Consider The Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do to you; or treat others as you would like to be treated.
A good rule? Not according to George Bernard Shaw, winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1925. Shaw is famously quoted, "Do not do unto others as you would expect they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same."
Shaw has quite the résumé, and many philosopher would tend to agree with him. Consider the following scenario:
A very twisted individual enjoys being hunted by people with high powered rifles. He gets a massive addrenaline rush from it that can't be beat by any recreation he has ever experienced. Following the golden rule, he decides to return the favor, terrorizing his neighborhood.
At face value, this seems to blow a hole in the golden rule. Much to the contrary, these lofty scholars have simply illustrated that the simple language of the rule isn't enough to convey it's true value. I will enterpret the golden rule and rephrase it in a way that cannot be obscured and tangled into something that it is not.
Another famous quote comes very close to describing the goal, "Kill your enemy with kindness." Significantly harder to twist into something ugly, this phrase is still too simple to truly convey the idea. Instead of cleaning to the relatively inarticulate attempts of enlightened people to convey their understanding of the golden rule, let us examine the underpinnings of the rule.
On With It
We live in a competitive world. While humans are clearly at the top of the food chain, some are more atop it than others. Few would argue that the Bush family is high on the food chain, while the transient bums on the street are low on it.
In our daily efforts to thrive, we often see in ourselves shortcomings in one area or another. We may never be as good an athlete as Lance Armstrong, as smart as Albert Einstein, as attractive as Angelina Jolie, as rich as Bill Gates, as kind as Mother Teresa, and so on. It is only natural that we see these shortcomings in ourselves and feel insecurity. Likewise, Lance will never be as smart as Albert, as good looking as Angelina, as rich as Bill, or as kind as Teresa.
The word "insecure" is derived from the word "secure". The process of securing something that is insecure typically involves defending it. To you and I, this means that we defend ourselves from injury against our insecurities.
Imagine a world where everyone is intimidated by everyone else, constantly defending themselves and internallizing conflicts. This would be a world without trust and without relationships. In this sense, a "family" is a group of people who trust each other. Within the family unit, people lower their guard. A dysfunctional family is one in which members do not believe they can trust other members; everyone raises their guard and tension arrises. Friendships often fail when one friend damages the trust of the friendship. Tensions rise.
What is the golden rule in this context? Treat the insecurities of other people delicately. Acknowledge that you have different insecurities than he or she. Best is to figure out what they compensate for and build them up in that area. If they are ashamed of their looks, complement their looks. If they think they are dumb, complement their intelligence. Build up the confidence of everyone in yoru company, and over time they will learn from your example and build you up as well. But whatever you do, don't get offended by their shortcomings. Accept them and build off of them. Build up the confidence of others as you would like to be built up.
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Etymology
By chance, I came across a quote today on my massive 16 ounce coffee cup that corroborates one of my main points in the preceding article.
Creator and executive producer of the television drama House
Regarding Etymology:
People don't read enough. And-- David Shore
what reading we do is cursory,
without absorbing the subtleties
and nuances that lie deep
within -- Wow, you've stopped
paying attention, haven't you?
People can't even read a coffee
cup without drifting off.
Creator and executive producer of the television drama House
Evolution
It took me a while, but I managed to bring my thoughts full circle in the effort to explain the deeper context from which I drew the thought that started this blog. I recorded my thought process and would like you to read it in order to truly understand the deeper context and meaning of my statement. Warning:this is long and asks for feedback at the end.
Suppose, as an example, that I were to walk down the street and stop to enjoy a quick sip of Jack Daniels out of the bottle. If someone arrives in attire that was designed so that it appeared significaant or important, and yells a command (this person is often called a "police officer" in Western society) indicating that you I should stop, am I obligated .
Am I a philosopher or an etymology theorist or both??? Similarly to the case of police officers, consider that we are supposed to punctuate very precisely in describing our speech, such that you would include three punctuation marks to indicate that three options had been given and you, just as I asked in the previous sentence. Should you attach three questions marks to indicate that three questions had been asked? Yes, and that makes sense because I am indicating that there are three objects to choose from: "philosophy", "etymology theorist", and "both". (this is referred to as an "answer").
