How To Do The Inconceivable.

(If you’re short on time, skip to the bottom for numbered instructions.)

Because it is time, that’s why.  Someone needs to grab the bull by the horns and reveal the secret to accomplishing anything.  The following few paragraphs are going to give you the tips you need to do anything you can conceive.

In the recent Tom Cruise movie Oblivion, T.C. and his female counterpart are two-weeks away from completing their mission on the ‘remote site’ that is Planet Earth.  After the two weeks, they will return to the new human settlement with those who survived the war.  Granted, the work they were doing was not in itself particularly difficult or boring.  Loneliness seemed to be the biggest negative.  And the dream of how life would be like in two weeks’ time kept them going.

How many of us ever thought we’d spend as much time and energy as we have to accomplish so little?  How did we do it?  Where did we get the strength from?  Were we born with it?  Even if we were born with it, we must fight the desire to victimize ourselves.  Instead, as a group we need to accept total responsibility for our lives.

Where did the strength to put up with a life we never conceived come from?  The strength came from believing a lie.  The lie that there will be more time in the future.  Break down the concept of the future a little and you’ll see why this is a lie.  The future has not happened.  The present is happening.  The future “is not”.  The present “is”.  What do you gain if when you trade what “is” for what “is not”?

The future will never be.  Can you understand this?  The future will never “exist.”  It will never “be.”  That’s it’s definition.  If you believe that the future is something that “will be”, then you’re no longer describing the same abstract idea that’s being discussed here, and is commonly labeled “the future.”  There is no catching-up.  There is no getting ahead.  These are impossibilities.

I have been nearly exclusively reading the classics for almost a decade now, and a common theme is best summed up by Jon J. Muth in his children’s book, “The Three Questions”, based on Leo Tolstoy’s ideas.  “Remember then that there is only one important time, and that time is now.  The most important one is always the one you are with.  And the most important thing is to do good for the one who is standing at your side.  For these, my dear boy, are the answers to what is most important in this world.”

The choice is always yours.  If you want to do the inconceivable follow the instructions below.  If you want to exist in reality, stick with living in the present.

Instructions for How to Do The Inconceivable:

Step 1 – Believe that after you’ve accomplished it, you’ll have time to do what you really want.

Step 2 – Understand that there is only one step.

How To Philosophize

I recently took an undergraduate philosophy course for pay.  (Highly recommended if you get the chance.)  Martin Heidegger was the thinker we studied the most.  That man knew how to philosophize.  The professor had us read Heidegger’s, “Phenomenological Interpretations with Respect to Aristotle: Indication of the Hermeneutical Situation.”  Quite the title, no?  Apparently, this paper put him on the map.

It is extremely difficult to read.  Supposedly this was purposeful.  It seems Heidegger’s intent in everything he did was to get people to live in the moment.  He wrote with such depth and complexity that his readers can’t be thinking about something else and understand what he was trying to communicate.

So what made this paper so important?  In it, Heidegger argues that the time has come for someone (himself in this case) to remind humanity that no matter how smart we think we are, we don’t actually want to find answers to our questions.  We don’t actually want the ‘seeking for truth’ to conclude.  As in, we think we do, but that’s only because we have a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to be human.

That might not sound radical upon first reading.  Think about it this way.  There are several problem-solving techniques.  One in particular has six steps.  1.  Recognize the problem.  2. Gather the data.  3. List the possible solutions.  4. Test the possible solutions.  5.  Select a solution.  6.  Implement the solution.  Heidegger was given a place at the table because he convincingly argued that life is always and only about step one, or recognizing the problem.  He wrote this while other great thinkers of his day (and today) made arguments regarding how to perform step six, the final step.  “Implement the solution.”

There are some thinkers today who concern themselves with prescriptive philosophy.  They recommend things like censoring children from religion because research shows that once people internalize the scientific method they don’t return to their childhood faith.  In his paper, Heidegger questions this whole concept.  He basically argues that the idea of doing everything according to a logical system which centers around adding longevity to our lives is an escape.  We shouldn’t be trying to build Utopia.  I take his writing to argue that this Utopia some seem to be striving to create would rob life of meaning.  What is more important, more difficult, and more worthy is continually defining our existence.  Why do we want to live forever?  What is appealing about world peace?  What does a world of well-fed people actually look like?  This is because no matter what answers the past has given us, the very nature of the questions demand continual asking.  For all I know, the Greek philosophers didn’t even exist.  What do I care what their answers were?

Thousands of years into our existence one man was still able to gain notoriety by simply reminding us that the fun part of living, or what might be more easily understood as the ‘being’ part of human being, is step one.  That is, recognizing the problem.  And that’s how to philosophize.

A Fine Morning Indeed!

Barefoot, I journey from my bed to the cabinet containing store brand one-minute oatmeal.  Still groggy, I see two silos before me.  One nearing empty, the other ready to tag in at a moments notice.  Will I get it right?  Noticing slight wear, I reach for the one on the right.  I am so good.  The moment doesn’t last, as I notice something sticking to my feet.  I don’t want to know.  Wiping them off on my ribbed bamboo kitchen mat, I continue preparing the meal.  Again, my feet feel soiled.  I cannot ignore it anymore.  I must vacuum.  Upon placing the container on the counter, tip-toeing, I make my way to the three-season room where I keep her.

