Focus on Life™

“A characteristic of a primitive culture is that it regards itself as highly advanced.”

I heard this somewhere and I think it puts nicely the point which we seldom stop to think. If we look into past we can feel superiority to past centuries and generations. They were not as advanced in technology and wisdom and they had more struggle with everyday life as we do today. Still putting into aside the material side of living— are we more developed and better human beings after all?

The outset is different. We look more nicely dressed and cleaner. We have better houses and means of transportation. More knowledge and better working conditions. Sure things are better now than in the past. More drugs, better healthcare and education system, less tyranny and so on. But are we more than a primitive civilization who thinks too high of oneself?

Despite all the great knowledge and wisdom we are still killing people. Others are starving to death and most of the human population on earth is barely coping with the ordinary life. A great minority of people is ruling and possessing most of the power and richness in the world. Most of the wealth seems to be distributed purely by chance. Some happen to live in an area of natural resources or has born to a country with great wealth. Personal talents or own hard work do not guarantee success in live. It is not what you know but who you know, still.

Today people are after beauty, wealth, power and possessions. They get kicks by consuming and thinking about their own happiness and pleasures. The society is build in a way that supports and sometimes encourages individualism and egoism. We encourage and sustain behaviour that can even harm other human beings and more importantly our nature. How many animals are making a mess in their own nest and destroying their own surroundings?

What could be the characteristics of a developed civilization? My answers are as good as yours. Here are some for a starters:

First of all they would not kill each other. Also they would appreciate the environment from which their existence is dependent on. They would try to improve the surroundings and hence leave it in a better shape than they got it from the previous generation. Individuals would not focus on their own good but for the well-being of others. The greatest heroes would be those who help and encourage others to success and achieve in life. Everyone would be recognised by their talents and capabilities and supported in developing those. One would not need to be supervised by a government or collegial entity— everyone would understand the common good and behave accordingly. The focus would be in the positive development of individuals and would concentrate on progress and not on failures and set backs. A behaviour based on pure power or submission in any form would not be tolerated (against animals as well).

The above items have nothing to do with our knowledge, technology or wisdom. They are more related to the very existence and life itself. More information does not necessarily mean that we are developing to the right direction. Or even mean that we are developing at all. More data and details of more issues do not necessarily mean that we have progressed in thinking and in the basic fundamentals. It almost seems that less people are considerate and firmly having their feet on the ground. More accurate description of the surroundings do not count as creative thinking, and that’s what most of our sciences are about. In the school we are taught pieces of information, descriptive details. Seldom anyone is encouraged to raise question and develop own thinking. Our children are not taught anything really useful— how to live and become better as human beings. How could they because their parents don’t know anything better: “Panem et Circenses”.

We need dualism to live and experience. The list of examples
is basically infinite: day and night, good and bad, dark and
light, male and female, healthy and sick, and so on. Without
the opposite concept, we would not recognize the difference;
all would be the same. And when there is nothing else, we
cannot imagine or appreciate anything else—it would not
exist for us. This would make learning difficult because there
would be no way to compare things and occasions. How could
we appreciate life if there was no death?

Still, we are blind. We do not want to see that one cannot
get the other without expecting the other to occur as well.
We’re after happiness but we’re afraid of sorrow. We’re after
wealth but cannot stand poorness. We get disappointed when
the other event appears. Usually it’s a great disaster or bad
karma/luck. And when the positive occurrence meets us, we
have deserved it—naturally. It’s quite funny, I must say.
Unfortunately, this is how we live and act. The consequences
of our blindness are not nice to see. As much happiness as we
create, we create at least the same amount of sorrow by not
seeing the full picture. Our selfish behavior creates a mess
that others have to solve.

Most of the dualisms are our own creation. They do not
actually exist in our physical world. Think, for example, of
good and bad or beauty and ugliness. Each person formulates
his or her own perception of these concepts. Things are just
what they are—we create the meaning, the dualism. If we
would see the pure, true existence, there would be far fewer
surprises and disappointments and far fewer ideological wars
or “acts of rightness.” But are we able to learn to live without
the dualistic existence reminding us the lesson every day? For
instance, humankind has not learned to live in peace since the
first day of our existence—the concept seems so difficult to
master. Yet if you hit someone with a hammer and the other
person gets hurt, he or she might just hit back. Then you are
hurt as well, and everybody is worse off. Get the full picture?

