hopelesshappiness.com

OBSERVATION: On a broad scale, (for example a bureaucracy), our basis for reason is not right and wrong; it is not fairness; it is not justice; it is not ethical behavior; it is varying combinations and degrees of money and power; power in turn, being determined by money and/or one's position of influence. And once one has tasted financial success and/or power, it is difficult for that individual (or organization) to think in any terms other than what he, she, or they believe to be the greater good; beliefs tainted by power that tend to lose sight of the individual. This is sad.

There is a stack of wood in my yard. This week I kicked it in frustration, and a hefty log rolled off, bruising my leg. Friedrich Nietzsche said "The growth of wisdom may be gauged exactly by the diminution of ill temper." I'm not sure I agree with Mr. Nietzsche. I believe my bruise added experience which contributed to wisdom. Last week I got angry and expressed frustration toward two individuals, one of whom understood and apologized, thus clearing the air, adding experience, and contributing to wisdom. The other individual wanted to fight; but I would argue that this also added to experience and contributed to wisdom in that I learned to consider the difference between one who is capable of reason and a block of wood.

Delirium: 'a more or less temporary disorder of the mental faculties, as in fevers, disturbances of consciousness, or intoxication, characterized by restlessness, excitement, and/or delusions.' By this definition, I cannot think of a circumstance when delirium (to some degree) does not accompany anger; or for that matter, any emotional reaction. I realize now that I have stated the obvious. Nonetheless, it is a reminder I want to explore. This (for me) solidifies my disagreement with Nietzsche's quote above.

I have recently discussed the necessity of a personal balance of transcendental and empirical. In the same sense, I do not believe that true learning and growth can take place without some emotive rationality. One must recognize, acknowledge, and fully feel the emotion, (and in some circumstance express the emotion), before being able to act rationally upon the emotion. To subdue emotions constricts the range of possible, rational response. Though once fully felt, to control emotional expression or reaction keeping it from the realm of irrational response, can be difficult.

Side note: 'emotive rationality' sounds like a phrase Dr. Spock (from Star Trek) might spout, and though it is an admirable concept, I also realize that irrational response (while perhaps not favorable) is at times unavoidable and still maintains a potential for adding to one's Wisdom.

Delirium by definition is a pathology, implying abnormal behavior. Yet I believe many (probably most, if not all) of us can recall a time we have been caught up in 'a moment' (of joy, fear, sadness, ecstasy, anger, disgust, serenity) when/where we have exhibited this pathology. Rather than suppress this state, I believe we should cultivate it, learning to (beyond the moment) react rationally. What would Life be otherwise without an experience of intoxicating love; or contempt for an injustice; or a temporarily delusional sense of optimism; or occasional, short-term melancholia; or a rare moment of delirious happiness. These 'abnormalities' help to define our reality and should not be held in check by an illusion of constant happiness or an expected sense of decorum.

I recently ran across a description of the musical rhythmic pattern 'clave' typically found in Afro-Cuban music. David Byrne in his book 'How Music Works' states that "much Latin music has a framework referred to as the clave (the key), which sometimes isn't even played or audibly articulated by any one instrument..." and he goes on to exclaim, "what a beautiful concept that is: the most important part is invisible!" I propose that emotion is to Life as rhythm is to music and the ideal (clave) invisibility can be attained by practicing emotive rationality. Emotionally, most of us will continue to clumsily oscillate along a spectrum of 'slow waltz to strident death metal' - unable to consistently keep the beat; but one can aspire...

Alexander the Great said, "If all were of one mind, the cosmos would stand still." I believe he was encouraging evolution through doubt, disagreement, and questioning, and not predicting the degree of specialization so prevalent in (it seems) every industry and corridor of today's Society; a specialization that makes it appear we are all as far away from 'one mind' as is possible. I believe this appearance to be deceiving and I will come back to this point toward the end of the post, but first I want to consider specialization by looking at some examples.

Today many of us find it difficult (if not impossible) to see the bigger picture because we are so overwhelmed by the demands of our individual responsibilities. I don't believe this aids in our overall learning and growth as intended, though it does (in many cases) add to the quantity of knowledge and/or output. An example: a trip to an orthopedic group 2 to 3 years ago resulted in a neck specialist noting a bulging disc 'not bad enough to warrant invasive procedures' so a nerve specialist was consulted who did not see 'serious' nerve issues but did say the MRI showed a 'slight' tear in the rotator cuff, resulting in a visit to the shoulder specialist who said the tear was not deserving of surgery at this time and recommended a physical therapist. Finally the physical therapist was able to see the connection from neck to shoulders to arm pain (which I could see in the mirror) and recommended specific exercises to alleviate the melding pain from these various 'not-so-serious' ailments. The exercise helped, but what is fascinating to me is that these three educated, intelligent doctors apparently could not see (or refused to look and/or communicate) beyond their specific area of expertise. Each ailment exacerbated each other ailment and it took me weeks into months (and who knows how many dollars) to adequately understand this.

