hopelesshappiness.com

"Unless you are happy to entrust the future of life to the mercy of quarterly revenue reports, you need a clear idea what life is all about."

The quote above is found in the introduction to "21 Lessons for the 21st Century" - Yuval Noah Harari's latest book. If this were a required essay question, (which in a sense it is), "What is life all about" may elicit many similar and grouped responses, but at its core the generalized answers would consist of (in this moment) 7,666,971,887 varying interpretations so full of depth and nuance that the most intrepid explorer, faced with this allegorical maze of narrow corridors in changing arctic to equatorial conditions, could never map even his or her own interior. And of those most intrepid explorers that embark upon this journey, some never return. I believe it is good to explore and poke around at some depth, but as passageways begin to narrow and climates move toward extremes, perhaps it is best to climb back to the surface to live another day. And for those of us who are at the surface and who are claustrophobic, I believe we would be just as well substituting "the hokey-pokey" for "life" in the quote above.

And perhaps they are more synonymous than our high-minded human brains would like to admit: active, communal participation is at least a place to start. But active, communal participation in and of itself is not as marketable and thus is not as profitable as is an autonomous, independent celebration of "Me" even though this marketing of "Me" that ultimately results in its own unrecognized communal participation is created to delude and deceive and keep us busy with high-minded self-importance so we are unable to actually do the hokey-pokey. I vote for the hokey-pokey.

As it is today, many individuals would refuse to "put their right elbow in" and many others would rather cut off their left arm than to "shake it all about." This is sad. We should strive for an honest and sincere ambidexterity. Yes, we will still own our leanings, and some small degree of duplicitous political correctness will invariably creep in, but the effort must be made.

I should shake my weak wing with wild abandon and put my whole self in, but instead, today, we feel compelled to choose sides and unfortunately the choices seem to be limited to us and them and the distance between us and them seems to be widening. Yet when I look closely, I see some circularity. In some specific aspects of this spectrum the far right and the far left are closer than they realize. And as the more moderate elements (as they sit today) continue to move and circle further left and further right, there may come a day in the not-so-distant future when, by flattening the segment we occupy, we have once again become moderate.

I do not claim to understand all the subtle intricacies of our political spectrum, and I am not a fan of generalizations or labels, but for the sake of argument if we label today's far right as nationalistic conservative traditionalism bordering on fundamentalism and favoring capitalism, and if we label today's far left as social democracy favoring capitalism, and if we acknowledge that some aspects of traditionalism overlap with some aspects of the nether regions of social democracy, then we can visualize these two extremes circling to meet each other where ultimately, (with the flattening mentioned above), the left becomes straight-up liberalism, the right becomes straight-up conservatism and the center becomes a form of social democracy. I believe this the most likely scenario because I believe today's younger generations influenced by today's culture will more likely move social democracy to center stage pushing dying pockets of nationalism and fundamentalism further right toward inconsequentiality; and this belief is supported by research and polls.

Regardless of the polls, there are those who will disagree with my conclusion of a most likely scenario, but a significant majority of those who would disagree will be insignificant in 40 years and many will no longer be casting votes in 20 years.

And, "That's the Jingle Bell...
That's the Jingle Bell...
That's the Jingle Bell Rock!"

Shake your weak wing with wild abandon and put your whole self in!

"The greatest delight which the fields and woods minister, is the suggestion of an occult relation between man and the vegetable. I am not alone and unacknowledged. They nod to me, and I to them. The waving of the boughs in the storm, is new to me and old. It takes me by surprise, and yet is not unknown. It's effect is like that of a higher thought or a better emotion coming over me, when I deemed I was thinking justly or doing right."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson

"Occult" as in mysterious, secret or esoteric. To acknowledge Nature, and to be acknowledged by Nature, is not depraved or evil; it is to be Human. If I set myself apart from Nature, I am denying an aspect of myself that makes me whole. I am as much Nature as is the tree and the flower and the meadow and the forest. Dominion should never be part of the equation. To rule is to influence, change, alter, prevail without permission or agreement. If I am Nature, and if you are Nature, and if we are Nature we must seek harmony so that each of us may choose to flourish in a way that adds to and completes the whole. If I choose dominion I am severing a limb; I am performing a lobotomy; I am closing off a chamber of my heart.

