Lately I have been reading what some might consider a classic tome: How to win friends and influence people. Although I have been familiar with the work and even owned a copy or two in my youth this is the first time I have set aside the time to read it. Although I am only a fourth of the way through I have thus far found myself reminded of the lesson I already knew but have let fall into disuse.
As early as my childhood I had always related well to adults. My mother always commented that I was, "quite the little charmer." but truth was more complicated than simple charm. Adults were comfortable around me, often too comfortable which lead to me being privy to discussions far beyond my years. My role in adult conversations was more often that of an active participant than a quiet observer. Towards the end of a particularly adult topic they would often blush at the realization that the content was more than likely inappropriate.
The biggest hurdle in maintaining a healthy separation in the relationship between adult an child was that adults genuinely liked talking to me. Conversely just as any child wants to "belong" I had a genuine interest in them. On numerous occasions I found myself privy to countless secrets and even confessions well beyond my years. Sadly my rapport with adults never seemed to translate to my relationship with my peers.
The affects of my upbringing had a lasting affect on my demeanor. People often felt comfortable around me or gravitated toward me. My friends can regale you with countless tales of complete strangers randomly approaching me to share some intimate detail of their lives with me as though we were old friends. Friends and family found it humorous and yet annoying at the same time.
One day a few years ago now everything just slowed down and eventually stopped. What changed? I just got tired and stopped caring about other people. In retrospect I think I just felt overwhelmed. I had enough to deal with in my life and families life without adding to the burden with other peoples problems. Admittedly I was / am being selfish. Everything began to come down to a simple estimation of time and effort per interaction.
Simple interactions like saying hello to an acquaintance meant giving them a piece of my time and my energy. Let alone factoring in the horrifying possibility that they may want to relate some trivial experience to me. That meant allocating even more time and effort to the conversation in addition to any afterthoughts or lingering considerations or the time it would take later to relate the experience to someone that inquired. The final irony of course being that afterwards you now possess a pointless account of some trivial event of so little importance that even the storyteller forgets not only the exchange but the event in which was discussed as well.
You may be wondering what any of this had to do with reading a book. In short, the author promotes an overall attitude that is the antithesis of what I have currently adopted. To his credit he is correct, a healthy interest in other people will make you far more likable. I am certain I have failed to cultivate to the fullest many friendships and as such have missed numerous opportunities. What he has so far failed to mention however is the sheer amount of effort, time, and will that it takes on the part of person wishing to "be more liked".
I can only hope that as I continue reading he has developed some method of making the process easier or at the very least more manageable. Thus far the book has reminded me of my selfishness as well as the consequences it confers. I have long since realized that it is probably time for a change but I have been putting off like a child with homework.
Friday, August 5, 2011
Thursday, August 4, 2011
+2 str
I've been doing a lot of thinking lately about a comment that was made to me during a get together last weekend. To summarize, I was discussing with a friend a recent situation in which during a disagreement with someone, that person brought with them 5 of their friends as a means of intimidation. I made the comment, "If its a game of numbers, why not pick up the phone as you have friends of your own?" It was his response that resonated with me and continues to preoccupy my mind. He commented, "No offense, and I appreciate the gesture, but your not all that intimidating!"
There is truth in his statement of course. The question I asked myself (and subsequently answered) is why? It seems no matter how advanced we get everything still comes down to raw strength and physical appearance. Originally I was tempted to limit my observations to the male gender but it applies equally to the female sex. I would go so far as to say that had I been both taller and more muscular I would have had a much easier and happier childhood. That is not to say that the more physically inclined get a free ride, only that they have less obstacles to overcome.
When you are physically more intimidating people behave differently around you. While not an absolute, people are naturally and almost instinctively inclined to avoid conflict with you. Physical appearance can intrinsically provide a basic level of respect based on simple fear. The opposite is also observably true. When the subject is not perceived as a threat the incentive to avoid conflict is lessened. How often do you see a group of high school students making fun of someone who appears to be capable of grinding them to a pulp. This response doesn't stop with high school. A large part of how you are treated throughout life is directly tied to a persons physical presence and by extension their intimidation.