Consider also that the "bold" punctuations I used above are used to help guide your eyes back up to them as your target of focus.
What I have been doing this entire time, in analyzing the words "police" and "punctuation", can best be described as theorizing about "etymology". I believe that the word etymology is commonly understood as "the origins of a word," in which "origin" manifests in the readers' mind as the outline of the borders of a country, like how it is drawn on a map. Words are meant to manifest ideas within our minds, but most of us skip over these ideas quickly in an attempt to read at the pace that your school requires you to. In reading at this pace, we are often racing through reading assignments like each passing second is a precious but quickly vanishing resource, as if we were going to die.
This is to say that we are all in a hurry, but we don't have to be anymore. Perhaps, now that we are expanding our life expectancy to levels never seen before in history, we are evolving into a species that slows down and ponders things, rather than racing by each passing idea as an attempt to stay away from certain death, which is what our scurrying friends called ants do all day. They race around and try disparately to stay alive in a world where humans have nearly taken over completely.
I challenge you to ponder the means of each of the subjects I traversed: . This line of reasoning has led me to believe that medicine is the most valuable area of study because it further helps to slow down our thought processes, letting us develop and expand our ideas in such detail that we have nearly infinite capacity to survive as a race, thus fulfilling our ultimate destiny as a race to populate the universe for as long as time can see into the future.
Such a human destiny has already been depicted in the famous moving videos (movies for short) called Star Trek and Star Wars. Unfortunately, this is far FAR in the future for humans. I only hope that it isn't so far forward that we have perished in a self-made inferno (Global Warming), that may now be reached by our primitive self-destructive behavior in which we attack other human beings and animals in order to survive.
Thankfully, our evolved tenacity for self-preservation outweighs our tendency to kill one another, and so we have not destroyed the world with nuclear weapons yet. Trust me: we will not let nuclear weapons or global warming block the way of our collective survival as a race. We're clearly at the top of the evolutionary food chain, and I don't predict any other animals to surpass us on the food chain consistently, save for the event that the ice caps melt and our civilization is swept away.
This is called "Armageddon". Perhaps we will be wiped out by a terrible disease that has a 100% mortality rate among humans, leaving the next most evolved creature to have free reign over the earth. I submit that this is what killed the dinosaurs: a massive plague, which launched apes on their way into evolution's current champion and proven best survivor, in the form of the almighty human.
Shouldn't the ultimate focus of study in academia be the study of evolution and how we got to this state in human culture? The domains of explanation vary from Psychology, Etymology, and even Religion. These are commonly united under a common roof and called a university. These are all small schools of thought that reach towards this overarching goal, to answer the Great Human Quandary.
The term "the Great Human Quandary" requires quite a bit of elaboration. One can depict the Great Human Quandary be the Chinese tale about a wise man on a mountain who knows the true meaning of life. The wise man on the mountain had not yet zeroed in on the true meaning of life, so he had no answer. Thusly, we have finally defined the "Great Human Quandary".
Are you ready for something exciting? I think I figured it out, and it is not quite as difficult as we were led to believe. It is the core idea of everything that makes our worldwide culture so diverse and explains why the subject of evolution is gaining acceptance in society. What we see in our society is that being educated in academia is improving people's lives dramatically over non-educated humans. Academia is the most highly evolved to promote flourishing. We have, in the past, been so confused by the words "person" and "people", and this quandary (called the Great Human Quandary) will surely leads us to the answer.
Yes, right now we are. Even if we weren't the most fit-for-survival form of life on this planet, this provides us with the hope that life on Earth will continue to prosper into the future, regardless of which life form has taken dominance.
I just hope that it spawns from us humans. Judging by the enormous lead in proliferation that we hold over all the other species, it probably will be us. That makes me particularly happy!
