Affirmative Distraction

 The elephant in the room is diversity and everybody is talking about it. But what people aren't talking about is the fact that the room is really big and there are a lot of elephants in it. With the overturning of Affirmative Action, there is an outcry of how this will affect universities as well as businesses in how they will recruit and what they will focus their resources on. The problem with this thinking is that it isn't looking at a bigger picture. 

For one, diversity for the sake of diversity doesn't always create a healthy working environment. You can have a very diverse group of people in a situation, but if that group doesn't find a way to bond, then how can it be functional? These institutions have to not only focus on recruiting and enrollment, but also competition with other similar institutions, funding, and functionality, as well as the various core missions they prioritize. 

For another, when an institution values diversity OVER everything else, it can devalue its ability to focus on its intent, whatever that may be. Focus is key for organizations when they are not only wanting to survive but succeed and thrive in an always-growing competitive world. 

And lastly, what if some people want sameness? What if black people just want to work around black people? What if women just want to work around other women? Why force others onto them? Sameness really isn't a bad thing. If you look at the people you surround yourself with, you might just find certain similarities with yourself. 

All this aside, I agree with diversifying organizations such as universities and companies. We SHOULD focus on being able to adapt and bridge gaps into professions for anyone who is qualified. But that shouldn't be the only focus. For us to succeed as individuals, organizations, companies, we also have to compete against those that want what we want. And to do that, we have to be willing to stay true to who we are. And yes, who we are changes over time. But doesn't that make life much more interesting? 

Death

 I once thought of death as a being. A person, sort of. I mean, why wouldn't I portray it as a being, seeing as though I am a part of the generation that has witnessed and experienced some of the largest media format explosions in all of human history. Death, in most of these formats, is always portrayed as a being in one way or another. 

But as I've gotten older, I wonder. I wonder if it is more complex than it is one being. When most people look at the world, they see cause and effect in its most simplistic forms! Cause: Hitler started the Third Reich. Effect: World War 2 happened. But the world, and universe I would say, are much more complex than that. World War 2 was a phenomenon that would have never occurred if it weren't ripe to occur. So many series of conditions had to be in place for Hitler to come into power in the first place. 

Death, in my mind, is the same thing. It is not A being that is there to take one into the afterlife. It is a culmination of all the factors in one's life to happen precisely when it happens. From infant mortality to someone passing away at the ripe old age of ninety-seven it always happens when it happens. Nothing more, nothing less. 

Not that people don't have their own personal experience as they are going through the dying process. There are many stories of individuals seeing loved ones as they near departure. Some people see loved ones that have since passed away. Some people see what they call angels. There are so many rich and beautiful stories about the experiences people go through. But those, in my mind, are still part of the manifestation of the dying process and how complex it is in its many forms. 

To those that may or may not read this: Please don't think I am trying to minimize death. The opposite, actually. I think it's easy to think of Death as having the form of a being because many of us minimize life. We'll say we don't. But we do. So, when it gets time to die, we hold on to those same forms we held on to when alive instead of fully immersing ourselves in the micro-universe as well as the macro-universe. 

Just more Random Thoughts by yours truly...

The Four Horsemen of Evolution?

I was thinking the other day about what the Four Horseman of the Christian symbology meant. You have Pestilence, War, Famine, and Death. These four things seem to have plagues humanity for the length of Its tenure here on this planet. 

But why do we look at it like this? Through Pestilence, we have developed ever-evolving medicine to allow for us to combat the many viruses that would plague us. Through War, we have evolved medical practices that have saved more people than we can imagine. Through Famine, we have developed the compassion to work towards sharing resources on a global scale. And through Death, we have learned to value life. 

So why do we continue to look at these Four Horseman as the enemy of Humankind? What if the Four Horsemen are Life's greatest teachers in that we learn to look at life not as individuals but as part of something which is much larger than us? Each of us has a sense of individuation that seems to distinguish us as being separate beings. But what if that distinguishing is only a part of the complexity of it all rather than the separateness of things? What if the separateness we see is only a manifestation of a certain type of illusory type of thinking? I am not suggesting that humans are connected here. I am suggesting that we are connected by the fact that we are just manifestations of life and that, in a certain sense, we are only partially different (genetically) from our surroundings. But that difference is also a part of our connectedness. 