To me, physical strength is not nearly as intimidating as the will to do what others won't. Some of the worst conflicts result from the inability to assess anything other than physical presence. No sane person enters willingly into a conflict they don't believe they can win. Yet whenever we see mismatched opponents we fail to take this into consideration.
We wonder sometimes what causes students become violent and lash out, but sometimes it seems so obvious. Knowing you are unable to win in a fair fight is hardly an incentive to fight fair. Kids are simply doing what man has done since the beginning of time. If you can't beat you opponent hand to hand then lie down and die or find a stick with which to strike him with.
I have come to terms with reality concerning this issue. Whether it is fair or not is irrelevant. Might makes right, and to a certain extent human beings are programmed at some basic level to respect strength. The most basic observable manifestation of strength will always be physical appearance. I must accept that I can not change this. The only real decision I have is whether my understanding compels me to change.
There is truth in his statement of course. The question I asked myself (and subsequently answered) is why? It seems no matter how advanced we get everything still comes down to raw strength and physical appearance. Originally I was tempted to limit my observations to the male gender but it applies equally to the female sex. I would go so far as to say that had I been both taller and more muscular I would have had a much easier and happier childhood. That is not to say that the more physically inclined get a free ride, only that they have less obstacles to overcome.
When you are physically more intimidating people behave differently around you. While not an absolute, people are naturally and almost instinctively inclined to avoid conflict with you. Physical appearance can intrinsically provide a basic level of respect based on simple fear. The opposite is also observably true. When the subject is not perceived as a threat the incentive to avoid conflict is lessened. How often do you see a group of high school students making fun of someone who appears to be capable of grinding them to a pulp. This response doesn't stop with high school. A large part of how you are treated throughout life is directly tied to a persons physical presence and by extension their intimidation.
To me, physical strength is not nearly as intimidating as the will to do what others won't. Some of the worst conflicts result from the inability to assess anything other than physical presence. No sane person enters willingly into a conflict they don't believe they can win. Yet whenever we see mismatched opponents we fail to take this into consideration.
We wonder sometimes what causes students become violent and lash out, but sometimes it seems so obvious. Knowing you are unable to win in a fair fight is hardly an incentive to fight fair. Kids are simply doing what man has done since the beginning of time. If you can't beat you opponent hand to hand then lie down and die or find a stick with which to strike him with.
I have come to terms with reality concerning this issue. Whether it is fair or not is irrelevant. Might makes right, and to a certain extent human beings are programmed at some basic level to respect strength. The most basic observable manifestation of strength will always be physical appearance. I must accept that I can not change this. The only real decision I have is whether my understanding compels me to change.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Day 1 of ...
Every year around this time my wife leaves to go scrap booking with her family at a cabin down south. She gets to spend some quality family bonding time and I get to hang out and do my own thing. This year is a little different however since our daughter was born.
I think at first she considered taking our daughter with her. Eventually however she realized it might be somewhat impractical. I have no reservations about watching our daughter by myself. After all I'm a big boy and a parent so I think of watching our daughter as less of a task and more of a responsibility and a privilege. I may be projecting, but I can't help but to sense a general feeling of apprehension about the arrangement from my mother and to a lesser degree my wife.
Yesterday was my first day taking care of her myself in the afternoon. Overall it was uneventful and normal. We played, she peed, she ate, she barfed on me, the usual. Once all her needs were taken care of and she had gone to sleep I was free to pursue "me time".
The only event that really stood out to me was her bath. As I sat beside the tub washing her and playing with her my mother came upstairs to "observe". At one point as I leaned her forward to wash her back she began to slide around the tub which is normal. When it happened my mother commented, "It's not so easy is it?" I looked up to see her smiling smugly as though reveling in some vindication.
I must admit, I was really irritated and after I moment I told her so. I have never insinuated that caring for a child was an "easy job". By her smugness and sense of vindication however I felt as though I had somehow been cast into the stereotypical mindset of an American male circa 1950. I had been type cast in a very unique way, not directly, but by this perception that any struggle I might undergo somehow provided a feeling of satisfaction.