I consider myself to be further advancing this thought of evolution that Charles Darwin excelled at describing to a level of clarity that we do not often see in our society. As a result, I am now considering the notion of switching my major focus in college to Philosophy, which I believe is the overarching subject of Philosophy. That said, this will require me to stay in school for a year after my expected graduation date, and would change my career goals in life considerably from computer science (Informatics is an evolved Computer Science, now called "Web 2.0") to continued academia at a University.
Another possibility, is that I complete my Informatics degree and apply as a graduate student in Philosophy, if that is in compliance with University rules. Any advice on this tough decision are welcome. Now, I realize that it is possible that I could potentially convey my views on life and evolution clearly without ever bothering with a University, so perhaps I should just pursue my career in Informatics as a way to fund my survival enough so that I may publish my thoughts on whatever environmental sustainability (which I define as "overall flourishing") truly means to me.
Eagerly awaiting any reply that indicates that you have so graciously read all the way to this point.
My Theory
Suppose, as an example, that I were to walk down the street and stop to enjoy a quick sip of Jack Daniels out of the bottle. If someone arrives in attire that was designed so that it appeared significaant or important, and yells a command (this person is often called a "police officer" in Western society) indicating that you I should stop, am I obligated .
Am I a philosopher or an etymology theorist or both??? Similarly to the case of police officers, consider that we are supposed to punctuate very precisely in describing our speech, such that you would include three punctuation marks to indicate that three options had been given and you, just as I asked in the previous sentence. Should you attach three questions marks to indicate that three questions had been asked? Yes, and that makes sense because I am indicating that there are three objects to choose from: "philosophy", "etymology theorist", and "both". (this is referred to as an "answer").
Consider also that the "bold" punctuations I used above are used to help guide your eyes back up to them as your target of focus.
What I have been doing this entire time, in analyzing the words "police" and "punctuation", can best be described as theorizing about "etymology". I believe that the word etymology is commonly understood as "the origins of a word," in which "origin" manifests in the readers' mind as the outline of the borders of a country, like how it is drawn on a map. Words are meant to manifest ideas within our minds, but most of us skip over these ideas quickly in an attempt to read at the pace that your school requires you to. In reading at this pace, we are often racing through reading assignments like each passing second is a precious but quickly vanishing resource, as if we were going to die.
This is to say that we are all in a hurry, but we don't have to be anymore. Perhaps, now that we are expanding our life expectancy to levels never seen before in history, we are evolving into a species that slows down and ponders things, rather than racing by each passing idea as an attempt to stay away from certain death, which is what our scurrying friends called ants do all day. They race around and try disparately to stay alive in a world where humans have nearly taken over completely.
I challenge you to ponder the means of each of the subjects I traversed: . This line of reasoning has led me to believe that medicine is the most valuable area of study because it further helps to slow down our thought processes, letting us develop and expand our ideas in such detail that we have nearly infinite capacity to survive as a race, thus fulfilling our ultimate destiny as a race to populate the universe for as long as time can see into the future.
Such a human destiny has already been depicted in the famous moving videos (movies for short) called Star Trek and Star Wars. Unfortunately, this is far FAR in the future for humans. I only hope that it isn't so far forward that we have perished in a self-made inferno (Global Warming), that may now be reached by our primitive self-destructive behavior in which we attack other human beings and animals in order to survive.
Thankfully, our evolved tenacity for self-preservation outweighs our tendency to kill one another, and so we have not destroyed the world with nuclear weapons yet. Trust me: we will not let nuclear weapons or global warming block the way of our collective survival as a race. We're clearly at the top of the evolutionary food chain, and I don't predict any other animals to surpass us on the food chain consistently, save for the event that the ice caps melt and our civilization is swept away.
This is called "Armageddon". Perhaps we will be wiped out by a terrible disease that has a 100% mortality rate among humans, leaving the next most evolved creature to have free reign over the earth. I submit that this is what killed the dinosaurs: a massive plague, which launched apes on their way into evolution's current champion and proven best survivor, in the form of the almighty human.
