Company Culture and Philosophy

"What expectations do you have for me as a trainer? What can I do to make this experience better for you? You tell me your preferences, and I will also tell you what I expect from you."

I was so happy be asked such a pointed question that I almost could not answer! Imagine that, a perfect stranger wanting to make our time together pleasant and without conflict.

My response was something like, "Just be reasonable. We're all human beings and you can expect that I will do some very human being like things, like stretching and yawning. I mean no disrespect if my attention drifts elsewhere for a moment."

Apparently my feedback was appreciated, because "BE REASONABLE!" was written first on white-board for our class's list of preferences. It also made an appearance on the list of what was expected of me and the other trainees.

Remember the old Socratic formula?

Reason = Virtue = Happiness

Words like respect, integrity, and ethics are being heavily emphasized. Having not yet encountered evidence to the contrary, I will enthusiastically conclude that I have thrown in my lot with a terrific group of human beings.

Impressions of my new job

Within the first hour of my first day, the training manager said, "We're all adults here. We respect each other." I could not stop smiling, because I could never imagine someone from DialAmerica saying that. If they had, I would have shat myself from laughing. Then I probably would have been sent home without pay. Needless to say, being able to attend to my body's needs (stretching, urinating, caffeinating) without having to get permission is a basic degree of mutual respect that has been sorely lacking in my professional life.

The first day was spent discussing the expectations and benefits, and what I'm hearing is like a beautiful dream: paid time off, two on-site fitness centers (with full weight sets), two on-site cafeterias (with fresh and healthy dining options), a huge ass-paycheck (hyphen placement pending), etc. Of course, I am expected to be 100% on time and competent in order to maintain my position. Not a problem. I'm loving the environment. I'm not frowned upon for engaging in typical modern human behaviors like using my phone, reading a book, trying to find happiness in the moment, etc. You know, reasonable stuff.

Reasonable!

That word came up so many times today. Examples:

"Being honest at work should not present a problem. Remember, our standard is whether or not a reasonable person would consider what you are saying to be offensive."

"Don't be afraid to professionally voice your opinion. We don't want you to always blindly do everything we say. That's not reasonable. If we did that, how could things ever get better?"

Pretty neat, eh?

Of course, there is the standard workplace banter about churches, voting, and whose sports teams have the larger genitalia. C'est la vie. I've decided to keep my positions to myself unless bluntly asked. I've worked hard for the truth and there is no value to it if I pass it out like the New Testament or Book of Mormon (or a pocket Constitution). But perhaps that is simply a way to shroud in terms of virtue my selfish urge to not get fired. I'll figure that one out before too long.

Aside from the normal detritus of culture bubbling up in water cooler conversation, I've no complaints about my cohorts. The people are genuinely nice, non-violent, ethical (at least in terms of professional integrity), and happy to be alive. I am sometimes genuinely amazed that such perfect strangers can come together for 8 hours a day, happily coexist, and competently manage the voluntary (and yes, contractual) flow of billions of dollars to and from trusting and non-violent customers. I guess I was under the impression that we needed armed thugs to tell us how to play nice with each other.

FYI, Macon sucks.

Carbohydrate Withdrawal

I have recently started listening to the Healthy Mind, Fit Body podcast. I have enjoyed their take on how a lot of our eating habits are learned behaviors from childhood. At a very deep psychological level, we reward and punish ourselves with the nutrition (or lack thereof) we give our bodies, and diet is in a large way a manifestation of our self-esteem.

Background aside, I was intrigued by the evidence in favor of eliminating complex carbohydrates (cereals, breads, grains, etc.) in favor of more fat and proteins. Eating foods with a large concentration of complex carbohydrates causes your body to produce insulin to counteract the increased levels of blood glucose. It stimulates your liver and muscle cells to store glucose in glycogen. It also stimulates fat cells to form fats from fatty acids and glycerol. Meaning that if you eat a high carb meal with a complement of fat, the carbs are ensuring that the fat will not be used for immediate energy, but will rather be converted and stored. Burrito with sour cream, anyone? Bread and olive oil?

