Money isn't everything...but I sure as hell love it. Don't you?

Yeah..we know this very well don't we, that 'money isn't every thing'? The phrase sickens me. Why pray tell, you must be thinking.

Let me try a few substitutions for the word 'money' in there:

1. 'Air' isn't everything
2. 'Sex' isn't everything
3. 'Banana' isn't everything
4. 'Food' isn't everything
5. 'A house' isn't everything.

Well yes, I hope you get the point? You don't? Let me spell it out. 'No one thing' or 'Class of things' is every thing!! Got it? Sorry I can't help any more. Leave it here if you can't grasp it. Don't read on if you can't get the point.

For those who can see where I'm coming from, I am absolutely amazed by the stupidity of the statement 'Money isn't everything'. Logically it is a nonsensical statement.

Ooooh but now we're meant to interpret things in figurative way at times. So let me have a go at it. In broad brush the statement could mean that money isn't meant to be the highest priority in life. First of all I could agree with that for people who do not live in social democracies and capitalist based systems. And certainly at the centre of the Sahara or Arctic Tundra, money is unlikely to be the highest priority.

But what if you live in a capitalist system. I observe how people operate. In large part they go to work to get paid. Paid what? Money - I suppose. Their lives revolve around money - earning it, saving it, investing it, buying food, houses and cars with it etc etc. And yet ...yet..these are the same people who go 'Money isn't everything' - when in reality money is such a high priority. In fact it probably is the highest priority, because without enough of it, they can't enjoy those lovely holidays and quality family times they brag on about as being of higher priority (than money).

Oh no...but we can't appear to be driven by money! Nooooh...money is a bad thing isn't it. And we can't be seen to be materialistic. We're better people than that. We can't love money....we must instead...love nature...wild-life, planet earth, the environment and the poor suffering people of this earth. Now we're in the right crowd. But money? Ooooh noooooooh...loving that means you're a selfish, self-obsessed git. Yuh know - one of those Scrooge types.

Well, I'll tell you what I think. People - including those who may think they are my buddies - are guilty of hypocrisy for going "Urrhhhh...murhney isn't everything". We love to delude ourselves and to live up to false images. False images? Yes. The one where you really love the money, it is almost everything, but you declare that you're really not like the money grabbing riff-raff - because you want to improve your public image or even fool yourself about your own image.

Money is a very powerful marker of success and it allows us to enjoy life with a greater degree of freedom. People who go 'Money isn't everything' are usually the ones who most need it - and they will continue invariably to be enslaved by it (consciously or unconsciously). And yes money can lead to destruction. How we use the 'knife' is up to us - to carve a beautiful object, prepare a meal, carry out surgery, or to inflict harm to self or others.

I love money. "Money!" Say it. Say it. Next time you go to take photos of someone or a crowd, instead of telling them to say 'CHEESE', ask them to shout "MONEY! MONEY! MONEY". It's guaranteed to bring out bigger brighter smiles or even laughter! Try it!

Wrongly accused

Amazingly (about 20:00 2008-09-07), I'm contacted by email, by a colleague I had not seen or heard from for 28 years. In the first two emails. I'm told that I've abused some child in some forum, by cussing the child. Naturally when you get this kind of thing you think to yourself "What the heck!"

Eventually I track down the link to a forum. I read it carefully looking for where I've abused anyone by cussing them. No I can't see it - or else I'm blind.

The forum is about me confronting some idiot on a nonsensical attempt to pin blame on me for something. I put the idiot right in stern but factual language, backed up by evidence and reasoning. I'll remind any reader now that in my profile I've stated that I enjoy punishing idiots. I really do. It's just my thing - and I really don't care (me being ignorant perhaps) of who thinks anything bad about that. Look, I'm not talking about people who don't know something. I'm talking about utter idiots. People who are on the brink of wilful stupidity. No I'm not taking about the dyslexic or the mentally retarded. And I'm not talking about people who are children!

When you punish idiots, especially in a pubic space, you run the risk of at least two things:

1. Someone else coming along, doing a quick read and forming a conclusion that you've been harsh or abusive.
   1. The result could be that you muddy your own name.
   2. you do not attract many friends/ acquaintances.
2. That people will be scared shitless about what they say to you, for fear of being considered an idiot and being so punished.
   1. People avoid you - is the effect.

You know I'm cool with all of this. I'm in no popularity or unpopularity contest. I just want to be me. Being me gives me great satisfaction. Punishing fools is not an illegal act. The most I might 'suffer' is a greater degree of social isolation - which is hardly any suffering. I'm at peace with myself which is of far greater importance than the avoidance of social isolation.

Idiocy

There are times of course when I cannot punish idiots. On occasion an idiot may punish himself - and not even know it. It's not as good as actually dishing out the punishment, but sometimes you settle for second best.

