There’s some memey post (apparently originating at Evolving Times) now circulating through the personal growth blogosphere asking: What would you do with an extra 36 hours of free time each week? Now, I appreciate Edward’s motivation for the post: work less and enjoy life more a la Timothy Ferriss. My problem is the assumption that we are all too busy too enjoy life. We don’t need more time in each day, we need to understand our beliefs and myths about time better.

Does this sound like someone you know:

“I’d love to learn Spanish, I’m just so busy. Hey, did you see Entourage last night?”

The term “busy” is another way of focusing our choices away from ourselves. By saying “I’m too busy” we are not using our personal power to determine what we do and when.  Every moment of every day, I have a choice to continue doing whatever I’m doing or do something else. This is precisely what Scott H Young talked about in his insightful post about time. Time is a relative construct, really we are always in now. When you’re deliberate in your actions, you can find yourself doing exactly what you want to be doing every moment. Time cannot be wasted; time is only this moment. As Scott says:

Time is not a resource. It is completely inside your mind. You can’t experience time, only right now. You simply have memories of the past and projections of the future that leads you to suspect time exists. It is your focus on these concepts of time, which don’t appear through the senses, that make it real.

Even if you look beyond this abstract perspective, time is not a resource. Twenty-four hours will pass in the day no matter what you do. You can’t store or collect time, nor can you grasp it in this moment.

When we say we “wasted time”, what we mean is that we remember certain moments in the past as being unfulfilling. No activity is objectively fulfilling or unfulfilling. I choose how I spend my time; I choose to be fulfilled or not. This feeling of being unfulfilled comes from a lack of presence in the now. Scott explains:

If your time is being invested in pursuits that lack quality, you will feel deprived even if the amount of time is unchanged.

The first way to increase quality of the now, is simply to look for it…When you stop planning, projecting and remembering and focus only on what is happening right now, worry dissolves. The oasis is beneath your feet, the desert was just too distracting.

The second way to increase quality deals with the method of interacting with the world. Become deliberate in what you do. This could be seen as a parallel to the first suggestion. Focusing on the now is mostly blocking out thoughts through effort. Whereas, doing in the now is task oriented.

Every minute is free time. We are free to do anything we choose every moment. There is no reason to wish for more time because the only time you’ll ever have is now. If you wish you were doing something else right now, do it. This doesn’t necessarily mean you’d have to sit in a field of daisies all day. Sometimes I like going to the grocery store or the post office because I like getting things done. When we recognize that every moment is a choice, these things don’t seem like chores. If we increase the quality of our every moment through deliberate intent, life will seem less hectic and more fulfilling.

Seth Godin had a fascinating post about a human rights group that posted signs around his college reading:

On Wednesday
Wear Blue Jeans
If You Are Gay

This of course caused a great deal of discussion and debate. Every person who had read the sign was forced to make a decision about what they were going to wear the next day and what that would mean.

This example relates directly to our post from yesterday. We all like to regulate our interactions with others. In Seth’s example, the human rights group threw a monkey wrench into our illusion. No matter what you would have worn people would have made assumptions about your sexual identity.

We may attempt to control our interactions by telling people about our personality traits, explaining our ideals and describing hobbies (or even if we attempt to control interactions by being as secretive and evasive as possible), but this is ultimately something we need to let go of. When we label ourselves we limit ourselves to behaviors or ideologies that fit the label.

For example, how would you feel if you’d unwittingly worn jeans on Wednesday and found out about the sign when you got to school? Conversely, how would you feel if you had worn khakis? Would you feel differently? Would you spend the whole day explaining that you didn’t know about the sign?

Notice your reactions the next time someone labels you in public. How do your reactions change based on your identification with the label? For example, I used to love being called a “Trekkie” in high school. The first thing I told people when I met them was that I was a Trekkie. However, I would get extremely annoyed when people described me as “nice.” Being “nice” seemed uninteresting and bland. Now, I no longer introduce myself as “Laura the Trekkie.” However I’ve noticed I do still get annoyed when I am described as “nice,” I guess I’m still coming to terms with that. Are you the same as the labels you place on yourself? How much of your identity is wrapped up in labels?

As I asked before, how much of this represents the “real” you and how much is simply a need to create a division between yourself and other people?

