hopelesshappiness.com

Every day we pretend; living in a land of make-believe, we play dress-up and live the day, the moment, happily-ever-after. I suppose this is more functional than the alternative: to be truthful, living in a land of sensibility where we could respond reasonably to reality and live the day, the moment, for the future. This latter option feels more right; but it would be dysfunctional because we would ALL have to completely not care how we are perceived by others. As a species we have become incapable of this level of selfless regard.

I am cold. I am always cold. I am chilled by the callous disdain we pretend to not have. I am astounded by the unrefined ignorance exhibited daily by pretentious pinheads. I am constantly stopped in my tracks by the frozen sludge of bureaucracy.

Raw, biting, bitter, icy, (and largely successful) attempts to grab and hold on to power, (made by those who want us to pretend that the status quo is best), keeps those who work to advance truthful sensibility from moving forward.

Until a large majority of us stop pretending, we will be unable to respond reasonably to reality. And until we are able to respond reasonably to reality, we will remain an endangered species. And if we are unable to respond reasonably to reality soon, it may be too late; if it is not already.

We find warmth in make-believe and dress-up and happily-ever-after. When we strip away these trappings, we find ourselves cold. So, encouraged by pinheads, we snuggle back up, deep inside our fuzzy cloaks of invisibility and we allow the status to quo.

Better to be cold.

The smell of wet
Rotting leaves and mud

Death, followed by Life
Until it is not

Each cycle is the same
Until it is not

Milky and sulphurous, Life flows
Until it does not

Death is not waiting
Death is running alongside
A step ahead
Watching for an opportunity
To cut me off

The end will be sudden
The end will be painful
The end will be a comfort
The end will be momentous
Until it is not

I am wary
Watching death, peripherally

If I speed up
To a step ahead
I may be tripped up
From behind

If I change lanes
To confront directly
I may be waylaid
Death may simply stop
And wait

No, I must continue
In my lane
Warily
Peripherally
With confidence

I see others
Running alongside
Their personal death

Some, a step behind
Some, a step ahead

I pass some, stopped
Confronting
Or pleading

I see some, fearful
Not looking back
Trying to outrun

The inevitable

I see death
Over and over and over again
Biding his time
Sadly smiling to herself
Knowing

The end is sudden
The end is painful
The end is a comfort
The end is momentous
Until it is not

Is it true that the eyes are the window to the soul? To consider this, I suppose one would first have to define (or at least characterize) soul. Because this is my written thought and because I am likely the only one that will read it, I think we will use my definition for soul.

Soul: The aspect of an individual as seen and understood by the individual to be the individual; apart from the body but impacted by the body, apart from the emotions but influenced by the emotions, and apart from the intellect but persuaded by the intellect.

Considered in this regard the soul is either 1) a bladder-like receptacle that collects the unexplainable detritus of life which is then expelled into the void upon the death of the individual, or 2) a bladder-like receptacle initially imbued with meaning and purpose that collects wisdom which is then transformed into Truth upon the death of the individual.

Reconsidering, …perhaps the Truth will show that 1) and 2) are exactly the same. Perhaps as I am living in this existence it is merely a matter of perspective. Perhaps not.

So from my perspective the soul is a place where the individual collects and questions uncertainties, and formulates beliefs that ultimately guide actions that ultimately define the individual. And because we put so much emphasis on individuality and power and importance, this soul definition outmaneuvers all others, and by doing so may perpetuate cycles of selfishness. My body may tell me one thing, my heart may tell me another thing, and my brain yet another; but when it comes to understanding “me” (especially when the body, brain and/or heart disagree) I first gather this information together to determine which bits when coalesced most conform to my soul definition. The soul encourages consistency and provides a measure of comfort and safety. I tend to put more trust in my soul. So in the sense that I see what and how my soul sees, (at least metaphorically) the eyes are indeed a window to the soul.

Research also shows that physically the eyes in various ways do provide clues to one's emotional state. I believe the emotional state revealed by the eyes reflects direction after one's soul has processed and coalesced. So in this literal sense the eyes again are a window to the soul.

So what happens when the eyes are faulty, deficient or malfunctioning? The literal eyes I believe in most cases will work to continue to reflect one's soul direction though defective eyes may throw up some barriers. For example eyeglasses become a window to the window to the soul. But what about metaphorically? What if the soul sees with lazy eye or cloudy eyes or double vision? The literal eyes and the literal interpretation of this faulty definition will feel consistent and sincere to the individual because it emanates from the individual soul; that bladder-like collector of things. It is sounding more and more like I believe the soul to be a scheming, manipulative untrustworthy soul. But if this is what I see, and if what I see is guided by what the soul sees, then how can I trust this? And if the eyes are a window to the soul, but the eyes are being hoodwinked by the soul, how can I trust the eyes of another? I am back to the constancy of uncertainty and questioning; most significantly, questioning my self.

I have had medical procedures that have exposed my brain and my heart. Next week I am seeing an ophthalmologist. Will my soul also see the ophthalmologist? Will the ophthalmologist see my soul? Or will we discover together that I do not have a soul? It is a question that weighs heavy on my…

…soul

This past week at work I have had so many urgent task priorities that I have been unable to process beyond the particular specificity. By definition, to process is to apply a series of actions or steps toward a foreseeable end result or toward a progressive continuation. In the context of the urgent tasks, I have applied a process to attain an end result. In the context of the multiple moving parts, the complementary side-by-side tasks, the cycles, and the flow, progressive continuation has (in this past week) come to a screeching halt. By focusing on the task, I am losing sight of the big picture.

By definition a process is systematic.

To systematize is to step back in order to keep up.

To step back is to assess, prioritize, plan, then act.

Process improvement requires a systematization of the whole; not just of each individual task.

