Topic: The psychology of sunk costs…the legitimate potential to improve the psychology of the world

On Sunday, I got on the Long Island Rail Road to watch the Giants game in New York City.  I have a monthly train ticket, that cost $203.  On Sunday, I left my ticket in a different jacket.  My initial thought was, “shit…i’m gonna have to pay $6 for no reason.”  Well…because I bought the ticket on the train, and not from the machine, there was an additional $6 charge.  I ended up WASTING $12.  Plus the $6 to get home, that’s nearly $20 that I spent simply because I left that little monthly ticket at home.

Some people in this situation would feel various emotions.  Regret. Guilt. Anger.  For me, I realized that the circumstances were fixed.  There was nothing I could do to change the situation.  So my thinking was based on the reality of the present moment, not some fictitious moment where I might still have had my ticket and would have avoided the payment.

After my junior year of college, I worked at a restaurant.  Within a couple of days, I had made about $250, and bought myself a Specialized mountain bike that I rode around St. Louis and to work.  One night after work, around 1am, I discovered someone had stolen my bike seat.  After about 10seconds of running through negative emotions, I quickly accepted the situation, rode home while standing out of the saddle the whole time, and went to buy a new bike seat the next day.  At that moment, I learned the lesson of the sunk cost.

The idea of the sunk cost is the idea that you have lost something meaningful to you.  You wish you could have access to you bike seat, or to your train ticket, but you don’t, and as a result, you are inconvenienced.  You suffer pracitcally, logistically, and financially.  However, you do not necessarily need to suffer emotionally!

There is one type of sunk cost that has managed to plague me emotionally.  And that is the idea of lost relationships, and lost experiences.  For a while, I suffered with the idea that I had 4years to learn so much in college, but I didn’t.  That time is a sunk cost.  For a while, I suffered with not being able to access in my memory so many people and conversations I’ve had in my life.  For a while, I suffered with not being able to be friends with so many people who I had felt close to at one point or another in my life.  Friends from school, from summer program, from travelling.

In an effort to combat the negative psychology that has affected me, with regards to the sunk costs of time and relationships, I have begun dedicating myself to concentrating on the past, as part of an effort to build my future.  I not only want to learn new things, I want to learn those things that I was exposed to growing up.  I not only want to make new friends, I want to build on friendships that have faded slightly over time.  I not only want to develop new ideas…I want to dig back into my journals and my past, and build on those things.

Thanks to xanga, and the efforts I made in the past, I had an old acquaintance comment on my site, a guy named Andrew who I wrote about in Dec. of 2003.  The last 2 years of my life have been so life altering and ridiculous in terms of the scope of experiences, people, and thoughts, that the sunk costs of not having instant access to all of them have sometimes caused me great mental anguish.  But, the person who commented had the effect of shaking the snow-globe that is my brain…referring to those tourist trinkets people buy, where there’s a snowman in an encased glass full of water, and when you shake it white bits begin to fill the globe, giving the effect of snow. 

That’s how my brian is…perhaps, that’s how all our brains are.  I don’t believe we lose memories, rather, memory is merely organizing information within the brain.  Time magazine has its cover article about neuroscience, and improving our brains.  Scientists are learning that our ability to learn actually increases in age, perhaps because we become more equipped with tools for accessing files inside our memories. 

In the next 5yrs. i’ll be working hard to access all those files, and will be working hard to recover some of those sunk costs, those forgotten ideas, writings, people, and experiences, that have shaped my life, and that have the potential to work together to help improve the lives of others. 

Now…time for lunch.  Need to find some hearty bread and perhaps cheese, and some veggies and dip to get me through the afternoon.

-dan

Topic: Deep and shallow thoughts, conversations on life and death, growth and decay

I have titled this post “deep and shallow thoughts,” because I want to address how our culture perceives thought.  Yesturday, while watching the Giants season come crashing to an end, my friend and I had one of those conversations that overflows into a wide-range of topics.  Were we just 2 friends conversing away our afternoon, or 2 people engaging in real intellectual thought?  When 2 professors get together to discuss the philosophy of life, the psychology of thought, the sociology of human interaction, the history of religion, the economics of poverty, are they engaging in real intellectual thought, or are they just 2 peers conversing away their afternoons?

Our conversation about religion and life led me to some startling thoughts, which were mundane things that others had already discovered before…I was just discovering them in my own way, maybe wasting my time re-inventing the wheel.

Anyways…I was thinking how a human body is simply made out of cells, which are continuously growing and dying.  When I scraped my hand, my body grew new cells.  Our limbs, skin, blood, brain, everything about our bodies are simply a collection of cells.  The process from conception, to birth, through aging, and to death, is a scientific process.  We may be unable to explain why the process happens as it does, in the same way we can’t explain ultimately why gravity exists, but i’m going to hold off on those ultimate questions for now.