Jeremy Rifkin’s latest book, The European Dream: How Europe’s Vision of the Future is Quietly Eclipsing the American Dream, takes a strong stand where he states that American dream is worth dying but European worth living. He questions USA’s superpower status in the economy and compares the Old Continent with US and surprisingly the east side of the Atlantic looks more appealing. Naturally it’s all about metrics but I must say he has a point. Rifkin’s other books include The End of Work among others.

Why do two people live together? This question came up
today when my friend had some issues with his spouse.

The framework Martin Buber created in his famous book
I and Thou in the 1920s is one way to treat the subject. Most
of the time we are living in an I—It relationship with our
world. The world around us has some purpose for us. We
have created names (labels) and categories for various items,
things, and actions around us. We have a perception of them
and we think (i.e., we think we know) what they are. This
works OK with ordinary functions and items but not so well
with people. Still, most of the time we treat people like
things. They serve a purpose for us.

Another relationship is possible and this is I—Thou way
of being in the world. We do not try to categorize or label the
other. We admit that we cannot know the other person
entirely, not even talking about changing him or her. In addi-
tion, we are constantly changing, which means that nothing is
static (i.e., our thought model will not be realistic). In an I—
Thou relationship, we do not have any purpose, function, or
“image” of the other person in our mind. We simply take the
other as “fresh,” how she or he appears and is. We both are
what we are and discover each other every moment. This rela-
tionship can be achieved via a dialogue. In dialogue, both par-
ties share and contribute by creating something between
them that has no preconditioning or any expectations.

Quite a lot of marriages end up in divorce nowadays. We
often hear couples explain the reason for the split as the other
party changed or the couple just drifted apart over time. This
could not happen in an I—Thou relationship where someone
is not trying to get something from the other party. Nor is
there any attempt to change or try to define the other person.
When we create an image of the other person in our mind, we
also instantly create expectations and relationships. We create
an object that serves a purpose for us. Everything is fine as
long as the “image” in our mind matches with the reality. But
it only takes a few moments before the other changes and
shows some parts of his or her existence that do not fit to our
“perfect” picture of the other we had created earlier on. When
the illusion is broken, we get angry. We are disappointed or
frustrated. Our image of the beautiful life together did not
materialize. We had thought it through already (i.e., lived) in
our mind and then we just should have had to live according
to our predefined plan (i.e., imagination). When this does not
happen, we blame the other. We did not expect this. We did
not want this or we did not expect this to happen. The other
has changed—how unfair! Is there anything or anyone we can
rely on or trust anymore on these days!?!

Did we ever know the other? Did we actually have our own
needs and illusions and dreams we wanted to fulfil? The other
was just an object for those purposes. He or she came into the
picture because I needed him or her to fulfil my
dreams/needs. Maybe I was lonely, or needed to improve my
self-esteem, or I was after wealth or security, wanted to fulfil
others’ expectations (e.g., relatives) of a socially acceptable life
or I wanted to have a beautiful wedding or a family. Maybe I
was after happiness because I was unhappy before. Being
together was not enough in the first place. The question was
not even about the other person. We disappointed ourselves.
We failed our own expectations. The other person was just a
vehicle for our own needs. Were there any possibilities for a
lasting relationship after all—maybe everything went wrong
from the first impression (thought)?

Relationships can work out only when we are not expect-
ing anything from the other, ever, and when there is no need
to be fulfilled or anything that is lacked. When just being is
enough and no expectations are laid out, we can find love and
happiness. A true dialogue.

Do we know what it is to live? We say we’re living. So we
should be masters of life. What does it mean to be alive?

It looks like a lot of routines and useless everyday tasks. We
call it the ordinary life. But by being alive we mean none of
those moments of gray days and sleepy mornings. For us to be
alive is about experiences and moments that stick out from
the ordinary—something to remember, no matter whether it
was for good or bad. Nietzsche wrote about his own life and
marked that his weakest moments were his greatest moments.
They made him stronger.

Our greatest moments are the ones where we have experi-
enced something meaningful. They have taught us something
about life, about its sadness, sorrow, beauty, joy, anger, hatred,
love, happiness, or freedom. These lessons usually do not
come easily. Many times it means that we have to break out of
the ordinary, safe life, and we can be caught by surprise.
Experiences require us to extend our limits—come out of our
safety zone. (Otherwise they would be part of our ordinary
lives.) Sometimes stretches are giant leaps that hurt us deeply.

