Friday, January 5, 2024

LIVING WITH THE SELF

We have a self. We not only have feelings and thoughts and impressions of others - also about ourselves. How do we live with ourselves?
I found twelve ways. Most of them come in opposite flavors. And there may be more.
Check with yourself. I am not sure if they should be considered in any particular order. Anyway, here they come.

Feeding ourselves. This can be literally or metaphorical. During meetings we may be on the lookout for appreciating glances or remarks. We may be hungry for compliments, at least for acknowledgement.
The negative of this is starving ourselves. We do that when we feel that we don’t deserve positive feedback. Or when we feel it is safer to be unnoticed, invisible. Or we do that to discipline ourselves. It may make us feel special, not like most people, not like common people. Or we punish our body. It is disgusting to exist, to have a body.

When this is about attention from others, it is about presenting ourselves or hiding ourselves. The most common reason to hide is shame. ‘Sorry for existing, sorry for taking up space.’

Wishing ourselves well, hoping and dreaming. We are not only what we are, we are also what we want, desire, need, hope for. Or the reverse: what we fear, what we want to avoid, what we worry about. We are also what we expect: good or bad.

Defending ourselves. Against silent and outspoken criticism, against our inner critic. Sometimes plural: inner critics. We may even rehearse our defense in our mind before we actually may need to do so. We may defend ourselves before we are attacked. We may even defend ourselves against possible compliments by excusing ourselves before others had the opportunity to react. We may defend ourselves aggressively, attacking those who possibly might criticize us. All this may cost much energy, so we are already tired before we really might need to defend ourselves.

Pitying ourselves. Ever heard of self-pity? For the professionals reading this: the auto-psychodrama. We suffer from this especially when we are well-intended but misunderstood: an awful, but common combination. And when we act this out to receive our well-deserved pity from others, we are going to be disappointed. More reason for self-pity. There are many disappointments in life, so many reasons for self-pity. Don’t leave the train at this station! This is not the end of the line!

Doubting ourselves.  We never can be really sure of anything. Also not of ourselves. What to think about what we did? What we said? How we reacted? What we hoped for? What we were afraid of? What we decided? What we chose? "Maybe I am doubting myself too much. Maybe I should be more self-assured, like Jack, or like Minnie."

Being indifferent to ourselves. Usually while we are indifferent to about everything and everyone else. Why bother? It’s all meaningless anyway. Who cares? Life is boring.

Destroying ourselves. This is worse, much worse. It is the ultimate remedy against frustration without end. The ultimate remedy also against self-doubt, self-blame, and guilt. It is the road to suicide, sometimes the gradual one: terminal addiction.

Developing ourselves. We can also invest in ourselves. Learn things, discover things. Exercise. Grow stronger, more knowledgeable, more able. We even might grow wings.

Enjoying ourselves. Usually that is what simply happens. We may seek it and we may succeed in that. But it is often somewhat slippery. It may take quite some time before we learn what really is satisfying and making us happy.

Examining ourselves. Looking in the mirror, listening to our own voice. Weird and difficult. Almost impossible without judging. And how to judge? Difficult to do without praise or criticism. Others can help, sometimes considerably. Others can also greatly hinder our self-appraisal. How are you appraising yourself? What for, actually?

Forgetting ourselves. This is a paradoxical one. When we forget ourselves we also forget that we are forgetting ourselves. It may mean that we are in flow: forgetting the time, forgetting ourselves, absorbed in what we do in what we experience. It may also mean that we mentally died. Rebirth? How? Why?

Naked self-awareness. Also a paradoxical one. May be an incredible fullness. Or may be an incredible emptiness. Essentially, first an incredible emptiness and, if you mentally survive that, an incredible fullness. Don’t expect this. Don’t prepare for this.