I could give examples from business as well. I have seen many variants of Operations people tripping over Human Resources who were battling Training and Development who did not understand Research and Marketing who looked down on the Sales force who felt they weren't supported by Operations... and on and on it goes. And the saddest part is that frequently everyone is right - from their unique, specific point of view.

Another example: a recent perusal of a major state university's web site revealed "More Than 280 Degree Programs" offered. From Turfgrass Management to Peace Studies to Urban Forestry to Family and Lifespan Development, it is another indication of the funnel effect on individual learning and growth. Don't get me wrong; the subject matter of these majors is relevant (we should all pursue a degree in Peace Studies), but the question remains - is this degree of specialization also restrictive? Does it keep us from doubting and questioning, and does it prevent a balancing of the technological, empirical, knowledge-based aspects of our evolution? A balancing perhaps better served by a broader, big-picture perspective that addresses transcendental truths (unknowable certainties) and spirituality (unknowable uncertainties). If you have been following recent thought, you know I am not advocating organized religion; I am advocating individual growth through uncertainty and balance.

We are not at all far away from 'one' mind. The depth of expertise and specialization fools us into believing we are each independent and autonomous, yet if we look closely, we see that in many ever-increasing ways we have each simply become a single neuron in a single mind of humanity that reflects our culture's narcissism and illusion of happiness. We are too close to 'one mind' for comfort as this 'Way' will only lead to stagnation, catatonia, and a slow, smelly rotting from within. Again, I am advocating individual growth through individual uncertainty and individual balance, which in turn will inspire a dynamic, contentious productivity that will advance the whole. When we do not (on our own) find this mutually beneficial, communal harmony - when an individual or collective imbalance becomes cumbersome - I believe that balance finds us.

It is the end of an era. As I sit here allowing the last few granules of sugar to dissolve on my tongue, I realize that I will never know a lemon drop quite like this lemon drop. When we were first introduced, I knew it was something special. What can you say about a drop that in its youth was so vibrant and full of flavor, and throughout its Life upheld that potential... that promise... right up to the end. And it was not a bitter end... no indeed... it was sweet, and gentle, and endearing; an end befitting a Life well-lived.

I will never forget this lemon drop. It will live for all eternity in the dark, dank recesses of my mind. A lemon drop for all the ages. A lemon drop that has raised the bar. A lemon drop that has blended the sweet (of the drop) and the sour (of the lemon) to near-perfection. A lemon drop that in its Life (I'm certain) evolved as it dissolved to encompass each of the Platonic solids. A lemon drop that has contributed enormously to my understanding of what it is to be a lemon drop.

My memory of this epochryphal (not a misspelling) lemon drop will soothe me to sleep each night, quickly melt away any frightful dreams, and gently awaken me each day to a new possibility of challenge and reward. My life has been enriched to a degree I never thought possible. Yet, we must move on. There are gum drops and jelly beans and butterscotch discs and root beer barrels all waiting for an opportunity... ...an opportunity to serve a purpose... ...an opportunity to exceed expectations... ...an opportunity to fulfill a destiny.

With the recent passing of this lemon drop there is a void to fill. I can only hope this tribute will inspire and encourage its successors to express their essence in the same way; now please hand me an Atomic Fireball... ...thank you.

Georg Friedrich Hegel (1795 - 1831) said, "Periods of happiness are empty pages in history." I have been down this road before, most recently in 'last week's post' where I examined cycles of peace and unrest. In that post I said that I was somewhat saddened by the realization that I had had "2 or 3 good days in a row." Some may not understand how sadness can come from happiness. Shouldn't we glory in peace and tranquility? While I understand the necessity of one (sadness or happiness) in order to quantify, appreciate, or even define the other, I still ask why I felt sadness in the midst of a 'good' week. This week I have been struggling with this incongruity.

Upon further analysis, (I think) there are multiple incongruities at play here. First I want to identify and understand these incongruities, then I want to come back and define 'a good day' as I intended it in last week's post and contrast that with previous definitions, and finally I want to revisit the concept of a 'utility of happiness' checking for new or evolving thought. When I reach this point I may decide that this exercise has merely been a (necessary) review, or I may find it a springboard to further written thought now or in future weeks.

