REFER TO GREY by Robert Greigos © 2010

Consonance and Confluence

Thu, 02 Sep 2010 13:55 -0400

It's interesting to note how much magical thinking is still so often a part of our lives. By "magical thinking" I mean the presumption that there is a meaningful substantive connection between two things whenever they occur in proximity to each other. For instance, depict an attractive lady beside a shiny new computer and one might imagine owning that computer would precipitate just such an attractive lady into one's life. There is no rational reason to believe in such a "magical" connection, but people do nonetheless.

Scientists take special interest in concurrent events and mathematically measure them using statistical correlation, degrees of confidence, and estimates of significance. But, scientists are also extremely cautious with their explanations as to what the linkages they discover mean. Is there really a cause and effect relationship? Or is the relationship something else, the result of independent but parallel processes, perhaps, as with hair and nails? Both grow, but neither is the cause of the other. However, most of us are not scientists and most of us fail miserably at discerning true cause and effect from mere coincidence. And as a consequence we live behind numerous walls of superstition and prejudice based on magical thinking, not scientifically demonstrated fact.

There are other aspects to magical thinking too. Take the aspects of language: rhythm, rhyme, and melody. How many times have we been convinced of the truth of something solely because of the mesmerizing magic by which it is presented, say in song or jungle, rap or compelling poem. That something has consonance with other things that we value or hold to be true, in other words that it "sounds like" it belongs or fits with something we already know or believe, then we are very often willing to adopt it as also true when, in fact, it may not be.

Another form of magical thinking is misapprehending confluence. Flowing water picks up all kinds of junk. The more momentum an idea develops, the more misinformation and distortion begin to come along for the ride. We are sometimes tricked by the confluence of ideas, words, and events into believing that they can and should be equally believed, when if we actually took the time to examine them separately we'd see that they shouldn't. The tragedy of panic is the result of misapprehending confluence.

On the other hand, there are times when we are fully justified in noting elaborately developed consonance and confluence and wondering at the underlying magic of it all.

Shared Concern

Sun, 29 Aug 2010 14:34 -0400

Human motivation has long been an interest of social scientists. Within one scheme of understanding humans are either intrinsically motivated or extrinsically motivated. That is, the rewards they seek are either internal, e.g. for pleasure or to lessen pain, or perhaps to resolve a concern or achieve a desire, or they are external, e.g. for pay or to avoid a threat. Advertisers scour the literature for both novel and reliable ways to motivate us to buy. Politicians, especially Republicans, often point to potential or imagined threats to gain our interest and maybe our votes. Religious leaders threaten us with eternal damnation or the promise of life amongst angels if only we'd behave according to their proscriptions and prescriptions. Even our friends and families are constantly attempting to nudge us in one direction or another with all manner of ploy.

One such ploy is the sharing of concern, as in "Honey, I think we need to do something about that leaking pipe." It's an interesting ploy because it's so civilized. One person expresses a concern they alone have in a manner that seeks to include another in that concern through the use of the pronoun "we". Implied, but not explicitly stated, is the possibility of danger or loss. In this case, "leaking pipe" implies possible water damage. I say civilized because no extrinsic direct threat or quid pro quo is being erected. The speaker is probably for the most part extrinsically motivated, but instead of acting alone to resolve the issue they are seeking the participation of another. They intrinsically crave a civilized shared resolution to the concern. And it's interesting to note that participation of the other party may not be because they now recognize there is a need for concern. They may only act because they care that the speaker is distressed, as if they themselves were experiencing that distress. What is extrinsic becomes internalized as intrinsic, rather like "What's yours is mine and what's mine is yours."

Such shared concern is the basis for not only a workable marriage and family, but of a workable community. Coordinated action in service of shared concerns is the foundation of human civilization. Without shared concern there is no civilization. There is merely bickering over which rules or persons have authority and which do not, as is currently happening within the U.S and elsewhere.

May we all discover what ends are truly important and that working together is much more efficient and potentially more sustainably rewarding than not.

Meaning

Sun, 22 Aug 2010 17:44 -0400

Several recent conversations have me thinking about meaning, what meaning is and how we derive it. It's a question that has relevance, I believe, for not only making photographs, but for living life. One such conversation was with a long time friend who expressed dismay that a friend of hers, who is facing late stage terminal cancer, had completely given up on life, wanting only to lie in bed and die. She told me she could never do such a thing, just give up like that. Another of those conversations was with my son, who had recently begun to feel the process of managing a business he'd started had become meaningless routine, prompting him to consider major changes in his life. And yet a third conversation was with an extremely talented young photographer who reluctantly described a growing disinterest in making new photographs.

Some would suggest, I think, that all three conversations point to the possibility of depression taking hold. But teasing out whether physiological changes are the cause of darkening mood or whether a poverty of perspective, and resultant lack of action, is dampening physiology has never been clear to clinicians. Hence, some concentrate on treating physiology, others perspective, and still others assume both possibilities may simultaneously be valid. Most of us are not clinicians. And so most of us quietly explore notions available to us that might lead to renewed enthusiasm for a narrative that makes sense to us, and hence gets us moving again. We look for inspiration. We look for meaning. We might find that inspiration or meaning in conversation with a friend or parent or advisor, or we might find it in an essay, or a photograph, or within some work of art.

The brain and its workings are so very interesting. Whether there is such a thing as a soul, something related to our personalities that has existence outside the workings of our brains, isn't clear. But just looking at the facts as they present themselves, it is certainly clear that the way the human brain works allows us to imagine we exist with some uniqueness and with a certain amount of free volition. It also seems true that if we did not have the developed capacity to think of ourselves and the potential consequence of our actions with some kind of abstracted objectivity, the question of whether or not we have a soul or what it means to be alive might never occur to us. The structure of human brains, and likely of some other creatures, makes it possible for sense data to be stored, recalled, modeled, and manipulated with volition. We do not just react to things, as we reflexively withdraw our hands from something hot. We perceive, consider, and then act. That capacity to consider is what allows us to question if "meaning" is present. And if it isn't, we are lost.

But what exactly is meaning? In the previous post The Sense We make of Things I noted that two processes underlie the sense we make of things: one, categories, and two, story or narrative. Categories allow us to break up the continuum of sensory input we experience. Story allows us to arrange those categorized chunks of sensory input into relationships that seem meaningful. People differ both on how many and what type of categories their minds readily employ and on their abilities to both fabricate and appreciate stories of useful or engaging content. But there is no perception of meaning unless the story being contemplated includes us in some engaging and inspiring way. Without understanding that inspires committed engagement, there is no meaning. Without meaningful engagement, we become nameless outsiders peering in.

That old poster of Uncle Sam pointing to us is an attempt to engage us. But what is the story? Engage us in what? What are the categories? What are the relationships? What are the costs? What is it that needs to be done? What are the likely outcomes? Politicians and advertisers both seek to engage us and involve us like that poster of Uncle Sam. But few succeed these days. We are jaded from lack of fulfillment. The stories they offer us are hollow and empty of meaningful consequence. So we wander the Internet, spin through media channels, thumb through books and magazines. We believe we are staying informed. But we are losing our sense of meaningful narrative, a narrative that includes both us and our neighbors in a substantially compelling manner. That isn't a new theme. It's an old theme. We are waiting for Godot. But Godot is very late in coming. Or maybe, Godot has already come and gone and it was, for the most part, a non-event.

The struggle for meaning is a daily endeavor. May your struggles yield meaning that will inspire and engage all of us.