Between the lunch and dinner shifts I would be allowed a break from my dish washing duties at the Kittansett Club in Marion, Massachusetts. This was during the summer of 1973. If the weather was sunny, but with a light breeze, I would often choose to sit among the boulders, which were closely packed together where the end of Butler Point meets Buzzards Bay. For many of these days I carried with me a worn paperback book with a bright blue cover entitled Future Shock.

I was among the many readers and neophyte futurists to gobble up that book, starting when it was published in 1970. Although I was three years late to the party, by then I knew about the scope and flavor of the book’s buzz. It attracted me. And the book did not disappoint.

Alvin Toffler set out to highlight the importance of change among populations, cultures, and individuals. In particular, change that is ever more accelerated, novel, widespread, and challenging. Toffler was a futurist, professor, correspondent, and businessman. During the mid-1960s he and his wife Heidi detected that technology was hastening cultural change worldwide. This led to five years of research, resulting in the book Future Shock, which has sold many millions of copies, has been translated into numerous languages, and is still in print fifty years later.

Even as a kid, I found the notion of The Future to be fascinating. My mother may have unwittingly been a part of the reason why. Having grown up, if you could call it that, in wartime Germany in the late 1930s and 1940s, she always had a special admiration for things “modern” once she became a young mother and U.S. citizen in 1950s America. Later on she became a big fan of the NASA space program, the Mercury 7 astronauts, the Saturn 5 launches, the capsule retrievals in the ocean, and so on. I shared with her a love for that slice of American lore.

On my own, I loved science fiction when I was young. Those black & white after-school space movies channels 6, 10, and 13 out of Albany used to broadcast (along with the monster movies of course) were fun and imaginative. History also held an long time allure, so it wasn’t a big leap to shift my attention from the past to the future. How people lived and how they will live still remain appealing topics. Hence, my revisitation of Future Shock.

However, aside from a recreational interest in futurism, there is also my curiosity about Toffler’s prescience. We live today in what was his future. Given his forecasting was generally in the twenty to fifty-year range and now that we’ve passed the fifty-year mark I have found intriguing the idea of assessing his outlook. Alvin Toffler, who passed away in 2016, continues to have a reputation as an exceptional futurist. So, presumably he had an astute ability to both evaluate the etiology of profound changes and envision how they would eventually be expressed by individuals and societies.

Change forms the foundation of futurism. Change also brings out of people revealing aspects about how they process life. It seems as if change is more feared than welcomed. A lot of folks like things just the way they are and actively shun change. Of course, there are exclusions as with some individuals thriving continuous novelty while others live with life stories that scream for something better. Nonetheless, these types of people appear to be exceptions to the rule. By way of observation, most folks remain rooted after their hard-fought scramble to establish stability and security in their status quo.

Change management, or lack thereof, can be seen as a personality or social trait. Some leverage the possibilities and opportunities inherent in change, while others are more reactive and resistant. Large-scale change in and of itself is neutral. How it is perceived and engaged determines if it is to be handled as an asset or as a liability.

The question often asked is, does change represent an improvement or a setback? Clearly then, this challenge of people adapting to or defying change has huge implications for how societies either progress or stagnate. So, another impetus for reviewing Future Shock is to discern if Toffler provided us with an astute warning fifty years ago which perhaps went unheeded. If so, were we left by Toffler with a useful methodology for these times that deserves another look?

Therefore, an analysis of the premise, contention, and predictability of Future Shock will disclose the validity of Toffler’s fifty-year-old thesis. Of particular interest is the soundness of futurism as a worthy forewarning mechanism for societies to follow and also how the book may lend some insight into the possibly flawed conventional wisdom concerning opposition to change. 

Alvin Toffler wanted to get America’s attention in a big way. After all, one doesn’t insert the word “shock” into the description of their central argument and include it in their book’s title unless the intent is to jolt and startle. To that end, Toffler was successful as noted above. However, beyond selling a lot of books and presumably making substantial money, he was convinced humankind had reached a profound threshold by the mid-twentieth century that called for a bellowing admonition. The world as it was known in the mid to late 1960s was undergoing accelerated change, impacting not just that time, but more alarmingly ushering in an uncertain and potentially fraught and dangerous future. A cautionary portrayal of what was being faced by the American public, and by extension the so-called ‘First World’ population of his time, set the dark tone of this book. This is not a light and breezy read. Sure, he pointed out positivity and wise judgment being exhibited by some people capable of meeting the future when and where he saw it, but in general he seemed to see ordinary citizens and their leaders as totally unqualified to withstand, never mind benefit from, the onslaught of rapid technical and social transformation that had been unleashed.

Adaptation is a crucial ability. When applied to organisms it depicts the vital steps necessary for survival and continuation of the species. Biologically, adaptation is seen as both behavioral and physical. How organisms interact with their environments in terms of decisive actions and optimal body structure determines if they will endure or face extinction. Regarding modern humans, adaptation is largely a consequence of how intellect is utilized. People operate such that the handling of constraints and possibilities offered by their environment resolve whether they will thrive or founder. Mental acuity and creativity become indispensable in facing basic problems integral to human existence.

Indeed, whole cultures are incessantly challenged to adapt to dynamic and difficult conditions. In 2005, Jared Diamond wrote a compelling book called Collapse, in which he delved into the disintegration of several cultures throughout history that had failed to adapt to changing social and ecological circumstances. Cultural failure has happened before. And it seems imprudent, if not fatuous, to think it won’t happen again.

How we as humans adapt or not when faced with rapidly changing social and physical environments is the premise of Future Shock. The book’s purpose is to shepherd us through the turmoil of accelerated change by suggesting coping mechanisms, alternative attitudes, and reframed perspectives. The urgency Toffler saw was one of people needing to develop, if not command, their capacity to manage the rate of change washing over their individual circumstances and their affiliate society. Not doing so would shackle civilization to “adaptational breakdown” or “disease of change”, also known as future shock.

Unquestioningly, Toffler pointed to the proliferation of technology as the catalyst for hastened change. This is not to say he was a Luddite and opposed to technological advances. He was far from such a position. Rather, he saw technology as irritating the vulnerable space between externally derived change and human responses to it. Technology is innately new, different, innovative, and strange all at once. At the individual level and eventually at the social level, technology insists on adoption or rejection by the market. It was clear by the 1960s, if not sooner, that the tempo of novel technology introductions was quickening. An inflection point had been reached.

New technologies come with both direction and pace. Presumably they are established to solve a problem or add an improvement to what has gone on before. Fine. Enhancements and efficiencies should be welcomed. However, if the preponderance of technologies is such that the ‘old ways’ are continually being questioned and contested there can result disequilibrium and resistance. Therefore, to assess in isolation the justification, substance, and value of technology and the change it brings is shortsighted. The velocity of change must also be considered when determining if a new practice or process alteration should be judged as either a welcomed benefit or a shunned liability. Toffler took this perspective. He didn’t question the essence or merits of technological change nearly as much as the propagation rate of such change.

