Essay Backlog #03 - What Are the Odds?

“Oh my dog did you see that!?! That falling piano just knocked over the umbrella stand causing it to bop me on the bonts! What were the odds of that happening!”
“Well I'd have to say... exactly 100%.”
“Spoil sport.”
“That's what your mum said last night.”
“What?”
“Never mind.”

Have you ever had anything very unlikely happen to you? You know how it goes; a bird manages to shit on exactly your head in an empty street, you get a fast-food meal with two toys inside, your friend (never you) finds fifty Euros just lying on the street et cetera. Stuff that's so unlikely to happen to anyone you just can't resist saying out loud: “what were the odds?” and be astonished at the apparent implausibility of the whole situation.

Well here's the thing with odds, with all statistics really, they always talk about the odds of something happening in a situation, to anyone, never to your situation, never to you. Statistics can tell you what the odds are that a bird will shit on anyone's head within twenty-five kilometers around your house, but never what the odds are that it'll happen to you (although there are narrative conventions that compel it to happen at the most inopportune moment, although when is there ever an opportune moment to be defecated upon by poultry but you get my meaning I trust) because statisticians work with samples of large groups of people and draw conclusions from their experiences which produce general results i.e. results that apply to anyone (general) rather than someone (particular). What this implies is that when something statistically unlikely happens to you, it does not mean the odds were only 3% (for example); no, the odds were exactly 100%. You know why? Because it happened. Because statistics do not talk about actuality (that which is the case), only about potentiality (that which can become the case) and only about anyones, not someones. They do not talk about the things that actually happen or will happen, instead they talk about what the odds are (based up readings of the past) that something will take place. It's perhaps confusing to just leave it at that so I'm going to try and drive the point home with a full example.

When you take part in a study of one thousand people and are all asked about being shat upon by any type of bird, the result of that study might conclude that of those tested there is a chance of 0,3% a day (for that group of people) per person that they will be crapped upon. So everyday about 3 people will statistically come into contact with being shat upon. Now, because the group of people is quite large, we will extrapolate it to happen in the entire area at about this ratio and the statisticians publish an article that reads: “bring your umbrellas this summer, according to a recent study there is a 0,3% chance of being shat upon by birds each day in this region”. Now we switch perspective, and we go from the general (anyone) to the specific (in this case, you). You go to the beach on a sunny day, you leave your umbrella (feeling lucky are we?) at home and as if you are the butt of some cosmic joke you are promptly pelleted by an ironic sea gull. What were the odds? 0,3%? No. 100%. The odds that it could happen to anyone were 0,3%, the odds of it happening to you was 100%, because that is what happened.

Well I hope that clears things up.

Cheers.

Essay Backlog #02 - Cosmic Justice and the Quest to Just Not Care Anymore

In an effort to make myself seem more objective by pointing out my own subjectivity (and then informing you about it) I'll write up front: I hate the idea of Karma. I think it is an insipid, sanctimonious hunk of bovine secretions only outdone by the sanctimony of its many New Age adherents and I hope it goes away soon and we can all forget about it.

So apparently “the universe” (rather than God or Santa Claus presumably) has a big list with all the names of you little boys and girls and in-betweens in it and in which he/she/it writes down when you've been naughty or nice, but not just in this life, oh no, it's a list of all the lives you've ever led (yes you have more than one, did you know that?) and it will punish you for all the naughty things you've done by making you live again but this time with Polio or cardiac arrhythmia and when you've been nice enough and learned your lessons you get to go to the big playground in the sky forever, and there's ice cream and cookies and chocolate for ever and ever and you never get cavities or a stomach ache or sugar-induced diabetes.

Yeah I'm not going to be making any friends with this one.

Let's start things off with the more universal problem: what is this claim based on? Just like with all claims regarding the unobservable, untestable and fairy tales in general it is tantamount we ask: “what in the blazes makes you think that?”. I mean, really? Something is keeping track of your spiritual development? Who? Why? You have more than one life? How? There is a sort of “God-less” Heaven where you go when you've ascended your lowly, sinning ways? Where? And most importantly: what credible basis do you have to assume all this? And if you're the type of person that just assumes it “as if” it were true to have some sort of guideline; who is deciding what's right or wrong? You? Some guide. And no; Karma only makes sense when you also accept the business of souls, reincarnation and Nirvana, you can't cherry pick only the “you'll get yours someday, that's your Karma” bit, which is disturbing enough by itself in any case. Moving on.

