hopelesshappiness.com

"The human enterprise has been to dominate Earth and everything on it, while remaining constrained by a swarm of competing nations, organized religions, and other selfish collectivities, most of whom are blind to the common good of the species and planet." [91]
--Edward O. Wilson; "The Origins of Creativity"

I have (rather clumsily) been working to say this for years. Well Put! We are (unnecessarily) tripping over each other with little individual effort to understand the urgency we face. Pay Attention! Read a Book! Become a Stakhonovite! Create Autonomously! Disavow Ego! Reject Membership! Think! Act Thoughtfully! Now!

...Before it's too late.

If I were to work to see myself as my neighbor sees me, and if I were to work to see my neighbor as I see myself, and if I were to work to see my neighbor as any 1 of, (in this moment), 7,458,197,595, then perhaps my ego will be moderated, and perhaps I will be more likely to contribute. (In today's technological world, it is not only conceivable to see any other Human individual as a neighbor, it has become necessary.) And while this 'see myself as my neighbor' proverbalization may sound biblical, not only are there many versions of the golden rule dating back to as many as 2,000 years before christianity, in this New-World version the impetus comes from reasoned, thoughtful consideration of what we know today and is not simply an edict commanding morality that then today is translated into superficial courtesy and political correctness. I believe that most of us are capable of more reasoned, thoughtful consideration. The challenge is to stop tripping over ourselves as selfish individuals in selfish collectives.

I believe that to break free from these outdated convictions and commitments, I must first recognize myself as a selfish individual. I can begin this elucidation by examining the process of selfish disagreement, (assuming relatively equitable foreseeable consequence in terms of potential for harm and/or good). Here goes...

1. When my personal (i.e. selfish) desires and/or needs conflict with yours, (accounting for the assumption above), it appears that the only rational reason that mine should supersede yours, is because I say so;
2. And I say so because I am me;
3. Yet I am me, against OVERWHELMING odds, and because of a complex and random series of events that will never be duplicated;
4. So there is no logic that dictates that my desires and needs should take precedence over yours;
5. And if I realize this and you do not, then your desires and needs will more frequently dominate mine;
6. Because even if we impartially agree (for the sake of analysis) that the total package of one individual's desires and needs (in a given moment or in a lifetime) is assigned a value of 10,
7. And then we work to make a mutually agreeable decision,
8. But, by realizing the inanity of the concept of "me" I allow 5 of my 10 for you and keep 5 for myself,
9. And you, (not realizing the inanity of "me"), keep 8 thus giving me only 2
10. You win 13 to 7.
11. Even a generous soul, only keeping 6, will still beat me 11 to 9.
12. And, to be truthful, even one who understands and agrees with the inanity of "me" will succumb to their personal-individual-me human nature probably more often than not,
13. If not overtly, then by claiming that they are allowing 5 and 5, but acting in a way that reflects 5.1 to 4.9.
14. This nod to human nature must not become an excuse---Effort Must Be Made Regardless!

A real world example: two servers in the same restaurant double-book the last piece of cherry pie, and if both you and I absolutely love cherry pie, the only logical reason I should get it instead of you is because I (as me) say so; but by assigning a value to these conflicting desires, the more selfish individual will get the cherry pie.

I believe it is time to outgrow both individual and collective selfishness. But then, who gets the cherry pie? Flip a coin? Or cut it in half? Either option would be preferable to contentious divisiveness. We must consider these and other options in lieu of selfishness...

...Before it's too late.

On
Gossamer wing
Aloft, take flight

Your
Restless spirit
Most ev'ry night

A
Weightless release
Vast depth, alight

'til
Shimmery thoughts
Refract your sight

Then
Dappled unease
Betrays your height

And
Temporal heart
Brings back the night

... ... ... ... ...

With
Wavering steps
Unsure, contrite

An
Unguarded soul
Awaits their night

"The woman's skin was yellow-brown, like ferrous earth, and hairless, except on the scalp; not shaven, but hairless. The features were strange and childlike, small mouth, low-bridged nose, eyes with long full lids, cheeks and chin rounded, fat-padded. The whole figure was rounded, supple, childlike."

