hopelesshappiness.com

"What 'should' we be worried about?" This is the Annual Question for 2013 on edge.org. Since I have read the question, I have been worried about the question. And then as I have read multiple responses to the question, I have been worried about multiple issues. It is clear that we have many viable candidates for worry, but to say we should worry about 'everything' would (while potentially true) be counterproductive.

So ... I would like to approach the question by defining 'worry' in two different ways - from an individual perspective, and from a group perspective.

From an individual perspective I would define 'worry' as (simply) concern, because I believe it also to be counterproductive (on an individual basis) to truly worry. Then I would respond (to the question) that we (as individuals) 'should' be worried about 'the moment'.

I have said it numerous times (most recently last week) that having learned from the past, one should live in the moment, for the future. The moment is all we have because it is here - now ... and now it is gone ... but now we have a new moment ... And on ... And on ... And on ... If we choose the BEST action or behavior for any given moment that reflects personal, deeply-felt values translated into goals, we are showing care and concern (worry) for the moment. I believe these moment-to-moment goals should be smaller, incremental goals that contribute to exoteric goodness and/or inner peace thereby leading us closer to Truth, Wisdom, and ultimately Happiness. But from there it is up to the individual to identify personal goals that will lead one towards Happiness.

To elaborate: In the everyday lower-case sense of happiness (i.e. cheerfulness or satisfaction) I would not describe myself as a happy person, though I do prescribe to the notion of social happathy as defined in that previous post. In the more esoteric upper-case sense of Happiness (i.e. searching for Truth and Wisdom) I agree with Aristotle who maintained that Happiness cannot be judged until one's Life is over. In either case (upper or lower), 'the moment' is all we have in which to advance an agenda. And to advance an agenda, one must first have an agenda. And once that vision is in place, one must know to adapt that agenda in any given moment, based on what happened in the previous moment; (learning from the past, for the future). And, I will say again, that I believe the agenda/vision must involve one's search for Truth, Wisdom, and Happiness via exoteric goodness and inner peace.

From a group perspective, I would define 'worry' as a cause of uneasiness or anxiety for the future. I believe worry in this sense will help us (whatever the group may be) to identify problems and focus on resolution. I strongly believe that before we can tackle group/cultural/national/global worries a majority of the group's individuals must first master 'the moment'; and (at least from my experience) I don't believe we are there. With this in mind, my response (to the question) from a larger group perspective is - we 'should' be worried about our sociocultural sense of entitlement and the resulting lack of compassion.

Yes, I am talking about narcissism, but on a deeper level I am talking about that self-righteous sense of entitlement that is encouraged and perpetuated by mass media, bureaucracy, large government, organizational politics, and organized dogmatism. And yes, many of these already-disfigured social or cultural evils recklessly overlap, and become even more mangled by crashing into and bleeding all over each other and many innocent bystanders.

And to resolve this worry? - I believe we must start with education by helping young people to learn 'how' to think instead of teaching them 'what' to think. It is a daunting task that may take multiple generations to accomplish and will require a drastic shift in perspective from 'the importance of me' to 'independent questioning (of everything) using reason and logic'. But once we reach that point, imagine the possibilities.

There are some cultures that have begun this process, and that alone (not only from a sense of nationalism) is a potential worry as pointed out by other responses to this question. Comparatively, I am an uneducated blogger and I have no clue as to how one qualifies for submission to edge.org, nor do I know if there is room for a layman's perspective on what we 'should' be worried about. But I do strongly believe that as a whole we cannot resolve many of the worries of the world without first laying a strong foundation based on the thoughts presented above.

I am likely to remain a lonely voice in the wilderness, but looking around I find an increasing number of lonely voices also calling for simplified reason and logic. I am encouraged.

It is what it is - for the moment. This week I reviewed the post Time and Happiness because I needed the reminder. The past and the future are muddy and confused, and I am having difficulty focusing on the present. It's right in front of me, but of late the present moment has been a blur because of the whiplash-inducing motion of my simultaneous fixation on the past and future.

It appears that my sense of justice and my indignation will not change the world. I cannot sway indifference, right wrongs, rescue fair maidens, or punish evildoers. I am not a superhero.

But here is what I can do: I can live by guiding principles of my choosing. I can live with compassion and empathy for others. Having learned from the past, I can live in the moment, for the future. I can live without making excuses. And I can live with the knowledge that my humanity will interfere with the nobility of the thoughts above.