Oh the joy.  I have an Oreck, see.  So slender.  Such a durable tangle-free chord.  And light as a feather.  Not that it matters; I’m a man.  I’m strong.  I grasp the sublimely coiled chord draped studiously from only the top hook, and in one motion the vacuum is connected to an energy source.  Pausing, I’m compelled to note that even the plug seems purposefully designed.  Like every time before, as if alive, the wide prong seeks its way to the left eye of the shocked face that personifies the outlet.

Decision time.  This is what I live for.  Rotating brush on or off?  Fantasizing about surprise victory over stubborn debris that suction alone won’t pick up, I let the brush slumber a little longer.

It is smooth going at first.  Plasticky popping sounds proclaim progress.  Despite the apparently recent remodel of the kitchen, the lower cabinets hang just low enough to be a stumbling block.  Good thing I have the edge cleaner.  Horse-hair edge cleaner.  I’d have it no other way.  Is it going to be enough…?  YES!  “Got ya!,” I exclaim.

Speaking of the bamboo mat, it looks clean, but curiosity and a sordid past get the better of me.  Let’s see what 102mph of suction can find.  Snap, crackle, pop!  No it’s not the hatted Rice Krispie gang.  Instead, it is the sound of a growing fondness for such an amazing partner in life.  Having returned to a state of strong purity as only bamboo can, I purposely locate myself on the mat as I direct my attention towards the last of the dried food.  As I revel in the success of the chore, the clean mat warms to the temperature of a mom’s loving embrace.

“Well done son.”

If Movies Could Speak – A Letter

Dear Spoiler Alert,

As you know, it has been a while since I’ve written you.  No, this isn’t a dream.  Please try to pay attention.  I’ve been thinking a lot about our relationship.  No, I’m not actually your child.  I know it is difficult for you but can you be patient and hear me out?  There’s something I need to tell you.  No, I’m not pregnant with a demon.  It’s about us.  Well, actually it’s about you.  No, you’re not dead.  Come to think of it, I don’t know where to begin.  No, the end is not the best place.  Do you remember growing up?  No, I’m not here to tell you your parents were actors.  Do you remember your first Christmas?  No, there’s no change, Santa Claus is still a fantasy.

Writing this letter is proving more difficult than I imagined.  No, I’m not writing from prison.  I think there is something wrong with you.  No, you’re not an android.  You see, when we were young…  No, you were not abducted by aliens.  When we were young, there was a time when you used to let me experience life for myself.  No, I’m not breaking up with you.  Please just continue reading.  Life used to be so full of wonder.  No, we are not about to be overrun by zombies.  I used to laugh, get scared, and generally love my life.  No, you can’t have my bike; this isn’t a suicide letter.

One day something changed.  No, we still haven’t found life on other planets.  I don’t remember the specifics.  No, I did not just awake from a frozen sleep.  I can remember a time though, when a pretty girl gave you extra attention because you knew something before everyone else.  No, I’m not that girl’s daughter.  Please keep reading.  I have a little more I want to say.  We’ve all done it.  We’ve all ruined the end of a movie for someone else, at least accidentally.  No, they didn’t send me to bring you in for a lobotomy.  But with you it was different.  You never apologized.  You never changed.  From that first time until now, you have been making life miserable for me.  No, you didn’t infect me with the rage virus.  Please just try to continue reading.  Because of you I am unable to add enjoyment to life.  Because of you I am unable to capitalize on life’s unpredictability.  I don’t want to know what happens at the end.  Can you understand that?  Life isn’t about being the first to know what happens next.  It is about spending time with people.  Experiencing things together.  No, I haven’t met someone else.

You need to know that there is no end.  Do you understand?  No, that’s not because our energy continually passes on to other beings.  I mean to say that I think you should try living in the moment.  There is no big reward for sharing what happens at the end.  When I know the ending ahead of time, it doesn’t add value.  Really, it only highlights your personality’s flawed nature.  No, you don’t suffer from multiple-personality disorder.  Ugh, I give up.  No, this isn’t where I reveal that I’ve always been the bad guy.  Is there nothing I can say to get to you change?  Is there anyone you’ll listen to?  No, this isn’t an intervention.

I hope you understand I had to try.  I guess you always knew how this would end.

Your Good Friend,

Motion Pictures

.

T.C. – Top Dream Crusher

He was Top Cadet, Top Friend, Top Suburban Son, Top Forrest Boy, Top Gun, Top Bartender, Top Brother, Top Veteran, Top Car, Top Immigrant, Top Lawyer, Top Informant, Top Vampire, Top Spy, Top Spy 2, Top Spy 3, Top Spy 4, Top Spy with a Sense of Humor, Top Sports Agent, Top Freak, Top Motivational Speaker, Top Crazy Man, Top Future Cop, Top Samurai, Top Hit Man, Top Normal Guy, Top Politician, Top Director, Top Nazi Traitor, Top Rock Star, Top Ex-Cop, and most recently Top Astronaut.  I can be talking about none other than the Top Actor of the World, Tom – T.C. to me – Cruise!

Just the facts:  I saw Top Gun when I was 8 and went on to become a military pilot.  My first anniversary out of the military occurred last year, and I figured it would be a good time to watch the movie again.  It had been about 7 years since I last saw it.  So much had happened in my time in the military that I was curious what I would think as I watched it again.  You know what?  As the movie ended, I felt like I was 8 again.  I thought to myself, “Man, I can’t wait to grow-up so I can be a military pilot.”  Then I realized, “Wait a minute, I’ve already done that!”

