you're doing it, I suppose, because you want all children to eat. But that also means that some of those organizations, I would imagine some. Well, in fact, we both know some of those organizations are not speaking the language of love at all. They're speaking the language of the flies buzzing around the child in that image, in that, you know, at the 2am video to try and get people, you know, through an acquisition campaign. I don't know, maybe that is the language of love, but always that seemed to me exploitative. I don't think that's what you're talking about. So if we just avoid those organizations, do we let them. Do we let them wither on the vine in order to make space for the organizations that are willing to embrace love at the service of humanity rather than this other thing?
- [20:43]
Dr. Jen Shang
You know, what I find most fascinating about any human experience is that love is about the only thing that can't be forced.
- [21:01]
Unknown
Please tell me more about that.
- [21:04]
Dr. Jen Shang
If we truly believe that love is the thing that we're growing, we would never, ever use any method to stop people from not loving, because that's their choice. They choose if they want to love. If they choose, they don't want to love our loving way to interact with them is to respect them and to wish them well.
- [21:36]
Unknown
So just let people be and then provide them.
- [21:42]
Dr. Jen Shang
Nothing at all. We just do what we do best. We do what we believe in. We generate the results we can generate. We create the examples we can create. We keep saying what we believe, we keep sharing what we believe. We keep. We keep attracting investors, inviting and welcoming and respecting and wishing them well, whether.
- [22:03]
Unknown
Or not they choose to follow the.
- [22:06]
Dr. Jen Shang
Because whether or not to love is other people's decision.
- [22:10]
Unknown
We can't enforce that on them, just like they can't enforce other people to love.
- [22:15]
Dr. Jen Shang
We can always invite and welcome and respect and wish them well. We can always do that. And we shouldn't stop stop doing that. But that is as far as we would go. I would go other people would go for but that's as far as I would go. I can't even cook well.
- [22:35]
Unknown
And just to be clear, the reason that you wouldn't go further why do you think it's productive or just because it's antithetical to your nature?
- [22:47]
Dr. Jen Shang
Because beyond that is not my definition of life up.
- [22:50]
Unknown
And that would be like.
- [22:54]
Dr. Jen Shang
That would be losing the whole point.
- [23:02]
Unknown
I understand we have gone the sector, at least here in the United States feels like we've gone down this path so far far with so many organizations in order to generate so much income, in order to address so many issues that governments do not address. I imagine turning this giant battleship of activity around must be very, very difficult. And when the argument is lean into love at the individual level, you know, organizations, people would deflect. I guess they'll say, you know, that works for me, but it doesn't work for my boss. So, you know, you've lost them, I guess for that friend. But as a sector as a whole, especially when you write a book to presumably not just to show but to provide an opportunity for people to embrace this what is the hope? Because this sector now not one end of door or person who doesn't get it today, but for the whole what do you hope the book will help the sector to understand and to do potentially.
- [24:16]
Dr. Jen Shang
Obviously the hope is everybody chooses love. That is always the hope, right? But if we let the achievement of our hope to dictate our actions, it is always less productive than we just simply doing what we believe to be the right thing to do. Because the evidence is going to be always more negative than positive if you look for how many people choose it. It's always difficult to choose love when it's competing against the bottom line.
- [24:56]
Unknown
I'm also thinking that people are probably looking out and they're seeing this great array of problems to address, and they must get frustrated, and then they lean into these other techniques.
- [25:07]
Dr. Jen Shang
It is still bottom line.
- [25:08]
Unknown
Right, Right. And that's. That's probably why they're doing it. But then how. Effect maybe effective isn't the right word, but I'm searching for the right word. How. How can we help people to see that the opportunity for addressing the things that do really matter to their heart are that really pursuing something that is better aligned with love is ultimately going to make it possible to feed those.
- [25:38]
Dr. Jen Shang
Children.
- [25:41]
Unknown
Without running into all the silly stuff with the numbers, like you said.
- [25:46]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah. So what my experience have been with people who have taken our philanthropic psychology certificate is that it's the people who have already had love in their heart that the knowledge of love really benefit them. If people come to the knowledge without love already in their heart, it will just be another piece of knowledge like any other knowledge that they use to do whatever they want to do.
