Fear of Another Planet

Hearing others speaking a foreign language makes me wish I knew another language. Lately, I have been enjoying the opportunity to learn from Spanish-speaking co-workers. Therefore, it makes no sense to me that anyone would instead wish they were speaking English. Further, I think the root problem with this way of thinking is a systemic issue fundamental to a major criticism of mine regarding American society in general: “You need to learn my ways,” is the same as, “I need to remain ignorant.”

While dangerous activities and chemical addictions are probably best avoided, the biggest risk to gaining experiences is discovering that your assumptions about them were incorrect. I believe that is exactly what frightens people about the unknown; they don’t want to risk feeling obliged to change. Resistance to change can make sense in an evolutionary sense- an unyielding, unreasonable desire to preserve a way of life is often the only thing that prevents its annihilation.

Human survival throughout history has depended upon the coordination of a minority possessing ingenuity with a majority possessing a brazen, stubborn fighting spirit. Being generous and open-minded does not make one a good soldier. I am currently reading Homage to Catalonia, by George Orwell, which is a first-hand account of the operations of an atheist army unit in Spain during their Civil War, and it really highlights the importance of obediently following orders, and the benefits of them being followed because of genuine convictions rather than fear of retribution.

The default position for most is to justify and defend their current state of being. We can feel a sense of betrayal for appreciating things outside of our declared preferences. We immediately point out apparent flaws by contrasting novel things from established likes. We tend to accentuate the positives in our own experiences and the negatives in the experiences of others. It is extremely difficult for some to admit they don’t like something because they are biased against it. We are so used to this, in fact, that it can be creepy when someone unflinchingly declares a bias. We tend to prefer justifying our beliefs with largely irrelevant and retroactively applied rationalizations. We actively seek out and latch onto claims that support our presuppositions as well as those that refute anything contrary to them.

This is purely conjecture, but I’m guessing we possess a genetic chemical reaction that resists admitting the need to change. Apologizing or admitting mistakes is often accompanied by a horrible feeling of sickness in the pit of the stomach, heart palpitations and even dizziness. Stubborn steadfastness seems wired into our DNA.

As a culture, we are taught that it is more important to convince others of our competence than it is to be competent. There seems nothing more offensive than those who refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of our point of view. This requires an egocentric desire for the other to forfeit theirs. Instead of acknowledging that multiple perspectives can be valid even when incompatible, we demand for ourselves to be right and them to be wrong. Those who are not with us, or like us, are against us.

I am not a poker player, but I can see why it appeals to a certain demographic. There are two ways to win: either by having the better hand or convincing the other players that you do. While being dealt good cards is largely luck, bluffing is a skill. It relies upon letting another know almost all the facts, but withholding the most important detail. It is important to remember that in everyday life, that important detail may remain hidden for everyone, but we will tend to assume we know what it is. Effective bluffers succeed by convincing themselves that they are telling the truth. Although this seems absurd, succeeding at pulling the wool over another’s eyes suggests that convincing another of a thing makes a thing correct.

One of the better TEDTalks is about being wrong, and the speaker, Kathryn Schulz, asks, “How does it feel to be wrong?” She receives several answers from the audience, and then declares that those answers are wrong. They answered what it feels like to realize you are wrong. Her point is sublime: Being wrong feels exactly the same as being right. Understanding this simple fact helps understand why we tend to assume we’re right. Ms. Schulz points out that, in the present tense, it is extraordinarily difficult to think of anything we’re wrong about. We dismiss contrary opinions by assuming those who possess them are ignorant, stupid or evil, in that order.

I recently overheard a white lady declare (to a black man), “Black Conservativism is on the rise, and will continue to grow. More people just need to be educated.” It is patently offensive whenever someone assumes anyone with different life experiences than theirs are ignorant. It is impossible to have a valid frame of reference for how another’s life experiences affect their point of view, and it is equally impossible to assume our different life experiences have somehow given us a more valid perspective than another’s. Those motivated to dispel their agenda are not interested in educating. They gleefully latch onto everything that supports their claims without ever objectively considering the possibility that they could be wrong by dismissively mocking anything contrary to their agenda, which inevitably leads to distortions of logic. Rush Limbaugh is a great propagandist to listen to in order to practice identifying logical fallacies. He simultaneously warns against being brainwashed by the “lamestream” media and promotes turning off programs you don’t agree with. In other words, he wants to be the one doing the brainwashing.