One perspective's whole is another perspective's individual task.

Process improvement results in gains in both efficiency and productivity.

Process improvement must constantly evolve.

Considering this process of nesting processes, it becomes obvious that to better improve an individual task process I must come to a deeper understanding of my overall responsibilities; and to come to this depth of understanding I must also see how the results of my individual tasks and overall responsibilities flow into and intermingle with other incoming contributions; and to improve the process further I must follow this streaming productivity (at least) to where it then 1) flows into a larger, faster-moving stream, or 2) empties into a basin, or 3) (due to other streams flowing into it) becomes a torrent of productivity in which (in all 3 cases) my tasks and responsibilities have melded in so thoroughly as to be unrecognizable.

I could continue this analogy to encourage the torrent---(productivity) and flood control---(efficiency), and to discourage leisurely flow into the calm, placid waters of a still, silent basin---(bureaucracy, status quo, business as usual), and I will to an extent, but I also want to narrow my focus by widening my perspective. I want to begin to differentiate leisurely flow from rapid flow because it appears that many of us mistakenly perceive the complexity of bureaucracy and the busyness of tedium as productivity; (i.e. rapid flow). It is not. I want to follow my flow from its source to its end: Will it be consumed as sustenance contributing to a torrent of productivity? Or will it be swallowed whole by a sea of silent quiescence?

It is difficult to track an individual contribution. Perhaps the key is sustenance. Is my contribution maintaining its individual substantiality as is? Not growing or adding to a greater whole? And then what about the greater whole? Is it then moving on to be consumed as sustenance? Or is it in turn swallowed whole? There are many points along the path where it is simpler for me to keep my head down believing the flurry of activity that surrounds me is a torrent of productivity when in actuality, just around the bend, we may be swallowed whole.

As I am thinking this through I have also come to realize that there are many individuals who would prefer that their individual contribution maintain its individuality and not meld into a greater whole because after all it is all about “me” the individual. It is this mindset that supports, strengthens and perpetuates bureaucracy and business as usual, and it is this mindset that skews reality and keeps us from seeing (or even imagining) what is just around the bend.

Inevitably though, an individual contribution will lose its shape and definition regardless of how it is promoted, and it typically does so just before it goes around that final bend so the individual does not see (or have to admit to him or her self) that “me” inevitably is fused into the greater whole anyway; so at this point many choose to grab hold and ride a different individual contribution and then continue to repeat the process for a lifetime.

Wouldn't it be better to widen one's perspective by narrowing one's focus?

Wouldn't it be better to see beyond me by following a personal individual contribution to its ultimate and inevitable demise that either contributes to a torrent of productivity or drowns in a sea of silence?

Wouldn't it be better if upon my demise I had contributed to more than just the status quo?

Wouldn't it be better to step back in order to keep up?

Have we become the necessity of minutiae? Have we evolved from the actual small and trifling detail to the delusional belief that to surround oneself with a collection of details adds meaning and purpose to inconsequence? What is it about copious complexity that we find so alluring and so all-important? I suppose it keeps us busy; gives us something to do; distracts us from reality.

One might argue that the reality of meaning and purpose is every bit as real as the reality of survival. I would argue that today's reality of meaning and purpose is every bit as individual as yesterday's reality of survival. Because survival of the individual (for many) has become something taken for granted, and because many individuals are unable to wrest their focus from their self, they have shifted their consideration from longevity to relevance, (though the essence of reality has not changed). I would suggest that the individual continue to see survival as the ultimate reality and advance their thinking to work toward survival of the species. Next to that, individual meaning and purpose is inconsequential fluff existing in an alternate and specific reality as created and maintained by the individual.

I understand the difficulty in accepting my personal details, (my perception of me), as inconsequential fluff. But in many ways to embrace this reality is liberating.
…It allows me to see that I am as necessary (or as unnecessary?) as every other individual on this planet; (perhaps not as influential but every bit as necessary).
…It allows me to focus on personally enjoyable details (such as cooking and reading and walking and writing).
…It allows me to think more freely with less regret and less guilt.
…It allows me to work to save the world.
…And though it allows for empathy, encourages kindness, and demands that one respect the autonomy of another, from the perspective of others, my truthfulness often comes across as angry or mean or surly or sad; and I suppose it is all of those things, but it is also real.

I am concerned for the future of Humanity. You should be concerned for the future of Humanity. If we could harness the wasted energy spent on relevance, would it be enough? Or is it already too late?

This brings me to faith. By definition faith is belief that is not based on proof. I have faith that Humanity, in some way, shape or form, will survive. On our current trajectory, my belief appears to be a fairly large leap. But I am evidence, and each day I find an increasing number of examples, of active faith. There are two types of faith. Quiescent faith is seen in those who focus on relevance and/or sit and wait and hope that things will get better; that ‘someone' will figure it out; or that we will be okay, if not in this lifetime then in the next. Active faith (or active hope) is seen in those who focus on survival by listening and reading and learning. Active faith is productively angry and mean and surly and sad and truthful and real. Active faith is purposeful effort that recognizes the pointillist perspective of autonomy and the whole.

For me, faith is not an answer and active faith is merely a start. To those who believe in a better life beyond this one, I cannot disprove your faith and I will not expend energy on a pointless argument. But I can ask that you contribute to the well-being of future generations while we are sharing this plane of existence. I don't believe it is too much to ask that you fit an active faith alongside your faith. I believe it will complement and strengthen your faith and I have the strong impression that this is happening in many evolving enclaves of faith.

I suppose a certain amount of energy spent on personal relevance is unavoidable and even necessary. We are, after all, only human. But the more of that energy one is able to redirect towards active faith, the better our chances for survival.

And in the end, survival is the ultimate reality.