When I decided to re-engage Future Shock I found myself yearning to see if Toffler’s predictions for the future had been accurate or overly speculative or wildly missing the mark. My porous 50-year old memory assumed Toffler must have made predictions of the future like the old-fashioned world fairs used to do. I certainly remembered this was a book about the future, so prophecy must have been a big part of it. Turns out, I was somewhat mistaken. My recent re-reading of the book made clear early on that this was not meant to be a crystal ball in book form. Whereas, Toffler did engage in speculation about social and scientific trends and the yet-to-be-realized practices associated with them he expected his readers to know his conjectures were best guesses based on available quantifiable and qualitative information, flavored with a dash of imagination. Toffler decidedly stated, “No serious futurist deals in predictions.”

That said, I evaluate where Toffler was generally on and where he was generally off with regards to his main thesis. Has future shock been the severe affliction he thought it could be? If so, where is the evidence of future shock in our current time and if none is to be found, why not? Did the cultural, social, business, education, and technological trends he suggested as possible materialize or not? Did humankind ever learn the skills of adaption to control rapid technological change? Are we still individually or societally in danger of the negative effects of future shock? Can the future be utilized to improve the present time similar to the way study of the past has been found to be helpful? These are the kinds of questions I seek to answer.

Rereading a book you remember being enjoyable and impactful fifty years later is fun. (Maybe I should consider picking up again Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. I remember really loving that one.) My overall impression this time around is that Future Shock attempted a bold and valid assertion. It also was impeccably researched. I get why it was groundbreaking and in many ways it still holds up. In general, Toffler was justified in popularizing the notion that technological change was gaining momentum with such unrestrained speed that the population could be at risk for psychological and sociological disruption. Replacing tradition with transience was an untested phenomenon.

Toffler revealed how increased knowledge was clearly fueling change, but not visibly informing people about how to adapt to it. Evidence was presented demonstrating how abundant novelty, innovation, and change can result in individual and group instability.  Anecdote after anecdote illustrating defiance of change among the wider public was also shown. The easily perceived mismatch between our capacity to intentionally merge rapid revolution with able adaptation must have seemed very conspicuous to Toffler and surely shouted for a clarion call such as Future Shock. He had a well-founded and authoritative reason to write this book. He also was not only quite prescient at times, but prudent in his counsel.

From the start, Toffler was correct to question our addiction to permanence. It is completely understandable, if not poetic, to revere traditions, customs, cultural mores, and tried and true methods passed down to us from generation to generation. There is comfort in connecting with the past and embracing time-honored conventions. Ambiguity, and with it stress, are diminished. We can be more at ease. Nonetheless, an over-reliance or excessive dependence on permanence leaves us ill prepared for a truism about our existences. Life is always subject to change. There is no such thing as the completely static life. Desperate or habitual clinging to constancy will eventually lead to disappointment, anxiety, and pain.

This reality is strongly reinforced by the Indian religions of Hinduism and Buddhism, where we see the concept of impermanence addressed so prominently. In short, these philosophical traditions state that attachment to people, things, and ideas is a fool’s errand, because they will all change or cease thereby leaving suffering in their wake. To reverse this pattern, which is carried out person by person and generation after generation, it is necessary to relinquish a craving for permanence. Toffler recognized we were set up for future shock, if for no other reason than because we ordinarily cling to changelessness. We are not primed to cope with the degree of change showering over us.

Toffler adeptly zeroed in on the causes for mass psychological distress and unease. Intensifying conditions without historical precedence were mushrooming mid-century at such a robust rate, questions about where it was all heading were naturally going to arise. A child in 1903 could have heard about the Wright brothers pioneering success in aviation and lived to an old age that witnessed astronauts walking on the Moon. This same child might have traveled to a rural school on horseback and driven a Corvette during their retirement sixty years later. Progress was revered and in many ways welcomed given the expansion of labor-saving improvements and fresh entertaining distractions suddenly made available. Nevertheless, mixed into this seductive lifestyle-shifting were disconcerting signs indicating all may not be well in the brave new world of modern America.

The exacerbation of transience, novelty, and diversity lay at the root of the personal and social torment most concerning Toffler. Even if we see these three trends as potentially positive, which of course they can be, there can still occur such a fast-paced proliferation of these developments that they are essentially rendered encumbrances. Coping mechanisms are required to manage the intensity and consequences of elevated levels of transience, novelty, and diversity. And it is just these management safeguards which are missing from wide swaths of the American and western populations.

Toffler succeeded in not only communicating the origins of future shock, but also the manifestations of unmanaged stress and relentless overstimulation. Future shock is displayed both psychologically and physically. Adaptation, or lack of it, was researched yielding studies and cases revealing physiological degradation and illness of individuals overexposed to change. Furthermore, he detailed the existence of an “orientation response”, denoting how people mentally adapt to external alterations. Our brains construct stores of previously assimilated information and use these impressions to reference and rate the quality and characteristics of new stimuli. Applying our orientation response requires mental and physical energy, not unlike being repeatedly startled. Repetitions of this reaction can leave one feeling stressed, similar to too much triggering of our ‘flight or fight response’. Symptoms can range from anxiety, apathy, and difficulty making decisions to uncertainty about what long lasting values to adopt.

In 2016, Robert Gordon of Northwestern University wrote a landmark book asserting that American economic and living standards underwent remarkable progress during what he described as the “Special Century”, 1870-1970. The Rise and Fall of American Growth enumerated how modernizing transformations in transportation, the home, food, apparel, retail, healthcare, and employment not only propelled economic growth, but vastly boosted the well-being of American society. Given our retrospective perch we can now see how Toffler’s viewpoint came from the end of that bullish stretch. To him it very well may have seemed there was no end in sight of more and more life-changing transitions.

I know what you might be thinking. But wait, the technology that would lead to the personal computer was just getting started. In the 1960s the guys at Fairchild Semiconductor in California, like Gordon Moore, were starting to make the claim that the number of transistors in an integrated circuit were now doubling every two years (Moore’s Law). Vast game-changing transfigurations were just around the corner. How can you say the Special Century was ending when the information revolution was getting ready to explode? As Robert Gordon points out, the splash of technology over the past 50 years, while impressive and compelling has not vaulted us into the level of elemental change or economic growth wrought by the life-fulfilling innovations evident during the Special Century. Toffler, on the other hand, had his recent past as his reference point and it showed a progression of radical changes of the type highlighted by Gordon. It made every sense to think the nascent but burgeoning technology sector would lead to a continuation of critical changes.

This lack of, well, future orientation may be in part the reason for some of Toffler’s overzealous prognostications. To begin with, Toffler seems to have overstated people’s inability to cope with the future. We have largely succeeded thus far to avoid mass psycho-biological paralysis. Future shock has not been as egregious of a “disease” as he thought possible. History has marched on these past fifty years and by and large we have weathered the storm of invention and disruption thrown at us. If anything, the eruption of technological change has made us more resilient and versatile. This is not to say there have been no instances of people confounded by technological changes to the degree they have felt frustrated or even debilitated, but overall the scale of psycho-emotional catastrophe imagined by Toffler is of a tamer magnitude than he thought likely.

