Tagged: life
Don’t Own Him
How far should we allow good intentions to go? At what point is a good intention a bad reality? At what point does a good intention become a disservice to itself? After all, intention requires intending. That is, the act of trying to accomplish something.
A song at church the other day had the lyrics “Our God…”
I’ve been taking some writing courses recently, and am becoming more aware of people’s use of language and word choice. I’m also just returning to church after nearly a decade. Together, those two reasons create a skeptical approach. I know what I believe. But I’m not convinced that what I believe is what you believe, so I look for clues.
Back to “Our God.” Here’s the problem. “Our” creates, whether intended or not, “your.” In the case of God, there is no “your.” If you’re like me, you know there is just God. If you’re like me, you’re done with the, “Well, other people all across the globe use the word ‘god’ as well, but their ‘god’ isn’t our ‘God’ so we need to clarify it” feeling.
I say allow no room for doubt, allow no room for discussion, allow no room for misinterpretation.
Life should be lived assertively. Life should be lived unabashedly. Life should be lived wholeheartedly.
God is not my god. God is not your god. God is not our god. God is. Or as He put it, “I am.”
Jesus chose death over compromise. Like any great teacher, He can be puzzling. How could a man preach ‘love’ and not compromise? I don’t fully know, but I have a suspicion that together we’ll figure it out.
For now, just don’t own Him. His very nature demands it.
Memory’s Blessed Burden
Some pilots in Top Gun wore polo shirts under their flight suits. “Majesty” was number 33 in his 3rd grade Sunday school chorus book. MC Hammer appeared on Saturday Night Live on the opening weekend of The Addams Family movie. His dad put up a giant cardboard “Guess Who’s 30?” sign in the front yard on July 16, 1986. When playing catch with Jerry, it was easier to catch a raquet ball in the ol’ timey baseball mitt than a baseball. His 3rd grade friend slept during class in the Janet Jackson concert t-shirt he obtained at the concert the night before. Two loser sophomores attempted to intimidate him on the first day of highschool. His name was on the scoreboard at the Toledo Mud Hens game on his birthday. The vomit formed the shape of a baseball diamond in the corner of the stairwell at that same game. (Icks-nay on blue kool-aid.) Pastor Craig teared up at the end of some sermons. Jerry buried fool’s gold so that he could find treasure.
He could remember all these random things and more. Remembering so much was not without a burden. That burden was knowing where the gaps were. The burden was that he knew precisely what he could not remember.
Listening to the sermon, he was uncomfortable. Unable to ward off comparison and criticism, he longed for the memory of just a single sermon Pastor Craig gave. Was it the delivery? The rhythm? The message? He needed something to help him make sense of why today’s sermon sounded so backwards. Hmmmm…errrrrr. Nothing. Ugh!
Then a new thought occurred. Surrounding the gaps in his memory were Pastor Craig’s actions, which by definition were memorable. He remembered them to be authentic and full of integrity. He remembered feeling that the pastor loved him. What exactly did the pastor do to make him feel loved? The pastor aimed an intense focus on him. The kind of focus that is only made possible by living in the moment. Pastor Craig exemplified living in the moment.
At least, that’s how he remembered it.
How To Respect
(If you’re short on time, skip to the bottom for numbered instructions.)
He couldn’t be sure, but it seemed there was at least a correlation between the two. He thought it was more likely cause and effect than correlation though. But he knew it didn’t have to be. He knew that laziness was the real culprit.
Of course, he couldn’t blame anyone in particular. It certainly wasn’t the aggregators fault; they were just amassing the information. Likewise, it wasn’t the people who provided the information’s fault. All they did was volunteer knowledge–itself a pretty harmless action at worst.
There seemed to be no other option. It had to be the individual. Was the individual person the guilty party? Yes. He was sure of it. He knew it all along. He tried to pretend the responsibility didn’t fall on a single person’s shoulders, but it was clear now. As much as he wanted to shrug off the burden, a singular sensation passing through his body signaled that he was right. Everyone was accountable for the lack of respect permeating the culture.