Today I felt like it was about time I write another post, but it just isn’t as easy as it seems. Emily always comes across such interesting, random internet bits, things that spur her mind off in a million directions.

My life seems very interesting, to me. I could write about my walk through Golden Gate Park, how I mindfully cleaned the apartment, my success at language learning or why The Blind Assassin is speaking to me. But most of these things that I’ve seen, heard or contemplated today seem to be messages meant just for me. (Who knew assassin had four ‘S’es in it? And how the heck to you type ‘S’es anyway?)

When I ran into Wendell Wallach at the Singularity Summit (before I knew who he was). We talked about writing. He told me he was in the midst of writing a book. I told him I was a blogger. He said that he often finds writing excruciating. At the time I thought, “Well it’s not that hard to just spout off a blog post. Put a bit of kitsch along with an intriguing premise, add in some new age speak and voila!” But today, I agree with Wendell. I am desperate for a topic. I even checked out Google Trends, hoping it would spur my mind. Evidently Jodie Sweetin is pregnant, conspiracies abound about a 9/11 mystery plane and NBA player Greg Oden is injured. I don’t really care about any of that.

Today I don’t want to write any kitsch, I have no profundity to put out there and I just don’t feel like producing. I’m in a yin phase it seems. Blog posts are rather yang.

For those of you who want a quick primer on yin and yang, luckily I just happen to have written one. (The more you know, after all.)

Yin and Yang are representations of phenomena in the natural world in the form of opposite forces. They are combined in the yin-yang symbol showing the ideal unity of opposites. Yin symbolizes the feminine, passive, receptive, soft and dark forces. Yang represents masculine, active, creating, hard and bright forces.

Yin and Yang are a way of describing complementary forces in nature and not absolutes. All forces have both yin and yang states and are in constant motion, not static. I find this an especially fruitful way of viewing the world, rather than in a strict, opposing, absolute and immutable dichotomy, such as some views of “good” and “evil.”

You may or may not have noticed from our posts (see the first paragraph of this post too), that Emily tends to be rather yangy and I am rather yiny (is that like a ninny?) Emily says that I should erase this nonsense about ninnies because it’s a term from the 1930’s. Anyway, if I keep this up, she’s going to ban me from the blog… my point is that sometimes we argue because of our tendencies towards one state or the other.

Like Emily pointed out yesterday, balance is important in our actions and within ourselves. Do you tend more towards yin or yang? Maybe you can think of ways to balance out your dominant aspect, or spend time with a friend who tends toward the opposite. For example, I am supportive of Emily’s plans to create anarchy and revolution after we watch V for Vendetta and Emily indulges my thoughtful questioning of cultural displacement after we’ve watched Lost in Translation. Maybe that’s why we get along so well. However, that’s also why Emily hates this whimsical, meandering, blog post and is spitting nickels as she tries to edit it now!

First of all, if it weren’t for Eliezer Yudkowsky I’d have hardly anything to blog about these days, so thanks Eliezer. He had a good post about the Radical Honesty movement, but honestly, the Esquire article was a lot better. Then again, maybe Esquire guys are just more my speed…

Radical Honesty is just what it sounds like: always telling the full truth no matter what. Sound hard? Sounds fun. I like to think I’m a pretty honest person already. Actually I’m sort of inspired by this whole thing. I think I’m going to try it.

So my first step is checking out the official Radical Honesty website. I think it’s kind of an ugly, site and the font is too small on the menu bar. Then again, maybe I’m just insecure about my own questionable web design skills and the way the new colors on our site are turning out terrible on Laura’s computer.

The next step was to email the person who organizes my local “Radical Honesty Practice Group”. I was honest in my email that I want to go there because I think it would be funny and interesting. Also I wrote something else that I don’t want to write here because my parents read this blog. I think saying it like that is probably a cop-out according to Radical Honesty, but I don’t care. Ha!

After that I got an email from a guy I know who annoys me sometimes, especially when he talks about money. So I told him it annoys me and I was glad. Then a guy came into the office where I’m temping and was hanging around bugging me. So when he asked me how I like temping I actually told him the whole truth. It was long and I think it made him uncomfortable so he left. Fantastic!

