Don't Panic

I write a lot of different ways; in personal notes, in to-do lists, in journals, on micro-blogging platforms, but I started this one because sometimes I like to have my thoughts out loud. Maybe that's because I want to spark discourse, discussion, or debate. Maybe that's because I like to prompt responses, even of dissenting opinions, so that I can get a feel for “what's out there” and learn more about the world. Maybe that's because I want to disseminate my views both to like-minded and contrary standpoints. Maybe that's because I want to impart some of my (what I perceive to be) wisdom. Maybe that's because I'm bored.

In any case, I've had several thoughts that I wanted to share or just see what the reaction to them would be, so here we go; a blog.

I don't intend to promote, advertise, or otherwise “share” this blog on any kind of wide or far-reaching scale. If it makes it around more than just the water cooler, so be it. At least I'll know “my thoughts are out there.”

How will I write?

I thought about this for a bit and realized I wanted to list out a few points.

I write open-minded.

As a scholar, a scientist, a realist, and a kind person, I feel obligated to remain open-minded about my topics. Surely I have strong opinions, but I'm grounded in them based on my values, and values can change with new information. Anyone unwilling to change, in any aspect of their life, is afraid. I am not afraid; I'm capable of seeing things from multiple sides and motivations, and I realize that it's possible for me to be wrong. Every time this happens is a learning opportunity, and we can only improve through learning.

I write as a pragmatist.

Most of what I think is based on what is useful. Use can have many connotations, but mostly I mean “what does the most good.” When I draw a conclusion, I try to keep in mind what has utility. I shy away from arguments that defend a position in favor of statements that confirm value.

I write as a reductionist.

I tend to reduce things to the most basic concept or central, underlying cause, often to a fault. Someone says “there's a homelessness problem in this country” and I reduce that to “there's a lack of compassion in this country” even though the issue is multi-faceted and has numerous working parts. This is somewhat the cause of my desire to treat the underlying disease rather than the apparent symptoms. I recognize that not every topic can be so cavalierly reduced, but I often do so anyway because it simplifies the problem and, therefore, the solution.

I write as a polar bear.

This is my own term for my tendency to polarize things as black and white. I realize there is a wide spectrum of gray area in between two conclusions, but I gravitate towards one side out of a need to feel decisive. For example, a coin-flip has two options, that feels nice. A roulette spin could have numerous outcomes with one or more possibilities of winning, but I still see it as either “winning” your bet” or “losing” your bet. This analogy is perfect because, although the game of roulette is entirely based on random chance, there are “betting strategies” that can reduce the likelihood of losses (which is not the same as increasing your chances of winning).

Who am I?

To start, I'm just some guy who thinks about things.

But context is important, so here are a few other things about me, in no order other than the order I thought of them.

I am college educated. My field of study is nothing special and bears no relevance on my life (at present, anyway), but the experience did teach me valuable skills like critical thinking, thorough research, discerning whether a source is reliable and trustworthy, project management and task planning, achieving goals and meeting deadlines, working hard, working smart, and the value of a wide-spectrum of information.

I am non-religious. By this I mean I subscribe to no particular religion, nor am I an Atheist. My views an opinions are not influenced by any divine message that I am required to believe without scrutiny. I see the value in several aspects of various religions but do not believe one must be an adherent zealot of the entire theology to extract and use that value. I also think most religious beliefs fail to account for context and utility.

I don't consider myself a member of any political party. I typically vote in line with one in particular, but I don't believe that makes me a member. Each political party has pros and cons (just like with every religion), but I chose to vote based on the issues about which I am passionate. This means I often vote for candidates on the same side of the bench, but I consider this happenstance more than political stance.

Let's see, that covers education, religion, and politics. Just one more thing.

I don't believe I am “right.” Obviously I think I have the right idea, or am correct when I can demonstrate so, or have a better opinion than those who oppose, but I don't take for granted that this makes me automatically correct and beyond reproach. I value anyone who can give me enough information to change my mind. I believe willful ignorance is one of the worst things we can perpetrate, so I hope that, whenever I think I am right, someone who has proof I am not will show me.

With all that said, and the proper context in place, let us begin.