Quote #42

“The only thing worse than a man you can’t control is a man you can.”
- Margo Kaufman

Over the years I’ve worked with all sorts of people. I must say, it has been frustrating trying to work with some of them. No matter how hard you try to help, influence, or direct them, they do whatever they want (for better or for worse).

It’s infuriating really, but I suppose it’s better than the alternative.

Sure, being humble, teachable, and a good follower – those are all great traits. I don’t think having those traits makes you a controllable man.

But when I look around me at the way people are living reactive lives – reacting to this, responding to that, and all in the precise manner that was intended by the creator of the media – I see a bunch of sad little people who have no idea they aren’t thinking for themselves.

I am glad that I was taught to think for myself as a child. I am not bound by what the masses feel, think, believe, or wish. I am bound by my own will and my agency.

I hope that I can teach my children similar principles.

Quote #37

“I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
- Albert Einstein

As a species, I don’t think we’re doing very well.

We’re meddling in the business of other creatures and the whole planet, thinking ourselves to be God. We attempt to rescue species of animals that are endangered, and we impose breeding restrictions (or lift hunting restrictions) on animals that are over-populating in a way that is affecting us.

Rescuing endangered species may have been a good idea for animals that we hunted or killed irresponsibly, or species that we affected negatively by deforestation, but only to a point. Part of life for animals is adapting or dying. Either they learn to live with changes in their ecosystem, or they die. You’ll never see a lion skip out on a caribou meal simply because he noticed that there were fewer caribou around lately.

Even among the many classes of life on Earth, we are the most contentious internally. We fight (squabble, really) over the most ridiculous things, and we can’t keep out of each other’s business. We resort to violence much faster than we should. We turn simple events into circus-worthy spectacles on a weekly (almost daily) basis. I could go on, but it’s depressing me.

I can’t watch the news anymore. Last time I overheard a story on cable news I got so depressed some of my random Twitter followers asked if I was OK. That’s not cool (but it was kind of the concerned netizen). Today I heard a story summary on CNN that very nearly sent me into tears. I can browse news headlines on Google News without too much trouble since 1) Google News tailors the headlines to my interests (to an extent) and 2) I can choose what stories I click on and which ones I skip – and headlines aren’t as depressing as whole summaries that leave little to the imagination.

Our species worries me. I am concerned every day about how bad things are.

Having made discoveries that were essential to the development of nuclear weapons, Einstein knew that weapons development wouldn’t stop at nuclear power. He knew that humans loved proliferation, and that once two nations harnessed nuclear power for weapons, they would be forced to invent even more powerful weapons in order to prove their military prowess.

The worst part is that the world is never in short supply of maniacs willing to use these weapons. It’s true that the sane (or at least more sane) world leaders are mostly against the use of weapons of mass destruction due to the philosophy of Mutually Assured Destruction. But all it takes is one crazy person to begin a chain of events that will ultimately lead to the mass destruction of large populations and the infrastructures necessary to maintain life.

The next major world war does not promise to end well, and our species hasn’t done anything in recent years to show a trend toward improvement.

I’ll try to pick something less depressing to write about next time. Until then, try to be a peaceful, kind person.

Quote #25

“Never fight an inanimate object.”
- J. O’Rourke

This quote has unexpected meaning for me today.

Sure, at first glance it’s just funny. I picture a guy fighting a couch, or a rock, or maybe a tree. His knuckles are bloody, the inanimate object isn’t sustaining any noticeable damage, and the guy just looks silly. His rage, his folly, and the futility of his actions are all standing out strong.

Today my mind was flooded with chaos when two work related training opportunities hit at the same time. They don’t conflict with each other, but they are both mandatory, and they will turn my life upside down. Lots of complications, both with work and with my family life, began tearing through my brain. It was like a couple of furious tornadoes ripping through the middle of New York City. I couldn’t think straight. I couldn’t make sense of anything.

I guess they call this panic.

The thing is, I don’t generally experience panic in this way. Events don’t set my panic mode off. Situations do, but not by surprise. For example, I know I will panic if someone draws a syringe from their pocket and attempts to jab me with it. I experience irrational fear in the presence of needles. That definitely causes panic. To a lesser degree, I know I will panic in a crowded place if I become stressed. Stress doesn’t make me panic, but stress on top of over-stimulation (such as being around too many people) will generally make me panic a little.

