whatareyouthinking

Based on some comments I’ve heard in person or have seen posted on sites where I post my ‘parables,’ I am quite surprised by the number who actually take these at face value (i.e. literally). I wish to assure you this is an unintended consequence. As the writer I am pleased if someone finds value in this work at any level. Nevertheless, I assure you the stories have a meaning far beyond the superficial circumstances of which they’re circumscribed. The frivolity of the literal is intended to serve as analogy to the frivolity (from my viewpoint) of the ideology to which it points. If while reading something ‘clicks’ and you know what I am getting at, please comment! I’d love to talk to you. If you are confused, you are also in good company and I’d love to talk to you too. After all, it is only with my own writing that I actually seem to know enough to not take too literally. Others’ metaphors often elude me.

In an automobile, there is DRIVE and there is PARK. In between these gears, there are many levels of speed. No one will say, “you are either in PARK or you are in DRIVE and that’s all there is to it,” because everyone knows there is much more than that. Neither does one settle and say, “everyone is going at some speed” as PARK truly is a reality and does not produce any measurable speed. There is also NUETRAL, but this is not necessarily a middle ground as NUETRAL serves specific purposes that tramscend a wholly inadequate “somewhere between PARK and DRIVE” definition. In addition, the low gears, although rarely used, are similar to DRIVE but serve other functions that are not best suited for DRIVE itself.

Many live out their lives as if DRIVE and PARK are the only options, one of them being good and the other bad. One may isolate all the benefits of DRIVE and share their ideaology of how everyone needs to be in DRIVE all of the time–as people need to move! But another will isolate all of the horrors of DRIVE and contend that DRIVE is the culpable gear since while people are in it, they often hit things and cause much harm to others and property. This one will bring to light all the benefits of remaining in PARK and encourage others to not be like those evil DRIVERS!

Some who are wary of making such commitments to either PARK or DRIVE may choose to go with NUETRAL. This is a safe bet for those wishing to avoid the extremism associated with the DRIVERS and the PARKERS. Neverthless, should the NUETRAL ones need to remain stationary while situated on a steep incline, they themselves will witness the ramifications of avoiding DRIVE or PARK at all costs.

Others, recognizing the consequences of blind adherance to the aforementioned three, may experiment with some of the LOWER GEARS and do so with moderate success. After a time, they find that these too have their shortfalls.

Does a skilled driver succesfully operate in any one extreme (or alternative to an extreme) on every ocassion? Can a wise driver ultimately find balance by somehow blending all of the options; DRIVE, PARK, NUETRAL, Etc. simultaneously as he goes about his journey? No! A truly skilled driver makes good use of all the gears, but knows how to use them at the appropriate times so that he may safely and effectively reach his destination–and without causing unecessary harm to his fellow travelers. 

And those most in control don’t even rely on automatic transmissions.

To me, much of the self-help material and life changing formulas appear as a product of one who found success through the usual trial and error, then looked back on his life and recalled the events in a most orderly, idealistic fashion. The guru’s product then walks the subscriber through a series of logical steps not likely taken by the author himself. Imagine Columbus, after landing in America, claimed that to have been his plan all along. After his return, he could indeed provide useful information on how to get there, but a step-by-step guide would not accurately detail his initial journey.

One may argue, “But we can learn from another’s experience. Self-help materials are available so others can avoid the same pitfalls the writer had to face.” To this I agree.  Still, those who follow such formulas will run into their own pitfalls, snags that even the author had not considered. It doesn’t mean the adherent necessarily followed the formula incorrectly, but met his own set of stumbling blocks–as all do. Here, the point is simply that the success itself generally predates the steps that allegedly lead to it.

Some think there are only two in the world—us and them.  Some try to beat the system, as if the system was something to be conquered.  Nevertheless, the present system is comprised of all who have used the system or beat the system in their own way of dealing with the system.  Therefore the system is nothing more than the sum of all of its contributors.  It is not the system that we are generally attempting to beat, or even brag about beating, but rather it is our entry into the system through unconventional means.

Once we are in the system, we may wittingly or unwittingly modify the system for the good or perpetuate what we hated about the system in the first place.  We may even learn something from the system, perhaps even the necessity of some of the system’s attributes—even the things we may not have liked before.  A higher level of understanding about the system.

Still, we may be persuaded by the system.  Persuaded to do what we don’t like to do even though we know in our hearts that it is not the thing to do.  At this point we are no longer modifiers or contributors to the system, but programs produced by the system.