Evolutionary biology teaches that the most adaptable organisms are those that
survive best and longest. Cockroaches have lived basically unchanged for over
300 million years because they do not care what they eat or where they live.
They survive well in all climates, indoors or out, rain or shine.
Raccoons have been around for only a fraction of that, perhaps 25 million
years, but have survived for the same reason – adaptability. While not as
strong, aggressive, or dominant as other animals, their intelligence, tactile
sensitivity, agile paws, and omnivorous habits have given them an evolutionary
leg up.
Alex Hardin had always been considered indecisive. When asked what kind of
food he liked, he always said, “Whatever” and meant it. Pork, lamb, fish,
hummus were all the same to him.
It wasn’t that he lacked taste. On the contrary, Alex had a fine palate,
could always identify the wild berries in the coulis, the earth spices in the
truffle sauce, and the back-terroir flintiness of certain Oregon pinots. It’s
just that he didn’t care. Put more carefully, he placed no particular value on
cuisine. Food had its interesting variations and subtleties, but it was still
fodder – basic sustenance.
It was no surprise that it was of little difference to him whether his
vegetables were organic, locally-produced, or farm-grown. He was just as happy
with tomatoes and pears grown in Argentina or Chile than those grown around the
corner. He was indifferent to the living conditions of poultry, farmed fish, or
pigs. He was happy enough to eat oysters while they were plentiful, but knew
that with the increased population pressures on the Bay, their numbers would
eventually dwindle. This was not a matter of concern, only fact.
Mountains or sea? Alex was indifferent. Both were pleasant changes of pace
from life in the city. Progressive or conservative? Either one. Politics were
cyclical, political movements ebbed and flowed, nothing in the world ever really
changed, so ‘conviction’ was irrelevant.
Blonde or brunette? Leggy or full-figured? Aquiline or pert nose? Although I
doubt he ever thought of himself in this way, Alex was a proto-feminist. He
loved all women not because the way they looked but for the unique,
special, one-of-a-kind sexual responsiveness which was as stamped and patented
as any original.
Similarly, although Alex was never concerned with labels – it was enough that
everyone else was obsessed for him – he would best be described as a Stoic.
Play the cards you are dealt, limit desire, figure out what’s what before it is
too late, and let the world take its course. Or a Hindu. The world is only an
illusion; so choice – let alone convictions – are meaningless.
Evolutionary biology and Greek and Hindu philosophy coincide nicely. Don’t
be picky.
When he was a child, his parents thought he was wishy-washy. How could
anyone with so few preferences and so few conviction ever survive in the real
world. The tried to get him to declare his preferences. Few children liked
broccoli and most liked ice cream. What was Alex’s demurral all about? Neither
his mother or father could ever have been called indecisive. Their careers in
law demanded just the opposite. If cases were not decided on truth, they were
adjudicated based on strong, logical, well-argued convictions.
The Hardins, who had never read Epictetus or Seneca the Younger, could not
have possibly recognized what was to become their son’s Stoic bent, nor would
they have appreciated and encouraged it if they had. The world is made up of
winners and losers and nothing in between. There are no successful
fence-sitters in today’s America.
Instead the Hardins wondered what they had done wrong. How could two such
decisive, purposeful people have given birth to such a…..Here, words failed
them. ‘Spineless’ was far too cruel. ‘Wishy-washy’ was closer to Alex’s bland
comings and goings. ‘Indecisive’ gave him too much credit for rational
analysis. However he turned out the way he did – whether faulty genes,
inadvertently negligent upbringing (the Salvadoran maid), or some unexplained
psycho-physiological anomaly in his brain, their son was a loser.
Alex was nothing of the sort. Not only did he have discriminating taste, a
very logical mind, and a decisive management style, but he used those talents to
his advantage. He was well-respected in his field and in his community.
Women were intrigued by him. His elusiveness was a challenge. Unlike men
whose sexual interests are basic and simple, women want to know men,
what makes them tick, and to figure out who they are. There is too much risk in
emotional choice.
Whatever the reason, Alex was in his element. Since he was happy with all
women, he entertained them all. He was unconcerned that most of them soon gave up because of
his ‘lack of commitment’ or unwillingness to share his feelings.
Colleagues and acquaintances were frustrated by his lack of commitment. He
demurred on the most important election of the last two hundred years, said his
progressive friends about the Trump rise to power. How could he have?! He saw
both sides on Israel, Iran, Syria, Brexit, immigration and taxes. He had no
religious affiliation, appreciated all religions but was quick to point out
their faults.
Alex, however, saw nothing but hysteria. It seemed as though there were
nothing but belief in America unfortunately expressed as righteousness,
moral indignation, anger, and hostility. It wasn’t only that the most strident
and intolerant interest groups had no coherent, rational, evidence-based
foundation for their protest, but such collective emotionality was directed at
others. While true belief may be the result of individual search and personal
conclusions, it rarely is. It seems to need resistance to firm up and
aggressive push-back to consolidate.
Beliefs alone are not so much the problem; it is the militancy which results
from those beliefs that causes trouble.
Alex found it harder and harder to live well. As much as his innate Stoicism
gave him a strong defense against irritability, bad humor, and scratchy
dissatisfaction with everything, he as not totally immune. It is hard to ignore
a racket.
If it weren’t for the noise and bad music, he might have enjoyed the show.
True believers do have a comic side – the manic, hyper-passionate, revivalist
fervor of those for whom pollution is not just an environmental hazard but an
assault on dignity, community, and personal value. For whom lagging black, gay,
and women’s rights is an insult. Protests, demonstrations, and marches are St.
Vitus’ dances, circus side shows, and vaudeville acts. Where is the equanimity?
Except for the most disciplined Greek Stoic of 2000 years ago or the most
hermetic Hindu ascetic in the Himalayas, few people can be unaffected by the
loud off-key brass, the howling, the obsession, and the lamentations.
Alex, however, had a good bit of the old school in him enough to inoculate or
at least partially protect him from the hysteria. It wasn’t that difficult,
after all, to pull the plug current events, heed his mother’s advice to avoid
religion and politics over dinner, and to read Conrad.
There are few people like Alex Hardin. Most cannot withstand the incessant
pressure to choose and have given in to preference. It take a lot more to
hold on to the conviction that conviction doesn’t matter, than to embrace collective purpose.
Monday, February 27, 2017
Survival Of The Fittest–Limiting Belief And Conviction (A Stoic Primer)
Labels:
Politics and Culture
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.