As it is with me and you, it also is with me and the tree and the flower and the meadow and the forest. Though we are finding that Nature (believed to be non sentient) does communicate, and we know that Nature can be vicious in its momentary selection of the fittest, a tree does not appear to act with malice aforethought. A tree does not appear to consciously choose dominion for the "rush" that comes with power. If a tree (or a tornado or an alligator) does act divisively or destructively, I believe it is because it seeks sustenance and survival. Humans do not have to purposefully choose nonproductive and destructive dominion over a Nature that is perceived to be non sentient or non speaking. Humans do not have to purposefully choose nonproductive and destructive dominion over other Humans. Yet we do. Simply by creating an imaginary divide between us and them, we perpetuate dominion, which, in turn, undermines natural efforts toward the sustenance and survival of all Nature.

We claim to have dominion. Yet, in truth, if we continue on this trajectory, we will prove to be a mere footnote. And if all of Humanity becomes a footnote, then the most powerful and influential individuals who ever lived will be but footnotes within a footnote. So what is the point of dominion? This is the "higher thought" and "better emotion" that Ralph Waldo Emerson felt with "the waving of the boughs in the storm" making him reconsider his belief that he was "thinking justly or doing right." We should all reconsider our thougts of and our relationship with Nature. We should all seek harmony so that each of us may choose to flourish in a way that adds to and completes the whole.

Henry David Thoreau said, "Old trees are our parents, and our parents' parents, perchance. If you would learn the secrets of Nature, you must practice more humanity than others."

To look up at an old tree, and to look into an old tree, is to learn from strength, maturity and endurance; the embodiment of parental protection and benevolence. If old trees are our parents, then all of Nature is our maker. And if all of Nature is our maker, it follows that many individuals would want to ask who or what gave birth to Nature? To come closer to Knowledge of an Ultimate Maker, some feel dominion over Nature is a shortcut. Yet our distorted and dissonant dominion, as it is today, only ensnares and condemns; us, our parents, our parents' parents and our children's grandchildren. And if it is simply creation all the way down, we must first navigate here and now. And if there is an Ultimate Maker, it is still this first journey that matters most. Either way, regardless my desire to be God, today I am Nature. Today I must seek harmony so that I may choose to flourish in a way that adds to and completes the whole.

I may believe that flourishing is made more difficult by those purposefully seeking disharmony; but if I allow myself to be distracted or misled, I set myself apart from Nature. If I listen to distortion and dissonance, I am not listening to the old trees or the flowers or the meadows or the forests. If I react before considering the whole, then I have also lost sight of the One.

The One is whole. The One is Nature. The One is the here and now, knowing that the here and now will remain here and now for as long as Humanity survives. To hope for a future beyond this Natural here and now is to abdicate responsibility. To be distracted and misled is to ask my children's grandchildren to fix what I broke. To live by faith alone is to set myself apart; sever a limb; perform a lobotomy; close a chamber of my heart. I must work to seek harmony so I may choose to flourish in a way that adds to and completes the whole.

The fact that you did not see the pedestrian in the crosswalk, will not bring him back to life. And your refusal to acknowledge that winter is coming, will not keep you warm. And your disdain for those who disagree with you, does not make you right. And your apathy or hatred for those who are different from you, does not make them wrong. And your domineering certainty, will not garner legitimate or long-lasting respect. And your privilege, does not make you smarter. And your perceived entitlement, does not make you capable. And your efforts to do good for people, does not mean you are doing right by them. And your belief that you know what people want, does not translate to helping them with what they need.

As the pedestrian, it is not very gratifying to say, "I told you so."

One day, you will become the pedestrian and you will understand. But depending upon your vision, your anticipation, your disdain, your apathy, your hatred, your need for control, your certainty, your privilege, your perceived entitlement, your definition of good and your psychic abilities, that day and that understanding may come too late.