Saturday, December 23, 2023

SOME FALSE BELIEFS - OR MENTAL DISEASES

This title is a bit misleading. It should be called: Beliefs that I consider to be dead wrong. And that I have heard being said by - let’s call them: alternative - people

Nothing is real.
This is a favorite with people who want to seem deep to themselves and to others. Look how courageous and open-minded I am! Are you courageous and open-minded enough to follow me into this wild and open country?
If nothing is real, the person who is saying this is also not real, so who cares?
The right take is that whatever we experience, is less than what is out there. Or, when we are introspective, whatever we experience about ourselves, is less than what is in there. Our perceptions and our thoughts are limited - and they may be twisted. As there is something like fantasy. There is often unreality in our assumptions, our expectations and even in our perceptions.
Real is what makes a difference. A nice saying, rather practical, but too glib. Canopus is a real star, but does it make any difference? Not to the stock market, not to my love life. Difference to whom? In what?
Anyway, you don’t want that a brain surgeon, operating on you, believes that nothing is real. Cutting at the wrong place may make a difference. Unless life and death aren’t real either. And what about pain? Some maintain that it is also an illusion.

Nothing really matters.
What matters or not depends on whom we are talking about. And matter or not matter for what? The weather in Siberia doesn’t matter. Not to me, as I am not there and I have no family or friends there, no business interests, no plans.
X is important to A in regard to Y. If you don’t specify who and what, the question of what matters is gloriously empty. Importance or lack of importance doesn’t exist. It doesn’t grow on trees. Something may or nor be important for someone, in some respect. For survival, for example. Or health. Or success. Or happiness. Everything is important. Also an empty slogan by empty minds.

Definite causes have definite effects.
A causes B. So if we encounter B, there must have been A. Speeding leads to more road accidents. Pretty true. But there are many factors involved here. The state of the roads, the state of the speeding vehicle, the mental and physical state of the driver, the weather, the time of day or night. The presence or absence of other traffic, of people, of animals even. According to some, the positions of the planets - and the natal horoscope of the driver.
A causes B, all other conditions identical. But conditions are never identical. A causes B may be a correct and useful statement, as long as we don’t forget that is dependent on conditions. And as our knowledge is limited, we are never 100% sure. To be 100% sure in general is a mental aberration.
Sometimes we may get close. Which is good enough. But never forget: there are conditions.

Scientific facts are more important than direct experience.
Especially in the social sciences this is a widespread idea. People are amateurs when it comes to evaluate human situations and human behavior. That is true. Unfortunately, what social scientists call facts are the conclusions of research that is always partial and always on limited samples that are never completely representative. Facts that are established by research should be taken seriously, but not as gospel.

Direct experience is more important than scientific facts.
Alas, the opposite is also flimsy. Our personal experiences are valuable, our personal conclusions may be right, but not necessarily. Chances for misreading the so-called facts of experience are legio. The more experience we have, the larger the chance that we read right. But experienced people may make grave mistakes also. Clear-mindedness and especially open-mindedness are essential to increase the chance that our perceptions and evaluations are right - and useful. Only people low on uncertainty avoidance can stay open-minded.

There are parallel worlds.
There aren’t, at least no worlds that don’t interact. The assumption seems that our mind can somehow enter parallel worlds. That may be true, but that implies an interaction. If there is a truly parallel world, its existence is meaningless for this universe. There is no way to know and there is no possible interest in this empty assumption.

Time doesn’t exist.
Or, only slightly less idiotic, time is circular. Well it isn’t. There is always before and after. And there is the idea that time is relative. Okay, relative to what? Time measurement of course is relative to place and speed (speed itself is relative to places). ‘Time is the fourth dimension.’ Well it isn’t, it is no dimension at all. It is a vector.  In a dimension you can return to a place of departure, in time you can’t.
And there is of course the notion popular in stories, especially in movies, of time travel. The only time travel that exists is the kind all of us do, every moment of our life. We can’t travel to the past, we can’t travel to the future. Also not in the future. We can remember, we can visit recordings of the past. And we may visit plans and projections, scenarios, expectations. Mentally, we may both dwell in the past and in the future.
There may be some precognition. We can see the tree in the sapling. But not all saplings grow into trees. Leave time travel to SF and Ground Hog Day.  Let’s not spend more time on this.

Sunday, September 22, 2019

AN EXTRATERRESTRIAL TOUR GUIDE TO OUR PLANET

What would an extraterrestrial travel guide say about our planet?