Plus, your liver will always produce slightly more insulin than is needed to deal with the blood sugar spike. Which means that after decades of spiking your blood sugar, there is a good chance that it will spike you. Type 2 diabetics have an abnormal glucose-tolerance test and higher than normal levels of insulin in their blood. Their body does not respond to and cannot use its own insulin. Yikes!

To test the effects of this, I have been consuming a vastly reduced amount of carbs in my daily diet. And today I felt like I must have been coming off of heroin. I was shaky, fatigued, weak, famished, and I could think of nothing but doughnuts and cookies. I craved them. And this is highly unusual, considering I rarely eat sweets. I reached a point of unbearable physiological (and probably psychological) discomfort and compromised with a sweet & salty trail mix. I felt instantly better and my mood was elevated.

Hello, my name is Nick and I've been addicted to carbs all of my life. I had never realized how much my energy depended on them. And I also understand that to be so dependent is to risk all sorts of diseases, among them Type 2 diabetes and cancer. I am leaning toward adopting a low-carb lifestyle based on how this trial period is playing out.

:-)

I biked to work today and I feel fantastic. I was in such a good mood all day long! And I feel like I've got a ton of energy! I love it!

Normally I'm pretty groggy for most of the day, but something about that extra 30 minutes of exercise and sunshine did the trick.

I love being alive!

Nothing else insightful to add.

Spreading Philosophical Joy (feat. the Socratic Method)

It has been a while since I've blogged. It has also been a while since I've felt like it. I'm liking this new "do what you feel like doing" personal freedom thing. I'm feeling it, so let's do it.

Recently I've been engaging in philosophical conversations with a number of new co-workers, all brimming with intelligence and curiosity. I've been enjoying my days immensely, since I'm pretty much getting paid to talk about what is true and what is virtuous.

The Theory

The truth will set you free and will bring you happiness.

The Hypothesis

If I can help someone to act with more integrity in their interpersonal relationships, his/her outlook on life will improve. If I can teach someone to reason from first principles, the detritus of his/her mind will give way to critical thinking and rationality. If I can achieve this, I will get a dopamine treat. I will know that there is hope for our future.

The Experiment

By using the Socratic method in conversation with a co-worker, I am able to follow up his/her comments and ideas with curiosity. If someone says they are angry, I will ask why. If someone says they don't know why they do things, I will ask them why not.

The purpose of the Socratic method is to reveal to another human being the gaps in his/her thinking. It is the most powerful and seemingly innocuous approach in the philosophical tool belt. It innocently compels others to come face to face with their own ignorance, hypocrisy, and outright immorality. Perhaps this is why Socrates was executed.

My Observations

Not surprisingly, a significant number of people have become very defensive and hostile when my questions reveal to them uncomfortable truths. Once I determine that someone is too far gone to have an interest in truth, I will leave them in peace. I have no interest in them. And it would seem that these people have no personality in which to be interested. It was killed off a long time ago and filled with the trivial trappings of culture and propaganda.

Despite the aforementioned people, I am still surprised at the number of my co-workers who are receptive to my probing questions. They seem to possess genuine curiosity and delight in self-exploration.

Although one anecdote does not a statistically significant sample population make, I have received one comment that is promising. Having taken my line of questioning on expressing one's preferences to heart, this person has improved her relationship with one of her friends. Instead meekly accepting an apology, she was able to express her disappointment in an assertive and rational manner. She was pleasantly surprised that the other person was receptive to her emotions.

In a way, this person experimented on her friendship by making herself vulnerable through honesty. She concluded that there was a strong foundation in this particular friendship, and that the other person was genuinely concerned about her feelings.

She has since told me that she is an overall happier person after having talked to me for a few days. Whereas her overall happiness level was previously self-reported at 25%, she is now in the area of 28%-30%. Of course this is only a small incremental improvement, but in my defense, you can't teach a human being how to think and apply reason overnight...

...After all, the public education system does spend 12+ years teaching us how not to think.