In an instant, his mood changed. He felt cheery and seemed to see the world in a different light. If the problem had been identified, there could now be a solution. Of all people, he should have seen this bright conclusion earlier. It mattered not. He wouldn’t allow these thoughts to dampen his mood.
Up until recently, there did seem to be a direct relationship between how much information a person knew, and how wise they were. Naturally, the information age has saturated mankind with data. As a result, everyone acted on the belief that there were answers to life’s problems. People thought that information was wisdom. The mistake is forgivable. Nonetheless, it must be addressed. The starting place, is re-learning how to respect another person. He knew this point was tricky, as not every person behaves in a way that deserves respect. He also knew that people rise to the occasion, and in this country every person has the same inherent right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In this manner, at least, all people deserve respect.
So how does one give respect? See below.
Instructions for How To Respect:
Step 1 – Listen.
Step 2 – Ask, “What are you going to do?”
How Long Until We Learn? 12 Years? 20 Years? Never?
“Does everyone understand?” the professor asked. She just finished explaining a nuance regarding citations in academic writing. “Once more then, common knowledge doesn’t need to be cited, but other than that, it’s best to cite the source of your material. For example, that Pearl Harbor was attacked on December…9th..?” Snickers from the class. “…was it the 9th?” she begged for help.
“7th,” he spoke up. “December 7th.”
“That’s right, thank you. Now you all know that I don’t ‘do’ dates very well,” she joked.
“And that you don’t love your country,” he remarked half-joking, but seeking a status increase in his classmate’s eyes as well.
“Haha. Yes, apparently that too,” she laughed, genuinely appreciating the comment.
His helmet on and secure, he slowly backed the motorcycle out of its parking spot as he prepared to head home from class. Recognizing that a motorcyclist’s every movement is exposed, he concentrated on making his scan for obstacles look as cool as possible.
Finally, he was on the road. Warm air, no seat belt; he was one with the machine. “This will never get old,” he thought to himself. Seeing brake lights in front of him he looked up to see yellow become red. Downshifting, he slowed to a stop. The car in front of him had a sticker that caught his attention. It simply read, “9-11-01.” He couldn’t place the date. Adam and Eve themselves couldn’t describe the shame he felt as he realized his mistake. How many times did it have to happen until he learned that pride comes before the fall? Less than 10 minutes after enjoying a good laugh at the professors expense for not remembering the date Pearl Harbor was attacked, he didn’t recognize a sticker whose purpose was to help us never forget the events of September 11, 2001.
Frustrated he rode the rest of the way home analyzing how this could have happened. Suddenly, an interesting thought: “Wow. It has been 12 years. I wonder how everyone felt in 1953 about Pearl Harbor, compared to how we feel now about 9/11. I always hear about how great the 50s were… Will people in 2073 look back and romanticize this decade too?” It seemed unlikely.
**
Insecurity. Individuals feel it, nations feel it. In either case, it is a problem that should be stomped out as ferociously as possible. The attack on 9/11 spoke to life’s uncertainty. How long are we going to pretend that this was new information? No living thing is free from a risk of dying. Why are we still insecure?
Given the occasion to ‘get the jump’ on the yearly discussion, I don’t mind taking the first stab. We’re still insecure because we don’t understand where security comes from.
Here’s the situation as I see it: After taking until the mid-1980s to repress Vietnam’s memory, we built a military of overwhelming strength. The end of the 80s saw the end of The Cold War. Less than a few years later, we literally obliterated Iraq’s military during Gulf War One. (Our pilots were shooting down Iraqi pilots before they could retract their landing gear on takeoff.) This victory made it impossible to resist feeling invulnerable.
The trouble, however, was that the “we” that became invulnerable included the greatest generation. By 9/11, “we” no longer included the greatest generation or their experience-based (vs secondhand) knowledge and wisdom. What did they know that would have helped us? What might we have learned from existing with them, rather than reading about them? What information do we need to internalize so we can rid ourselves of the wasting disease called insecurity?