The moment that followed was singular.  I realized that I don’t think I ever actually wanted to be a military pilot.  I realized that all these years I actually wanted to be Tom Cruise.  Or at least like him, Top Actor.

This thought terrified me.  You see, recently I joined a Toastmasters public speaking club.  Toastmasters is an organization that pushes people to follow their dreams.  The club I am a part of is no different.  Besides being overly encouraging, they are time keepers.  If you tell them your goal, they will help keep you accountable.  I knew that if I told any of them that I wanted to be Top Actor, they would literally start encouraging me to follow my dream to Hollywood.

Thus, I was faced with a dilemma.  I joined Toastmasters to challenge myself.  This was the perfect topic for a speech.  However, there was no way I could share this dream of mine with this particular group of people.

Then it hit me!  What if I just told them the truth?

Of all the people who make excuses for not following their dreams, I think I have the best excuse ever.  I thought that maybe I could convince them that some people just shouldn’t follow their dreams.  And I was one of those people.

Think about it.  As a pilot, I spent 8 years perfecting my radio-call voice.  You know what I’m talking about.  The very monotone, betraying no emotion, professional way of speaking.  Besides being monotone, a radio-call is also a strictly formatted four-part way of communicating.  There is not much room for deviation from the monotone four-part format.

My thesis:  I argue that even Tom Cruise himself couldn’t become Top Actor if, like me, he had to overcome 8 years of speaking in a radio-call voice and format.

And I can prove it.  In order to do so, I need to take you through a few examples of how his movies would’ve sounded if he made them in a monotone, four-part radio call format.

To begin, allow me to take you back to the living room at the end of Top Sports Agent.  In the movie he says, “…We live in a cynical world.  A cynical world.  And we work in a business of tough competitors.  I love you.  You… complete me.”  To which Dorothy interrupts, “Shut up.  (Sniff)  Just shut up.  You had me at hello.”  Pretty powerful stuff, no?  Well, let’s see what that would look like if a T.C. would’ve had my restrictions.  Here goes.

*Pshh*  Ahh Dorothy…This is Jerry…I’m standing in your living room and ahhh…We live in a cynical world.  BREAK *Pshh* … *Pshh*  …A cynical world.  And we work in a business of tough competitors.  BREAK *Pshh* … *Pshh*  …Ahhh…I love you.  You complete me. *Pshh*

*Pshh*  Ahh Jerry…Dorothy here…Standing in the same room…Shut up.  Just shut up.  You had me at hello.  *Pshh*

I mean come on!  There is NO WAY anyone would have identified with those characters or that sentiment.

I can hear some of you already.  You’re saying, “Hey, wait a minute.  You picked an easy one, a chick flick.  I bet some of his other movies would have sounded alright.”  Okay, I’ll take that bet.  And I’ll raise you.  Let’s jump right to a military movie.  Top Lawyer.  You remember it.  Lt. Caffy thundering away while leading Colonel Nathan R. Jessup expertly toward admitting he ordered the CODE RED.  Let’s pick it up with Colonel Jessup.  He asks, “You want answers?”  Lt. Caffy replies, “I think I’m entitled them.”  “Yawan’answers!”  “I want the TRUTH!”  “YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!..”   And then the great speech about walls begins.  Now, here’s how the scene would have played out if T.C. was a pilot.

*Pshh*  Ahh Lt. Caffy…Colonel Jessup here…sitting in the witness stand…Do you want answers?  *Pshh*

*Pshh*  Ahh Colonel Jessup…Lt. Caffy speaking…I’m at your 11…I think I’m entitled them.  *Pshh*

*Pshh*  Ahh Lt. Caffy…Colonel Jessup again…still in the witness stand…Do you want answers?  *Pshh*

*Pshh*  Ahh Colonel Jessup…Lt. Caffy here…I’ve haven’t moved…I want the truth.  *Pshh*

*Pshh*  Ahh Lt. Caffy…Colonel Jessup here…once again from the witness stand…You can’t handle the truth.  *Pshh*

See?  No drama.  It would have been annoying.  No one would have told their friends to go see Top Lawyer.

At this point, I think I’ve done enough to prove I’m right; and I should not follow my dreams.  In all fairness, though, we need to come full-circle.  Some of you are thinking, “Well, he seems to have a good point.  Maybe he couldn’t become Top Actor.  …Except that Top Gun is the movie that really put T.C. on the map, and in it he made radio-calls.  So, no, I won’t let him off the hook, his theory is destroyed by Top Gun.”  I respond, “Is it?”  Do you really believe that the radio calls are what made that movie?  We all know what made that movie and transformed Tom Cruise from Top Forrest Boy into Top Actor.  The bar scene.  “You never close your eyes anymore when I kiss your li-i-ips.”  Goose takes over, “There’s no tenderness like before in your feeengerrti-i-ips.”  Back to TC, “You’re trying hard not to show it…”  Entire bar.  (It’s appropriate to join in wherever you are right now, too.)  “BAYYY-BEE!”  “But baby!  Believe me, I knoooow i-it…”  And on and on.  A scene like that spawns a career.  Here’s how it would look radio-call style.