The woman is Ambassador Keng, from Earth. She is on the Planet Urras, located 11 light years from Earth. The time is several centuries into the future. She is speaking to Shevek; an Odonian physicist and an anarchist, from the desert world, Annares. Annares was founded as an Anarchic State, 150 years previous, by revolutionaries who voluntarily left Urras to live on their desert planet free from rule. In the passages below, Ambassador Keng is rationalizing injustice and social inequality.

"Let me tell you how this world seems to me. To me, and to all my fellow Terrans who have seen the planet, Urras is the kindliest, most various, most beautiful of all the inhabited worlds. It is the world that comes as close as any could to Paradise."

"...I know it's full of evils, full of human injustice, greed, folly, waste. But it is also full of good, of beauty, vitality, achievement. It is what a world should be! It is alive, tremendously alive---alive, despite all its evils, with hope."

"...My world, my Earth, is a ruin. A planet spoiled by the human species. We multiplied and gobbled and fought until there was nothing left, and then we died. We controlled neither appetite nor violence; we did not adapt. We destroyed ourselves. But we destroyed the world first. There are no forests left on my Earth. The air is grey, the sky is grey, it is always hot. It is habitable, it is still habitable, but not as this world is. This is a living world, a harmony. Mine is a discord. You Odonians chose a desert; we Terrans made a desert... We survive there, as you do. People are tough! There are nearly a half billion of us now. Once there were nine billion. You can see the old cities still everywhere. The bones and bricks go to dust, but the little pieces of plastic never do---they never adapt either. We failed as a species, as a social species."

"...[we] saved what could be saved, and made a kind of life in the ruins, on Terra, in the only way it could be done: by total centralization. Total control over the use of every acre of land, every scrap of metal, every ounce of fuel. Total rationing, birth control, euthanasia, universal conscription into the labor force. The absolute regimentation of each life toward the goal of racial survival. We had acheived that much, when the Hainish came. They brought us a little more hope. Not very much. We have outlived it. We can only look at this splendid world, this vital society, this Urras, this Paradise, from the outside. We are capable only of admiring it, and maybe envying it a little. Not very much."

"...We forfeited our chance for [Justice and Social Equality] centuries ago, before it ever came into being."

Shevek's response:

"You don't understand what time is. You say the past is gone, the future is not real, there is no change, no hope. You think [Social Equality] is a future that cannot be reached, as your past cannot be changed. So there is nothing but the present, this Urras, the rich, real, stable present, the moment now. And you think that is something that can be possessed! You envy it a little. You think it's something you would like to have. But it is not real, you know. It is not stable, not solid---nothing is. Things change, change. You cannot have anything. And least of all can you have the present, unless you accept with it the past and the future. Not only the past but also the future, not only the future but also the past! Because they are real; only their reality makes the present real. You will not achieve or even understand [beauty and vitality] unless you accept the reality, the enduring reality, of [Justice]. You are right, [Social Equality] is the key. But when you said that, you did not really believe it. You don't believe in [Justice]. You don't believe in me, though I stand with you, in this room, in this moment. My people were right, and I was wrong in this: We cannot come to you. You will not let us. You do not believe in change, in chance, in evolution. You would destroy [a world] rather than admit our reality, rather than admit that there is hope! [Justice] cannot come to you. [Justice] can only wait for you to come to [it]."

"...there is nothing here but States and their weapons, the rich and their lies, and the poor and their misery. There is no way to act rightly, with a clear heart, on Urras. There is nothing you can do that profit does not enter into, and fear of loss, and the wish for power. You cannot say good morning without knowing which of you is 'superior' to the other, or trying to prove it. You cannot act like a brother to other people, you must manipulate them, or command them, or obey them, or trick them. You cannot touch another person, yet they will not leave you alone. There is no freedom. It is a box---Urras is a box, a package, with all the beautiful wrapping of blue sky and meadows and forests and great cities. And you open the box, and what is inside it? A black cellar full of dust, and a dead man. A man whose hand was shot off because he held it out to others."

The quoted passages above are from "The Dispossessed" - a 1974 science fiction novel by Ursula K. LeGuin. (The brackets indicate my interpretation of metaphorical equivalents where the original would lack context.)

This week, after finishing the book, I have come back to these and other passages to further absorb the disquieting prescience, and to explore the idea of Revolution, how it associates with Happiness, and how this may relate to us. The remainder of this week's written thought is this examination and exploration, (including some additional paraphrased interpretation), that may branch beyond this moment's intent.

