At this point, I must also share a slightly weird habit of mine. Whenever I'm listening to good music, I have the tendency to imagine myself in a movie, looking at myself from a third person point of view. I write scenarios in my head and narrate how that specific scene would go with the song that's playing in my ears.
The first thing that sparked in my head when listening to Simone's song was what my own funeral would look like in a movie and I decided that this song would be the soundtrack for that specific scene. People would get together and say really nice things about me and my spirit would be in the room, watching the entire thing, dancing along while the church choir (even though I'm not Christian I still imagine having a church choir to raise the spirits up) would sing along to the song, and I'd feel warm and fuzzy about all the things I would hear people say about me.
And then a thought suddenly hit me like a ton of bricks dropped down from the rooftop of a ten-story building on a concrete sidewalk. Why is it that it's only at someone's funeral that we take the time to talk about how awesome, how nice, how smart, how funny, how crazy, how important he or she was? Like really tell the whole truth, as we feel deep down in our hearts, but are reluctant - for one reason or the other - to vocalise with 100% honesty and transparency of the heart?
What is holding us back? What are we worried about? Concerned? Are we scared that if we tell someone how awesome we think they are, that will give them the upper edge in our relationship? Or, if we tell someone that they are the funniest person we've ever met, are we worried that it will make us look or sound less funny? Really, what do we think will happen?
In contrast, think about all the times that you did tell someone how you truly felt about them. Think about the way they reacted, the way their face changed, perhaps lit up, and the way it made you feel to see them feel happier or better about themselves because of a positive sentiment that you shared with them.
One important distinction that I must make here is the one between the honest expression of feelings I'm talking about, and flattery. Flattery isn't necessarily always authentic or genuine, and is mostly used with the expectation of getting something in return. The thing I'm referring to, however, is just a pure expressiveness and opening of the heart, a full transparency of emotions because we don't see the need or purpose of filtering out our positive emotions and because we believe the world will become a much more pleasant place to live if everyone lived with the same conviction.
In fact, it is because we all think too much about everything and everyone else and what "they"re doing and saying and why they're doing and saying all those things, that we collectively put ourselves in a Prisoner's Dilemma that we can't escape.
For those of you who may not be familiar with the term, Investopedia describes Prisoner's Dilemma like this:
A paradox in decision analysis in which two individuals acting in their own best interest pursue a course of action that does not result in the ideal outcome. The typical prisoner's dilemma is set up in such a way that both parties choose to protect themselves at the expense of the other participant. As a result of following a purely logical thought process to help oneself, both participants find themselves in a worse state than if they had cooperated with each other in the decision-making process.
Let me use an example to elaborate. Wes is at a party for work with people he'd like to leave a good impression on. He meets Ty, who's a friend of a friend, at the party and starts talking to him. Wes thinks Ty is a super cool guy with whom he'd actually like to be friends and spend time. However, he also wants to impress some other people in the room and is worried that they, too, will find Ty charming, which may take their attention away from himself. As a result, Wes talks all night in attempts to impress the room and sees Ty as a threat. In the end, Wes and Ty end up saying bye and go on their own ways.
Now allow me to tell you the issue I have with this scenario:
Wes and Ty should've been friends. It's a shame that they aren't going to be. And that's it.
Now, let me explain how this situation would work as a Prisoner's Dilemma.
There are four scenarios under which this situation could unfold:
1. Wes doesn't tell Ty he thinks he's cool because he's afraid that doing so will make Ty look like the cool guy (and perhaps make himself looks less attractive) in front the people he's trying to impress. Ty doesn't tell Wes he thinks he's cool because they just met and Wes hasn't said anything to him either.
2. Wes doesn't tell Ty, etc etc for all the above reasons. BUT, Ty doesn't care about impressions and what people will think and what they'll say, so he tells Wes that he would love to hang out sometime. (**This is the point at which I believe the Prisoner's Dilemma would break in real life, but I'll explain that in a bit.)
