Optimism with prejudice

I've been reading Enlightenment Now by Stephen Pinker, and I have mixed feelings.

He gives a positive view of many trends portrayed as disastrous in pop culture and media: gun violence, world hunger, . But he leaves me skeptical---which is odd, because I'm usually an unabashed optimist.

Most of his arguments hinge upon broad comparisons to the past. It's pretty easy to argue that the human condition has improved since the Dark Ages, the Victorian Era, or even the 1950s. People around the world today live longer, healthier lives with more information and technology available than ever before. His use of statistics is admirable, and I agree with much of his thesis. But in some cases the message still falls flat.

Perhaps this is the wrong time to read such a book. It first released in 2018, so while it captures tinges of the issues we're facing now, we've seen a lot of negativity in the last few years. Many of the 

I think what really bothers me more than anything is Pinker's insistence on praising capitalism as the benefactor for the majority of modern progress and leaving that premise unquestioned. Considering his normal erudition, such a shallow view on political economy shocked me. 

In fact, in a book about fear and bias, I was secretly hoping he would try his hand at dispelling some of the sensationalism around communism and socialism. Instead, he draws a hard line between socialism and social policies, referring to socialism as an intrusive barrier to progress while praising capitalist countries that "invest in their people." He talks about destitution and isolationism of communist countries without acknowledging the global geopolitical forces that contributed to those.

He discusses the decline of communism and the decline of totalitarian leaders as factors that led to increased prosperity around the world. I don't think he's wrong, mind you. But it's confusing and disingenuous to blame communism for what individual leaders did. The policies of Mao or Stalin or Castro are not the same as the ideal of communism. And the fact that their deaths caused such political turmoil implies that their personal appeal far outweighed any ideological considerations.

I don't blame democracy for the choices of my representatives. I hold the individuals accountable. And though I have some trouble with this sometimes, it's also true about capitalism and billionaires. Complex systems allow for some extreme situations.

Maybe these details don't belong in a book about optimism. But I like the book and the author, and this kind of oversimplification is disappointing.

Writing back the tears

I'm in sixth grade gym class, and we're playing a game called Dareline. The concept is simple: the coach calls out a description (all boys, white shoes, blonde hair), and everyone matching it must run the length of the gymnasium while avoiding balls thrown by a small group in the center. 

It's one of my favorite games because I'm good at hiding in the crowd. Poised behind the boundary line, I'm ready to run and dodge. 

"Black shirts, go!"

I glance at my shirt. Dark green, I decide. The coach disagrees. After a moment, he shouts my name, thinking I missed the initial call. It's too late; the crowd has dispersed, leaving me at the mercy of several ball-wielders. Running isn't even an option. I'm not just out; I'm out in slow motion. I'm humiliated.

As I exit the play area, I weakly argue that my shirt is green. But behind my eyes, I feel a familiar sensation ready to undermine my reasoning: I'm choking up. Tears form, and my voice cracks. People ask if I'm okay, which only intensifies the embarrassment.

In the locker room, I feel a tap on my shoulder. "Hey, you're right. That does look green in this light."

Evening nappuccino

Most people I talk to say naps aren't worth it. I disagree, but with a caveat: you don't need to sleep to have a good nap. It's all about resetting.

The important bit isn't the actual sleep cycle, though that can be surprisingly refreshing too. Instead, most people will get more value from closing their eyes and de-focusing their mind. Think of it as meditation or a mindfulness exercise. Let your thoughts flow, then let them go.

A fun technique I've grown fond of is the nappuccino. The theory is that, since caffeine takes about a half-hour to kick in, you can get an extra boost from drinking some coffee right before a short nap. At that length, deep sleep is unlikely to take over, so you won't feel sluggish from sleep inertia. (And again, you don't really need to sleep---that's just a bonus.)

I was exhausted today for no particular reason. Spending 25 minutes this evening in silent darkness made a huge difference in my mood and energy. Thanks, Daniel Pink.

