The average American will trade freedom for security in a heartbeat. A desire to maximize our lifespans, even at the expense of liberty, seems to be deeply ingrained in the traditional American psyche. The reason, I think, is that the assurance of long-life helps compensate for a psychological insecurity. Americans want so much to be thought well of. To be liked, to be included, accepted. (Notice this is the language of Facebook.) So we strive to be responsible citizens. We strive to not offend, to keep up appearances, and fulfill the expectations of our peers.
This is all well and good, but the problem is in the vast discordance between those we consider our peers and those who are physically our neighbors. It’s safer for us if our bubble of peers contains only those with a socio-economic or educational background relatively similar to ours. We feel secure there--even if it means ignoring our neighbors or the people living in the communities we pass by everyday on our way to work.
We live in a deeply fractured society. The distribution of wealth is nowhere near equal, but the greater issue is that we are losing our ability to shape our environments. Only 30% of Americans are placed in a position where they can conveniently enact changes within their community. These are the comfortable, well-paying jobs--doctors, engineers, lawyers, upper-management positions. These 30% are seen as “winners”. Another 40% of us believe we’ll be there soon--another year, another 5 years, another 10 years. These still believe and try hard, even under complete awareness of how much they hate current situations. The other 30% are escapists, having sought refuge somewhere else, somewhere other than the American Dream and economic promise of power and privilege.
So what does it take to reclaim our ability to shape our communities? What's the best available approach?
Permaculture is the idea that plants, and especially plants we eat, are an integral part of a sustainable culture, and that by outsourcing the growing of these plants to industrial farms, we are losing a potentially invaluable part of healthy community life. The social bonds that develop through the growing and preparation of food can bring great benefits to the psychological health of those involved. And here’s the great thing: involvement is dependent only on physical location and no other requirements. Urban farming makes it convenient for us to treat our literal neighbors as peers--to burst that bubble of distant but socio-economically similar acquaintances--and to reap the improved self-confidence and increased emotional support that comes from increased face-to-face interactions with those around us.
Saturday, February 05, 2011
Monday, November 08, 2010
personality type theory - categorical vs. holistic thinking
Personality type reflects the extent we rely on words and the categories that words create. The Myers-Briggs system uses 4 categories. Why? The last letter represents how we make ourselves known to others. Those who rely primarily on words and the categories words create to make themselves known to others are called Judging, and extrovert their Decision Making function. Those who do not trust words and rely on a more holistic process to make themselves known to others are called Perceiving, and extrovert their Information Gathering function.
From there it seems reasonable to discuss the Decision Making and Information Gathering functions. Those who rely primarily on words and the categories words create to guide their decision-making are called Thinking. Those who rely on a more holistic process to make decisions are called Feeling.
Those who rely primarily on words and the categories words create to gather information are called Sensing. Those who rely on a more holistic process to gather information are called Intuiting.
Finally, what’s left is how we get our energy. Those who prefer words and the categories words create for their energy we call Extroverts. Those who draw their energy through a time of reflection and temporary retreat from words we call Introverts.
Thus we have four personality sphers, each with the possible letters ESTJ or INFP. ESTJs rely on words and the categories words create in each sphere, while INFPs rely on a more holistic process drawing from both words and the biological instinct.
For instance, I am INTP. I rely on a holistic process to get my energy (I), gather information (N), and make myself known to others (P). However, I rely primarily on words alone to make decisions. This is true, as I am very distrustful and skeptical of things in general, but demand a strict logical consistency of my actions.
From there it seems reasonable to discuss the Decision Making and Information Gathering functions. Those who rely primarily on words and the categories words create to guide their decision-making are called Thinking. Those who rely on a more holistic process to make decisions are called Feeling.
Those who rely primarily on words and the categories words create to gather information are called Sensing. Those who rely on a more holistic process to gather information are called Intuiting.
Finally, what’s left is how we get our energy. Those who prefer words and the categories words create for their energy we call Extroverts. Those who draw their energy through a time of reflection and temporary retreat from words we call Introverts.
Thus we have four personality sphers, each with the possible letters ESTJ or INFP. ESTJs rely on words and the categories words create in each sphere, while INFPs rely on a more holistic process drawing from both words and the biological instinct.