We often assume different is evil. In fact, the “garbage in, garbage out” excuse is actively provided as justification for avoiding anything different. Not only is this claim heavily exaggerated, but whoever is deciding for you what is and isn’t garbage is invariably full of it. The criteria for what is deemed garbage is always dependent upon the bias of the person making the judgment. Some people attempt to circumvent this by attributing their judgments to higher powers, which has proven a startlingly successful tactic for getting others to subscribe to one’s beliefs. There is moral objectivity to be found, since we are all connected by existing as human beings and should therefore treat one another as equals, which means the exploration of certain sources of enjoyment should be strictly avoided. That does not preclude the possibility that even those things could be found enjoyable, but acknowledges that there are things more important than enjoyment.

Gods and deities are unchanging. There is nothing sinister in this; it is simply a result of them representing archetypes and ideals. Tellingly, unchanging personas are also an integral element in comedies. In Christianity, the most fundamental teaching is to believe in Jesus’ divinity and obey his teachings while leaving behind our own desires. This seems to promote change, but it is revealing that the greatest desire of an all-powerful being is to be believed. Considering the utter inconsequentiality of whether or not we believe the legitimacy of the existence of one supreme creator and judge, it is absurd to think such a being would care in the least. It would seem inconceivable for there to be a real-world scenario in which the benefits of a generous or self-sacrificing act was contingent upon the recipient acknowledging the act had been done. Instead of incorporating a logical construction of a supreme being, Christianity ensures that the ideal nature everyone should aspire toward regards being believed as the single most important concern. The most fundamental teaching in Christianity is not to be right, but to believe that you’re right and persist in that belief, with asceticism proving tenacity. I can’t fathom how that ideology can be perceived as anything but frightening.

Humans tend to enjoy repeating catchy, easy-to-remember phrases, regardless of their validity.
Sound bites are highly successful at comforting us, because they make decisions seem simple and straight-forward. Our willingness to grasp onto a well-constructed sentence leads to a bandwagon mentality where we side with whoever is more eloquent or witty. People will actually prefer responses that artfully dodge questions over those that give direct answers. Anybody who has used the internet has experienced its convenience for finding and flaunting whatever echoes our perspective, and the popularity of a so-called meme’s dependence upon its clever and accessible packaging, regardless of how dubious the information it contains.

Another interesting affect of the internet which hinders change is its use of direct marketing. It suggests things we may want to purchase based on the words we type. This limits our introduction to unfamiliar ideas, interests and activities. Google, for example, prioritizes searches according to things we have clicked on in the past, which becomes an obstacle for conducting further research into unexplored internet content. This gives the impression of a small world without that much to explore.

One frequent method for defending conservatism is by placing artificial limitations on things by declaring the way they are “supposed” to be. Many styles of music can be dismissed by stating, “Music is supposed to have a melody.” The fear of bats is justified because, “Mammals aren’t supposed to be able to fly.” People will proudly, and without a shed of irony, declare what “freedom” means. These claims are humorous in part because they give the impression that a thorough scientific analysis was done before their conclusion was drawn. How can you argue with the way things are supposed to be? It’s like arguing with the way a word is supposed to be spelled without the benefit of it being verifiable.

I have heard people summarize a foreign culture by declaring, “They’ll never change.” This immediately makes me wonder when they themselves are planning on changing. We aim to improve by honing our current selves into what we currently perceive as an improvement, but we assume that the ideologies underlying our existence will remain constant. Therefore, change not only threatens to throw a major monkey wrench in our plans, but seems to render our lives up until any change a complete waste of time. Somehow, we assume persisting with our convictions justifies them, and instead of accepting the option of wasting only a part of our life, we instead waste the entirety of it.

