I just finished Malcolm Gladwell's book, "Blink,"
Tag-lined "Learning to think without thinking."
I have to say, this was a necessary read.
Often i can get bogged down with the details.
With every aspect of analysis.
Tirelessly debating the pros and cons.
Example:
A few weeks back, I went to Target with the intentions
And the cash to buy a TV.
With Sonja by my side,
And a movie picked out for the new screen,
I managed to talk myself out of buying the TV
And into buying a pizza.
Gladwell's book is not so much about not thinking.
But more or less about training your gut instinct.
He provides an example in the first pages of the book:
A museum was presented with a rare statue.
Pre-Roman Empire, unknown artist, beautifully made type of rock.
The museum was skeptical.
There were less than 20 of these statues remaining.
And none in this condition.
But the museum was curious. And they needed a show-piece.
So, because of the rarity of the statue, the museum had every aspect inspected,
Every dimension analyzed,
Every detail looked over.
It was compared to other works.
Its history was learned
Its insides were tested.
The geologists, historians, and scientists agreed.
Everything checked out.
The museum bought the piece.
They then took the piece to the art experts to show off their purchase.
All the experts hated it.
They said, "Something is not right."
"I hope you didn't buy it."
Turns out, the statue was a replica.
Because the museum ignored their suspicion,
Because the museum wanted this statue to be true.
Because the museum needed a show-piece so badly,
It wasted millions of dollars on a fake.
Blink is that moment in time where subconsciously we make up our mind.
That instant where snap judgments are made, where emotions exist, where thinking is natural.
The moment when we know that "something is not right."
Or the moment when we know "That something is special."
That moment is quick.
It happens in a "Blink."
And all our past experiences,
All our current conditions,
All our knowledge and emotion go into that moment.
And it all combines to create a notion of instinct.
But we can choose to ignore our instincts.
We can want something so badly
That our feeling for the situation,
Our ethos about the experience,
Fades into the night like lightning in a distant storm.
We can train our instincts.
We can study art endlessly.
We can know history.
We can even know the rock.
But when our instinct screams, "no"
And our heart screams louder, "yes,"
Can our instinct persevere?
Gladwell hints at this throughout the book,
But stays focused on the idea of the snap decision,
Blink of an eye moment.
However, I'm much more curious as to how
And when we decide to relax in that moment.
To trust our gut. To follow our suspicion. To go with instinct.
Because wisdom not only lies in instinct, but also in timing.
My break from Time Magazine has lead me to not only read 1 book, but 2 books.
The second book i picked up was:
"A Million Miles in a Thousand Years" by Donald Miller.
I have to confess, I'm a Donald Miller fan.
I read three other books by the author.
And i enjoyed each of them, none more than "Through Painted Deserts."
Anyway, I enjoy Donald Miller because his diction is very verbal.
It sounds like a conversation.
It doesn't sound like a book,
It sounds like a recorded discussion.
And so I was excited for this read.
And it did not disappoint.
"A Million Miles in a Thousand Years" is a book,
About story and a movie.
But mainly story.
It's about how we are all living a story.
And our stories have meaning.
And how those stories also give meaning.
With a hint of post-modern thinking,
Miller describes life as a series of stories that make up something bigger.
A corporate story. A Story if you will. The Human Story
And these smaller experiences give meaning to the larger Story.
The trick is to live a life with stories worth telling.
Experiences that deserve to become memories.
Not just to stockpile memories like water in anticipation of Y2K,
But to prove at the end that you lived.
To show that you managed your life as well as your money.
To provide value to your breaths.
But Miller takes it farther than an encouragement to do something.
He reminds us that we need to do something that is something bigger.
Life isn't about our story. It is about our Story.
And how your experience fits into it.
Because life is not lived independently, but intertwined.
So live your life with people.
Make memories with others.
Incorporate in the something bigger, corporate, Human Story.
And in the End, that Story will surely be memorable.
I am a subscriber to Time Magazine.
I like reading Time because I feel connected to the world.