Case in question? Sure. Person calls a mobile phone from overseas weekly for about 5 min and runs up their bill, disregarding the alternative of calling a landline number at the same timeslot. The cost to call the mobile is about 5 times that of calling the landline.

Now someone must be thinking, why not give them the landline number. Oh yes - they have both numbers but opt for the mobile for no obvious reason. Now you might be thinking there is some advantage for them to calling the mobile that I'm not seeing. No. No such advantage.

Now you might be thinking that the person doesn't know that calling a mobile in that country is far more expensive than to a landline. No. That one has been ruled out as well.

Conclusion supported: Human stupidity is based on - just that - the absence of a logic, or the absence of an intelligence acting on a logic.

Answering off the point..

It is an amazing phenomenon that makes me wonder how the human race has survived this long - yeah 'answering off the point'. WTF does that mean?

It means like when you ask somebody a simple question you get an answer that does not address your enquiry. Or you ask a question of someone and you get all manner of information that was not relevant to the question - as if the other is trying to second guess where you might be heading, and head you off.

So here is an example:

Me: So, when was it you came to realise that that was the case?

Other: My mother died. Then we had to go up north. It was complicated because she was suffering with cancer. The whole family was distraught.

Me thinking: What the bloody hell did I ask you? It's a flipping easy question 'when' like in bloody when. Why the heck do I want to know about your mother? Do I know when she died FFS!?

Me [being stiltedly polite]: I'm sorry if I interrupt you, I didn't quite get when it was you came to realise that that was the case?

Other: Oh it was after the explosion in Ealing Station.

Me thinking: FFS - How am I know to when there was an explosion in Ealing station? Am I supposed to ask, 'Give me the date and time when you came to realise that that was the case!"

Look, I'm sorry if anyone disagree's with me but the simple and rather clear answer to the question could have been something like, "It's difficult to recall exactly...it was summer of 1997...probably around June...yes it was most likely to be because the days were very long..that's when I came to realise it was the case."

Now that is a more on target answer, because it gives me a reasonable timeframe in response to the question. For God's sakes, this is English..we are human beings...we're supposed to be sentient..this is the 21st Century - else I'm an entity from another timeline!

Of Rivers and Wild stallions

The unconscious has been explored by Freud and many other psychoanalysts. What this 'thing' is, is largely unknown - simply because we cannot hold down the unconscious and look at it. After all it is that which is beyond conscious scrutiny. Yes there are loads of theories on the goings on in the unconscious but there are no hard facts. This is simply because the unconscious is not readily open to empirical scrutiny. (I'm not talking about 'the subconscious' - and I'll not explain that further.)

But the unconscious is observable by others when it is not at all visible to the individual's own scrutiny. This is a fact stemming from the reality that we often are unable to see ourselves as others do.

I often see people reacting or not reacting to something said or done. It is the consistency of the reaction or lack of it that says something. So the unconscious can be touched - likened to putting a long stick into a pond  - the bottom of the river cannot be seen but it can be felt. Just as the stick transmits the resistance from the floor of the river to the one holding the stick, that is how the unconscious can be touched.

So too with the mind, it is the resistance to new ideas, new thinking, changes in general that tells of the unconscious. Of course, this is not to say that people do not consciously resist certain things. However, when resistance to change is seen for no logical reason or no discernable reason, that is your base of the river. The floor of the river determines to some degree the flow of water at the top.

What people say they will do often does not match what they actually do - we all know that. But I often ask myself "Why say you'd do something - commit to it - and then not do what is required?" Laziness? Sure - but that's too easy an explanation. What is more important is what produces the so-called 'laziness' - and the contour of the river's floor might determine the resistance to flow on the surface.

The unconscious is also like a wild stallion - difficult to tame. The stallion is easily spooked by events, instinctual drives, raw emotions - it knows little about logic and is not good at reasoning. Our conscious existence - meaning our self-aware worldly existence - is the product of a 6 mm skin of brain - which is far more highly developed than in so-called lower animals. Keep in mind that before we became conscious, our remote ancestors got by on 'the unconscious'. So the unconscious has become skilled at survival, and the things that challenge survival over thousands and thousands of years.

But hold on, it is a new world - a very fast world, with much larger and complex issues to manage. The unconscious often fails us in this new world. It's not geared up to crunching numbers, balancing complex values and other abstract ideas. The wild stallion was good for getting us from A to B, but in today's world it struggles to cope with the demands we might place on it. It is burdened to get to Z via umpteen other subroutes or combinations of routes.

And now we are caught in a world where logic and reason is meant to prevail, but we're all left riding wild stallions that are lost, scared and hard to control. How will humanity survive this amazing and mounting tension? I'm thinking about it - but I sense danger ahead for the human race. 

