Growing up is not for babies

The problem with problems

2011-06-27T22:14:00.003-04:00

One of the largest struggles that I've had since I started out on my own in the world is how to cope with the challenges that present themselves in my life.

How does today's society influence us in creating coping strategies?
Many would surely argue that it's now easier than ever to not only find the support you need in coping with the typical challenges in life, but also be confident that the decision to do so will not be misinterpreted by the consensus. Generally speaking, I would assume that this evolution in public perception is largely responsible for the improvement in the mental well-being of countless souls that would have toiled too significantly under the weight of their own psyche. Practices such as psychotherapy, counseling, and meditation are entirely well and good, for those in such situations, because it gives many the courage to formally address their challenges without fear of judgment or condemnation from family and colleagues.

What about the "other" problems?
Where does this leave those whose mental struggles differ from the norm, yet are still challenging to grapple with? Speaking from my own personal experience, the traditionally "big" issues like relationship strife, loss of a loved one, job unhappiness, and family discord are in many cases dormant and in others, completely unknown to me. To take this a step further, the current 20-something model, which affords me the ability to fluidly adapt my circumstances to changes in disposition, should make it simple for someone like myself to easily dodge any rain clouds that might appear on the horizon. To top it off, I would be the first person to admit that the things I would consider to be my life's "challenges" are laughable to most, irrelevant to many, and not truly that challenging, relatively speaking.

So why does everyone seem to struggle at some point?
Perhaps our minds create the struggle because we believe we're hard-wired to do so as a term of the human contract. Or maybe it's because we simply love having a story to tell, as it caters to our inherently self-indulgent sensibilities. Regardless, in the end, I believe the answer lies inherently within and dependent upon our evolving mental condition and our collective minds' inherent inabilities to rapidly adjust. More simply stated, for each stride we make in our ability to fulfill our basic needs and cope with the challenges of old, a new set of mental hurdles will present themselves. And I'm not speaking of issues such as global warming, human poverty, etc. - those problems are systemic in nature and will require the strength of all humanity to resolve.

What are today's challenges?
I'm speaking of the personal struggles of the 21st century - issues such as the exercising of personal privacy in a rapidly-opening world, the discovery of a "life's calling" amongst comparatively infinite amounts of opportunities, the pursuit of life balance in the face of limitless opportunities to overindulge, the belief in a higher power in an increasingly secular society, and the establishment of fulfilling personal relationships in a populace more heavily bent towards "me first" than ever. And I would argue that no matter how well we think we were raised, or how significant of a "common thread" may appear to exist between these issues and others in the past, this period in our humanity has presented us these challenges in a way that makes them completely unique to anything else we've previously experienced.

So what's the best approach?
In the end, I think it's critical for us to find coping strategies and mechanisms, similar to how we have done before - the power of mental therapy should be entirely supported. However, the challenge lies in the fact that the questions to ask towards self-discovery are different than the ones from before, and the answers are also more likely to be specific to the individual. In other words, one size fits all just simply won't work. However, we shouldn't go it alone, because there's too much at stake - I'm firmly convinced that it's a more dangerous world than ever for the mind in personal turmoil.

Virtue in the eyes of the average human

2011-04-24T21:49:00.001-04:00

Which is more virtuous: to be grateful for what you have, or be forgetful of what you don't?

Is it neither?
Strangely, perhaps there may be a time and place for neither, from what I can surmise. I feel like at certain junctions, the only way to evolve beyond ourselves is to focus on what we could have in the way of strengths and capabilities, rather than what we currently possess. It's certainly a noble goal to pour our hearts into becoming stronger lovers when we fight, or better winners/losers. The power of this concept can be amplified when we see others possessing these defining characteristics that we don't currently - yet should rightfully - posses.

OK, but...
Supposing that the appropriate times and places to "ignore" these virtues are limited in nature, though, and must be executed in the pursuit of noble outcomes, I think we find ourselves in a society where we're pushing them away in a rampantly inappropriate manner. Some would argue that this is natural, as humans; our vanity drives us to take our temporal gifts for granted and our envy moves us towards anger over those that we lack. Yet regardless of where you stand on the debate regarding whether or not we - as humans - are inherently good or evil, it can't be ignored that those tendencies are extremely real.