3. Wes thinks that telling Ty he would love to hang out sometime will have no effect on what others think about himself. As a result, he tells Ty that he's a cool guy, and he'd love to hang during the weekend. (**)
4. Ty and Wes both tell each other what a pleasure it was to have met, and that they'd both love to hang out and do stuff together.
** Now, this bit is a little tricky with human relationships, because I believe that the majority of us are wired in a way such that when we feel warmth from someone, we like to give it back. Consequently, I believe that if either Wes or Ty were to tell the other one how they feel, their feelings would be reciprocated. That means that our Prisoner's Dilemma is actually an easier one to get out of (if ever we find ourselves in it in the first place), which makes it more mind blowing that we have so many of such problems in our lives, and in much greater scale.
If you think about it, politics is a huge Prisoner's Dilemma. Almost all political leaders (or at least leaders countries) talk about how they want world peace and for people to stop dying and killing each other. Unless they are the head of a militant or terrorist group, you will not find the leader of a political group or country who says they want more people to get killed. In fact, we see photos of presidents shaking hands in "cooperation" and mutual understanding, as per policy - but shaking nevertheless - which only in extremely rare cases ends up with a permanent solution to any problem.
Please take a second to think about this. Why do countries want power? What will they do with it? China wants power because the US has it, and the US wants power because Russia has it, and Russia wants power because... You get the idea. It's a vicious cycle. The fight to be the richest country, to have the largest military, to have the best weapons, to have and maintain control over others... these are all in place today because no single country (with a power to create a significant impact) wants to back down.
But imagine what would happen if one of them did. Just one.
Imagine if the US didn't care about having dominance in the Middle East anymore. That they didn't care if they were the richest country in the world, but just cared that their citizens have enough to live and survive on and 'pursue happiness'. That they just want to be at peace with their neighbours and continue living their lives. That Germany didn't thrive in the face of Greece's struggles and tried to see this as an opportunity to be humble and helpful, rather than an opportunity to drown in a pool of narcism. That organizations such as the UN actually worked, giving all of its members an equal voice, rather than appearing to do so, but actually being ruled by the decisions of the five strongest ones.
This list can easily go on. But just imagine if all of those things actually happened. Or at least just one of them. And then imagine if others followed suit. Imagine if, all of a sudden, leaders stopped acting with greed and a desire to compete, but rather with a desire to make everyone happy. If everyone acted with the intention of making everyone happy, think about what could happen.
Of course I understand that what I'm talking about is not simple. In the way that the world has shaped up to be, it is far from being simple.
And yet, it is.
* * *
As the title of this post suggests, all of these thoughts were triggered by Nina Simone's song "I Wish I Knew How It Would Feel To Be Free". When Obama dies, what will people say at his funeral? That he did a great job keeping the value of the USD up? That x number of terrorists in Afghanistan were killed during his presidency? Of course other things will be said. I'm sure he's a great dad and a nice husband, but the world in which we live today masks all those roles up because we, as humans, over centuries, somehow placed ourselves in this vicious Prisoner's Dilemma of continuously going after one another and against each other. We marginalised everyone who was not one of "us", we created the "other", and raised generations with the mentality that the "other" is out to get us, that "we" are the only protectors of "us", and no one else is to be trusted in this cruel, dog eat dog world.
But when you think about it, can we really say that's true? Whatever your beliefs may be on creation, you will reach the conclusion that we originated from the same place. The "us" and the "other" were both monkeys at one time, or children of the same two parents, if that's where you come from. The important point here is that there actually was no "other" and "us" in the beginning of time. We just created it over the years to end up where we are today.
And this world that's one big Prisoner's Dilemma affects us every single day. From our relationship with our friends to our careers and job interviews, to our romantic lives, to politics, and basically, to everything else that life has got to offer.
I'll end this post with two questions:
Why?
Is it really worth it?
No comments:
Post a Comment