A tribute to George

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7f0GStBCeUU&feature=player_embedded

Before I started any kind of study of academic philosophy, I was mostly exposed to certain ideas by pop-philosophers (which these days are mostly comedians). George Carlin being a large intellectual influence merely by his combination of humor and thoughtfulness.

Although I disagree with some of George's motives for taking this stand, I find the result to be brave and admirable.

Philosophical Punch in the Mouth Vol.4

This quote comes from Seneca's essay regarding the virtue of mercy. I've picked this because I am a new teacher and this fairly describes my ideal for classroom management.

"There is the further point that a great many people are capable of returning to virtue's path if punishment is waved. But pardon should not be exercised in an unthinking way; for once the distinction between bad men and good is removed, what follows is confusion and the outbreak of vice; accordingly a wise restraint should be shown, such as is capable of distinguishing between curable characters and ones past hope. The mercy we exercise ought not to be indiscriminate and for all and sundry but it should not be withheld completely; for pardoning all involves no less cruelty than pardoning none. We must preserve a mean; but because equilibrium is not easily achieved, whatever is likely to tilt the balance should incline the scale in the more benign direction."

I have been called too nice as a professional and maybe I am not reaching a proper equilibrium, but this is because I continually incline to that benign direction.

Emotionalism

    Before I get into reasoning, I'll just declare that I don't want to be an emotional person. The fewer emotions I can have, the better. I have no expectation of this happening in my lifetime, but I keep it as a personal goal. For people in mindsets other than the Stoic or perhaps Buddhist (the eastern cousin of Stoicism) way of thinking, this seems ludicrous, dangerous, or perhaps cowardly. I've spent my entire life in a shroud of rubberized feelings bouncing up/down/left/right and mostly in circles. I can't speak for anyone, but I don't see much different in the shared lives of those around me.

    My perception is that we have three states. Good feelings, bad feelings, and no feelings. However, good and bad feelings are in one dimension of existence and no feelings is in another. What I mean is that the good and bad feelings have a special relationship. They play off each other and depend on each other. They form a necessary dichotomy. We misuse impressions to create a bad feeling and when the fog is lifted from our mistake it is transformed into a good feeling. Similarly, we push ourselves to emotional highs regarding the objects of our lives and often come into a crash.

    The no feeling dimension is rejected for the same reason we fear most things, their being foreign. Our proclivity towards understanding puts us at odds with it. I'm hardly an expert, but I feel like there are moments where I can catch a glimpse of what it is like. It doesn't feel all that pleasurable like a state of bliss. It just feels very calm and authentic. I think we can stumble into it at times, but our untamed feelings are too strong to leave us there for long.

    The first problem I have with excess feeling all the time is that I barely get to live my life in the moment because I'm constantly having to fend off these voices trying to persuade me of what to do and what to think. Can't my mind know what's a natural way to live without these constant feelings?

Surrender

   As I've been honing my Stoic thinking process, the idea of surrender has thrust itself in my consciousness. Without delving too deep into this idea, let me show how I've begun to do it. Imagine a situation comes along where I make an incorrect judgement and feel the resulting emotion inside. My problem in the past is that I've dwelt on the mistake and feeling after they happen.

   The truth is that I was meant to make that mistake and feel that emotion because I had not corrected my thinking beforehand. (And sometimes your imagination just hurls false judgements upon you!) So instead of beating myself up, I am now trying to simply surrender to those thoughts/feelings and allow them to process and move along. This allows me to move forward with time and keep my mind clear.

    The lesson for me being that we can't avoid the backlash for living in discord with our nature. So just surrender to the consequences. What else can you do? If you don't wish to go down that path again, then set your mind to become what it wasn't before that happened.

