hopelesshappiness.com

This week I am working at sorting through my responsibilities; some of which are always at odds, and some of which have recently progressed to drawing up battle plans.

Is a personal responsibility a burden of obligation? Or is it an opportunity for reasoned growth? Perhaps it is (or should be) both.

Digging deeper, what is the difference between a 'responsibility for' and a 'responsibility to'? ... ... After some thought, I see 'a responsibility for' as involving ownership and control, whereas 'a responsibility to' would suggest the necessity of volitional action. And perhaps herein lies the conflict. Perhaps I should let go of feelings of ownership, and perhaps I should actively acknowledge the reality that control is elusive and (often) illusive. And by letting go, perhaps I can more freely focus on actions that (based on the virtue of my willingness to act) are less burdensome - actions that will advance reasoned growth.

When I first drew up the list below, (prior to the thought above), I included 'my wife and children' and 'my extended family' at the top of the list. I see now that I cannot be completely responsible 'for' another individual, but I can be responsible 'to' others through the willing actions listed below; (and I believe by working hard at these obligations, the potential influence will be greatest on those closest to me).

I have a responsibility...

• to actively care for my physical health;
• to perpetuate lifelong learning;
• to contribute productively;
• to grow spiritually;
• to question everything;
• to compassionately listen for understanding;
• to be truthful;
• to maintain a sense of humor;
• to minimize harm;
• to seek personal, familial, communal, global, and universal reconciliation.

Though I feel that (with an active awareness of the avaricious overindulgence of ownership and control) I can reduce the potential for conflict, I still have a list that has considerable potential for contentious contradiction.

These days I struggle mightily working at a balance of truthfulness and minimal harm; and I do so on many different fronts. In this struggle, according to the circumstance, I will predict the likelihood of my truthfulness being heard and understood vs. the likelihood of a greater harm, and I temper this calculation with the acknowledgement that not only is my truthfulness not a Perfect Truth, but my truthfulness (in the spirit of 'question everything') is (though truthful and confident) still inherently rife with uncertainties and doubts.

These days I struggle working at a balance of physical health and productive contribution. I have physical limitations that I work at compensating for with an effort toward serious study and lifelong learning, translated into weekly written thought. It has been observed (by myself and others) that this degree of determined focus and absorption at times results in excess stress, which in turn may impact physical health.

These days I struggle working at a balance of humor and responsibility. I take all responsibility (including my responsibility to maintain a sense of humor) seriously. To interject humor is to lubricate the gears, thus reducing the friction as I work at balancing personal responsibilities. These days I have failed to consistently interject humor as I should.

Every day I struggle working at a balance of spiritual growth and skepticism. Jules Verne said, "Science, my lad, is made up of mistakes, but they are mistakes which it is useful to make, because they lead little by little to the truth." The same might be said for religion; but in order to advance toward spiritual Truth, one must first acknowledge the possibility of mistakes, and next acknowledge the unattainability of a Perfect Spiritual Truth. Many who claim a certainty in faith will not allow for the possibility of mistakes. Certainty in faith is a contradiction of terms. Organized religion (for me) implies indoctrination and requires a passive acceptance. Every day I work hard at questioning every thing, thereby continuously pushing spiritual comfort just out of reach. Spiritual comfort is the primary marketing strategy for organized religion. Spirituality without religion is possible; it is also more difficult, more painful, more lonely, more truthful, and (I believe, potentially) more rewarding.

These days I struggle working at a balance of lifelong learning and compassion. The more I learn (in the areas I choose to study), the higher the levels of frustration and the less the likelihood of compassionate understanding. These days I believe this to be my most urgent area of contention. While not antisocial, these days I have become more withdrawn and more adversarial.

The previously-mentioned struggle between truthfulness and minimal harm also plays into this urgent struggle between learning and compassion. One year ago in the post 'Free-Floating Happiness' I made a case for compassion. I have frequently championed truthfulness, lifelong learning, and minimal harm. But as I have consistently thrown these four obligations into the same arena I have been victimized by internally-generated philosophical fisticuffs that have forced me into a corner now uncertain whether to attack with knowledge and truthfulness, cower in fear of doing harm, or (like a wise and benevolent wizard) hide behind a curtain of compassion. This last option is phrased as such because these days, that is how any outpouring of compassion feels.

Here is an example - a friend who has his two boys for the summer was very upset the other day because his ex called and said the boys wanted to cut their time with Dad short and fly back to the coast 2 or 3 weeks early. Living several hundred miles apart, he complained - (seemingly rightfully so) - that this was his only time with the boys and he did not want it cut short. Later that day he was inviting people for a 4th of July party and telling everyone he had "shipped" his boys off to his parent's for the weekend. Additionally, when asked how he was enjoying their visit, he was overheard to say 'he had to shut himself up in his room every night to get any peace and quiet.'