Of course, the lists below are riddled by assumptions about what extraterrestrials visitors would be like. My main assumptions are that they are more or less human and that they have lived for many thousands of years in peace. I also assume that beings who can travel through space are technologically advanced and have known age-long stability and are rather mental and calm than emotional and impulsive.

I am submitting a list of five main attractions, five experiences to avoid and five reasons for a a negative travel advice to visit this planet at all. All for the benefit of extraterrestrial visitors. Let us start with the last list.

THE FIVE MAIN REASONS FOR A NEGATIVE TRAVEL ADVICE TO PLANET EARTH
  1. A nuclear world war
  2. A pandemic
  3. Worldwide famine
  4. Mass killings; extermination and concentration camps
  5. Worldwide exploitation and slaughter of animals

Only Number 5 is actual right now. For visitors it is probably not frightening (unless they seem like animals to us), but disgusting, horrifying. It could be the main reason not to visit us. Don't go there!

THE FIVE MAIN CONDITIONS OR DESTINATIONS TO AVOID WHEN VISITING EARTH
  1. International wars
  2. Civil wars and religious wars; widespread violence; torture chambers
  3. Corrupt regimes (risky for tourists!)
  4. Sexual exploitation of children
  5. Sexual exploitation of adults

These first three are about risks, the last two mainly about disgust.


THE TOP FIVE ATTRACTIONS
  1. Nature, esp. oceans and waterfalls; variety of climate, flora and fauna
  2. Variety in peoples and cultures
  3. Performance artists: dancers, acrobats, etc.
  4. Musicians
  5. Romance (??)

My guess is that this planet is more varied and richer than most. And wetter. And that vitality plays a much stronger role than in societies technologically so advanced that physical and emotional challenges probably are minimal. Our more vital bodies may have a particular attractiveness. (Or maybe considered gross.)And differences between male and female may be here more outspoken.

You might have alternative lists. Please share!

Friday, November 2, 2018

Good Government: A Perennial Need

A well-governed state is a country in which people are safe, prosperous and free. A country where people want to live.
An ill-governed state is a country where most people are poor, a country where many are at risk, a country in which people are stuck. It usually is an authoritarian state, where critical people refrain from expressing their opinions.
A failed state is a country where the economy is in shambles, a country without an effective government, a country in which people are subject to arbitrary authority and unforeseeable violence, a country where people flee from. There is lack of government, or rather many local and competing governments. Often a repressive or incompetent government has been overthrown by popular revolt.
Imprudent government and incompetent government in the end lead to rebellion and civil war. The worst evil is an endless civil war with no clear winner in sight. An evil that may be further compounded by racial or religious conflicts. Think of states like Somalia, Libya, Syria and Yemen. Think also of Venezuela, a state if not failed, at least imploding, decaying.

So our fundamental political challenges are:
Maintain well-governed states in shape. That effort never stops and is less certain than it has long been the fashion to believe. Plurality easily leads to majority and majority may lead to repression.
Introduce plurality in monopolistic states: difficult and risky.
Restore failed states: almost impossible. It requires competent benevolent dictatorship. That is rare. And it ultimately digs its own grave as it dulls civic society. The only alternative is the suspension of national sovereignty. Since the disrepute of protectorates under the League of Nations that hasn't been tried anymore.

Whatever the kind of government, leaders matter. Leaders of states are not just figureheads, even in democracies. After assassinations, important domestic and foreign policy changes do happen. Who is leading makes a difference.

One of the most successful states ever was Rome. It was successful for many centuries. Even its downfall took centuries. How came? What where the secrets of its success? In modern parlance: what were its critical success factors? We have an extensive analysis of those in The Discourses of Machiavelli, an analysis still relevant today.

Machiavelli writes that the two fundamental success factors in life, certainly in public life, are virtu and fortuna, quality and good-luck.
He sees as the critical competences for a well-ordered, a 'virtuous' republic, in order of importance, prudence, discipline and justice.