I find it interesting from a mental standpoint just how intricate and subtle the implication was. Something as simple as exacting satisfaction at something could create a perception about someone else. I actually think that without realizing it, if someone then felt attacked it would invoke a defensive reaction them. Suddenly the person finds themselves defending a position they never actually had in the process of fending off what they believe is a personal attack, only later to wonder how they ended up on that side of the argument to begin with.
I have let go of much of my feelings about the situation now. Mostly because I have come to realize that she is most likely projecting feelings about my father or others. While I don't think it is right, I don't believe it is malicious. In the end if some small satisfaction at my expense might serve as a balm for some past hurt I don't want to rob her of it.
I think at first she considered taking our daughter with her. Eventually however she realized it might be somewhat impractical. I have no reservations about watching our daughter by myself. After all I'm a big boy and a parent so I think of watching our daughter as less of a task and more of a responsibility and a privilege. I may be projecting, but I can't help but to sense a general feeling of apprehension about the arrangement from my mother and to a lesser degree my wife.
Yesterday was my first day taking care of her myself in the afternoon. Overall it was uneventful and normal. We played, she peed, she ate, she barfed on me, the usual. Once all her needs were taken care of and she had gone to sleep I was free to pursue "me time".
The only event that really stood out to me was her bath. As I sat beside the tub washing her and playing with her my mother came upstairs to "observe". At one point as I leaned her forward to wash her back she began to slide around the tub which is normal. When it happened my mother commented, "It's not so easy is it?" I looked up to see her smiling smugly as though reveling in some vindication.
I must admit, I was really irritated and after I moment I told her so. I have never insinuated that caring for a child was an "easy job". By her smugness and sense of vindication however I felt as though I had somehow been cast into the stereotypical mindset of an American male circa 1950. I had been type cast in a very unique way, not directly, but by this perception that any struggle I might undergo somehow provided a feeling of satisfaction.
I find it interesting from a mental standpoint just how intricate and subtle the implication was. Something as simple as exacting satisfaction at something could create a perception about someone else. I actually think that without realizing it, if someone then felt attacked it would invoke a defensive reaction them. Suddenly the person finds themselves defending a position they never actually had in the process of fending off what they believe is a personal attack, only later to wonder how they ended up on that side of the argument to begin with.
I have let go of much of my feelings about the situation now. Mostly because I have come to realize that she is most likely projecting feelings about my father or others. While I don't think it is right, I don't believe it is malicious. In the end if some small satisfaction at my expense might serve as a balm for some past hurt I don't want to rob her of it.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Xoom xoom
I've been pineing over a tablet device for sometime now. When Motorola offered a free blu tooth keyboard and two day shipping with the purchase of a Xoom it was all the incentive I needed to get me off the fence. We barely managed to get our order in before the deal ended a few days ago, and today they arrived. We were a little disappointed with Fed Ex as they gave the packages to someone standing in our driveway who informed them that they did not live here. Luckly the person was a friend of ours and that aside they arrived in good condition.
We were excited and eager, as is anyone with a shiny new toy. The device is lightweight and yet solid enough that it doesn't feel flimsy or cheap. True the reviews it is a fingerprint magnet! After you the initial setup and "ohhhhh ahhhhh" phase I found myself thinking, "Now what?" I have this thing now what do I do with it? Of course I immediately tried to run Frontierville. At first attempt it loaded but did not seem playable. Afterwards I was impressed when I noticed that Android had already brought over and installed many of the apps that had been using on my phone.
The interface is smooth and responsive but suffers from an issue that seems indicitive of all tablets (even the Ipad). A hot topic seems to be how the different platforms handle multitasking. To my mind neither of them currently do in a true sense. Both OS's support uses multiple applications, but only one at a time. If you are in your browser and you get a message, you click a notification and now you are no longer looking at your browser as the chat window has filled the screen. When you finish your message you switch back yet again to your browser window once again leaving the chat window behind until you receive another message. I hesitate to use the word "window" but you need to be able to resize apps or set them on top of or behind other apps. I want browse the web and have my messages appear in a semi transparent window that I can respond to by clicking in.
