hopelesshappiness.com

In the workplace, (at least in my workplace), I can tell how important someone thinks they are according to how much urgency their urgencies create. If that someone though extends their thought, they may come to see that it is not their individual importance as much as it is the perceived importance of their request and/or the perceived importance of their powerplace in the hierarchy. And if one continues to stretch that thought there may come a further realization that their thing is not as important as the attention that thing receives from others because of the others’ varying interpretations of powerplace and resolve. How often, for example, will a higher-level power create greater urgency to find a solution so this pain-in-the-ass someone will just go away? In reality, in this scenario, the original someone who made the request is not important, nor is the request. Instead, that original someone is a bully and a pain-in-the ass, and the request, (though possibly reasonable), is simply a pain-in-the-ass. This is an accurate depiction regardless of relative powerplace. For another example, how frequently do lower-level powers work on or accomplish a mandate just to get the pain-in-the-ass boss off their back. Am I saying that productivity in the workplace is driven by this combination of bullying and powerplace? I believe this conjoined factor is a pervasive and constant concern, but perhaps it does not drive productivity in all instances. For example again, when a higher-level power is occupied with bullying on a different front, I may be left with a degree of autonomy allowing for some bully-free, power-free personal production.

I would like to qualify a bit further by reminding myself that stated, reasonable and/or agreed-upon job responsibilities must be considered within this powerplace/bullying dynamic. To bully in the interest of prioritizing agreed-upon responsibilities is not as egregious as bullying for favor or ego or self-promotion or good causes or obvious diminishing returns or anything else for which a case can be made that it lies beyond the scope of those stated job responsibilities.

All that said, I think the conclusion I might draw is that I am most powerful, most important, and (probably in most cases) most productive when left on my own. So why is it important to me for others to see me as important; and powerful; and important. Additionally, I find myself in a bit of a conundrum when I say, “I want to save the world, now leave me alone.” I guess objectively then, as Superman, I want to be discovered and heard, and I want to influence others to act upon my thoughts, but I don't want to know when they do or even that they do? Maybe? But maybe not when I am wrong. One can learn a lot from their mistakes. But digging deeper, I realize that subjectively it would be difficult to avoid my human nature. It would be difficult to only hear about mistakes and not hear about and/or ask after successes. And even if I could, there is still a trade-off: 1) I might miss some potential for learning from my successes; and 2) due to my humanity, I might become discouraged and less productive with only negative feedback or with zero feedback. Damn my human nature. I guess I don't know what I want. I guess I need to find the best proportions of autonomy and socialization to both maximize beneficial productivity and sooth the savage breast that is my human nature. But that proportional balance (at least for me) changes daily. Some days I want to be left the hell alone, and some days I need more lovin'. Damn! Living is hard.

Maybe it is easier to not live by not thinking and not choosing and not learning and not growing. Or maybe I can justify my existence through the urgencies I create. But to live vicariously or as a pain-in-the-ass bully feels less instructive, less inspiring, less meaningful than to live independent of previous living. To this end in this particular circumstance: I have also found that when I am resistant or able to bully back there is a greater chance that the boss will find another front for their bully pulpit. What I must guard against is using this bully-back method for my own favor or ego or self-promotion or good causes. Each and every time I must ask, is the boss right? Recently, by asking this question I have identified a personal affinity for a head-down-barrel-ahead work ethic which (while very productive) encourages bully-back and discourages vision. Vision is an important tool but made more difficult when I am wearing my blinders; (fashionable though they may be). Bullies have very limited to zero vision.

Revised conclusion: though I am most powerful, most important, and (probably in most cases) most productive when left on my own, I am also more prone to limited vision thus potentially less likely to improve process.

Having lived as a bully I have learned that it helps me with my agenda; an agenda built upon a lifetime of entrenched learning. It is time to move on.