Security comes from within.
It won’t come from Obama. It wouldn’t have come from Romney. It won’t come from Clinton or Christie.
Whether Hippocrates ever intended his paraphrased oath to be applied by everyone is inconsequential. “Do no knowing harm.” That goes for everyone. All the time. Whether at work or at play. In your personal life, in your professional life.
Is life complicated? Yes. Has our government acted honorably all the time? No. Do people capitalize on every opportunity to take advantage of each other? Yes. These questions and answers do not paint a pretty picture. So what. Not one of them has any bearing on the decision you are about to make right now.
The only way to overcome this problem is to stop doing knowing harm. Today. No matter who is telling you, “It’s okay.” Whatever consequence you fear will happen if you disobey, you must risk it. Past mistakes are irrelevant. The rest of the planet is longing for Americans to wisely use the power we hold. You know what I’m talking about. You can’t feign ignorance any longer.
I need your help. The only way to get there is together.
Conservative’s Reason
“Chopper down,” the radio sputtered. This was a first. In the worst way. After all, this was supposed to be an ordinary mission. There was no added danger this night. There certainly was no reason to have expected this.
“We have to go get them! I’ll start running the ‘Before Takeoff Checklist,” the flight engineer suggested excitedly. This was difficult to stomach. There are some guys who just want to get into the ‘action’. He was one of those guys. I, on the other hand, was not. I remember my uncle, who was in the Navy, describing how once a helicopter caught fire as it landed on the ship. He recounted how so many guys ran towards the fire. A Sunday stroll was the pace he chose. That always stuck with me.
“Sir, do you want me to let them know the helicopter needs to be destroyed once everyone is clear?” asked the aircraft commander. The unit commander was on board this particular mission. He sometimes sat in the back of the helicopter to make sure he didn’t lose touch with what’s really going on as he only watches the missions on a screen most other days. Again, I was shocked. Wow. This is getting real, really fast.
The flight engineer pushed again for achieving ‘hero status’ in one mission, so finally I addressed him. “Look, we don’t even know what happened. If they were shot down, it probably isn’t the smartest thing to go fly into range of that weapon, is it?”
Confusion like this was relatively rare. But as pilots have a knack for analyzing past mistakes to avoid making them again, we knew what to do. We called it the ‘conservative response rule.’ This was a helpful tool to use in cases of disagreement among the crew. Basically, past aircraft mishaps revealed that when there is disagreement, the more conservative option voiced should be followed until more data can be gathered.
In the above example, one crew-member wanted to fly, the other wanted to wait. The more conservative idea was to wait, therefore we waited. Waited only until more information was available.
That’s the key to this rule. Even the name ‘conservative response rule’, brings to mind always doing the conservative thing, but that’s a severe misunderstanding which can hamstring entire missions. There are times during flights that being aggressive and daring is the right decision. The point of this rule is to make sure everyone is in agreement that selfless bravery is called for. If there is not agreement, stick to the conservative course of action until more information is available.
What’s the practical application to grounded life? Outdoor activities come to mind. How many times have we been with friends and disagreement shows up about what to do next? Say, climbing a mountain as a storm is brewing. Some want to continue, because they say the storm will surely pass. Others suggest turning back. Friendships have been lost over such situations.
As for me, I say stick with the pilots. Turn back or at least wait a while to see how the storm develops. Dead aircrew are longing for you to learn from their mistakes.
Unlike other ‘lessons learned’, this one has a specific audience. Within each of our friend groups, there are those who are natural leaders. If this is you, next time there is disagreement, put this rule to good use. Besides enhancing your status (rightfully so), it just might keep people and relationships intact.
How To Be The Best Ever
(If you’re short on time, skip to the bottom for numbered instructions.)
Whoa there! Slow down a minute. Have you really considered what you’re doing?