*Pshh*  Ahh Pretty blonde woman…Maverick here…at your six…you never close your eyes anymore… BREAK  *Pshh* … *Pshh* …when I kiss your lips.  *Pshh*

*Pshh*  Ahh Blondie…Goose speaking…at your eleven…There’s no tenderness like before…BREAK  *Pshh* … *Pshh* …In your fingertips. *Pshh*

*Pshh*  Ahh Blonde woman… Maverick again…I’m the one at your 12 o’clock…You’re trying hard not to show it…BREAK  *Pshh* … *Pshh*  …baby. BREAK *Pshh* … *Pshh*  …But baby, believe me I know it.  *Pshh*

Whew!  Need I say more?  Need-I-Say-More?  Terrible.  I’m bored writing this.  “Tom who?”  That’s what you would say to me if he had made his movies the way I have had to speak for the last 8 years.

There you have it, proof positive that some people shouldn’t follow their dreams.  I am one of those people.  Are you?  Are you you holding on to any dreams that need to be given up?  I find my answers in the movies.  Maybe you will to.  It’s like in the movie Lion King when Rafiki tells adult Simba that to discover his destiny he needs to, “Look hahhhder.”

Break the Rule, But Don’t Give Up

“We can’t break the rules!  They keep us alive!”

(Deep breath.)  “Calm down.  What are you talking about?”

“I’m talking about the MASTER WARNING light we just saw informing us that the tail-rotor gearbox has pieces of metal floating around in the oil.  That means the tail-rotor could be coming apart and seize at any moment.  We need that tail-rotor!  The aircraft manual says we must ‘Land as soon as Possible,’ which means the first available area.  We are flying over available areas.  We should land!”

(Another deep breath.  He’s young, don’t mess up this teachable moment.)  “Look, we were just performing some maneuvers which reduced the g-forces on the aircraft.  Chances are there were already some ferrous pieces of metal lying on the bottom of the gearbox.  When we performed the ‘bunt’ the lowered gravity probably caused those pieces to float up.  The magnet grabbed them resulting in the MASTER WARNING light.  We are over the beach.  I do not believe we need to land on the beach and incur a logistical nightmare to confirm that the gearbox isn’t disintegrating.  I am going to fly to the nearest runway and land there.”

“But…”

(Okay, now’s the time to make it clear the decision has been made.)  “No ‘but’.  Here’s the thing: If at any point there is even a hint of any sort of problem, we will land at the first available area.  That’s the plan you need to hold me to.  Anything else, even bad weather, and we’re heading to the ground.  Deal?”

“Okay.  I can agree to that.  Let’s just hurry up and get there.”

Today, I still question if I made the right decision.  I know that dying because I didn’t want to inconvenience some tourists and mechanics, let alone embarrass myself, wouldn’t have been smart.  Just the same, I did not believe the tail-rotor gearbox actually had a problem.  We had all had metal ‘chip detector’ lights illuminate before.  There were so many false alarms in fact, that it was difficult to ever believe that there was a problem.  Just the same, the book said we should have landed, so we should have landed.

Then again, I am living proof that we didn’t need to land.  We weren’t actually in danger.  How did I know?  Where did I get the confidence from to break the rules?  I got it from listening to the old pilots.  As you get older as a pilot, you learn that rules will need to be broken.  Policies will need to be ignored.  There is just no way that policies and rules can be written for every conceivable situation.

The important thing when breaking rules is to set new rules.  When breaking rules, don’t go totally freestyle.  Just because you need to break a rule, doesn’t mean that you no longer believe in the value of rules.  Naturally, pilots developed a five step process to follow when breaking rules.

Step 1.  Get Feedback.  Maybe someone else has been in a similar situation.  Maybe not.  The important thing is to ask.

Step 2.  Make a decision.  In the above scenario, I decided to fly to the closest runway.

Step 3.  Plan carefully.  While we were discussing the merits of this decision, we were navigating to the nearest runway, coordinating our new flight plan with air traffic control, and ensuring we had enough fuel to execute the plan.

Step 4.  Set limits.  Breaking rules isn’t what kills pilots.  Continuing to break the rules is what kills pilots.  Break a rule, but always set a limit to the new rule.  If you find yourself bumping up against the new limit, time to really get conservative and land.

Step 5.  (Most important)  Brief the plan.  We don’t live in a void.  Other people help keep us accountable.  If we don’t tell others what the plan is, no one will be able to help us stick to it.  In the above example, I set the new limit very conservatively to show the rest of the crew that while I didn’t believe we were in any danger, I took the situation very seriously.  When they heard that one random light bulb burning out, or one reported thunderstorm in the area would convince me to land, they bought into my decision.  A great instructor taught me that three little problems, no matter how unrelated, equal one big problem.  Big problems should be handled on the ground.  Therefore, make the conservative decision and land the aircraft.

As should be expected by now, these five steps transfer perfectly to life as well.  Life has no comprehensive rule book.  Just the same, there are codes of behavior that should generally be adhered to.

For example, let’s say you’re one of the lucky few to have never had revolving credit card debt.  One day life finally happens to you in such a way that you need to leave $100 on your card.  What should you do?  Only you will know the truth of the situation, but chances are you need to break your rule.  So break it.  Just don’t forget that there is a force, where it gets it’s strength we’ll never know, which tempts you to give up the good fight.  You’ll find yourself needing more and more things you can’t actually afford.

