hopelesshappiness.com

I was disturbed and saddened this week when I read, (in 'Moral Tribes' by Joshua Greene), of a study that showed endorsement of a policy by conservative or liberal leadership had more influence than the actual policy substance. The study participants were shown a generous welfare policy endorsed by conservative leaders, and a restrictive welfare policy endorsed by liberal leaders. Both policies created significant majority partisan support, despite the fact that in a parallel study in which there was no policy endorsement, (as would be expected) conservatives preferred the more restrictive policy and liberals preferred the more generous policy.

As I have pondered this paradoxical behavior this week though, I am considering a change of heart. This consideration was influenced this morning by an off-the-cuff remark I made to my wife. On the way to work, as I found myself climbing down from my soapbox (-a frequent occurrence-) I said, "I'm sorry; some days I get tired of myself too." (I should note that my wife is very kind and patient, and had not said a discouraging word, nor even rolled her eyes; though I was preoccupied with a safe dismount, so I could have missed an eye-roll.) But I am being truthful when I say this vigilant effort at learning and growth for a better understanding can wear on one's body and mind, and these seemingly futile efforts toward fruitful communication can wear on one's spirit.

Perhaps there is something to be said for partisanship.

Perhaps it is time to simplify and stop thinking for myself. If I can let others do my thinking for me, perhaps I will have more time for HBO; (I like HBO).

Perhaps I should switch my reading efforts exclusively to fiction, and restrict my writing efforts to grocery lists and Scrabble score pads.

Perhaps my credentials are not as impeccable as required by those 'powers that be' who set that standard for those allowed to influence. I admit I am an old, low-ranking, pedestrian bother, full of imperfections and faults, only working part-time, and with a disability, a government check, and a low credit score. I know in the eyes of many I would not make their grade, so why should I care about things (I cannot impact) and people (who don't want to be bothered)?

Though I have learned my place, perhaps I should stop shouting at passersby, and learn to live quietly within my designated restrictions and limitations.

Perhaps I should no longer work at leaving a better world for generations to come; (including my beautiful granddaughter). Perhaps instead I can live within the utopian bliss of Shangri-la with all of my friends and neighbors; (we could join hands, smile, sing sunny tunes, and be happy together).

I know you detect a touch of sarcasm, but I really do like HBO. And I am sure there are studies that show if I surround myself with cheerful, smiling people, I will find myself smiling and feeling cheerful. So Why Not? Why should I bash my brains into oblivion when I could just walk right in? And be welcomed with open arms!

Put this way, the choice appears to be a no-brainer...

We have a tendency to panic when we cannot trick ourselves into believing we are in control. Oftentimes we put on a brave front but depending on the perceived degree of turbulent helplessness, within (our minds, our guts, our hearts), there may rage a storm; which in turn may easily impact one's physical well-being. The truth is that when we perceive ourselves as having control, we are in actuality a mere heartbeat from chaos, turmoil, upheaval, distress, annoyance, discomfort, displeasure, or disturbing / troublesome points between and beyond. We don't like to acknowledge this reality.

Additionally, we don't like to be reminded of this reality in the form of others in turmoil. There are some others who appear to like the drama of upheaval, and for those individuals it is not difficult to find (and oftentimes exaggerate) the pain; but it is also not difficult to recognize these individuals and apply a grain of salt. And for those others who are in (what we perceive as) legitimate pain, we tend to apply the maxim 'time heals all wounds' and/or we shun these individuals until the maxim actually begins to work. We also appreciate those who appear to quickly bounce back from adversity (at least partially, if not mostly) because it helps us to avoid the second-hand pain. But what of those (due to inexperience, lack of opportunity, ineptitude, or actual destructive impact) who get stuck in pain and either cannot see the value of resilience or simply do not care? It is easy to advise someone not to pile pain on top of pain, yet throughout this site I have maintained that pain and adversity create learning and growth opportunities and ultimately carry us toward Truth, Wisdom, and Happiness; but as in anything, there can be too much of a good thing. The challenge is (especially with a loved-one) knowing when to let them see your pain as a result of their pain; and this is often accomplished by exhibiting frustration or even anger. Verbal concern, proximate empathy, and perceptive compassion are all necessary, appropriate, and helpful - to a point; but there will come a point when (I believe) one must choose to either 1) push, 2) walk away, or 3) indulge from a distance, so as not to also become mired in the muck and slop of another's despair. When it comes to anyone (but especially my family), I am not a coddler, and I find it very difficult to create distance by walking away or becoming a bystander; (pain should not become a spectator sport). But I also find that I often tend to push too hard, too soon.