It’s a rare thing to see me panic, even just in my head, in the face of unexpected situations. I am familiar with my limits, and with what makes me panic. But today, in a situation that would normally only cause a fit of frustration, I panicked.

Thankfully, I was able to calm myself down and work my way through the problems. I made a phone call, wrote an email, spoke with my boss, and soon had pretty much set everything up to handle the two training events.

Thinking back on it, my panic mode could have led to me attempting to fight against what had happened. Perhaps part of what had jammed up my logic was that I knew there were forces involved that I couldn’t influence, and yet I couldn’t stop my mind from frantically exploring every possible avenue in search of a solution. Those are forbidden paths, I told myself. You can’t seek solutions there! And yet, the raging storm had already begun, and I just had to wait for the power to die down.

It may have been a unique experience for me, but I have seen it happen before in others. People tend to have these sorts of irrational confrontations with problems from time to time. I think it’s natural.

Being as stressed as I was this morning (the two training events obviously weren’t the only things on my plate at the time), I don’t know what I could have done to prevent that little panic attack, but I do know what prevents the more common, but less intense panic attacks I see in others. It is important to identify the inanimate objects in a problem.

You must choose your battles. You cannot fight against just any element of a problem. Where are the stones? Where are the trees? If you’re trying to solve a problem, but you’re not getting anything but bloody knuckles, perhaps you’re just fighting an inanimate object. The objects you need to fight are almost always contained within yourself.

You should first look inside of yourself and see what you can attack inside of you that might fix the problem. Have you acted immaturely? Have you been selfish? Have you been negligent? Have you made a mistake? Fix it first, then reevaluate. Continue the process until the only things left that could possibly be keeping the problem alive are outside of you. Then look closely at things that reside in your circle of influence. Is there anything that you definitely have some degree of control over that could be changed to fix the problem?

Finally, as a last resort, if nothing in your circle of influence can solve the problem, you begin looking for the right targets on the outside. You find the responsible individual. You find the right tactic. You plan ahead. You strategize. This is where one of my favorite books comes into play. The Art of War taught me a lot about fighting to win.

But in the beginning, ensure that you are not about to engage in battle with an inanimate object. That would just be silly.

Quote #23

“What is beautiful is good, and who is good will soon also be beautiful.”
- Sappho

This is a difficult concept for some to understand, but I think it’s quite simple.

First, there are many things in our life that are beautiful. Obviously, there are some things that some people see as beautiful that aren’t necessarily good in the purest sense of the word. But to me, if something is inherently, naturally, and at its core beautiful, then it is a good thing.

That first part doesn’t baffle too many people, but I can see how it could become a tool for justifying certain bad behaviors.

It’s the second part that I love though, because it is a powerful statement that I have found to be true throughout my short life.

Those who strive to be and do good, even if they are not on the surface an especially attractive person (physically speaking), they will become beautiful. I have seen this happen time and time again. Even my wife, who was never someone I would consider ugly, didn’t attract me physically in the beginning. But she was working hard at being good. Over time, she became beautiful to me. Beauty is, after all, in the eye of the beholder. And I beheld that she was beautiful.

This works for anyone, any time. People around you who notice the good in you will also see beauty. It may not happen immediately, but that beauty will bloom before their eyes as your goodness and its beauty are revealed to them.

Quote #22

“Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing.”
- Ralph Waldo Emerson

I will have to do something that isn’t Ralph Waldo Emerson next time. The thing is, he’s just got so many good quotes out there, and many of them are among my favorites.

This particular quote is on my mind right now because of something I am currently witnessing between… people I know.

Of course, because this is a free and public Internet, I am going to attempt to be as impartial as I can in relaying the circumstances and how they relate to my quote, but given the topic at hand, I will have no choice but to present one party as having acted favorably in regards to the subject.

Our story begins in a lush, yet remote forest clearing. There, at the edge of the clearing, were three small houses packed tightly next to each other, side by side. The front doors all shared a sidewalk, and the back doors all opened up to a small space for a yard. The middle house had a fence around the backyard space, but the other two did not.