Shouldn't the ultimate focus of study in academia be the study of evolution and how we got to this state in human culture? The domains of explanation vary from Psychology, Etymology, and even Religion. These are commonly united under a common roof and called a university. These are all small schools of thought that reach towards this overarching goal, to answer the Great Human Quandary.
The term "the Great Human Quandary" requires quite a bit of elaboration. One can depict the Great Human Quandary be the Chinese tale about a wise man on a mountain who knows the true meaning of life. The wise man on the mountain had not yet zeroed in on the true meaning of life, so he had no answer. Thusly, we have finally defined the "Great Human Quandary".
Are you ready for something exciting? I think I figured it out, and it is not quite as difficult as we were led to believe. It is the core idea of everything that makes our worldwide culture so diverse and explains why the subject of evolution is gaining acceptance in society. What we see in our society is that being educated in academia is improving people's lives dramatically over non-educated humans. Academia is the most highly evolved to promote flourishing. We have, in the past, been so confused by the words "person" and "people", and this quandary (called the Great Human Quandary) will surely leads us to the answer.
Yes, right now we are. Even if we weren't the most fit-for-survival form of life on this planet, this provides us with the hope that life on Earth will continue to prosper into the future, regardless of which life form has taken dominance.
I just hope that it spawns from us humans. Judging by the enormous lead in proliferation that we hold over all the other species, it probably will be us. That makes me particularly happy!
I consider myself to be further advancing this thought of evolution that Charles Darwin excelled at describing to a level of clarity that we do not often see in our society. As a result, I am now considering the notion of switching my major focus in college to Philosophy, which I believe is the overarching subject of Philosophy. That said, this will require me to stay in school for a year after my expected graduation date, and would change my career goals in life considerably from computer science (Informatics is an evolved Computer Science, now called "Web 2.0") to continued academia at a University.
Another possibility, is that I complete my Informatics degree and apply as a graduate student in Philosophy, if that is in compliance with University rules. Any advice on this tough decision are welcome. Now, I realize that it is possible that I could potentially convey my views on life and evolution clearly without ever bothering with a University, so perhaps I should just pursue my career in Informatics as a way to fund my survival enough so that I may publish my thoughts on whatever environmental sustainability (which I define as "overall flourishing") truly means to me.
Eagerly awaiting any reply that indicates that you have so graciously read all the way to this point.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Fatsos, Alcoholics, and Stoners
I ought to precede this article by saying that I am great friends with and respect many different fatsos, alcoholics, and stoners. They are my friends, and I value them highly (often called "cherishing them").
I am often shocked when people jeer at the growing weight problem and people are turning to Jenny Craig and other diet weight loss measures, few people seem to realize that it isn't about all the food you eat.
The weight problem is not growing because people are eating too much, it is growing because more and more people have decreased their activity level so far that their movement level is much like that of a statue. That's right, what I am recommending is that you GO OUTSIDE and use your body. Once upon a time, humans were able to exist for thousands of years by primarily relying on their body to accomplish "daily chores" like sprinting through the woods to catch deer, creating large crops of corn, or fishing in a river. Why do you think so many native Americans are alcoholic? Picture a world where we had to be active both physically and mentally every day in order to provide enough food to survive. In this world, would we have fatsos, alcoholics, stoners, and gay people? (I know it is very "politically incorrect" to put gay people in this category, but I have done so intentionally and do not imply any malice towards gay people, because I have no such feelings.)
Is there time during the typical day during which you normally are watching TV, playing video games, or watching news about people far outside of your personal domain that you are really concerned with? If so, you would benefit by taking up one of many great activities like basketball, biking, baseball, hiking, and so on are a great ways to give you time to reflect on how to improve the quality of your life, ponder new ideas and aspirations (this process is often called "creativity"), and do things that require you to learn, like dribbling a basketball, riding a bike, hitting a baseball, or doing whatever it is hikers have to learn to be good. This is a process that can be learned at any age in life AND one that we all knew as children.