I am not going to waste words on defending this predilection toward high expectations and (what may appear to some as) lack of patience. I believe an active awareness will assist me in softening my hard edges, quieting my quick tongue, listening for understanding, and openly acknowledging my own many mistakes and imperfections. Reminders such as this written thought help me to be actively aware, which has really been (as I look back) the main reason for these past three-and-a-half years of weekly ramblings. And I think in this (roundabout) way I have discovered what I am really thinking about this week - the value of consistent, disciplined thought, leading to learning and growth, as it applies to my daily existence.

• Some weeks I write to stay sane; (and that is not a large exaggeration).
• Some weeks I write to express frustration, learn from it, and move on.
• Some weeks I write to allay fear.
• Some weeks I write in response to another's thoughts; (most typically as I've absorbed them in their writing).
• Some weeks I write to organize my thoughts on a particular topic or concept.
• Some weeks I write to discover new or unacknowledged thoughts.
• Occasionally, I write for fun.
• Some weeks I write in circles.
• Some weeks I write to inhibit impulsive action.
• Some weeks I have, (especially at the beginning), written to teach; which is how I learned that I am both teacher and pupil.
• Some weeks I begin writing simply to maintain the discipline.
• And most weeks I write to maintain a sense of control.

...which is where I began; but this week I am not going to chase my tail.

(NOTE: I had a similar train of thought to the 'bullets' above in this post from last September.)

No matter the specificities surrounding my chosen (or accidental) thought for the week, after 190+ posts, the overriding reason has become (as already stated) "the value of consistent, disciplined thought, leading to learning and growth, as it applies to my daily existence." Which leads me back to, (though I promised no circles), the desire to help others see the value in objective consideration of subjective experience.

My method for considering personal experience as objectively as I am able, is to translate thoughts and feelings into the written word. This act of writing (for me) clarifies the emotion, without removing it. In a sense it adds a level of rationality allowing me to see my feelings from above and still feel them from within. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, this method lags behind real time, meaning that 'in the moment' emotion often drives action or reaction. This is unfortunate because as rationality catches up I may discover that my behavior was arbitrarily improper. Yet this is also fortunate because it is honest and I believe it forces me to better evaluate and learn from the experience.

Not everyone writes; but perhaps everyone should. In this moment I cannot think of another medium that would come close to the advantages I have found in disciplined writing... but let me think...

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

I see that a case could be made that any creative expression would allow one to translate thought and feelings through an assortment of innovative or inspirational endeavors. These could include literature, painting, drawing, sculpting, theatre or film, music, dance, photography, culinary arts, and many craft occupations or hobbies. In addition to participation and/or performance, some may say that an intensive study of these arts, or various humanities, would help one to focus and organize thoughts and feelings. And from there I suppose that we could allow that creative expression is possible in any discipline one might find, say in a listing of degree programs or even course offerings at any major university. And from there it is a short jump to claiming that immersion in an organization and/or a (perceived) 'good' cause is adequate expression of one's thoughts and feelings. And where to next? Perhaps devotion to a charismatic leader? Or a sports team? Or a computer game? Or a television show? I think we have crossed a line somewhere in this progression, but where?

Where is it an expression of consistent, disciplined thought that helps us to evaluate and learn? And where does it become a vehicle for the purpose of distracting us from pain and adversity?

If one is able to operate a remote control, one is able to think. And if one is able to think, with disciplined effort, one is able to organize thoughts. The challenge becomes remembering previously constructed thought formations, and then re-evaluating and re-interpreting them.

In this moment I cannot think of another medium that would come close to the advantages I have found in disciplined writing.

(Yeah, I know... ...but it was only a small circle.)

Today is Friday. Typically, by now I am in the 'revision/fine-tuning' stage of my weekly post. This week has been calm, which is appropriate considering last week's post, and which may help to explain the attendant dearth of written thought. This week I finished one work of fiction ('The Bone Clocks' by David Mitchell), and I am working on two books of nonfiction; one with the word "Santa" in the title, and the other with the word "Zombies" in the title, and both titles are questions - ('Does Santa Exist?' by Eric Kaplan, and 'Do Zombies Dream of Undead Sheep?' by Timothy Verstynen and Bradley Voytek). In the midst of pondering Santa Claus and the Zombies, I also worked at learning the game of Go, which I believe added to the relative tranquility of my week.