I need to have patience however as the medium is still young and developing. I really like the "app model" of distributing software. For the most part apps are priced in the right range. $1, $2, $5 etc is more than reasonable for most apps and even in the event that you do purchase a dud your only out one or two dollars instead $30 or $40.
I've seen a number of posts asking whether or not a tablet could replace someones laptop or desktop pc. The answer of course never simple yes or no as it really depends on what you are using your machine for. As a developer it can't replace my work machine, but I have been intrigued by the idea of replacing my everyday use platform with a tablet. I think that with right configuration and applications a tablet could in fact be a viable alternative. I'm feeling confident enough that I am going to try it and see how it goes!
The challenge: Utilize the tablet in place of a pc or laptop for everyday use as appropriate. *Disclaimer, usage pertains to where it would be appropriate. ex. My work requires the use of development tools that are not available on most mobile platforms.
Friday, April 1, 2011
Friends and Facebook
Like it or not Facebook has had a significant impact of society, though I won't comment whether for the better or worse. Facebook didn't necessarily change the way in which we communicate, communicating being defined as the transmission of data. What fundamentally changed was the nature by which communication is consumed.
Rewind 50 years and consider the following scenario: You've just had a baby and you want to let other people know. What do you do? You compile a list of people you think might want to know about the event and write them each a letter. For brevity you try to consider whether some people will be interested enough. Fast forward a couple of decades and perhaps instead of letters you are deciding who to call. Speed forward a few more decades and replace the phone with email.
Email gave us the advantage of simply copying multiple recipients but the premise is still unchanged in that you must specifically select the people you think may have interest in your message. What Facebook really did that was so "revolutionary" was shifting the responsibility of interest from the person disseminating the information to those with an interest in receiving it. Passive observation has allowed for more people to take part in conversations they find relevant.
Intrinsic to the Facebook communication model is the concept of "Friends". I believe "Friends" was a good choice of words to describe the implied contract between both people. Lets look at what we are really saying when we accept a friend request. Creating this connection as friend means ultimately that both parties have some mutual interest in each other and by extension in what they may have to say or things happening their lives. It does not imply an obligation to comment or reply to the information that is being distributed. For all intents and purposes it represents the same principal as its "real life" counterpart.
Consider then very carefully what you are saying when you "UnFriend" someone. The message you are sending is very clear. It is the "real world" equivalent of saying to someone, "I have no real interest in anything you do or say nor am I interested in sharing anything with you. I do not care about you, what you do, or what you think." Some people believe that actions online do not extend to real life. As though to say you could write you friend an email to tell them you hate them and wish they would die, but still show up for dinner at their house later that day only to be confused at why they are upset. Your actions, digital or real, still convey Your feelings and intentions.
Recently a long time friend of my wife and I decided to "UnFriend" her and then became immediately confused when I in turn "UnFriended" him. At the surface it sounds quite silly and petty like children making faces at each other on the playground, but when you look a little harder you see the real intent. To translate it to the real world the conversation would be similar to the following:
In many ways I think Randi and I were both disappointed. Its not everyday that someone goes out of their way to tell you they don't like you. Our disappointment however was somewhat tempered by our expectations but this was one of those instances where you hope that you will be wrong.
In many ways these particular friends have always been a direct antithesis of us. Personally I don't consider this to be bad thing necessarily as different viewpoints and approaches are what make life interesting. The problem is the perspective that someone adopts when supporting an opposing view. Some people support their difference of opinions and beliefs as a simple matter of preference, while others tend toward tearing down opposing views.
Unfortunately these particular friends have always tended towards the latter category. One point in particular was children. Haven chosen not to reproduce anyone who did not feel similarly was stupid and wrong. Although we feel differently on the subject it had never mattered in the past since we didn't have children yet. When feared that having children would probably mean an end to our friendship with them but optimistically we hoped not. Although nothing was directly said, shortly after the announcement communication began to drop off until our friendship finally ended.