For instance, I am INTP. I rely on a holistic process to get my energy (I), gather information (N), and make myself known to others (P). However, I rely primarily on words alone to make decisions. This is true, as I am very distrustful and skeptical of things in general, but demand a strict logical consistency of my actions.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance review
I think the following passage captures Pirsig's theme:
Pirsig builds of this common feeling of stuckness--lost keys, test questions that we can't quite remember, computers that don't do what we are telling it, etc. The book opens on a road trip that the author is making with his son Chris, and John and Sylvia, a likable couple who also enjoy motorcycle riding. Chris is riding on the back of his father's cycle, John and Sylvia on their BMW. Pirsig knows his bike inside and out, observant of every mechanical nuance that might be a clue toward keeping the motor in top condition. John and Sylvia, however, both are "stuck" when it comes to technology (BMW cylces are known for having few mechanical problems on the road), and leave even the smallest jobs to a paid mechanic. Finally Pirsig comprehends why: "To get away from technology out into the country in the fresh air and sunshine is why they are on the motorcycle in the first place. For me to bring it back to them just at the point and place where they think they have finally escaped it just frosts both of them, tremendously." (Ch. 1, pg. 8)
Pirsig's book presents a theory about the source of John's and Sylvia's exasperation with technology and outlines the foundations for a solution. At this point I feel it necessary to issue a disclaimer. You may be thinking this book sounds like both an enjoyable and illuminating read. And for the first 100 pages you'd be right! The core of the book shifts in style, though it's not necessarily a change for the worse. My disclaimer: "This book was written for people who like to struggle with ideas." Pirsig, who also spent four years teaching rhetoric in the Montana and Illinois university systems, admits as much at this point within the book--"I suppose if I were a novelist rather than a Chautauqua orator I'd try to 'develop the characters' of John and Sylvia and Chris... That would be quite a novel, but for some reason I don't feel quite up to it." (Ch. 12, pg. 129)
Webster's defines a Chautauqua as: "a traveling show or local assembly that flourished in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, that provided popular education combined with entertainment in the form of lectures, [among other activities]." This book was written precisely for those individuals who feel excited by the idea of a Chautauqua.
The rest of the book is more an autobiography of the author's journey through Western thought than a novel, although it retains many literary elements. Pirsig's insights continued to surprise me through the whole 373 pages. His main concern is the question "What values does scientific thinking teach us?" He comes to doubt society's commonly-accepted viewpoint that science teaches only morally-neutral, objective analysis.
Pirsig is not satisfied with this answer because for him, science is a means to Truth rather than a means to utilitarian application. Utilitarian application may satisfy most, but Pirsig invested too much in the pursuit of deeper Truth to stop there. To him, the near universal acceptance of utilitarian application as a validation of science, at the expense of the pursuit of a single absolute truth, becomes a ghost that haunts his whole way of thinking. "Great minds struggle to cure diseases so that people may live longer, but only madmen ask why. One lives longer in order that he may live longer. There is no other purpose. That is what the ghost says." (Ch. 7, pg. 85)
The problem, as he sees it, is that there are infinite possible applications of science, and indeed an infinite number of truths that experimentation can prove. We treat scientific knowledge as an end worthy in itself, but there is no ultimate completeness to be found there. "It is science itself that is leading mankind from single absolute truths to multiple, indeterminate, relative ones... Science itself is producing the indeterminacy of thought and values that rational knowledge is supposed to eliminate." (Ch. 10, pg. 108)
Science, when its end is only technology and no longer a meditation on Truth, becomes every bit as subjective as musical taste or religious belief. We use science to extend lifespans and rearrange the elements of the earth into any number of products for physical comfort or electronically-produced amusement in the same way that one prefers Beethoven over Mozart, or Catholicism over Baptists.
To avoid facing this inconsistency, Western thought has petrified, insisting that Classicism and Romanticism are mutually exclusive spheres rather than two approaches toward the same end. There's the "hard" sectors of science and business, which are ruled by objectivity, and then everything else--the arts, volunteer work, religion. In fact these spheres are different, but it is wrong to think think they have nothing to do with each other, and that the "hard" sphere should be controlled only by objective analysis. Classicism develops out of our social predisposition to use language--to learn the accepted name of things and conform to one's cultural grouping. Romanticism comes from humanity's evolutionary, biological need to experiment and experience until arriving at the behavior that feels most right. It is the interaction of these competing worlds that created and has the ability to expand humanity's consciousness. Pirsig is exploring this fundamental duality of consciousness through the lens of Western philosophical thought, using motorcycle maintenance to explain the Classical mode of dividing and classifying knowledge, and Zen, the Romantic holistic approach.
This book is for those who enjoy wrestling with these sort of ideas. In one of the more revealing autobiographical segments, Pirsig employs a quote from Albert Einstein describing an angel who expels the egoists and utilitarians from the Temple of Science. All that remain, "those who have found favor with the angel," are those whose "finely tempered nature longs to escape from his noisy cramped surroundings into the silence of the mountains where the eye ranges freely through the still pure air and fondly traces out the restful contours apparently built for eternity." (Ch. 10, pg. 104) For these, I could not recommend ZAMM highly enough.