Go outside and play every single day. If you don't have time, you are overextended and need to take a little personal time each day. Do it even if you have a young child who can't keep up with you. If the child is nearly immobile, be as active as you possibly can be while teaching your son or daughter how to live an active life. If the child is a bit older and can move quickly, he or she will quickly start to challenge your own skills at the new sport, which will likely develop in near parallel to the skills of your child. If you do not have a child, you would probably benefit by teaching a friend or partner (both often called "a companion" in a non-homophobic world) the skills that you have learned that exceed their skills, and they can reciprocate for you.
If this has meaning for you, either as a current way of life or as an ideal way of life, please leave a comment either to give advice or to seek advice.
Onward:
I am often shocked when people jeer at the growing weight problem and people are turning to Jenny Craig and other diet weight loss measures, few people seem to realize that it isn't about all the food you eat.
The weight problem is not growing because people are eating too much, it is growing because more and more people have decreased their activity level so far that their movement level is much like that of a statue. That's right, what I am recommending is that you GO OUTSIDE and use your body. Once upon a time, humans were able to exist for thousands of years by primarily relying on their body to accomplish "daily chores" like sprinting through the woods to catch deer, creating large crops of corn, or fishing in a river. Why do you think so many native Americans are alcoholic? Picture a world where we had to be active both physically and mentally every day in order to provide enough food to survive. In this world, would we have fatsos, alcoholics, stoners, and gay people? (I know it is very "politically incorrect" to put gay people in this category, but I have done so intentionally and do not imply any malice towards gay people, because I have no such feelings.)
Is there time during the typical day during which you normally are watching TV, playing video games, or watching news about people far outside of your personal domain that you are really concerned with? If so, you would benefit by taking up one of many great activities like basketball, biking, baseball, hiking, and so on are a great ways to give you time to reflect on how to improve the quality of your life, ponder new ideas and aspirations (this process is often called "creativity"), and do things that require you to learn, like dribbling a basketball, riding a bike, hitting a baseball, or doing whatever it is hikers have to learn to be good. This is a process that can be learned at any age in life AND one that we all knew as children.
Go outside and play every single day. If you don't have time, you are overextended and need to take a little personal time each day. Do it even if you have a young child who can't keep up with you. If the child is nearly immobile, be as active as you possibly can be while teaching your son or daughter how to live an active life. If the child is a bit older and can move quickly, he or she will quickly start to challenge your own skills at the new sport, which will likely develop in near parallel to the skills of your child. If you do not have a child, you would probably benefit by teaching a friend or partner (both often called "a companion" in a non-homophobic world) the skills that you have learned that exceed their skills, and they can reciprocate for you.
If this has meaning for you, either as a current way of life or as an ideal way of life, please leave a comment either to give advice or to seek advice.
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Top 25 Unreported News Stories for 2007: failures of the "free press"
I was doing a little research on security, privacy, and censorship and happened upon this list of the most important but unreported stories of the year. I copied the headlines for each of the 25 because the articles are long. Do you know if most of these are legitimate stories? I never know what to believe.