If you are not familiar with it, or have never played the game of Go, I strongly encourage (at the least) an examination of its history, rules, surrounding commentary, and impact. I have read (in multiple sources) that Go is the oldest known board game still being consistently played, with age estimates ranging between 2,500 and 4,000 years. It is often compared with Backgammon and Chess as seen in the first (unattributed) quote below. This quote combined with the following three (for me) impart a relevant feel for the game:

"Backgammon is a game where man battles fate. Chess is a game where man battles man. Go is a game where man battles himself."

"In Chess you start with everything you have on the board. In Go you start from nothing and build." ---Tim Klinger, quoted in The New York Times, July 29, 1997.

"The developed structures at each point in the game are the past, and the possibilities existing in that situation are the future. Together they constitute the present. Properly understanding the past and future in this sense is the essence of good timing." ---W. Cobb

"Success at Go requires the tactic of the soldier, the exactness of the mathematician, the imagination of the artist, the inspiration of the poet, the calm of the philosopher, and the greatest intelligence." ---Zhang Yunqi, Weiqi de faxian (Discovering weiqi), Beijing, Internal document of the Chinese Weiqi Institute 1991, p. 2.

When I bought this game I could not generate curiosity or interest within my circle of potential opponents. So this week I devised a solitaire version that incorporated an element of luck (using two die) that is not present (nor should be) in traditional Go, but quite gracefully serves its purpose as a learning tool by allowing for some unpredictability in each successive individual play. Very simply, black plays first (as in traditional Go) but before playing black rolls a single (6-sided) die to determine where it may play. Looking at the board as the black player would see it, the board is mentally/visually divided into six areas: four quadrants, a bottom half, and a top half. Moving left to right and bottom to top, the lower left quadrant is 1; the lower right quadrant is 2; the upper left quadrant is 3; the upper right quadrant is 4; the bottom half is 5; and the top half is 6. The die roll should be left as it lands to signify the area black may play in. This area includes the 10th (or border) lines that enclose the area. Before white plays, the same process is followed, except the areas are numbered according to white's seated perspective; (so, for example, if both players show a 1 on their respective die, they are not paying in the same quadrant - they are each playing in opposite corner quadrants).  In each successive turn in this version black and white may decide to roll the die or not; if the die is not rolled, the allowable play area remains the same as in the previous turn and as signified by the face-up die. The die roll is NOT considered a player's turn. The player must play in the designated area but does so immediately, thus maintaining the integrity of balanced play. As a game progresses a player may roll the die a 2nd (or as necessary 3rd, 4th, 5th...) time IF AND ONLY IF that specific designated (by-the-roll-of-the-die) area is in endgame cleanup (i.e. 100 percent undisputed dame and territorial ownership), yet there are other areas  that must still be played out to determine any territorial ownership. Die roll is suspended and players may use the entire board once endgame cleanup (i.e. 100 percent undisputed dame and territorial ownership) is reached in 3 of the 4 quadrants. These last two rules disallow forced blunders and maintain traditional Go rules. (Please forgive any ignorance, naivete, or butchered terminology; I am still learning.)

This solitaire version worked very well for me (at least) partially because, in the spirit of the game, on each successive turn, I looked forward to possibility with an emphasis on my opponent's next move, as I knew my opponent would show me that same respect. Additionally, by me sitting at the side of the board (I believe) it is helping me to see the energy of the entire board, the unspoken conative commerce being conducted between the players, and the dynamics of the all-inclusive bigger picture - as it is meant to be.

I have played one game. I made many mistakes. I learned much. I was challenged. I was calmed. I am looking forward to my second game.

Walk infinite paths
to choose finite liberties;
look... Shapes so pretty.

Last week I circled peace. It is not the first time I have sought composure and tranquility within the folds of my consentient insignificance and relevance. In some circumstance it feels that I do indeed instinctively synthesize this conflicting push of relevance and pull of insignificance, and in other situations I must consciously move myself to subtly layer these yin and yang yearnings or choose one over the other. I do want personal relevance (but when I am aware), I do not want it at the expense of exoteric goodness and inner peace. I am too often not aware. I associate relevance with the darker motives that result from interpreting Life through my life, and I associate insignificance with the exoteric goodness and inner peace that can come from an acknowledgment and active reconnaissance of Life as the ultimate determinate of my choices impacting my life.

I do have choices. We have choices. Many individuals interpret this as free will and from that interpretation it is a very short and manageable leap to personal relevance, followed by a need for personal relevance, followed by an addiction to personal relevance, leading to a fog of incomprehension. I am not saying that free will is misinterpreted or nonexistent. I am saying that free will (as personal choice) is often misguided.

I believe (as dictated by my Humanity) that I must seek and possess some degree of personal relevance. I also believe that the higher the degree of desired (or necessary) personal relevance, the more jaded the outlook, the more diluted the exoteric goodness, and the more slippery the inner peace.