Toffler also relied a lot on an ‘intentional community’ model when offering change management suggestions. For example, his idea of streamlining the family as an efficient and simplified mobile collection of two parents with similar careers and few children. If this arrangement were to become too restrictive to the all-business couple there could be “professional parents” whose job it would be to do the child rearing. Presumably the breadwinners were to schedule regular meetings to check in on their kids. Another case in point involves “preadaption”. To avoid the anxiety of frequent transitions to new locations, jobs, schools, etc. families could engage with a structured orientation, featuring simulations and remote meetings with key players from the new city. It is not evident practices like these have flourished.

There are many such instances in which Toffler proposed engineered and calibrated changes for people and communities as an alternative to experiencing abrupt upheavals in any number of areas of life. Whether these arrangements were to be centrally controlled by government or some other entity or whether they were to sprout organically among well-meaning citizens is rarely clarified. Regardless, after awhile these recommendations start sounding too contrived and unrealistic. Also of note, people are not as willing to be managed as Toffler seemed to think they were. As Toffler made clear, futurists are not in the prediction game, as counter-intuitive as that may sound. It’s good he clarified as much, because his forecasts make for a mixed bag as best.

When reviewing the changes of the past fifty years much has indeed been driven by technological advances. However, technology alone has not been the sole catalyst. Rather applied science has functioned in tandem with other significant influences. A principal trend impacted by technology and a source of great change was the resurgence of neoliberalism as the prevailing economic model of the U.S. during this time. Although neoliberalism is often associated with free-market capitalism it also promotes elements that have dominated the past fifty years such as globalization and free trade. Our ability to extend interactions and integrations across the globe via information technologies has come to define our current turbulent times.

In fact, remote connections among people affect not just international economic and cultural relations, but national and local ones as well. Social media has so ensnared the interests of so many that the generation and dissemination of information, both factual and not, is directly transforming our politics and dealings with one another. Privacy as well is becoming a quaint virtue of the past. We are all being rendered to data points as public and private institutions ascribe to Big Data serviceability models. So yes, technology is a phenomenon common to the consequential changes of the past half-century, but technology’s impact is most felt in its capacity to influence the dynamics of governmental, economic, and cultural trends.

If Future Shock were to be written today my guess is that Artificial Intelligence (AI) would play a major role. Just as Toffler was warranted in writing a cautionary tome in the 1960s when it was apparent the world was changing in unique ways, the 2020s can also be seen as on the precipice of an uncertain future. Like the technologies of the ’60s, which were billed as developments and improvements over what had been, AI is promising to introduce greater efficiencies of functional systems, problem solving and production processes, increased leisure time, and on and on. And again, as in the ’60s, this new fangled technology of AI ushers in ethical questions of appropriateness, risks, and unanticipated consequences.

We study history to better inform ourselves about the present. By not repeating mistakes from the past we can improve the quality of the current moment. Futurism also attempts to influence ongoing time, but instead of delving into recorded history to do so futurism identifies possible upcoming scenarios based on an analysis of existing trends, signals, and patterns with available pertinent data. Perhaps the best way to avoid future shock and a lack of adaptation is by undertaking a systemic process of strengthening preparedness. To actively prepare for change may be the best way to adapt. A good offense makes the best defense. Toffler’s work in this regard still makes sense today.

In conclusion, the morale of this story is that from some point in the last two centuries the future ceased to materialize as an unchanging and reoccurring episode as it had been throughout much of human history. Futures will forever more be uncertain. Therefore, for each new generation futures are now to be seen as planned, structured, and envisaged to determine if they will turn out to be either good or bad. The challenge of intentionally addressing and if possible shaping the future with all of its potential and jeopardy is owed to our descendants. The Anthropocene is upon us. We are God’s agents on earth. There is no time for future shock to impede us. Yes, let’s seize each and every day in our present time, but also leave a future worthy of enthusiastic grasping by our children and their children.

Trail Cat

Walking steeply down a hilly and remote Scottish footpath

On a glorious sunny Spring day

When below us emerging from the wood and crossing the stream

Appear two women with several young children

But wait! What is that?

Trotting determinedly along behind the last child

Like a loyal dog

Was a cat! A trail cat

Yes, a cat was marching with the women and children

A sleek, gray, attentive, and unusually compliant cat

The troupe climbed the hill toward us and we stepped aside

Ascending slowly but dutifully up the hill the cat panted

Uncommon sight it is to see a cat huff and puff

After a brief pause to study us

The cat answered to its name called from up the path

And resumed its hike leaving us to gape in surprise at the trail cat

An Unspoken Conversation

It’s a conversation he hasn’t wanted to have with himself.

Even though he knows it is necessary to do so.

Funny to think of avoiding a topic of which only he knows.

No one else need judge or reprimand.

He could speak to himself, but does not.

And that too scares him.

Pain and despair press down making it hard to breathe.

This weight suppresses any light or spirit he may have remaining.

There is no one else to blame.

Decisions were made.

Risks were taken.

The only one holding him back from taking the next step is him.

But, the future is wide open and so very frightening.

Back Among the Trees

We came back in late May.

The trees had fully leafed a couple of weeks earlier.

They’re hovering now over us and the house in a quiet, but imposing manner.

The wind is still and so are the trees.

But they can still shoot the color green all over and around us.

And the oaks alpha over the maple, birch, and beech.

These are things one notices.

Such can be life living under a dome-like canopy.

In a forested land that rolls and stretches as far as the eye can see.

The Rain

The Spring on the coast of western Scotland was very rainy. Unsurprisingly.

The Scots seemed to take it in stride and some let on they even appreciate it.

Returning to New Hampshire we found the Spring to be dry. Surprisingly.

The rain today clears pollen from the air.

And gives the thirsty plants a wee, but so far insufficient drink.

Usually I do not like rainy days.

They depress me and leave me feeling confined and annoyed.

Like an energetic child stuck inside a boring house.

But occasionally a rainy day comes along that soothes and comforts.

I make an extra pot of coffee to nurse throughout the day.

Allow myself more daytime reading than usual.

Listen to the steady sound of water striking leaves and ground.

It can be easier to sense the rhythm of nature.

On one of the good rainy days.

How Old People Can Keep Fit

Remember what we did so naturally as children?

Run

Jump

Stretch

Bend

Climb

Lift

Roll

Crawl

Reach

Kneel

Swing

Fall

Crouch

Hop

Skip

Twist

Dig

Balance

Squat

Flip

Let’s continue doing these activities as old adults.

(Except maybe Flip)

Doing so keeps us feeling alive.

The Introvert

People

Interactions, relationships, encounters, friendships

Reveal cringe-worthy memories.

Moments that produce anxieties, fears, fumbles, gaffes, regrets.

And of course, faux pas.

People

Was I smart enough?

Friendly enough?

Witty enough?

Charming enough?

Moral enough?

People

Cant’ live with ’em. Can’t live without ’em.

So many feelings to hurt, offenses to make, blunders to smooth over.