Prudence, or sound judgment and practical wisdom, is the ultimate quality. The main source of prudence is education. People who are well-educated (not the same as having been to school) appreciate prudent leaders.
Discipline is practical morality, embodied in law enforcement. The main source of discipline is, according to Machiavelli, religion, a religious mindset. Discipline is needed to make the necessary tough decisions in the face of crime, corruption, unrest, famine or war. Discipline is needed when sacrifices must be made.
The main aspect of what Machiavelli considers justice is a culture of equality before the law—Roman citizenship.
Every society has many differences in interests and in views. The most fundamental difference is between the few—rich and influential— and the many—poor and menial. In Rome, those were called the patricians and the plebeians. Today we may talk about the elite and the ordinary people. Aristocracy gives power to the first group, democracy to the second. In Rome, the patricians made for a long time sure that no one among them could grasp permanent power. Halfway, they allowed the rest of the people to have its own representation and power base. Of course, slaves were excluded, though some became citizens.

The opposite of 'virtue' is vice. What does Machiavelli see as the cardinal political sin? Corruption. Imprudence, indulgence and injustice are the three chief vices that corrupt a republic. Wide-spread greed ticks all three boxes.
The main breeding ground of injustice is inequality. Think of the many forms of discrimination, stereotyping, elitism. Without a common identity, differences easily become divisive. Pluralism is the hallmark of a well-ordered society. We may be all different, but we share being human. We are all people. The deepest political sin is to label and treat others as not fully human: as Jews, as blacks, as women, as backward, as scum, as alien. Or as profiteers on one side and loafers at the other side.

A well-ordered republic accepts, but manages its differences in interests and views. It institutes countervailing powers.
Even majorities need a countervailing power. "The winner takes all", especially with short-term views, is an unwise solution. Majorities should never suppress minorities. Successful democracies are inclusive, not exclusive, plural not singular. Inclusive societies are more stable—and more prosperous.
Authoritarian majority rule is as vulnerable as minority rule. It grows into dictatorship and suppression and so in injustice.
Rome handled the main conflict, between the rich and the poor, the patriciate and the plebs, explicitly in the tension between the senate with its consuls, and the tribunes of the plebs. Democracy was neither unleashed nor suppressed. The rich and powerful had to be as much disciplined as the poor and powerless. They had to obey the laws as well. Machiavelli gives strong historical examples of Roman discipline.
The separation of powers by Montesquieu: legislation, administration and judiciary, is another classical example of countervailing powers. Independent judges are the last defense in a democracy in which the differences between legislation and the administration have become blurred—or where the differences between public service and private companies have become blurred.
Countervailing powers prune all-too powerful players, either business monopolies or political monopolies. Paul Collier: "At the core of all successful societies are procedures for blocking the advancement of bad men." And in our enlightened age, bad women as well.
Wherever plurality is curtailed, society is stifling itself. Without countervailing powers, corruption spreads. Corruption is always and everywhere the mortal enemy of good government.

We need political competence: prudence, discipline and justice. If we have prudence and justice, we need law enforcement against corruption. But without prudence and without justice, law enforcement itself becomes the strong arm of corruption.
Good government doesn't bring heaven on earth, but is forever taking steps in the right direction. Lately, examples of the opposite direction abound.

Wednesday, February 7, 2018

Turning the tables: How revolutions do choke on themselves

What do the anti-smoke lobby, women’s lib, socialism and black emancipation have in common? That enlightenment largely is the new darkness.
They are all movements to righten glaring injustice by continuing the problem they want to solve. Turning the tables is just turning the tables. George Orwell ends Animal Farm with: The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

What is the case for female emancipation? Thousands of years of oppression. What better case is there? What stronger case is there? Still, emancipation is largely more of the same, just turned inside out.
Oppression of women is based on the idea that women are a different kind, that to know that someone is a woman is telling a thing or two. Even when there are true statistical difference, you can’t judge individuals on that. ‘Women are more emotional than men.’  Let’s assume that we know what we mean by that and that the difference is statistically significant, still there will be millions and millions of women being more businesslike than millions and millions of men. If being or not being emotional would be a meaningful difference, let’s say for a particular job, the fact that a particular candidate is male or female is highly irrelevant. Or should be. Unless we pick blindly - what only people do who are grossly incompetent and grossly indifferent.