In this case, we actually need these "external" teachers (these Horsemen) to help us to discover that which is inside of ourselves because we as a species have yet to look within as a given practice. We continue to look outwardly at the illusionary boundaries of cultures and identities and forget that the manifestations that is our existence is representative of the inner struggles we deal with on a day-to-day existence. It's no wonder that these Four Horsemen continue to manifest in a cultural and global sense. Until we begin to listen to what they represent, how do we begin to allow their teachings to help us evolve beyond them on an existential level?

I leave these questions for you because I don't think my thoughts are your answers. I want your answers to be your own. And when I say your own, I mean humanity's. 

The Solidity of Air

 Mind is as solid as air. There. It has been said (or typed, actually). If you read my previous post on types of thinking, this shouldn't come as a surprise that I would have to write something like this. The suggestion that we are not our thoughts is heretical to many people. But the more you dig, the more you come to find out that this is true. Thinking that you are an identity is just as delusional as thinking that air is a duck. 

These statements aren't just philosophical. They are words that come from a lifetime of quieting the conditioned mind and hearing what is, rather than what is not. What is is beyond words. It can't be described nor can it be discussed. You either know it or you don't (though many people have a sense about it). Those who know it, know they don't know it. Those who don't know it, say they know it. It is beyond any notion one can think of. Therefore it has no weight nor form. It is neither humble nor loud. It just is. 

Types of thinking, from my previous post, are just ways people live their lives. Quieting the conditioned mind and waking up is realizing that you don't have to be so narrow while living your life. It is the great surrendering to life that most people find terrifying. But they only find it terrifying because they have objectified what it is to surrender. The surrendering is not an act of bravery. It is just an act. For those who are terrified of it though, it is considered the warrior's path. But when the person has truly surrendered, they don't identify as a warrior. 

This is why mind is as solid as air. You can grasp at it all you want, but you never really seem to get anything out of it. 

Identity as a Type of Thinking

 Identity has been going on for about as long as humans have had memory. Way back when there weren't any major civilizations, people formed tribes and other types of groupings. The varying tribes/groupings identified themselves through various means as a way to keep their people safe. For instance, maybe your tribe wore your hair in one way and a different tribe wore theirs in another way. Depending on what their hairstyle was, you could either see them as enemy or friend. This is just one simple example, of course. 

As time has gone on, identity has become more diverse the bigger the population in a given culture. Now, identity involves, skin color, clothing style, gender, color of skin, political allegiance, to name a few. In America, we teach that people are these identities instead of the practice that identity thinking is just one form of thinking. This causes a lot of feelings of isolation and mental illness as people are misinterpreting how they are thinking as well as how others think. This also produces an us versus them mentality as it is still relegated to the part of the brain related to fight or flight. 

When we realize that identity thinking is just one form of thinking, we realize we can have a lot more flexibility with how we see the world. Identity thinking is just like any other type of thinking. When you are thinking of things in a literary way (like a publisher or author), you look at things such as character development, story, plot, etc. When you think spatially (as like being in construction), you think in terms of depth, width, height, etc. Same with identity thinking. When you deal with identity thinking, you think in terms of how the world makes sense in a way that fits your identity. The difference between identity thinking compared to other forms of thinking is the amount of insistence suggesting we are those thoughts instead of like anything else where we think those thoughts. The carpenter doesn't think they are width or height. The author doesn't think they are the plot. 

We all tend to connect with certain types of thinking and that is great! It is when we think we ARE the content of that thinking that we practice what the Buddha said is dukkha (the illusion of thinking that we are our thoughts). Connecting with certain types of thinking can be almost spiritual in nature. It is like connecting to something bigger than yourself. 

I know this post won't be a popular post as it goes against so much of what we are taught from birth. But it has to be put out there as some people are ready to hear it.

Edit: I watched a video and wanted to share it as part of this post as I think this relates highly to this topic. Here goes: Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality | Anil Seth - YouTube

The Art of Being Offended (Part 1)

 I really think we are looking at the whole "being offended" thing the wrong way. Generally speaking, being offended means that we see something and then have a discomforting experience based on our perceptions of what we saw and then react by either demanding that reality to stop or by lashing out and attacking it. Both responses are based in the same area of the brain that causes the fight or flight response and so no matter how people respond, they are still escalating their own intensity. And once they do this, they are also escalating the environment they are in. Many people will have wonderful explanations for why they are offended and can even make some compelling arguments. But in the end, they are still responding with fight or flight behavior and thus continuing a cycle of reactionary living. 