From left to right, in the first house there lived a short Asian man and his wife. They had a small child and a dog. The dog was well-liked by his family, and he took good care of them. He was very protective of his family.

In the middle house there lived a very tall man from England. He and his short wife had two dogs that got along well. The dogs were good friends, and they were both carefree, happy dogs. They didn’t get to run free often, but they enjoyed their fenced-in yard and loved sitting on the couch despite being told not to do it.

Finally, on the far right, there lived a medium sized man with his wife and two children. They tried as hard as they could to be good, quiet neighbors, but the rigors of family life often resulted in a slammed door or a loudly spoken word here or there. The medium sized man and his wife enjoyed the company of the tall man, and had often had pleasant exchanges with the short Asian man’s family.

Perhaps the only potential problem in the small neighborhood existed because of a law set by the town to which the houses belonged. All dogs were required to be on a leash when not contained within a fenced yard. Where the short man came from, dogs were allowed to run free, and his dog was well-behaved. He saw no reason to keep his dog tied up or fenced in. Most of the time the dog was inside the home, but when they went for walks or took the dog out for any other reason, the man never had the dog on a leash.

This didn’t cause problems most of the time, and so the neighbors largely tolerated the behavior. Then, one day, the dog was out alone and the medium sized man’s wife walked too close to the dog. He became startled, and being close to his owner’s properties, he became territorial. He growled at the woman, and this frightened her. She told her husband of the incident, but the husband declared that the dog was simply being protective of his territory. Surely it wasn’t anything to be concerned about.

All three men worked for a large business situated just outside the forest. They each worked slightly different schedules, but often passed each other while going about their duties at work.

One day when all three neighbors were home, the Asian man decided to relax with his dog while listening to his music. There he sat, his dog at his feet and his music drifting gently through the air, soaking in the loveliness of his home and enjoying the relaxation.

Suddenly, his music was drowned out by the sound of his wife cleaning the home. He turned up the volume a little until he could make out the sounds again. Returning to his favorite chair, he closed his eyes and began to relax once more.

Next door, at the tall man’s house, the wife was watching a television show when the sound of the Asian man’s music forced her to turn up the volume.

The Asian man heard the television volume go up next door, and became angry because he could no longer hear his music. So he turned it up.

The tall man heard the music volume go up again, and decided it was just too loud. He couldn’t hear himself thinking over the noise of the music and the television show.

Calmly he knocked on his neighbor’s door and requested that they turn the volume down.

Pride, immaturity, selfishness, and feelings of entitlement seized control of the two men. What might have been a simple compromise or act of tolerance quickly escalated into a war of unheard of proportions in that region. Both parties complained loudly and freely to their friends, family, and coworkers.

The battles raged on for several long weeks before the problem became an issue at their place of employment. Their management had to get involved because the bickering and squabbling became a barrier to effective work output for both men.

A meeting was held, a compromise was thought to have been reached, and the two men begrudgingly shook hands and parted ways.

Several months passed. On a couple of rare occasions the two men had arguments over the dog running free, over volume levels, or over anything else they could manage to argue about. The medium height neighbor on the far right rarely heard anything from either neighbor, and largely presumed the conflict to have ended.

By this time, both the tall and the medium neighbor had experienced several run-ins with the short man’s growling dog. The dog had grown slightly more bold and aggressive, and he often patrolled the sidewalk in front of the three houses as though the entire neighborhood were his. The tall neighbor, of course, brought this to the attention of the short neighbor, but it quickly turned into more bickering. The medium man simply felt that it wasn’t his job to tell a grown man to obey the law. He simply decided to hope that some kind of law enforcement officer would happen to see the dog loose one day. Surely justice would be served then.

The tall man, though, perhaps because of his culture and possibly due to his nature as a man who had a deep sense of personal responsibility and accountability, much preferred knowing that he had done all that he could to resolve problems before they became worse.

Unfortunately, the short man greatly resented being told what to do and how to do it. He was glad for his independence and autonomy, and he had no intention of letting the taller man boss him around.

And so, the squabbling began again.