So far Radical Honesty is going great. I’m going to try to keep it up for the rest of the week. It’s kind of freeing and I can really see how it would help communication. Here’s a quote from the Radical Honesty founder:

Q: Do you feel we have to be honest with ourselves before we can have a relationship with someone else?
A: You can’t be “secretly” honest. Being “honest with yourself” is simply not separable from being honest with another. A person who says, “I was honest with myself, but decided not to tell…” is just another miserable liar and will have to suffer the consequences. Sharing honestly, with others present, is the way we can have an authentic relationship with another person.

That’s very interesting. Being honest is one thing. Honest all around, all the time, not internally vs. externally. It’s not easy, but it’s very important. Although, to be honest, I’m not sure how well I’ll handle the first time someone says, “Actually, that does make you look fat.”

Emily and I went round and round over yesterday’s blog post. Here are some excerpts from our conversations:

Emily: Could you take a look at my blog post? I would appreciate your input.

Laura: Well I like it so far, but I think you should definitely address this sentence, “I know that I want to fix the world, but not quite as much as I want to live in an air-conditioned house and hang out with my friends.” Put something about how you’re not sure how to fix the world, because the issue probably isn’t your ability to forgo comforts, as much as it is trying to figure out what to do. That was a big part of the whole problem with Peace Corps. We have no problem foregoing comforts, but we see that whatever ideology we are trying to work towards isn’t worth it, because it’s flawed.
Maybe Gandhi’s point (be the change you want to see in the world) is the whole point, because how can we be the change we want to see in the world when we’re making ourselves feel horrible for having air conditioning and bemoaning our existential crises? When we are subscribing to that Christian worm philosophy, that we’re worthless? We have to get to the root of that in order to be the change we wish to see in the world, because otherwise we’re just being ourselves with all of our self-hatred and martyrdom enveloped in ego needs.
When you write, “How can I continue to pay taxes that build bombs? How can I go clubbing with my friends when children are cold and hungry?” I wonder if you are saying you don’t deserve to find peace and happiness? That you should feel miserable because other people feel miserable? When does compassion and feeling pain become self degradation and loathing? How can we feel compassion for the suffering of the world and also feel compassion for our own suffering? I think that’s the key. We have to unlock our own suffering and deal with that.

Emily: Those are good points. It’s just such a huge issue, I’m not sure I can wrap my head around the whole thing in one little post. I think that the problem with Peace Corps is that we think that by suffering we alleviate suffering, which is untrue.

Laura: Right, exactly. That’s also my point with your post though, you are still making yourself suffer.

Emily: I’m saying that by not doing anything I am actually suffering more. I know I am making myself suffer, but it’s like if you saw something bad happen and you didn’t intervene because you were scared, you would feel bad after. You make yourself feel bad, but if you had intervened you wouldn’t feel so bad even if you got hurt in the process of helping.

Laura: Right. But how does that apply to you now? You’re not working on releasing your own suffering. My point is you need to do that somehow. Maybe it’s possible to do it through good works or something but I’m not sure. I don’t understand how that applies to you now though. Are you saying that because you aren’t doing good works to change the world you feel even worse?

Emily: Yes

Laura: Then you should do good works

Emily: Right. But my problem is that I see it as an all or nothing proposition, like either I should be standing in front of tanks or just forget about it.

Laura: I feel like you’re still stuck seeing things as out there vs. in you in some way and that’s causing part of the problem. I don’t know. I don’t quite get it.

Emily: Maybe that’s true. I don’t know the answer right now either, but it makes it hard to put it into a post and not be too grouchy.

Laura: Right, that’s why I was hoping some of my points you could use in your post, to give some balance. Maybe also think about making yourself feel guilty for existing in the world. It’s like the whole Joseph Campbell thing about western thought not embracing the world and life…about how it’s against the world and life and we should all suffer and be worms. You have that thread going in your thoughts/thinking. It actually could be quite Christian.

Emily: You know I just thought of something. Once I went to see Julia Butterfly Hill speak. She sat in a redwood for like 6 months or something to save it, she was pretty famous for that. I was really excited to hear her tell about her experience and how we should jump up and make a revolution and all she talked about was stupid crap like using a reusable coffee mug. I was so disappointed I remember.