Philosophical Punch in the Mouth Vol.3

From Epictetus' Discourses, Book 4  1:99-106

- 'How do you mean, attach himself?' So that whatever god wills, he wills too, and what god does not will, he does not will either. 'How, then, can this be achieved?' - Why, how otherwise than by considering god's purposes and his governance? What has he given to me to by my own and subject to my own authority? What has he reserved for himself? He has given to me whatever lies within the sphere of choice, and made that over to me free from all hindrance and restraint. This body formed of clay, how could he make that free from hindrance? And so he has made subject to the circulation of the universe my property, my furnishings, my house, my children, my wife. Why, then, shall I fight against god? Why do I will what is outside the reach of my will, to possess absolutely what is not granted to me absolutely? So how long shall I possess them? As they were granted to me, and for as long as possible. But he who gave takes away again. Why, then, do I resist? Not to say that I shall be a fool contending with one stronger than myself; but prior to that, I shall be doing wrong. For where did I get things when I came into the world? My father gave them to me. And who gave them to him? And who made the sun, who the fruits, who the seasons, and who the fellowship and intercommunion between men? And then, when you have received everything, even your very self, from another, are you angry with the giver and do you reproach him if he takes anything away from you? Who are you, and for what purpose have you come? Was it not he who brought you here? Was it not he who showed you the light? Has he not given you fellow-workers? Has he not given you senses? Has he not given you reason? And as what did he bring you here? Was it not as a mortal? Was it not as one who would live, with a little portion of flesh, upon this earth, and behold his governance and take part with him, for a short time, in his pageant and his festival? Are you not willing, then, for the time that is granted to you, to behold his pageant and his solemn assembly, and then, when he leads you out, will you not pass on your way, after paying him obeisance and offering him thanksgiving for what you have heard and what you have seen? 'No, but I wanted to enjoy the festival still longer.' So would initiates into the Mysteries like to be longer in their initiation, so perhaps would the spectators at Olympia like to see more athletes. But the festival is over. Leave it and depart like a grateful and modest person; make room for others. Others too must be born, as you were, and when they are born must have land and houses and the necessities of life. But if those who come first do not withdraw, what room is there left? Why are you insatiable? Why are you never satisfied? Why do you crowd the world?

A couple points:

1) I am a Pantheistic Stoic in that wherever I see God in Stoic text I just substitute Universe.

2) I see so many Stoic ideas in Christianity that it sometimes seems more than just a coincidence. IE: "But he who gave takes away again." (The lord giveth and the lord taketh away)

3) I love the oratory style of Epictetus. He pins you in a corner with rapid fire questioning that you simply don't have a counter answer for. 

Pain Analogy

     Pain. It needs no introduction. I just thought of an interesting way to think of it. Imagine a gasoline can or water can for plants. The can represents an incident of some kind that inspires pain. The water of the can represents the accumulated pain of that incident. The flow of the water out of the bucket represents the intensity of our pain. If we take some of the worst events of our lives, we will imagine that bucket being filled to the brim. Take that bucket and start pouring the liquid out of the spigot.

    Initially, the water flows out in a large and unsteady stream. The water can be whitish from all the air and jostling. Sometimes it will flow out in chunks because of air displacement. This opening period is when you feel the full fury and violence of the pain. 

    Then the water calms somewhat. However, there is still a very reliable and steady stream. You can see the transparency of the water as the flow remains consistent and strong. At this point in the pain game, people can get frustrated because of the persistence of sensation. There have been times in my life when I've wondered when it might end. 

    The next phase is when we still have a transparent stream but it breaks up into droplets towards the end. This signifies to me the light at the end of the tunnel where relief can be found.

    The second to last phase is when there are only droplets coming out of the bucket. The pain is just intermittent at this point. Life becomes just a little bit easier.

    And finally, the end has come when you take the bucket and turn it completely upside down to even see if you  can find any water at all. I've come to learn that this is not the time for celebration or satisfaction. Never own up to the fact that your pain is a bad thing. It is simply a challenge. An endurance challenge for the mind. One we can all win.

Hanging By a Thread

    By most accounts, I believe people are comfortable with accepting the pleasant side of what comes their way from fortune or fate. However, the reverses of fortune are not met with such an embrace. Why is this? One theory is that we suspend our belief about what reality has to offer us because, in the mean time, we don't want to think about the things we would prefer did not happen. This approach I will argue (as have others before me) is the worst of both worlds. The two criteria I will use to evaluate this approach are by how we see and treat a thing, a relationship, or an entity while we still share space and time with it and how we deal with its almost eventual absence.

    Let's look at the first situation or how I will call it, how much we appreciate something. The inevitable and literal outcome of thinking that something will always be yours (by denying you will ever be parted when you must) is simply taking something for granted. This is the state of not appreciating or enjoying something. The second scenario is what the response will be when we do lose something. Seeing that this occurrence is a broad departure from what we conceptualize, there is undoubtedly a shock in accepting these events.