Now, the tall man had many friends, including the medium sized man and his wife. One evening the tall man invited most of his friends over to his house for a party. They played games, they ate food, and they enjoyed each other’s company late into the night. Occasionally, the party-goers let out exclamations of excitement over events in their games, or their conversation became passionate to the point of loudness. The medium man and his wife were sleeping during the party, having stopped by to say hello earlier in the evening, but retired early to ensure they could get enough rest to deal with their children in the morning.

The noises of the party were not enough to wake or disturb anyone in the house on the right, but on the left the bitter short man decided he had heard enough. He called the law enforcement agency and requested that the party be silenced at once.

This action, of course, angered the tall man, and he also decided he had put up with enough. So he went to the city officials and began to file a request to have the short Asian man evicted from his home.

The tall man was not silent about his actions, of course. He told anyone who would listen. And so once again the management found out about the fighting. And once again meetings were held.

This time the management had also decided they had seen enough. So they appointed a mediator to hear the evidence from both sides and make a decision on what should happen to the two men, how justice should be served, and perhaps even who was at fault.

Clearly both men had exhibited copious amounts of angry behavior ranging from name-calling to noise-making.

Now, we will skip ahead to the end of the hearings before discussing how this relates to the quote.

In the end, the tall man’s actions were nearly entirely ignored. An investigation was launched into one or two comments he had made in anger that could be considered racist, though he may not have intended them to be. By the end of the hearings most observers agreed that it didn’t matter much since he had clearly behaved himself in a more mature and controlled manner.

The short man though was condemned for his actions. He was punished quite severely and many people felt he could have been punished further.

It’s almost hard to believe that the punishment would be handed out so unevenly given that both parties behaved with immaturity and anger. It’s true that the only real law broken was that of the dog being off the leash, but surely all of the bickering between them couldn’t be blamed on just one of them, could it?

What was the difference between the two that decided the difference between their punishments? Common sense and plain dealings.

Long before the formal investigations with the mediator, the tall man decided that he would be straight forward and plain in his dealings with the mediator. He had also been plain in his dealings with the short man, despite the anger that motivated some of his less fortunate actions. And so, he resolved to continue to deal plainly and honestly with the situation, since common sense dictated that he couldn’t be punished if he hadn’t done anything legally wrong.

And so, in the course of the proceedings, the tall man was honest, plain and open about his actions. He admitted to using strong, angry language. He admitted to everything that he did that he felt was wrong.

The short man, on the other hand, took the stance of denying that he had done anything wrong. When asked about his dog, he replied that he had a cat. When shown evidence that he had a dog, he replied that he always kept the dog chained up. When presented with evidence that the dog was often loose, he was caught in his lies. And so it was with everything else. He spun webs and webs of lies attempting to hide his wrongs and paint a picture in which he had been a victim rather than an aggressor and a bickering neighbor. Lies, he discovered, could not hide what he really was.

And so when the lies about his own behavior began to fail, he sought to destroy the tall man with wild accusations. He lied about how noisy the tall man was, he accused the tall man of hating him due to his being Asian, and he did everything he could to discredit the tall man’s position of honesty. But the tall man had been honest, and he had evidence to support his honesty. The lies could not destroy the honesty of the tall man.

The short man was astonished at the tall man’s common sense and at his plain dealings. The mediator was astonished as well, and all involved took note of the virtues of common sense and plain dealings.

May we always practice common sense and deal plainly with our fellow man.

Quote #21

“Men who know the same things are not long the best company for each other.”
- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Many people are afraid of things or people that are different. People can be very intolerant of things they don’t understand or aren’t comfortable with.

Differences are the spice of life. If everything I said and did was exactly like what you know and also do, then you wouldn’t find me worth your time – you spend all of your time around someone who is almost exactly the same.

This idea translates into so many other things in life. People who have the same interests can only talk about those interests for so long. They may feel very comfortable together for a while, but they will not long be the best company for each other.

Similarly, things that we find abhorrent in ourselves, when they appear in others, become even more of a nuisance. The similarities between people may bring them together at first, but they are not the glue that binds us, they are not the spice that flavors our relationships.

I am fascinated by people, and especially people who are different from me. The more different they are, the more interesting I find them.