So…what makes a couch different from a living organism?  Well…eventually a couch will decay and turn into dust, just as a plant, an ant, an elephant, and a human being will.  The various forms of matter that create us, are everchanging.  I’ll have to dig up my biology notes from freshman year of highschool to get you that definition for a living organism.

I’ll save all the biological speculation, and get to the idea of what it means to be human.  What is a human life?  Well…humans are a unique species on this planet.  We evolved from chimpanzees, to the point where our unique brains allowed us to do unique things.  Most unique, was the development of language.  Just think how many thousands of years it took for cave men to evolve language from simple grunts, to some of the complex forms of language that we now use.  The combination of language and tools allowed our species to differentiate itself from all the others.

We can study the psychology and sociology of animals.  Some species of monkeys have relatively complex forms of communication, using different sounds towards different family members.  Animals have unique mating habits, and unique ways of organizing themselves in community.  Human beings have made enormous leaps beyond other animals, but these leaps do not make us anything more than animals.  We’re born, we live, our cells grow, our cells die…ultimately our brains, the sources of our consciousness, turn off, like an old computer.

To many people, these ideas (incomplete as they are), come off as upsetting.  The idea of our mortality is upsetting, as is the idea that their may be no greater purpose for us as human beings.  However, I’d like to note that with our great developments as a species, we are most likely the only species that has woven meaning into the fabric of our lives.  No other species comes close to the level ot thinking and action done by human beings, that would constitute “giving life meaning.”  In addition, we’re perhaps the only species that has the knowledge of the inevitability of decay.  We know we’re going to die.  But, we also know how to “live.”

So…through rational thought, we may come to discover the spirituality that many seek in this otherwise meaningless world.

your thoughts…
 

Topic: mission statement

I just wrote up my personal mission statement / goal sheet for the month of January.  Since around Oct., I’ve been writing assorted notes to myself, and carry around probably too many scraps of paper with reminders and ideas to follow-up on.

After filling up a sheet of paper, I still felt something was incomplete.  I had written down a bunch of things, but I didn’t feel as though I had really motivated myself to accomplish anything.  So…I went back through everything and began circling words that stood out.  And without further ado, in no particular order, my top 12 list for how I hope to prioritize and spend my time this month:

friends
family
exercising
reading
reflecting
network
cooking parties
running
responsibility
FOCUS
plan
calm
balanced

Topic: Liberal means open-minded

I popped into B&N briefly today, and my eye caught a book titled, “Why Jews shouldn’t be liberal,” or something to that extent.  This book attracted me for a couple of reasons, one being my need to read criticisms of liberals, and the other being my curiosity as to why a Jew would argue for other Jews to oppose liberal politics.  Christians you hear about all the time on the news, and for the most part they succeed in coming off close-minded and angry, but a Jew?

As it turns out, Jews and Christians have many things in common besides the Old Testament.  The first few pages I read were a good look inside the thoughts of a conservative.  I find myself stopping and criticizing less, although still reading with a critical eye.  For example, I was struck by the almost fanatic worship of free-market capitalism that was celbrated by the author.  I was also struck, although not surprised, by the vicious language used to attack liberals.  It made me ask the question, “Can a person accuse another of being arrogant, without then being arrogant themselves?” 

I think the author had some ok points about society, but the way in which he begins with the presumption that all things conservative/libertarian are right, and then builds evidence around that, is what struck me most.  Certainly, liberals are guilty of that as well.  Guilty of worshiping blindly to theories and philosophies, making it nearly impossible to see the realites of society.

For example, conservatives tend to view “government as the problem.”  When the government takes money from people in the form of taxes, and spends that money in its budget, freedom has been destroyed.  That I believe to be an essential factor in conservative thought.  Private property, which includes the money we make, should under no circumstances be “stolen” from us.

So…conservatives start with a philosohpy which they hold to be true, and argue from there.  All government programs are bad, because in order for the government to pay for government programs, they need to first rob people of their property.  This is inherently unfair.

What liberals fail to realize, about conservatives, is that their views on politics stem from this particular philosophy.  Ultimately, understanding is more important than lashing out.  I had a 45-min. conversation w/ a conservative co-worker that never would have got off the ground if I had dug my heels in the sand when he argued that welfare and tax money for public schools was wasteful. 

Speaking of education (you knew i’d change the subject), my co-worker was arguing how it was unfair to have to pay such high tuition, when the actual education that comes from tuition is such a small percentage of what is paid.  “Why should i have to pay for a psychologist who probably gets paid $80,000 just to help females with their issues?  Why should i have to pay for a sports stadium that i never step foot in?”  I found his concerns interesting.  I believe there is a lot of waste in education…Wash U would plant and re-plant flowers every month and go overboard for parents weekend, and the business school had flat-screen tv’s that showed images of campus, a complete waste of cash in my eyes.  Yet, my friend’s comments made me see another philosophical difference between liberals and conservatives.  Liberals see community where conservatives don’t.  Liberals see money spent on others as important because those others are part of the community, whether a college community, or the US community.  If a conservative is not interested in being taxed so that some poor person can have food stamps, then that’s the very reason that we need to tax.  Because clearly people in this country are self-interested (which is not a problem in itself), but that self-interest does not take care of our nation’s poor.  Rather, we require the gov’t to come in and take a bit from everyone, “for the good of the community.”

