Photo by Jennifer Phoon

It seems the theme of hypocrisy is still present in my head.  This time, as applied to religious beliefs.  There are many different faiths and belief systems out there, each with their own following.  I’m not talking about any hypocrisy within these beliefs.  I mean the hypocrisy that is present in how people tolerate other views.  Most people are fine with talking about other beliefs and criticizing them, but not all are comfortable when their own beliefs are criticized.

It should be understood by people of religious faith that what they believe in as a path for answers.  Being this, they should know that there are multiple paths available.  Since there are multiple paths available, criticism of the different systems is inevitable.  But some who are  strong believers in their faith are unable to accept any criticism or even agree that their system is one among many.

The type of thinking that allows one to criticize the religions of others, but get offended when their own religion is questioned is hypocritical.  This is the same type of thinking that has caused so much conflict between the Middle East and the Western world.  Many people are quick to assume that it is a fundamental flaw in Islam that causes Muslims to be violent, but this is not the case.  Any strong believers of their own faith would react the same way to “offenses.”  If Christianity did not already dominate world, and was in a minority state as Islam is, Christians might react the same way.  The problem occurs when the followers believe that their faith is the only truth and that it is the only truth for everyone.

The absence of this problem would mean a world where religious issues could be discussed without inflaming any particular group.  People would be able to speak and act openly without the danger of offending anyone.  At the very least, the same people who get offended should be respectful and tolerant of other religious beliefs.  But this also does not exist.  Tolerance is preached universally, but the key is practice it unconditionally, not in a way that conforms to already our existing beliefs.

Photo by Philipp Klinger

The rules and ideals we hold to be true for ourselves and the ones we seek to impose on others must mirror one another.  To do otherwise is hypocrisy.  To expect a certain treatment while we treat others differently is hypocrisy.  When this imbalance exists, the reactions we have to rules and ideals are meaningless.  A rule that is not applied to oneself and others in the same fashion ceases to be a viable rule.

To make my point more clear, I offer the following example.  In my classroom building, the elevators are always quite busy.  As the doors are closing, more people will often run up and open the doors to get inside.  At other times, when I have been inside the elevator when this happens, I notice people grumbling about the delay this causes.  This is so common that now, when a person comes in at the last minute, they will apologize as they enter.  This is baffling to me.  Why would a person find it necessary to apologize for exercising the right that they have to use the elevator?  I asked this person why they apologized, and they told me that it was because people have complained in the past.  I have been using these elevators for over 2 years, and I know that most people have rushed in at the last minute at some point in the course of their schooling here.  The same people who complain about late comers have most likely been in the same situation themselves.

Why complain about someone else doing a thing that we ourselves will do in the same situation?  These hypocritical complainers must view their actions as being excusable because it serves their own interest.  But the actions of the other person are not excusable, because it hinders their own interests.  This practice of taking whatever actions benefit ourselves most creates countless inconsistencies.  To me it is ridiculous to expect to be treated differently than how we treat others.  If everyone were to live in this way, society would cease to function.  This same sort of thinking applies to many other everyday situations.  Cutting people off in traffic and getting angry when cut off.  Taking to long in a line and complaining of others who do the same.  Why can we not think that maybe they are in the same situation we were in when we did the same?

We cannot elevate ourselves above everyone else in how we apply our principles.  If we live by ideals meant to rule only ourselves, then they are not ideals at all, but simply living in a self-serving manner.  If we can notice and eliminate these hypocrisies, a lot of everyday annoyances and frustrations might be eliminated.  Treating others as we expect to be treated.  This lesson is taught since kindergarten, and yet it is one that is not remembered.  I think it’s time to re-apply it.

Photo by d3l

What we wear on the outside, what we decorate our bodies with, inevitably causes assumptions to be made by others about who we are. What started with a necessity to protect ourselves from the elements has evolved into an art form. From what I have been able to observe around me, I have separated the way people view clothes into two main categories. Aesthetic wearers and niche wearers.

Aesthetic wearers are those who choose the clothes they wear based on what they find visually appealing. They are for the most part not limited by any particular style. They wear anything and everything that they think will look good on them. This may sometimes be inhibited due to social acceptability but anything allowable by law is fair game. This group includes those who wear clothes more for functionality than for appearance, because to them, function is beauty.

Niche wearers, as I call them, are those who decide what to wear based on what group of people they choose to associate themselves with. They choose clothes based on what characteristics they want others to perceive in them. The Emo look is an excellent example. Here, members of the group choose to wear similar clothing to show to the rest of the world their membership. The niche wearers are not limited to those who want to show group membership. This includes people who want status, style, sexiness, or any quality that they are consciously choosing to exemplify. The popped collar wearer is a prime example. Never has there been such a blatant indicator to the world that this person is purposely seeking to be viewed as “cool.” The niche wearers will consistently choose to follow their desire for certain qualities over comfort, quality, sometimes even price.