Aaaarrrrgghhhhh!

Do I attack with truthfulness? Do I cower silently, fearing that I might hurt his feelings and/or lose a party invite? Or do I hide in the folds of a false compassion expressing trite sympathies for his woes? I know... a more correct answer is that I should work at easing his suffering - (though I don't know that he realizes he is suffering) - by gently (perhaps humorously) chiding him for his contradictory actions and behaviors, and if he becomes defensive or belligerent I should back off and believe that what I have said has or will reach some part of him - lead with compassionate truthfulness, then work to minimize harm and maximize learning. Nonetheless,

...Aaaarrrrgghhhhh!

Depending on circumstance (who, where, what, when), it can be very difficult to prioritize one's obligations. I am not sure if I have experienced new learning this week, though I have solidified some past learning.  I have one more day...

... ... ... ... ...

Upon reflection, I believe differentiating 'responsibility for' and 'responsibility to' is a new (or at least uncommon) personal perspective, and I believe it has helped to lighten the load and simultaneously increase potential output.

... ... ... ... ...

In these past hours, I returned to the written thought above and added the content on humor. While certainly not new knowledge, it is renewed learning. While trying to remember at what point I had banished my sense of humor, it sent word back that I did not banish it; rather it had fled a cold and lonely darkness - me - to find refuge and survive as it could. My sense of humor has survived, and though malnourished and frail it has agreed to return. And I have agreed to increase the light and warmth necessary to nurse it back to health.

These days I am learning...

I am sitting in a big comfy chair, with a nice view overlooking an expanse of landscape. The movers arrive and say they are going to take my chair but they say I will be fine because they are going to give me a smaller, less comfortable chair. This smaller, less comfortable chair is facing a wall now, with a nice picture, but no view. I complain, but it turns out that as long as I have a chair, nothing will be done. So I get up and leave in search of a bigger, more comfortable chair. The first one I find, though still somewhat smaller, looks comfortable, so I sit down. I find it more dirty and worn than what it appeared from a distance, and I find the view very squalid. So I get up and leave in search of a bigger, more comfortable chair. The next one I find has a nice view, but it is smaller and much less comfortable, and after sitting for a bit I find the hard, straight back and uncushioned seat with no arms to be problematically uncomfortable, and I am physically unable to continue sitting in it. So I get up and leave in search of a bigger, more comfortable chair. The next one I find is not a chair at all but a steampunkish robotic contraption that I am strapped into and I am required to constantly be on the move, which isn't so bad, but it is not comfortable and the only view I have are fields of drab, institutional gray. So I unstrap myself and leave in search of a bigger, more comfortable chair. The next one I find looks comfortable and appears a little bigger, but still not as big as where I began. I sit down. It is fairly comfortable, (though not as comfortable as where I began), and it is not dirty, or too worn; but it must have been a trick of the light because it is not as big as it first appeared, and the view is not nearly as expansive. But for the moment I decide not to whine or complain. I decide to accept the hand I've been dealt. I decide to lower my expectations. I decide to stay. And I decide I will come back in the morning. It has been a long day. I go home. When I arrive at home I find the movers have arrived and been busy while I have been out searching. I find that my bed is now smaller and less comfortable. I find that my pantry is now smaller and less well-stocked. I find that my television is now smaller and less vibrant. I find that the plumbing, and the furnace, and the electricity, and the kitchen appliances are all less efficient and more difficult to contend with. I find that friends and family have moved into other neighborhoods far away from the movers. And as they are carrying off bits and pieces the movers turn their heads and they tell me that I should be grateful that I once had a big comfy chair and a nice view. And the movers tell me that I will be fine because they are going to leave me with a smaller, less comfortable Life. And when I complain, it turns out that as long as they are only taking a little bit here and a little piece there, nothing will be done.

Let your imagination run wild for a moment and visualize yourself chained and fettered to a desk, or locked inside a building for a set period of time each day (more days than not) and at the notion of custom and/or the fickle nature of some individual (or group of individuals) you are forced to perform tasks; and if you do not perform these tasks to the standards and expectations of (often) subjective judgement you are in danger of not making the rent check, or the grocery bill, or paying for heat, or...

Thank goodness we live in an enlightened age where the vagaries of outdated practices and the whimsy of impulse do not threaten one's livelihood. But if you did find yourself in such a circumstance, here is my question: Would you prefer to be painfully stretched up to and possibly beyond your human limitations? Or would you prefer to be closed up in a dark box performing menial tasks. To be tormented on the rack? Or to be thrown in the hole?