Laura: Hmm interesting

Emily: Yeah

Laura: I think there’s something here for you. Something about liking drama. I don’t know

Emily : Maybe, that would certainly apply across many areas of my life. Read this. I am not sure what exactly the message is though. But the story feels related.

Laura: Great story. I keep coming back to something. Like in the story, when she’s talking about drugs and doing “bad” things. I was very interested in that for a long time. my journals are full of that. I wanted to show the world that I’m bad. I wanted to do drugs and be immoral and ruin my life or something, so that what I felt inside would match the outside. That’s one reason why I had to go to Peace Corps, I felt I needed to suffer. I felt like I’d been given too many gifts/good things in life. But really I was trying to get the face I show the world to more closely match my inner self. I felt like such an over achiever/suck up, so concerned with what other people thought of me, not with what i thought of myself. I felt like I was taught about life being a competition and I needed to be the best, and good, friendly, kind and all that, but I wanted to try all the opposite stuff to see what it was like. But it’s like now I don’t really see it that way at all. I don’t really want either. I want to be free from these labels. I want to do what I want to do. It’s like now I feel like I identify with the people who walk away, who are willing to give up the “happiness” in order to see what is beyond that. Does that make sense? They’re willing to give up their nice world so they can walk away and see another way to view reality, not just as the dichotomy between happy town and the fearful/tortured child- right and wrong. Because that dichotomy is the dichotomy of the self vs. the not self. The I vs. the world. This is what I want to investigate (and so do the people who walk away from the town).

Emily: Right exactly, that’s what I think too. But I don’t know if I can be happy not doing anything. I need to still be participating. I feel like I really need to walk away. How can I give taxes to the US government?

Laura: Well you need to find the way to walk away for yourself, you need to find what you need for yourself now.

Emily: Yes, easier said than done, that is my problem exactly. I know I want to walk away, but I don’t know where to walk to.

Laura: Right, that’s why I think you need to release some stuff and get some clarity so you’ll know what to do. It’s like you want to move on before you know where to go. We’re really trained to run away or distract ourselves from the pain/emotion. But it’s the running away that actually causes the most pain. When we let it out, it’s less powerful.

Emily: Yeah, maybe I can just say that in my post.

Laura: I like what you say. But, I still think you need to point out how we often make ourselves feel guilty about this stuff. It’s not our fault we exist, even though Christian thought in the West often teaches us that (at least I don’t believe it). It’s not our fault the world is suffering. Plus, how do we know the suffering of others is greater than our own? The suffering of the world is extremely compelling, but we also need to deal with our great internal suffering. You also need to point out the dangers in becoming attached to an ideology . Maybe talk about how being psychologically numb to your own suffering may be the first step. We have to melt our numbness to our own suffering and sort that out first.

Emily: I know what you’re saying, but to an extent there are things that are our faults: orphans, no; Iraq war, yes.

Laura: Yes but you need to address the fact that we make ourselves feel guilty for our existence when we contemplate the suffering of the world and that is not the point. Right now your post sounds mildly coercive.

Emily: Yeah, I know what you mean. I should point out that guilt is not constructive at all or really even justified. How about this? “I know the suffering of the world is not my fault, so why do I feel like it’s my responsibility to alleviate it? Maybe I’m hoping that by saving the world, I will feel better about myself, when actually feeling better about myself might save the world.”

Laura: Yes.

And after all this debate, the post entitled “Psychological Numbing” was the outcome. We posted our conversation because we want to give insight into our thought processes and what we discuss before we post anything on the blog.

One thing I have a lot of trouble accepting about myself and the world around me is the lack of revolutionary change. Sometimes I feel like there is so much wrong with the world that I should become a vegan nomad dressed in rags liberating farm animals and laying down in front of tanks in various locales. But I don’t. Instead, I recycle and turn off the water while I brush my teeth.

My tax dollars helped kill over 1700 Iraqis last month and over 4000 Americans since the start of the war. That is unacceptable to me, but when I start thinking about it, the tragedies begin to build up into such a cacophony that I have to shut it out entirely just to function. So that’s what we do. We shut it off so we can continue to function.

There was an interesting article about this very topic in my step-mom’s Oprah Magazine this month (I can’t find a link to the article). It was about psychological numbing and the Darfur genocide. It said that in the face of great tragedy we block out the problem so that we can continue to function normally.