The way I have constructed it is a little too simplistic. In reality, no one is perfectly one or the other. Everyone has a different balance of the two. This is because we already have preconceptions about what looks good, and they are based on seeing others. So the aesthetic wearer cannot be completely original, and the niche wearer will not choose to wear something completely ugly. But for the most part, elements of both these ideologies are visible in the style choices of the people around us. The actual possibilities in appearance are not exactly infinite in reality, so it is very much possible to see a niche wearer and aesthetic wearer in the same exact outfit, but what differs is the motivation. I believe everything a person puts forth to others can indicate something of their personality, and clothes are no exception. So next time you find yourself in a social situation, see if being an aesthetic or niche wearer has any bearing on the way a person interacts with you. I would be very interested to learn of your experience.

Photo by Noel Zia Lee

Is the value of a cute and familiar animal greater than that of an unfamiliar animal?  I’m defining familiar in terms of closeness to humans.  Of course this varies across cultures as well.  Eating a dog or cat would seem unthinkable to most people in the United States, but it is commonplace in Asia.  But this bias toward animals that we think are cute or animals we have become accustomed to living among seems inconsistent.  The value of a dog versus the value of a cow does not change with the human opinion.  Both are four-legged mammals and neither have any discernible mental advantages over the other.  So our decision to eat one and adopt the other comes down to how friendly these animals are to us.

We could adopt a subjective view of the world and claim that whatever we perceive as value is value, making the friendliness of the dog its higher value.  But in this view, I would also become acceptable to differentiate among humans like this.  I would be able to kill anyone that I believed had lesser value to me.  Obviously this is not the prevalent philosophy.  The people that eat cows are for the most part, people that think humans have value and certain animals have value.  Outside of the subjective view, we have no logical basis for differentiating among different animals.  Without a logical basis, it is just inconsistency in its most obvious form.

How can a person be against eating dogs, but eat cows?  Most consumers of beef or chicken would not want to cause the death of a cow or chicken, yet they eat them.  It seems that we are just choosing to ignore what’s not in front of us.  It’s more convenient to make these differentiations than to face our inconsistency.  A person who chooses to eat animals should be perfectly willing to kill animals.  Some might be willing to accept the killing but want someone else to do it, even this is fine because they are accepting responsibility.  But to eat meat without wanting animals to die is wrong.  A person who chooses to eat meat and kill the animals that gave rise to the meat must also accept the killing of other animals.  If I choose to kill and eat stray dogs, the beef eater should not tell me that I am wrong.  It would just be a matter of taste.

The existence of an objective moral truth is arguable, so I cannot claim whether it is right to kill animals or not, but either belief should be practiced with complete consistency.  The meat eater should be willing to accept the death of every kind of animal.  The animal rights activist should not cause the death of any animal.  To choose among animals corrupts whatever we believe and we end up with an inconsistent and faulty moral code.

Photo by ShawnCampbell

The most successful ideology to spread across the world in the past century is consumerism.  While so many people argue about political ideologies and which ones are more successful, consumerism seems to have slipped by unnoticed since it can thrive in almost any political system.  Basically, it is the idea that a person’s happiness is directly connected to the amount of material possessions they amass.

To think that buying things is what will make us happy seems downright silly.  Sure materials can give you temporary pleasure or even long-lasting pleasure, but to equate this pleasure with happiness is wrong.  Most of the time, the pleasure gotten from buying things is not even a result of the intrinsic value of the object, it is a result of how it satisfies our egos.  The demand for luxury products is in large part driven by the need for people to feel superior to others.  The Lexus is better than the Toyota, the $2 million house vs. the $1 million house.  What do extra bedrooms have to do with our happiness?  Will I not be able to achieve contentment in my life if I don’t have leather seats in my car?

This idea can cause us to run blindly toward the objects we desire without paying attention to what we are doing to get them.  People end up working jobs that they don’t like so that they can pay for things they don’t need.  College students are studying subjects that will make them the most money so that they can get the best house and car.  If a person’s life is spent doing things without passion just to obtain these goods, in the end, life will have been a complete waste.  The happiness comes in the way we live every second of it, not just in the moments where we finally are able to buy that new flat screen.  We end up suffering to achieve these ends.

Every time a goal is met and a purchase is made, the pleasure dissipates quickly.  The new suit will not bring the same excitement everyday.  So then you have to find something else to desire, to work toward, to get the next high from.  With this ideology, we end up living from object to object, never realizing why it never lasts each time.  The idea of a life lived in a futile pursuit is horrifying, yet people are not horrified at themselves.  Desire and pleasure should not be confused with happiness, that is the first mistake.  Now, even the younger generations are being programmed to operate this way, along with other cultures who had escaped this thinking before.  There’s a reason why there is starting to be a shift in thinking toward Eastern philosophy in the United States.  Some are realizing that materials are not the source of happiness.  But all of this starts with questioning.  We must constantly question our motives and examine our definitions.  It is only with constant oversight that we start to shift our own minds.

It still amazes me when I find that so much of our answers are already right in front of us but nobody seems to notice. Yesterday I was in a Psychology class of at least 100 people while the professor went over the concept of an authentic self and an egoistic self. These are the two components of our personalities according to one theory.