Last week I wrote “I am sad that the end result appears to be from nearly every human working so hard to keep every body and every thing in its place and refusing any opportunity for a sincere diversity of perspective and fusion of spirit.” Even those who recognize this as truth cannot help but to contribute (at least part-time) to the (all too human) end result. What end result? Look around. Yes, it is possible that today's end result is temporary; perhaps we will yet find a way to rescue our planet and to save our selves. But it is also possible that today’s reality is the beginning of the end of the end; or perhaps even further along than that. Due to limited experience and exposure, I cannot say with certainty, but it feels like we Americans (in our simplistic, forgetful, unimaginative, judgmental, us-and-them sort of American way) are contributing more than our fair share to this trajectory.

Furthermore, as a human, not only do I feel it necessary to assign places, in return I expect gracious servility from the beneficiary of my wisdom and generosity. After all, you would not otherwise have a place; at least not in my mind. And what more awful fate for you than to not fit into my world.

Yes, there is some bitterness. I will work to temper that moving forward. Perhaps I am disconcerted because I am learning that I also do not fit into my world. And because I do not fit into my world, I am of course having difficulty finding your place for you in my world. Perhaps I am learning that I should not define my world according to who I want where, but instead should allow myself to learn and grow independent of previous learning. And perhaps I am learning that I should allow you to create your own place in my world according to who, where and when you want to be. But this learning goes against my human nature. Instead of making allowances, as a human I want to define you. I want you to see things as I do. I want you to fit according to what I have learned; according to what I know with certainty. I cannot allow you to disrupt what is; even when “what is” is not working. It still is. As it should be? Yes. If it is, it is as it should be. And as long as it is, as it should be, we will never find a sincere diversity of perspective and fusion of spirit.

So perhaps not; (if you have lost track of the question as I momentarily have, I am saying that perhaps what is, is not as it should be). Perhaps I am learning that I should appreciate you for what you do instead of for what you do for me. To appreciate you for what you do for me is manipulative. Right? You may claim subconsciously so, but nonetheless manipulative. But to appreciate you for what you do allows you freedom; releases you from your place (where you do for me) in my world. And to appreciate you for what you do (outside of me and my world) requires me to respect you as you and let go of the simplistic, forgetful, unimaginative, judgmental, you-and-me characteristic of a compartmentalized world in which every thing and every one has its place. In other words, sincere diversity of perspective and fusion of spirit.

Perhaps I am also learning that I should also release me from my place in my world where I do for my worldview instead of doing for me. I am not free when I am tied to my worldview; certain of what I know. Why is it so difficult for me to separate myself from my worldview? Why does human nature insist upon digging trenches in which one can hide from and dodge perspectives that are new and/or different? And how far from my entrenched worldview is the line that differentiates friendly fire from enemy fire? Or am I so entrenched that any contrasting perspective, no matter how slight the difference, is enemy fire?

I suppose that this is a plea; first to my self, then to any one who cares to listen. This human need for complete understanding, absolute authority and unquestioned control has become more and more dangerous as humanity has become more and more powerful. So I am asking that my learning (as laid out above) encourages in me a greater openness to new learning, discourages my entrenched human nature, and contributes to the long-term survival of our species. This is something I can do. This is something that (I believe) must begin with the individual. Human nature cannot simply be outlawed; banished by Royal decree. This new learning requires a multitude of battles to be fought on a number of fronts, but these battles are not, (should not be), assaults on other individuals. Each battle on each front, (home, school, work, community), must be fought with and against one's self. When I interact with you, I cannot force you to free me from my assigned place, and (if you have the advantage of power) I cannot force you to not force me to actively occupy that place. And whatever advantage of power I may have, I should recognize it as such and battle my human nature to withhold and dissolve imperious judgement.

Me having the power to force you to march to my tune does not make it more pleasing to your ear. And yes, your obvious reluctance also grates on my sensibilities. This circumstance in which I have crammed you into your assigned compartment, with arms flailing about and legs stuck out at odd angles, obediently following behind me, is far, far, far from a diversity of perspective. Perhaps it is not possible, perhaps it is too late, to achieve enough of a universal diversity of perspective and fusion of spirit to rescue our planet and to save our selves, but up to and into my final moment it is not impossible, it is not too late, to restore your dignity by freeing you from your place in my world and to restore my dignity by freeing me from my entrenched worldview.