    This is where the Stoic technique of negative visualization comes in. The premise of this technique is that we imagine the negative outcomes in our fates in order to prepare ourselves for these eventualities. Seneca argues that the shock is half the battle. On a side note, I don't think that negative visualization is the most apt term. What we're really doing is just realistically visualizing events. It's not a stretch to suppose that we envision the things we would prefer to happen without prompting ourselves. By creating mental space for the other possibilities, we are simply balancing our view of the future. We get the best of both worlds by being realistic since we can appreciate what we have when we have it and we can  prepare ourselves to be without it.


     The analogy that I use in balancing my thoughts is to imagine there being a tiny, thin thread that either holds something in my life or something (or myself) in existence altogether. This thread could snap at any moment and take everything and anything away at any moment...

The fairer sex (2 of 2)

    When talking about male/female relationships, the Stoic deference to the public interest over the private interest makes the distinction about how this process should run. Ultimately, it is up to the individual to make the decision for themselves as to which interest is more imperative, their own or the rest of humanity's. It is the argument of the Stoic that aligning yourself with the public interest (since we are social creatures) is one of the biggest steps towards the ultimate goal of "living in accordance with nature".

     In the first section of this column, I highlighted my own failings in pursuing women with what I wanted to have for myself (beauty, sex, attention/affection, and an object of my pursuit). While it might be different from person to person, this is what I refer to when I say the private interest.

    Looking at unions between men and women or even gay couples, what might we determine as the greatest benefit for the public to come out of these arrangements? From the limited number of benefits to the public I can ascertain, there are none more obvious or essential than the production and rearing of children who will contribute to and become the new face of our societies.

    The next question becomes, "How do we know who will be a good mother/father?" When it comes to relationships of any kind I believe the qualities that make us good fathers, husbands, children, brothers and friends. I can list a number of virtues, but the summary would be to look for someone who has taken successful efforts to make themselves better on the inside and who takes care of the body they've been entrusted with. And don't mistake me, looking good and being healthy are not the same although healthy always looks good.

    Before I continue this line of thinking any further, there is something I need to mention. Along with the public/private split in ideologies, there is another split that relates to relationships. It is about who is responsible for happiness. The person who aligns themselves with the public interest naturally must see themselves as master of their own happiness since acquiring things for themselves is not their goal. It also makes sense to me that someone who has their private interest at heart must look without themselves in order to make themselves happy. I believe this dependence on others leads to the dysfunction I often see in most relationships. My conclusion being that the reasons for entering most relationships that I see are selfish and misguided.

    Where this all leads me, I'm not sure. I'm considering taking a very Christian stance of just waiting until I'm married since I'm attempting to move sex down the list. I don't really find it that difficult to abstain once I set my mind to it. The frame of mind that I believe is taking hold is one of accepting that there are two ways to approach this situation. The right way and the wrong way. And aside from some mild gratification, the wrong way really doesn't offer me much.

Philosophical Punch in the Mouth Vol. #2

The Discourses (Epictetus) Book 1: Chapter 6: Lines 37-43

"Now that you realize these things, you also should look to the faculties that you have, and say as you behold them, 'Bring on me now, O Zeus, whatever difficulty you will, for I have the means and the resources granted to me by yourself to bring honour to myself through whatever may come to pass.' - No; but you sit trembling, for fear that this or that might happen, and lamenting, and mourning, and groaning at what does happen, and then you find fault with the gods. For what is the consequence of such meanness of spirit, but impiety? And yet god has not only granted us these faculties, which enable us to endure everything that happens without being humiliated or broken by it, but, like a good king, and a true father, has given them to us free of all restraint, compulsion, or hindrance, and has put them under our complete control, not even reserving any power for himself to hinder or restrain them. Possessing these faculties in freedom and as your own, will you make no use of them, not consider what it is that you have received and from whom, but sit groaning and lamenting, some of you blind to him who gave them and not acknowledging your benefactor, and others basely resorting to complaints and accusations against god? Yet I undertake to show you that you have the equipment and resources for greatness of soul and a courageous spirit: you show me what occasion you have for complaint and reproach!"

I certainly have nothing to add to this magnificent piece of writing aside from a mere anecdote. This quotation has the singular responsibility of inspiring my spirit and intellect into the Stoic mindset.