This isn’t to say we shouldn’t be skeptical of government.  This shouldn’t say we shouldn’t be skeptical of the poor.  “Why should I have to support a woman who irresponsibly had 5 kids?”  That’s a genuine concern.  “Why should I be taxed higher because I busted my ass off to get a high paying job?”  That’s also a genuine concern. 

I ran into a girl at Wash U. last year, and during a discussion about higher education, I came a cross a new viewpoint, a conservative viewpoint.  “Why is it my problem if college kids are lazy?  Why should I be penalized by having some of my tuition money go towards extra programs or counseling for these people?  Why should I be sympathetic towards them when I grew up with nothing, and had to scrape my way to get where I am today?” 

This conversation was truly eye-opening, as it made me realize part of the ideological gap between conservatives and liberals.  This girl was absolutely right to feel that her hard work should be rewarded, but what I had a hard time demonstrating to her was how she would benefit if those less hard-working students were assisted, even if it meant taking some time or resources away from her.  I told her we don’t need to necessarily sympathize or coddle those students who waste their time in school, just as we shouldn’t nurse the poor.  But to show disdain towards these people is equally irresponsible.

Another difference between ideologies that’s come up continues on this idea of responsibility.  When people fail to succeed, conservatives blame only the individual, while liberals are open to the idea that society played a role.  “With hard work and a little luck…” a conservative might say. 

And it’s true.  Countless poor people have succeeded in this country.  In the worst schools, students can still access any book they want from the free public libraries, and learn to their hearts content.  “Success is a choice.”  In a way, I respect the conservative line there. 

But…I believe the differences between conservatives and liberals also is that liberals see individual cases, whereas conservatives might only see genearlities.  “Poor people are poor because they’re lazy,” vs. “This poor person grew up in a single-parent household to an illiterate mother in a crime-ridden neighborhood.”  In the liberal mind, society plays a key rold in determining who will succeed in life, and therefor it is sometimes necessary to use gov’t to interfere with society in order to remedy things.

Many conservatives also have a longing for the past.  What was in 1776, is what should be in 2006.  A conservaitve might site what happened 230 years ago as our country was founded, in order to make a point about life today.  “Our founding fathers did not say anywhere in the Constitution that our purpose as a nation was to help the poor.”  In fact, the founding fathers had no objections to slavery either.  Many conservatives argue for the written word of the law, holding that higher than any modern interpretation of the relationship between law and society.

To me, politics isn’t all that complicated.  Help me to fill in any blanks, but there’s really only 2 pieces to politics.  There’s the issue of taxes and budgets, and the issue of legislation.  The difference between the US and Canada and the UK and Venezuela and China, politically speaking, are the differences in how much the gov’t taxes its people, in what way it taxes its people, and how those taxes are spent.  Its also the difference between what is allowed, and what is not allowed within a society.  Can gays marry?  How are business regulated?  How are criminals tried? 

And as people, we must never forget about the 4th arm of the gov’t, beyond the judicial, congressinal, and executive…the way in which we as individuals have any idea about what’s going on and are able to have discussions about politics.  The media.  Is the media “free?”  Who owns the media?  Who does the media serve?  Which biases are included and which biases are left out of the media?

My co-worker made a comment about how futile it is to discuss politics, except for entertainment purposes.  And I believe he’s largely right.  Our form of democracy as it stands today is stacked against the will of the people.  The media we receive is over-sensationalized and driven by corporate agendas, working against efforts to attract people into taking an active role in making change in society.

But…i may have struck a chord w/ my conservative friend.  He was going on about, “I have no control of the gov’t, my vote doesn’t count, and at the end of the day, I’m always going to have to pay 30% or more of my paycheck to Uncle Sam for services that don’t affect my life.  I work my job, and take care of my family.  Isn’t that enough?”

And I thought of my friend who got arrested in DC the other week for an act of civil disobedience, protesting against the House and Senate budget cuts.  And I told this story to my friend and I think it struck a chord.  “Our elected officials are about to cut food-stamps to thousands of poor people.”  I actually haven’t read all that much about poverty issues, but when it came down to the nitty gritty policies of food and shelter that people need, it was hard for my conservative friend (whose mom was the youngest of 9 and was briefly on welfare herself) to agree with the cuts.

Yet…on the flip side, I continue to see the conservative argument.  “How hard is it to get by in this country by working min. wage, if you spend responsibly?”  I have a copy of “Nicke & Dimed” at home, which I need to read and start sharing with people…because I believe the big problem in politics and society, really, is how little we know and understand one another, in particular, those within this community of America who we never even see or talk to.  What is life like really for those who are the beneficiaries of gov’t spending? 