But I have found that after reading the weekly edition,
I have no time to read anything else.
So, I decided to take a break from it.
But I didn't want to take a break from reading.
So, I picked up a book my sister got me for Christmas:
"The Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell.
Explaining how small things make big differences,
Gladwell defines the point in which trends become more,
Epidemics that seem to immerse culture.
These epidemics are supported by three types of people,
Along with other variables: Salesmen, Mavens, and Connectors.
Mavens know everything,
Salesmen convince everyone,
And Connectors tell everyone.
This book simply sheds light on important truths,
Truths that are rarely discussed outside of marketing meetings.
It explains that the news station you watch may affect how you vote,
That the neighborhood you live in affects what you wear,
That the smallest details in life actually have large affects in behavior.
And so I wonder: What small thing has shaped my behavior?
Or even what small thing has not shaped my behavior?
The most memorable proof presented in the book
Deals with New York's 90's Subway Culture.
Crime was rampant, graffiti covered cars, and people rarely paid.
If you haven't noticed, those conditions have significantly improved.
But it wasn't an increased presence in Law Enforcement.
It wasn't that all of New York decided at once to clean up the underground.
Instead, the New York Transit Authority made it a priority to clean graffiti.
Graffiti was the key to lowering crime rate, increasing subway revenue, and a cleaner underground.
Cleanly painted cars signaled that New York cared about public transportation.
Small things make a significant difference.
New York still has graffiti.
We all do.
But before each train leaves,
It is inspected, cleaned, and painted as necessary.
New York identified the "Tipping Point" that changed New York Transit for the foreseeable future.
I can only hope I can identify that point in my life.
I really love Netflix.
It provides entertainment instantly,
Deferring a generation's lesson on delayed gratification
To power outages and money shortages.
But, as much as i love Netflix,
I have to rant about one thing:
I had Dexter Season 3 Disc 2 in my queue
From the beginning of January until the end of April.
I was soooooooo frustrated.
Every time i returned a movie,
I would cross my fingers and hope
That the next disc that would arrive in my physical mailbox
Would be Disc 2 of Season 3 of Dexter.
And when that day came, i celebrated.
Then, i watched the disc and sent it back.
And my frustration subsided.
So, Netflix, you have taught me something:
Delayed Gratification is overrated.
Send me the next disc of Dexter TOMORROW.
PS, sorry for the shallowness of this post.
TIME to read.
I have been reading "Where I Lived and What i Lived For" by Henry David Thoreau.
While reading Thoreau, all i want to do is move into the woods,
Chop down some trees and build my own house,
Not buying the land or getting permits or filing any papers.
Why?
Simplicity.
And Escape.
Christmas is fast approaching,
And with it comes the fashionable fads,
New programs, diets, desires, and beliefs,
Expectations, inventions, gifts, and clutter.
And distractions.
As a Christian, it is necessary to identify the intentions of Christmas.
But, it is just as necessary to notice the reality of it.
And here is where i like what Thoreau, and others of the Transcendental movement say about
Truth, reality, and our place among the two.
In an essay, Ralph Waldo Emerson writes:
"So shall we come to look at the world with new eyes. It shall answer the endless inquiry of the intellect, — What is truth? and of the affections, — What is good? by yielding itself passive to the educated Will. ... Build, therefore, your own world. As fast as you conform your life to the pure idea in your mind, that will unfold its great proportions. A correspondent revolution in things will attend the influx of the spirit."
The desert of life proves an eternal thirst for its inhabitants.
And so we drink the next remedy for our dry pallet.
Whether poison or pleasing, our tongue turns to sand.
Emerson (and others) thus suggest that we look at truths and reality as an overarching theme
And stand firm in our convictions. A sort of pseudo post-modernism.
But instead of finding truth in experience,
One finds it in thought.
However, i recognize the dangers:
How can there be truth in what we think?
How can one reality "transcend" all personal thought?
How can idealism be attached firmly in the natural realm?
But i am struck by this question:
Do these dangers outweigh the imminent threat poised by an acceptance of the newest experience, trend, or affection?
