I recently read a book written by two lawyers about the concept of “ownership”. Their contention is that with almost every issue in the world there exists an ownership dispute in one way or another.

When they made this claim early in the book I thought: “Hmm, that can’t be right”.

When I read further and they gave more and more examples I thought: “Well, maybe MANY issues can be tied to ownership…”

Once I finished the book and started listening to the news on the radio with the concept of ownership in mind I thought: “Holy moley…Everything is related to ownership.

Think about it: immigration, bar fights, arguments over seat saving in movie theaters…. small scale, massive scale; the list goes on and on.

The concept of ownership has been in my mind ever since. Do I own too much? Do I own too little? Why do I even feel I own these things to begin with?

It’s blown my mind and I challenge you all to randomly look on a news site (millennials) or look in a random page of a newspaper (ancient readers who are accessing this by telegraph) and find a single article where you can’t, in some way relate the issue to ownership. If you can find one that doesn’t have to do with ownership in any way whatsoever, I’ll eat a hat on camera.

Think back to the last time you felt really angry. What was it that made you feel this way? Did someone act unjustly toward you? Did your embarrassment of having failed at something lead to anger? Did you try to disguise your sadness as anger?

If this anger you experienced was allowed to run its course, uncontrolled, it’s likely that you would have hurt someone, said something you’d later regret, or broken something. This is not uncommon, as any movie about a down-on-his-luck boxer climbing the ranks of the middle-weight division will demonstrate. The destructive response to anger has also been a noted phenomenon even as far back as ancient Greece. In his famous work De Ira the Stoic philosopher Seneca stated, “Anger, if not restrained, is often more harmful to us than the insult that provoked it.”

Some people may argue that anger can be a good reaction to certain situations. In high stress situations or competitions, isn’t ok to see red?

I would argue that it is not. Anger blinds us to the possibility of reasoning our way through a situation. The emotion can only lead us to one final destination: destruction. There is no bad situation that can’t be made worse by becoming angry.

This is not to say that that the initial reaction of anger can or should ever be completely snuffed out. It’s probably not even possible or at the very least extremely difficult to do. What I and many of the stoics would offer is that one should attempt to control and restrain the reactionary feelings of anger we all experience.

There are many ways to do this: meditation, mindfulness, breathing exercises, and many others that may work for a given person on an individual basis.

Whether you implement anger control methods on your own or seek counseling/therapy is up to you. But whatever you do, strive to regulate your anger. We only get to experience this life once (possibly). So don’t deprive yourself or others around you of a fulfilling existence by letting your anger run wild.

Getting rid of cable was one of the best decisions we have ever made. The ridiculous cost of watching mostly ads slowly but surely revealed how unnecessary the service is.

But one thing that I do miss is the occasional sports program, especially the olympics.

Watching some of the events over the past few nights was so exciting to me. Athletes pushing themselves to the limit; old, obese commentators who likely rode the bench in high school or ran the roller hockey courts against neighborhood toddlers when they were in their 20’s giving their hot takes on why Simone Biles is a quitter; records being set… all of it is amazing.

But perhaps the best moment I saw was the U.S. Athlete Isaiah Jewett fell after clipping his heel on the runner from Botswana behind him. Both of them tumbled to the ground and the other athletes flew past them, leaving no chance for either of them to recover.

Instead of getting angry, pounding the ground, demanding an apology; Isaiah got up, helped the other runner up and they ran through the finish line together in last place.

As inspiring and amazing as it is to see clips like this one, where the runner recovered after a fall to win the race, even more amazing to me is the integrity and good-sportsmanship that Jewett showed by helping and bonding with his fellow runner, who also had his olympic dreams dashed.

In the interview following the race, although clearly disappointed, Isaiah said only: “I’m just happy to be here.”

That should make you prouder to be an American than any record setting pace or olympic gold medal.

Quick one for this beautiful Friday.

For context, I highly recommend listening to this podcast: Joe Rogan Experience: Episode #1691

In the podcast, the woman being interviewed describes the horrors she experienced growing up in North Korea and how, when she escaped and was able to go to school in America, she was amazed at some of the problems her friends would talk about. Problems such as boys they liked ignoring them, or a friend not sitting with them at lunch just baffled her.