My Conclusions

For those bright and brilliant few that can still be rescued from their false selves, the truth is electrifying. By applying it to every aspect of your life, you get the joy of consistency and integrity, as well as objective knowledge by which to measure the true value of your relationships. If someone doesn't care how you feel, you must MUST MUST know this truth. It may hurt in the short run, but your long-term happiness depends upon your knowing and accepting the facts of reality.

I've only recently begun applying the Socratic method at the onset of new interpersonal relationships. I've determined that this is the best way to weed out the people who are worth my time. And it would seem these same people find pleasure in their interactions with me. And it seems they are learning to apply the values I put forward toward their own lives. The result? Happiness.

The Socratic formula?

Reason = Virtue = Happiness

"The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature" by Matt Ridley

Half the ideas in this book are probably wrong. The history of human science is not encouraging. Galton's eugenics, Freud's unconscious, Durkheim's sociology, Mead's culture-driven antrhopology, Skinner's behaviorism, Piaget's early learning, and Wilson's sociobiology all appear in retrospect to be riddled with errors and false perspectives. No doubt the Red Queen's approach is just another chapter in this marred tale. No doubt its politicization and the vested interests ranged against it will do as much damage as was done to previous attempts to understand human nature. The Western cultural revolution that calls itself political correctness will no doubt stifle inquiries it does not like, such as those into the mental differences men and women. I sometimes feel that we are fated never to understand ourselves because part of our nature is to turn every inquiry into an expression of our own nature: ambitious, illogical, manipulative, and religious. "Never literary attempt was more unfortunate than my Treatise of Human Nature. It fell dead-born from the Press," said David Hume.

But then I remember how much progress we have made since Hume and how much nearer to the goal of a complete understanding of human nature we are than ever before. We will never quite reach that goal, and it would perhaps be better if we never did. But as long as we can keep asking why, we have a noble purpose.

I would like to spend another post at least delving into some of the interesting research and ideas that went into this book, but I wanted to start with this excerpt because it spoke volumes to me about the integrity of its author.

The pursuit of truth requires that we not be adherents of conclusions, but rather that we are able to respect and adhere to the methodology by which we arrive at these conclusions. The scientific method is a more important idea than anything it can reveal about the truth of reality, because it is the means by which we can detect error.

For example, I sometimes forget that I am not actually an anarchist. I am first and foremost an empiricist. I hold anarchism to be true because empirical evidence demonstrates that Statism is immoral, corrupt, and unsustainable. If there were evidence to the contrary, then I would not be an anarchist.

I think maintaining humility in the face of reality is a hallmark of wisdom, and I respect Matt Ridley for his devotion to the scientific method (not to mention his encyclopedic knowledge of the biological sciences).

More often than we realize, or that we care to admit, empirical evidence derived using the scientific method reveals truths that make society uncomfortable. You can ignore reality, but that does not change it. You can't argue with reality. My humble advice, especially for those among my readers who believe in science, is to apply its methodology to everything.

Science works. Yep, even in politics. But you'll probably not like the results. If you feel hostile toward truth, ask "why?". Yep, science even works on you.

:)

Thoughts on being in love

A while ago I posted a definition of love that I agreed with.

"Love is our involuntary response to virtue."

As far as I can tell, this has been my experience with that strange and wonderful phenomenon.

I don't really know what else to say, other than I'm happy. I smile whenever I think about what I've found in such an unexpected place. And sometimes I just smile without thinking about much at all.

Thank you! <3

We are all anarchists in theory, but assholes in practice. The "Against Me" argument.

What follows is a paraphrase of Stefan Molyneux's "against me" argument. This argument can be used to cut past all of the flowery language bullshittery that goes on in most political debates. Discussing politics should not be about making clever points disembodied from reality.

What is the "against me" argument? It goes something like this.

FRIEND: I support our troops and I think the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are justified.

ME: I understand. I don't think you should be shot for supporting the wars.

FRIEND: Well, of course I shouldn't be shot!

ME: I don't support the wars. Do you think I should be shot for not supporting the wars?