As Americans, we are told to buy, spend, consume, or else fall behind.
But, the simplicity of a consistent culture is a new temptation.
The simplicity of things being and not changing.
And so, when i read about Thoreau and his wooded escape in Massachusetts, i envy his experience
Because he is free from the bondage of culture.
He has escaped the slavery of consumerism, materialism, and the next "best thing."
The burden of "brand new" removed,
His escape to nature proved to produce
not only great literature, but great thinking as well.
"The people always will what is good, but by themselves they do not always discern it.
The general will is always rightful, but the judgment which guides it is not always enlightened.
It must be brought to see things as they are,and sometimes as they should be seen;
It must be shown the good path which it is seeking, and secured against seduction by the desires of the individuals;
it must be given a sense of situation and season,
so as to weigh immediate and tangible advantages against distant and hidden evils.
Individuals see the good and reject it; the public desires the good but does not see it.
Both equally need guidance.
Individuals must be obliged to subordinate their will to their reason;
the public must be taught to recognize what it desires."
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract
I believe the church has always and will continue to exist as a monarchy.
Yet aren't Rousseau's words against the French Monarchy an accurate portrayal of life in the church?
"Individuals see the good and reject it."
This is humanity's theme.
Paul's outcry.
Identification with morality without obedience to it.
And so we combine our efforts to fulfill the good (Israel, the church, etc.).
And we desire morality.
"The public desires the good but does not see it."
This is the church's identity.
The anthem of western religion.The church without vision.
Stagnation.
And we are trapped in an enigma:
A morality with no people fails.
A people with no direction fails morality.
And morality with direction is disputed.
America.
The Exorcist is a demonic thriller that transformed the anti-supernatural presupposition from doubter to believer.
Chronicling the possession of a young girl named Reagen, The Exorcist shines light on what is hidden in the Catholic and Protestant Closet-- the supernatural. Since the introduction of psychiatric diseases and somatic disorders, the supernatural has been explained away through personality defects. However, The Exorcist revives the inkling of the supernatural by sharing a story of elements unexplainable to the psychological realm but rather the spiritual. In a despiritualized culture, The Exorcist made a box office splash by presenting ideas that are absent outside the third world. The Exorcist captures the curiosity of culture by utilizing a storyline unfamiliar to the common citizen.
As i finished this movie, i wondered why a world detached from the supernatural world watched The Exorcist, a movie about the very thing culture has tried to corrupt. And then it struck me, the world loves the demonic because it explains circumstances. If evil exists, then actions are excused. If the demonic is real, then destruction is justified. We want the excuse without the consequences. We want the bad without the good. And so, we watch The Exorcist and think of its possibility but hear about the church and think of its absurdity. The Exorcist ironically helps us sleep at night when the reflection of the day's actions awaken us. It seems that culture is so concerned with qualifying its content that it misses its reality, that if the supernatural exists, then the church exists.
Good Will Hunting is the feel good saga about the Southy, Will Hunting, who's math abilities have been overlooked due to his custodial duties. Introduced as a janitor and revealed as a genius, Will Hunting seeks to fulfill his potential as defined by himself in this tale of a maturing life in logic and love. The story unfolds as Will Hunting is released from jail under the supervision of a Professor and a Psychiatrist. As the relationships unfold between the math savant and his respective colleagues, Will Hunting begins to discover that love trumps achievement. Despite pressure to perform mathematical functions that are simply solved by him, Hunting is intrigued by what he cannot figure out- a woman.
Good Will Hunting brilliantly distinguishes the difference between empirical knowledge and experiential knowledge, emphasizing the depth of first person experiences compared to the cheapened explanations read from the perspectives of others. Throughout the movie, the Psychiatrist explains to Will that he cannot truly know what he has not witnessed. I have to agree with the power behind participation compared to observation. Although one can obtain knowledge of art by reading or viewing photographs, the essence of the experience is eradicated if one is not present to gaze upon the beauty found in every stroke of the brush. One can read a Shakespearean Sonnet and learn about love, but this pales in comparison to the experiential knowledge of a sacrificial relationship.