The point of this post, was hopefully to demonstrate the need to understand one another, liberals and conservatives alike, we need to bring an open-mind and healthy skepticism to the table, and to recognize that besides science, there may be no absolutes in this world.  (i had an interesting discussion w/ my minister-to-be friend about god, and came up w/ the argument that if god existed and could affect the non-science world, meaning there was a supernatural relationship between god and society whereby we aren’t alone, than it’s only logical to believe that tom. gravity won’t exist because science is just a by-product of god…ugh, been too long since i’ve thought about that topic).

Anyways…discuss.  What do you think?

Topic: Chicago & Munich

Well…my trip to Chicago is nearly complete.  Have an early flight back to NY tom.  Unlike Sept. when I had such a good time here that I wanted to relocate, I’m now excited to head back to NY, and also excited for future returns to the Windy City.

As it turns out, many people from my college, Wash U., have relocated to Chicago.  Along with my 2 best friends, I have close to 10 acquaintances who live here, who I’ve grown much closer to after catching up with them this past weekend.  I have a friend at U of Chicago Divinity School who is studying to become a minister, and will be studying public policy there in a few years, with the hopes of using Christian values to influence politics(helping the poor, vs. helping to fight abortions and same-sex marriage).  Another friend is the drummer in a punk band, “Much the Same,” and will be recording an album this spring and doing some touring, trying to make the next big step towards a full-time career as a musician.  Two of my close friends from freshman year, who have been dating for some time.  My guy friend has a dog now, a real step up in responsibility from his days as a “drunkin’ frat boy.”  The girl, like myself, living at home in the ‘burbs, trying to save a buck and enjoy the city life.

It’s a great city for me to visit, and while I will miss having this kind of community at home, I’m starting to find some interesting people in NYC, and I’m looking forward to the next few months with them.

Tonight, my friend Doug and I went to see Munich.  Hands down, one of the best movies I’ve seen in ages.  While not meant to be a 100% accurate movie historically, the movie made some amazingly powerful commentary about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well as addressing the issues of terrorism and violence in general.  What is gained?  Is this the only way?

There’s about 15 different issues I’ve been talking about tonight w/ my friend…and will slowly begin incorporating them into my writing.  I’ve also decided, that while I realize writing will not be my main pursuit in life, or at least, not my main pursuit financially, writing will always be central to me.  In fact, I’m just starting to think about what it means, “to be a writer.”  I’ve never considered myself a writer…even though I wrote a book (which…felt in many ways like writing a college paper.  I wrote, but more to convey a message than out of the desire to simply do some writing).  However, I now feel that the creative aspect of writing, as well as the social aspect, are two things that I love.  I love taking ideas in my head, and finding ways to lay them out there for others to look-at, to reflect on, and to respond to.  In fact, writing for myself now ranks significantly lower than writing for others.  Actually, affecting people and having them affect me with their responses are the ultimate things that drive me to write.

Anyways…it’s late, but topics that Munich has got me thinking about…

1) a future post, essay, something, perhaps titled, “Tomorrow” regarding the direction individuals and society are headed.  No argument or thesis, just thoughts and observations. 

2) a discussion on cultural psychology…ex)  If you had to put an age to our culture, what would it be?  For example, cave men would be like infints, without language or knowledge of the world.  What is the personality of the world, or just the US today?  My initial thoughts were that we’re about late-teens.  Relatively intelligent, although still in that angry phase, still ignorant and naiive, still having trouble relating to others, still unsure what direction we’re heading in.  I think the next 100-200 years will be along these lines, but I think it’s possible in 200-400 years, to reach a more adult-stage of culture, where we are a bit more mature, have lived more life and have more to reflect on and more experiences to have learned from, and we can look back at our awkward teenage years, and laugh a bit.

3) This movie Munich…i just want to digest the politics, history, commentary, cinema…so many things. 

Giants in the playoffs!
New Year’s resolutions to increase fitness and eat/cook more healthy/creatively.
Matisyahu…Hasidic regae.  Considering catching them at MSG next week.   

Topic: A post from Chicago…on liberty, President George W Bush, progressive/Democratic politics, and looking ahead to a better outcome in the ’08 elections

I left the following comment on ganryu’s site regarding the issue of the US gov’t spying on its own people, and using unwarranted wire-taps.  It was also about the issue of the direction of American politics and society… 

just to play devil’s advocate a bit regarding the issue of gov’t spying on its own people…I don’t quite see why people are so opposed to the limited cases in which the gov’t is listening in to our conversations.  For example, we’re free to discuss whatever we want here on this blog.  Maybe the gov’t is watching.  So what?  They’re watching, but we’re still free to discuss.  As long as we’re not planning anything violent, we have nothing to worry about.  I say, “spy away,” I have nothing to fear, and I’m not bothered.  In the case of the student who was investigated for taking out Mao’s Red Book, I agree that it’s certainly absurd.  But…I think taking an absurd and rare example (sure…there’s many similar stories out there, but the % of people who get investigated for taking out books is likely a small number), and using that example to rail against the governments efforts to investigate legitimate threats, is a problem. 