I am talking to myself as much as (and more than) I am talking to you. Many of those who have a greater need for this talking-to, are not listening.

How do I convince those in need to listen; not to listen to me, but to listen to their own inner workings. To see their self from outside of their self. To recognize willful ignorance as the circular reasoning that it is. (I do not agree with you because you are untrustworthy. You are untrustworthy because you disagree with me.) Circular reasoning.

If it is not an observable fact with tangible evidence and a consensus that crosses many divides, I have no choice but to say, "I don't know with certainty." Instead, if I am inclined to argue, I must say, "I believe." And I must concede, "you may be right." I cannot force those who know with certainty to sincerely apply this test and this process to all those things they know with certainty. This process is not difficult to understand, but for many it is difficult to implement because they perceive it as a threat to their essence and their way of life, and that scares the oblivion out of them. This intense and painful fear moves one to practice willful ignorance.

Willful ignorance perpetuates and compounds willful ignorance. And as we surpass a certain critical mass of willful ignorance, it becomes dangerous and destructive. I believe we have surpassed that point. To believe that my worldview---my ego---my willful ignorance should precede reality, is simply not very nice. Those who practice willful ignorance are not very nice people. Perhaps by appealing to one's sense of decency we will have some greater success in helping people inclined to argue to more frequently say:
"I believe..."
"I don't know with certainty."
"You may be right."

Those who abide by this process are Believers. Believers are nice. Knowers are not very nice. And large groups of Knowers or Knowers with excessive influence are dangerous; especially those Knowers who are also Doers. On the other hand, Believers who are Thinkers and Doers, are much more likely to understand reality and to contribute to the productive advancement of all of Humanity.

I cannot force a Knower to become a Believer. And though many Knowers see themselves as Believers, one cannot be a Believer who Knows.

The fact that you did not see the pedestrian in the crosswalk, will not bring him back to Life.

This week I am floundering. I believe we are making progress and I am actively hopeful, yet I remain frustrated and I am feeling more disheartened in this moment, (Wednesday), than I did one week ago. Because I am divided, and in an effort to regain my focus, I believe that this week I will simply share some recipes.

SHRIMP BURGERS

2 lbs. Shrimp, in food processor pulsed to coarse ground
1/8 cup each Holy Trinity (onion, celery, green pepper); minced
1/3 cup bread crumbs
2 tsp brown sugar
1 1/2 tsp salt
1/2 tsp Cajun/Creole Seasoning

Form in patties. Grill over indirect heat w/smoke for 10 to 20 minutes; allow patty to turn from gray to pinkish before flipping to ensure cohesion.

Suggested: top w/ Creole Mustard, Cheese, and Tomato Slice, on choice of bun.

TRIFLOAFLE COAST ROAST

1.5 lbs. shrimp + 1/2 lb. scallops, in food processor pulsed to coarse ground
1/8 to 1/4 cup each Holy Trinity; minced
1/2 cup bread crumbs
2 tsp brown sugar
1 1/2 tsp salt
1/2 tsp Creole/Cajun seasoning
FOR THE TOP:
Combine
Approx 5 tbsp bbq sauce
Approx 1 1/2 tbsp worcestershire sauce

Form in loaf pan or casserole dish and bake covered until done.

Salmon or crab could also be incorporated into the Coast Roast for different flavor profiles, but so roast will hold together flaky fishes or additional dry ingredients should be avoided. Shrimp works best as the anchor ingredient.

Perhaps I have chosen these two recipes to share because (as a pescatarian) for me they represent my personal effort to join new thought and non traditional ingredients with established / conventional mainstays. The shrimp burgers and Trifloafle Coast Roast are not just alternatives but also very nice complements to the traditional hamburger and meatloaf. I have also found that the Coast Roast goes nicely with any larger cut of roasted meat. There is such a diversity in tastes today, with so many options, that I believe it has become necessary to go beyond simple tolerance, (which will always be the first step), and seek compatibility leading to synergy on a common ground.

That sounds like a lot of interpretation for an unadorned reworking of readily available ingredients; but this week I need to be reminded that, with some effort, new thought and old thought can come together to create a greater whole.