I am Superman

Not often am I inspired by goodness in the human condition. Saturday 20th September 2008 was different. I bought the book "The Book of Lies" by Brad Meltzer and came across the site: Book of Lies Soundtrack.

Then I came across http://www.ordinarypeoplechangetheworld.com/ which then took be to songs by 'Five for Fighting'. And then I got the song 'Superman' - and lyrics here:http://www.lyrics007.com/Five%20For%20Fighting%20Lyrics/Superman%20Lyrics.html

Today:

I'm only a man in a silly red sheet
Digging for kryptonite on this one way street
Only a man in a funny red sheet
Looking for special things inside of me
Inside of me
Inside me
Yeah, inside me
Inside of me
I'm only a man
In a funny red sheet
I'm only a man
Looking for a dream

I'm inspired by the human condition or a small portion of it - my misanthropy put on hold.

Today and hopefully for the foreseeable future I am delighted to be counted as one of the nerds who say 'I am Superman'!!

Grief

Friend o' mine called up yesterday and asked me something about 'how you manage or deal with grief'. Yeah grief.

Well, it's one of those things you have to laugh about - and we did - in retrospect. I had an initial thought, but did not say much as he explained.

This is the funny part. When he first asked me - and I told him this later - my first thought was, "I just give um grief back!"

I gotta laugh at myself really. Well of course I also understood that he meant 'loss of a loved one'. But you know in life you don't actually tell people what crossed your mind - it could be embarrassing.

For those who don't know, 'grief' in England is used to convey things like stress, aggravation, hostility or bother - alongside its more usual meaning. I didn't know that when I first came to England.

Praa...praa..praa....praaahh

Man, I just got off the phone to some mega-idiot! Trust me there is such a thing. I really wonder why I go on the phone at all to utility companies.

Every bloody time I call one of these call-queuing things, my blood pressure goes up!

Yesterday I wasted bloody 52 minutes of my time. Today 22 mins.

Invariably this is what happens:

1. I'm in England but I get put through via crackly telephone line to somebody sounding like they're in India. How do I know that? Because I bloody well know what an Indian accent is, and it leads me to imagine I'm speaking to someone in India. Look I don't care if they're really in Tristan da Cunha - okay.
2. Next they speak in this bloody polite tone that is stilted and frankly annoying.
3. They usually don't understand anything I say - although they speak well articulated English. So then I have to repeat myself.
4. Then they speed up in rate of speech, because now they sense they don't know what the hell is going on.
5. And now comes the pain, this Indian or whatever accent, becomes more accentuated with the rapid speech and begins to cut me across in mid-sentence. Like wait to bloody hell until I finished what I'm trying to explain!! Christ man!
6. So then I tell them in stern words to STFU (well not like that) - basically I cut back across them and say, "Hang-on a second - I'm in mid-sentence here when you cut me up - that's very rude. You couldn't possibly know what I was going to say next."
7. Then they shut up for a bit. Listen up but continue to get nuance of meaning wrong.
8. Oh I forgot to say that all the above might happen up to three times while I'm passed from department to department, one not knowing what the heck the other is doing.

So - at the end of these calls I'm shattered. Why do I endure it? Well I'm seeking a better deal for myself. On one occasion I thought I might save myself £36 per year.

If you know what I'm going to say like why should I speak at all. Look this thing seems to happen mainly with people sounding like they're from India. I ain't got nothing against people from India, but heck man - just learn the language, learn to listen and have some manners, for God sakes. Oh I know what, I'm supposed to feel sorry for these people and blame their employers. Well I do blame their employers, but I'm sorry the 'messenger' or frontline staff will get shot when you cross me.

But now I'm thinking, "Heck  - the real financial cost to my health is probably gonna exceed what I save in money on bills! Is it worth it?" And hold on a second, what about how I value my time on the phone. What's the cost of that? So between yesterday and today I've spent over an hour on the phone getting nowhere and probably damaging my health. So I'm no better of financially for the call, and my health is probably affected if I do this too often. Is that a good deal? I don't think so.

Conclusion - let them take the money! It's always about money - isn't it. Your money or your life! Who the heck cares.

What's the measure of friendship?

It's an question that's been on my mind for quite some time. People go "I have many friends...or I only keep a few close friends". Of course, defining what a friend is, is central to the question. However, friendship is the core issue and someone who maintains a real friendship is by definition a true friend.

The discerning may ask, "Well is there such a thing as an 'unreal' friendship?" Sure. That's where someone claims to keep a friendship or simulates it very very well. There are some people who take a big interest in what you say and what you do. However, you come to a nagging awareness at a gut level that that interest is an investment for their future possible needs.

