Quick Reminder: As of November 11th I’lll be paywalling some essays. If you enjoy my soul (ew/weird/cool), use this Loyalty Discount, only for subscribers. (Offer ends 11/11/23).
This essay’s topic changed after I spoke to my dad about my non-violent approach to conflict, and he said he was upset by (paraphrasing), “People like you who tell others what to do." This shook me, because, excluding my kids, I don’t tell others what to do.
I mean, there are exceptions of course. I once told a married friend to stop cheating for example. But as a rule, I counsel, but don’t condemn. However, if I am pushing someone to consider perspectives that make them uncomfortable, GOOD.
That's my job. I'm a philosopher.
My dad didn’t press the point, so I feel safe saying I’m not a bullying know-it-all, but lest you disagree, I’ll set the record straight: I’m trying to teach the value of critical thinking, so we see our blind spots and avoid heuristic1, emotional decision-making.
Why? Because emotional reactions are unsound and often lead to unintended and unlikable consequences. From "I just fell in love marriages" to "I'm quitting my career and moving to LA to act," most of growing up is learning to regulate our passions.
Being human isn’t easy. In addition to emotions, we have brains and bodies with contradictory demands, and as if that’s not hard enough, we also have this nagging conscience/soul/thingy-ma-jig, begging our hearts to open and choose…mercy?
This week, I yet again only heard the same two sides of an endless, insane debate. One said, “They deserved it!” while ‘the other’ said, “They deserved it!” Meanwhile, no one spoke about the real problem we all face, no matter what side we’re on: OUTRAGE.
Outrage is the second-most common human feeling. We see infants indulging in it when they’re hungry, and if unchecked, it’ll grow and grow until someone is so enraged they are willing to kill another and/or themselves to quench their outrage!
Did you notice I said it’s the second most common emotion? Of course you did. You read The Casual Casuist, so you’re smart, open-minded, and on the hunt for Truth (yay us!). So what’s the first emotion? Say it with me: LOVE!
Sadly, even though we acknowledge love’s power to heal, when we encounter violence, we often say things like, “It’s not enough,” and I think it’s because we’re socialized to to do so. How else is a group supposed to convince its members to go to war and kill?
Outrage sucks! I felt it every day for years after my ex-wife abducted our son. I was constantly tempted to “solve” my rage with violence. Someone even (unsolicited) urged me to contact a military company to kill my son’s “captors” and return him to me!
That’s when my life changed.
I chose non-violence instead, and it worked. Just like it did for Gandhi. And Estonia. And Latvia. And Lithuania. Did you know that from 1966 to 1999, non-violence played a critical role in 50 transitions from authoritarianism? It helped end the Cold War.
Another reason I prefer non-violence is that it de-escalates a situation. Had I chosen a violent solution to my woes, I would have perpetuated and encouraged “justified retaliation” against me (for my violence), and I’d always be “looking over my shoulder.”
I want non-violence to be my through-line,2 and I hope my decision will encourage others to opt in. I want to be known as a guy who never condoned violence, and even more important, someone who showed mercy and kindness to his so-called enemies.
Think I suck? You’re not alone. Most people think vengeance is okay (just not when someone else does it). That’s why we call it a cycle of violence, not a “one-off.” But no one will survive “a war to end all wars,” and I think retaliation is the recipe for that.
A heuristic is any approach to problem solving or self-discovery that employs a practical method that is not guaranteed to be optimal, perfect, or rational, but is nevertheless sufficient for reaching an immediate, short-term goal.
A through line is a connecting theme or plot used in films and books. It was first suggested by Konstantin Stanislavski as a simplified way for actors to think about characterization. He believed actors should not only understand what their character was doing, or trying to do, in any given unit, but should also strive to understand the through line that linked these objectives together and thus pushed the character forward through the narrative.
This week Coffin Talk interviews Melissa Maker, a pediatric physical therapist and lifelong equestrian who has worked at a therapeutic horseback riding program for more than 25 years. She’s got loads of wisdom, and you can listen right here (or on any app).
Can't post what I want to, but following the "do unto others" would certainly help a lot!