We all have limitations. And we all aspire toward meaningful purpose. Labels (such as 'new hire' and 'underling' and 'part-time' and 'disabled' and 'young' and 'old' and...) are confining and typically result in time in the hole; yet when one shows initiative, finds more meaningful purpose, and achieves beyond expectations the wheel of whimsy turns and an individual may earn some quality time on the rack.

It would of course be best if the hostage could escape the hole and be given opportunity for stretching exercises that will aid all parties in determining and agreeing upon one's capabilities and potential. Unfortunately, even in this enlightened age, some captives feel safe and comfortable in their hole and are intimidated by exercise; and some decision makers feel safer with the convicts in their holes and feel they can't spare the time to lead (what they may see as) exercises in futility.

Self deception is human nature. We lie to ourselves (often subconsciously) so it is easier to lie to others. So whether I am a decision maker (putting someone on the rack or throwing them in the hole) or a prisoner (pleading to be stretched or seeking the safety of my hole), I will be able to justify my actions. And when I look closely I believe these roles and justifications to extend beyond the workplace. And perhaps this all leads us to the ultimate question - If I cannot trust my self, where do I search for Truth?

I have built this entire web site - nearly 4 years of weekly written thought - on the idea that (upper-case) Happiness is dependent on one's Lifelong search for Truth and Wisdom. And now I admit that I lie to myself?

It is a dilemma...

...A dilemma I have been pondering for more than a day now.

First, an awareness of the possibility of subconscious self-deception has the potential to pull it into the light where any justifications can be examined more objectively. Next, a consistent practice of objectively examining justifications (which typically come after the reality of action) may encourage a closer examination of a proposed action (in light of the potential for self deception) before the conscious choice is acted upon. And finally, a consistent practice of objectively examining conscious choice before action, may eliminate the necessity of justification. The more frequently I justify, the greater the number of lies - to my self and to others.

Summary:

1. An awareness of the likelihood of self deception.
2. Objective examination of justifications.
3. Objective examination of conscious choice before acting upon it.

This is a daunting task. To eliminate all lies - (a Perfect scenario, which of course is not possible) - I would have to completely and perfectly see and understand my choices and their resulting impact as another will see and understand this impact. To reduce lies I must work toward that Perfection by considering the perspective of those impacted. These thoughts are parallel and very close to this previous written thought on minimizing harm. I believe these methods of analysis will aid in being more truthful and in working closer toward Truth; and this reminder is important, but I do not feel I am breaking new ground.

... ... ... ... ...

It would be interesting to ask the following questions specific to a circumstance / relationship:
Are you fulfilled?
Are you satisfied?
Are you bored?
Does it hurt?

I believe I would put satisfaction and boredom each on a scale of 1 to 5, and fulfillment and pain each on a scale of 1 to 10, with the highest number indicating 'very much so' or 'unbearably so' and the lowest number indicating 'not at all'. Now if pain is defined as 'the rack' (painfully stretched), and boredom is defined as 'the hole' (dark box / menial tasks), and if we can agree (at least to an extent) on the premise 'no pain, no gain', and if we allow the individual to define/interpret fulfillment and satisfaction, then I would subtract boredom from satisfaction, add that number to fulfillment, and subtract that result from pain. The greater a positive number, the greater the perceived pain. The lesser a negative number, the greater the perceived satisfaction up to fulfillment. The closer to zero, the greater the perceived depth of the hole. Of course the results are perceived results because (regardless of efforts otherwise) I may be lying to my self.

Notes:

• I include satisfaction and fulfillment to ensure a differentiation between the two, believing most individuals will see fulfillment as the more desirable / valuable.
• The first part of the equation (subtracting boredom from satisfaction) is in place to account for those satisfied with boredom; and to emphasize that while boredom for some could be satisfying, it will never be fulfilling.

When I apply this equation to a specific circumstance or relationship, even in the realm of the 'less personal' or impersonal (such as a part time job), I find myself rethinking initial instinct and justifying final choices; indications that I cannot trust my self. And when I consider applying this equation to a personal relationship I am immediately overwhelmed by a torrent of irreconcilable thoughts and emotions arguing truthfulness, justification, peace, goodness, compassion, courtesy, respect, love, anger, justice, frustration, and an innumerable quantity of other unidentifiable bits of floating, flying, stinging, biting internal detritus. 'Two weeks ago' I considered paradox and the process of seeking reconciliation. As I said then, it is an ongoing cycle.

