I had a nice big breakfast of oatmeal with honey, raisins, banana, and chipolte pepper powder. I meant it to be cinnamon but the bottles of spice looked a lot alike to me right then. I ate it anyway.
Not bad at all. A good way to wake up certainly. However I’m not planning on doing it again anytime soon.
Pilots that fly past their destination airport in Milwaukee. Or, back in 2008, pilots that flew from Honolulu to Hilo, past Hilo with not enough fuel to reach the continent. Fortunately, the latter woke up and turned back. Apparently so did the former too.
These pilots lacked awareness since they were asleep (at least that’s my guess). But we can lack awareness for many other reasons. Walking to my car I was thinking of calling my wife, what I was going to tell her, wondering what to have for dinner, and watching the traffic on the road I was to walk across all as I took my phone out of my back pocket. I fumbled my phone and dropped it - hard - on the brick sideway. My iPhone no longer had it’s usual screen, but only a while screen with abstract black lines.
Lack of attention to the task at hand is the cause of many accidents: cell phone use by drivers, texting while driving a train, dropping a phone. Ram Dass, Timothy Leary’s lab mate, used to say “Be Here Now”. He got that from the old traditions of Buddhism and it’s not bad advice not just for avoiding accidents, but for many things. People who want to loose weight eat less if they pay more attention to their food. I enjoy more and remember more of anything when I pay attention.
In a recent post I talked about adaptation. You can’t adapt if you don’t see changes and new patterns, and you can’t see that if you don’t pay attention. As my wife tells herself - and me, “watch what you’re doing”. I’ve taken it as a westernized version of “be here now”.
I came across the phrase “normalized deviancy” recently. It’s the idea that we can get used to things that are not normal and we come to behave as if they were normal. Things like 1-2 hour commutes to work or wearing ties (or heels) perhaps. But this phrase has the embedded idea that there is a “normal”; I’m not so sure of that.
Anyone who wants to read the history of the world, or even just the many ways that people today live around the world should see that normal is a very flexible idea. Even in just one country the variation in the way we live can be high. But deciding what “normal” is this way is using it as a descriptive term. How about as a prescriptive term?
So what should “normal” be? We could decide that by figuring what we want, what’s good for us, or what we’re evolved to be. But I’m not sure that’s much better. Now we have to decide what is good to be able to measure what normal should be. So how do we describe what is good? There are different value systems and what’s good in one environment isn’t good in another; there’s also a physical aspect to this as well as a moral or ethical one.
What we think of as “normal” is really seems to be an adaptation to our situation and our environment. My commute seems normal since I do it routinely and many people I know also have similar commutes. Flying into a rough strip in Africa or northern Canada is not normal because I only read about it online or in books. It’s healthy and a good survival trait to be able to adapt to one’s surroundings.
PTSD in returning vets might be an extreme example. In a war zone, being hypervigilant and not wanting to drive under overpasses help you live longer. Since the danger is high these are very strong adaptations. But they’re also adaptations not useful back at home so it becomes a problem.
Some adaptations, like pilots in Africa thinking rough brush airstrips are normal, are not completely successful. The rate of accidents for cargo aircraft that use these strips is significantly higher than similar pilots in developed countries. However it’s probably a reasonable guess that the accident rate is lower than it would be if the pilots didn’t adapt!
When I reach for something, a doorknob, a tool, or a pen, my hand automatically adapts to the shape of the object and I pick it up without thinking. I’ve picked up a similar object probably thousands of times before. A man with arthritis knows his hand won’t work as reliably. He learnes to recognized that and to take a bit more time and to beware of how it might go wrong. He adaptes to change. One day I may have to as well.
Humans can be highly adaptable. Our brains are basically pattern recognition machines that can easily learn new patterns and responses to those patterns. The trick we have is to do is to keep adapting. One way is to let one generation die off and the next take over. This works slowly but reliably at a population level but is a lousy strategy for an individual.
A better way is be aware and to recognize changing patterns. And to respond to that change successfully we have to watch and be aware of things happening around us. That’s requires effort and attention instead of going on mental autopilot. Life is a full time job.
Risk concerns the expected value of one or more results of one or more future events. Technically, the value of those results may be positive or negative. However, general usage tends focus only on potential harm that may arise from a future event, which may accrue either from incurring a cost (”downside risk”) or by failing to attain some benefit (”upside risk”) - Wikipedia
Flying small airplanes and driving a Citroen 2cv are considered risky by some people. So sometimes people think my wife and I are risk-seekers. In the past I’ve been an entrepreneur and my wife has her own business now too. These too are sometimes considered risky endeavors.
But there’s actual risk: (probability of an accident) X (the loss per accident). Then there’s perceived risk, “those little airplanes are always crashing”, “small old cars will kill you in an accident”, and “large companies are always more secure”.
There are some risks that are larger in flying than driving: altitude for example. Then some things more risky in driving too. In flying I don’t have some yahoo on his or her cell phone at 70 mph just 6 feet away from me and drifting into my lane for example. In the plane, I’m much more in control of my own situation. If I avoid zooming too close to the ground and flying too slow, don’t fly in weather I’m not trained or equipped for, and make sure I have enough gas, then I’ve just avoided most of the accident causes!
Small cars are not always more dangerous: they can move out of the way more easily. And recent economic news makes it clear that large companies aren’t secure. Perceived risk is not real risk, it’s just not accurate.
Bruce Schneier has a great article pointing out that we systematically perceive risk incorrectly saying, “People have trouble estimating risks for anything not exactly like their normal situation.” This psychology has also been studied (see “Stumbling on Happiness“).
There’s a lot written about mitigating risk. This just how to avoid risky situations. There are various ways to do that: sit at home and don’t do anything is one extreme. But my wife and I handle risk in several ways: using training, and maintenance to prevent some of the types of risks. And where those won’t work, simply avoiding putting ourselves into that situation. I.e drive the backroad instead of the highway in the 2cv. Life is more than simply avoiding risk. We have decided it’s more risky to get to the end of our lives not having enjoyed them. Or as my wife puts it very simply, “Life is for the living”.
But I’m still not keen on bungy jumping.