It seems to me that this is a good survival mechanism, preventing the tribe from having a collective existential crisis during which they might mope around instead of forage; however, I’m not sure that psychological numbing is still serving humans well. We’re told to “Stop Global Warming” “Stop the War in Iraq” “Stop the Darfur Genocide”, so we buy organic lettuce and hope for the best.

Gandhi said, “Be the change you want to see in the world.” I know some of the changes I’d like to see around me, but I’m not sure how to “be” that change. There must be a middle ground between guerrilla revolution and a Tibetan monastery, I’m just not sure what it is. I don’t want to be psychologically numb. I don’t want to sit by and watch history unfold in ways I find deplorable. I don’t think I’m the only one who feels this way.

I know the suffering of the world is not my fault, so why do I feel like it’s my responsibility to alleviate it? Maybe I’m hoping that by saving the world, I will feel better about myself, when actually feeling better about myself might save the world.

Read: The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas

I know I need to walk away, but where to go?

Sometimes in life I find myself having emotional reactions that are hugely disproportionate to their triggers. This happened to me this morning, in fact. I’m in my second day of illustrious temporary employment at an office in downtown San Francisco. Today a lady from “corporate” came in and when I introduced myself as “Emily, the temp” she said, “Oh, I paid my dues as a temp too.” This got me all riled up inside.

We think that when you have a very strong emotional reaction to something, especially when it seems to come out of nowhere like mine today, you should examine the real cause of the reaction. This reaction is coming from someplace inside of you.

First, let me explain what I mean by irrational anger. This is anger that comes on suddenly and from no objectively offensive source. In my case, the woman’s comment was not malicious in any way, but it changed my mood instantly, like flipping a light switch. This indicates that something else was causing my reaction.

Steps for Examining Irrational Anger

1. Determine specifically what upset you about the situation. Was it a statement, the tone, the person involved, or the circumstances?

In my case today, it was the idea behind the statement.

2. Clarify exactly what bothered you. Pinpoint the trigger to your reaction. The trigger is the external force that drew the reaction out of you.

My trigger was the idea that by temping I’m aspiring to someday get hired to work in an office like the one I’m temping for.

3. Find the cause. The cause for your reaction is inside of you. Why did this specific trigger cause you so much distress?

This trigger caused me distress because while I’m sure I don’t ever want to work in an office like the one I’m assigned to, more importantly I’m insecure about my career path and what I’m going to do with my life. This was the real cause for my reaction.

Once you’ve found the root cause for your reaction you can begin to accept and work on that part of yourself.

Ways to Recognize Irrational Anger in Others

1. Overzealous arguing. We all know someone who loves to argue excessively, especially about their cause of choice, whether it’s politics, religion, or the New York Yankees. When someone is fanatically attached to something and takes every opportunity to get worked up into a frenzy over it, there is usually a deeper cause.

2. Taking exception unnecessarily: “How rude! Who does she think she is? How dare she?” Those kinds of statements are usually preceded by objectively inoffensive behavior. When someone has a disproportionate reaction, it’s probably irrational.

3. Hitting a nerve. We’ve all done it, made a remark to a friend and seen the look on their faces change instantly for the worse. We say we “hit a nerve” because it is usually an issue that is specific to the person. This is the most obvious way that irrational anger shows itself.

Handling Irrational Anger in Others

This can be tricky. Since the reaction is irrational to begin with, any intervention you attempt may be reacted to equally irrationally. The most important thing to remember is that even if you’re the trigger for a reaction, you aren’t the cause. Take note not to bring up that subject again, but don’t blame yourself for their reaction. If you’re close to the person you might consider gently asking what their reaction was really about. Maybe they know. If they don’t, you can try suggesting some steps like ours for figuring it out.