You know who you are. You’re the one believing that you really do excel at one particular skill. You’re so confident that you could be the best ever at it, that you are on the verge of totally restructuring your life in order to prove it to the world.
If there’s not one confusing thing about life, there’s another. Take definitions for a moment. They can be descriptive or prescriptive. If you’re like me and strive to always exist in the present, you likely find yourself drawn to descriptive definitions. If you’re not like me and you prefer to live in a fantasy world, you’re likely drawn to prescriptive definitions. For example, dictionary.com defines “peace” as “the normal, nonwarring condition of a nation, group of nations, or the world.” That is a prescriptive definition. Howard Bloom, crazy thinker that he is, suggests a more descriptive definition. Starting as a Tabula Rasa, he writes “peace” usually means, “‘Since I’m on top, let’s keep the status quo;’ or ‘Now that I’ve managed to climb on your back, would you please be kind enough to sit still'” (Bloom 265).*
Reading over dictionary.com’s definition is quite comical if it is supposed to be descriptive. The ‘normal’ condition of the world. Right.
Back to you, though. Here you are. The best ever. But no one knows it. We don’t need sources to know what being the best is. It is simply being better at something than everyone else. With 20/20 hindsight, let’s see what we can learn by looking at how a couple of people who are arguably the best ever did it.
I’m thinking specifically of Michael Jordan and Lance Armstrong. If you haven’t watched MJ’s Hall of Fame speech, what you need to know is that it disappointed most people. Not me. I took notes. Here was someone who was the best ever. How did he do it? I wanted to know.
Next we have Lance Armstrong. Even more than MJ, Lance Armstrong solidified his place in history as the best ever.
But we’re talking about you. So without further ado, here are the instructions.
Instructions for How To Be The Best Ever:
Step 1 – Forsake everything, literally every other thing in your life if it doesn’t help you become the best ever.
Step 2 – Believe, really believe that when you finally get the recognition you so desire, it will have been worth it.
Experience’s Danger
The reason pilots debrief a flight after landing is to see what lessons the experience can offer. The end goal being to use the lessons learned to improve their performance during the next flight. A continual striving, as it were. But, at its core, experience is not an exclusively positive thing. If left unquestioned, it can have negative consequences too. Seasoned pilots know this all too well.
I’m talking about the danger in mistaking the current situation to be the same as a past experience. For pilots, this occurs most when troubleshooting a malfunction. Pilots have a tendency to enjoy being able to say, “Oh, that’s nothing to worry about, I’ve seen it before.” However, choosing a course of quickly reaching a conclusion without proper evaluation of the situation can create larger problems down the road. For pilots in the air, this course, if uninterrupted, leads to death. While grounded people don’t face immediate death for mistaking “this” for “that”, the result is definitely unpleasant.
Who can’t relate to this lesson? I’ve had many, many arguments with loved ones that only after they went to great pains to rephrase and re-rephrase their point did I realize, “Hey, while it seemed like they just wanted to re-hash some past grievance, it actually turns out they aren’t thinking about it at all.” I then experience the wonderful feeling of dumbfounded shame. All the energy I had been putting into the argument up to that point was misguided. Instead of devaluing their position and jumping to the conclusion that this was the “same ol’, same ol'”, I should have given them the benefit of the the doubt and really listened.
Ask yourself, “Have I ever actually been hurt because I gave the benefit of the doubt to the other person until more information could be gathered?” Unlike pilots, who have a strict and short time-table to work with, I have seen no reason to act under the guise that life has a time table. We can take all the time in the world to hear each other out. In fact, that might lead to a longer life in the end anyhow.