I find that there are many friendships and relationships in my life that began with a shared interest or two and solidified with the discovery of new and interesting things about the other person. There have also been some relationships that began with so many things in common that it was hard to believe we were two separate people. The fact of the matter is, unless there are differences, relationships of the second type usually go stale much faster than relationships of the first type.

I have made my friends from among the most different people I have found. Different from each other, and different from me. That is why I think we have been such good friends, and that is why I feel that my life is as interesting as it is.

I hope I never meet someone too much like myself, and if I do, please don’t make me spend too much time around him. I’ll get bored.

Quote #17

“What we become depends on what we read after all of the professors have finished with us. The greatest university of all is a collection of books.”
- Thomas Carlyle

Books and their relationship to people have been on my mind a lot in the last few hours. I’m consumed with these thoughts, and the only way to free my mind is to type them all out. I’ll get to my feelings on this quote specifically in a moment, but first we have to take a little trip down story lane.

It all started when my daughter (she’ll be two in a few weeks) pointed at a picture of someone and said, “crying.” This has been a theme with her. It’s no exaggeration to say that she is obsessed with the idea of crying. Every time she hears it she perks up and talks about it excitedly. Even when she herself is upset and crying due to hurt feelings or bruised body parts, she says, “I like crying.” She thinks every picture has someone or something crying in it, and she likes crying no matter who is doing the crying and no matter the reason. It’s her passion, I suppose.

Tonight, just before dinner, she mentioned crying again. I turned to my wife and said, “If I ever wrote a book about our daughter’s life, it would be titled, The Whole World is Crying.” My wife laughed, because there really isn’t a better way to sum up the oddly sadistic, slightly hidden side of her character.

We went on to joke a little about what we would title the book about our rambunctious six-year-old. I think I liked, I’m Not Bouncing Off the Walls, They’re Bouncing Off Me” best. The conversation went into remission at that point, but the idea ran wild in my head.

I brought the topic back up later after the books and people comparison had been swirling around in my brain for a while. You see, I’ve always been somewhat fond the idea of people as books, and of the “don’t judge a book by its cover” axiom. This fondness probably stems from my ability to make accurate predictions of traits a person possesses based on my initial observation of their outward appearance and behaviors. Essentially, I view people as books, and I do indeed judge them (initially, at least) by their covers.

However, when I began to wonder about what title I would give to a book about my wife, I couldn’t come up with just one. In fact, I came up with two (off the top of my head).

My wife and I have this running joke that she’s a very intelligent individual, but her communication skills are surprisingly poor at times. I once offered in jest that English must not be her first language, which, in reality, couldn’t be further from the truth. Also, she’s endlessly fascinated with different cultures, social behaviors and world politics, so I titled one of her books, I Love Your Country but I Don’t Speak the Language.

I titled her other hypothetical book, Ear to the Ground with My Eyes Shut. She’s like an old Indian tracker with her ear to the ground listening, able to tell that there are exactly three hundred men, fast approaching, some on horseback, accompanied by one hundred members of her own tribe. However, if she’d open her eyes and look out at the horizon, she’d realize that it’s actually a war, and if she doesn’t move soon, the whole battle will be right on top of her. She might not feel entirely flattered by the idea, but she knows it’s the truth, and it’s one of many things that I love about her.

Its obvious that adults cannot be summed up in the title of just one book. Adults represent a collection of books.

As I transitioned from thinking of book titles to sum up the people in my life to the next phase of my train of thought, this quote about books making up who we are entered my mind. To me, this quote is beautiful because I love to read and learn from the wonderful treasures of knowledge that are stored up in books. My formal education feels petty in comparison to the vast hordes of knowledge I’ve amassed from reading good books. It’s striking to me that, apart from my family relationships and friendships, the only thing I’ve acquired on earth that is of any value to me is my knowledge (something I’ve been well aware of in principle my whole life, but it never really “hit” me in this context).

So books take on this whole new level of meaning in the grand scheme of humanity and life, and my train of thought continued to…

I realized that chewing gum is the most pointless creation ever devised by man, and we’d be a lot better off if it were abolished from the face of the planet. That’s a discussion for another day, though.