To avoid the credit pitfall, act like a pilot.  Ask for feedback, make a decision, plan carefully, set limits, and tell someone the new plan.

Don’t give up on rules, just because you’ve had to break some.  I’m counting on your being there for me in the future.

I Need You To Pay Attention

Monochromatic green.  That’s the color of Iraq.  All the cities we ever flew around appeared as varying shades of green.  Despite several flights per week around the country, I can’t even say that I ever actually saw Iraq with my own two eyes.  Instead, it seemed like I was in a helicopter watching a movie about flying around Iraq.

Viewed through night vision goggles, all light appears white; to include shooting stars.  There we so many shooting stars.  Here’s a tip for any aspiring military pilots:  When executing combat missions under the cover of darkness, don’t talk about how many shooting stars you see.  Other crew members simply won’t appreciate the beauty inherent to these singular events.  Apparently, looking in the direction of possible threats has more value.

Why was I noticing shooting stars?  Because they’re attention-getting.  They are a bright light, the essence of ‘visibility’ itself, streaking across an otherwise dark sky.  My crew’s point was well taken though; “Pay attention to what needs attention.”

Outside the cockpit, distractions abound.  When flying, when living one of these ‘mini-lifetimes’, it is easy to categorize things as distractions.  During a flight the timeline is set; the end is literally hours away.  Think about what a distraction even is.  Fundamentally it begs for something to be distracted from.  There must be a goal, a reason.  When flying, the mission, the intent, the goal; all these are clear.  Mankind doesn’t take to flight on a whim.  Or maybe it is a whim, but even flying for enjoyment is still a goal whose attainment distractions can prevent.  Crashing and dying is not enjoyable.

Regular grounded life, on the other hand, does not have a set timeline.  The end is nowhere in sight.  But, just like flying, life has responsibilities that must receive attention.  Does life have events like shooting stars that are distracting?  Certainly.  Should life’s shooting stars be viewed at the risk of failing to attend to the bigger responsibilities?  No.  Like I had to learn to stop noticing the seemingly unavoidable shooting star, all of us could stand to stop giving attention to life’s many distractions.

Attention is a function of time.  It is a scarce resource.  Pilots learn this the hard way.  We call it channelized attention.  Channelized attention is when we focus too much attention on something insignificant, such as a burnt out light bulb, instead of the significant gauge that tells us we’re descending into terrain.  Channelized attention’s effect on grounded people may take longer, but let’s not kid ourselves about its strength.

Each of us must decide how long we will focus on life’s burnt out light bulbs while the aircraft is descending.  The difficulty is, unlike large flying organizations which have an overall mission from which they delegate to pilots smaller missions, life does not have a universal mission.  Each one of us must decide our purpose.  Only you will ever know yours.  But you do know.  You’ve always known.  It’s time then.  Pay attention.  I can’t afford for you not to.

Tabula Rasa. It’s like the movie…

A movie is a story.  A story has purpose.  Fundamentally, a story is an interpretation of an event.  The study of philosophy is the study of how we interpret life.  (Hear the next sentence in the voice of the Architect from Matrix 2).  Ergo, a movie is philosophy.  With me?  Moving on.

My love for movies is a disease.  Say nearly anything to me and my next few words will likely be, “It’s like the movie…”  I’m actually very embarrassed by this when I meet new people these days.  (Obviously everyone else is just so busy and mature they have no time for fun…)  Lately though, I’ve decided to own it.  The following is an explanation of my decision.

People always ask me how I do it.  “For the love, Pete!  How do you remember so many movie quotes?”  Actually, that’s the second question in the conversation.  The first is usually, “What’s wrong with you?”  I’ve had some time to think about this.  The movie quoting that is; there is nothing wrong with me.  And here’s the truth.

Aristotle basically coined the concept of Tabula Rasa.  It means “blank slate.”  I first heard the phrase Tabula Rasa as a freshman in college.  I’ve been intrigued by it ever since.  It simply expresses the idea that we’re all blank to begin with, as in from birth.  Only through living do we fill up the blank slate and become who we are.  Surely you remember where you were on 9/11.  Why do you remember your location on a specific day over a decade ago, but not two years ago?  I’d argue you remember it because 9/11 was a surprise.  That’s the reason I remember movie lines so easily.  They are a surprise to me.  All of life is, but movies especially.  I watch movies as a blank slate. Do I know the good guys are going to win?  Will the guy get the girl?  Yes, yes.  Just like I know that I’m going to eat another meal soon.  But just because I’ve been right every day about my chances of eating again doesn’t mean that I don’t know with certainty what my next meal will be.  And that doesn’t mean I can’t immerse myself in a film and pretend that maybe, just maybe this time the bad guys will win and the story will end with something more gripping than the guy getting the girl.

Movies have so many lessons.  Any type of storytelling does.  As we talk, if you’ve seen the movie I’m referencing, our connection in this lifetime just grew.  If not, I hope you at least found my best attempt to reenact the scene enjoyable to witness.  Either way, our time together increased, and as a consequence our relationship deepened.  Maybe that’s why I do it.  Maybe I reference movies so much because it lengthens the conversation, consequently increasing our time together.  It’d be a sad world if you think I ought to be ashamed to admit that I want to spend more time with you.