Humanity (singular or plural) is an enigma. John Donne said, "no man is an island." Orson Welles said, "we're born alone, we live alone, we die alone." Is there more Truth and Wisdom to be found in isolation? Or will we move closer to Happiness by contributing toward societal or group goals? Many (perhaps most) would respond that an appropriate combination of the two would be advantageous; but if only one path could be chosen, which would be the more enlightening?

40,000 years of history show us that those societies smaller in size and/or more geographically isolated tend to progress at a much slower rate, or not at all; (Australia and New Guinea are examples). But that is in terms of advancement from stone to metal to industrial to technology and from hunter-gatherer to agriculture/food production to manufacturing to service workers to present-day knowledge workers. So thus far most of this advancement has been empirical in nature. From a transcendental perspective one might argue that empirical advancement allows more minutes in a day for spiritual consideration, yet is the God of 40,000 years ago really that much different from the God of today? Considering that much of spirituality should come from within and is a result of one's search for meaning and purpose (Truth and Wisdom), and from one's fear of death, I don't believe personal spirituality has made great strides towards a consensus on the God/Life After Death question. It should also be noted that those seeking an empirical answer are no closer to a God Truth either. If anything, empirical advancement has made evident the necessity of transcendental questioning.

I don't believe it should be as simple as "no man is an island" for empirical considerations and "we live alone, we die alone" for transcendental considerations. Look at what large populations in proximity to other large populations have accomplished compared to isolated bands, tribes, or even small countries with smaller populations. Yet spiritually we have chosen to isolate ourselves in small bands, on separate islands, whose flora and fauna represent varying faiths, beliefs, and superstitions. Perhaps we need a Great Flood to bring us together; or a Great Drought to dry up the land and the seas, and show us we are not that far apart.

The point is that as individuals (singular) and as a whole (plural) we must find ways to transcend our humanity in order to close the gap on Truth, Wisdom, and ultimately Happiness.

I believe we must start with the singular. I believe that our transcendental thoughts and energies must be infused with a healthy dose of reason and logic. I believe rational thinking can be learned and must be taught (through examples of history's great thinkers) beginning at a very early age. I believe everyone should (respectfully) question everything. I believe that once a majority of the individuals (in this age of knowledge) understand and utilize reason over emotion we are more likely to advance spirituality as we have advanced tangible, worldly, empirical concerns.

Synergy and interdependence are underrated. The whole IS greater than the sum of its parts. But to experience the manifestation of this phenomenon we must first become a whole (plural), and to do that we must begin with the singular. I believe when it comes to transcendental progress the thought of this synergistic power may intimidate some and incite current 'powers that be' to fight this suggested uprising of reason and logic.

I know where I need to start: 'I can live by guiding principles of my choosing. I can live with compassion and empathy for others. Having learned from the past, I can live in the moment, for the future. I can live without making excuses. I can live with the knowledge that my humanity will interfere with the nobility of the thoughts above.' And I can live each day making a concerted effort to transcend my humanity.

"For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee."

My gratitude naturally leans more towards "it could be worse" as opposed to "count my blessings." It's not that I expect things to get worse (though sometimes they will), but rather that I look around and see so many people that in various ways have a tougher life or are going through a tougher time than I. In fact, I suspect I could look closely at any one individual and find at least one way in which they have it tougher.

I have previously identified gratitude as a crutch; and it is a crutch when one depends on it constantly or frequently, thereby allowing it to hinder their search for Truth and Wisdom. If one feels so 'blessed' that they stop questioning, then gratitude is a crutch. Whereas if one looks around in order to learn from the strength of others (who have it worse), then this perspective on being grateful is consistent with one's search. So with this latter perspective, gratitude can serve as both a crutch to help one through a tough time, and also as a tool to further one towards Truth and Wisdom.

Nearly a year-and-a-half ago I posted on the Periodic Happiness Table of Elements page that "some crutches, such as Gratitude and (realistic) Optimism, are perfectly natural and should be encouraged and practiced." I have qualified Gratitude above, and 'realistic' qualifies 'optimism'. Defining optimism as 'a belief that goodness pervades reality' supports the concept of exoteric goodness through empirical behavior, which in turn implies an active, exertive hopefulness. Despite these encouragements and qualifications I still believe that even constructive utilization of a crutch or crutches will slow and potentially stall one's search. One should not be lulled into a false sense of security.