The essence of discrimination is lack of discrimination, is to think in abstract generalities instead of concrete individuals. Likewise, many women really think that men are a different kind of people.
Does having different physical equipment mean different qualities and different preferences? Again: statistically yes - at least in many respects and not at all in many more. But individually not at all.
If being a muslim gives ten times more probability to be a suicide bomber (I am making this up), still 99,999% percent of Muslims aren’t. The evil is in generalizing in judging individuals.
The way many women talk about men is just turning the tables, historically understandable, to say the very least, but simply continuing thinking in stereotypes. Also, many black people think about white people as if they were a different kind.
There may be real differences in skin color, in gender, in money, in religion, in culture, in sexual preference, in age. But seeing individual people in such categories is not very helpful.
Black people who see white people as racist are racist. Women who see men as bigoted are bigoted. Non-smokers who see smokers as dumb and evil are dumb and evil. Poor people who see rich people as bastards, are bastards.
When revolutionaries win, they usually treat others like they have been treated. When tyranny is toppled, injustice trades places. Whoever runs Russia becomes a czar, whoever ends on top in Egypt becomes a pharaoh.

And now we have modern, enlightened people who embrace diversity and celebrate gays, bisexuals and transgenders, celebrate everyone who used to be considered outlandish, exotic, handicapped or weird. They are inclusive of outsiders and they celebrate their own broad-mindedness and open-mindedness.
The only people they reject and even despise are the narrow-minded, the petty-minded, the bigoted, the nationalists, the populists, the racists, the backward. The people that voted for Trump. The despicables.
 White is the new black. The tables have been turned. And sometimes the compliment is returned again: the backlash.
Progressives despise conservatives; conservatives despise progressives.

Any social or political movement that downgrades the unwanted, the despicables, that has contempt in its diet, is a social ill. Contempt is the great poison, humiliation is the great evil.
So, if we would eradicate these tendencies in ourselves, we would solve the problem. Without these unwanted, primitive judgments we would be clear-headed, objective, neutral. Yes, but probably also tasteless, robot-like, autistic.
So, if there is a solution, there is only a partial one.

In individual cases, we should be aware of our tendency to generalize and look through our own filters. When I was 19, I boarded a bus in Amsterdam-West with six or seven black man in it and felt somewhat threatened. I was shocked by my own discrimination. Why was this? Was I a bigot myself?
Coming back to it several times in the next month, I suddenly found the explanation: I couldn’t read their faces, they looked all the same to me. But once you are in Surinam, where black people are in the majority, this apparent sameness dissolves in a few days and you see and sense the individual differences like at home.
When I first landed in Tokyo, I saw a mass of Japanese that all looked the same - though I noticed the difference between young and old and between male and female. After a week or so, I saw them like I see Dutch people: in their individual differences. Some businesslike, some artistic; some expressive, some reserved.
My guess is that when you would be among a tribe or among a rather isolated rural area anywhere in the world, it may take you a few days or a few weeks extra to sense the individual differences.

Prejudice is natural. When we hear that some stranger at a party has been just released from years in prison or in a mental institution, that strongly influences the way we see that person. That is unavoidable. Bur we should see our first impressions as a starting point, not an end point.
We look differently to obviously very poor people and to obviously very rich people. Especially when our own financial position is not too bad, but vulnerable.
We look differently to very famous people. And fame rubs off—a little. “Yesterday I bumped into Brad Pitt! And he smiled at me!”
We walk with prejudice and we meet prejudice. Some of us meet a lot of it.
There is painfully little we can do about that. But we can do something about our own prejudice: consider our first impressions simply as our first impressions.

If we would like to improve society, naturally we dislike those who are opposed to these improvements. We want to overcome their objections, their resistance. We see our opponents as backwards—or as arrogant. We want change, if necessary: revolution. But revolutions most of the time end in chaos—or in more of the same: upturned tables that are indistinguishable from the old ones. Sometimes marginally better, sometimes clearly worse.
What remains is to study and understand how really successful improvements have come about, how some new countries really have taken off, how some revolutions really have been beneficial. There is reason for optimism, but at least as much reason for pessimism.
“The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”
Beware of pigheaded do-gooders. Don’t be one yourself.

(Disclaimer: This writer declares that he has nothing against doing good—and nothing against pigs. He even doesn’t eat them.)