The thing that really gets my goat is the reason this whole idea is becoming popular in the first place, and let me tell you the motivations are not flattering. I realize full well that there are variants of this principle that can do some good (as a sort of “what goes around comes around” thingamajig) and –while still irrational and lacking foundation in reality-- those I do not have as big a personal problem with. However: Karma is gaining traction now because large amounts of people in Western cultures are looking for ways to justify their lack of empathy and social engagement.

As a result of the revolution of the Self of the last century, where personal development and happiness became the central principle to guide one's action (which was fostered and cultivated by corporations as a way to sell more products using the techniques of Freud and psycho-analysis), people are looking “within” for their salvation, and Karma offers the perfect ideology to support that preoccupation. Allow me to explain.

You're uncomfortable about your relative social and financial comfort in a time of mass poverty and warfare? No worries! You've deserved it! Your suffering in past lives and the actions you took to rise above it have brought you this far. Rest easy. You're uncomfortable about the troubles of your friends but don't really want to help them? No worries! They obviously still have some lessons to learn in this life and it would be best for them if you just left them to their own devices to rise above their tarnished spirit. You're in trouble? No worries! That's all part of the plan remember? Don't try to battle the injustices, you obviously still have some lessons to learn and it's best you let it sink in as much as possible (and develop your spirit) instead of solving it --and even potentially ruining the lessons of others--. Wait, you do want to help out? No problem! In fact if you do so it will help you personally in this life or another; you don't have to worry that you might not get anything back, Go..I mean “the universe” remembers your virtue and will pay you back eventually!

Basically, you can morally justify any situation with minimal effort. If you can't be bothered to let other people's problems get in the way of your lifestyle, bam, perfect justification. Corruption and greed in your economic and political system? Oh well, they'll be punished eventually but I'm watching TV right and my toe kind of hurts so I obviously can't go out and do anything about it –and ruin all those lessons the poor and downtrodden obviously still need to learn in the process--I hope they'll become as enlightened as I am someday, bless their little souls.

Fuck that.

Cheers.

PS: And yes I do judge a belief by its followers.

Essay Backlog #01 - The Benefits of Monotasking

Thursday 16th of June 2011

I am so tired of hearing about multitasking. When I wrote the title of this piece even this damn word program dared to chide me, claiming there is no such things as monotasking (“silly mortal” it implied silently). Well I have since added it to the internal dictionary and am poised to take the world by storm with this revolutionary old concept.

I really don't get why people get so thrilled by the idea of doing things side-by-side, at the same time, I really don't. While I understand the appeal of variation and efficiency, multitasking just doesn't grab me and I've figured out some of the reasons why. But first, let me explain this otherworldly alternative I am proposing.

The essence of monotasking is doing things one after the other, which is not as straightforward as I make it read (normally I'd say “sound” but that would be silly here).
Technically monotasking is the default way of performing tasks, so any tasks that are not multitasked are automatically monotasked. Or so one would think... Ordinary “tasking” actually does not specify the mode or manner in which the task(s) is/are performed, so it could be either multi- or mono- depending on situation and preference. Specific monotasking is far more focused than that. When one monotasks there is an explicit intent to do only a single (conscious, hardihar, smart Aleck) thing at a time.

This means no quick-check on Facebook, no staring out the window for “just a second”, this means no smoking or coffee break, no planning dinner while walking the dog. None of that. It is said that it is exceedingly hard for people to look at a flame for over fifteen seconds because our fuzzy brains get distracted and can't hold focus much longer than that. And monotasking is the art that challenges us right there in this handicap; it forces us to truly pay attention to what we are doing.

To modern (wo)man all this might sound cumbersome and restrictive, perhaps even boring, but wait, here is the revelation that you've been waiting for! Monotasking reveals the extraordinary worlds behind ordinary things; the wonder in the mundane, and the tranquility in life's chaos. Doing things with attention --with focus-- slows you down, enables you to enjoy the ordinary and to feel at one with yourself where normally you would be torn on all sides.

Try it now, monotasking has been shown to reduce instances of insomnia, depression, cancer, chronic flatulence and so much more. It truly is the path to a new, unified you.

Attempts at humor aside, try doing one thing at a time; not only is it harder than you think, but it's even more rewarding than that when you manage to figure out the how.

Cheers.

Essay Backlog #00 - Prologue

Over the years--and especially during a specific period in Italy--I've written a bunch of essays that just sit on my Drive gathering dust. I think that's a shame so I've decided to simply copy-paste the ones I like the best so they'll be available to the interested reader. The topics of these essays vary widely, but I've decided to put even the more political ones here rather than on redrevolutionarywriting because they represent flashes of inspiration rather than well thought-out dissertations. Enjoy.