People

Avoid them purposefully.

Shift my focus.

Choose solitary tasks.

Allow thoughts to wander.

Reclaim a center.

People

Sorry, but I am out, done, finished.

Forever.

Seasonal Affective Mood

The muted light

illuminates the woods

in yellow.

Lively winds

from the northwest

send dry leaves

fluttering and spinning

to the ground.

Despite this beauty

I feel apprehension.

Another lengthy, frigid, dark, and biting

winter is just around

the corner.

The stratus clouds

are steely gray today.

They form a canvas

against which a V-shaped

flock of honking geese

fly south.

Firewood is stacked.

Flower gardens put to bed.

Colorful summer gear stowed.

The precious sun

sinks lower in the sky.

And I brace

myself for the advancing

onslaught.

The Bicycle

A borrowed bicycle

belonged to the homestay

in Hoi An

where I stayed.

Old and red

it rekindled a sentiment

of being a kid again.

I wove through a street market,

past tropical houses,

along dusty roads,

toward the sea.

Being a foreigner

among natives and locals

of Vietnam

who barely gave a notice

to this American

riding through their homeland.

This land

spoke fear and war

to my teenage years.

But today

the sun is warm

the ocean is bright blue

I am free

to ride a bicycle

across this land.

Listening Intently

We walk along the dirt road

located through the old woods

that was once a stagecoach route

which started carrying passengers in 1831

from Hanover to Lowell in a single day.

Today, as is true most days,

the road is quiet and seemingly still

as it penetrates this patch of forest

with its tumbledown stone walls

and a visible opening left over

from a logging operation five years ago.

We pass the pond with its far-off view of Mount Sunapee

as soon the road begins its rise to a stand of hemlock

where the wide path to the right invites

us to the lonely clearing on Shadow Hill

that displays the remnants of a campfire

and a high view of the pond and western hills.

Here the dog is off-leash sniffing and exploring

as I try to read the story of today’s woods

told cunningly and gently

through blowing of soft winds and solitary warbling of birds

and filtered light amplifying the lapping of water against the steep hill.

For those with an awareness and an attentive ear

and a consciousness which takes in the delicate vibrations of nature

can also be heard the orchestra of trees growing

with fallen wood rotting and humus decomposing

and the creaks and groans of water freezing

all punctuated by the tone of the decaying flesh

of a squirrel who lived its brief life among these trees.

A Day

Another day to float through.

Free of agenda and schedule.

Except for picking up your pieces.

Or so I tell myself.

What did you say?

I couldn’t hear you clearly.

You know, I’m not what you think.

Although maybe you know that.

With your head thrown back.

And your eyes closed and mouth gaping.

Excuse me, but…

Choices are strange, you know.

Life is a lot of risky business.

With stinging rebukes.

And nods of agreement.

Just by stumbling through another day.

Which reminds me.

Of the confusion of youth.

And silly false choices.

Combined with conflicting images.

From 1973.

Of cornfield mazes.

Abandoned gold mines.

Hitchhiking through Ohio.

Trying to be alternative.

While embracing middle class life.

And doing neither particularly well.

Doesn’t matter now.

It’s in the past.

Heaven and Hell can wait.

There’s more living to be done.

Beneath the full moon.

Which was here before birth.

And will be here after death.

My heart had finally settled back to its natural rhythm a short while earlier. My mind on the other hand had not. It had been about an hour since the near miss on NY Route 67 as it neared Interstate 87 north of Albany. The fright I experienced once I realized my tires were starting to be overpowered by the shoulder’s soft sand was a slap to my psyche. An oncoming van drifted into my lane forcing me to the right. Thankfully, the van’s driver snapped to in enough time to center the vehicle within its lane, but not before I found myself contending with several seconds of outright uncertainty, and to be honest fright, as to whether or not I would lurch sideways, flatten the 1960’s era guard rails, and land starboard side on a downward sloping embankment with a full load of beer, soft drinks, and bottled water.

Twenty-two year’s worth of driving know-how together with a sudden visit by Lady Luck prevented the worst from happening. Optimally calibrating a soft touch on the brake with subtle steering allowed me to securely grab enough pavement to right myself. With a jerk the truck was back on the road again heading east in the direction of New Hampshire instead of sliding downhill into a ravine.

It took a minute before I cursed aloud. I imagined having my thickset hands around the van driver’s throat and squeezing until he (or she) went limp. This image stayed with me longer than it probably should have, but such is rage. I wasn’t feeling very analytical or understanding or sympathetic. I was pissed. Eventually, as I replayed the incident in my mind I had to admit it wasn’t necessary to pull my rig so hard to the right as quickly as I had. There was clearly an element of overreaction involved. And I do recognize that sometimes my overreactions were more trouble than the initial cause. Fatigue more than likely played a role. After all, I had driven twenty-five of the previous forty hours, by far breaking trucking regulations. Truth be told, I was a wreck physically and emotionally. I just wanted to get home.

Sarah would be there. Ahh, Sarah. I knew she wanted more in life than to be settled with me in our mostly finished simple prefab house a couple of miles from the village in our desperately rural Sullivan County town. The truth was, I was the best she could do back when we met. At least that is the narrative I’ve been telling myself since she moved in six years ago. With little money, an ex-boyfriend who her threw her out, an abandoned GED program, but with a country-girl cuteness that still weakens my knees, I offered to take care of her. That’s what girls want, right? A man to take care of them.

She took two days to think about it, but eventually showed up in my driveway just as I was returning from a run to Connecticut. We had sex for hours that night. I thought I had won the lottery. But even though I could tell she didn’t share that level of excitement about me as I did her, I told myself, no worries. She’ll come around. She’ll realize I am the best she’s going to do.

And then Sarah announced a few months ago she was pregnant. She took the test to tell us the baby was to be a boy. I was both thrilled and scared. I hadn’t planned on becoming a dad and was afraid it would change my life too much. However, the more I thought about it the more pride I felt. Unexpectedly, the idea of being a father made me feel more complete, more proper, more mature. I liked that feeling. Knowing Sarah was going to have a baby boy made going home after a run like this a little better than before. I looked forward to seeing her in a way I hadn’t in the past. That was how I felt that afternoon. Ready to be home with my girlfriend who was going to have our baby. I shook off what remained of the jitters from the near-accident and continued driving east across Vermont. It would dark by the time I got home, but not too late. One more cup of coffee should do it, I thought.

It’s funny how a certain kind of outdoor space, a natural space, can shift my mood in an instant. I’ve driven this route west to east through Vermont many times and it contains several views on the roadside that catch my eye, give me slight pause, and induce calmness. Today, it was the one with a sweeping hillside that is grassy and kept clear of overgrowth due to having been hayed a couple of times per season presumably and which reaches a line of stout oaks on a hilltop forming a tight canopy. In the late afternoon on sunny days the hill and trees receive an angled light, which amplifies the colors and brightens the picture just the way I like it. Glancing this image for a mere two or three seconds as my truck rumbled by brought me a momentary feeling of peace and contentment. Things were feeling better. The near-accident was fading away from my thoughts.