The fairer sex (1 of 2)

    Looking at my sexual/romantic exploits over the years, I see that I've exclusively used the desire model for how I've picked and lived with women. Obviously, there are certain traits in a companion we should want before others, but my desire model refers heavily to sexual desire and emotional desires to be fulfilled by the partner. I've always wanted to want someone. I've been so hypnotized by that feeling of transitioning from wanting someone to having someone. The bliss of allowing your imagination to picture how wonderful and pleasurable it will all be. Wanting someone to be yours forever. The evidence all points to the failure of this model. There isn't a person who ever lived on par with the cosmic and infinite pull of a man's desire unleashed. 


    And what better object than females to ignite this longing. At least in this country, they are ruthlessly trained from the crib to become beautiful and to capture the attention of boys and girls alike. Sadly, this show often reaches derivative where women of all ages experience terrible anxiety from their own desires to be desired. What could be a more unstable and painful arrangement than to have one desire be based on the ever-changing fickle nature of another person's want?


    The question I've posed to myself being at this crossroads is, "Where do I go from here?". 


    For me, the first part of the answer is simple. I must totally reinvent my thoughts and actions regarding sex. Without taming this instinct, I simply will never have a good relationship with a women. The first reason being that I will choose all the wrong women. The second reason being that the relationship will revolve around the sex and doom it internally. Easier said than done, right? Not really. The opportunity exists to practice this one all day everyday. Here's how my process is working step by step:


1) Realize that my desires for sex(or anything else) are an enemy needing to be conquered. If you don't fundamentally believe that the desires are to be checked, then you're reading the wrong blog. 


2) I've taken a renewable oath of chastity until the New Year. It helps to confront your desires by establishing that they won't be indulged anytime soon. 


3) Masturbation. This one is a biggy. Many religious peoples believe that by masturbating we are fanning the flames of desire. And frankly, I'm not sure they're totally wrong. Personally, I find it as the means to ridding myself of my lustful thoughts. Some of us are just the 'I can barely concentrate' types. However, I find it's important to frame the activity around what the goals of it are and to try to limit the racy thoughts as much as possible. 


Before I introduce an argument comparing lust and hunger, I will admit that these are not synonymous ideas since  food is necessary to live whereas orgasms are not. However, I believe they play themselves out in the body and in our behavior very similarly so I believe we can apply similar principles from one to another. When both of these desires reach their boiling points, it is our imaginations for what we will need to satisfy them that take hold. The job then becomes to accept less than what we imagine or in some cases to accept nothing. With food, we can see the simplicity of eating a simple sandwich and a piece of fruit rather than a three course meal. With sex, often we have to have the strength in many cases to do without. And what I've done with masturbation is to reduce my viewing of porn by 90 plus percent. I have no other conclusion than the images in porn stir the imagination and inflate the desires. Opposed to trying to inflate desires, I frame the experience as an act to help eliminate and repress the desires. Humorously, I've found it near impossible to eliminate some fantasizing. This part being what I interpret religious people have issue with. Folks, it's clear to me that we can't control some of the thoughts we have come into our head from our imaginations. Our job is to limit them and to not indulge them.


4) The last step is to re-train my eye. This will be the most difficult. I will be honest and admit that my eye is used to looking at and evaluating women as sexual objects.It's so automatic at this point that I've barely scratched the surface here. The only progress I've made is by not allowing myself to continue staring at someone I've spotted. I'll get back to you on this one. 


Part 2 will take us away from eliminating old, bad habits and talk about creating new, good ones.

Bullying

     The recent rash of suicides among children that were inspired by their problems with being teased/harassed by their peers is something that needs to be discussed in relation to Stoicism. I have a few points of contention with the reaction that I mostly see regarding this issue. The focus is entirely upon trying to stop or reform those doing the harassing. The first problem being that this isn't a behavior that will ever disappear (yes, I appreciate and support the efforts to limit that behavior) and the second being that you're only addressing half the participants. More specifically, we're accepting the shaky premise that the victims of bullying are exactly that, victims. What a shame to think of other human beings as being so helpless as to have no other recourse against the verbal taunting of pubescent children save killing themselves.

     Let's take a look at this situation in a factual manner before we move ahead any further. Children A thru Y say or post online a host of ill-intentioned and ill-natured insults to Child Z. Child Z has negative judgments about the nature of the insults. These judgments lead to emotional pain and other fresh judgments about his/her situation in life. The pain from the judgment about insults and the pain from new judgments (I'm not a good person or I have no way to escape or no one cares about me) becomes so extreme that Child Z judges that life isn't as valuable as escaping this pain and ends his/her life.