Additionally, routine issues that we have as adults in America are completely astounding to this woman who (warning: graphic) routinely witnessed rats eating people as they starved to death on the streets of North Korea. She couldn’t wrap her head around the idea of obesity (which now hovers around 40% of Americans). The idea of having too much to eat, when she and her family were purposefully starved is an absurd concept in her mind.

As difficult as this podcast is to listen to, I think it is important that everyone does. It’s important to realize that a hard day at work or a bad grade on a test are literally nothing when compared to living in a nation that actively oppresses its people.

I get a feeling of intense emotional pain when people claim that they accomplished something because they worked harder than someone else. Even worse when they say they worked harder than everyone else. My contention is that close to 100% of everything each of us have accomplished in our lives is due to luck, with the remaining tiny percentage allowing for some measure of effort.

For the vast majority of those reading this, here is a short list of things in your life that were the result of luck and not hard work:

• Being born with a functioning body and brain;
• Living in a country that allows you to pursue your dreams;
• Having someone in your life who guided you through tough decisions;
• Living in a time with so much incredible scientific and medical technology;
• Let’s stop here.

For those of you that are picturing the person who always claims he or she got rich by outworking everyone, I feel your pain. For those of you who don’t relate to this at all and are thinking: “this is bogus! I worked hard my entire life and everything in it is because of me there wasn’t a single lucky thing that ever happened to me…”

It may seem like I’m being negative, and maybe I am…to an extent. But here’s the point: I believe that we have very little control over what happens in our lives. We couldn’t control for where or when we were born into this world. We couldn’t control for any disabilities or lasting injuries we may have learned to live with. Everyone is working as hard as they possibly can, with the tools at their disposal.

The one thing that I believe we can control is how we treat one another. So let’s all cut each other some slack. Let’s recognize that we were probably a lot luckier in our lives than some people, and probably much less lucky than others. And for goodness sake, let’s stop telling people we accomplished things strictly through hard work.

How often have you felt true hatred in your life? Have you (or do you currently) hate someone or something?

There is a theory on hatred that goes something like this (Herman Hesse quote incoming. Highly recommend all of his books): “If you hate someone, you hate something in him that is a part of yourself. That which isn’t part of ourselves doesn’t disturb us.”

If this idea has merit, it has massive implications for our currently divided political system. For example, the hatred directed at those on the right of the political spectrum, that comes from those on the left of the political spectrum (and vice versa) is due to something that both sides have in common. Breaking that down further, it’s not necessarily the differences in opinion that cause hatred, but rather the self-hatred that both sides have in common.

In fact, perhaps it’s the differences that should be focused on more closely. If these differing ideas don’t cause hatred, maybe they could result in learning and better connectedness between groups.

Now I’m well aware that people can still commit atrocities even in the absence of hatred. There are other emotions, philosophies, and agendas at play. But I would argue that hatred blinds us to the possibility of compromise.

So my question is this: if our politicians were more introspective and took a look inward at their own self-hatred, biases, and insecurities, do you think we could heal the divide we are currently seeing?

On a smaller scale, could each of us do the same? Before we attack an ancient relative for an insane article they repost online, could we first examine why we hate these posts so much?

We might find that the main problem is coming from within, and we might just gain some perspective in the process.

The concept of truth has fascinated me for roughly the past ten years, and it became even more of an important issue in my life in the past three or four years.

Maybe it was always the case, but it seems like recently truth has become less important than winning. I know that this is often the case in the legal world. To both the prosecution and defense, it matters little whether the person on trial is actually guilty, as long as the “right” side wins the case. There is too much money, power, and ego on both sides to allow something as trivial as truth to get in the way of a victory.

But the law is messy, complicated, and I don’t really understand it at all, so let’s move away from there.

I look at anything in the world that is disputable through three lenses (I’m going to use my own language here, I know many philosophers have put this in better, cleaner terms):

1. Provable truths
2. Unprovable truths
3. Opinions

Let’s run through each of these, starting with number 1: provable truths (although it might be kind of fun to start with number 2 or three. It wouldn’t make any sense and would be very confusing though…)

Provable Truths

This category includes items that are either:

• True by definition.
• Mathematically provable

“True by definition” includes statements such as “all bachelors are unmarried”. Since the definition of bachelor is that they are unmarried, this statement is true. (Side note: if you talk to any philosopher for longer than a few minutes, this example always comes up.)