There are some weeks when my Happiness comes up lame. Rather than being laid up, or painfully hobbling along, I pick up a crutch and make every effort to stand tall until I heal.

I am re-thinking Anger. I have previously stated that it is my favorite of the seven deadly sins because it seems the one I am most naturally inclined towards. Dante described wrath (or anger) as "love of justice perverted to revenge and spite." Though I do love justice, this sounds ugly and I do not like seeing myself in this light; (or dark, as the case may be). The opposing virtue to Anger is alternatively presented as compassion, patience, forgiveness, or composure. I have no problem with this balance for those I love and care about. Balance is a challenge though when I feel exploited, manipulated, or excessively wronged by others.

With close friends and family I am more easily able to forgive, thereby eradicating anger. With others, when the wrong is radical, I find forgiveness very difficult. Perhaps the key then is to live with the anger and work with compassion, composure, and patience to mitigate Anger's impact. Will compassion encourage forgiveness? I can see that possibility for less consequential injustices and/or in those instances where mutual respect remains. But what of those instances where mutual respect has not yet been established, or where there has been a significant loss of respect?

These 'instances' cover a lot of ground; including very large, impersonal (nameless-faceless) bureaucracies. It is hard to forgive someone when there is no someONE.

And this line of thought also brings up the following question: Can an organization take on a disordered personality, sweeping up individuals in its path (within the organization) to where they know not what they do? And if an organization can exhibit neurotic or even (in extreme cases) psychotic tendencies, should one be more composed, patient, compassionate, and (dare I say) forgiving towards those individuals simply caught up in the culture?

... Perhaps so ...

After all, this need to belong is a very human need that works closely with other very human needs including social activity, acceptance, and purpose, as well as some potentially darker needs such as superiority, self-interest, importance, power, and control.

So - this thought begs the question, Should one be forgiven for being Human? That is a very big question. And my first inclination is to answer 'Yes'.

This thinking though may lead some to ask is there really anything to forgive? Especially in the case of an individual merely caught up in a bureaucratic or organizational culture? I believe regardless of the circumstances one is responsible for one's individual behavior and instead of condoning lemming-like behavior by forgiving, perhaps we should applaud and encourage non-conformist behavior. This does not change the fact though, that circumstances may call for more understanding, empathy, and compassion; and this thought brings me right back to the earlier question - 'Will compassion encourage forgiveness for a radical wrong in a non-family/friend circumstance?'

I feel that true forgiveness is reserved (I said 'is' not 'should be') for close family and friends with whom there is a depth of attachment and mutual respect. I believe one can be compassionate and resentful at the same time, but I do not believe one can truly forgive if there remains even the slightest resentment. It is human nature to feel resentment if one believes they have been wronged. The perceived intensity of the injury impacts the lifespan of that resentment. For those of us who love justice, resentment can hang around for a very long time. But I believe it true for everyone that in non-family/friend circumstances one does not forgive so much as one forgets. I know this to be true by experiencing and observing renewed resentment in one who is reminded of past, forgotten wrongs.

So if true forgiveness is (in non-family/friend circumstances) impossible how does one with a love of justice forget? I believe compassion can mitigate the pain of resentment, but if compassion cannot encourage forgiveness can it speed the process of forgetfulness? I don't think so ...

If one is practicing compassion through empathy and understanding, one is considering the target of the resentment; and through this living thought is also breathing life into that resentment.

To review:

1. True forgiveness for excessive injury in a non-family/friend circumstance is impossible.
2. Substitute virtues may mitigate the pain, but (especially for those of us who love justice) may also fuel the resentment.
3. Organizational or bureaucratic cultures do not excuse lack of personal responsibility / accountability based on consensus legal and ethical guidelines and principles; especially when an individual caught up in the culture also recognizes the questionable ethics as questionable.
4. Revenge and spite are ugly.

I am at a point where I see 3 options:

1. Seek fair, impartial justice.
2. Be Angry.
3. Forget.

Counterpoints/comments towards the 3 options above:

1. Fair, impartial justice is difficult in the legal system and beyond difficult in the ethical arena.
2. I am tired of being angry.
3. I want to forget.

But I don't know how to forget. I have already said that compassion will (inadvertently) nourish resentment. And forgetting (while I am thinking about it) feels a lot like giving up; but if I am able to forget then I won't be thinking about it and it won't feel like I gave up - until the next time I am reminded. And in some cases, reminders are frequent.

