A writing piece from Scott P. Scheper.
One American Plaza
Downtown San Diego, CA
Saturday, 4:13 pm
Yesterday I left you hanging.
If you recall, I outlined how two life principles, I wrote about in Issue No. 105, and Issue No. 107, seemingly contradict one another.
If you're unfamiliar with what I'm referring to, go ahead and read yesterday's piece now: Issue No. 108.
OK, now with that out of the way, let's dive in...
So we have a fun predicament:
Should we ascribe to the belief that, A: in life your results are your habits? Or to B: in that your results are defined by one critical action?
Here is what I advise: Believe both A and B are true, and act as if only A is true.
Do not care, or give thought to B (i.e. in life, your results are defined by one critical action). Why? Because it's out of your control.
This concept may sound familiar——indeed, even trivial——if you're familiar with stoicism philosophy. Yet, if you contemplate this long enough, you can travel to some insightful philosophical zones.
Underlining the decision to focus on what you can control, echoes an observation Albert Einstein once made:
- You can view that the universe as a friendly place (one happening for us).
- Or, you can view it as a hostile place (one in which things happen to us).
Either way, you're right. Why? Because it's a perception. The universe doesn't care, which one you choose. However, it still has implications on the type of life you'll have.
Both currently stand equaprovable (i.e. both are equally without proof). Empirical arguments of influence can be made for each view.
It must be said that the friendly universe view doesn't necessitate fantastical, religious ideologies; while the hostile universe view withholds a more logical, scientific ideology. This is an errant notion! Rather, both the friendly and hostile view of the universe are equally compatible with rationality.
Now back to the decision at hand...
I recommend the friendly view of the universe. Why? Because it's the optimistic path in life. It's movement is towards love, hope, and purpose. The other view is the pessimistic path. It keeps in in the lower-level desires in Human Nature: survival, security, connection, control, esteem.
The reason why this is dangerous is because in the lowest level of the lower-level of human desires is survival. And beneath survival is despair. Beneath despair is death.
Life is hard by default. Whether you choose optimism, or despair, is up to you. Even if you disagree with the optimistic view of the universe, it seems reasonable to at least acknowledge this: when faced with life's adversities, a consistently optimistic view will not cause more harm than a consistently pessimistic view. If you don't believe this, that's perfectly fine, too. I'll bet my life on the optimistic view. You're free to bet yours however you wish.
We navigated through quite a bit in today's piece!
I wanted to say a few more things, but no——abruptly, I shall end——in the interest of my time.
Scott P. Scheper
Didn't expect to touch on all of these areas. And if you find yourself lacking clarity at this point, don't worry. There is a lot of very deep things packed in here. And... because I allocate less time to The Scott Scheper Daily, then I do to my monthly physical newsletter (aka, The Scott Scheper Letter), I have less bandwidth to simplify my daily words. ↩︎
Being that I don't care about your time, you dipshit (with raillery, I say this). And you are welcome——for your word of the day! ↩︎
Scott P. Scheper