“Mathematically provable” encompasses math principles that are the basis for much of our scientific understanding such as 1+1=2. You can run experiments over and over and over again using high-level computers, dobermans, or even sleeping relatives and see that 1+1=2 remains true.

Unprovable Truths

Truths that cannot be proven one way or another can rest comfortably in this next category: “unprovable truths”.

This is probably the most complicated one, Therefore, I am going to be basic with my examples and conclusion so as to not force those of you kindly reading my blog to have to sit through a 45 minute read. If you’d like to talk through it further, send me a message. Examples of unprovable truths include statements such as:

• There is a God.
• We are living in a sophisticated simulation.

For both of these statements, there is a truth. It is true that there is a God, or it is not true that there is a God. It is true that we are living in a simulation, or it is not true that we are living in a simulation. Debating these questions is fun and the process can take you down logical roads that are intense and tricky to navigate, but once you get to a certain point, you have to take a leap of faith.

It’s unlikely that we will ever develop techniques to definitively say which of these statements are true, however, this does not mean that there isn’t a truth that we just can’t access due to our limited senses, current neurological capabilities, etc.

Opinions

Opinions are a different animal entirely. People often try to claim that opinions contain truths or can be analogous to truths in certain circumstances. But in my mind, they do not contain an absolute or relative truth at all. They are…opinions such as:

• Nike running shoes look better than Adidas running shoes.
• The sound of butter sizzling in a pan is the best noise in the world.

These are both opinions. We don’t use logical or step-wise methods to come to conclusions on these items. Instead we use our past experiences, our preferences, the pleasure centers of our brains.

While this, I’m sure, seems obvious and like a waste of time to even mention, this brings me to my larger point.

The Larger Point

Between the three options above, what do you think the news media should focus on? Since this is a one-sided conversation, I won’t wait for your answer because I will not hear you, and you won’t have heard me so you won’t be able to answer the question anyway until this is published. I suppose I could go back and edit it once you’ve read that question and had a chance to think about it but….no.

My thought would be that the news should focus solely on provable truths. Without using colorful language and biases, news reporters should convey the necessary information in such a way that the public can then make their own opinions about the topics, having received the objective data.

I don’t know if this is a controversial stance. It seems like it shouldn’t be. However, I hear very few people calling for the creation of an unbiased news channel and many, many people insisting that the incredibly biased, opinion-based news source that they favor should be the only option available.

Which leads me to think that many people believe that opinions are somehow tied to the truth. I just can’t wrap my head around this belief.

I’ll close with a great quote that kicked off a great book I read the other day:

“The truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it” – Flannery O’Connor

As part of my 30 day personal blog writing quest, I have also decided to get up early each day and either go for a walk or run. So today, the alarm went off at 5, I did my daily journaling, completed my morning hygiene rituals, then headed out the door to run.

I ran around the park near our house and started to think about what I would write today. The concept of “enough” has been one I’ve thought about a lot this past year:

What is the definition of enough?

What is enough in terms of clothing?

What is enough in terms of food?

What is enough in terms of free time?

What is enough in terms of salary/money?

Depending on how you go about things, you probably tackle each of those questions with a certain thought process. Maybe you visualize your concept of enough and think about how much you currently have of a given item. Or maybe you are a minimalist and you recoil at the idea of having more than enough of anything. Let’s pick a few from the list and dissect them:

Clothing

I think starting with clothing is the easiest because I believe that literally everyone who reads this can take stock of their current wardrobe and pick at least one clothing item of which he or she has too many. Shoes, shirts, socks…take your pick.

We recently gave away 12 pairs of jeans. 12 PAIRS OF JEANS. There were jeans at the bottom of my drawer that I literally had never seen before. Whatever your definition of enough is when it comes to clothing, I hope we could all agree, 12 pairs is much more than is needed when it comes to jeans.

Food

There’s a lot that goes into the concept of enough food:

• How much physiologically do we need to survive?
• How much should we have stored for ourselves and our family?
• Is it ever ok to have more than enough food?

It’s uncontroversial to say that everyone should have enough food to survive. The tricky part comes in the second two bullets. How much should you save? If you believe the apocalypse is coming, probably a lot, which would also answer the question of it being ok to have more than enough food.

Money

In a survey, respondents were asked how much money they would have to make for them to be considered “wealthy” by their own definition. Up to a certain level of income, everyone involved the survey responded that double their current salary would put them in a “wealthy” category. After that level where it was no longer double, respondents still listed an amount higher than what they were currently making.

