A Conversation for The Structures in Our Lives

Hopelessness isn't the Issue

Post 1

Martin Harper

I see a lot of people in Peer Review complained about the hopelessness of this entry... but I don't think that's really the issue. It's more the claimed universality - the tone that seems to brook no disagreement.

> "It is natural to wish to resolve such complex tension structures, until you begin to understand why they are actually not resolvable. Taking action in an attempt to resolve the unresolvable will undoubtedly result in disappointment and possible disillusionment."

I disagree: there are plenty examples of 'damped harmonic systems' which do reach a resolution between two opposing tensions. And the same structure of tensions can be in many possible states.

For example - the overweight/hungry tension: on its own that might be very repetitive, always oscillating between high and low weight. But equally it might not. The dieter might oscillate faster and faster between the two extremes, eventually dying of obesity or hunger, and reaching a markedly different state, if not a positive one. Or the dieter might reach a compromise between the overweight tension and the hunger tension, at some point where sie can be happy with hir weight, but where hunger is not ruling hir life. Or the dieter might exercise, which damps immediate hunger tension and also reduces weight and increases self-esteem. And sie can do all these things without analysing hir structures, or anything similar.

And that's just a very simple system. When you couple the huge complexity of realistic examples, with the inherent chaos of existence, with the ability of meta-desires to adjust one's desires and hence tensions, with the impact of other agents... well, I think it allows vastly more movement than the rather simplistic model in this entry.

> "... Structure is unavoidable. It is unavoidable because a desire to avoid structure can itself only operate within a structure, as will be seen."

Did the sub-ed take an axe to something here, or did I miss something? I couldn't see anywhere in your entry where you show this to be true.

-Xanthia


Hopelessness isn't the Issue

Post 2

Bels - an incurable optimist. A1050986

Hi Lucinda (et al)

Thanks for your comments.

I'm sorry the tone came across the way it did. It's one of my problems. I'm aware of it, and certainly not complacent about it. Although for various reasons this entry has only just appeared in the Edited Guide it was written some time ago, and I'm still learning about the tone here. Whatever it may have seemed like, I do welcome discussion on the issues raised, otherwise I would never have entered this process or bothered to reply to comments.

You quote me thus...
"It is natural to wish to resolve such complex tension structures, until you begin to understand why they are actually not resolvable. Taking action in an attempt to resolve the unresolvable will undoubtedly result in disappointment and possible disillusionment."

...and you reply:
"I disagree: there are plenty examples of 'damped harmonic systems' which do reach a resolution between two opposing tensions. And the same structure of tensions can be in many possible states."

There are indeed examples of tensions which can be resolved, and in fact I mentioned the Millennium Bridge as one such, but that was to illustrate the principle of addressing the structure rather than the resulting behaviour. "Taking action in an attempt to resolve the unresolvable will undoubtedly result in disappointment" - surely that is true by definition? And note that I wrote 'Taking action' - this is a reference to the direct, head-on approach.

You go on to write:
"For example - the overweight/hungry tension: on its own that might be very repetitive, always oscillating between high and low weight. But equally it might not. The dieter might oscillate faster and faster between the two extremes, eventually dying of obesity or hunger, and reaching a markedly different state, if not a positive one."

I personally don't think death is an ideal everyday solution to conflict, except of course in certain highly exceptional cases. Curiously, even at times of darkest despair - and I have had some - I have never seen suicide as an acceptable solution. But obviously some people do. It is also of course possible to see dysfunctional eating or substance abuse as a manifestation of an unconscious death-urge.

"Or the dieter might reach a compromise..."

Indeed. Many people do settle for some sort of compromise. That is not, however, a resolution of an oscillating system, merely a reduction in amplitude. The subject chooses to reduce the conflict to a 'tolerable' level, something 'they can live with'. It's a solution of sorts, but it's never going to be a really satisfying one. To live life to the full means aspiring to something higher, I feel.

"...the rather simplistic model in this entry."

I agree it's rather simplistic. In fact, very simplistic. That's all I felt able to provide within the confines of an h2g2 guide entry. A whole book is needed.


Hopelessness isn't the Issue

Post 3

Martin Harper

Understood - tone is tricky to get right, isn't it? I had similar problems with the first draft of my gender-free pronouns entry. Aside from that tone, this is a well-written entry, and I do like the way you've provided examples and explored the subject.

Certainly damping can be introduced by addressing the structure directly, but it can equally be introduced by changing behaviour. For example, your dieter might introduce damping by trying to diet slowly but surely and avoiding 'crash diets'. That's certainly direct, head-on, action... and it works often enough that it's fairly standard advice.

I agree that trying to resolve the unresolvable is doomed to failure - my issue is that opposing tensions are not always (ever?) unresolvable. Which brings us to compromise. You say "That is not, however, a resolution of an oscillating system, merely a reduction in amplitude". I disagree: compromises can result in the system ceasing to oscillate completely, as in a stopped pendulum, and that is certainly a resolution. It may not be an ideal resolution for all people, but it will be ideal for some, and the very act of compromise often removes or reduces the underlying tensions.

Death is of course an undesirable outcome for most (all?), but it illustrates my point - change is *always* possible in the real world, both desirable and undesirable change. We may be strongly influenced by these desires and tensions and structures, but we're not *trapped* by them. Such cycles can be broken by behaviour, by analysis, or simply by Chance.

I'm all for keeping entries simple - but I think in this case the way you've simplified has made these structures seem more restrictive than they really are. Do you personally think structures are this restrictive?

-Xanthia


Hopelessness isn't the Issue

Post 4

Bels - an incurable optimist. A1050986

Obviously some behavioural changes will work for some people some of the time. I believe I cited in PR the case of Nigel Lawson: middle-aged, having to attend lavish dinners, eating and drinking too much. He changed his behaviour in a way that worked successfully, and wrote a book about it. This entry is not supposed to be a How To... reduce weight, stop smoking, whatever. There are probably dozens of books about that. Changing behaviour does work for some people. Crash diet? - could be effective. Slow but sure? - works for some folk. There's no magic bullet, you might have to try different things.

This entry, however, is not about what works, but what doesn't work, and tries to offer an insight into why repeated attempts fail - if they do. And there's lots to suggest that many people try repeatedly and fail repeatedly.

Of course there's an element of chance or good fortune. JK Rowling, for example, was once in a terrible state through lack of money. Worried sick. She now says the best thing about her phenomenal success is that she no longer has to worry about the bills. But she had no idea, while she was scribbling about Harry Potter, that she would ever see a penny out of it, let alone a huge fortune. That big event will obviously have brought about change in her life, her behaviour and her structures. But I wouldn't mind betting that there are also some things that haven't changed a bit.

So my central point is that behaviour is governed by structure, and where people are repeatedly failing to make desired improvements in their lives the chances are it's to do with trying to change the behaviour without first attending to the underlying structure.


Key: Complain about this post

Write an Entry

"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."

Write an entry
Read more