#1 Future of Internet Debate Ignored by Media
#2 Halliburton Charged with Selling Nuclear Technologies to Iran
#3 Oceans of the World in Extreme Danger
#4 Hunger and Homelessness Increasing in the US
#5 High-Tech Genocide in Congo
#6 Federal Whistleblower Protection in Jeopardy
#7 US Operatives Torture Detainees to Death in Afghanistan and Iraq
#8 Pentagon Exempt from Freedom of Information Act
#9 The World Bank Funds Israel-Palestine Wall
#10 Expanded Air War in Iraq Kills More Civilians
#11 Dangers of Genetically Modified Food Confirmed
#12 Pentagon Plans to Build New Landmines
#13 New Evidence Establishes Dangers of Roundup
#14 Homeland Security Contracts KBR to Build Detention Centers in the US
#15 Chemical Industry is EPA's Primary Research Partner
#16 Ecuador and Mexico Defy US on International Criminal Court
#17 Iraq Invasion Promotes OPEC Agenda
#18 Physicist Challenges Official 9-11 Story
#19 Destruction of Rainforests Worst Ever
#20 Bottled Water: A Global Environmental Problem
#21 Gold Mining Threatens Ancient Andean Glaciers
#22 $Billions in Homeland Security Spending Undisclosed
#23 US Oil Targets Kyoto in Europe
#24 Cheney's Halliburton Stock Rose Over 3000 Percent Last Year
#25 US Military in Paraguay Threatens Region
To read more about each of these topics, use the following link: Project Censored Top 25 List
#1 Future of Internet Debate Ignored by Media
#2 Halliburton Charged with Selling Nuclear Technologies to Iran
#3 Oceans of the World in Extreme Danger
#4 Hunger and Homelessness Increasing in the US
#5 High-Tech Genocide in Congo
#6 Federal Whistleblower Protection in Jeopardy
#7 US Operatives Torture Detainees to Death in Afghanistan and Iraq
#8 Pentagon Exempt from Freedom of Information Act
#9 The World Bank Funds Israel-Palestine Wall
#10 Expanded Air War in Iraq Kills More Civilians
#11 Dangers of Genetically Modified Food Confirmed
#12 Pentagon Plans to Build New Landmines
#13 New Evidence Establishes Dangers of Roundup
#14 Homeland Security Contracts KBR to Build Detention Centers in the US
#15 Chemical Industry is EPA's Primary Research Partner
#16 Ecuador and Mexico Defy US on International Criminal Court
#17 Iraq Invasion Promotes OPEC Agenda
#18 Physicist Challenges Official 9-11 Story
#19 Destruction of Rainforests Worst Ever
#20 Bottled Water: A Global Environmental Problem
#21 Gold Mining Threatens Ancient Andean Glaciers
#22 $Billions in Homeland Security Spending Undisclosed
#23 US Oil Targets Kyoto in Europe
#24 Cheney's Halliburton Stock Rose Over 3000 Percent Last Year
#25 US Military in Paraguay Threatens Region
To read more about each of these topics, use the following link: Project Censored Top 25 List
Saturday, May 26, 2007
The War on Addictive and Harmful Drugs: the only war worth fighting
In any case where a species of animal becomes so well evolved that it is at the top of the food chain and may run rampant and overpopulate its environment, it begins to civilize immediately. Civilization is most basically defined as a large community that develops social rules as guidelines to our actions. Government exists to define where to set the guidelines and when it is ok to cross them (you kill a serial killer because he is crossing the agreed-upon guidelines). Similarly, we need government to regulate the flow of addictive drugs so that they are expensive enough that people have to ration themselves, thus keeping society from destroy itself. Should we let people have cocaine for very cheap so that they don't end up homeless? The answer is no, because that would cause a large portion of people to be strung out and crazy. Society would completely deteriorate and we would have a world of strung out drug addicts. This is what necessitates and justifies the war on drugs, although we did go a little overboard with sending troops into Colombia.
For a real-world example of what happens when a government fails to regulate the sale of a highly addictive drug, head over to Wikipedia and read up on the First Opium War, which resulted from the United Kingdom severely damaging Chinese society by shipping huge quantities of cheap opium to China, whose government and military proved to be incapable of fending off the lucrative and powerful British drug-fueled invasion. From the article:
Think about this and feel free to comment, whether your thoughts are in agreement or discrepancy.
For a real-world example of what happens when a government fails to regulate the sale of a highly addictive drug, head over to Wikipedia and read up on the First Opium War, which resulted from the United Kingdom severely damaging Chinese society by shipping huge quantities of cheap opium to China, whose government and military proved to be incapable of fending off the lucrative and powerful British drug-fueled invasion. From the article:
The conflict began a long history of Chinese suspicion of Western society, which still lingers today in East Asia.Colombia, Afghanistan, and local methamphetamine makers, could very feasibly cripple American society through this proven tactic of distributing cheap addictive drugs unfettered. I believe that a war on drugs is the only war worth fighting. In closing, consider a statement that puts the U.S. in China's historic position and Afghanistan in the U.K.'s historic position.