On the other hand, some experiences happen out of
nowhere, where we can just enjoy the beautiful moment with
total harmony like a sunset on a perfect summer day. There
are no expectations, and we take life as it comes, with no fear
or stress but just with curiosity and open-mindedness—like
in a holiday trip.

What are the moments you’re the most proud of? For
many, these moments are ones where we have done some-
thing that we believe was the “right thing to do.” Something
noble, humble, unselfish—almost heroic. We were not think-
ing about ourselves, we were acting for a greater good.
Hollywood movies, fairytales, and novels are full of these sto-
ries. They resonate in us and give us a good feeling. Somehow
it’s built on us and is universal. Is that to be truly alive and the
purpose of life? Or is it called love? And what if love, life, and
truth are just different names for the same purpose, and our
journey is to get to know them by living and experiencing.

Actors monitor their performances by watching the dailies.
The best dailies are watched by no one We just live them.

We would learn so much by being able to watch our own
dailies each evening. Weekly review, not even yearly or
decadewide appraisal, would be sufficient. Most of the time
we are so busy, so occupied with something to do.

The TV is on, the radio at least. If we have a free moment,
we catch up on the unread papers or magazines. While we
await the next meeting or appointment, we spend our few
spare moments talking to someone on the cell phone. We
have got nothing to do at home? Start cleaning. Arrange your
record collection. Go for a coffee. Never stop. Fill your life
with action and noise.

Feel important. Feel loved. Feel experienced. Feel busy.
Feel balanced. Feel secure. Feel happy.

What happens if we stop? Can we stop? Most of our lives
we are hiding, escaping, filling the blanks by occupying our-
selves. Refusing to face ourself. We look for easy fixes.

We’re after feeling good. We’re after happiness. The prob-
lem is that our perception of happiness changes the minute
we achieve what we were after. Our object of desire and hap-
piness shifts from item to item, never stopping. We’re like
hamsters in the wheel—until we decide to step out of it.To
do that, we need to see the dailies first. Not many of us have
found those. They are hidden to the world we know nothing
about. They are too close to us. We just live them by spinning
the wheel.

Who thinks if there is no thought.

Who is aware when we’re dreaming.

Today’s thought.

It is easy to act outright. It takes more nerve and courage to question first and evaluate the motives of one’s actions. And it’s almost extreme to make up one’s main after all those steps and being able to act rationally against one’s first hunch…

Yesterday I had a good conversation about ownership. These days I’m going through a process whether to acquire a car or not. Barely there has been a moment in my adult life when I did not have my own vehicle (usually a fast one). Now I’m selling my bike but seriously thinking of not getting anything as a replacement.

Why do we need a car? In many cases if one lives in a big city it’s much cheaper to rent a car or use a taxi instead. This same analogy applies to a summer cottage / yacht and other stuff as well. Even though the financial calculations would indicate clearly that there is no point buying anything - still we do it.

Illusion of freedom is one of my favourites. At your own will you can go whenever and wherever you desire. Yeah, right. Thinking about my past years there haven’t been that many of those spontanious acts of freedom carried out. Living in the downtown is more hassle free without using a car no matter whether one has it or not.

Another good point was that one do not want to think about the costs all the time. It’s easier to hand out a thick pile of cash at once and then pretend that the capital costs are not real. When using taxi one has to think about money every time.
As a car owner one pretends to ignore the endless maintenance costs, insurances, taxes, and of course the petrol costs. And the biggest of all in more expensive vehicles is the huge depreciation of capital. Quite a lot of money to be burned just to have a nice option to use the vehicle if one would need it and being able to forget the money issue at least for every 400 kms or so.

How about the real motives? Above were the obvious ones. But the true ones have nothing to do with the transportation from A to B. Our mind is a master to hide the true motives under rational surface with convenience and practicality etc. Who can admit that owning one’s own vehicle has nothing to do with self-esteem, ego, showing off or ownership (i.e. feeling of security by owning)? If not why is the world full of exciting and exotic cars with more horsepowers and gadgets one would need to get from A to B even in the normal range of family cars. And most of all we have the taxis and public transportation anyhow where one can work at the same time while travelling. I am what I consume and possess might not be that far from the truth still today. Poor nature and environment. They have to bear the consequences of all our useless nonsense.