And don't get me wrong: I think having a sense of being offended is what makes us human. I am offended everyday by the parochial mentality of so many people I interact with. I am also offended by the fact that as a culture we make someone's wealth the measurement of their value. And the list could go on and on. But you almost never hear me talking about it. Because there is no reason to. I use these reactions as learning tools to help equip my mind to stay sharp and interact with a world, that by and large, is unaware of itself. 

We can retrain ourselves to act in a more emotionally regulated manner though! Aha! You can exercise those demons! Exposure is good but is not always the best place to start. I say that because, like anything else, putting oneself into the same situations with the same mindset is not conducive for promoting flexible behavior. 

The first place to start is within. Practice quieting the mind on the whole. It only takes about 15-30 minutes a day to do this. Find a quiet place where you can sit and let the mind just "be" without attaching to thoughts. Sounds easy, right? Nope! In this fast-paced world, quieting the mind is a fairly difficult task. Or like an old friend once said: It is simple, not easy. Once you sit in this quiet place, just sit. That's it. If your mind starts to wonder, bring it back to the present moment. If the mind starts to make impressions about your surroundings, bring it back to the present moment. If you start planning on things you want or need to do later, bring it back to the present moment. If you start to question whether or not it is working, bring it back to the present moment. You are probably starting to see a pattern here: Stay in the present moment. That is literally all you have to do. 

Once you have done this for a couple months, you can begin to expose yourself to things that you would normally be offended by. Perhaps watch a news outlet that you have been emotionally opposed to and watch a segment. While you are watching, be aware of how you are forming your thoughts and reactions, cognitive and emotional. Try not to get attached to them, just watch how they ebb and flow. The first few times is usually the hardest. But with practice, you will find that you can watch almost anything without being too attached to your responses. 

At this point, you might be asking "why do I need to do this" or "what good will this do"? And my answer is very simple, you don't need to do it. You don't need to do anything I suggest. But I have found learning to not get upset, or at least reducing how much I get upset, allows me to be in better control of myself during more stressful times and handle social situations with more grace than before. It's definitely not acting like you don't have feelings or don't respond to things. It's more like responding with dignity. It also offers the other person the space of having their own dignity, which makes it possible to have civil discourse. What you usually find is that you and the other person have more in common when you can have civil discourse. 

The lie of Virtue

 

“If someone is toxic in your life, rise above them. Don’t let them bring you down.”

“If someone is a negative influence on your life, be the positive one.”

“If someone treats you with unkindness, treat them with kindness.”

I hate these messages. I hate what they represent. But what I hate most, is how they condition people into inaction. Let’s take a look into the myth of the hero and villain. We have our overgeneralized versions of each to be sure (Buddha, Jesus, Satan, etc.) and those are wonderful ideals of each. But what does it take to be one. In any action/adventure movie, if the Villain did their thing and the hero just said, “You know what, I am just going to be positive on this one and not lower myself to their level” the story would end a different way.

For the hero to be the hero, they have to be willing to do what most people just won’t do: Be worse than the villain. They have to go further than even the villain is able to go. They have to be the bigger monster. The difference between the two is that in the end, the hero has that inner-monster under control and doesn’t need to unleash it on the world, unlike the villain. Does this change the hero? Yes. It transforms them into an ever-evolving creature. Buddha when he threw away Dukkha. Jesus when he went to Hell to free souls. But the villain also becomes more evolved as it grows and crosses new thresholds as well. Satan when he was unwilling to follow God’s rule. The serial killer after each kill. Whether they are hero or villain, they did those things that separate them from the rest of humanity: They were willing to embrace the unknown.

So when somebody says not to stand up to the bully because we don’t “want a scene”, they are really saying “Please don’t disrupt the norm. I don’t want to be out of my comfort zone.” They are not taking the higher road. They are taking the road of the sheep and calling themselves virtuous. The sheep isn’t virtuous. The sheep is just there to be used in whatever way deemed necessary. The virtuous are those who have embraced both hero and villain but are still willing to treat others with dignity and respect. They help pick up something when someone drops it. They do things for others and don’t ask for a thank you. They are mostly invisible, except for in times of need.

Many people will disagree with this. But how many of those that disagree with this have gotten off the sidelines and jumped in the game and actually did something that embraced that scary unknown?