Looking back it is somewhat sad. Very few friendships actually come to a definitive end, opting instead to simply drift apart for a while. Some would say that such an ending indicates that there was never any real friendship to begin with, but I would have to disagree. Looking back I can definitely recall some very fond memories and good times. Though I do not relish the feelings of disappointment I would not trade the fun we had and the good times we shared in order to avoid it.
Rewind 50 years and consider the following scenario: You've just had a baby and you want to let other people know. What do you do? You compile a list of people you think might want to know about the event and write them each a letter. For brevity you try to consider whether some people will be interested enough. Fast forward a couple of decades and perhaps instead of letters you are deciding who to call. Speed forward a few more decades and replace the phone with email.
Email gave us the advantage of simply copying multiple recipients but the premise is still unchanged in that you must specifically select the people you think may have interest in your message. What Facebook really did that was so "revolutionary" was shifting the responsibility of interest from the person disseminating the information to those with an interest in receiving it. Passive observation has allowed for more people to take part in conversations they find relevant.
Intrinsic to the Facebook communication model is the concept of "Friends". I believe "Friends" was a good choice of words to describe the implied contract between both people. Lets look at what we are really saying when we accept a friend request. Creating this connection as friend means ultimately that both parties have some mutual interest in each other and by extension in what they may have to say or things happening their lives. It does not imply an obligation to comment or reply to the information that is being distributed. For all intents and purposes it represents the same principal as its "real life" counterpart.
Consider then very carefully what you are saying when you "UnFriend" someone. The message you are sending is very clear. It is the "real world" equivalent of saying to someone, "I have no real interest in anything you do or say nor am I interested in sharing anything with you. I do not care about you, what you do, or what you think." Some people believe that actions online do not extend to real life. As though to say you could write you friend an email to tell them you hate them and wish they would die, but still show up for dinner at their house later that day only to be confused at why they are upset. Your actions, digital or real, still convey Your feelings and intentions.
Recently a long time friend of my wife and I decided to "UnFriend" her and then became immediately confused when I in turn "UnFriended" him. At the surface it sounds quite silly and petty like children making faces at each other on the playground, but when you look a little harder you see the real intent. To translate it to the real world the conversation would be similar to the following:
Friend: "Hello Joshua and Randi. Randi I don't really like you anymore, I'm really not interested in anything you do or say and I'd really rather you stay out of my business as well."
Joshua: "Please leave now."
Friend: "Why? What did I do?!?"
Joshua: "Please leave now."
Friend: "Why? What did I do?!?"
In many ways I think Randi and I were both disappointed. Its not everyday that someone goes out of their way to tell you they don't like you. Our disappointment however was somewhat tempered by our expectations but this was one of those instances where you hope that you will be wrong.
In many ways these particular friends have always been a direct antithesis of us. Personally I don't consider this to be bad thing necessarily as different viewpoints and approaches are what make life interesting. The problem is the perspective that someone adopts when supporting an opposing view. Some people support their difference of opinions and beliefs as a simple matter of preference, while others tend toward tearing down opposing views.
Unfortunately these particular friends have always tended towards the latter category. One point in particular was children. Haven chosen not to reproduce anyone who did not feel similarly was stupid and wrong. Although we feel differently on the subject it had never mattered in the past since we didn't have children yet. When feared that having children would probably mean an end to our friendship with them but optimistically we hoped not. Although nothing was directly said, shortly after the announcement communication began to drop off until our friendship finally ended.
Looking back it is somewhat sad. Very few friendships actually come to a definitive end, opting instead to simply drift apart for a while. Some would say that such an ending indicates that there was never any real friendship to begin with, but I would have to disagree. Looking back I can definitely recall some very fond memories and good times. Though I do not relish the feelings of disappointment I would not trade the fun we had and the good times we shared in order to avoid it.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
The middle aged and the restless.
It's about 3:45 and I just can't seem to sleep. I've been restless the last few days although I'm not sure why. Even now as I lay here in bed blogging from my I feel unsettled. It's almost as though I've left something undone but I can't quite remember. Time seems to just slip past me again and the moments feel fleeting.