My coffee was nearly done when I crossed over the river into New Hampshire and then south on route 12A. I pulled the rig to the outside edge of a parking lot near Walmart, so I could run in and get Sarah a bag of peanut butter cups. She’ll like that I did that, I thought. Twenty more minutes or so and I’ll be home. Once back on 12A I again appreciated my not having flipped the rig back in New York. Getting home in one piece felt like a reward.

Something felt off as soon as I stepped from the mudroom door into the kitchen. Sarah’s ‘hello’ to me was inauthentic, almost guarded. Her smile seemed somewhat forced. The air felt thicker than usual for some reason. I instantly sensed anxiety and apprehension seep into my consciousness. I hated times that didn’t go right. Suddenly, this felt like one of them.

She reached for can of seltzer sitting on the kitchen counter. It allowed her to take her eyes from mine, if only for a moment. I told Sarah I would be right back. I took my travel bag to my small office off of the living room where I dropped it to the floor thinking, I’ll need to ask her what’s wrong, because it sure felt as if something must be wrong.

While asking Sarah, what’s up, I opened the refrigerator door to grab a beer and noticed two six-packs of unrecognizable beer. I knew it was some sort of expensive craft beer, the kind of thing I never wasted money on and confusingly, either did Sarah. There were also two unopened bottles of pinot grigio, which is Sarah’s drink. Or at least it was before she became pregnant. But even before pregnancy, she typically kept only one opened bottle in the fridge at a time. Not two unopened ones. This didn’t look right.

I asked if she was planning a party or something. Her face looked fake. A mixture of discomfort and unease. Bubbling from her were insincere comments like, “Party?! No, of course not. I thought you might like to try a different kind of beer. So I’ve got some booze in the fridge. It’s not that big of a deal, is it?”

As I said, “I don’t get it”, a pickup rushed past the house on our dirt road kicking up a cloud of dust. Through the living room picture window I saw what looked like the back of Frank’s F-150, a good friend of mine in town. For a split second I thought, what is Frank doing around here now and why the speeding by without a stop?

I turned back toward Sarah. She had noticed the truck as well. Fear was spread across her face. She tried to hide it, but it was unmistakable. “What’s going on, Sarah?” I was tired and now feeling stressed. Sarah was pissing me off with her evasion and now this sudden look of dread. “Tell me what the fuck is going on, Sarah!”

She couldn’t or wouldn’t speak. Sarah never was a good liar. And her silence told me she wasn’t going to even try. Her eyes began to moisten and her mouth opened slightly as if she wanted to speak, but no words came out. Sarah’s left hand then slowly moved toward her raised stomach where it rested. My eyes followed her hand as she touched our baby.

I may not be the brightest bulb in the marquee, but I eventually do figure most things out. Frank! He drinks those fancy-boy beers! Was he coming here to drink them with Sarah? My heart quickened. The silence was broken.

“I’m so sorry,” Sarah said. “I didn’t know you were coming home today. Thought you would be in Buffalo tonight. I didn’t mean to hurt you.”

“Are those beers Frank’s? Tell me what you’re up to! Tell me now! Don’t bullshit me, Sarah! You and Frank were going to drink? And you’re pregnant! You’re not drinking these days. That was him driving by just now, wasn’t it? And he didn’t stop.”

Sarah started to answer me. “Me and Frank…we…don’t want trouble…have to do this. She quickly turned from me, grabbed her purse from the kitchen table, and bolted from the house to her Corolla. My surprise at her unexpected flight was momentarily paralyzing. By the time I got outside she had started her car and jammed it into reverse, barely maintaining control on the road. And then she was gone.

Sarah and Frank? What the fuck?! I gasped for air. A sinking feeling in my gut took hold as I realized my whole world had just collapsed. My blood reaching the boiling temperature gave me the energy and motivation to act. On a wall of my office hung my Ruger American hunting rifle. From my desk I grabbed the box of .30 caliber rounds and loaded the gun.

My mind was racing. “He’s been screwing around with Sarah while I’m on the road? I’m gonna kill him. I’ll blow his fucking head off!”

There was no sadness. No remorse. No second guessing. Just a feeling of disbelief mashed up with rage, leading to a single goal. To kill Frank. My truck was in the barn where I kept it while I was away on the road. With the rifle resting in the gun rack behind me, I charged dangerously fast to Frank’s place. Upon arriving, my truck vaulted from the road to his front lawn, leaving deep ruts where I had slammed on the brakes.

His truck was in the driveway. Behind it was Sarah’s Corolla. “I’m gonna kill you Frank, you bastard! Get out here!” I shrieked at the house.

There was no response. I screamed some more. Still no response. I figured Frank had his gun ready to use on me if I tried getting into the house, but I didn’t care. To get their attention I started shooting out the windows of his Ford and of Sarah’s car as well.

Strangely, it never occurred to me that the scene I was making would bring out the police. Even before I started shooting, Mrs. Lambeau who lived across the street from Frank’s house must have heard me, seen me with the rifle, and called the town police station. Officer Charpentier must have been the only one on duty to take the call, because she is who showed up to confront me.

“Put the gun down on the ground and step away from it, Mr. Dean,” Officer Charpentier called out from behind the town cruiser. “Once you do that we can talk about this. Do what I ask right now, please.”

“Not until I blow Frank’s brains out!” I yelled back to the police officer.

She responded with, “I’m not going to let you do that, Mr. Dean.” I saw that her service weapon was drawn. “Now put the rifle down slowly onto the ground and back away from it in my direction.”

“C’mon, Jim. Do as she says. Put it down.” Roy from down the road was speaking from the back of an oak on the corner of Frank’s property.

“Thank you, sir, but I have this,” Officer Charpentier said to Roy.

“So, Jim,” Officer Charpentier said to me in her even voice, “follow my directions and put the gun down.”

I don’t think it was what the town police officer said, but how she said it. Officer Charpentier was composed, steady, and taking command of the situation. As I listened, I was able to regain a shred of mental acuity. Enough clarity of thought anyway to allow me to realize Sarah was gone. As pissed as I was, she wasn’t coming back to me. I was no longer wanted. My breathing dialed down from huge gasps of air. I put down the gun on the lawn and walked to the cruiser.

The pain of the entire experience lives with me today, many years later. I would put it that I’m hurt and wounded more than I am defeated. I have my son a couple of days a week and I have something of a life. Working on being grateful for what I have is something I really do try to work on. Yet, crying comes to me much more easily than it used to and I kick at the rickety old boards of my barn in frustration a lot. It’s just that the anguish of betrayal, lost trust, and rejection continues to haunt me. Why we don’t make the best of our short time on earth, I’ll never know. I’ll just never know.

The most precious inheritance that parents can give their children is their own happiness. — Thich Nhat Hanh

Introduction

Deciding on a guiding set of principles to live by with the intention of getting the most from life sounds like a good idea. Perhaps I should say, the idea of experiencing happiness and purpose in life sounds like a good idea. I mean a purpose beyond just feeling good most of the time requires some structure or framework comprised of values, beliefs, and ethics which can provide a life affirming center or grounding while navigating the tempestuous comings and goings of life. Philosophy is a timeless discipline made available to assist those of us interested in such a pursuit.  