Wouldn’t it be beautiful, I decided, if a memorial bookshelf were erected in my honor when I parted this world? It could be filled with all of my favorite books according to a list I maintained while alive. Then, when a friend or family member visited the bookshelf, I could continue to offer them wisdom and knowledge from my favorite volumes. Heck, I could even throw some fiction in there to entertain them. And with my ambitions to write, my memorial bookshelf could feature an entire section of books authored by myself.

The idea warmed my heart.

Then it went a step further. Families could own and maintain a family library. It would be a place to erect these memorial bookshelves. Then you’d have one place to go that would be filled with rows and rows of the books that your fathers and grandfathers loved.

In fact, right now I’m pondering the prospect of sending an email to all of my family members asking them to include a list of about two dozen of their their favorite books in their wills. When they die, I could build beautiful, handcrafted bookshelves in their honor (or find suitable shelves on eBay and have the loved-one’s name engraved on them), and fill them with the books that they loved. Then, when I am wealthy, I could buy a plot of land, build a library, and call it the Haddad Memorial Library. I could appoint a board (similar to a board of trustees) to be caretakers to the library, and charge them with doing everything it takes to ensure the library’s continuous maintenance and operation for all of eternity.

What a legacy that would be! I’m afraid I’m just being fanciful and romantic though. In today’s world it would never catch on.

While my ideas may not catch on, I do feel that I’ve brought up some thought provoking questions that you should ask yourself.

First, if what we become depends on what we read, what are you becoming?

Second, if a book were written about your life, what title could it be given that would offer an at-a-glance look into your personality? If you come up with something witty, intense, horrific, humorous or average, I’d like to hear it! Please leave your book title in the comments (I won’t steal it, I promise).

Finally, if a memorial bookshelf were to be erected for you tomorrow, what books would you want on its shelves?

Quote #14

“Tact is the ability to describe others as they see themselves.”
- Abraham Lincoln

 

The idea of tact came up in a class the other day when we were talking about dealing with customers on the phone. I consider myself to be fairly tactful, and in class I remembered this quote by Abraham Lincoln. It got me thinking.  ”Is this what tact is?  Is it really this simple?”

Think of the most difficult, tense situation you have ever found yourself in with a customer or any individual you had to work with. What made the situation tense? What did it take (or would it have taken) to settle the situation peacefully? Have you ever met a person you considered tactful? What made them tactful? How about a person who had absolutely no tact? I’ll bet they were pretty selfish and self-centered.

Children have no tact. They are wonderful, can be very sweet, and even considerate, but they have no tact because they are incapable of knowing how you see yourself. They cannot put themselves in your shoes.

Most of the time, when I am being tactful, I believe that my tact comes from my ability to know how others see and perceive their world. People become offended quickly when you ignore them or show little regard for their feelings. If you can show them that you understand their position they will be more willing to listen, more willing to work with you and more friendly toward you.

Even better, if you can appeal to what they like about themselves and avoid topics that touch on things they don’t like about themselves, you will evade many communication mishaps. The golden rule applies: if you treat others the way they want to be treated, you will be more effective working with them and communicating with them than if you ignore their point of view. The trick is learning to see others the way they see themselves. That is a topic for another day.

Quote #10

“Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good.”
- Friedrich Nietzsche

 

Funny story about this one…  I wanted to quote this to someone, and I couldn’t remember the quote!  Anyone who knows me (even if only casually) can say at least two things about me.  First, that I have a horribly dysfunctional memory and secondly that my thoughts or ways of doing things are often unique, if not completely original.

What makes this quote true?  Does a bad memory always go hand in hand with original thought?  Sure, to many who read this the answers are obvious.  Some people, though, may have difficulty seeing the wisdom that is so carefully enveloped in these simple words.

I am a problem solver.  I love the challenge of a problem that needs solving.  There are usually many solutions that will fit a problem; the challenge isn’t simply to find a solution, but rather to find the best solution.  That elusive best solution is what drives me to solve problems.