    I will say that most children, without the proper guidance, will naturally not accept insults graciously. But the point of the previous paragraph was to illustrate the responsibility that Child Z had in the process that lead to his/her suicide. By responsibility, I am not pinning blame for being the recipient of the insults but for the manner in which he/she responds to them or thinks about them. What I really feel is that these children have been let down by the adults in their life who have not had the combination of wisdom and conviction needed to prepare these children for what they will face in life.

    And what wisdom do I refer to? The wisdom that says:

- Are the things people say about me even true? If not, why do I let it bother me? If someone called you a horse, you would think them equally foolish to what they said.

- Do I respect the person who is the source of the insult? If they are lacking wisdom and character, I would only be putting myself on their level to let their insults affect me. Also, if someone who is uninformed says something I am or do is wrong then there is a good chance it is right!

- Instead of being angry or upset with those who insult us, we should feel sorry for them that this is what they have lowered themselves to.

- The things people say about us are not insulting unless we decide they are. We all agree we have a right to our opinion. So make it one that helps instead of hurts. Sticks and stones....

And when you can become convinced of some of these ideas, then let it show with your reaction. Laugh off one insult while ignoring another.

I Prefer

    The Stoics make a wonderful distinction when it comes to how we pursue material things, pleasure, life itself and all other things that they define as being "apparently good". For instance, wealth is something that most people seem to gravitate towards naturally and is apparently good. Wealth, however, has no intrinsic power to make one's life good as opposed to virtue (the source of true good). The opposite of virtue and the only bad things in life would be the vices. All the rest in the middle is indifferent since it can neither bring you good or bad. Even life and death are indifferent since they are merely transitions into and out of phases we must all enter and leave. Whether the virtues and the vices are all that matter is a conversation for another day....

     This distinction that is made is that many of these apparent goods (money, ability, health) which are indifferent can also be preferred. For me, the power of that statement is apparent and abundant. The power is in the point of view. Take this silly example. You're at a restaurant and you're going to order a hamburger. There's no mention of cheese or cheeseburger anywhere on the menu. You say to the waiter, "You know what, I'll take the hamburger, but I'd prefer to have some cheese on it. If you don't have it, that's fine". Or you could complain to everyone about not having any cheese or decide that a plain hamburger simply isn't good enough for your fussy palate. Which person do you want to be? 

    The point is that we cultivate a certain ease and peace of mind when we simply prefer something opposed to desiring it and seeing it as something that is essentially good in our lives. We're able to let it go and we're able to accept its absence. In a word, we prevent becoming a slave to this object or state or desire. This is how Seneca responds to the criticisms levied against his wealth in his essay On the Happy Life. The opening of this quote is Seneca giving voice to the questions of one of his critics.

'Why, then,' you say 'do you mock me, since you give wealth the same status as I do?' Do you wish to know how differently we view it? In my case if wealth slips away, it will deprive me only of itself, but you will be struck dumb, you will think you have been deserted by your own self, if it leaves you; in my eyes wealth has a certain place, in yours it is centre-stage; to sum up, my wealth belongs to me, you belong to yours.

    

Philosophical Punch in the Mouth, Vol. #1

As I've read various Stoic authors, I've come across many sections of writing that perform two functions. The first being a raw deliverance of the truth that stinks of reality so harshly that it burns away your nostril hair. The second function being a style of delivery that calls you out where you are put in a Neo-esque position of choosing between the comfortable lies you tell yourself everyday or dislodging your cranium from your rectum. That feeling of discomfort and simultaneous realization is what I equate to taking a philosophical punch in the mouth.

This is the first such section I've decided to highlight in the blog. This comes from Seneca: Letters From a Stoic, Penguin Books (181-182).

"So the spirit must be trained to a realization and an acceptance of its lot. It must come to see that there is nothing fortune will shrink from, that she wields the same authority over emperor and empire alike and the same power over cities as over men. There's no ground for resentment in all this. We've entered into a world in which these are the terms life is lived on - if you're satisfied with that, submit to them, if you're not, get out, whatever way you please. Resent a thing by all means if it represents an injustice decreed against yourself personally; but if this same constraint is binding in the lowest and the highest alike, then make your peace again with destiny, the destiny that unravels all ties. There's no justification for using our graves and all the variety of monuments we see bordering the highways as a measure of our stature. In the ashes all men are levelled. We're born unequal, we die equal. And my words apply as much to cities as to those who live in them. Ardea was taken, and so was Rome. The great lawgiver draws no distinctions between us according to our birth or the celebrity of our names, save only while we exist. On the reaching of mortality's end he declares, 'Away with snobbery; all that the earth carries shall forthwith be subject to one law without discrimination.' When it comes to all we're required to go through, we're equals. No one is more vulnerable than the next man, and no one can be more sure of his surviving  to the morrow."