I believe (as dictated by the whole of Humanity) that I must recognize and act in accordance with some degree of personal insignificance. I also believe that the lesser the degree of personal insignificance, the more pretentious the outlook, the less efficient and meaningful the exoteric goodness, and the less consequential the inner peace.

This becomes somewhat of a balancing act in that (I believe) a recognition of both relevance and insignificance are typically present to some degree in a large majority of individuals, but a high degree of one does not preclude a high degree of the other, (and vice versa), especially when one considers that the output of each can come from either or both of one's interactive self and one's unrevealed self; (see this post from December). For example one can possess a high degree of personal relevance and still publicly contribute meaningful exoteric goodness, and this same individual can also esoterically possess a relatively high degree of personal insignificance, thus strengthening that exoteric goodness and further enabling an inner peace. Personal relevance and personal insignificance should not be considered on a simple, single spectrum; it is a multi-dimensional complexity of braiding and reversals, that becomes more and more dangerous at the extremes.

So here we have (1a) personal relevance and (1b) personal insignificance, as interpreted by (2a) my life and (2b) Life, and expressed through my (3a) interactive self and my (3b) unrevealed self, and resulting in some (positive or negative) degree of (4a) exoteric goodness and/or (4b) inner peace. So if each strand and or braid of this multi-dimensional complexity contains an adjustable, instinctive, or reactive share of each of these 8 components (with the unpredictability of circumstance thrown in for good measure), is it possible to choose the strand or braid that will maximize inner peace? Or does this construct just simply contain too many variables?

Some would say I am over-thinking ... ...Perhaps I am. But I would prefer over-thinking to a simplified outlook of comfort and pleasure as peace. And I would prefer over-thinking to an expression of goodness exclusively for the sake of onlookers. And I would prefer over-thinking to turning a blind eye toward the unpredictability of circumstance. And I would prefer over-thinking to the incomprehension and ignorance of personal relevance sans personal insignificance.

There are too many (constantly changing) variables to consistently find the strand or braid that will bring inner peace. But whether I am choosing instinctively, reactively, or consciously I have found that I can create some composure by consciously raising my level of personal insignificance, reaching across the span toward 'Life' as an interpretive aid, and expressing this result within my unrevealed self. This composure then brings some calm which creates space allowing me to assess circumstance and increase the likelihood of tranquility and peace; momentary and fleeting though it may, at times, be. These three (identified) components (personal insignificance, Life, and the unrevealed self) are less instinctive, less comfortable, and less readily-accessible, which is why there must be conscious effort. Last week I circled peace at 10,000 feet looking for a safe landing place. This week (through this conscious effort) I found calmer air at a lower altitude enabling me to locate a gentle terrain on which to land.

Composure, then Tranquility...

Life is serious, and should be taken seriously. I frequently make the mistake of confusing 'Life' with 'my life' which leads to the mistake of taking myself too seriously. (And though it does help to explain), this should not be an excuse for frivolity, narcissism, pretentious affectations, political shenanigans (in the context of politics as struggle for power and control), and (in some cases) dysfunctional despondency. I should be objectively serious. When I am objectively serious, I believe I am more likely to learn and grow and less likely to spiral into excuses. But how do I remain objectively serious about Life when everything is filtered through my life? This is what I am thinking about this week.

It is not a new question.

My perception of this gap of understanding between the two ('Life' and 'my life') is a deep chasm that (in this moment) appears very narrow; so narrow in fact that I can almost (but not with a suitable degree of confidence) jump across. So (based on observation and experience) it appears that I can either 1) decide it is not worth the risk or effort and stay on my side (believing I can do as much good from here), or 2) search for and/or build a connective span (of some sort) thus allowing me to believe I have bridged the gap even though I still (thanks to my humanity) spend a large majority of my time in my life and continue to largely interpret Life from this side of the gap.

I believe that adversity helps to connect dots, fill voids, and leap gaps, and in this context my most relevant personal experience (where for a short time I found a natural bridge that seamlessly melded my life and Life) was the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Assuming I decide to work toward a greater understanding, how do I replicate that natural fusion? What sort of connective span would most effectively approach a maximally productive intertwining of Life and my life?

First, as I think this through it feels I should go it alone because if I recruit others (or if I am recruited by others) to help find meaning across the void, it suddenly becomes multiple individuals, each interpreting and reacting from their 'my life', which will create a greater potential for frivolity, groupthink, pretense, and politics; these things are counterproductive.