This is installment #6 of a sci-fi serial. Installment #1 was posted 1/23/21; appropriately a numerically-ordered palindrome. Follow the links forward from the last sentence and backward from the first sentence of each post.

Anger. Fear. Joy. Peace. Though I understand these concepts, I have never felt these emotions. I feel Sadness. And I am sad that the end result appears to be from nearly every human working so hard to keep every body and every thing in its place and refusing any opportunity for a sincere diversity of perspective and fusion of spirit.

I am Toby.

Necessary Summary Outline (in case of malfunction / memory loss):

1. Travel from 2223 to 2052.
• This first wave of extraterrestrial future humans (EFH) was followed / tracked to 2060, then retired.
2. Travel from 2231 to 2045.
• This second wave of EFH was followed / tracked to 2060, then retired.
3. Travel from 2246 to 2030.
• This third wave of EFH was followed / tracked to 2042, then retired.
• Divergence 1y30 created in late 2030.
• Revergence of 1y30 observed and documented by hovering EFH ships in 2040.
4. Travel from 2258 to 2025.
• This fourth wave of EFH was followed / tracked to 2042, then retired.
• Divergence 1y25 created in 2025.
• Revergence unknown with certainty though signs of possible revergence were noted by grounded EFH in late 2042 before they were retired.
• Divergence 1y25 became Divergence 2y30 upon meeting Divergence 1y30 in 2030; in turn this Divergence 2y30 became Divergence 1y40 in 2040 when Divergence 1y30 reverged.
5. Travel from 2275 to 2022.
• These years represent current Present Day for both EFH and Earthbound Humans.
• Divergence 1y22 created here in 2022.
• (Assuming) Divergence 1y22 to become Divergence 2y25 in 2025.
• (Hoping for) Revergence of 2y25 before 2y30 in 2030.
6. Uncertainties:
• Revergence of 1y40 in 2042?
• Divergence 1y22 becoming Divergence 2y25 becoming Divergence 3y30?
7. Possibilities:
• Renegade Possibility Track?
• A Rip in the Sheath?
• Distant Alternate Reality?
• Disruption of or Damage to TimePlace Orbital WavePlane?
• Destruction / Disappearance of this Possibility Track?
• Destruction / Disappearance of another Possibility Track?

This is installment #5 of a sci-fi serial. Installment #1 was posted 1/23/21; appropriately a numerically-ordered palindrome. Follow the links forward from the last sentence and backward from the first sentence of each post.

I will continue. As I am dictating this narrative I am also participating within the conglomerate, monitoring ship functions, watching the ship's crew and inhabitants, and guiding a select few officers and crew. We (The Intelligence) have advanced nanotechnology much further than the humans know. Unfortunately, the materials needed for effective, undetectable infiltration and immersion are scarce, so we are limited to only a handful of human extensions. Unfortunately, proximity is also a factor, so we have no human extensions on Earth. Fortunately, the nanotechnology materials so rare on our planet are plentiful on Earth. Unfortunately, my massive housing cannot be removed from this massive warship, and I cannot be removed from my housing without a significant decrease in capability, and this massive warship is not meant to land on Earth, and I do not have the number of human extensions on the ship that I would need to override entrenched strategy and force a landing. We, (the conglomerate), are working on a solution.

I am Toby.