What a great reproach against two things that are an abomination to our existences: 1) whining and complaining about life. 2) attempting to transcend our shared fate with material things and these legacies which  die with those who were around us.

Grace

     If I had to pick one description of how I think a Stoic should be pictured, I wouldn't make it impervious or unfeeling or disconnected. Those descriptions are false perceptions by people who haven't taken the time to truly know what Stoicism means. The term I would choose would be grace. How uncommon it is that we hear about someone being attributed with grace aside from athletes and dancers. It would seem we've lost sight with what it means to be emotionally and intellectually graceful in our thoughts and actions.

     Grace has multiple meanings that all fit seamlessly into the aspirations of a Stoic. For instance, all of us have been at a dinner table where someone has said grace or a small prayer of thanks for the food. If you are any kind of observer of reality, you will see the sense in being thankful and appreciative of your next meal. I've not missed a meal in my 32 years unless by choice, but until I started practicing the thought of being without food or even a table to eat it at I've never appreciated my meals so much.

    Grace might also mean being in a state of favor with the almighty (something is almighty but I'm not quite sure what it is). The fact that you're reading this right now is all the proof I need of your state of grace. How so? First and foremost, chance or divinity decided to arrange a few billion particles and make them into you. Since you've not killed yourself yet, I see you find this to be a fine place to stay. Aside from that, you've got working eyes, someone took enough interest in you to teach you to read, and you've got a working internet connection. It would be a shame to think you didn't appreciate any of those things I've listed when we well know they won't be yours for long.

   Grace also means to show mercy and to pardon others. I don't know how this wasn't obvious to me for so long when I expected nothing less from others toward myself. When you eliminate all your imperfections and vices, I'll grant you the privilege of scorn. Until then, chill the fuck out.

    Lastly, grace is the model when must strive for when life is made difficult. In being graceful, we are hardly shaken and far from broken by anything we encounter. We don't find fault in anything but our own judgement and our failure to be more prepared to accept what happens. When does grace begin? You know that 2 second rush of chemicals in your body after you're surprised, scared, or disappointed? Right after that.

Control

    If you've read any Epictetus, you've undoubtedly been beaten over the head by the idea of what is in our control and what is not in our control. If you have not, the short version is that we can control our thoughts/opinions and we cannot control anything else. The logic that follows from that premise is that if we can control only our thoughts, then we should focus all our concern and efforts into making our thoughts/opinions into the best state they can be for what I see are two reasons. The first reason is that the quality of our existence and actions is a product of our thoughts. If you want a good life, then you can find it inside your head and nowhere else. I'll relate the second reason with a story of my friend, Jeff. When it comes to placing a wager, Jeff refuses to place the wager unless he is fully confident of the outcome. While I don't usually share the same conservatism for the sake of entertainment, I find his logic to be outstanding. This relates to Stoicism because consider concerning your mind with some matter (a car, the environment, a relative) that is not your thought/opinion. In essence you are making a wager with your mental health since, ultimately, you do not control those items and you may experience a negative outcome. The Stoics have the same line of reasoning as Jeff in saying that they will not place any mental wager that they are not assured the outcome of.

    This idea is probably one of the deficiencies of Stoicism in terms of attracting people. Not because it doesn't make sense but because it is either confusing or threatening to their current beliefs. The question I would put towards those who think this idea is foolish is, 'What is so foolish about the idea of increasing your chances for happiness by putting it in your hands and limiting the factors that influence it to one?' Shouldn't a simplified plan with only one variable be more likely to succeed than one dependent on many outside factors? How many people go and get married with the idea that it will make them happy? We know the statistics on that dispute the intended result. The culture in America is designed for us to chase the things outside ourselves as the fulfillment of the good life instead of looking inward. The rest of the blog will be visually devoted to making this idea less confusing and perhaps a little more palatable and persuasive. One of the latest internet memes has been to use charts or graphs to present a joke (of which I've added one). I'm making my own chart about control for all the visual learners.