FRIEND: Of course not! Nobody is talking about shooting anybody! You have the right to not support the wars in Iraq.

ME: Ah, good! Then we are both anarchists, I see.

FRIEND: I'm not an anarchist.

ME: If you think I have the right not to support the war, then you must also logically believe that I have the right not to pay taxes, since taxes support the war. Do I have the right not to pay my taxes?

FRIEND: You must pay your taxes unless you want to end up in jail. Besides, taxes are used for things other than the wars.

ME: Taxation is enforced with violence. I do not believe I have the desire or the right to wish violence to be used against you for not supporting the wars. Do you have the desire to see violence used against me?

FRIEND: Evasive bullshittery

ME: Do you support the use of violence against me?

FRIEND: Yes, if that's the game you wish to play. I believe you should pay your taxes or go to jail if you don't pay your taxes.

ME: Then you are no friend of mine. In fact, you are a moral cancer on this world. The threat of violence has no place in my life or in any affair that I would consider civilized. Goodbye.

ENEMY: ...

OR:

FRIEND: No, I do not support the use of violence against you.

ME: Thank you, friend. To be logical, you must give up your false beliefs in Statism and patriotism and all of the other violent creeds that kill us wholesale and break our spirits. You are an anarchist fundamentally, but your false beliefs have made you a tool and an asshole. Think about it.

FRIEND: ...

The existence of a god is philosophically impossible

How logic works in the real world

Rock exists.

What is Rock?

Rock is a relatively hard object that is naturally composed of aggregated minerals.

Can you prove Rock exists?

Here is Rock in my hand.

How logic works for the religulously inclined

God exists.

What is God?

God is omnipotent and omniscient (never you mind that contradiction! your mortal mind can't comprehend his ways), and exists everywhere but doesn't exist in physical reality, and is love and hate and sunshine and darkness and responsible for everything that happens except for the things that he allows you to do with your free will that he planned for you.

Can you prove that God exists?

Proof of God is everywhere if you know how to see it. If you can't already see it you have to have faith.

Strong atheism, or the declaration that there is absolutely no possibility that a god can exist, is commonly viewed by most people as an irrational position. It is often ironically lumped together with the anti-rational fanaticisms of orthodox religion.

Because modern philosophy has inculcated our society with the idea that having a strong opinion is "dogmatic" and "uncompromising", most fence-sitters will postpone the decision and declare themselves to be agnostic. Agnosticism is the unwillingness to apply logic to an emotionally-charged hypothesis.

The burden of proof must be carried by the person who presents a hypothesis.

Failure to prove a scientific hypothesis yields a "not true" conclusion.

Failure to prove a religious hypothesis yields a "not quite proven but still a possibility that it may be true so let's not discard it" conclusion.

Are gods subject to physical laws?

1. Physical laws govern existence
2. Existence is defined as that which is composed of matter or energy
3. If gods exist, they must be composed of either matter and/or energy
4. If gods are composed of neither matter nor energy, they cannot exist
5. To say that gods exist but are not composed of neither matter or energy is to effectively say that "existence = non-existence"
6. If gods exist and are therefore governed by physical laws, they can be perceived using sensual evidence
7. If gods can be sensually perceived, there would be ample proof
8. If gods are subject to physical laws, faith and religion are unnecessary and praying to God is equal to praying to Rock

Do gods perform miracles?

1. Miracles are, by definition, violations of physical laws
2. If gods exist and are therefore governed by physical laws, they cannot logically violate physical laws

Religion, government, and modern philosophy are the triumvirate of power that currently enslave the world to thugs and con-artists. In the future I'd like to discuss the symbiotic relationship that these institutions have developed with each other, but for now, understand that accepting any lie from any one of these groups snares you for the rest of them.

If you are wrong about a strong opinion that resulted from faulty logic, there is power in humility. Being humble in the face of reality is the hallmark of wisdom.

If you are wrong about a compromised opinion that resulted from indecisiveness, you have yielded truth to evil. Being polite in the company of emotional hostility is the hallmark of a slave.