I can hear a few of you right now, “But that’s the thing… I really don’t have the time to deal with (Insert your favorite combatant).” Hmm. Sure. Okay. We’ll do it your way then. Instead of being patient and seeking understanding, which has been proven time and again to result in strengthening relationships (regardless the outcome of that particular discussion), let’s rush to a bad decision. Come to think of it, I now see why you want to rush to a bad decision. If I rush to a bad decision, I will then have even more time for even more rushed, bad decisions based on misunderstandings. Just think about how many bad decisions I’ll be able to make in one lifetime if I hurry! Sorry, no. I’ll take my cues from pilots. If their unique and ongoing relationship with death teaches them to gather all the data before making a decision, rather than forcing the current problem to look like a past experience, then I, too, will treat every situation as unique until proven otherwise.
What about you? How will you use this experience?
How To Live Uncensored
(If you’re short on time, skip to the bottom for numbered instructions.)
A professor of mine recently led a classroom discussion on censorship. I am embarrassed, therefore compelled, to admit that this is a hot-button issue for me. I cannot stand censorship. Why should one human being have power over what another human being is exposed to?
Just the same, I can surely see the other side of the story. Wait, no I can’t. What is the problem again? Has there ever been any data to support that uncensored living is problematic? Sure, there seems to be well established correlations between those who watch violence and those who perpetrate it, and the like. But causal?
There has to be an identifiable problem before we can start solving it! What is the problem?!
So this got me thinking. What, even, is censorship?
Censorship definitions refer us back to the word ‘censor’, which is a noun. By noun, we mean a person, place or thing. In this case, a censor is clearly a person. This is extremely important to the following philosophizing or interpretation of life. (Why is it important to spell out that a censor is a person? Because as free and alive men and women, we should want to live uncensored. Since we don’t right now, we need to know what that would even look like.) So a censor is another person. This makes sense because fundamentally censorship really can’t be imposed on oneself. By definition, a censor is someone who views/hears/reads something, deems it objectionable and then suppresses it. If I view/hear/read something, I can’t reverse that. I can’t censor myself. So we’ve learned something: The minimum number of humans required to bring forth the concept of censorship is two.
Why is this important? Because now we’re getting to the heart of the concept. There must be two people in order for one person to act as a censor.
Furthermore, it seems to me that censorship deals exclusively in the realm of surprise. As in, people clamor for censorship when they’ve been surprised. Or the well-intended censor believes if he doesn’t act, the audience will be unpleasantly surprised. Are you with me? Taking a page out of history, picture this: a well-tailored family sits down to watch the Ed Sullivan show. Everything is as it should be. Then, surprise! A man humps the air! This isn’t what they were expecting at all. Oh, boy. What are they ever to do?
Well, what did happen? What did they do? Maybe some turned off the TV. Maybe others wrote letters. Maybe others discussed it. Maybe others ignored it.
Could the surprise have been avoided? YES! Most definitely. When in history did adult men and women give other adult men and women control over their life in the way that those parents did with TV? As if there was something inherently congenial about what was broadcast on TV? “There was up until that point…”, you say? Well then, lesson learned.
What lesson? Don’t believe there is another living person worthy of control over your life.
The good news is, the information age is here. Not a single human being alive should be surprised by what they see or hear. If you value the freedom you have, and want even more of it, you’ll recognize this as a good thing. If censorship is inherently about limiting surprise, and surprise is coming to an end, the end of censorship is therefore near. Without the ability to be surprised, individuals have regained some of the control they gave up with the advent of TV and other forms of mass communication. And anytime we as individuals gain back control, it is a victory for freedom.
Censorship is about controlling life in the present to promote a desired future. Am I being clear? The thing being censored must really exist in order to be censored. Something not yet real cannot be censored. For example, whether fiction or non-fiction, censored violence is still violence. It still was brought forth into reality. How foolish are we to expect that life, inherently full of unknowns, should have a moment where we can for sure know the future? How did people ever make it to this, “Alright children… For the next short while, we are all going to stare at this optical illusion. Unlike the rest of the day, we should be totally safe from surprises. You see, there are men and women behind the scenes making sure that nothing we don’t expect will happen.” Are you kidding me?