While we desperately cling to our own convictions and encourage everyone to follow their dreams in general, we are veritably obsessed with discouraging others when their specific dreams differ from ours. The obstacles and challenges in any course of action that differs from one we have ever taken are instantly elaborated upon. If, on the other hand, someone wants to explore something that we have fond memories of, we simply tell them they’d love it and should go for it. Why is that?

Goals and priorities that contrast from ours befuddle us. When I was a motivated drummer, others with drumming styles similar to my own tended to annoy me, whereas I obsessed over those whose drumming attained what mine aspired to be. But my opinion of drummers that I couldn’t really relate to was all over the map. Since judgments tend to be relative, it is nearly impossible to make sense of things without a frame of reference that we can relate to. For example, it is widely assumed by Americans that everyone wants the “American Dream,” so there tends to be a lot of confusion in America why people from other countries would be proud of their own heritage. We assume others share our desires or are misguided. There is nobody scarier than he who is truly convinced that everyone should pursue the same goals as him, as those who value homogeneity are most willing to commit atrocities against those who don’t fit in.

We are compelled to think of ourselves as both a unique and integral member of society. We seek worth, validity and justification, without which our lives are meaningless. We want to be extraordinary and lead extraordinary lives. Basically, we want to be better and more important than everyone else. So, we create a world in which we are. We get so caught up in our world that the possibility that another would also desire worth, validity or justification is regarded as an incompatible impossibility and forgotten. In our world, we perceive the way things are while others wander aimlessly and babble incoherently. The best thing we can do, for their sake, is convince them to believe us and follow our lead.

We are so convinced of our own correctness that discovering we are wrong often feels magical. This is more comfortably experienced in an imaginary, fictional scenario, as it doesn’t threaten our actual convictions, which is why things like mystery books are so popular. It is a shame that discovering that another is right doesn’t have the same effect, but can instead lead to resentment. We tend to underestimate both others and ourselves, and in both cases we tend to blame the other. We are just as quick at passing judgment for the shortcomings of others as we are at declaring things done by others are out of our reach. Both reinforce ways in which we can’t relate to others.

If we are willing to change the paradigm from one of seeking the joys of being blessed toward the magic of finding truth, fulfilling discoveries await us. Times spent attempting to demonstrate superiority are missed opportunities of getting to know some interesting people, learn some fascinating things and experience some profound sensations.

Hard Work

There was a time when my second favorite cartoon (after G.I. Joe) was DuckTales. It was about the adventures of Uncle Scrooge and his three nephews, whom he was constantly telling, “Work smarter, not harder.” I was always suspicious of this advice, as I knew it was coming from a Disney cartoon, but was never able to quite put my finger on what it was about it that struck me as odd until now. The allure of this statement seems to be that it gives permission to avoid hard work. If it were simply an encouragement to be innovative, why not say, “Work smart while working hard”? Second, it implies everyone is capable of correctly applying intelligence to work situations, which, in my observed experience, is rarely the case.

During the same time I was watching DuckTales, I was reading Sherlock Holmes mysteries. Sherlock is famous for his unmatched perspective abilities, but the books stress that the key to his success is by using those skills toward correctly applying his tireless movements in order to secure results. He is constantly on the go, and Watson has considerable trouble keeping up with him in a physical sense as well as mental. One way this is highlighted is through the character of Mycroft Holmes, who is Sherlock’s older, and more clever, brother. Mycroft sits in a private club in which silence is required and solves crimes he reads about in the newspaper. He does not see the point in being bothered with practicalities. He does not capture villains. Mycroft Holmes is overtly intended to be the embodiment of bureaucracy. (In one story Sherlock remarks that Mycroft sometimes is the government, and explains, “The conclusions of every department are passed to him, and he is the central exchange, the clearinghouse, which makes out the balance.”)