Want to Hear More?
We have a couple of articles relating to this on our site:

The Impermanence of Emotion 

Freedom from Fear 

and some exercises:

Reducing Suffering 

Overcoming Fear 

It is only the artificial ego that suffers. The man who has transcended his false ‘me’ no longer identifies with his suffering. - Wei Wu Wei

Change is a central feature of life. It can be exhilarating, frightening, exhausting, or relieving. It can spark sadness or happiness, resistance or grasping. -Gil Fronsdal

I just got back from my Grandpa’s 75th Birthday Party in Gloucester, MA. It was a great trip, but it was also rather exhausting. We discussed change, getting old, and death. The discussions were emotional and full of fear. After I got back I listened to my favorite ZenCast, episode 102 in which Gil talks about the importance of fully contemplating death. This, along with Steve Pavlina’s recent post on emotions prompted me to write about emotions and impermanence

Insight into change is central to dealing with our emotions. Becoming equanimous during change and emotional storms is one of the keys to growing spiritually and personally. This means we need to learn to observe our emotional responses, to step back from them, not to identify with them and become them. This is a means to freedom. The Buddha’s last words were: “All conditioned things are impermanent. Strive on with diligence.”

No emotion lasts forever. Usually our emotions arise from conditioned responses. Something happens and we have an emotional reaction to it. These are old thought patterns that we’ve learned throughout our life. Our ego wants to protect us from pain and bring us pleasure, it’s scared and grasping. Think of it like a loyal watch dog, he may often be misguided but he is only trying to protect his owner. Our ego has learned emotional responses designed originally to protect us from pain and bring us pleasure. These emotional responses are just extra strong thought patterns, that are deeply ingrained and seem to arise automatically and involuntarily. Steve Pavlina’s excellent post uses the metaphor of video game avatars for our ego.

We can learn to view these emotions from a different perspective. Not as though we are the emotions and they are us (from the ego view) but from a more detached state. When we learn this we learn to reduce suffering and pain. Suffering arises when we cling to these emotions, as though we are the emotions, when we are deeply identified with them as inherent parts of our selves and personalities. We can reduce suffering, even in a world of change and impermanence. We can learn to let go, not to cling and find sublime happiness in our world. We can do this by seeing the impermanent nature of what we cling to and by observing what we are grasping onto and clinging to. As Steve puts it;

Although your emotions arise within your consciousness, they are not your consciousness, and you are free to stop, breathe, and rise above them. This will not eliminate the emotions — they’ll still be present — but you’ll begin to see them from a third-person perspective instead of identifying with them

When you experience this perspective shift, you’ll begin to notice a change. Learning to depend not on the ego, and instead on the higher self brings wonderful states of peace and joy. This isn’t some easy accomplishment because the ego, that watch dog, holds fiercely to old beliefs, patterns and habits.

Steve gives this metaphor for the experience:

Imagine playing a scary computer game or watching a scary movie. In the moment you may be feeling tense, anxious, or nervous. But behind that is a more subtle sensation you might call fun, enjoyment, or pleasure. You’re enjoying the larger experience of the game or movie, but this enjoyment is on a different level than your low-level experience of the current on-screen situation. Similarly, when you feel sad, angry, or frustrated, you may stop and notice a different sensation behind that emotion. To observe this sensation, you must step outside of the temporary storm and simply witness it for a while. I tend to think of this sensation as joy, but you may label it something else entirely. It is a pleasurable and expansive yet soothing sensation. Some people might call it ecstasy, God consciousness, or a feeling of oneness. Again, I hesitate to call it an emotion, since it isn’t felt on that level. It’s more like a state of consciousness.

Acceptance not denial or aversion

It’s important not to resist emotions or pretend they’re not there. The key is to completely accept them and be present for them. It doesn’t work to take the emotional reactions head on and try to control them, battle them or even become attached to them. As the Borg say, “Resistance is futile.” Emotions are natural and not something to be despised or resisted. They also aren’t an inherent part of any person, so we don’t have to personally identify with them. When we become too deeply associated with our egos, we can easily feel overwhelmed by our emotional reactions. We might be so overwhelmed that we block the message we need. It is key to remember that ego is not identity. Think of every emotional reaction as a guide. A way for our mind to show us where our clinging, old thought patterns, and inner turmoil lies. Emotional reactions are signals for us to stop and reflect on ourselves, to learn and grow. Steve puts it this way:

When I notice myself feeling the urge to ingest an excessive amount of sugar, caffeine, or idle entertainment, I can trace it to an emotional storm that I’m having difficulty dealing with. That’s when I have to remind myself to step back, observe the storm, and receive its message. I often resist the message out of fear for what it might require of me, but when I do eventually hear it, it’s invariably more gentle and forgiving than I imagined. I’m usually left with a feeling of gratitude.