The conflict began a long history of American suspicion of Afghani society, which still lingers today in Western society.
Think about this and feel free to comment, whether your thoughts are in agreement or discrepancy.
Sunday, May 6, 2007
Adroit Ape: defining "human"
Defining Key Terms
Forward
I have created this blog with the intention to explore and record any and all hair-brained ideas that I come up with. The title "Adroit Ape" developed from two strange sources.
The first source is an insightful satire video called "Dance, Monkeys, Dance" by Ernest Cline.
Before I continue, I would like to offer some insight into what I mean by "satire".
The second source is somewhat of a silent conversation I had with myself on Sunday, April 22, 2007 while shooting hoops (aka playing basketball) for somewhere between four and six hours. During this time I managed to learn to use my previously useless left hand. This probably seems like not a big deal at first, but it sparked a frenzy of thought. The following is a brief [EDIT: apparently I suck at brevity] overview of what went through my head.
a·droit [uh-droit] –adjective
1. expert or nimble in the use of the hands or body.
2. cleverly skillful, resourceful, or ingenious: an adroit debater.
ape [eyp] –noun
1. any of a group of anthropoid primates characterized by long arms, a broad chest, and the absence of a tail
an·thro·poid [an-thruh-poid] –adjective
1. belonging or pertaining to the primate suborder Anthropoidea, characterized by a relatively flat face, dry nose, small immobile ears, and forward-facing eyes, comprising humans, apes, Old World monkeys, and New World monkeys.
θrəˌpɔɪdI have created this blog with the intention to explore and record any and all hair-brained ideas that I come up with. The title "Adroit Ape" developed from two strange sources.
The first source is an insightful satire video called "Dance, Monkeys, Dance" by Ernest Cline.
Before I continue, I would like to offer some insight into what I mean by "satire".
"The wit makes fun of other persons; the satirist makes fun of the world; the humorist makes fun of himself." -James ThurberOf course, anything as satirical as "Dance, Monkeys, Dance" will invoke skepticism in most people. No one can deny that humans have the most complex culture on Earth. Watch this next video to help calm your thoughts about the distinction between man and ape.
The second source is somewhat of a silent conversation I had with myself on Sunday, April 22, 2007 while shooting hoops (aka playing basketball) for somewhere between four and six hours. During this time I managed to learn to use my previously useless left hand. This probably seems like not a big deal at first, but it sparked a frenzy of thought. The following is a brief [EDIT: apparently I suck at brevity] overview of what went through my head.
- Why am I right handed? Why aren't all people ambidextrous.
- I have concluded that the answer is more simple than most people would have you think. Forget all the left and right brain stuff, which is simultaneously an oversimplification of the way the brain works and a misunderstanding of dexterity (aka adroitness).
- My answer is as follows: I am right handed because I am too lazy and too embarrassed to learn to use my left hand. Learning to use my left hand requires quite a bit of patience. Further, the reason most people are right handed is because English is written from left to right. Watch a left handed person write a paper and note that they drag their hand awkwardly over their writing, smudging their "rat-scratch" handwriting. Arabic and Hebrew are both written right to left, while many Asian languages are written top to bottom. Statistics confirm that there are considerably more left handed people in Asia and the Middle East.
- For activities other than writing, I am also likely to favor my right side because I have already developed a sense of favoritism towards it, not to mention that it is generally more dexterous than my left side. However, I can confirm that once you have learned dexterity in your right hand (say with dribbling and shooting a basketball), you can learn that same dexterity in your left hand extremely quickly.
- Studies show that improving dexterity with your left hand also improves dexterity with your right, so dribble and shoot a basketball with your left hand only for a few hours and reap the benefits of vastly improved overall skills. Sometimes it just makes more sense to shoot with your left hand rather than your right, e.g. when a defender is on your right side.