Some people work smarter and not harder by delegating tasks. Delegating should be used to give tasks to more qualified persons and when there is more work than one person can handle, and so ideally, delegating does not eschew hard work. Unfortunately, it is too often used to enable shifting blame when work isn’t done correctly and taking credit when it is. People who aren’t working have a curious habit of telling those who are how they should be doing it. One obstacle I am trying to unlearn is the paranoia that when others suggest alternative approaches, they are suggesting that I’m incompetent. In reality, others, especially males, aren’t taking another’s competence into consideration at all and are merely demonstrating theirs, or at least attempting to. There is nothing easier than pointing out the flaws in others, so there is nothing more obnoxious than it being done smugly. Those who refuse to find a solution to a problem are responsible for the problem continuing to exist, even while they point their finger at those who caused it. There is nobody lower than he who thinks there is work beneath him. Leaving problems for whoever is blamed for causing them to fix is often not prudent or effective, but problems caused by ignorance must be addressed. A person can’t be blamed for continuously making the same mistake if nobody is informing them of the mistake being made. Deciding, “They should know better,” rather than determining if they do is just another example of ducking hard work and responsibility.

I spent a lot of time this week pulling weeds. Every so often someone would wander up to inform me that it would go much faster if I used RoundUp. If I wasn’t at work, where I’m obliged to maintain a modicum of professionalism, I’d respond it would go a lot quicker if I dropped a missile on it, too. Why use a poison that destroys everything to do a task I can perform with my bare hands? I wasn’t trying to get rid of grass or poison ivy. In order to avoid debate, I responded by saying corporate didn’t want RoundUp to be used (a great example of effectively shifting blame). They would then point out that I should get a weed-pulling tool. This tool is actually useful for using on broken-off roots, but I broke my weed-pulling tool last fall. For most weeding, though, using a weed-pulling tool would simply add an unnecessary extra step. Strangely, and tellingly, nobody pointed out that I should be wearing gloves. I wasn’t, not only because they are cumbersome and because I’ve perfected the art of kicking thistles to get to their root without getting stabbed, but because I had an ulterior motive of using the opportunity to build my grip strength for playing disc golf, which is currently my main hobby.

Anybody who appreciates The Karate Kid (1984), which was, of course, was my second favorite childhood movie, after the Star Wars trilogy, understands the necessity of dedicated hard work in obtaining any goal, even when it seems irrelevant or pointless. Hard work can be fulfilling or frustrating, depending upon whether you can see its results. Along with the motivation to improve, stubborn persistence is one of the most useful traits a human can possess. Hard work demands having faith in the process and a belief that it is beneficial in and of itself. If you can’t be proud of having the work you are responsible for completed correctly and timely, how can you exhibit any pride at all? One thing hard work does not necessarily lead to is monetary success, which is enough to make it seem pointless to many.

One maxim I have is: If you aren’t working harder than everybody else, you’re not working hard enough. Another is: If it’s not your job to worry about someone else’s job, don’t. It is difficult to remain a diligent worker without others attempting to take advantage of your willingness to contribute. It is difficult to remain a diligent worker without others attempting to take advantage of your willingness to contribute. There is certainly a limit to how much work a person can do, and a time when that fact should be voiced. How hard you work should not be tied to how much you are being paid until an actual risk to your life is involved. Aside from breaks and lunch, no employee has ever negotiated for a percentage of the work day being set aside for slacking off.

The only alternatives to working hard are to let everything fall into ruin or be dependent upon others to work hard instead. Some people seem to have been given the impression that they should only do things that are fun. The Jane’s Addiction song So What? begins, “Man wasn’t made to work; c’mon build a machine!” which always makes me wonder who should build said machine. If work was fun, they wouldn’t pay you to do it, they’d charge. However, working hard is more satisfying and enjoyable than avoiding it by doing nothing. People don’t generally exclaim, “I really love my job because I get to sit around and do nothing all day.”

The embracement of laziness leads directly to learned helplessness and incompetence. In our quest to avoid doing anything, we avoid learning how to do anything, and become increasingly dependent upon others to perform any tasks we require and produce any goods we need. As we continue to avoid doing things we feel we don’t have to know how to do, learning how to perform new tasks becomes more and more uncomfortable, until we succumb to uselessness and irrelevance. In many aspects of our everyday lives, automatons have already taken over, which I suppose is okay if our ambitions are to “sleep and make love deeper,” or at least stare at a computer screen waiting for something entertaining to appear.