The first incongruity is simply the rationality of disturbing the peace. Why would I do that? Tranquility is sitting within quietly minding its own business and I go and dump a bucket of cold sadness over its head. Perhaps it has to do with Hegel's quote above - if indeed "periods of happiness are empty pages in history" are happy people then contributing less, or even nothing, toward humanity's progress, as compared to those who struggle? (Keep in mind, I am discussing lower-case happiness here, defined throughout this site as everyday satisfaction and good cheer.) We learn and grow from pain and adversity and perhaps it is that simple - too much (lower-case) happiness (for me) indicates a quiescence that impedes progress. And though I believe this reasoning to be valid, it still does not change the disharmony felt with last week's sudden change of direction.

So perhaps there is a larger incongruity here; that being the tug-of-war between my physical humanity seeking comfort and my transcendental self seeking Truth and Wisdom. There are some who are satisfied with physical comforts. I am not. And I will not allow the lure of 'easy' to pull me away from my search. Because I am so adamant about this, perhaps this perturbation felt last week was simply my transcendental life support alarm telling me I had passed out and was in need of smelling salts. If I had ignored this alarm, I wonder how long before my transcendental life would have slipped into a coma.

An additional disharmony is that which is created between myself and others if or when I verbalize or act on these feelings of sadness, or expound on the virtues of pain and adversity. We are supposed to be happy. When someone asks "How are you?" we are supposed to answer "Good." John Stuart Mill said, "the despotism of custom is everywhere the standing hindrance to human advancement." He also said, "unquestionably, it is possible to do without happiness; it is done involuntarily by nineteen-twentieths of mankind." So if a majority of us are, in varying ways, unhappy, why do we insist upon a custom of pretending happiness, which in turn impedes 'human advancement'?

So this is great! Right? I have justified my self-imposed struggle with the help of some of history's great thinkers. Yet I still feel the fingernails-on-chalkboard chill of incongruity. Perhaps this residual dissonance is the frustration of mass conformity. Perhaps that 'tyranny of the majority' that John Stuart Mill, Alexis de Tocqueville, and others warned of is at critical mass and I fear being blown to (or swallowed up by) oblivion. Perhaps this feeling, frustration, and fear is societal dysrhythmia that I am unable to sync alone. Perhaps, eventually, it (society - nature - humanity) will rediscover its rhythm naturally. I think eventually, it will have to.

In the previous posts 'Happiness Left Behind' and 'Daily Happiness' (August and September, 2012) I laid the groundwork and then described an upper-case 'Good Day' as follows:

"Ideally a Good Day should be measured as a microcosm of a Good Life. At the end of each day I should be able to look back and say, "this day has been a fair reflection of how I want to remember my Life, on the last day of my Life."

Last week when I reflected on '2 or 3 good days in a row' (at the time) I was realizing greater physical comfort than normal, and minimal impact from other adversity / struggles. I was happy. And, I was reading, writing, working, and otherwise fulfilling my concept of a Good Day, but apparently, because I was in the midst of lower-case good days as well, it seemed to lack some meaning. I felt a little dull and a little lazy. I felt some unrest would help to re-sharpen my edge.

It is helpful to differentiate between 'good days' and 'Good Days' and to realize that though they are not mutually exclusive, occasional (or even frequent) 'not-so-good days' can boost the productive output of 'Good Days'.

So now I've come to the utility of happiness - is lower-case happiness useful? According to John Stuart Mill's math the reality of happiness only impacts five percent of us, though I might argue that it impacts all of us (on average) five percent of the time. I might listen to arguments for a slightly higher percentage, but anyone who claims 100 percent happiness is delusional. So, based on a minority percentage, I believe the reality of happiness is useful for obvious purposes of contrast, balance, and definition. Additionally I believe it to be the impetus for many to continue moving forward. However, for some, in our narcissistic culture of greed and (concocted) need, it is also the impetus for pretense. And while some very limited social 'happathy' can be justified, it is not the answer. I must learn to (in-the-moment) differentiate between the somewhat rare happiness (which I did experience last week) and the illusion of happiness; and I must avoid delusional happiness.

There is some seemingly new thought here (such as my examination of Mill, and the contrast between 'good days' and 'Good Days'), but for the most part this is a necessary rehashing of previous thought, from a different angle. Perhaps by re-emphasizing the necessity of unrest and seeing it (the past two weeks) through the eyes and thoughts of others, I have refined my understanding to where I can better 'actively accept' the unavoidable societal dysrhythmia, and recognize and manage personal disharmony. It feels I have evolved from a theoretical perspective to a more practical (and necessary) daily application.