Progress
The key to spiritual and personal growth is our ability to keep looking within and to keep growing. Life is full of changes and impermanence. Clinging to old habits, past hurts and repetitive emotional reactions stifles our growth, even though it may seem safer for our terrified ego. When we have emotional reactions, it’s important not to get stuck in the middle of it, but observe our reactions, ask ourselves the tough questions about what we are feeling and why, to be present with the emotion and not to deny it or cover it up.

See the full article on the Impermanence of Emotions at our companion website.

Lately, I’ve noticed a lot of people telling me that I can’t do things. It usually goes like this:

“I’m thinking about moving to Mexico and blogging from a beach hut.”

“You can’t do that!”

“Why not?”

I’m amazed at the volume of reasons people can think of for why I can’t do something. Normally quiet people are suddenly spouting off an entire doomsday prophesy of how I can’t do this or that. What is going on here?

All of us have been in these situations. You can’t ask her out, she’s too good for you. You can’t become an artist, you won’t make any money. You can’t move to Moscow, you don’t speak Russian. If you listen carefully you’ll see that what people are really saying is “I would be afraid to do that and you should be too.”

People are so used to being ruled by fear, that they can’t understand when someone isn’t. They want to feel like their safe choices are ok, so they try to make you feel fear like they do. They will always try to talk you into a safe path similar to theirs. “You can’t move to Moscow, you don’t speak Russian,” really means I don’t think I could ever learn Russian and the idea of wandering around a city, not knowing the language terrifies me. Don’t let another person’s fear become your own!

Not sure about my theory? Do a comparison. We all have a friend who isn’t afraid of anything. A friend who follows their dreams no matter where it may take them. Tell your idea to that friend and see how their reaction compares to everyone else’s. A fearless person would say, “Great idea! Go for it!” In fact, this fearless friend would probably have a lot of very useful advice. Isn’t this the kind of person you would like to surround yourself with?

When you’re feeling nervous about a new idea or new direction in your life, the last thing you should do is adopt other people’s fears as your own. For more on fear, see our article Freedom from Fear and the companion exercise Overcoming Fear.

I’ve just finished rereading Colin Wilson’s The Mind Parasites. It’s a great book that makes you think about human potential and the frontiers of the mind. I intend to read much more of Wilson’s work, especially after finding this interview. Here is the most interesting excerpt:

…We have inside us what I call the robot — a sort of robot valet or servant who does things for you. So you learn something like talking French or driving a car or skiing or whatever, painfully and consciously, step by step. Then the robot takes it over and does it far more quickly and efficiently that you could do it consciously. … Now, the robot does all these valuable things like talking French and so on for us. The trouble is he also does the things we do not want him to do. We listen to a piece of music; it moves us deeply the first time. We read a poem, we go for a country walk, whatever, and it moves us. But the second or third time you do it, the robot is listening to the music or reading the poetry or doing the country walk for you. I said I’ve even caught him making love to my wife. And this is our real problem — that the robot keeps taking us over and doing the things that we would rather do. … Do you remember that Sartre said that during the war, when he was in the French Resistance and he was likely to be arrested and shot at any moment, he never felt so free. And obviously you would in these circumstances — you keep your energy so high because of your sense of crisis, that you would feel far more free. Now this is clearly the secret of freedom — keeping your energy so high that the robot is a bit like the thermostat on the wall which turns on quite automatically when your energies drop below a certain point, and then suddenly, without even noticing it, you’re living mechanically, robotically, instead of with the real you. The interesting thing is that it’s only a matter of one degree. Therefore, if it’s just one degree to turn on to the robot, it’s only one degree of effort to turn the robot off.

I think we can all relate to his idea of the robot, just going through the motions of doing something. The question is how can we escape that monotony? We all know thrill seekers whose solution to life sounds a lot like Sartre’s time in war. Must we all become adrenaline junkies to experience transcendent happiness?

Honestly, I don’t know. This seems to be a central problem for many people, especially young people. Should we learn to find happiness in life’s monotony or do we rebel against it? Maybe mindfulness is the key to turning off the robot. Maybe we should constantly seek new experiences to keep the robot on its toes. Maybe there is a time for each.