Regardless of what “justifications” terrorists like al Qaeda might have, and regardless of what evils the US has committed, we do live in a relatively free and prosperous country.  This is not to downplay our flaws, but in Communist China, for example, I’d be banned from even discussing anything anti-government.  The threat of radical Muslims attacking America is certainly a threat.  It’s a threat around the globe. 

When Bush & company say they’re using wiretaps to protect us from Muslim terrorists, what is it you believe he’s “really trying to do?”  What is the right’s evil agenda to the American people?  I know the Republicans are not always the most moral of people.  I know there is much corporate influence in their agenda setting, both economically and foriegn policy wise.  But, I’m not sure I still buy into the “Bush is Hitler,” type of language that comes out of the left.  I think he’s perhaps naiive, ignorant, and short-sited, and those characteristics may lead to policies and a tone that create “evil,” or “injustice,” but I think the left does a disservice to itself by creating an image of the right and its leaders as people full of hate.  Sure, there’s Bill O’Reily’s and Pat Buchanans out there who are openly insensitive and racist, but it’s not as if the Republican platform is preaching “our goal is to make life miserable for the poor, and we want people to live in fear of the government and to watch what they say.”  It’s in Communist and Muslim countries that we see governments telling their people, “live this way, or go to jail.”  Although, it is also in socialist countries such as those in Latin America that we hear politicians openly saying, “We oppose war,” and “Our first priority is helping the workers and lower-classes to obtain a good education, health care, water, etc.”  But then again, socialist policies do not necessarily lead to those goals. 

I’m still developing my politics, and while I clearly support socialist speak, I also see the value in capitalism.  Ultimately, I believe what is necessary is an appropriate blend of the two.  But, more importantly, what I think is important in order for any kind of societyal progress to occur, is for people to come to understand one another, and use a language of understanding, even towards those we view as “oppressors.”  After all, if we hope to change the ways of those we disagree with, aren’t we best served by truly understanding their rationality?  Aren’t we best served by working with, rather than against?  Or better put, to beat them at their own game?  There’s no reason to believe that democratic capitalism can’t produce the type of system that socialist/communisits support, a system where all are equal, and all have access to the necessities in life, and where leisure is valued above work.  In fact, there’s no guarantee that a socialist/communist system, or any system, will produce that.  The system isn’t as important as the people that make up the system.  And…it’s easier to change people than it is a system.

Rather than focus on “revolution,” what if we focussed on creating mindful and compassionate human beings, consumers, voters, laborers, employees?  What if we worked to transform the psyche of society so that policies were hardly relevant.  The private sector does amazing things to take care of the poor.  It’s Bill Gates, not any gov’t, who’s giving billions to help the sick around the world, and to create small schools.  Benevolance comes through people, not through political systems. 

Through the right type of organizing, we could fill the white house with philosophers, doctors, teachers, and social workers.  There’s nothing preventing this, although money makes it easier to line DC with businessmen and lawyers.  But…money does not control everything.  Money didn’t stop protesters from halting the WTO discussions in Seattle, organization did that. 

And while both Dems and Republicans aren’t as radical as socialists, communists, greens, etc., democrats as a party are more sympathetic towards the needs of the poor, the needs of the public, the needs of the workers.  And, they are the only party with a legitimate chance at power, because all the other parties are simply to radical in their views, or too intellectual in their philosophies, to get their message out to the majority of the American people.  And, maybe to some extent, they’re too stubborn to compromise a bit on their party-line to join hands with the Democrats.  While the Dems often support Republican policies, they don’t always, and there would certianly be different agendas on the table if the Dems were in power.  In order to make a difference and change the national agenda from privatization of social security and public schooling, from disregard for the environment and tax-cuts that overwhelmingly benefit the rich and do next-to-nothing for the poor, we need to get Democrats into power, and then we need to hold their balls to the flame by altering the public consciousness on the issues. 

your thoughts?

-dan

Topic: It’s the media (medium?) stupid…and make sure to read the article I have posted at the end of this post…brilliant!

Just a quick post, as i’m leaving the office shortly to make my trip to Chicago, where I have a good 4 days, and 5 nights, to relive college.  Familiar faces, drinking, late nights, watching tv, cooking crazy-ass food at crazy-ass hours…as one of my best friends from school would say, “This weekend is going to be….delicious!”

I want to write briefly about media…not specifically the news media, but the idea of media in general.  The way in which ideas as communciated.  Books, movies, music, blogs, advertising, all the forms of media that exist.  The news media is just a small piece of all the media that’s out there.

Watching “You can’t be neutral…” a movie about the life and work of historian and social activist Howard Zinn, re-kindled some sparks inside of me.  Sometimes, it takes a certain medium, in this case a DVD, to affect you.  There’s also a great line in the book I’m reading about books…”They change people.”  Simple words and images…they do change people.