The conclusion challenge:  If you can’t remember much, are you assuming too much?  Are you living life with a full slate?  How’s that working for you?  A blank slate is much more fun.  It’s like in the movie “Dumb and Dumber” when Jim Carey discovers 25 years after the fact, “No Way!  That’s great!  We landed on the moon!!”

Course Correction

Introduction.  Body.  Conclusion.

Pilots perform a takeoff.  Pilots fly to a destination.  Pilots land safely.

I always rush into things.  Four blogs later, I realize I should have begun with an introduction.  My thinking was that we’re all big boys and girls.  Read my writings or don’t.  I want you to like them for what they are in and of themselves, not because I convinced you to.  Just the same, I do think that I owe you an introduction of sorts explaining why I think you should enter into this relationship.  That’s easy.  It’s because I am a pilot.

I love that pilots are stereotyped as arrogant.  That makes this so much easier.  Introduction complete.

Pilots are arrogant.  But it’s justified.  We actually do know better.  When it comes to making decisions, especially time-sensitive decisions, nobody knows how to do it better.

This is because unlike non-pilots, pilots get practice at living.  Think about it.  I have.  There is no more perfect metaphor to life than flying.  That means there is no more perfect way to practice life, than flying.  Each has three parts.  1.  Birth & Takeoff.  2.  Life & Flight.  3.  Death & Landing.

1.  Birth & Takeoff – The moment a human is born, a sequence of events which has only one ending begins.  It is the same in flying.  Once an aircraft takes off, either controlled or uncontrolled, it will land.  “What goes up must come down,” as they say.

2.  Life & Flight – The metaphor grows stronger the further we explore it.  In life, as in flying, there is only the illusion of control.  Life can end at any moment, no matter how it has been lived.  Seemingly healthy people drop dead with no warning.  There is no formula for longevity.  You can do your best to live ‘correctly’, and yet you’re not in control.  The same goes for flying.  Everyone can agree that during the flight that killed you, you made every decision perfectly.  That doesn’t change the fact that you’re dead.  While the vast majority of aircraft mishaps are determined to be caused by pilot error, there are still plenty that are simply out of the pilot’s control.

3.  Death & Landing – This brings us to the deathbed.  As we age, we certainly spend more time thinking about how we lived.  Looking back, we are at least curious if we would make any decisions differently if given the opportunity.  After a pilot successfully lands his aircraft, he too looks back and analyzes how the flight went.  Why does he do this?  Because flying, like life, is inherently dangerous.  Unlike life, however, the danger in flying is imminent.  The pilot knows this, and wants to avoid the danger at all costs.  So the flight’s events are recounted.  Mistakes are discussed in an attitude of learning.  He always is thinking about the future and what can be done to avoid making the same mistakes next flight.  And with every successful landing, there arrives another opportunity to take flight once more.

Here’s where the metaphor blossoms.  Pilots are arrogant, we do know better, because we literally get to practice living.  Each time we takeoff we face the threat of death, even if we perform our duties flawlessly.  Consequently, the few hours we are in the air become mini-lifetimes.  Grounded people only live real life.  As mistakes are made, the consequences occur and are lasting.  If similar situations arise, there is a possibility to avoid making the same mistakes.  Generally though, the intensity of the consequence isn’t strong enough to avoid it on a second chance.

Consider being hundreds to thousands of feet in the air.  Are you sure you want to stubbornly ignore what looks to be the thunderstorm that is building in your flight path?  You know that if you fly into it, you could die.  You might wait until the last moment, but you turn.  But the thunderstorm that is the recurring fight with your spouse, parents or children can be flown into every day with minimal immediate consequences.  Unlike a real thunderstorm that can immediately kill a pilot, that thunderstorm might take the rest of your life to kill you, but kill you it will.

What about the hydraulic leak you’re being told about?  How much fluid can you lose before the system fails?  If you don’t know the answer, you conservatively end the flight early, and learn the answer before you fly again.  Similarly, there can be slow leaks of love and respect that when ignored can kill a relationship.  But unlike the situation of the imminent threat of death if you lose your hydraulic system, taking the time to learn how to stop leaking love and respect might seem like it can be put off until another day.  Can it though?

In the end, the pilot has intense motivation for actually learning from mistakes.  The grounded person does not.

The pilot, then, lives one mini-lifetime after another.  Over and over again.  Practice, practice, practice.

Whether pilots have ever been aware of this metaphor or not, the very nature of their profession affords them the opportunity to apply the lessons they learn at work, to their personal lives.  And this is why we seem arrogant.  We wouldn’t make the decision if we hadn’t already thought it through using our professional debriefing skills.  This is why we don’t seem to want to hear other opinions.  We’re sure that we know what we’re doing, and sometimes we’re just lazy and don’t want to take the time to explain how we came to our decision over and over again.  The result is that it seems like we’re dogmatic and uncaring.  That couldn’t be farther from the truth.

This is not to say that pilots don’t make mistakes.  This is not to say that pilots don’t sometimes treat minor life events with too much gravity.  But when it comes to making decisions, to developing criteria with which to make decisions, to sorting through the vast amount of information and discerning what it truly important, pilots won’t steer you wrong.

In conclusion, this blog will serve two purposes.  First, it is the place where you can come to read some of flying’s most important lessons learned.  It should be clear now that these could also be called life lessons.  Second, it is the place I will use to improve my writing skills.  As mentioned here, the ability to stop and debrief the recent past is invaluable, so your feedback is priceless.  Was I unclear?  Do you disagree?  Let me know.  Like pilots say, “We don’t crash in compartments;” so my failures will become our failures.  The same is true for you.  The only way to get there is together.