- Continuing my internal conversation about dexterity, I began to see how this relates to other areas, e.g. eye-sight. Muscles squeeze your eyes to shape the lens so that objects at a certain distance are in focus. I find that the more I play basketball and the less that I use my computer, the better my eyesight gets. For this same reason, I have decided that I will only use my eyeglasses when I absolutely MUST see something. If I use them more, I am missing out on an opportunity to exercise my eyes. If you are suffering from poor vision, identify the cause (probably your computer) and take up a hobby that requires you to exercise your eyes. I recommend basketball, since you can buy a ball for $15 and use it on any public court. It forces you (or at least should) to focus on both the hoop and the ball, giving your eyes a chance to focus both near and far. As an added bonus, you'll develop coordination with the rest of your body and get in shape at the same time.
- Tip: You're not going to be a hot-shot right at the start. Warm up by holding the ball in one hand and bouncing it off the backboard a few dozen times, catching it in your hand in the shooting position. Don't go straight to the three pointers or you are likely to get frustrated. Once you feel confident with this backboard drill, practice bouncing it off the backboard and into the basket with that same hand. If you can do this ten times in a row from close range, you will notice vast improvement in just a few minutes.
- I'm not just talking about dexterity and eyesight. This applies to virtually everything we do. Practice makes perfect. Or rather, focus and practice makes perfect.
- If you are a slow reader, practicing reading and really focusing on what you are doing will make you a better reader.
- If you are struggling in school at math, put a little extra time into focusing and practicing what you are doing, and you will quickly find yourself at the top of the class.
- If you feel uncomfortable talking to strangers, practice talking to strangers and focus on the conversation. This brings me to my next point.
- Charisma is just the skill of making strangers like you. This is definitely a skill that eludes many people. Unfortunately, with six billion (and counting) people on Earth, the fact is that almost everyone is a stranger to you. You would be wise to focus on learning charisma -- that's right, "learning charisma". The trick here is very simple.
- Turn strangers into familiars. Show interest in the person. Focus on establishing rapport.
- relation; connection, esp. harmonious or sympathetic relation: a teacher trying to establish close rapport with students.
- How do you establish rapport? I'll explain with a short story.
We were having a huge party at my house called Around the World. We had six different bars that served regional drinks. I was a little nervous about going to this party because I typically don't like partying with 200 strangers and 100 people whom I know to varying degrees.
I ended up working at one of the six bars all night. Nobody else wanted the job, and I took it reluctantly. Working bar turned out to be an excellent choice. Why? I had something everyone wanted: free alcohol. There was no anticipation or reluctance to approach people. They came to me. Conversation came easy and I was proclaimed to be the best bartender ever by a number of people, despite my terrible drink-making skills (which I promise to practice, along with my alcohol-tolerance skill). Here's how the typical conversation went:- person: "What are you serving?"
- me: "rum and Coke... except we ran out of rum, so it's vodka and Coke."
- person: "Ok!"
- me, while starting to make the drink: "Where are you from?"
- person: "[insert random Greek house here]"
- me: "No, where are you from?"
- person: "[place]"
- me: "Oh, cool. So, who do you know here?"
- person: "Everybody!"
- me: "No you don't. You don't know me!"
- person: "What's your name?"
- me: "Barry."
- person, extending hand to shake: "I'm [name]!"
- me: "So are you having fun?"
- person: "Yeah, it's pretty sweet here."
- me, nodding in agreement: "Yeah, it's pretty tight. Are you drinking responsibly?"
- person, wide eyed and shocked: "No. I don't think I'm going to remember this tomorrow."
- me, looking at drink and hesitating to give it to them: "Can I trust you with this?"
- You get the idea. I had this conversation probably ten or twenty times and everyone responded well to it, even though I looked completely and utterly like ass that night -- I had a black eye and a five-o'clock shadow and was pale like an albino rabbit. Practice everything. We humans are excellent at learning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)