So if there is no justice; and if I am unable to forget/give up; then I guess it must be okay to be angry; and I must find a way to be okay with being angry.

So now I've come to the question - Can one be angry without spite and without seeking revenge?

I do see the partial truth in cliches like 'time heals all wounds' and advice such as 'give it some time' but I believe the truth in these thoughts is not a healing or an eradication of anger, but more an acceptance according to my definition of acceptance: "biding one's time in a difficult situation, faithfully recognizing and acting on every opportunity, and thoughtfully creating opportunities, to perpetuate positive change."

It is the emotion in anger that perverts it to revenge and spite. If one can simply acknowledge the fact of anger and objectively work towards accepting it according to the definition above, then the emotion will subside with the effort of acceptance, and the effort will reassure one that the acceptance is not the same as giving up.

It's worth repeating: if there is no justice; and if I am unable to forget/give up; then it must be okay to be angry; and I must find a way to be okay with being angry. Perhaps a start is to acknowledge, objectively accept, and internalize, thus creating a sort of external / empirical forgetfulness.

So while it is unlikely that emotion can be removed from anger - (then it wouldn't be anger) - I believe the emotion can be tempered and controlled. Once to this stage of anger though, one is in danger of forgetting, which feels like giving up. And giving up is not consistent with one's search for Truth, Wisdom, and ultimately Happiness.

So - I will simultaneously work on empirical forgetfulness and transcendental Truth with the (active, contributory) hope that it will impact exoteric Goodness ...

Now I need to understand if this empirical forgetfulness will encourage a forgiving Happiness? ... Or will it lead me towards forgiving Happiness? ...

Wherever it leads, I will continue to evaluate Anger. It deserves more attention.

Per last week's post, I have made a strong effort in this past week to identify (1 or 2) specific hopes and actively contribute to their manifestation. Additionally I have made an effort to simultaneously Embrace the Hurt and Let Go of the Hurt. I believe I have made more consistent progress towards the manifestation of Hope than I have in simultaneously Letting Go of / Embracing the Hurt. Both of these efforts are long-term; but at those times when Life does not make sense - when the world around us seems confused and unfriendly - progress can become tangled and unfathomable. I am going through one of those times.

I like order. I like for things to make sense.

In regards to Hope the additional focus and effort has been most effective when I set daily goals and check on progress at the end of each day. Accountability to myself (with considerable discipline) and/or to another (willing to help) is key. Each day that I accomplish one or two identified goals that work towards realizing hope adds to the discipline and likelihood of goal-accomplishment the next day; and encourages hope.

In regards to simultaneously Embracing the Hurt and Letting Go of the Hurt my efforts in this past week have brought mixed results. I have been more successful internalizing Goodness thus mitigating the impact of the Hurt by focusing it outwards. As suggested last week though, I have (for the most part) done this when alone and/or via thoughts only. What I have found is this confluence is most likely as I am lying in bed, falling asleep. And as a result there have been a couple of nights filled with restless, disturbing dreams that in the morning leave me hurting. But during the day, consciously internalizing Goodness has left the Hurt as a noticeable but somewhat unrecognizable hot spot kept in check by the Goodness. I am still working on consciously and purposefully Letting Go externally; I'm finding this to be a much tougher task than relieving the internal Hurt.

... ... ...

Today is Friday. Much of the above was written Monday and Tuesday. It has been a good week. I have made consistent, daily progress on various fronts throughout the week and I have rediscovered the importance of melding the various elements so as not to dwell on and/or be overcome by any one rampaging aspect of Life at any given time.

Life does rampage, and (if one's paying attention) can often seem out of control. In this previous post I discussed the occasional necessity of "one foot in front of the other - repeat - again - and again..." I believe these last two week's posts, by focusing on Hope, have advanced that concept to its next stage of development and instead of accidentally or fortuitously making the intangible tangible, has helped me to take a little control over that process. Now I am paying very close attention to where I am placing my foot, and with occasional glances ahead, these purposeful steps are more productively carrying me forward one day at a time.

I like order. I like for things to make sense. And now I like purpose; (both transcendental and empirical). But for those times when sense, order, and purpose are lost and/or confused, I will say again ...

... "One foot in front of the other - repeat - again - and again ..."