My Idea of Fun

I’ve been taking writing courses at UCD since January.  One class ended with a pass/fail writing assignment.  Failing would also mean failing the course.  Below is my passing paper.  The assignment was to convince the professor which grade we deserved using by analyzing our previous coursework.  It was a class in rhetoric, or the tools that a speaker/writer has at his/her disposal to persuade an audience.  The general topic the professor chose to use was the ever appropriate “Gun Control.”  We read and analyzed the rhetoric used in several articles including the chapter from Steven Levitt’s Freakonomics which correlated the legalization of abortion to falling crime rates 20 years later.  The three types of rhetoric we studied were 1. Logical- if A then B.  2.  Ethical – if I you are to be persuaded by me, I must demonstrate credibility to you.  3.  Pathetic – An argument can be more persuasive if it literally causes you to have a physical reaction, such as fear, crying, nausea etc.  With that said, enjoy the paper.  Oh, and I changed the professor’s name.  Enjoy.

I’d like you to close your eyes.  Visualize with me a day in the not too distant future.  The year is 2021.  It is Spring.  You arrive at the university as always.  You notice the air lacks the usually pervasive petroleum scent.  You excitedly think, “They did it.  They really did it.  Clean cars are everywhere.”  As you walk to the building, the sound of fabric flapping in the wind rouses you out of a pleasant daydream.  You find yourself staring at Old Glory.  Wiping away the start of a nostalgic tear, you overhear students discussing Hillary’s inauguration speech indicating to you that she has been reelected President.  A smile forms.  Nearing the building, you begin to notice several of the students and faculty looking at you and smiling.  Worrying first that they’re noticing a fashion faux pas; you give yourself a subtle once-over only to breathe a sigh of relief that everything is as it should be.  Walking further you notice the smiles have a certain quality to them; a level of envy, if you will.  “I could get used to this.,” you think.

“Is it true?,” one particularly stunning student asks.

“Uhh…,” you stammer.

“Is it true?,”  the student repeats, apparently star-struck.

As you search for some clue about what is going on, you see it.  How could you not see it?  A banner across the entirety of the building reads, “Admits Pete, the ‘Humble’, ‘I wish I could take the credit.  But the truth is I owe everything, the skills, the money -everything- to my first English Writing professor, John Smith, who can still be found instructing the art of writing at the University of Colorado Denver.’”

Okay, now open your eyes.

How would you like to live in that future?  The university would surely give you a raise.  They’d also permit-not just permit-but expect you to capitalize on all the talk show invitations you’d surely receive.  There would definitely be a book deal.  Heck, maybe my future self would even be gracious enough to be your co-author to ensure you’re rewarded for all your efforts.

There’s a catch though.  My future self can’t possibly find it in his heart to pay back people who helped him achieve his dreams if they didn’t actually help.  As a professor of mine, there is only thing left for you to do in order to help me make my dream a reality.  I need my grade in your class to be a solid “A”.  Not a skin-of-my-teeth “A-“; not a what-exactly-did-he-do-to-deserve-it? “A+”; just an “A”.

There are only two data-points from CANVAS (the web-based syllabus) relevant to this discussion.  First, I actively participated in every assignment save one.  Not just participated mind you, but actively participated.  This was best demonstrated by my usually being the first person to post.  On top of that, the points that I brought up in student discussions caused people to actually think, while demonstrating that I actually had to think to develop them.  No “CTRL C” then “CTRL V” for me.  There was even one student who consistently praised my posts for their ability to make her think outside the box.  “Pete- Your post’s always stimulate other thoughts for me. I didn’t think about this approach to pathos.”  Second, my average to date is 85.9%.  If you run the numbers you’ll discover that even a passing grade on this paper leaves me in need of one percentage point in order to mathematically achieve the “A” I think I deserve.  Here’s where the 1% comes from:  This paper.  It is a demonstration of my command of ethical and pathetic rhetoric wrapped in a bow called logical rhetoric.  Assuming the paper clearly proves to you that I understand those two types of rhetoric, the only conclusion for you to draw is that I also understand logical rhetoric at an “A” level.   When you reach the end of this paper, ask yourself, could other than an “A” student have written this paper?   Seriously, to take just one example, could any self-evaluation of my Pathetic Analysis paper better demonstrate my understanding of pathetic rhetoric than this paper’s opening?  We’re in agreement then.

Returning to the task at hand, the way ahead, as I see it, has two paths.  First, stick to the description of this assignment you offered, in which I’d evaluate my previously demonstrated submitted works in defense of the letter grade argued for in this paper.  BO-ring.  Or second, accept the challenge you offered in those papers to develop a truly intriguing argument.  You see, in my training to become an instructor pilot I was taught that “learning” is defined as “a change in behavior based on experience.”   “Learning” therefore is about change, not past performance.  This definition is at odds with colloquial peanut-gallery commentary (a southern accent works best), “Ya’ larn somethin’ new every day, don’t ya’?,” isn’t it?  Higher education is about learning.  Accordingly, I’m choosing  to use my 2000 words “gloves off” to make the most persuasive argument I can that I deserve a solid “A”.