Versatility as a virtue

Have you ever read the labeling on a bag of Epsom salt? Turns out it isn't just for soaking your feet.

Epsom salt: for regular plants and vigorous feet.

First off, this copy is amazing. Three disparate uses with unique descriptions, and the bag even has instructions for all three uses. Mix and match the uses and descriptions for a minute. Who knew plants could even get constipated?

But beyond the absurdity, you really must admire how broadly useful this stuff is. It's among many household items with such hidden versatility: dish soap, rubbing alcohol, duck tape...  They have my undying admiration.

Versatility is one of my favorite traits in any object or organism. Perhaps I'm biased---I am human, after all, and humans are pretty adaptable. But on a grand scale, adaptability to novel situations is the survival trait. Our environment will always be changing. Thanks to a combination of intelligence and motor skills, we can cope with all kinds of circumstances. 

That also means we have an extremely broad set of activities available to us. Humanity has range. To me, it follows that individuals should have range. We should all be fairly generalized in our skill sets instead of hyperspecializing. 

I take a generalist approach to my own life, but it's not really a conscious effort. Trying new things is how I stave off boredom and ennui. Though novelty seeking isn't a virtue in itself, and plenty of activities are not worth trying, I feel a certain mental acuity when learning and applying new ideas. Even something as benign as checking out a new food or musical album can spark new ways of thinking and experiencing life.

That's not to say everyone needs to overload on hobbies like I do. My calendar is a whirlwind, and it can be stressful. Sometimes I need to retreat to familiar territory (video games, music, walking) to avoid burnout. Other times I need to try something radical to break out of old patterns. When I manage to find the right balance, life feels fulfilling. 

Some people are content to seek that balance through the standard channels: work, family, society, media. Mundane interactions can bring a surprising amount of insight if approached in a deliberate way. Uncaring repetition, however, can lead to complacence and a narrow view. On the extreme end, you'll find the enemy of versatility: dogma.

Preparing for the unknown is a matter of broad practice and broad perspective. Step outside your comfort zone. Try a new hobby, read a weird book, and get a second opinion. Test your resilience.

I'll take my time and hurry up

Writing regularly has been helpful. But for several days, I've drafted thoughts and not published them. It's that feeling of futility that creeps up on me every once in a while. Maybe I should go back and just publish them retroactively?

Setting expectations for the year

Today is the first day of 2023. It's also the first day of the week, a Sunday. And the first day of the first month, January. All these distinctions are arbitrary. Yet because humans have celebrated them for so long, they hold power in our collective psyche. Starting something on such a significant makes it statistically more likely to succeed.

That is to say, today's a good day for a new start.

I'm a numbers person, so my goals need to be quantifiable. For example, if I wanted to cut back on drinking, I could measure the amount of alcohol I buy. But should I count the amount I spend? Or the number of purchases? Do I limit myself per day, week, month? As usual, overthinking takes over.

So I try to find simple feedback systems that play into my existing habits. Before trying to set a strict goal over the long term, I give myself flexible guidelines to apply and adjust regularly.

My favored low-effort strategy for reducing bad behavior is one I call the skip method. It's simple: the next time I get the urge to drink, I don't. Instead, I take a moment to consciously remind myself that I'm trying to cut back. Then I grant myself permission to give in next time---but only next time.

Denying the initial urge is easy knowing that it's just this one time. It also inspires me to think about the decision and the behavior in the moment of temptation. Over time I learn to recognize my triggers, which can lead me to improved long-term strategies. Eventually, I try to skip two or three instances before giving in; no matter what, I can only hold one "pass" at a time. But it's enough to keep me going.

Anything works better for me than thinking in absolutes. Though cutting drinking out entirely might be a better long-term goal, it isn't as attainable as skipping every other drink. Any strategy is bound to fail that doesn't try to address the compulsion and its root causes.