We’re free to do whatever we desire. We have a free will—or
do we?

How free is our will? Are we able to decide what are we
going to do tomorrow? We can plan things but we cannot
always guarantee that things are going to turn out the way we
have planned. Other things can happen. So where is the free
will?

Even if we forget the future and just focus on our behavior
I’m not sure that we have any freedom at all. Pick a situation
that could happen in your life. How do you think you will
behave? What kind of decisions do you think you will make
in this situation?

For example, you’re in a traffic jam and already late for a
meeting. No big deal. You have been in the situation before.
How do you act? Do you behave differently every time? Most
likely not. You just follow the pattern or habit you have
mechanically repeated time after time. You react. Even if the
situation is a brand new one for you, you still have an idea of
how you will act in the moment when it happens. We are
stuck with our own thinking and perceptions of the world.
We are dragging our past with us, and it ties us to the behav-
ior patterns and sets the limits to our freedom of choices.
How free is a will that cannot innovate and create new
dynamic responses every moment? Repeating old formulas
does not sound so free after all. Couples who have been
together for a long time know what each other will say or do
beforehand—each has learned the other partner’s thinking
pattern. Very original and free, indeed.

Free will is an illusion. From the outset, it looks like every-
thing is possible. By observing the issue more carefully,
though, we start to realize that the true freedom of will is
mainly limited to our point of view (perception)—how we
take the events that occur in our lives. Are we sad, disap-
pointed, angry, frustrated, and so forth?

Next time you’re late for a meeting and traffic is really
jammed, instead of getting red and speeding around, try
catching yourself in the middle of getting angry and just
change your behavior. No point getting angry—you’re already
late. You cannot reverse the clock. Why not be in a good
mood and instead enjoy the ride. This will be less stressful,
and you might even avoid a ticket. Sounds more free to me.
The trick is to keep this new perception going—all the time.
Don’t follow the old thinking formulas every moment—be
awake. If you do this, you might even do something unpre-
dictable, fresh.

Flow of time is an illusion. Time is motion. It has a dura-
tion—a measurement of motion from one point to another.
Quantum mechanics do not behave this way and, therefore,
Einstein was more than a bit upset: “God does not play dice
with the universe.”

The paradox is that we are always in motion—if not phys-
ically at least in our mind. We are never really in the moment.
Our mind wanders around endlessly either recalling past
memories and experiences or projecting things for the future.
Our mind reacts for the current moment while not being able
to experience the current now time as it is. We do not see the
world as it is. Our own view of the world is adjusted and
biased, depending on our personal history, cultural back-
ground, social and behavioral standards and expectations, as
well as experience and memories of similar situations in the
past.We see what we know, and we know what we have expe-
rienced in the past. See the loop?

We crave security and predictability. We want to have sta-
bility in our lives. Unfortunately, “now” is always new—
unknown. It is a dynamic process that cannot be known
beforehand. It destroys part of the known in order to create
something new. Therefore it is called the “change.” Still, we
want to be able to be in control. We cannot stand the unpre-
dictable—at least our mind thinks so.

Have you tried to keep your mind still, not thinking about
the future or the past? Not thinking about anything while
walking in the street. Purely observing and appreciating what-
ever comes your way. What happens? By not letting your mind
label and judge things around you and squeezing your obser-
vations into a historical framework (your experience or preju-
dice),you start to see clearly and register more than ever about
the world around you. And the best part is that you can even
recall those things later on. You can visualize your entire route
to work or home, with all the details and passersby, not even
talking about their clothing or what they were saying and so
on. All this is possible because your mind is not “working,”
thinking about the past or worrying about the future. You’re
free to live in the moment—always in the timeless now time.

How could you know something beforehand and label it
because the now moment is ever changing, new all the time,
the unknown? Still our static mind wants to control some-
thing dynamic. And it always fails, but we do not see it. Our
mind has its tricks to hide its own faults. It lays blame in all
the other directions. It’s always somebody else’s fault. Our
expectations are not fulfilled. We are sad or angry, frustrated
or surprised, thanks to our mind. But who created those
expectations and thoughts in the first place? They did not
happen, as the physical world exists, objectively. They were
our own mind’s creations, which we treated as real. They
became real for us. They are our own “static” creation, which
did not align with the real world—the now time.

It’s time to stop extrapolating the past for the current
moment and take life as it comes. Without objections or
force. Just by letting go and letting it flow.