There are some who dedicate a lifetime to studying philosophy or the development of thought and knowledge as a guide to behaviors and the very nature of existence. To be sure, philosophy is a grand and historic academic discipline attempting to discern the universe as it is and exploring fundamental questions of how society and individuals should function within it. Unfortunately, as a subject it can quickly appear dense, abstract, and overly general or too specific, leaving a person feeling the topic is irrelevant and lacking in utilizable and concrete meaning. However, there are other philosophers who see their task as helping everyday people formulate their own personal philosophies as a way of self-improvement. Thankfully, philosophy need not be confined to ivory towers. It can also work on the streets, as it were, popularly sowing understanding and progress.

I’m interested in identifying a personal philosophy. Perhaps “identifying” is not the right word. Determining, building, formulating, realizing may be among better terms. Whatever verb I choose the larger question may be, why bother? There are a couple of reasons to bother. For one, philosophy, which literally means “love of wisdom”, is becoming more meaningful to me. Gratefully, I notice I’m getting wiser as I age, so peering more intentionally into the nature of wisdom is intriguing. Also, speaking of age, I recognize how the mind turns to a life review as we get older. Socrates sternly declared that an unexamined life is not worth living. Though a bit harsh, he makes a good point. Reflecting on how life is and has been lived shines a revealing light which can be useful in cultivating gratitude, personal growth, forgiveness, and a range of necessary corrective actions.

A lifetime of interest in politics, history, and psychology leaves me feeling incomplete. As engaging as they are, these disciplines do not provide enough guidance on how to live a good life. I’m drawn to exploring a more fundamental structure that better explains not only why I’ve lived as I have and what now makes me tick, but more importantly how I can prevail more satisfactorily during the years I have left.

I realize also, as late in the game as it is, that not being guided by clear moral standards and values can leave one unprepared or worse when the inevitable ethical dilemmas present themselves as they do in the lives of everyone. Simply saying one is ‘spiritual’ or ‘always kind’ or ‘being the best person I can be’ may not be enough to safeguard against damaging choices. Many of us find it easier to reject the advice of others than it is to replace their caring words of caution with a legitimate and bona fide set of convictions passionately embraced. I believe the younger one is in accepting this personal challenge of crafting a personal philosophy the better one’s life can be. I wish I could claim this had been my path, but alas I cannot.

Influential Philosophies

Identifying a personal philosophy is a luxury we now have given the times in which we live. Not long ago people were routinely born into a religious tradition complete with a step-by-step prescription for how to live one’s life and what pre-determined principles to value. Along with this inherited creed came the unambiguous and strict message that no questioning of precepts was necessary or welcome. This arrangement works well for those who readily accept faith and the infallibility of traditional thought, but for others who want to associate empirical evidence with conviction or inquire about the efficacy of applying old solutions to new problems, religion can be seen as deficient, if not oppressive.

Like most people my age, I was brought with a traditional religion. In my case, Roman Catholicism. As a child we often do as we’re told and attending church each Sunday morning followed by religious training or catechism after school each Monday afternoon is what I did until I was about twelve years old. Although it was far from a rapturous experience, rebelliousness toward this regimen was never a consideration. Indeed, by the end of this church-based indoctrination I wanted to explore the possibility of becoming a Catholic priest. One evening, when we were thirteen years old, my friend John and I scheduled an early evening chat with our parish priest Father Champoux to ask him how we could go about getting started with becoming priests. He didn’t hesitate to tell us that this is not something we should do. In fact, he was rather firm about it. Such was the start of my drift from the Catholic Church.

Despite not having been a practicing Catholic for the past fifty-four years or so I nevertheless need to acknowledge that the influence and teachings of the church for those first dozen years of my existence shaped much of my lifetime’s practical philosophy. Leaving behind for the time being the repressive and dictatorial manner in which Catholicism presented itself to children in the 1960s, (and no, I never experienced sexual abuse) I can humbly say there were indeed principles which were imparted to me by priests, nuns, and brothers, which I took to heart. Chief among them was a reverence for service to others. The call to reach into our benevolent hearts to serve our fellow humans—the sick, the weak, the uneducated, the elderly, the needy—is of profound spiritual and social importance. In addition, growing up around a lot of Jesuits as I did, who are members of a religious order known for their work in education, research, and cultural endeavors, gave me an appreciation for intellectual pursuits. Also, even the atheists among us have to concede that the social and interpersonal order society relies upon has many of its roots in old-time religion. For this, we can all be thankful.

So while acknowledging the importance Christian religion had in my early psychological, moral, and philosophical development I do not hesitate in declaring that adhering to a Christian tradition is insufficient for me to use in identifying my personal philosophy. I understand this is a brash and probably disrespectful declaration to make toward a religion currently practiced by nearly two and a half billion people. While not entirely dismissing the religious who claim their faith has all of the philosophy one needs with the added benefit of providing deeper levels of meaning and an exhilarating sense of amazement, I still ask why shouldn’t Christian teachings be enough for me? Why am I so special that Christian doctrine appears lacking? Quite simply, this religion, or any religion for that matter, is too doctrinaire, too obstinate, too pedantic, and too authoritarian. I may have been raised as a Catholic, but I was also raised as an American with a reverence for free will, individualism, and self-reliance. From a young adult age I noticed a discrepancy between the values of unquestioning faith required by religion and volitional decision making encouraged by democracy. I guess the liberating ethics of the Enlightenment appeal to me more than dogmatic loyalty to ancient rituals and scriptures.

So knowing which path I don’t want to follow exclusively in defining my personal philosophy, where do I turn? Well, the answer is a developing story. But it is taking shape. And one thing becoming clear is my personal philosophy will be eclectic—a cherry picked collection of values I find to be most gainful. There are so many intriguing and engaging approaches to philosophical thought it will be difficult and perhaps unnatural for me to select just one school. Therefore, what follows is a review of influential philosophies toward which I am drawn. Following my synopsis and in conclusion, I will cobble together a statement giving definition and clarity to my personal philosophy. An exercise such as this not only applies a strategy to help me reach my goal of identifying a personal philosophy, but may also serve as a stimulus or maybe even an inspiration for any reader interested in doing the same.

“There is no need for temples; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness.” H. H. The 14th Dalai Lama.

Next to Christianity, Buddhism is the next popular practice with which I also have familiarity going back more than thirty years. Notice I don’t refer to Buddhism as a religion, although many others do. I don’t because there is no theism involved. Buddha never claimed to be a deity or divine, but rather a human who showed the way to enlightenment. That fact alone appeals to many westerners oriented toward secularization, but who are nevertheless searching for spiritual and ethical guidance. Therein was my original draw to Buddhism.