- [26:15]
Unknown
And it's all about them. So another question. I hope you don't mind these organic questions. So where does that begin for a lot of people in a field like this? Is it really much earlier? I mean, do we have to. Is the opportunity with people who are quite young, with our children, is that really where the opportunity is, where they learn that language of love? And so when they decide to embrace philanthropy as one vehicle of expressing the.
- [26:48]
Dr. Jen Shang
Opportunity lies at every single choice people make.
- [26:54]
Unknown
So it doesn't matter if they're 6 or 60, if they're.
- [26:57]
Dr. Jen Shang
If at every choice they make, they choose love. We can always turn the ship. Person can always turn the ship. They can always get better. There just have to be that one moment where people choose to choose love and they never go back.
- [27:19]
Unknown
When was that moment for you?
- [27:30]
Dr. Jen Shang
The moment I chose to study psychology, when my parents got divorced, I decided to care for myself.
- [27:50]
Unknown
Those. Those kinds of moments are. Are very difficult, but they're also framing, I guess, for, you know, what do we want the next picture to look like? And how did you find that way of saying, it doesn't have to be like this, it can be like this.
- [28:15]
Dr. Jen Shang
I didn't have the confidence until when I see my teenage children past the age when I chose psychology.
- [28:27]
Unknown
Oh, really?
- [28:28]
Dr. Jen Shang
Yeah. Took me 30 years to have confidence in the decision I made at age 15.
- [28:38]
Unknown
So what was it about watching your children grow that kind of gave you that impetus for change?
- [28:47]
Dr. Jen Shang
I'm a good mother. I raise good Children. I raise loving children. I raise children who love their family, love themselves, and want to find careers to love other people.
- [29:03]
Unknown
When you talk with your kids about.
- [29:05]
Dr. Jen Shang
These concepts now, don't ever let them hear this podcast.
- [29:11]
Unknown
Why?
- [29:14]
Dr. Jen Shang
They will be so embarrassed by what their mom says. Like, oh, no.
- [29:19]
Unknown
Oh, well, okay. How old are they now?
- [29:21]
Dr. Jen Shang
Teenagers.
- [29:22]
Unknown
Okay, well, then that's okay. We can generalize about one thing. That would probably be it. Okay. But still, they pro. They must understand this because you've been kind of living with, hibernating and living with. And now embracing and evangelizing. I don't know if you use that word for these concepts. How do they talk about these things themselves? What language do they use?
- [29:51]
Dr. Jen Shang
Well, I can tell you a conversation that we had when my daughter was nine years old. The dinner table conversation goes, well, you can't possibly do that. That's exchange relationship. You should go with communal.
- [30:08]
Unknown
How did they know anything about. Oh, they were listening to their parents. Okay. They're growing up in a household of academics. Yes, it does give you a vocabulary, but often that vocabulary can be a little dry, you have to admit. But this is a. This is a precise vocabulary, talking about something that's usually very imprecise. So, all right, so they grew up hearing these things and understanding these things. I wonder how that has then influenced their concept of not just romantic love, because it probably did that too. Right. But just everything like love of family, love of community, and also community responsibility, which is not something we've talked about. And maybe I should be asking this question. I'm sorry. What is the role of responsibility within love as we understand it when we decide to truly embrace love? Is there a role responsibility? Do we have a larger responsibility than to just. Than the pure honesty of love?
- [31:07]
Dr. Jen Shang
I have raised my children with the first and foremost, emphasize on their ability to love themselves. They learn how to love themselves.
- [31:19]
Unknown
And why was that important?
- [31:21]
Dr. Jen Shang
Because then they will love others with the same love.
- [31:24]
Unknown
Okay. And so, yeah, having embraced that. One more question, because we started this conversation talking largely about people who will and won't do these things within our profession, for example, within our field. And sometimes then they'll deflect. Your children clearly are not. You don't have to say anything else about your kids, but I'm interested to know about maybe their friends or their wider circle. So within a community of younger people, some of whom now know these concepts, they have a language for these things, but they've also been around loving parents who have interrogated these ideas as well as just Embracing them. How does that impact then the broader community of their associations as they think about their role? Have you been able to see whether those ideas transmitted to one and then kind of spreading out among their peers?
- [32:28]
Dr. Jen Shang
What I found really most amazing about my teenage children is to observe what they choose not to say.
- [32:40]
Unknown
Yes. Can you talk more about that?