Next, if I must go it alone, how do I objectively judge my objectivity? Though I do not believe Perfect Objectivity to be possible, I do believe that the best method for stretching toward that ideal comes from a practice of Quantum Happiness as explained in that post from last summer and followed up two weeks later with Free-Floating Happiness.  These two posts (with the help of other thoughts in other posts) encourage a connection that adds the whole of humanity and subtracts special consideration for the concept of me as an intrinsically absolute entity. Many individuals balk at this (emotionally) but (rationally) it makes a lot of sense, and by focusing on its logic I believe I can come closer to an objectively serious outlook that will move me yet closer to an understanding of Life through my life.

So if a portion - ('all' would be Perfection, which I do not believe is possible) - of this 'energy of me' is subtracted from 'my life' and added to 'Life' I am 1) creating that personal adversity necessary for connection, 2) doing so without harming others, 3) taking Life seriously, and 4) adding objectivity by subtracting a degree of subjectivity. But is this enough to begin work on a connective span that will consistently bridge the gap?...

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

...Perhaps, yes... ...It may be a beginning. But as illustrated by many natural disasters (including Hurricane Katrina) the shared pain and adversity of hundreds or thousands of individuals is that many times more efficient; largely because, in these special circumstances, these individuals are working with no agenda other than an instinctive compassion and responsibility. We cannot (and I do not) wish disaster on anyone to encourage this addition (to 'Life') by subtraction (from 'my life'). But we can (and I do) encourage an active awareness of this gap and a serious communal effort to find common ground from which we can begin to bridge it.

So it appears that with discipline and practice I can personally maintain an active awareness that will encourage thoughtful, serious objectivity. And though I believe it could be counterproductive and potentially harmful to recruit or seek out other like-minded individuals, I (in this moment) also recognize that alone it will be difficult to maintain an effective connective span; especially one that would be utilized by others. I could yell "FIRE!" but after looking around many would see that it could be multiple generations before they (i.e. their descendants) would feel the heat, and therefore they will not be inspired to take themselves any less seriously and/or to redirect their energies. When individuals are given the option to pay now or later, too many of us (too frequently) procrastinate.

Consider an equation with 'my life' on one side and 'Life' on the other side. I could multiply 'my life' by 7,290,352,626 and it would still not equal 'Life'. Yet I could subtract a portion of the 'energy of me' from 'my life' and add it to 'Life' and if I do this every day, with no expectation of quid pro quo, I have made a significant contribution.

I could stop here and feel good about my life, because I do this. Most every day I reach across the span and work at a serious understanding of Life. But because (in nearly all everyday circumstance) I have no choice but to lug my Humanity around wherever I go, I find that I continue to take myself too seriously. I still find (within my self) pretense and frivolity, a certain amount of selfishness, all too frequent political struggles, and the occasional despair verging on dysfunction. And, I have not found consistent safe passage across this void; for myself or for others.

I have long (perhaps all my life?) flinched from, ducked, resisted, and/or fought authority. This tendency creates a natural reluctance to wield authority, though I have more than once found myself in a leadership position that in hindsight, (I feel) caused the gap to widen to a point where I lost sight of Life. This penchant for uncertainty, doubt, and the questioning of all things authoritative creates reluctance to instruct others, because - What do I know? This inclination has also led me to long believe (have faith) that each individual is capable of interpreting and then choosing a best course of action. I may be losing that faith. I believe that today's leadership (government, business, spiritual, bureaucratic) has lulled many of us to sleep and/or hypnotized us with comfort and a facade of authority.

Perhaps I digress. But perhaps this background is necessary for serious objectivity. And perhaps there are too many sheep and too few independent thinkers. Is this the way it has always been? Is this the way it must always be? I would like to think not; but if this maximally productive bridge to a serious, objective understanding of 'Life' must be built with blood, sweat, and tears on a structure of autonomous thinking, how do I encourage that before it is an absolute necessity? How do I simultaneously lead others and discourage them from following? How do I create pain and adversity, yet do no harm? How do I encourage uncertainty, doubt, and serious questioning, and also convince others to act now? It is this state of contradiction that has led me to my current 'lead by example' stand, with the active hope that we don't arrive at 'too late' too soon. It is this state of contradiction that colors my humanity and discolors compassion and responsibility. It is this state of contradiction that helps me to see the gap between my life and Life.

What to do...

What to do...

Awareness is Good. Constant reminders and consistent practice help to move me forward, and even when this progress feels circular, it is Good. I believe there to be hidden pathways awaiting discovery. Life is serious, and should be taken seriously. I frequently make the mistake of confusing 'Life' with 'my life' which leads to the mistake of taking myself too seriously.