I have an overwhelming desire to go to the sea. Perhaps the weather here is just getting to me. So much left undone... and yet the thought of the warm ocean air and the sound of the waves crashing on the shore seems to excuse all responsibility. It's a pity that we spend most of our lives locked away from desires. At the end of our lives we will look back on the small handful of moments we truly enjoy and wonder why they number so few.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Uninteresting Musings
All this morning my mind has been preoccupied with the notion of time again. I was specifically pondering the concept of future. We often suppose that the idea of predestination precludes the possibility of free will. If it is written then what real choice do we have, and yet history is littered with predictions and visions. If time is not written there is nothing to see beyond the moment and if time is not recorded than there is nothing to look back on except memory.
An idea suddenly occurred to me that perhaps time and even mortality are not really the problem, but instead symptoms of something bigger, linearity. Our entire lives our governed by linearity and its manifestation as order. Words follow single file to form sentences, like footsteps that comprise a journey. We experience life in a single file arrangement of moments. Rob yourself of all your worldly senses and you will find that you have little left with which to distinguish the idea of "now" from "then" or even "soon".
If our eyes could see only black and white, color would still be present. The mind is limited by the means in which it has for receiving input. Time however is a concept and not necessarily limited by a physical input. The Greeks had two words for time chronos, which refers to the idea of sequential time, and kairos which refers to a qualitative period of undetermined time.
In the New Testament of the Bible kairos is referred to as "the appointed time in the purpose of God" or the time when God acts. In the Catholic church the words, "Kairos tou poiesai to Kyrio" are recited before the Divine Liturgy, which means "It is time for the Lord to act" and is used to indicate that the time of the liturgy intersects with eternity. As far back as Aristotle man has felt the need separate the distinctions of time to make absolutely clear that traditional linear concept was not the intended meaning.
If we remove the idea of linearity from time and assume for the moment that everything has happened, is happening, and will happen at once then perhaps destiny does not preclude free will. We ourselves have the choices and are making the choices. When an author writes a book he is choosing the words and order, and yet when he reads his book he is following his story in a linear fashion. It isn't that he cannot choose what his characters will do next, its that he has already chosen.
I doubt that anyone else will find any of my thoughts of any significant interest, but perhaps they will provide some comfort when I reflect on them later. There are moments when I feel so close understanding something I can't explain, and then suddenly its gone.
An idea suddenly occurred to me that perhaps time and even mortality are not really the problem, but instead symptoms of something bigger, linearity. Our entire lives our governed by linearity and its manifestation as order. Words follow single file to form sentences, like footsteps that comprise a journey. We experience life in a single file arrangement of moments. Rob yourself of all your worldly senses and you will find that you have little left with which to distinguish the idea of "now" from "then" or even "soon".
If our eyes could see only black and white, color would still be present. The mind is limited by the means in which it has for receiving input. Time however is a concept and not necessarily limited by a physical input. The Greeks had two words for time chronos, which refers to the idea of sequential time, and kairos which refers to a qualitative period of undetermined time.
In the New Testament of the Bible kairos is referred to as "the appointed time in the purpose of God" or the time when God acts. In the Catholic church the words, "Kairos tou poiesai to Kyrio" are recited before the Divine Liturgy, which means "It is time for the Lord to act" and is used to indicate that the time of the liturgy intersects with eternity. As far back as Aristotle man has felt the need separate the distinctions of time to make absolutely clear that traditional linear concept was not the intended meaning.
If we remove the idea of linearity from time and assume for the moment that everything has happened, is happening, and will happen at once then perhaps destiny does not preclude free will. We ourselves have the choices and are making the choices. When an author writes a book he is choosing the words and order, and yet when he reads his book he is following his story in a linear fashion. It isn't that he cannot choose what his characters will do next, its that he has already chosen.
I doubt that anyone else will find any of my thoughts of any significant interest, but perhaps they will provide some comfort when I reflect on them later. There are moments when I feel so close understanding something I can't explain, and then suddenly its gone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)