For me, the burden of proof is on the censor. What is he trying to protect? I hope to have shown his answer is irrelevant. It isn’t about protecting. It is about control. Why does he want control? Because ‘he’-the censor and ‘he’-the individual calling for censorship don’t know how to live in the present. They are captivated by the notion of the future. They only know how to live in such a way that demonstrates their denial of the present. They simply put up with the present, in hopes for a better future. If they’re children, we need to teach them. If they are adults, they should be embarrassed.
Ask yourself, “Do I want a better future?” or “Do I want to live life?” They are not the same thing.
Instructions for How To Live Uncensored:
Step 1– Stop believing you can influence the future.
Step 2- Understand that there is only one step.
Why Philosophy? The Answer is Mathematical.
The sound of the car door closing should have woken them. In any case, he was too excited to care. Up the stairs he went. Listening first for what he hoped to never hear, he finally knocked on their door.
“What?” his mother asked.
“I’m home.” he replied opening the door.
“Good…” she acknowledged.
“‘THE MATRIX’ IS THE BEST MOVIE EVER!!!” he burst.
“That’s great. Tell me about it in the morning.”
“No, you don’t understand, I have to go see it again. You have to see it. Dad, what are you doing tomorrow night? I mean, I could feel my jeans shaking from the bass it was so loud.”
That was me. April 1999.
In the fall of 1999 I learned that the ancient Greek’s had mused that we could all really just be brains in jars being stimulated to believe life as we know it is happening. Wow. I cannot tell you how powerful that one fact was. That begged the question, “What else did people thousands of years ago think about that is being presented as new today?”
Around the same time, this knowledge became slightly depressing. If “The Matrix” was actually thousands of years old, what hope did we have for ever thinking something new?
A decade later, I stumbled upon Heidegger. Intense. Taken together, Heidegger and a plagiarized Matrix have revealed how wrong the famous “to remain ignorant of history is to remain forever a child” saying is.
Love history, study history, worship history; just don’t believe that you’re somehow better for it. More and more it is becoming clear to me that “life” is perfectly synonymous with “now.” Simply acknowledging this gives me all the hope I need. Anxiety disappears.
For the doubtful reader, the best argument I can muster is the following personal story.
I attended college from 1999-2003. I am back in college for kicks right now. If you’ll allow my other writings to qualify me to make an observation, it seems US universities are really only interested in one thing: “How to Prevent the Holocaust.” The Stanford Prison Experiment. The Milgram Experiment. Professors and students alike stand in awe of their revelations. Somehow they miss the elephant in the room. They miss that humans are totally capable of taking part in another holocaust. This direct attempt to prevent the holocaust will not work. To accomplish the goal, universities would be better served if they backed up a step and challenged students to accept responsibility for the present. As I’ve written before, this idea of building a [fill in the blank] future is fundamentally flawed.
The only way I see to prevent another holocaust is to live for right now. I’m not talking about “immediate gratification.” I’m talking about an idea I first heard from Peter Drucker. In his book “Management,” he discusses that the Hippocratic Oath doesn’t apply only to the medical field. In his book, he makes the case that managers in any business have to live by it as well. I’d go a step further and say everyone should use it as a guide. Drucker paraphrases the oath down to, “Do no knowing harm.” Implied is you can’t “do” the future. You can only “do” the present.
By way of example, while deployed I hung on my wall some of the Samurai’s Bushido-type sayings. One was, “Courage is living when it is right to live, and dying when it is right to die.” I can tell you I have put a lot of though into it, and if the situation presents the “my life or me taking another’s life” dichotomy, I’m choosing the bullet. The German people chose poorly. They seem to have thought, “Even though this is wrong, if I do it now, at least I’ll make it to the future.” Wrong. No way am I making the same choice. Only someone avoiding “the now” could murder on command. Personal story turned rant over.
To recap, (“The Matrix” + Ancient Greek Philosophy + Martin Heidegger – Cicero + (Two x College) + Peter Drucker + Bushido) x Me^Infinity = Philosophy or interpreting existence is fascinating to me. What’s your story?
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.
Captain’s Log 