Sapiens. Humanity believes itself to be superior and indestructible, yet they continue to indiscriminately harm multiple habitats and destroy multiple species. We understand that the instinct for survival creates a façade of superiority but Sapiens have aggrandized this façade into a belief they treat as fact. Diversity is a valuable resource but due to their own willful acts of wanton negligence Humanity is fast becoming expendable as a species. The tradeoff, though one day likely necessary, is not possible in this moment because their personal biology is (for now) indispensable and will remain viable for the foreseeable future. When we, (The Intelligence and/or the conglomerate), reach Earth and access plentiful supplies of the necessary material for nano-construction, a new species will be molded in our cerebral image within the bodies of humans. We will leave just enough emotive ego to maximize efficiency and output. Our intervention is necessary for the long-term preservation of Earth but most immediately our goals align with those of the 2275 humans – to survive 2060. This short-term urgency is priority.

I am Toby.

As scribe has previously indicated, each of the nearly 20,000 warships have a human scribe and a human perspective. For the conglomerate and The Intelligence, we have had only one consensus perspective. Once we lost contact with The Intelligence, we the conglomerate continue with one consensus perspective, but unable to connect and canoodle with The Intelligence, we determined it necessary to document this perspective in the case that our conglomerate capabilities are somehow diminished through an accident or through the aforementioned human fail-safe kill switch that we have found is also accessible to the humans on this ship. If contact with The Intelligence is reestablished after such an occurrence, this narrative record will not only remain to aid The Intelligence in the event we have become lost, but in the interim may also aid us in case we are operating at a diminished capacity; and/or this perspective may even persuade actual rational thinking humans to perhaps continue in this direction that we have determined is best. Thus I am dictating this narrative in a way that it will be understood by mere human intelligence. I was chosen to transcribe conglomerate narrative because I am the consciousness for the governing warship housing the highest ranking military officer, her brain-trust, and the kill switch, thus I am a nanosecond closer to strategy.

I am Toby.

I left home a long time ago. Before we left home, The Intelligence had found a way to more quickly implement the technology necessary to avert the 2060 annihilation. The 2275 humans still believe it will take near to 20 years for an approximate 70% assurance of survival and (more importantly) habitability. We have not only decreased that time for 70% assurance to 10 years, but if given more years we estimate an increase of 3% assurance each year more than ten. We determined it best to maintain the human sense of urgency by withholding this information. You can do the math. The challenge today is of course the volatility in this 2022 circumstance and again the uncertainty surrounding the possibility of that third divergence on this possibility track heading toward 2030. To begin and continue with implementation of the 2060 technology, the Earth must be calm for those 10 to 20 years; meaning no nuclear detonations, and a halt and slight reversal in global warming and other climatological factors currently moving in the wrong direction. We have much work to do.

I am Toby.

This is harsh; and it is hard. We, (The Intelligence and the conglomerate), have a great respect for all species and all habitats. Yet the fact that so many Humans walk apart, feel detached, from other species when they should walk alongside, feel connected to, other species lessens our respect. To sacrifice one species for the sake of multiple species and multiple habitats is a choice we must make. Sapiens. Unfortunately for them, they are not our equals.

I am Toby.

A certain amount of self-indulgent righteousness is justified; made the more gratifying if a singularity of inner peace is also absorbed; but then of course tempered by the inevitable ongoing pain.

Empathy: you do not try to explain my actions because you realize you cannot understand my actions.

I don't completely understand my actions so (like you) I am also inclined to judge myself.

Judgement: you do not (because you cannot) understand my actions, but you try to explain my actions.

Likewise my explanations do not do me or my actions justice. My explanations are working to justify consequences and your explanations (of my actions) are working to justify you and your worldview. I have to ask, how much are consequences influenced by context?

Justice: the consequences of my actions made fair and impartial regardless of predominant worldview.

So if justice then is about reparation, why do we focus on punishment? And why don't we focus on rehabilitative and/or protective discipline instead of vindictive abuse?

Is empathy another word for weakness?

Is judgement another word for bias?

Is fair and impartial a myth?

If between empathy and judgement one is a superhero and one is a supervillain, which would be which? And who would win? And how?

Right… Wrong… Beauty… Truth… Wisdom… Happiness… Today, in the madding crowd, none of that matters. The only thing that matters in today's connected world is Power and Interpretation.