According to Shevek, "the separation of means and ends is false." According to Shevek, "there is no end." In the larger context of the entire novel, I believe he defines Revolution as the means with no end, or the process that connects the past with the future. To seek mere pleasure or (lower-case) happiness is to come to an end and begin again; it is a circular moment that works within, thereby against, time. To seek Wisdom and Truth and Authenticity, (i.e. upper-case Happiness), is to consider the past and the future and realize there is no end; it is a continuum that works alongside, thereby with, time. Revolution then, works with time and offers an individual the opportunity to work toward Wisdom and Truth and Authenticity. REVOLUTION IS AN INDIVIDUAL ACTION COMPELLED BY INDIVIDUAL THOUGHT. REVOLUTION REQUIRES PAIN. Conformity and bureaucracy and wishful thinking and quiescence are all circular moments.

Revolution is necessary for progress, but Revolution scares the powerful. The powerful prefer to encourage conformity, and to add to bureaucracy, and to energize wishful thinking, and to maintain quiescence; and they call this progress---and we frequently believe them. We believe them because we don't understand the difference between power and expertise; (see PRIVILEGED HAPPINESS 8/5/17 and IMPROVING HAPPINESS 8/26/17). We believe them because we are told to be nice at the expense of truthfulness; (see HAPPINESS FRACTURED 5/7/16). We believe them because "the future is not my concern;" (see HAPPINESS STRANDED 1/27/18 and HAPPINESS STRANDED PART 2 2/3/18). We believe them because we believe subservience is cooperation. We believe them because it is easier. To seek and to find pleasure and (lower-case) happiness is easier today than ever before. Thus, to seek Wisdom and Truth and Authenticity has become more Revolutionary today than ever before; and, (it's worth repeating), Revolution requires individual thought and pain.

In this new age of technological wonders, government is failing us; capitalism has failed us; our social and spiritual leaders have failed us; education is failing us; we are failing us; I am failing us. REVOLUTION IS NECESSARY to rid ourselves of institutions that have outlived their usefulness, and to redirect those stuck in circular moments toward the future to again work alongside time.

In this moment, we are slightly less than 1.6 billion individuals from the 9 billion projected in our (fictional?) dystopian future as presented above. At our current rate, we will reach 9 billion in less than 20 years. I (want to) believe that we have more than two decades of "blue sky and meadows and forests and great cities," but I also believe that if we do not consider Revolution NOW, we will risk our blue sky. Simply put, we will replace the possibility of propitious with the inevitability of bleak.

To look upon Life from a distance,
To see Life as a comprehensive whole,
Is a magical and wondrous perspective.

To live life day-to-day and moment-to-moment,
To parse out its never-ending parade of intricacies,
Is a gritty and often abrasive undertaking.

From the beauty of the vision,
To the intimacy of the excrement,
I must balance my expectations.

... ... ... ... ...

If I see beauty first,
If I start  with a vision,
I will experience disappointment.

If I see specificity first,
If I prepare for adversity,
I may not hear the ensemble,
...I may not see the bolt of lightning,
...Or feel the clap of thunder,
...Or know my muse.

I must balance my expectations.

... ... ... ... ...

I find balance through creativity. In some circumstance I create deductively, by seeing the beauty first. In some circumstance I create inductively, by seeing a detail first. In all creative circumstance I work to build coherent specificity in a way that presents the whole as a wondrous and magical creation. I am seldom outwardly successful; though I would like to believe that, within each creation, I am able to intuit the beauty of the vision and the intimacy of the excrement.

I enjoy creating in the kitchen. There I can start with a detail, (for example, a kernel of corn), and build to something new and different by adding layers that aspire to completion; (such as I did this week with a new take on skillet cream corn). Or I can begin with a vision, (for example, hearty beef stroganoff), and find the elements to layer so it may be perceived as one: (as I also did this week). I am confident this simple meal did not reach Perfection, but in its creation I was able to work both from the whole and from a small, simple, individual detail, to build multiple eccentricities into a greater whole; and I did so aesthetically keeping superfluous waste to a minimum, and imperfections fairly well-hidden.