And so, this film changed me, at least for the evening.  I was reminded that when human beings organize, they are a force more powerful than any government.  While most of the energy of the ’60′s is gone, the ’60′s is proof that human energy can change society.  There’s no question that the same energy is present, the problem has more to do with organization and the mediums in which the progressive message is conveyed.  Too many people talking amongst their friends about change, and not enough collaboration amongst like-minded strangers.  Identifying this problem, I believe, will quickly lead to identifying solutions.

Op-Ed Contributor

Don’t Think Twice, It’s All Right

Charlottesville, Va.

Skip to next paragraph

Enlarge This Image

Jon Krause

IT’S navel gazing time again, that stretch of the year when many of us turn our attention inward and think about how we can improve the way we live our lives. But as we embark on this annual ritual of introspection, we would do well to ask ourselves a simple question: Does it really do any good?

The poet Theodore Roethke had some insight into the matter: “Self-contemplation is a curse / That makes an old confusion worse.” As a psychologist who conducts research on self-knowledge and happiness, I think Roethke had a point, one that’s supported by a growing body of controlled psychological studies.

Not sure how you feel about a special person in your life? Analyzing the pluses and minuses of the relationship might not be the answer.

In a study I conducted with Dolores Kraft, a clinical psychologist at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and Dana Dunn, a social psychologist at Moravian College in Pennsylvania, people in one group were asked to list the reasons their relationship with a romantic partner was going the way it was, and then rate how satisfied they were with the relationship. People in another group were asked to rate their satisfaction without any analysis; they just gave their gut reactions.

It might seem that the people who thought about the specifics would be best at figuring out how they really felt, and that their satisfaction ratings would thus do the best job of predicting the outcome of their relationships.

In fact, we found the reverse. It was the people in the “gut feeling” group whose ratings predicted whether they were still dating their partner several months later. As for the navel gazers, their satisfaction ratings did not predict the outcome of their relationships at all. Our conclusion? Too much analysis can confuse people about how they really feel. There are severe limits to what we can discover through self-reflection, and trying to explain the unexplainable does not lead to a sudden parting of the seas with our hidden thoughts and feelings revealed like flopping fish.

Self-reflection is especially problematic when we are feeling down. Research by Susan Nolen-Hoeksema, a clinical psychologist at Yale University, shows that when people are depressed, ruminating on their problems makes things worse.

In one study, mildly depressed college students were asked to spend eight minutes thinking about themselves or to spend the same amount of time thinking about mundane topics like “clouds forming in the sky.”

People in the first group focused on the negative things in their lives and sunk into a worse mood. People in the other group actually felt better afterward, possibly because their negative self-focus was “turned off” by the distraction task.

What about people like police officers and firefighters who witness terrible events? Is it helpful for them to reflect on their experiences?

For years it was believed that emergency workers should undergo a debriefing process to focus on and relive their experiences; the idea was that this would make them feel better and prevent mental health problems down the road. After 9/11, for example, well-meaning counselors flocked to New York to help police officers, firefighters and rescue workers deal with the trauma of what they had seen.

But did it do any good? In an extensive review of the research, a team led by Richard McNally, a clinical psychologist at Harvard, concluded that debriefing procedures have little benefit and might even hurt by interrupting the normal healing process. People often distract themselves from thinking about painful events right after they occur, and this may be better than mentally reliving the events.

What can we do to improve ourselves and feel happier? Numerous social psychological studies have confirmed Aristotle’s observation that “We become just by the practice of just actions, self-controlled by exercising self-control, and courageous by performing acts of courage.” If we are dissatisfied with some aspect of our lives, one of the best approaches is to act more like the person we want to be, rather than sitting around analyzing ourselves.

Social psychologist Daniel Batson and colleagues at the University of Kansas found that participants who were given an opportunity to do a favor for another person ended up viewing themselves as kind, considerate people – unless, that is, they were asked to reflect on why they had done the favor. People in that group tended in the end to not view themselves as being especially kind.

The trick is to go out of our way to be kind to others without thinking too much about why we’re doing it. As a bonus, our kindnesses will make us happier.

A study by University of California, Riverside, social psychologist Sonja Lyubomirsky and colleagues found that college students instructed to do a few acts of kindness one day a week ended up being happier than a control group of students who received no special instructions.

As the new year begins, then, reach out and help others. If that sounds suspiciously like an old Motown song or like simplistic advice from one of those do-gooder college professors, well, it is. But the fact is that being good to others will ultimately make us kinder, happier people – just so long as we don’t think too much about it.

Timothy D. Wilson, a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, is the author of “Strangers to Ourselves: Discovering the Adaptive Unconscious.”

Topic: Anarchist anthropologists and why you shouldn’t take thing personally, how advertising targets people’s needs/desires vs making people into targets, strangers in falafel shops

Working backwards through the topics, I went to my favorite falafel shop last night, Mahmoud’s, on Macdougal st. in the West Village.  I had a couple of hours to kill before meeting up briefly w/ one of my best college buddies who was in town.  The food is quick and delicious, for only $2.75.  There’s only two booths, so I asked this Asian guy if he minded if I squeezed in across from him.  He commented on how amazing it was to find something so quick and delicious, for only $2.75.  I commented on how I was just thinking the same thing.  We chatted briefly, he’s a 3L at New York Law School, and now that his time in NYC is winding down, he’s trying to make the most of it. 

