Habits - freeing or limiting?

At the beginning of the year, the usual articles about New Year's resolutions rolled out in the media. Yawn.

These were followed by the usual blither on making your resolution into a habit. Same, same.

I didn't make any resolutions. But I did think about habits.

A quote from William James (Habit, 1887)¹ prompted this exploration (my emphasis added): 

"We must make automatic and habitual, as early as possible, as many useful actions as we can, and guard against the growing into ways that are likely to be disadvantageous to us, as we should guard against the plague. The more of the details of our daily life we can hand over to the effortless custody of automatism, the more our higher powers of mind will be set free for their own proper work.

There is no more miserable human being than one in whom nothing is habitual but indecision, and for whom the lighting of every cigar, the drinking of every cup, the time of rising and going to bed every day, and the beginning of every bit of work, are the subjects of express volitional deliberations." 

Really?! Habits are freeing 'our higher powers of the mind'? Can habits also be limiting? And William, how do we distinguish the 'useful actions' from those 'likely to be disadvantageous'? And are 'express volitional deliberations' so bad?

Post-truth (part 3) - reviewing the project brief

Truth is a massive topic and, as I said in part 1 of this series on post-truth, my writing comes after thousands (if not millions) of articles, comments, philosophical schools, books, memes, scientific debates, epistemological feuds, personal disagreements, psychological studies, ideological assertions and legal contests about truth. 

Click to enlarge

In part 1, I described how the dominant metaphor for truth – a journey to find truth – is a poor fit. Not just that, it creates problems for humanity’s relationship with truth. It stops us understanding what is happening with post-truth.

In part 2, I introduced a new metaphor - the construction of a house. I briefly outlined each of the components of the house: the ground (objective reality), the footings and foundations (our attempts to probe and understand reality), the floor (facts about reality as perceived and determined by humans), the walls (social consensus on truth) and the roof (psychological security of confidence in truth). 

I intended to follow this with a post explaining the metaphoric building processes (social agreement on truth) and the building code (social influences on these components and processes). Finally, I planned to get to a discussion about post-truth. 

I was aware I was skating rapidly over the details in the new metaphor and how I have selected from the extensive previous writing on truth. So quickly, I left too much out. Not surprisingly, it raised a few questions for readers.

This third post in the Post-truth series is a response to some of the questions. It seemed like a good time to go back to the metaphoric drawing board to revisit the project brief for the construction of truth. 

Burdened - writing the load off

This month marks two years of Wordly Explorations. A time for review. 

Last year pushed many of us to consider what we were filling our lives with and why. What are we doing with our precious finite time on earth? Are we relishing and honoring all that life offers? Are we exploring the vast richness of our physical, emotional, aesthetic and intellectual experiences? Are we honestly facing our challenges, and supporting others through theirs? Are we doing anything meaningful?

And for me: is writing a blog the right thing to be doing at this time in history? In what way does the blog contribute to the world? 

It was a weighty question and played on my mind over many months. 

With this in the background, I read Susan Sontag's 1966 Against Interpretation and Other Essays. I was struck with new ideas from these 60-year-old essays. I sorted out a few puzzles, found a new perspective on topics I struggle with, and cheered her underlying argument: how we use words can either open or close our eyes to the wonderful complexity of the world. 

In short, I experienced what I hoped my exploration of words and the world might provide for readers: maybe a new perspective, perhaps a pause to reflect on how we use words, and even occasionally, some new ideas.

Happy exploring until next year

Well, it's been a year! Sometimes, it's been a bit difficult to keep writing or to even justify writing as things go nuts all around the world. 

But for me, exploring words is always an exploration of the world (and vice versa). When things are strange or scary, that exploration can provide a moment of respite, a moment of clarity (hopefully), and a moment of amazement at the incredible phenomenon that is communicating and making meaning with words. 

I'm taking a break for the next month, but until then happy exploring! 

Post-truth (part 2) - we need a metaphor for truth that fits

In part 1 of Post-truth, I explored the dominant metaphor for truth: humanity on a long journey to a destination.

We use metaphors all the time to talk and think about the world.¹ A familiar metaphor is conventional ideas as 'inside the box' and new ideas as 'thinking outside the box'. There is no actual box, but the metaphoric box conveys complex concepts about creativity and originality. 

A good metaphor helps us think about the world. A bad metaphor can be misleading. 

A 'journey' is not a very good metaphor for truth. It doesn't fit well. In fact, I think it is misleading and, among other things, it blinds humanity to the early signs of emerging dictators and power-mongers. 

In this post, I introduce a new metaphor and a new way of thinking about truth. My goal is to incorporate the numerous contests of ideas about truth, e.g. objective versus relative, humanity's need to know truth, the boundaries to 'knowing', and the place of 'untruth' in all its guises.

This post introduces and explains the 'fit' of my new metaphor. In subsequent posts, I will explain how I see it can accommodate these conflicting ideas about truth.² 

I'm exploring old ideas but trying to think outside the box. 

Armed only with a new metaphor.

TATKOP 129

There Are Two Kinds Of People: those who prefer convenience and those who prefer privacy.

See more in the TATKOP series.

Post-truth (part 1) - revealing a false metaphor for truth

Truth is a word that captures the human mind and then blows that mind into little bits. 

Despite thousands of years of writing by philosophers, religious thinkers and scientists we really don't have firm grounding for the concept of truth. What do we mean by the word truth? How do we know what we know? Can we really know anything? What is reality; what is an hallucination? What is a fact; what is evidence? Who decides what is true? When it is okay to lie or should we never? All big questions. 

History, psychology and politics are full of argument about what we know - is what we think we know true, is it a selective and shared delusion, is it even a lie? Most of us have had conversations where agreement on the truth was impossible. 

We all hold a sense that what we know is true, until someone asks us how we can be so sure. It's a pretty difficult concept.

Despite this, most of us¹ seem to almost casually accept that truth exists… 

But maybe not for much longer. According to some, we are now in a post-truth era.  

Does this mean that we live in a time after truth? Has truth finished (and where are all those answers?) Or has it been discredited as a big joke? Do we each get to have our own truth now?  

More interestingly to me, how can we understand the word post-truth if we have such a shaky grasp on what the word truth means?