This is an interesting outcome, as it indicates that we have a tough time ever admitting that we have “enough”.

Try the exercise yourself: In your own head right now, think about a salary that you would consider to be that of a wealthy person. Is it double what you make? Is it what you currently make? Is it less than what you make? When you do this, realize that a person who makes half your salary considers your salary to be that of a wealthy person.

Tying it Together

Back to my run this morning:

As I finished up my exercise, and took a cool-down lap around the park, I came upon a man who was just waking up after having clearly slept in the park. He was stretching up toward the sky, yawning, as he slowly began packing up his sheet and pillow that were his only visible possessions besides the clothes on his back. Startled, as I didn’t expect to come upon someone in the park, I said hello and smiled stupidly. He smiled wide, said hello in return, then gestured to the rising sun and said: “looks like it’s going to be another amazing day!”

I agreed, said goodbye, then made my way back home.

When I was writing this post in my head, before I encountered the man, I had a strict definition of “enough”. I planned to lay it all out and strengthen my argument and say why we should have this much food, and this many shirts, and this many x, and this many y…

But then I came upon this man. He looked satisfied and carefree after a good night’s sleep. He was looking forward to the coming day. He, by many of our definitions, does not have “enough”. He doesn’t appear to have a home, he doesn’t have many clothes, he barely has any possessions; and yet he looks happy.

If there’s a message, I would say it is this: the next time you’re unsatisfied with how much you have, know that there are many people out there who have much less and are still enjoying this life. This shouldn’t mean that we should necessarily stop trying to advance, to make more money, to buy more things. But every once in a while, we should take a step back and appreciate what we have.

Salutations and Warm Season’s Greetings,

I have not used this blog nearly as much as I should. Therefore, this month I plan to rectify that and use it much more than I should or than anyone would ever want me to. I’ll be posting every day for the month of August. I’d like to post on a certain concept each day, so if any of you have anything you’d like to hear my hot take on, send it my way. If not, I’ll come up with them.

Note: this says it was published on August 2nd, but it was published on August 1st. You’re wrong if you think differently. As is WordPress. As is your friend who you call over to confirm the publication date. As is society.

In health (is there a more pretentious sign-off?),

Mel

Literacy is one of the most powerful tools we have as human beings. To be able to record a message in writing and interpret it are fundamental to our ability to thrive as homo sapiens. Many people do not enjoy reading, they find it to be a struggle or just not as stimulating as watching TV or listening to a story on the radio. That being said, often times, they understand that reading is important for their mental and overall brain health. As a result they may look for a book, where they can “learn something” rather than a fictitious story where it’s “strictly for entertainment”.

I have heard this from many people looking for book recommendations. They may say that they are looking to get into reading, but quickly add that they “don’t read for entertainment, but read to learn”.

Whatever gets people to become readers, I’m in favor of. So if you get very excited about the next installment of Winston Churchill’s years as a bellhop before he made it big, or learning further about how many times JFK visited San Bernardino to collect giant bottles of his favorite cherry juice, more power to you. Exercise those reading muscles in your eyes and brain.

However, I am of the opinion that one learns much more from a fiction book than is usually assumed.

When you pick up and read a fiction book, in order to enjoy it, you need to assume the roles of the characters. A good author will set up a scene in which you have plenty of information about the characters, allowing you to empathize with how they will feel when an action befalls them. Sometimes, in a very good book, you may cry when the characters are sad. You may cheer when the characters are victorious. You may contemplate the similarities to your own life and compare how you would react in the same situation. As you read more fiction, you will gain the ability to put yourself in the character’s shoes, which I firmly believe translates to the ability to empathize in real life.

Additionally, many fiction authors will do copious research before publishing. They will reference things within the setting they have chosen and drop interesting tid-bits that the reader can further investigate and learn more, if they are so inclined.

Lastly, the writing style in good fiction necessitates the use of complex sentence structures and vocabulary. It’s shocking how many new words one can learn in a random piece of fiction literature. Not to mention passively learning new ways to structure sentences, which can vastly improve texting and letter writing ability.

So let me reiterate: If you love non-fiction, boogie on and read all the non-fiction you like. But if you think that fiction books are frivolous and that you will learn nothing, please give a good one a try, then see how you feel.