Funny how it takes a sense of “ending” to drive us to “begin” doing things.  The end of college, the end of a trip, the end of the summer, the end of our lives….

I ducked into a coffee shop next door for some cocoa and to read a bit of this book, “The buddha of Surburbia,” that a friend lent to me.  Just like going to the gym, I’m trying to do just a couple of hours of reading each day, or every other day.  This book is sort-of-a Catcher in the Rye taking place in Eng.  It’s about a 17-yr. old boy who feels a bit trapped in a South London suburb.  His dad, who is from India, becomes enchanted with Buddhism, and as his reputation and eccentric behavior grows, it causes strainings on the son.  The story also touches on racism against Indians, as well as the conflict of free-spiritied children against their parents’ old-world ways, such as when the main characters cousin is set-up in an arranged marriage, and her father goes on a hunger strike when she attempts to rebel.

Buddhism, like other life philosophies and religions, I believe has its benfits and risks.  The benefits I see include mindfulness and calm, while the risks include escapism.  To me, it is just as important to understand the material world as it is to “make peace with oneself in a world taken over by materialism.”  To me, understanding people, science, history, culture, sociology, psychology, and having a sense of balance between seriousness and playfulness are the tools that can lead to a “good life,” a life of joy, a life not overcome with suffering.  While retreating into mediation and thought, or living in the woods, certainly has its benefits, I believe that in order to truly “survive” the modern world, one should not try to escape it.  And I’m sure there’s somethning in Buddhism, or Taoism, or probably Christianity, Judaism, or Islam, that says something along those lines, of being like water and fitting into the cracks and molding to your surroundings, of keeping values while adjusting to the times.

There was an article in today’s Times about an anthropology professor, Dr. David Graeber, at Yale who was recently released from his position as an associate professor.  No specific reasons were given, but Graeber believes it is because of his open political views, specifically those in favor of anarchism.  His story is interesting, as well as his political views that support anarchism (which does not stand for chaos, but rather a belief that people govern best when they govern themselves w/out a central gov’t). 

But one of my favorite comments in the article was by another professor, who said that Dr. Graeber was being to focussed on himself and his being let-go from his position, rather than being the anthropologist that he is, and seeing how he has not been isolated for being a lone-radical, but rather how the system itself at Yale is designed to make associate professors expendible.

I think that’s a great idea to take away…that we shouldn’t always take things personally.  We shouldn’t look at isolated things in life and think that whole world has conspired against us.  We shouldn’t look at a person’s single actions and make a blanket judgement on that person.  Rather, we should try to understand the situation in a more rational/objective, though no less human way, than we normally would.  Why did I get fired?  Why did I not get this job?  Why did I do poorly on this test?  Why do I feel so depressed?  Why doesn’t this relationship work?  Without abandoning the uniqueness of our lives, we can still begin to analyze them in broader terms.  We can see how people bring certain assumptions and values everywhere they go.  What you may consider shallow, is just someone who sees money and wealth as an indicator of high class.  What you may consider laziness might be the product of a lifetime of abuse or neglect that has eroded or failed to build confidence and drive in an individual.  What one person sees as fair, another will see as unjust.

There’s a big problem in our society with understanding issues from various angles.  It certainly is no easy task, but the task of communicating openly with others is made more difficult in our culture of attack, in which we try not to understand how or why people hold certain opinions, but we try to discredit them through names and labels.

Lastly, I’d like to talk about advertising.  You might have noticed more healthy foods hitting the marketplace.  Orange juice with calcium.  Whole wheat bread.  Soon there will be Dannon yogurts with a special bacteria to aid in digestion hitting the market.  Are corporations suddenly interested in people’s health, or are people suddenly interested in their own health?  I think this change shows how corporations and people’s needs can come together.  Corporations are built to profit.  People have desires.  In many instances, these two things have bad consequences (negative externalities is the term economists use).  People love fatty foods, so McDonald’s sells cheap food that over time can kill you.  Same thing with cigarettes.  People love easy to follow and mind-numbing entertainment, so tv producers come up w/ an endless barrage of reality tv.  People love to shop and consume, so corporations pump out advertising in every corner to address that love.

As people’s desires change, corporations will be forced to change as well.  If people start to become more mindful of their health, as they are, food companies will advertise healthier food.  If people become more mindful of their entertainment, tv shows will be less about celebrities figure skating, and more about major issue facing society.  As people begin to turn off their televisions and read, tv networks will be forced to make their shows more intelligent. 

A corporations is made up of people and is responsible to people.  Its responsibility is to its owners and shareholders to make profits, and to do so, its responsibility is to its consumers to give them what they want.  Positive, healthy, capitalism is not an oxymoron.  It’s merely 100 years away….