"A screw sticks, for example, on a side cover assembly...
"If you're experienced you'd probably apply a penetrating liquid and an impact driver at this point. But suppose you're inexperienced and you attach a self-locking plier wrench to the shank of your screwdriver and really twist it hard, a procedure you've had success with in the past, but which this time succeeds only in tearing the slot of the screw.
"Your mind was already thinking ahead to what you would do when the cover plate was off, and so it takes a little time to realize that this irritating minor annoyance of a torn screw slot isn't just irritating and minor. You're stuck...
"It's a miserable experience emotionally. You're losing time. You're incompetent. You don't know what you're doing. You should be ashamed of yourself. You should take the machine to a real mechanic who knows how to figure these things out." - Ch. 24, pg. 271 [out of 402]
Pirsig builds of this common feeling of stuckness--lost keys, test questions that we can't quite remember, computers that don't do what we are telling it, etc. The book opens on a road trip that the author is making with his son Chris, and John and Sylvia, a likable couple who also enjoy motorcycle riding. Chris is riding on the back of his father's cycle, John and Sylvia on their BMW. Pirsig knows his bike inside and out, observant of every mechanical nuance that might be a clue toward keeping the motor in top condition. John and Sylvia, however, both are "stuck" when it comes to technology (BMW cylces are known for having few mechanical problems on the road), and leave even the smallest jobs to a paid mechanic. Finally Pirsig comprehends why: "To get away from technology out into the country in the fresh air and sunshine is why they are on the motorcycle in the first place. For me to bring it back to them just at the point and place where they think they have finally escaped it just frosts both of them, tremendously." (Ch. 1, pg. 8)
Pirsig's book presents a theory about the source of John's and Sylvia's exasperation with technology and outlines the foundations for a solution. At this point I feel it necessary to issue a disclaimer. You may be thinking this book sounds like both an enjoyable and illuminating read. And for the first 100 pages you'd be right! The core of the book shifts in style, though it's not necessarily a change for the worse. My disclaimer: "This book was written for people who like to struggle with ideas." Pirsig, who also spent four years teaching rhetoric in the Montana and Illinois university systems, admits as much at this point within the book--"I suppose if I were a novelist rather than a Chautauqua orator I'd try to 'develop the characters' of John and Sylvia and Chris... That would be quite a novel, but for some reason I don't feel quite up to it." (Ch. 12, pg. 129)
Webster's defines a Chautauqua as: "a traveling show or local assembly that flourished in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, that provided popular education combined with entertainment in the form of lectures, [among other activities]." This book was written precisely for those individuals who feel excited by the idea of a Chautauqua.
The rest of the book is more an autobiography of the author's journey through Western thought than a novel, although it retains many literary elements. Pirsig's insights continued to surprise me through the whole 373 pages. His main concern is the question "What values does scientific thinking teach us?" He comes to doubt society's commonly-accepted viewpoint that science teaches only morally-neutral, objective analysis.
Pirsig is not satisfied with this answer because for him, science is a means to Truth rather than a means to utilitarian application. Utilitarian application may satisfy most, but Pirsig invested too much in the pursuit of deeper Truth to stop there. To him, the near universal acceptance of utilitarian application as a validation of science, at the expense of the pursuit of a single absolute truth, becomes a ghost that haunts his whole way of thinking. "Great minds struggle to cure diseases so that people may live longer, but only madmen ask why. One lives longer in order that he may live longer. There is no other purpose. That is what the ghost says." (Ch. 7, pg. 85)
The problem, as he sees it, is that there are infinite possible applications of science, and indeed an infinite number of truths that experimentation can prove. We treat scientific knowledge as an end worthy in itself, but there is no ultimate completeness to be found there. "It is science itself that is leading mankind from single absolute truths to multiple, indeterminate, relative ones... Science itself is producing the indeterminacy of thought and values that rational knowledge is supposed to eliminate." (Ch. 10, pg. 108)
Science, when its end is only technology and no longer a meditation on Truth, becomes every bit as subjective as musical taste or religious belief. We use science to extend lifespans and rearrange the elements of the earth into any number of products for physical comfort or electronically-produced amusement in the same way that one prefers Beethoven over Mozart, or Catholicism over Baptists.