The fact that I nearly aced all the minor assignments, makes discussing the big three papers the appropriate place to start.  Scoring an 80% on the Logical Analysis gave us (you-professor and me-student) a baseline to work with.  That grade and the associated commentary taught me three key things which resulted in raising my respect for you.  One, you clearly were going to be reading my papers.  Two, you know what you’re doing.  Three, I clearly misunderstood the assignment.  Oh well.  In either case, I found myself very motivated to really try to impress you with my Ethical Analysis.

The 80% I received on the Ethical Analysis could communicate that I didn’t learn from before, but that is not how I interpreted it.  This time I was mentally arguing with your stated reasons for the 80%, rather than thinking, “Wow.  I totally misunderstood the instructions.”    Nothing to do with changing that grade, but rather persuading you that I demonstrably performed at an “A” level in this class, I’d like to discuss your feedback to my Ethical Analysis paper a bit.  You wrote, “In the end, I have a hard time seeing how these two threads (he’s wrong, but he’s incredibly persuasive) come together.”  The truth that your comment captured was not that these two threads are irreconcilable.  Levitt can indeed be wrong or irrelevant on the whole, and at the same time a master of ethical (/logical/pathetic) rhetoric.  Where I failed in my analysis was in spelling out that there were two different categories.  See the difference?  In the first paper, I didn’t understand that there were different types of rhetoric.  My previously acquired logical abilities carried me to an 80%.  Paper number two showed I still had far to go, but I now understood that there were several nuanced types of rhetoric.  In order to develop an intriguing thesis in my analysis of Levitt’s use of ethical rhetoric, I needed to venture to a more abstract analysis of Levitt’s argument than ethical rhetoric.  That I did so without explanation is reflected in my grade.  In the film “Boondock Saints,” there is a scene where a mob-peon is trying to convince two newly-vigilante brothers that they should let him help them track and kill the bad guys because his position in the mob has given him intimate knowledge of the bad guy’s lifestyles.  As he makes his case, he erupts with such passionate reasoning that he starts buying wholesale into the idea himself.  In a moment of unmatched hilarity he has the epiphany, “We could kill everyone!”  It’s a funny moment precisely because it’s illogical.  Killing everyone wouldn’t leave anyone to enjoy the new crime-free society.  Similarly, Levitt implies (he is never assertive regarding how his conclusions should be used) either that abortion is okay because it acts as a crime-reduction strategy, which is totally contradictory; or that we need to really make sure that we make babies only when we can care for them according to some standard.  This second reason being nothing more than what various groups of people have been saying since the beginning of time.  My conclusion remains, Levitt is wrong.  Yet, his status as an author of a best-selling book-turned-movie proves he is a master of at least ethical rhetoric.  (Along with all the reasons we can single out in an analysis of his use of ethical rhetoric).  To be clear, I am not attempting to persuade you that I am right about Levitt here.  Instead, my point is that despite the same 80% number grade, I argue that your commentary responding to my analysis of Levitt as “wrong but persuasive” inherently demonstrates that I changed my behavior due to the experience of reading your feedback to my Logical Analysis.  Put more simply, your commentary revealed that I had learned.

Then there’s the recently graded Pathetic Analysis.  89%.  Oh, and on top of the fact that you thought it nine points stronger-a-paper than the other two, you even wrote, “I do think this is easily your best paper yet.”  The result of you teaching is me learning.

How to most effectively use my remaining 500-ish words?  One way might be to point out that I am more than aware that this entire paper has been about me.  While I’d like to, I can’t take full credit for this.  The assignment is to persuade an English Writing professor what grade I’ve earned this semester.  I am more than aware that I am taking a tremendous leap of faith by challenging the posted standards for grading this assignment.  Just the same, it is worth highlighting that everything in this paper is still applicable even if the student wasn’t me.  In fact, I would argue this is one feature of the online English Writing program that I find to be ingenious.  I don’t know if anyone thought it through beforehand, but the value of a professor grading a student purely on the student’s written word in an English Writing class is priceless.  Over the course of the semester you probably have come to imagine that I am a charismatic, charming and good-looking man.  Guilty, all true.  And I cannot deny that I normally take full advantage of these qualities in attempting to get what I want in life.  I’d be a fool not to, right?  But with this online format all those qualities are nullified.  I’m left with my words.  Throughout, I have only been pleasantly surprised to receive immediate feedback from you and students alike, saying that points I took to be obvious, to my chagrin, actually need explanation.  For the first time ever, this grade is not about me, but instead the submitted written words.  Therefore, I am totally disinterested in the grade.  You must acknowledge that you really don’t know for sure who is writing the words.  What if all the words you thought were coming from a human, were actually submitted by a new breakthrough in artificial intelligence called P.E.T.E. or a Persuasive Electronic Typing Entity?  Again, this simply illustrates that this grade really isn’t about me.  It’s about the work.

That brings us back to square one.  After careful self-evaluation, I, Pete or P.E.T.E., am convinced I learned the types of rhetoric, how to analyze other’s use of rhetoric, to purposefully use rhetoric in my own writing, and self-evaluate.  I learned this due, in no small part, to the planned content of this course and the individual attention of an expert, you.  Could I have performed better on each and every assignment?  Always.  In the same breath, what grade do I deserve?  An “A”.  Why?  Well, if you don’t know by now, I guess I totally missed my mark.  Did I mention the banner will be HUGE?