Tonight’s movie…”You Can’t be Neutral on a Moving Train,” by Howard Zinn!!!

Topic: 10cent wings, 99.5FM, learning, creative writing

There’s a bar in my hometown called Croxley’s (there’s one in NYC too), that has 10cent wings on Mon. night and about 50 beers on tap.  My new beer of choice, Old Speckled Hen, a smooth English brew.

I’ve discovered a great radio station, 99.5FM.  On the way home from wings last night, they had 15min. of uninterrupted Martin Luther King speeches about the Vietnam War.  This morning, they had my favorite news program on, DemocracyNow at 9am, I’d only seen it previously on the internet, so I grew slightly excited by that discovery.  Plus they play cool funky music.

Starting to read essays from orgs. like the Brookings Institute (liberal) and Cato (libertarian), since these organizations tend to influence politicians a great deal, and they’re not written in the traditional CNN, Fox News style, so you can actually read and learn some things instead of being bombarded by crap.

As I was dozing off a bit on the train ride home, I began to imagine a conversation between an educational scholar and Pres. Bush.  This conversation would be televised around the world.  The topic would be schools, and what we can do to improve them for all, for the poor, for minorities, and for the middle-class and above.  The education expert would begin talking about how the national mandate for standardized testing is actually harmful to students because it reduces their motivation to learn.  He’d go on to talk about how gov’t can hold schools accountable by having students use portfolios and exhibitions to actually demonstrate learning in a way considerably beyond what a test or essay can show.  Pres. Bush would probably respond, “your studies haven’t proved anything,” or “we need to stay the course,” or “grades are improving, so things are working,” or “you’re being too soft on education.”  The education expert would respond, “there are no studies that show that testing in any way reveals learning, and the best studies available along w/ our own common sense tell us and show us that kids are not learning any better because of grades,” and “the course we’re on is not leading us to where we need to go.  The course we’re on is causing schools to cut back on discussions, and the arts, and writing, to make more time for a curriculum that is almost 100% test prep,” and “the fact that grades are improving proves nothing.  In fact, we know that while some states have shown improved grades, the results of national tests have shown the opposite.  So we either conclude that the tests don’t tell us much, or we conclude that grades are not in fact increasing,” and “being soft on education would be keeping our eyes closed to what’s actually occuring in schools.”  President Bush (or any number of education policy creators) would then probably make a face, smirk, and laugh off all the comments.  He’d then go on to discuss things unrelated to education, “There’s a war going on, don’t you think I know what I’m doing?  I’m bringing freedom to the world, and I’m trying to bring freedom to students.” and he’d continue, “I appreciate your criticism.  Criticism is American, and I appreciate it.  People are entitled to their own opinions, even if their opinions are wrong,” and he’d conclude, “That was a fun conversation…you wanna go hunting?”

Maybe the education expert would push further…”I believe in freedom too.  Which is why we need to give students more freedom in school.  We need to free them from a one-size-fits all curriculum,” and continue “I appreciate that you support criticism, but with that you need to actually listen to and respond to the criticisms.  You’re not doing that.  In fact, the ability to have a truly open dialogue without shutting off someone because of their criticism is a skill that is not taught in schools, and that’s why we struggle so much to communciate with and understand one another,” and would conlude by saying, “sure…let’s go hunting,” figuring, if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.

I literally dream for this type of nationally televised conversation.  An unedited, unscripted, discussion between some of our most influential policy-makers, and your avg. citizen with eyes towards improving our society.  There’s obviously people that are addressing this right now somewhere, and while it’s frustrating to know that I may not see major developments in my lifetime, I am reassured to know that in a subjective way, things do improve over time.  Yes…despite the ugly history of the world, despite the scars and continued beatings of man-against-man today, we are moving forward.  In 150 years blacks went from slaves, to oppressed and discriminated, to equal beings in the eyes of the law, to today, where they hold seats in Washington D.C., they host tv shows on Comedy Central, and run the sidelines of the premier sports teams in the country.  The very fact that global issues such as addressing African poverty, are discussed by over 150 nations, is testament to the fact that we’ve progressed.  Imagine if all the monkeys in the world were trying to make headway to ensure that monkeys everywhere had access to bananas and the right to toss their shit whenver they felt (i’d imagine that would be the equivalent monkey utopia).  As a species, human beings have evolved from not knowing what on earth is going on, to working towards building the conditions whereby every human being might be able to live life into their 50s, 60s, 70s, and above, because they have adquate resources to do so.  Sure, there’s some bad apples in government, and sure, there’s some bad apples running businesses and roaming the streets, and sure, the threat of some of these bad apples to blow up part of the world, or simply to make life harsh for others, is as present now as it’s ever been, but we should not forget the work of those who have come before us such that we may be able to concern ourselves with such things, and those who continue to work on improving the conditions of this game of life that we’re all players in.

currently eating: PB&J on rye