Perhaps I need more practice...

... ... ... ... ...

I have practiced. And I have figured out that in any circumstance or relationship that requires a give and take I will at varying times experience both the rack and the hole. And I have discovered that results change (at least) on a daily basis. Though I can conceptualize a cumulative result based on history, I believe this historical perspective to be more subjective (and more difficult) than an assessment in and for the moment. And I have found that I want to rate pain differently depending upon who it is inflicting the pain. When my wife or children stretch me with high expectations, since I see that as willing sacrifice or loving kindness, I find that I rate the pain as less than if similar demands come from my employer. Is this truthful? Or is this a justification? I believe it to be truthful because of what I see as a stronger bond fortified by a reciprocal commitment to a more extensive common ground. Is this truthful? Or is this a more complex justification?

So you can see, practice has helped. It has helped me to become more discriminating and more truthful; or it has helped me to become more discriminating and a more convincing liar.

I will continue to practice...

A Question of Perspective:

Pain:
A screech and a crash and the steam-hiss of gears.
The ache and the anguish of lost-lonely fears.
Effluvious sludge in a runoff of years.
A Lifetime of learning; a Lifetime of tears.

Pleasure:
I shift when I can to more boisterous gears.
The carefree non-plan of 9 lives and 3 cheers.
Oblivious moments, ignoring the years.
Just living the life as my life disappears.

Power:
The confident roar of prevailing high gears.
My goal, to control the chief puppeteers.
A certainty sown in the youth of my years.
A Lifetime discerning where best to hide fears.

Poetry:
A swaying sensation of jazzy-smooth gears.
A sacred creation connecting the spheres.
With rhythm and grace I will dance through my years.
A Life of compassion; a Life full of tears.

Pretense:
The gnashing of teeth; the grinding of gears.
The mind-numbing weight of self-conscious fears.
Convinced of my wisdom beyond my few years.
I gush and I spout and I talk off some ears.

Quiescence:
I'm playing it safe by not switching gears.
No worries, no questions, and no new frontiers.
Complacently passing the days and the years.
A Lifetime of yearning for meaningful tears.

Passion:
A laugh and a smile to lubricate gears.
The warmth of a friend when doubt leads to fears.
Harmonious fire that burns through the years.
A Lifetime of questions; a Lifetime of tears.

Ponder and Quarrel:
It is a question of perspective. And I really should allow these perspectives to stand alone and speak for themselves. But with the hubris inherent to and necessary for pretense, I feel compelled to pursue further analysis and commentary; (though I can argue that this pretense is in actuality passion, since I have no reason to believe that my weekly written thought will ever be anything but that).

These perspectives quite clearly overlap, but I believe at any given period (and/or in any given compartment) in one's Life there will be one or two that predominate. For example, in this past decade, I have been shot-put between pain, poetry, and passion, with occasional (probably more frequent than I want to remember) forays into pretense. Passion pulls me from pain, but I have found that runaway passion may manifest as discordant anger. In poetry I find some energizing peace. Poetry is inquisitive spirituality without religion. The effort toward poetry must be conscious and intentional, and the ever-evolving result of poetry should be esoterically transcendental and ineffable.

I would argue that a Lifetime of pain and passion and poetry is preferable to a preponderance of other perspective combinations or any one single perspective. Perhaps I make this claim because I feel it is this combination of perspectives that has guided me as an individual these last few years. Or perhaps I make this claim based on perceived learning and growth in this past decade. There are many days I work very hard at increasing levels of poetry and passion to numb the pain, while at the same time not succumbing to the siren songs of quiescence and/or pretense. It has been many years since I have experienced a perspective of power at levels previously perceived; though I see now that much of what I felt then was an illusion.

Unlike poetry (which one must seek consciously and intentionally) pain is often thrust upon us. Some may argue this, and (to some extent) rightfully so; but those that do argue against the impact of circumstance are often those who are comparatively pain-free. Circumstance can influence all perspectives, but the individual still must take ultimate responsibility by pushing back into unfortunate circumstance, and by seeking other perspectives.

I must also argue that of all the perspectives, quiescence should be the least desirable as it limits potential for learning and growth moreso than any other - (including pleasure from which, by being active, one may learn from mistakes and/or by osmosis). Yet quiescence is the easiest and (too) often the most comfortable. To maintain the passive comfort of "no worries, no questions, and no new frontiers" the perspective of quiescence leaves a void; a sense of loss seldom acknowledged, but nonetheless felt. This "yearning for meaningful tears" inherent in quiescence becomes manifest in many different ways including unquestioning conformity to a cause or belief, political correctness, overstated outrage, drama, crocodile tears, an unnatural desire for and attachment to 'stuff', narcissism, an ignorance of or apathy for visible reality, an inability to see past or escape bureaucracy and other political inventions, and the inability to express oneself beyond simple and/or predictable platitudes. Because one mired in quiescence feels a need for meaning and seeks to fill that need they will learn to fabricate a depth of meaning from an otherwise superficial source; a source often presented as meaningful by another individual or group operating from a perspective of power or pretense.