Most problems occur many times.  Anyone who has used a Windows computer or had children can tell you all about problems that just keep happening over and over again.  How many times have you seen a problem and thought, “I’ve seen this before, how did I solve it last time?”  I ask myself that question every time, and you know what?  I can never remember how I solved it last time.  So, rather than going through the same motions (by memory) to get the same solution and outcome as last time, I have to solve the problem all over again, following different steps, forming a different solution.  The result of this is often (and inadvertently) the same solution, at times a less effective solution or, on occasion, a much better solution than the last one.

By taking a different approach to the same situations simply because I can’t remember how I did it last time I have found that many of my approaches to life are unique.  People often comment that they never would have thought to do something that way.

Of course, my experience isn’t the experience of everyone with a bad memory.  I would say that a bad memory encourages original thought, it doesn’t create it.  Perhaps if you are one of the unlucky souls who suffers from a good memory and rarely comes up with original thoughts or ideas, you could try this:  Next time you are presented with a familiar situation and you remember how you handled it the last time, forget it.

Forget all about your past experience and start from scratch.  Certainly you want to remember and use the most effective solutions in the beginning, and you wouldn’t want to be caught treading unfamiliar ground coming up with new solutions in an important situation where failure could be devastating.  At first you’ll want to save this for a time when a mistake would have a minimal impact.  Then, as you get better at acting like you don’t have a good memory and your original thoughts begin flowing more easily, you can start using this technique even where you thought you had the best solutions already.

You may find that all of your old solutions were fairly mediocre and some of your new solutions will be quite bright.

Quote #9

“Don’t walk behind me, I may not lead. Don’t walk in front of me, I may not follow. Just walk beside me and be my friend.”
- Albert Camus

As simple and straight forward as this may seem, it actually has a profound meaning for me.

I try to avoid claiming to know too much about any one thing, but when it comes to relationships, especially of the human variety, I do feel a tad more qualified than most to offer insights and ideas that may be of benefit to any human who interacts with another human on a regular basis.

I feel that this quote speaks very clearly for itself, and I do not wish to taint it with my ramblings attempting to break it down for you if you don’t get it. This is why I am going to illustrate what this quote means to me with a personal antecdote and leave it at that.

For two years I lived in a unique situation. I resided in several places with anywhere from one to three roommates at one time (all of which rotated in and out with some frequency), with one or two of those as assigned work companions. These companions were rotated on a regular basis, each one staying with me for a period of anywhere from a few weeks to several months.

Over the course of those two years I had no fewer than two dozen such companions, and probably almost four dozen roommates in all. As a man, I find that women make the best living companions, but all of these roommates and companions were young men like me.

I do not get along very well with other men, I don’t relate to them on any practical level. From early on in that two year period it was obvious that the living conditions would either equate to a recipe for certain disaster, or offer a tremendous opportunity for personal growth.

Our daily activities required frequent travels over moderate distances, and most of our traveling was carried out on foot. Thus, every morning for two years I left an apartment on foot and walked around all day with a companion (a male companion, nonetheless), someone I had to stay within a few yards of at all time.

Did I mention that I was living in Mexico for those two years? Would it make a difference if you knew that nearly all of my companions were native Mexicans and I knew almost no Spanish? For the first few months I walked in silence with my companions and had plenty of time to contemplate the non-verbal communications that passed between us, both intentionally and unintentionally.

One of the first things I noticed was the relationship between how well we got along and how we walked together. My very first companion walked next to me most of the time, but if I began to walk slower than he wanted me to he would not adjust his speed. Some times I would trail several yards behind and he wouldn’t even look back to see if I was there. My next companion never walked beside me at all, but instead insisted on walking in front of me, as did my third companion. Later I had a companion who was timid and would not walk beside me. He chose to walk behind me and let me lead the way.

While, to him, it may have appeared that I was leading the way, his choice of where to walk actually had a drastic impact on our companionship. In fact, the walking arrangement between two people both affects and is affected by their relationship. It may all seem trivial to you, but consider the following:

In my first companionship we walked next to each other, side by side, as long as I was walking up to speed. You could say, as long as I was meeting my companion’s expectations he awarded me with a coequal walking arrangement, as though his presence were a gift to me. As soon as I was too slow for his taste, he passively pulled away from me in an attempt to make me feel as though our separation (the retraction of his great blessing to me) were my fault for not walking as fast as he wanted me to. Of course it wasn’t his fault, he didn’t change speed.