When I create from food, my body can connect the wonder of nourishment with the circular superficiality of pleasure.

When I create from food, my hands can connect the exultation of expedition with the chafe of exertion.

When I create from food, my heart and mind can connect the fulfillment of compassion with the loss of the moment.

When I create from food, my essence can connect the beauty of the vision with the intimacy of extirpation.

When I create from food, my expectations are balanced.

This week I vividly discovered that I am pretentious. It came as a surprise, but it should not have. Pretentiousness is typically, (almost always), judged by another; very seldom, (almost never), by oneself. This makes a tremendous amount of sense. I am not going to purposely choose actions or words that I deem pretentious or even that I know will come across as such. I am confident that everything I do and say is authentic; the real ME. Yet I look around and see many individuals acting all uppity and arrogant. Can't they see how fake they are? I am so glad that I am always so artless and true-to-myself.

This week I discovered that, in a sense, pretentiousness is necessary for experimentation in order to evolve and to aid in defining this elusive being I call Me. Whether a foray into Steampunk or Tarot or the ancient game of Go, even when they don't stick, they have been valuable tools for learning and growth. This week I have learned that one individual's Steampunk is another's ceramic Toby jug. This week, I am determined that I am going to work, (in this and future weeks), to be more careful about judging another's affectation.

Pondering pretentiousness in this regard, brought me to consider possible underlying structures from which it---(pretentiousness)---may come forth to be perceived by another. These considerations in turn brought me to thoughts of opposing desires and fears that when consciously or subconsciously hidden, may appear to manifest as pretentiousness. I came up with six spectrums defined by a-desire-for and a-fear-of on opposing ends. They are 1) virtue and vice, 2) inclusion and exclusion, 3) knowledge and ignorance, 4) abundance and deprivation, 5) honor and shame, and 6) self-esteem and guilt. So am I asking, is pretentiousness actually the surface veneer hiding one's desires and fears? Am I never my genuine self, but merely, (as Freud suggested), a product of my desires and fears?

I don't want to believe this; so I won't. I am confident that I have experienced bursts of authenticity between my bouts of experimentation-perceived-as-arrogance. I believe that perceived pretentiousness is simply an indicator that one is searching for authenticity. And that's unavoidable; and okay.

So, beginning with virtue and vice I want to more closely examine each of these six pairs because I believe that by doing so I may perhaps better understand my efforts toward definition, and I may perhaps develop more patience with other's efforts toward authenticity. At the very least, I believe I will come to a reinforced recognition of the multi-leveled falsity of pretentiousness. And who knows? I may come away with much more...

A desire to be virtuous feels natural and is probably one of Humanity's oldest attempts at justifying rule of law to establish trust. This spectrum from virtue to vice is in many ways synonymous with a desire for order and a fear of chaos; (see this previous post). But, as said, I also believe that Goodness is our more natural state, (as opposed to iniquity), because I believe it is through trust and relationships that one finds meaning and purpose in this Life. Granted, (as stated in previous written thought), the trust and the relationships may need to be developed with future generations as well as with contemporaries, but this is doable and likely to reduce the quantity of perceived arrogance. When dealing with contemporaries, pretentiousness may be interpreted from this jumble of judgement when there is disagreement as to where the line is drawn between good and evil. For me, the closer to virtue one draws their line, the more that individual fears evil (either as practiced by others or for its siren call); and also the closer to virtue, the greater the perceived pretentiousness. Moving the other direction, the closer to vice (as it is currently commonly defined), the less likely it becomes to build trust and relationships, thus potentially leaving a Life devoid of meaning and purpose; (and forcing a degee of defensive determination that may also come across as pretentiousness). This spectrum, (as do all the spectrums), encompasses many elements and branches that originate from its roots: (in this case) virtue and vice. Within this spectrum, we could examine politics, religion, sexual mores, cultural differences, and even sports and rock n' roll from a perspective of good to evil, right to wrong, or merely my educated, thoughtful preference to your misguided, thoughtless preference. All of these disagreements have the potential for perceived pretentiousness.