Through considerable study and practice, much of it during my thirties in association with the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order (now known as Triratna Buddhist Order), I developed some key takeaways, which continue to inform my philosophical thinking and outlook on the world. The concepts of mindfulness, impermanence, and egolessness speak to me about the nature of being human in the universe dealt to us. To be very clear, I am in no way making a claim I am anywhere close to fully comprehending these theories, never mind living in embrace of them, however I know enough that to examine their meaning and appreciate their gravity contributes to personal growth and evolution.

Mindfulness refers to being fully aware. Imagine receiving all of the unending physical and mental stimuli coming your way such that it is all perceived and observed, perhaps understood, but never fixated upon unless we make a discerning decision to focus on a given prompt. Living thus is beyond efficient. It is honing circumspection and polishing self-illumination. Meditation is one of the behaviors, along with intentional reflection, that slides us ever so slowly toward increasing mindfulness. A frustratingly subtle practice, meditation yields its attention-enhancing benefits drip by drip over a long period of time. Establishing a regular practice is difficult, but once started the seduction of always returning to it remains persistent. The gain of expanding mindfulness is worth it.

Another key Buddhist concept states that reality is ever changing and our clinging to any physical or mental entity is fruitless and ultimately deeply disappointing. Impermanence is a fundamental doctrine of Buddhism and a very useful condition to accept in life. Existence is “transient, evanescent, inconstant” according to the Pali Canon, a set of Buddhist scriptures. Notice how we tie our happiness to permanence all of the time? We develop a fondness or even love for people, places, and ideas only to discover sooner or later that they will somehow change or end completely, leading to angst. Preventing change takes a lot of energy that could be better spent elsewhere. By consciously de-linking our positive emotions to conditions which will naturally alter over time leaves us better able to live in harmony with others and with the natural world. If we are to deliberately align our happiness to impermanent objects and people, such as loved ones, doing so with the full consciousness of what the commitment entails, in particular its transitoriness, can help with preparing for the inevitable changes that will take place.

Related to impermanence in Buddhism is the doctrine of no-self or no-ego. We tend to each view ourselves as fixed and permanent individuals—at least for the duration of our lives. But this self-perception of our stand-alone selfhood is in direct conflict with the notion of impermanence described above. In other words, if there are no enduring and unchanging entities, then there can be no distinct and original self. Ego or self are therefore illusory and not real. Thinking this way can get abstruse and confusing, because it is so contrary to what we’ve always thought. Regardless, for me the importance of egolessness is that it helps me to not be as self-centered and set in my ways. By being able to take the focus off of myself with all of my opinions, desires, prejudices, fears, and perceptions I can more easily reorient to the needs of others and more clearly know that what I think I know today can and will most likely change over time. Together, mindfulness, impermanence, and egolessness contribute significantly to my personal philosophy.

Allowing myself to accept philosophical wisdom from the East, as I did with Buddhism, opened the door for me to examine other traditions from Asia. I have not dealt nearly as extensively with these other well established philosophies and my takeaways do not reflect the richness of these schools of thought, however two heritages stand out as relevant in my search for a philosophy of life. 

One is Confucianism. In the West, the philosophy of China’s Confucius (551 BCE–479 BCE) is associated primarily with an adherence to filial piety, or duty to and respect for one’s family and ancestors. Such devotion is actually a subset of a more comprehensive belief in the virtue of loving relationships with other people. How we develop character and usher in the good life is directly the result of the quality of how we interact with others, specifically the degree to which each of us practices benevolence, or caring deeply for all human beings. Also of note is righteousness or the building of personal integrity that avoids ethical breaches. Therefore, establishing nourishing and considerate relationships is the core to a Confucian philosophy of life.

The other intriguing Eastern practice is Taoism (often spelled Daoism). This philosophical system developed in China as well and is associated with the thoughts and writings of Lao Tzu, who is believed to have lived during a time of great turmoil known as the Warring States Period. Taoism prompts us to accept that uncertainty is prevalent in life and therefore to be careful about forming rigid assumptions about how life should play out. Flexibility, agility, and resilience are key attitudes to develop as we navigate through life’s ambiguities. We are called on to acknowledge that order is naturally accompanied by disorder, as is stability/fluctuation, sameness/change, control/disarray, etc. Wisdom and the good life emerge from our skill in self-regulation given these conditions. As Voltaire said, “Doubt is an uncomfortable condition, but certainty is a ridiculous one.”

It shouldn’t come as a surprise, but the ancient West also offers us philosophical traditions. Several years ago I ran into the philosophy of Stoicism and I like a lot of what I am seeing. I think I can guess what you are now thinking. So, he wants to be stoic— impassive, aloof, detached, and sporting a stiff upper lip. Unfortunately, common English usage has corralled and limited the meaning of stoicism. In the context of philosophy there is much more to it. Thanks to Massimo Pigliucci, an author and philosophy professor at City College of New York, who I have seen and heard on a number of podcasts, I’ve been introduced to this ancient Greco-Roman philosophy. Several features stood out to me quickly. Firstly, paying homage to a philosophy from the West instead of the East for a change seems refreshing and balanced. Secondly, one can take simplicity and pragmatism from Stoicism, making it applicable in the short term without years of concentrated study. Finally, Stoicism openly admits to being a means for unearthing a eudaimonic life, by which is meant a flourishing life worth living.

Stoicism began with Zeno of Citium in Greece about 300 BCE. In time, many of its  principles were incorporated into early Christian teachings in Rome. There are two key foundational ideas underpinning Stoicism: one precept makes clear the necessity for everyone to become a moral person and the other pertains to a concept known as dichotomy of control. Regarding morality, an individual is encouraged to engage in a persistent practice of the four cardinal virtues — Prudence or always choosing the right course of action; Justice or seeking fairness at all times; Temperance or moderation and self-control; and Fortitude or strength and endurance. By practicing these four easy to understand virtues, as difficult as they may be to put into continuous practice, one can achieve a moral status. Dichotomy of control refers simply to knowing what one can control in life and what one cannot. This idea can best be summarized by the Serenity Prayer composed by the American theologian Reinhold Niebuhr in 1934, “God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.”  Stoicism offers us a practical philosophical method that seems well suited for these times.

For many years I have personally thought of myself as a Secular Humanist. This has been a thought, but until recently without much thinking behind it. Secular Humanism, which I’ll capitalize because in this essay I’m using it as a discreet philosophy, is a good fallback position for those of us who are not religious, but still recognize value in morality, social structure, personal responsibility, and that ethereal assumption of spirituality. Those of us who are hesitant to join a club of any kind can find in Secular Humanism latitude to explore deep life issues minus membership into a creed or persuasion.

Secular refers to a preference for non-religious institutions, such as government, as the most just way of organizing society. Humanism indicates the significance of humans ability to apply reason and morals to satisfy human needs sans divine or mystical intervention or origin. Together these terms stress religion not having a monopoly on morality or ethics; the preeminence of individual liberty and human derived ethical standards; and a reliance on science and reason for understanding the universe; among other core beliefs. Development of righteous character matters to Secular Humanists, leading to suggested ethical practices for personal refinement. The principles of this philosophy can guide a person to create a life of meaning and purpose, free of religious dogma.