- [32:42]
Dr. Jen Shang
Absolutely. To choose their words very carefully when they think about how to love their friends, you know, they don't. They are very cautious not to go, do you need help?
- [33:01]
Unknown
Oh, I see what you mean.
- [33:03]
Dr. Jen Shang
You know, they were like, mom, how can we find a way to help them without them knowing that we're helping? That's right. We can give them a ride when we're on the way. And I'll pretend I'm not to going hearing what you're saying. You know, it's just. It's the care that they put into respect other people exactly where they are, yet caring for them, it's just at the expense of kind of. How should I describe this? You know, like, it would have been easy for them to. I can help because they're good kids and they want to help. Right. But they're more caring than that. They're really caring. And that's what I have deep love and respect for my children. You know, like when my son choose not to ask questions and when I said, you can ask anything you want. No, mom, it's your privacy. I was like, wow, you know, that's my son.
- [34:45]
Unknown
I hope I haven't crossed any lines with my questions.
- [34:49]
Dr. Jen Shang
Well, you didn't. Pursuing the comment about Inception. So you're okay. Or conception, for that matter.
- [34:59]
Unknown
Well, I ask about these things not only for understanding, but because I'm always trying to figure out how the ethereal kind of relates to the, you know, the mundane. And it's. It's really interesting to. Because if we're. If we're not able to reach for something without, you know, forcing others, as you're saying, but for ourselves, reaching out for something that's a little more. I don't know, it's an evolution of ourselves, we're thinking, then where are we stasis? Doesn't seem very beneficial to us. But it seems like if we're embracing the language of love and not trying to get other people to do what we want, even if we think it's in their interest, that's very liberating. If we are embracing the language of love and not trying to enforce our will on others, that's very liberating. But I'm always wondering how we without trying to enforce our will or our perception on others, how do we get others to at least hear the message that they may be not hearing?
- [36:22]
Dr. Jen Shang
Jay Whether people hear or not is their choice. We can the world most beautiful piece of art. However they define art, we can be the world most exciting game, whatever they seem exciting, we can be the world most long lasting, passionate love. However they define love, if they don't want it, that's the their choice of how they love themselves. We respect them, we care for them, we wish them well. Anything other than that we're losing a part of ourselves and that's just not worth it.
- [37:23]
Unknown
And when you say losing a part of ourselves.
- [37:27]
Dr. Jen Shang
If we define ourselves as love, by love, in love to feel love, then anything short of that is not good enough for us. And since the only meaningful control we have over is how we feel and what we do, and that should be the only thing that we care about. Nothing else. Everything else is distraction, complete waste of time and energy.
- [38:06]
Unknown
So you've released the book and congratulations. I should start with that. Congratulations on this award. I know you. You didn't write this book. I assume. Assuming it's a bad idea. You did not write this book for awards. You wrote this book because. Why? Why did you write this book?
- [38:27]
Dr. Jen Shang
I wrote this book because Tony Berry asked me to. Tony Berry is the donor who sponsored the project, who journeyed with us through the project and who supported us to see the completion of the project. So when he told me his life story and he showed me what kindness can mean in another human being's life, I just can't say no.
- [38:59]
Unknown
And where do you imagine the project goes next? The book completed. You teach a lot. It sounds like you're traveling again. Where do you imagine this goes for you?
- [39:12]
Dr. Jen Shang
Well, a second couple have asked us to complete the stage two of the project so there will be another book coming out.
- [39:20]
Jay Frost
Well, that's it for this episode of the PM podcast. You can learn more about Dr. Shang, her work and the work of the Institute for sustainable philanthropy at www.www.philanthropy-institute.org uk. Her book Meaningful Philanthropy was published by Bristol University Press and is available through the publisher, Amazon and other booksellers. More information about the AFP Skystone Partners Prize for Research is available at www.skystonepartners.com. our thanks to our sponsor Sponsor Donor Search, the world leader in AI powered fundraising intelligence solutions for the non profit world. Our producer is Jack Frost and our theme music is Moving Out, Moving in by Jay Taylor and is provided courtesy of epidemic sound. If you like what you heard, make sure to subscribe wherever you like to listen. Check out our sister shows, Front Lines of Social Good and How to Raise. And come back next weekend for another conversation with a leader in the world world of social good. Until then, this is Jay Frost. Thanks for joining me.