Certainly he had a good heart, and none of the above was actually going through his head as we walked. He merely demonstrated these attitudes in his actions (or inaction), and the message was as clear to me as it would have been to anyone observing. Not only did it reflect his actual attitude and role (though inexperienced himself, he was supposed to be training me) in our relationship, but it had a deep impact on it as well, causing me to withdraw and speak to him only when absolutely necessary. How was I supposed to speak to him with that physical and symbolic distance between us that he was so carefully using to “teach” me?

When my companions simply walked ahead of me, refusing to allow me to keep up with them, we experienced problems. These companions looked down on me and saw me as a nuisance and a bother, and this was reflected and reinforced by the walking arrangements.

In my companions who purposefully walked behind me, despite my best efforts to walk next to them, I noticed a lack of confidence and our work efforts were less effective.

My most effective and positive companionships were all marked with a side by side walking configuration. This is not simply a coincidence, it is a rule. Not walking side-by-side can be a symptom of bad feelings in a relationship, or it can cause them. Like I said before, the way a person walks with another person can both reflect and affect the state of the relationship between the two.

So, while the quote is symbolic in nature (the symbology of which I will not discuss) there is a very real, literal meaning here that is deeply engraved in my heart. If you ever chance to walk with me in person, please remember the wise words of Albert Camus, “Just walk beside me and be my friend.”

Quote #7

“In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.”
- John Adams

 

If one of the founding fathers, and the second president of the United States can make fun of politicians and government institutions like this, then that tells you just how right quote #6 was.  In fact, this very topic came up toward the end of that post when I started talking about politicians rather than the government as a whole (this is the follow-up quote I promised).

I love how Mr. Adams addresses the uselessness of three groups of people at once in this quote.  The first group, the idlers, are useless and shameful in and of themselves.  They are a benefit to nobody and are a burden to society.  The next group, lawyers, well…  What can I say?  They are as political in thought and heart as any politician (many politicians and presidents were once lawyers).  Finally, three or more useless men are a congress.  If, in John Adam’s eyes, the whole of congress was filled with useless politicians in his day, I suppose we haven’t improved much on the system our founding fathers laid down for us.

I would never want to sit in on a session of congress.  I just know I would get annoyed.  I’ve dealt with useless men individually, and I’ve dealt with law firms, but I have been lucky enough to stay away from congress thus far and I intend to keep it that way.

Quote #3

“Advice is what we ask for when we already know the answer but wish we didn’t.”
- Erica Jong

 

This has been a common theme for me over the last decade or so.  At one time I asked for a lot of advice.  I used to ask for advice about almost everything.  I did, that is, until I realized one day that I didn’t need to hear any of the advice I was asking for.  I already knew what I had to do, but I didn’t want to do it.

Over the years I developed and grew, feeding off the rich wisdom of my parents.  Several years ago people began asking me for advice on occasion (for no apparent reason) and I actually knew what to tell them.  I quickly came to the realization again that advice is rarely sought in the actual absence of knowing what to do.

These days, when pressed for advice, I keep in mind that the person asking usually knows exactly what she has to do but doesn’t want to do it without getting moral support and hearing what she already knows coming from me as her friend.  Some times we just don’t want to do the right thing alone, we need to hear that someone else is encouraging us to do the right thing as well.  In reality, we should be able to do what we know to be right without hearing it from someone else.

I suppose, in some abstract way, we are hoping that by asking for advice we can bring our friend with us on the same emotional journey through which we are passing.  They hear about our plight, they consider the situation and come up with the solution with us, so it’s like we’re not alone.

It’s funny because we humans usually have a hard time holding back that we know the answer to a complex problem.  We are proud of our wisdom and knowledge, so we usually jump at the opportunity to share when we know the answer.  When it comes to our own problems though, we suddenly become experts at feigning ignorance.

As the advice giver, I now apply this principle when dealing with a friend asking for advice.  I withold that I know an answer until after I have extracted from him that he knows what he needs to do.  My advice, then, becomes encouragement to do what he knows he needs to do.  I refuse to tell someone something they came to me knowing.