There are many philosophical influences one can investigate in order to identify a personal philosophy. I have described the key points to some of these schools of thought, which to date have had great influence on me. However, there are other philosophies which I have come across more recently that have piqued my interest and which call to me for further contemplation as I consider my own personal philosophy. What follows are summaries of these philosophies defined with an emphasis on the principal features of each that I find most intriguing.

Above, in the section on Stoicism, I mentioned that the Stoic maxim leading to a moral life is to follow the four cardinal virtues. Pretty straight forward. But then comes along Aristotelianism, a philosophy developed by, you guessed it, Aristotle, and we find him pushing back on the Stoics’ simplicity by putting forward a concept of moral relativism. And this in the third century BCE!

Aristotelianism is largely about interpreting eudaimonism (a flourishing life worth living) through a focus on balancing virtue with realism and reason. Aristotle shunned philosophical dictates that were too prescriptive. He chose broader objectives for people to consider such as living to one’s full potential, capitalizing on one’s strengths, and accomplishing one’s chosen goals. Most importantly, he chose promotion of a balanced life as more meaningful than a narrowly specified moral life. For example, frequent drinking to excess can be considered intemperate and therefore immoral. But what if one were to drink modestly most weeks and splurge for a special occasion like a wedding reception? Despite the hangover the next day was the person immoral? No, would say Aristotle. He had a good time, possibly rekindled old friendships, and did no one harm. Give him a break. Overall, our party boy may very well live a balanced and quite possibly a virtuous life, despite an occasional overindulgence. Moderation leads to greater happiness and health for more people than does strict adherence to rigid rules according to Aristotelianism. 

This notion of realism in philosophy is also evident in the American philosophy known as Pragmatism. Nineteenth and twentieth century American philosophers/writers, attempted to define and give utility to freedom and free will for a population that had won political freedom during the American Revolution, but was still trying to figure out what to do with liberty at a personal level. They saw that a great deal of life is making it up as you go along, which can leave many feeling adrift. Freedom to choose can be both a blessing and a curse. Figuring out how to make lives worth living within an inherently unsettled world is slippery going. Absolute values can appear inordinately elusive and abstract, leaving reverent dictates impractical and unworkable. Perhaps the best we can do in an existence that leaves us free, but with constraints, is what Pragmatists Charles Peirce and William James advocated—just make one’s world better by pursuing beauty, truth, and goodness. (My apologies to committed Pragmatists for the oversimplification.) 

Freedom also plays a significant role in the European-born philosophy known as Existentialism. In fact, as Jean-Paul Sartre put it, we are “condemned to be free”. We didn’t ask for this life, but now that we’ve been given it let’s embrace our freedom to generate the best life possible through our choice of actions. However, while doing so, we need to be cognizant of several parameters: constructing a personal essence is ongoing and fluid and ends the day we die; with freedom comes responsibility for others, because we aren’t in this alone; and there’s much about life we can’t change, but we can always strive to be authentically true to ourselves. Existentialism is intentionally non-didactic and wary of conventional behaviors. Rather, it’s a license to be fully expressive during a life that may be short, but need not be boring or oppressive. Happiness and the good life come from continuous reflection on how to find meaning in life while being our own person.

You may find here a variety of philosophy that isn’t very complicated at all. In fact, much of it can seem like common sense. To illustrate philosophical simplicity and straightforwardness there is the Effective Altruism movement. Perhaps Effective Altruism can best be thought of as a moral system or framework. Effective Altruism calls for each person to discover for themselves what significant problem there is in the world that they can make a meaningful contribution toward solving. This may involve targeting charitable donations, working toward policy changes, or directly assisting those in need. The goal is to be an agent of change and improvement. It’s concrete, measurable, and principled. All that is needed is a willingness to make the world better than you found it. Not a bad commitment to make with one’s life. (I think I can hear the ghost of Ayn Rand groaning.)

Finally, who says philosophy doesn’t have a sense of humor and a party side? Such is the reputation of the ancient philosophy of Epicureanism. A while back I mentioned how the word stoic has been undeservedly confined by popular usage in English. The same holds true for the term epicureanism. We think of it solely as a reference to the pursuit of sensual pleasure, particularly when it comes to food and wine. This impression should be no more than a starting point for a richer philosophy that speaks to a fuller cultivation of happiness and the good life.

Epicureanism is something of the bad boy of philosophies, given the religious ascetic and Platonic-based rationalism biases against pleasure, which together hold philosophical dominance. Epicurus (341 BCE-270 BCE) was dedicated to helping people live happy and serene lives free of fear. He established the foundation for this approach to be found in nature, both in the natural world and in human nature. At its essence, nature expresses blossoming, flourishing, and unfolding. We can embrace these properties as a guide to life choices which strengthen delight and contentment. Relishing the simple joys that nourish body and mind, savoring the company of friends, and making the most of every minute of this one life we have is the practice of Epicureanism. As the Epicurean Frances Wright wrote in 1821, “Enjoy, and be happy! Do you doubt the way? Let Epicurus be your guide. The source of every enjoyment is within yourselves.”

My Personal Philosophy

I see myself as practical and therefore outcome oriented. It is important that I know why I would bother expending time and energy on any pursuit. The intended end result must hold value. So, with that in mind, I choose to engage in writing a personal philosophy, because I expect in doing so I will expand my personal happiness and find contentment in having a life purpose to guide me during my final years.

Living a philosophy involves reason, contemplation, reflection, and decision making. These thoughts are experienced, felt, and colored by emotions. What necessarily follows are corresponding actions and behaviors. I conduct and judge myself through a continual assessment of my performance or interactions with other people, the natural world, and the competing selves within me. But, it’s what I do that matters most.

Philosophy is a conceptual structure. The technical components of this structure provide its essence and substance. We are each free to construct our own philosophical framework. Our building blocks are the values which we endorse and embrace and the order and weight we assign to these standards. For myself, my goal is to shape a philosophy that reflects the principles I hold as sacrosanct and which I will cobble together in such an idiosyncratic way as to possibly satisfy no one else but me. And that’s okay.

Here I present my personal philosophy as a medley of principles to live by.

Relations with others are to be compassionate, caring, respectful, and sensitive to needs.

“To serve, not to be served.” Such was my high school’s motto. I continue to take it to heart.

My center is in me. My center is in you.

Living introspectively and mindfully informs how I will channel my energy and how I will preserve my physical and mental health.

Nature is my guide. Nature is my rhythm.

Remain agile and accept change. Resist change only when very clear-eyed.

Do the hard things like: Adopt uncertainty; Meditate; Breathe through anxious moments; Trust in life’s brightness.

Bask in the love of family.

Morality is always a worthy aspiration.

Remorse for past transgressions is a natural part of life’s review. Don’t shy away from past sins. Own them. Learn from them. Move on better.

Find solace in the righteousness of secularism.

Be balanced, measured, and moderate in all things.

Savor my freedom and individualism daily.

Don’t hesitate to be generous.

Feel grateful and delight in pleasures large and small that life offers…always.