I write regularly. I write to inspire one person to think at a deeper level in order to act more thoughtfully. Today that person is me. One day I will no longer be inspired; or even inspirable. When that day comes, I hope that my written thought will allow me to live on in spirit by inspiring another to think at a deeper level in order to act more thoughtfully. I will not be so bold as to presume I will influence more than one, (and one is merely the most viable goal I can reach for), but I will be so bold as to believe that for the sake of Humanity, we must find inspiration to think at a deeper level in order to act more thoughtfully.

Today it is necessary for me to write for me. Seven weeks ago I submitted written thought espousing "A freedom to define myself, without apologizing." To test this possibility, recently I have shared some written thought with a select few and reactions have reminded me that as a person each of us is sluggish and slow because each of us is overloaded with empirical baggage; baggage that limits freedom. Some are so overloaded that they can no longer reach for their intangible, ineffable, ethereal spirit. Others choose to cease communications with this furtive, incomprehensible self. Still others make some effort to communicate but do so on a schedule and/or according to convention. And I have found that after I work to communicate spiritually with another, I have picked up additional baggage dropped off by the recipient of my effort. Often, this additional baggage is not left intentionally but because this sudden drive-by attempted spiritual connection takes them by surprise. I believe though that perhaps an initial one-way spiritual reach will ultimately/eventually touch another in some way. It may feel clumsy and I may be uncomfortable with the result, but perhaps I can learn to immediately offload the additional baggage that has come in the form of this worrisome fumbled exchange, knowing that the potential would not otherwise be.

This encumbrance, this physical self that I am forced to drag with me most everywhere I go, is an excuse that I use to forgive myself for losing sight of, ignoring and/or compartmentalizing my spiritual self. "I don't feel good." "I need to rest." "I just want to watch my (mindless, inane) TV show and go to bed." "I really need that last piece of coconut cream pie." "I overslept." "I just don't have time." "She wouldn't understand."I don't want to overstep my bounds." "I don't want to make him mad." "They would make fun of me."

Yes, there are times when my body truly slows me down, but I believe this is an exception because I believe that as long as one retains mental acuity one can always find a workaround; one can always make a better choice; one can always think deeper thoughts. Some of the excuses above, (look at the last four), illustrate one's aversion to mental baggage that may result from spiritual (or at least truthful and sincere) effort. Regardless of their explicability, because these feelings include physical reaction, they are excuses. Think about it; anxiety is fear and fear elicits a physical reaction. It is difficult-to-nearly-impossible to completely escape the bounds of one's empirical baggage.

But I come closer to that freedom with written thought. And when I work to share that spiritual sense of my self, no matter the baggage dropped by others at my feet, and no matter how much of that baggage I feel compelled to pick up, I owe no apology. To some, if I am disagreeing with an entrenched personal belief, it may feel like a physical attack. It is not. I am simply encouraging them to think at a deeper level in order to act more thoughtfully. Any physical reaction is a result of personal fears and anxieties, and for that I will not apologize.

When one works to express the ineffability of spirituality it often comes across as weak and disjointed platitudes. As I said, I come closer to escaping the bounds of my empirical self in the solitudinous depths of my written thought; and this in turn can be translated into more thoughtful action. But, though actions really do speak (to others) louder than words, I must first have the words thought and felt at a deeper level of my self in order to act more and more thoughtfully. So perhaps the takeaway, the reminder, is that spirituality is an individual endeavor that must constantly evolve. And perhaps this is why I instinctively stated that I must focus my efforts on only one individual. Today that individual is me.

But if my efforts to share personal spirituality have the potential to touch another in such a way that this other individual is encouraged to actively pursue their own spiritual growth, (and I am recognizing that there is that potential), then I also feel compelled to share. I am at a crossroads. For more than seven years I have kept my written thought to myself. Today I see additional potential; one individual at a time. And though I am somewhat anxious about the possibility of additional baggage that may result from sharing, I should not apologize for sharing this truer version of me.

Forgive the repetition.