To avoid facing this inconsistency, Western thought has petrified, insisting that Classicism and Romanticism are mutually exclusive spheres rather than two approaches toward the same end. There's the "hard" sectors of science and business, which are ruled by objectivity, and then everything else--the arts, volunteer work, religion. In fact these spheres are different, but it is wrong to think think they have nothing to do with each other, and that the "hard" sphere should be controlled only by objective analysis. Classicism develops out of our social predisposition to use language--to learn the accepted name of things and conform to one's cultural grouping. Romanticism comes from humanity's evolutionary, biological need to experiment and experience until arriving at the behavior that feels most right. It is the interaction of these competing worlds that created and has the ability to expand humanity's consciousness. Pirsig is exploring this fundamental duality of consciousness through the lens of Western philosophical thought, using motorcycle maintenance to explain the Classical mode of dividing and classifying knowledge, and Zen, the Romantic holistic approach.
This book is for those who enjoy wrestling with these sort of ideas. In one of the more revealing autobiographical segments, Pirsig employs a quote from Albert Einstein describing an angel who expels the egoists and utilitarians from the Temple of Science. All that remain, "those who have found favor with the angel," are those whose "finely tempered nature longs to escape from his noisy cramped surroundings into the silence of the mountains where the eye ranges freely through the still pure air and fondly traces out the restful contours apparently built for eternity." (Ch. 10, pg. 104) For these, I could not recommend ZAMM highly enough.
Friday, July 09, 2010
Personality Theory
Jungian Personality-Type theory -
4 spheres of personality -
1st - how you think, how you "recharge" yourself - ENERGY
2nd - how you get information - INFO
3rd - how you make decisions - DECISIONS
4th - how you schedule your time/interact with others - TIME
| Are you more comfortable with: | ||
THE WORLD OF WORDS atomized world as created by language and symbols --- Sustained by the drive to share in society, to obey society's rules, to fit in, to conform CONFORMING | THE CONCEPTUAL STREAM continually flowing world of senses and concepts --- sustained by the drive to experiment, to experience all possible variations, to fully know everything around you. INDEPENDENT MINDED | |
| Extrovert | ENERGY | Introvert |
| Sensing | INFO | iNtuition |
| Thinking | DECISIONS | Feeling |
| Judging | TIME | Perceiving |
For more info on specific types, I really liked the descriptions on this site Plenty of good ones out there though, (others have free tests)
----------------------------------------------------
Consciousness arises from these two competing energies. They go by many names. Music theory calls it Repetition vs. Variation; literary critics - Society vs. Nature; Ayn Rand referred to it as Integration vs. Differentiation; also, stoicism vs. hedonism; conformity vs. independence; words vs. instinct.
Although market capitalism encourages people to follow their immediate self-interest, everyone's first experience with society comes from profoundly un-self-interested acts--the sharing of language. It is a lesson the child's mind is quite eager to learn. We want society's affirmation--we want to be seen as good by those who are important to us. We quickly learn that to share, there are rules we must learn and follow. We must learn certain words, and learn when to say them, and in what tone to speak. We must learn the standards of modesty, we must conform. But the other force, the biological energy within us, encourages experience rather than obedience. This drive tells us to seek out all possible variations, to know and experience a thing to its bottom. Animals too experiment. They will try an action again and again and again until they master it to an exceptional degree. To this, humans add language, rules and constraints. The strain of our biological drive to experiment against our social desire to share and fit in, is what creates our consciousness.
How do these energies play out in our lives? My theory is that left to ourselves, we are all non-conformist INFPs, but upon first feeling part of a group that we want to be a part of, all start out as ESTJs. The change from INFP to ESTJ is often (but not always) seen in children around the age 5-7, as kids go from being curious about everything and largely self-centered, to being strict enforcers of rules and focused more on pleasing others (friends or authorities).
Life in society then is a (not necessarily linear) journey starting from the conforming side of the conforming-independent spectrum, then learning to think for oneself (analogous to leaving Plato's cave and seeing the sunlight), and then possibly returning to society in an effort to implement a certain insight, (going back into the cave). In this interpretation then, there would be not 16, but potentially (3^4) 81 personality types. The INFP letters would all be the same, but each ESTJ letter could be either a "starting" E (or S or T or J) - meaning an extrovert who has not yet learned introspection - or a "returning" E (one who has).
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
No market for a playwright
If Shakespeare were an American, would he write music, using his words to cash in on albums and concerts? I would say he could be a better Woody Allen, but alas he was Catholic and not a Jew. Would he write for TV, could he make top writer for The Simpsons?
Or would he have been a modern Van Gogh, quietly writing plays while supported by a brother? It takes a culture to produce a Shakespeare, and America is a market instead.
Or would he have been a modern Van Gogh, quietly writing plays while supported by a brother? It takes a culture to produce a Shakespeare, and America is a market instead.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)