Well, yes friendship is different things to different people - and yes 'it depends', those famous words often uttered by idiots who like to live on the fence.

Oh and I should declare a bias, that I hope does not upset some who think they are my friends - I only ever had one very serious friendship. He died about 23 years ago. You will notice I refer to the word friendship. It is a qualitative thing, similar to 'friend'. However, friend is more a fixed kind of thing. It lends to the idea that either you're a friend or not - or that your 'in' or 'out'.

But friendship can have 'shades of grey'. In other words there can be degrees of friendship. And we all know about this at a gut level. In a circle of friendships, there are those people one keeps closer to than others. That may be based on different qualities and how you weigh those qualities up. If you value someone who listens attentively you might rate one who is a good listener highly. Another person may value 'trust' more than listening skills. So for that latter person s/he will keep different sets of people closer.

The meaning of friendship as I know it, and how I think others might value it, is as follows. None of the following ideas are meant to be well demarcated.

1. Genuine interest in what each other think and do. And I must distinguish this from the obvious 'patronising interest'. And genuine interest would cover things like 'caring', protecting, helping.
2. Total disregard for status, wealth, power or influence. Yes true friendship cannot be contaminated by these things.
3. Friendship is not about sexual relations. In general I think that friendship is not to be contaminated by primary 'survival' or biological needs. That's a different thing to my mind. I think that biological and social needs are about satisfying herd instincts. I see friendship as a purer psychological phenomenon i.e. it is not necessary to have 'biological' or 'social' glue to hold the friendship together.
4. Respect for what each other stands for. No person is perfect. Having respect (and I'll not be distracted by defining 'respect') for what each other does well is central.
5. A willingness to give. No I'm not talking money. I'm talking about the things money can never buy e.g. time, effort, help, genuine consideration, listening, genuine feedback. How would you know it's genuine. You feel it in your bones.
6. Boundaries. Yes - whilst friendship is a unifying space, each member of the friendship retains individuality. It is individuality and boundaries which, strangely to some, maintain a friendship.
7. Building. Friendship is something that builds and fortifies. Two or more minds working as a whole are stronger than the force of each added together. It's a different kind of mathematics.

The things that test the integrity of friendship, or the possibility of friendships are:

1. Money - or lack of it.
2. Fame or good fortune.
3. Power
4. An attractive potential mate.
5. Scarcity of essentials basic to life.
6. Time pressure.
7. Illness or disease.
8. Disagreement.

The list is by far incomplete.

What about love? No - to my mind that is state of mind driven by survival instincts. But that's a big and separate debate.  And I'm not in the right spot to debate the number of different kinds of love people might conceptualise.

There is a kind of superficiality to friendships, where people go 'Oh let's move on...nothing is ever perfect'. Nope that's not my thing.

Who are the people who find closer friendships with me? (notice the word 'closer'). Easy - people who subscribe to my values and my modus operandi - people with very thick skins on their backs, who are willing to go 100 extra miles. If you're not in, I'm happy that you're out.

I don't know if I'm right. It wasn't my intention to be right about it. I just wanted to put these thoughts that have been in me for many many years. I may modify them as I learn more.

What changes minds?

It was  00:30 2008-09-13 - when I decided to start writing this. Crazy? So what.

I've been thinking about what changes people's minds about things. For example what changes your mind about accepting something, believing something or doing something. Why the heck am I interested in that? Because of my statement that "The human mind can move mountains, yet there is no mountain as immovable as the human mind".

But somehow minds do change. And over the last few hours it's been at the back of my mind to list the things that I've seen or heard of that change minds.

1. Culture
2. Shared experience
3. Force of authority
4. Compelling logic
5. Pain and suffering
6. Feedback from multiple others
7. Direct experience
8. Traumatic events/experiences including pain or suffering
9. Kindness
10. Threats
11. Time
12. Leaders

I've decided to stop there with the list, because there is an important observation that 'reason' and 'evidence' are not on the list. And that's interesting in itself, because I have little faith in 'reason' and 'evidence' changing minds. When I say evidence I mean some kind of research; something that is very very reliable. Why do these two factors not change minds? Because minds are free to find alternative reasoning or to disregard evidence.

So that led me to think about the things can cause minds to resist change. I think this could be a big list.

1. Fear
2. Uncertainty
3. Anxiety
4. Tradition
5. Culture
6. Shared experience
7. Personal experience
8. Image of one's self
9. Habit
10. Lack of time to update knowledge, think or effect change
11. Inability to see the consequences of change
12. Lack of perceived benefit for self or loved ones
13. Narrow focus on basic human needs
14. Narrow focus on life
15. Personal characteristics - e.g. stubbornness, laziness

Okay - I'm gonna go away and think some more about this. If anyone out there has other ideas do post up some comments.