Historically, some major characteristics of varying political states and structures include Liberty, Corruption, Class Struggle, Servitude, and Tyranny. The stated (though not always practiced) purpose of any political configuration is typically individual Liberty. What we often find is that the more the actual or perceived Liberty, the more the arrogance of the individual, and (if widespread) the more likely the whole will slide into Corruption, Class Struggle, the beginnings of Servitude, or (in some cases) Tyranny.

Machiavelli said, "It is better to be feared than loved if one cannot be both." Machiavelli and Socrates-through-Plato go on to suggest that as Liberty begins to disappear, the people will seek a restoration of their lost Liberties (possibly) by rallying around a powerful individual; one who understands Machiavelli. Once in power the cycle continues as this individual (or someone in that line of succession) will eventually be overcome by arrogance and the result will be varying degrees of tyranny. From here the possibility exists that the tyrant will be overthrown by a few powerful (arrogant) warriors and/or politicians, which ultimately (likely) becomes immediate Corruption and eventual Servitude. And from here, once again, the many will revolt in order to restore Liberty, and once accomplished will become comfortable, arrogant, and complacent, thereby allowing Liberties to slip from their grasp, and the cycle will begin again.

This is a simplified look at political possibilities. Reality is naturally more complex, often incorporating multiple characteristics into a political state, and even moving back and forth between these characteristics. Additionally, today politics reach beyond the official governing of a people and into every nook and cranny of our modern culture; from business to education to social organizations to science to religion to families to friendships to... If politics is defined as a struggle for power and control, these possibilities impact our every waking moment (and perhaps our sleeping moments) as we also individually struggle to know how best to advance our personal well-being.

Today it is easy to be led. Those who lead -those in control - those with power - in any arena, would like to keep the status quo. They are comfortable and arrogant and (probably) complacent. Today, those who are led, are also often comfortable and complacent, sometimes arrogant (believing what they are told), and sometimes apathetic. Peter Abelard (1079 - 1142) said, "Through doubting we question, and through questioning we perceive the truth." Political states evolve or cycle by doubting and questioning. I feel I have broached this topic (of questioning) frequently.

This week I want to examine two areas: (1) how (or even if) one's internal politics (beliefs and struggles) can help us to know how best to advance our personal well-being; and (2) if we (individually and as a whole) are indeed doomed to a cycle dominated by some form of unrest, or if some degree of peace is possible.

One's internal political beliefs likely rest on the confluence of political structures most likely to grant the greatest amount of personal freedom leading to happiness, (or Happiness). Unfortunately, as history has shown, many of us are short-sighted seeking only happiness in the present and foreseeable future; i.e. one's own Lifetime. So if one lives in comfortable circumstance, one is likely satisfied, making it difficult to envision the extended cycle. Since (in the words of Machiavelli) "All human affairs are ever in a state of flux and cannot stand still" for us (individually or as a whole) to stand still is ultimately doomed to an erosion of individual Liberties; if not noticeable in our Lifetime, then in our children's. So to advance one's personal well-being through one's internal political beliefs, one must first avoid arrogance and complacency, and struggle with (i.e. doubt) the current state of affairs. One must begin with him or her self.

I believe the framework of the five previously-identified political characteristics (Liberty - Corruption - Class Struggle - Servitude - Tyranny) provide a structure and discipline from which we can logically examine inner political struggle; (as in what competing urges power personal decisions). Since we are discussing one's personal inner struggles as a necessary starting point we will (for the most part) confine the discussion to feelings and thoughts, excluding actions and behaviors.

Liberty - Since we are limiting ourselves to the realm of feelings and thoughts, Liberty would be the complete freedom to translate all manner of both Dark and Light feelings into intelligible thoughts. I believe this to be impossible if one desires to be functional and sane. If one allowed this in every moment it would overwhelm. Some restraint and control is necessary to ensure there is no harm. We are barely into Liberty and have already determined that it is corrupted by one's humanity. So the goal now becomes to maximize functional Liberty. From the individual's perspective, this must include constantly doubting and questioning one's own beliefs, study for purposes of learning and growth, and a long-term vision to avoid arrogance and complacency. This is particularly difficult in the face of comfort and happiness; and this difficulty reinforces the oft-repeated premise that one must seek Happiness over happiness. As previously stated, individual Liberty (in this case maximizing individual, inner functional Liberty) is the typical goal of any political system. What follows in the remainder of the framework is essentially my written thoughts describing each remaining characteristic to enhance my awareness and (maybe?) discover new or evolved personal politics, in order to achieve maximal Liberty.