So whose fault is it?
This may sound really crass, but I'm honestly starting to feel like it's too ambitious to expect the average person to be able to practice the two concepts on a consistent basis. In our culture, which enshrines the notion of individualistic achievement as a noble approach, we simply haven't built the appropriate motivational frameworks to stimulate humans in a way that makes them grateful for their good fortunes and ignorant to the voices of envy. To top it off, the spiritual will then suggest that this is where humanity needs God to step in, to remind humans to be cognizant of their sinful tendencies and teach them how to live in a manner that rejects them. Yet when stated like that, it almost seems like religious constructs remain to simply fill a void that we, as humans, have been too foolish to fill for ourselves with humanistic equivalents such as ethics and reason.

So in the end...
I think humans have the innate ability to practice both, without the support of the metaphysical, assuming we could create the appropriate environment that would foster them. And to answer the initial question, I think they're equally important. The critical job remains, however, of making them relevant to the average Joe.

The least traditional "sad to be lonely guy" rant, ever...

2011-04-17T22:08:00.001-04:00

I've been thinking quite a bit about this topic over the last 17 months since I last posted on this blog. It seems that the average 20-something goes through quite a bit of change during that period of their lives. Frequent moves, new jobs, evolving relationships - some may argue that flexibility is more essential at this time than any other. I'd even take it a step further that we, as 20-somethings, take pride in the fact that our loose ties with some of the classical "adult" social constructs (conviction of faith, starting of a family, commitment to a job/career path, etc.) provide us this freedom to make whatever decisions we want in pursuit of our own perceptions of happiness. However, I've found that this path has led me down many lonely streets since I've last posted, which to me, implies that it hasn't always been the most fruitful approach.

So besides the risk of being alone on the trail, what is the long-term risk here? I'd argue that our current societal framework depends heavily on the acceptance of the "adult" constructs at this pivotal point in our lives. The good news, though, is that we certainly aren't required to continue building our societies around them if we choose not to.

Can we, as 20-somethings, take the next generation into more formal "community-based" models? We certainly have iterations of them today all over the world (cities, villages, etc.) but I'd argue that capitalism and its offspring have driven us, in some strange way, to narrow our minds when it comes to the larger community. We seek the best outcomes for ourselves and our families in a way that oftentimes ignores the importance of bringing along the community as a whole.

I like the idea of being able to fully depend on a whole host of people - in the same way that many end up relying on one, at present - to talk me off the ledge when I'm struggling. However, I feel like until we stop thinking "me first", we're stuck with trying to find one other person to share our vision, with a 50/50 chance (at best) of that mutual dependency lasting the rest of our lives. Those odds are pretty daunting when we're talking about "forever". I would liken the change I'd push for to the Web 2.0 evolution, which has moved us away from static hierarchies and traditional models into more fluid, community-based, and rapid-responding frameworks.

Does that even make sense? Or in the end, am I really just writing all of this because I'm tired of feeling like the outcomes I've had in the past few years make me feel like the pursuit of "the one" is an outdated model?

On the issue of cooperation

2009-11-16T20:28:00.001-05:00

I read a great little story today that I thought I'd share here... It's something for all of us to think about in a world that tells us that we should only look out for number one...

Two children are in the kitchen; each wants an Oreo cookie, but there is only one left. A parent is near the kitchen and hears the discussion regarding the cookie and decides to let her children solve the problem. The discussion becomes very heated and fearing one child might injure the other, the parent rushes in and solves the problem by cutting the cookie in half. The first child takes one half, scrapes the creamy filling from the cookie, eats the filling and throws the outside of the cookie away. The second child takes the other half, scrapes the creamy filling from the cookie, throws away the filling and eats the outside of the cookie.

Of course, you can guess the moral of this story - if both parties had listened to what the other party was saying, they both could have had twice as much of what they wanted. I know this little vignette probably grossly oversimplifies more complex disagreements.

But does it really, though?

On the issue of diversion

2009-11-12T23:51:00.001-05:00

I was surfing around online a few nights ago looking for a good movie to stream via Netflix. Having read a bunch of reviews, I decided to try a documentary about the 2008 election campaigns. I started watching it when it hit me that I was hungry, so I drove down to Burger King and got some food: listening to the artist of my choice on demand via Pandora on my Blackberry.