I believe every individual to have some natural inclination to each perspective presented. I believe some natural inclinations to be stronger than others, varying in degree according to the individual. I believe circumstance can push one toward or away from a perspective. And I believe that by being aware of this question of perspective one can consciously choose to work at a Lifetime to their liking.

Reconciliation - 'The process of making consistent or compatible.'

We spend every thinking moment of every day seeking reconciliation. We very much want Life to make sense. When something does not make sense we can either a) forget it; b) hide it; c) respect it; or d) be afraid. All but the last of these is an attempt at reconciliation. To be afraid most often forces one to fall back on a, b, or c. To be afraid for an extended period (I believe) can lead one to (and perhaps over) the brink of truth and/or madness. Is there a connection between truth and madness? If so, is it more likely that truth leads to madness? Or is it more likely that madness leads to truth? If Friedrich Nietzsche were here, I would ask him. In 1865, more than 20 years before his ultimate mental breakdown, Nietzsche said,

"Hence the ways of men part: if you wish to strive for peace of soul and pleasure, then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire."

To inquire creates the possibility of an irreconcilable paradox; and this in turn creates the strong likelihood of either unacknowledged fear or acknowledged fear. When faced with the dilemma of a seemingly irreconcilable paradox: a) those who hold a strong opposing belief typically do not recognize or acknowledge their fear, they simply ignore then immediately forget any validity within an opposing perspective and continue to believe what they have been told to believe; b) those who consistently maintain a majority or a conformist belief may or may not acknowledge their short-lived fear, but regardless, immediately cram any oppositional validity into a personal pandora's box, thus hiding it from view and enabling a comfortable ignorance; and finally c) those who question a truth recognize, acknowledge, and respect their fear of the unknown, actively seeking reconciliation by virtue of learning and growth that leads to new knowledge, (which in turn should create another paradox, beginning the cycle again).

This week I have faced irreconcilable paradox. Every week I consciously consider and work at exoteric goodness. Every week I fall short in some way. But this week, (more than usual), I have seen and felt my failings with a visceral intimacy beyond discomfort. I have tried to put this off to circumstance, but can circumstance actually create iniquity? Or does circumstance simply drag my imperfections to center stage, forcing a reconciliation?

There comes a dizzying point in this constant cycle of seeking reconciliation when the learning and the fear begin to overlap.

There comes a dizzying point in this constant cycle of seeking reconciliation when one is unable to differentiate between a dog playfully chasing its tail and a snake destructively devouring its tail.

There comes a dizzying point in this constant cycle of seeking reconciliation when one is encouraged to forget or hide, or else feel the risk of facing the madness of truth; (or the truth of madness).

This week I have come to this dizzying point.

Typically, as we approach this dizzying point or when we come to this dizzying point many (I believe most) of us choose to forget or hide, which allows an escape from the fear and an excuse or reason to forego the learning.

Some have a very low tolerance for vertigo and come to this dizzying point much more quickly than others.

I believe that with practice, when we come to this dizzying point, most of us can become more tolerant and perhaps even learn to enjoy the ride.

In the company of others, (who are like-minded in their insistence on respectful skepticism and argument, and who can mitigate the dangers in approaching the brink), it can be a wildly exhilarating ride.

Alone it can be a difficult, contentious, painful, and potentially dangerous ride.

If I can avoid danger, will I learn more alone from the difficulty, contention, and pain? Or will I learn more through the safer exhilaration and interdependent synergy of mutually respectful argument?

If I can avoid the danger...
...of truth.

It is in our nature to complicate truth, making it more dangerous. But to simplify truth one must first know it, and in the context of an ultimate truth I don't believe this to be possible. If it were possible to see the simplicity of an ultimate final truth I believe the current danger inherent in seeking truth would be transformed into a demanding decisiveness. And therein lies the even greater danger of certainty.

We spend every thinking moment of every day seeking reconciliation. The fact that we do this vividly illustrates the elusiveness of truth.

To seek reconciliation is to seek truth...

To seek truth is inherently dangerous...

To face that danger is (for me) preferable to oblivious comfort...

We should seek truth...

We should be afraid of truth...

Regardless...