The egoistic self is comprised of what we think is desirable by the people around us and the part that is created by us to gain their approval. The authentic self is what we really are and what tendencies we are born with. Everyone has both of these sides, it is only a matter of what kind of balance each person has created between these two.

It seems to me that most people are heavily weighted in the egoistic self and this is clearly noticeable in how similar our behaviors are. Human beings are naturally social creatures and seek approval from those that are around them, but sometimes it goes too far. When someone is deeply entrenched in the egoistic self, an image that they have created for themselves to be more liked by others, their true self suffers and becomes forgotten. As they get more and more used to this and end up living a life very different from what they really want, they get depressed and maybe start questioning why they’re unhappy. This isn’t necessarily something that happens years down the line, this is something that probably happens to most of my peers as well. The part that astonishes is me that this information is being presented to some of these people in my class and they probably wont give it a second thought other than to copy it down and memorize it for an exam.

Even as you’re reading this, think about the qualities that you’ve tried to emphasize in yourself. Did you want to be more funny? smart? good-looking? strong? popular? I know I have. As we try to show these qualities that aren’t naturally a part of who we are, we step farther and farther away from the people that we really should be. To put on the show for the rest of the world can be a great burden. This burden will undoubtedly affect the clarity and freedom of your mind and actions.

A lot of the unhappiness in ourselves can be solved simply by questioning our motives and finding out who we really are outside of our social images. If we are able to live according to what we truly want, whether or not this is something that will make others like us, then we can improve our well-being as people. Who knows, we might even be able to effect change in other parts of our lives with this new found awareness.

I’ve always been very critical of how people are programmed from day 1 to operate a certain way in our society. I had never really thought of the benefits this may have until this summer. I was back in India and had a lot of time to kill during the day so I decided to try and teach basic math to our maid. I spent about a week trying to get her to understand the concept of multiplication and it seemed as hopeless as ever. She could replicate answers to previous problems I gave her, but she couldn’t figure out any new ones for herself because she didn’t really have an understanding of how it all worked.

This made me think of how part of the conditioning society provides for us is our education. After seeing the poor display by our maid, this made me a little glad that I had been exposed to higher learning and had the luxury of thinking about the bigger questions in life. It’s hard to imagine someone who isn’t able to understand math being able to understand other abstract ideas. I think there is some point in our learning where the law of diminishing returns comes into effect. For example, getting a PhD will not affect my ability to reason as much as my kindergarten class did. So I assume that there is some necessary level of education that human beings should have which will afford us the luxury of thinking for ourselves and analyzing the ideas that govern our thinking.

The trick is to learn as we grow up but not take everything at it’s word. Instead of going to school and memorizing information to spit back at our parents, professors, and future employers, we should try to learn and understand the material for ourselves and think of what it means to us. That is after all, at least I think, the benefit of humanity’s ability to reason. If we don’t do this, then we really aren’t getting as much as we can out of our learning and instead of something that can help bring us to a higher plain of consciousness, we let it hold us even more tightly in the cages of society’s programming.

It’s really surprising how much you can notice around you when you come out of yourself.  If you can leave the thoughts about your own life and day-to-day chores, your mind is able to soak up and give new meaning to so many things that you might have missed before.

I’ve been visiting India almost every summer since moving to the US in 1998, but when I was there this summer, I noticed a lot of things that I had missed before.  It was probably a result of the changes my mind has been undergoing in the last couple of years.

The thing that struck me the most was the vast cultural differences that exist between the social classes in India.  Now I might have known this at some level before, but I probably only knew it as a dry fact in my head and not something real or observable.  In America, a person earning $30,000 a year and a person earning $300,000 live similar lives.  Of course the latter has a lot more luxury, but they are exposed to the same TV shows, they both drive cars, enjoy central A/C, and if they were to meet on the street, they could probably carry on a conversation with each other pretty well.

Now consider this image, on a busy street in downtown Bangalore, there is a new nightclub that’s just opened and there’s a massive crowd of young Indians waiting outside, busy on their cell phones, adjusting their designer clothes, and sporting the latest looks from GQ.  Directly across the street, there’s a building under construction that has just shut down for the night.  Sitting at the 1^st floor windows, are some of the workers that have just finished.  These are people that make about $40 a month for their labor. They’re sitting and looking at the crowd assembled outside the nightclub.  These workers don’t know why the club goers are dressed so weird, they’re trying to understand why everyone is trying to argue with the doorman to get in.  This is quite different from the small roadside huts that they will go on to have a few drinks at.  The alcohol the workers drink come in plastic packets, they don’t speak English, they don’t know about the economy.  The two groups of people that are 15 meters apart from each other, from the same city in the same country, wouldn’t be able to carry on any type of conversation whatsoever.

It’s hard to describe the image, especially since I can’t convey the feeling I got when I realized this difference that exists.  It’s hard for people in America or other developed nations to understand I suppose.  If you have spent a lot of time traveling, I’m sure you’ve noticed this, and if you’re planning on traveling, keep en eye open for this, it really is quite startling when you first realize it.