This was all going on, of course, while I had a bunch of work to do that I was consciously avoiding. Could it really have been that easy to distract myself? A thousand times, yes.

I understand that historians will look back at this time and call it the dawn of the "Information Age", and today's 20-somethings will have been the first generation to be born into it. Though most agree that living in this age allows people "to have instant access to knowledge that would have been difficult or impossible to find previously" (thanks Wikipedia!), I think that access goes worlds beyond just knowledge. Broadly speaking, 20-somethings have never known a time when it wasn't extremely simple to scratch a curiosity itch or consume some sort of content (music, video, text, etc.)

Unfortunately, I think this can be a double-edged sword in the hands of many. For example, during college, I watched friends blow-off course work, bomb tests, and in many cases, even social interactions because their attention was so easily diverted by the myriad stimuli around them. In the work world, I see the same thing. And of course, as I alluded to above, it would be pretty dishonest of me if I didn't state that I fall victim to distractions like this on a semi-regular basis. In all this, I'm not surprised that our parents generally possessed better work ethic!

So what can we do to rise above it? One strategy that I'm trying is to set limits for myself on how much time I waste each day on Facebook or watching that third Seinfeld re-run. I've been trying to give myself 1.5 hours a day during the week. I recognize that this is probably not getting to the root of the issue, though - somewhere inside, I still have a tendency to procrastinate. It doesn't seem like I'm alone, either .

So, really, why do we get so easily diverted from the task at hand? I'm not entirely certain, but I just saw on Facebook that someone posted 50 new photos...

On the issue of risk

2009-10-21T23:31:00.002-04:00

What is a typical 20-something's appetite for risk?

I was pondering that notion this morning as I strolled across the street without the approval of the "walk" sign, (come on, there were no cars coming!) I did a little review of the past few days' activities on paper when I got into work and thought that besides the occasional act of pedestrian flagrance, I'm generally not too risky of a person.

By lunchtime, I had already sheepishly admitted to myself, as you can probably guess, that I can't truly assess my overall appetite for risk by looking at what I do and how I interact with others on a typical day in the field. Upon deeper reflection, though, I still concluded that I am usually not too risky when it comes to the big choices in life, either.

I feel like there's a great deal of disparity in the amount of risk that we as 20-somethings take on in our lives. I've got a lot of friends who are much like me; they went to college, got the grades, accepted the offer, and now live the 9-to-5, (or 6, 7, or 8) with no plans of coloring outside the lines for the next few years, even if they get a little frustrated with the hands they currently hold.

For every Jacob, however, I feel like there is another 20-something counterpart who generally isn't satisfied with the status quo. We all know the types; they're the ones changing jobs with some frequency, pondering new business ideas, and looking for the next big way to stir up the pot.

The good news is that I think our world needs both of these types of 20-something. People like me are going to bust our butts to make sure our organizations and ways of living stay on track, when there's general agreement that they're moving in the right direction. The others are going to reject stale ways of thinking, create new innovations, and enact the cultural transformations needed to ensure that we make this world a better place for those coming behind us.

And here's the coolest thing: I don't think either group is being too dangerous by operating in these ways. If you ask me, a "realized risk" was never really a risk in the first place if the taker appropriately planned their actions, reviewed the pros and cons, executed as best they could, and leveraged any lessons learned to get it right on the next go around.

I've accepted that I'm never going to be the type who strays too far from base camp, so we should never forget to be appreciative of the ones who relish the opportunity to stake out new boundaries for the rest of us in the great unknown.

Maybe one man's risk is another man's reward?

On the issue of impatience

2009-10-19T20:10:00.004-04:00

I was working on a PowerPoint presentation the other day with a fellow 20-something. I was cursing my laptop as we waited for copy/paste operations to complete, spell checks to run, etc. when it dawned on us that I was being pretty impatient.

It's not surprising that she noticed this, I suppose - as I look back over the last 24 years of my life, it's clear that being patient was always a tough one for me. Strangely enough, though, it's probably also one of the single-biggest things that we as people can control in times of uncertainty/frustration.