Corruption - As stated above, in the most ideal state (maximal functional Liberty), we are already corrupted by our humanity. Once one recognizes the necessity of some corruption, it is not a stretch to realize the benefits of a little more corruption; benefits such as 'easy' or 'lazy' comfort. We are too often corrupted by a desire to avoid hard work. In fact many of us find hard work desirable only when we are forced into that decision due to empirical realities or peer pressure. When left to our own devices, (devices such as the microwave, the drive-thru, the TV, the smartphone, and the Internet), we too often choose 'easy'. This corruption of one's potential not only harms the individual on an intuitive or transcendental level, but also empirically by further empowering those in power, thus solidifying the status quo and allowing more and more Liberties to slip away.

Class Struggle - Once corrupted it is easy to adhere to a majority belief (go along to get along); but too often the majority is not an actual majority but a vocal majority. (Moving for a moment into the territory of actions and behaviors), the minorities (I am speaking specifically to perceived minority thought) must not be afraid to speak out, and if enough do so they may be surprised to find that they are an actual majority (in thought). The first step though is to realize that I (as an individual) am a minority and regardless of perceived agreement, disagreement, or neutrality, especially if I am constantly doubting and questioning (as I should be), there will never be a perfect consensus. Therefore I should embrace the inevitable role of minority and continue to doubt and question. Moving further inward, each intelligible thought that I have will be a minority thought and at some degree of odds with all other thoughts. (Once we get past the externally-triggered struggle described above) this is the actual internal Class Struggle - the perceived need to reconcile groups of thoughts into a majority, in order to establish consistency partially by repressing, subduing, and beating down renegade, discomfortable, minority thoughts; these 'police state' activities should be recognized as such and avoided. Each individual thought deserves respect, consideration, and further analysis. So in this sense Class Struggle inspires and helps us to keep our creative edge and our desire to learn and grow.

So far I see that maximal, functional Liberty is the ideal, Corruption is (to some degree) necessary, and Class Struggle can inspire. I am curious to see if I will also find redeeming qualities (other than growth from adversity and cautionary examples) in Servitude and/or Tyranny.

Servitude - Servitude is the repression of minority or unpopular thought in the interest of advancing a single school of thought - one belief; no doubt; no question. To make this thought congruent with everyday empirical reality, one may convince themselves (and work at convincing others) of the 'rightness' of this thought. It appears that Servitude is only justifiable if the master thought is indeed the one and only Truth; knowing that of all the 'one and only Truths' around the globe, they cannot all be right. (What if I pick the wrong Truth?) Additionally this works against the necessity of doubt and questioning. (So now I have to ask if I am guilty of being a slave to doubt? - Interesting dilemma.) And now that I am doubting doubt, am I once again a free man? I don't know. I am confident though (at this point in my evolution) that I would much prefer doubt and uncertainty over indoctrination, dogma, unquestioning loyalty, and Servitude.

Tyranny - A tyrant is defined as 'one with absolute power used oppressively or unjustly'. Our inner tyrant is intelligible thought (one or a like-minded group) that immediately shuts down any reflection, and gives in without question or struggle, simply because it is what it is. This may be the result of long-term indoctrination, fear, or simply an inability to comprehend otherwise. The difference (for this discussion) between Tyranny and Servitude is that Servitude is more active and implies buy-in, whereas Tyranny is completely passive and requires no thought. Any perceived activity under Tyranny is simply rote.

I see no redeeming qualities within Servitude or Tyranny other than the aforementioned growth from adversity and cautionary example, though some may argue their occasional necessity as the part of the cycle meant to move us toward the ideal of maximal, functional Liberty.

Just by examining this cycle of varying political characteristics from an inner perspective has helped to structure my thoughts on how to advance personal well-being; from an awareness of the necessity of some minimal corruption to avoid a harmful overdose of free thought, to the inspiration of outlaw minority thoughts, to the recognition of Servitude and Tyranny so as to discourage and reduce their likelihood and occurrence, I am better for it. I am not sure that this is a new politics but (for me) it is evolved in that if I empower Corruption and Class Struggle to control my flow of perceived and actual Liberties, I may reduce the degree of necessary Servitude and Tyranny and/or (at the least) reduce (or eliminate) any resulting harm. I believe this to be possible by learning from (my own and other's) past experience and by recognizing the limitations of my humanity.

This morning I realized that I have had 2 or 3 'good' days in a row. This awareness saddened me somewhat as it also made me realize that the give and take between peace and unrest is constant and I should embrace both. It is sad that all days cannot be 'good' days. Within periods of peace I must create some unrest so I do not become complacent and so I will continue to strive for peace. We are not doomed to a cycle dominated by unrest; it is a gift that makes peace possible. Unfortunately, many of us are doomed by an illusion of peace that circumvents this natural and necessary cycle.