This graph is my representation of the control we have over the events in our life based on when they happen to us:

    Obviously, there is no control to be had over past events. We should all slap ourselves on the wrists every time we begin dwelling on the past. It is really hard to think of something more foolish unless your thoughts are about how you could have handled yourself better. As we move to the current moment we gain a sudden burst of control. Nothing major. We can choose to do certain things with our bodies or say certain things and most importantly we can establish our opinions on the current situation. And I think I'm being generous in saying that our control can extend minutely into the future. Definitely no further than today. We can put things into motion, but that doesn't mean we can assure their arrival. Many people might point to the successful plans they've made, implemented, and fulfilled as a counter to this idea. My response would be to point to all the failures and disappointments in their lives and ask where those fit into a plan. A phrase I smile at every time I hear it is that everything happens for a reason. People bring this out when those unscheduled and unpleasant detours happen in life. I see it as Monday morning quarterbacking to apply something meaningful and positive to a situation because the person is too scared to be in the hands of fate. Logic tells me that since they can't identify the reason that they are not the creator of the reason and that they must not be in control of the reason. 

    Take the time right now to look from the moment you were born to the moment you will die and ask yourself how much control you have over all this. Look at the nature of people, objects, and opinion. Do these things last long in whole scheme of things and can you bend them to your will? Now look into your own head and realize that you have dominion. Here is where you are master. Seize the reins where you can find them! I think you will find that when you begin to master this domain that you won't crave mastery anywhere else as you begin to realize that one precludes the other. 

Fire in the Hole!

     Imagine, for a moment, that you're a soldier in World War II who is stationed in a foxhole. The hole is deep, dry, and secure. You're safe from small arms fire barring the enemy hopping in the foxhole with you. (This happened to my grandfather in WWII. As a result, there was one less Nazi and one more me!) For the past week, there has been no sight or sound of the enemy. Your boredom eventually gets the better of your vigilance and your days are mostly dominated by scratching, picking and chewing.

     It's a Tuesday afternoon. The sun, clouds, and breeze are creating the perfect atmospheric conditions. You wonder if sitting in this foxhole most of the day is so bad. Then...something happens. Your foxhole is now inhabited by both yourself and a live grenade. If you wish to stay in one piece, then it's time for action. Freeze this picture before you put your hands on the grenade.... The picture I'm trying to paint is an analogy of what we go through in our heads everyday. The foxhole is your tranquility of mind. The grenade is the disturbances we face everyday. And the man in the foxhole is our power to decide and respond.

     Just like the man in the foxhole with his grenade, we can become anxious and alarmed by all of the sudden disturbances we happen upon. Maybe you're driving on the highway and someone cuts you off. Or you're visited by your significant other and they tell you they don't want to be with you. Or your brother calls you and tells you your father has cancer. Or, god forbid, you get on the scale and it tells you you're five pounds heavier than last week! Our tranquility of mind (foxhole) has been threatened by these events/disturbances (grenade) and it is up to us (soldier) to respond.

     Back to the foxhole... You could argue otherwise but there are three pertinent options in this scenario. The first one is to be so riddled with alarm and anxiety that you're sharing space with a grenade that you let it linger and make mince meat of your delicate flesh and ruin the safety of your foxhole. The second option is to be alarmed and anxious but still go about the task of removing the grenade with the hopes that your state doesn't cause you to delay or fumble about too much. The third option is to be the consummate soldier, and without anxiety and without delay, to remove that grenade from your coordinates on the double with extreme prejudice. In other words, to act like you've been there before because you have, My gut tells me that most people would probably exercise the second option. Some might make it out, some might not.

     However, when it comes to our tranquility of mind the vast majority of us pick the first option and let every unwanted thing that comes into our foxhole disrupt our tranquility. Where is it written in stone that all bad things need to upset us? How hypocritical we sound as we scold our children (quit being a baby!) for this behavior when, at least, they have an excuse! I ran into a woman who said she is the epitome of patience and tolerance at her job with customers because she values it so much but otherwise flies off the handle when not working. My first response is to thank her for proving that we have the choice and power to choose how we respond to the world. My second response is to say, "Huh? Are you telling me that you value your job over the calm of your own mind? Why wouldn't you want to behave like you do at work all the time?".   The option exists, if we have the fortitude and the awareness, to lob back these grenades to the enemy. For where does it matter you are, with whom does it matter you're with, and to what matter are your actions if you're safe and secure in that foxhole inside your mind?