Practicing patience is one of those 7,000,000-or-so odd things that all good parents reminded us to do. But oftentimes, we seem to forget about its importance between when our alarms go off and when we set them again at day's end. And it's not surprising that we do, if you stop for a second and think about it.

Our hyper-competitive 20-something culture prizes rapid career progression and bank account growth, along with a host of other mile-a-minute pursuits, above all else - if you put these types of things on a "patience continuum" (note: there's no such thing as a patience continuum that I'm aware of, but you can imagine one, right?), they would generally fall on the "impatient" side of the scale, I think.

So what do we miss out on by being so impatient? I think there are two important things: self-discovery and relationship development. On the self-discovery side, we get so caught up in the short-term - waiting angrily for things to come to fruition, cursing our luck when we can't control an outcome, dwelling on the unknownable - that we completely overlook chances to figure out who we truly are, what's important to us and where we want to make our biggest contributions in life. On the relationship side, it seems that we spend far too much time trying to determine how a person can help us get somewhere/achieve something faster, rather than discovering the myriad other things a person can do in helping us become better people.

Maybe we all just need to make more time for being patient... ...
Wait, what?

On the issue of vanity

2009-10-16T13:29:00.002-04:00

I have observed that 20-somethings have a little bit of a problem understanding their own vanity. And I'm sure a lot of you are thinking, "WOW - what an insight, Jacob… did you come up with that one all by yourself?" After all, a Google search for the phrase "Millennial Entitlement" turns up 139,000 pages.

My observations on the matter, however, lead me to believe that much of the ink spilled on this topic is about how our entitlement affects job searches, performance, expectations, and other such career-related areas. My contention is that our vanity runs much deeper than just how we enter, interact in, and leave the labor market.

I think it permeates our personal relationships: from the expectations we set with our family and friends as to how we should be treated and responded to, to the self-interested ways in which we respond to requests for support, advice, or companionship in times of other's needs.

I think it influences our romantic relationships; many of us set unrealistically high expectations of potential mates, to the point where it is impossible for a person to ever live up to the standards that we set for them. We also tend to ignore our own imperfections in times of tension or discord, and instead look beyond ourselves for the reasons why outcomes aren't as we wanted them to be.

Most importantly, I think it affects our general interactions in the world: many of us assume (either consciously or subconsciously) that our very existence, and the fact that we generally try to lead good lives, entitles us to a whole host of positive opportunities and experiences and that the ways in which we pursue them are inherently correct (or at least not incorrect). From line-hopping at a concert/sports event, to lying for convenience's sake, it feels like these injuries to our moral character could quickly become larger, permanent scars, if they are not defended against.

Back in March, 2009, an author/blogger by the name of Scott Young wrote about the importance of humility vs. confidence - his observations are spot-on. I think too many of us view confidence-building as the best ways to achieve positive results in our lives. Dr. Norman Vincent Peale, the author of The Power of Positive Thinking (186 consecutive weeks on the New York Times bestseller list) seemed to think it was of chief importance, as did the readers of the 5 million copies of his book that have been printed since its first publishing in 1952. And although I'm sure that Peale's intention was not to marginalize the importance of humility, I think the popularity of Peale's text stands as a testament to the belief that many view self-confidence as playing a significantly larger role in achieving happiness than self-humility.

This is a risky proposition. Humility is an extremely underrated virtue, one that I think many of us regularly struggle to practice. I know it's the biggest opportunity for improvement in my own life. I think if we can learn to leverage the power of humility to check our tendencies towards vanity, then we will be free to let go of our inclinations to assume that life is about seeking the best outcomes for ourselves, and instead focus on a more appropriate goal: leaving this world in a better place than when we first found it.

And… I guess it could also help you attain that new job or promotion you've been seeking...

It's about that time

2009-10-14T14:01:00.003-04:00

I've been doing a lot of thinking lately - I don't know if it's due to career challenges/opportunities, relationship maturity, or maybe my quarter-century lifetime milestone approaching, but it feels like now is the time to start collecting myself.

I don't anticipate this blog becoming a diary of my life where you can come check out how my weekend went, etc. Rather, I want this to become glimpses into the ideas and feelings of a 20-something professional attempting to provoke thought around the major issues of living in today's world. It's not always going to be exciting reading, but I hope that it's always thought-provoking.

I look forward to you sharing this journey with me...