Forgive the repetition. Two or three themes stand out:
1. Individually, we need to think at a deeper level in order to act more thoughtfully;
2. There is little to no potential for inspiration if I am unwilling to share my essence; and
--2a. I should not have to apologize.

Those who define any aspect of their world as "us and them" in that regard are unable to reach toward their essence. There are many individuals who align their empirical identity with an "us" and cringe at the concept of global or universal oneness. What I believe many people have some difficulty grasping is that this unity, this wholeness, is not a result of me magnanimously immersing myself in a global identity; this harmonious accord comes about as a result of me stripping away my ego, offloading my empirical baggage, and having no choice but to a) recognize the relative inconsequentiality of my empirical impact, b) see the wonder and import of ALL (past, present and future) Humanity, and c) let go.

It is interesting that for one to find their personal essence, one must lose their personal essence.

The good news, (or bad news), is that the world will invade my peace, reinstate my ego and remind me again of my empirical baggage. But perhaps by thinking, and writing, alone, and then working to thoughtfully share my essence, I will on occasion return to my essence. And perhaps each time I journey back and forth, I can offload a little more baggage and pick up a little less. And perhaps this will bring me incrementally greater peace within this physical self and within this physical world. And when I come close to the point in which I am no longer inspired or inspirable, perhaps I will have found the peace to carry me through.

Recent studies have hinted that uncertainty that comes about from lowering one's defenses actually enhances neuroplasticity enabling one to make more connections and think at deeper levels in order to act more thoughtfully / spiritually / essentially. Yes, more repetition; but I believe that is another major theme coming from this week's written thought. In my case it is restless repetition. Repeated journeys, in and out, back and forth, over and over, here and there, questioning conventional wisdom, searching for a different angle from which to approach my essence. Skeptical spirituality. Shared; one person at a time.

Perhaps my restlessness as demonstrated merely reflects the pervasive restlessness apparent in a majority of individuals in recent years. Leading up to 2016 and continuing through today, it appears that we feel change is necessary. And to our credit, we are sharing truthful and sincere effort but I believe it is misguided. I believe this blanket restlessness is motivated by a desire for predictable comfort and security which appears to be a reasonable inclination, but is misguided because the underlying desire is actually for mindlessly pleasant repetition. I believe we should seek security through the adversity of repeated journeys seeking personal spirituality, while acknowledging the necessity of uncertainty.

Looking more closely at these elements:

• I must recognize the value of, and I must consistently choose, adversity over comfort.
• I should focus on how I can contribute to the security of future generations and not on the warm-fuzzy security of my favorite TV show and a big slice of coconut cream pie.
• I must seek uncertainty, I must value uncertainty, and I must acknowledge that predictability is a delusional myth.
• I must reject mindlessness and consistently choose to think at a deeper level in order to act more thoughtfully.
• And I must seek spirituality and offload empirical baggage.

This week I am reading Michael Pollan's newest book "How to Change Your Mind". It is an examination of how psychedelics, (such as psilocybin and LSD), aid in expanding one's consciousness by stripping away the ego, and from there how this process can help with addiction, depression, and fear of death; mental illness and anxieties that may result from rigid or confined thinking. Psychedelics temporarily create thousands of new connections in the human brain and leave a lasting impression of that potential. This is where I am working to be when I write alone.

Nearing the end of the book, a correlation is made between the openness, creativity, and diversity of thought in an adult human brain influenced by psychedelics and those same characteristics in a newborn baby brain influenced by Life. As the years progress the "Default Mode Network" takes over and we lose the ability to consistently think at a deeper level. Last week I was able to watch my 6 month old granddaughter living the wonder of her new Life. It is pretty cool to think that babies are tripping all of the time. But as adults, the default mode network is more than okay; it is necessary for us to be able to translate the potential of thousands of new connections into more thoughtful action.

Repeated journeys.
In and out.
Back and forth.
Over and over.
Here and there.
Questioning conventional wisdom.
Different angles.
Approach my essence.
Skeptical spirituality.
Shared.
One person at a time.
Restless repetition.

Restless repetition.