Good Will Hunting explains in a tangible way what culture sometimes misses.
The experience itself is worth more than the knowledge gleaned.
The journey is more important than the desitnation.
The means justify the ends.
Experience determines reality.
Experience provides knowledge
Experience is teaches truth.
Experience is everything.
Recently i flew to Arizona (Phoenix) to visit some friends (in Chandler) with a good friend (Dakota).
As we ascended into the evening sky from the miniature airport in Springfield,
i found myself unable to do anything but read.
And so i did.
Every once in a while my eyes would dry from the blowing recycled air
and i would straighten out of my emergency row slouch to look about the plane.
There i found a man snoring, a man nervously fidgeting with his phone, and another man reading.
I must be honest, i judge people by what they do on airplanes.
The activity they chose when there is nothing else to do can really tell you a lot about a person.
But mostly, i judge people by the books they read on airplanes.
For example, there was a lady that sat next to me in the emergency exit row.
She was reading what appeared to be some woman oriented love novel with 400 pages and large print.
Here's my judgment:
She is married, but lonely (thus the novel she was traveling with and not the man).
Reading boosts her self esteem, but she does it rarely (large book with large print).
She was embarking on a 3 day work trip in which she will spend an equal amount of time at the bar as she will in her hotel room, yearning for conversation. Yet when that conversation arrives, she will drive it away with her constant chatter about anything and everything that has been building up for the hours she spent reading in silence on the plane.
I judge people by what they read.
What does your book say about you?
I think Toms are cool.
And i want to be cool.
So, I have looked at buying a pair of Toms.
Here is the issue:
I go to the Toms website,
I click the pair that i want (the same pair every time),
I pick size 12,
I proceed to checkout,
I enter my billing information,
I enter my shipping information,
I proceed to the final stage.
And then, I check my Facebook.
I just can't bring myself to buy them.
Yeah, its cool and responsible to support little kids in Africa by sending them a pair of shoes while you buy yours.
But, i think it's more responsible to not buy into American consumerism, explaining it away with a "good deed" excuse.
Don't get me wrong, Toms are great. But, Consumerism is not.
And the majority of the people who buy Toms, buy them as an excess pair of shoes.
So here's what the picture looks like:
American gets pair of shoes #10 and African Orphan gets pair of shoes #1
So, while everyone else is being stylish with their Toms and feeling good about themselves for helping orphans in Africa by buying new shoes, i feel good about myself because i wear shoes that i have had for 2 years because i don't need new shoes.
Here's an idea: If you want African Orphans to get a pair of shoes, but don't want to engage in American Consumerism, then you need to click this link. It will direct you to the contact page for TOMS Shoes. Send them an email asking them to add a donation section to their website. Mention my name and give your location so that they recognize our united efforts.
TOMS Shoes are good, but they could be better.
The Chicago Cubs will never win the World Series again. Ever. Ever. For eternity.
First, let me preface this comment by noting that i am a Chicago Cubs fan (to say the least).
And let me qualify the statement with the notion that i would be ecstatic if the Cubs do in fact win the World Series again.
(But they wont).
And finally let me contextualize with the fact that i haven't even given up on the Cubs this season.
So, why won't the Cubs ever win in the post season?
Let's start with baseball reasons:
1. Bad contracts to old, under-producing hitters (i.e. Soriano and Fukudome). Bad contracts not only keep players around for a stupid amount of time, but it also hampers the team from grabbing quality bullpen arms that have already cost the Cubs 6 games this year.
2. Old Facilities. Don't get me wrong, the atmosphere around Wrigley is indispensable, however, we must face the facts that the facilities as Wrigley are near the bottom in the majors.
3. A depleted farm system (although it is on the rise) from years of poor trades, mainly with the Marlins, Orioles, and Red Sox. And the Cubs always get the worst end of trades.