By touching on differences and disagreement, we have segued into inclusion and exclusion, and additionally I have illustrated how each of these spectrums will intertwine, (depending on circumstance), with other spectrums. I have PREVIOUSLY argued against inclusion stating that "If we focus on inclusion, we focus on differences, which, (though typically unspoken), reinforce divisiveness by clearly identifying an us and a them." And, "Teaching and preaching inclusion may simply encourage political correctness and perpetuate divisiveness." Based on these arguments, (and experience), it is obvious to me how pretentiousness can be perceived from an individual's desire for inclusion or from an individual (pompously) working to be politically correct. And if one is working from a fear of exclusion, it is also obvious to me why the individual may put on airs to become safe and secure in a group of one's choosing. This particular spectrum feels very short for those who perceive their self as excluded, but I believe it lengthens considerably for those who feel safe and secure and included; which is why I suggest that each one of us should begin from a perspective of personal exclusion, thus increasing common ground and dramatically decreasing perceived pretentiousness.

A desire for knowledge and/or a fear of ignorance may be sincere and self-directed, or it may be an other-directed delusion / facade. Either way it is apparent how pretentiousness may be perceived from this foundation. Be it a blowhard tripped up by his or her own actions or words that make plain the desire and fear, or an actual expert that is described as pretentious by those whose reactive fear of ignorance may also be perceived as pretentious, opportunity for artifice and duplicity is plentiful and may even sneak up on the performer and/or the audience. Pretentiousness may be lessened along this spectrum through empathic listening and careful communication. It is also important to note that each one of us is lacking (at least) some knowledge in (at least) some areas, and more frequent use of the simple, honest phrase "I don't know" will also lessen perceived pretentiousness. For many on this spectrum it is a relatively short spectrum, but I believe a sincere effort toward learning and growth will stretch an individual in that direction.

Remaining consistent with the context of this written thought, the spectrum of abundance and deprivation is largely applicable to comfort and security, beginning with basic needs and (often) blossoming into a desire for excess. Aditionally, this desire for abundance and/or this fear of deprivation may simply be that, or it may become entangled on a pretzeled  spectrum from privilege to impoverishment (implying a circumstance in which the individual has had little influence), and may further convolute by being interpreted as deserving or undeserving (indicating an often delusional belief reinforced by circumstance). I have consistently maintained that credit and blame are drastically over-emphasized, meaning that more of what we define as success or failure is essentially random fortune and/or misfortune; (I also believe that we tend to overlook or discount the impact of another's misfortune when it results in personal success or accomplishment). From this underpinning, it is a small hop-skip-jump from a desire for comfort, to a desire for excess, to a belief that I am deserving and worthy, to perceived pretentiousness. And on the other end, one who is mired in, (or even near to), impoverishment may come across (to those interpreting from privilege) as needy and/or more deserving, thus whiny and pretentious. Pretentiousness may be lessened on this spectrum with a better understanding of the serendipitous nature of abundance and deprivation.

The final two spectrums will be examined together:

A desire for honor and a fear of shame is similar to a desire for self-esteem and a fear of guilt. There is one important difference: honor and shame are bestowed upon an individual by one or more other individuals, whereas self-esteem and guilt are bestowed upon oneself by oneself. The inner feelings may (and frequently do) run parallel with those accorded by others, but I also believe that with practice, one can separate guilt from shame and again move toward self-esteem; a lack of honor is NOT synonymous with dishonor. Additionally, I believe that one can expand / inflate self-esteem, creating pride; (as in, one of the Seven Deadly Sins). It is easy to see how pretentiousness can be perceived from the pinnacles of pride as well as from the angry depths of guilt and shame. I believe openness and truthfulness, (and a recognition and practice of some qualities shared between the two spectrums) will mitigate this perceived pretentiousness. These shared qualities include skepticism, uncertainty, doubt, thoughtful questioning, and even a degree of diffidence.

Finally, I believe by admitting to and recognizing my pretentiousness, and working to understand its essence as found in personal desires and fears, I am also working to reduce nonproductive airs and to advance learning and growth, that will aid in the long-term survival of Humanity. I believe that to sincerely desire an individual effort toward Global virtue, Universal inclusion, Unbounded knowledge, Proportionate abundance, Commensurate honor, and Accordant self-esteem, will in turn diminish individual fear of vice, exclusion, ignorance, deprivation, shame, and guilt, and may encourage likewise individual effort. Nourish to flourish.