4. An under-critical fan base. The Cubs haven't won the World Series in 103 years. But their fan base has only grown every year. Why? Because the Cubs are the "Lovable Losers." The fans don't expect a World Series banner, they just expect a sunny day in the bleachers with a beer and a ballgame.
5. They are in the same division as Albert Pujols. No, not the Cardinals, but Albert Pujols.
Which transitions me into the philosophical reasons why the Cubs will never win the World Series again.
1. The familiar is comfortable. Because we live in a culture of comfort, the Cubs would only annoy people if they won the World Series because people are so used to them losing. For example in 2003, changing the familiar was too uncomfortable for Steve Bartman and Alex Gonzalez, so they combined to ruin the best chance the cubs have had since 1945.
2. There has to be a loser. Not everyone can win. So, the Cubs have volunteered to be that loser every year for all of eternity.
3. Americans live in routine. And so do the Cubs. Every year, Cubs fans expect the club to win around 85 games, and be competitive till September. And if this changed, so would every American's foundational understanding of the way the world works.
4. Curses are real. And so are goats.
5. The Cubs represent the helplessness of the American Dream. Every person dreams of being the one to rise to the top (i.e. the Tampa Bay Rays of life); however, they associate in reality with the Cubs, recognizing that all they can actually do is dream and hope for a few more good days than bad days.
I'm not talking about sinners being Lost.
I'm talking about pop culture.
I am addicted (which is a common result).
So, to couple my addiction, here is my ignorant (i am only on Season 2) understanding of the Emmy award winning drama.
Overarching Theme: Negative life circumstances shed light on hope.
Example: every character on the show.
Before getting to the Island (an isolated state which could also represent the emotional feeling coinciding with the negative life circumstance) every character experiences a life altering situation (ie. winning the Lottery, giving up a son for adoption, becoming pregnant, being arrested, killing a guy, family death, new job, addiction, etc.). After enduring said life circumstance, each character engages in a feeling of despair. Thus, the passengers of flight 815 find they have crash landed on an island where they have emotionally lived for some time. Despite the difficulty of the island, each character engages in some sort of Dharma, seeking to find hope beyond their blinding depression. While on the island, each character faces a testing situation, encouraged by the sage-like character John Locke (John Locke is famous for establishing the identity of the self and consciousness). Although characters try to escape the island, they are simply redirected back to the island in order to find their identity. Once each character finds his/her personal identity, they are depicted by hope.
Theory for Future Episodes: Characters who develop after experiencing a negative or challenging circumstance on the island will get off the island (either by dying, disappearing, or escaping).
This is the mild version of my theories. I also have thoughts about the numbers (4 8 15 16 23 42) and I'm developing a theory about character names (Locke, Rousseau, Shepherd, etc.)
Anyway, don't ruin lost for me. If you do, you will end up like Goodwin.
I went to NYC. In February. It was not warm. In fact, it was very cold.
And i was there for a school seminar, so we didn't do much tourism.
But we did do one thing that everyone alive should do:
Go to MoMA(Museum of Modern Art).
When this was posed as a possible place to visit, i was less than excited (out of ignorance).
Who goes to New York to see a museum?
But this museum was unlike any other museum.From the Architecture of the building with high ceilings and strategically placed cut out windows to the yogurt lids nailed on the wall, to the paintings, photographs, statues, and films, the entire experience was an expose´ of modern "art."
An exhibit of everything about life.
Art intrigues me. I want to be artsy, however:
I cannot do it, and half the time i do not understand it. (why is a red line down a white canvas a breakthrough in art?)
But here's what i can do: appreciate it.
And so, this post is simply an "art appreciation" post.Check out the pictures and bask in the brush strokes of life on the canvas.
This was one of my favorites
I could have stared at this for an hour.
Monet's Water Lillies. Ridiculous.
Picaso. He is weird.
Salvador Dali
Frida Kahlo
There was much more that i really enjoyed: Pollock, Chagall, Frank Lloyd Wright, and others.
The 3 hours we spent there were not enough.
I would have loved an entire day to just stand in awe at a social representation of life through material form.
