When I was in the ninth grade, I was up for an academic award from the Social Studies Department. I was graduating from junior high school at the time, and each department had an award they gave out (there was a cool certificate and, I think, a cash award). It was dependent on a teacher reference, an application, and an interview. They asked only one question in this interview, and it was a brilliant one: "What's the biggest problem facing the world today?" I think they wanted to get the young person's opinion. When it was over, my history teacher (who had become something of a personal mentor--almost surrogate father--to me) told me that I was very "flip" when I answered. I didn't believe it at the time; but it's been a trait that has been identified by just about everyone I've come into contact with, so I've come to accept it.
Here was my answer: "No one takes anything seriously anymore." I went on to explain that many of the things that are considered "important" (such as voting, taxes, abiding by laws, being kind to others) had more or less been reduced to nothing important at all. Taxes, I explained, had become some game in which the player must find a way to pay the least amount; everyone seems to have forgotten what that money goes toward. "Let's go get drunk and vote for Jesse Jackson" was another example I gave. People seem to disregard the meaning behind the things we were taught, as young people, to consider important. How these "role models" perpetuate this behavior is a whole other story.
So I become disheartened at work when I realize that some people are more interested in presenting the appearance of good work rather than actually working well. I become frustrated when I hear people complain about things they do nothing about (more so when these people actually could do something about it). I become angry when I find someone negotiating for a lower-than-reasonable price for quality goods or services (I even keep my pizza guy from giving me the coupon discount; I have no problem paying full price for a good thing, fulfilling my economic duty, and supporting local business). I have a problem with parents who think the rules should be enforced to the fullest degree EXCEPT when we're dealing with their kid. I don't mind when a student gets a "C" or a "D"; I do, however, take issue with the kids who set the "C" or the "D" as their goal.
I recently read an e-mail (a chain letter, but I read it) that made a really interesting suggestion: if everyone bought their gasoline from a company other than the biggest chain (ExxonMobil, I think) and just left them to twist in the wind until their price went down just below two bucks a gallon, everyone else would have to follow suit just to compete (the idea being that everyone avoiding all gas purchases on a single day, last year's suggestion, doesn't have any impact at all; leaving the number one guy stranded indefintely would cripple him badly). I have no idea if this idea is viable, or if it would work; and strangely, that wasn't the first thought that entered my mind. The first thing I thought was this: it would never work. Not because of the petroleum market, or the strategic reserves, or the market share; it wouldn't work because you couldn't get enough people to take it seriously.
Am I a cynic? Look at some of the groups in the world today with some pretty strict societal rules: Orthodox Jews, devout Catholics, The U.S. Marine Corps, . . . . Each of these groups lives under very precise guidelines, difficult ones, and succeeds at it. Granted, each group has its detractors; but the number of slackers in each is a very small percent. Why do these systems work? Because they believe strongly enough in what they're doing to do it well. Because they take it seriously.
Observations, rants, and plausible
deniability from a person who refuses
to be a prisoner of his own world.
deniability from a person who refuses
to be a prisoner of his own world.
The Village
I AM WRITING!
My Screenplay -- Draft Three
I'm currently reading:
On my Kindle 2
I'm listening to:
iTunes Radio
I'm driving:
The Honda FCX Clarity
Monday, May 08, 2006, posted by Q6 at 6:47 PM
4 Comments:
« back home
Post a Comment
You asked why Orthodox Jews, devout Catholics, and The U.S. Marine Corps work. I wonder if there's anything to learn from the observation that each of these systems is very strictly hierarchical. Is fear of punishment contributing? Is the prospect of promotion for those who don't make waves contributing? How much is the individual's work ethic, and how much is "tall poppy syndrome" or group pressure?
Valid points, all. Shouldn't some of those factors play into the daily lives of average people as well without belonging to such a substructure? Without even going that deep, shouldn't people have a stronger "life ethic"? What's the point of going through life just being a half-assed human being? If everyone tries to make it through the world getting the most they can through doing the least, where does that leave us? My mom raised me better than that . . .
Our Moms raised us better than that, in part, by teaching us to accept group pressure. I hope they taught us not to accept it blindly. "Don't call yourself Number Six just because everyone else tells you to," my mother might say, but then it might turn out to be expedient if I were to, for example, stand for election.
"Life ethic" might not even exist on an individual level. All an individual needs is to satisfy three basic physical needs: to eat, to sleep, and to defecate. Anything beyond that is voluntary.
I don't know how people can go through their lives half-assed, but I have to admit that, at times, I sort of coast through my life on automatic. It happens at work more often than at home - or, rather, I notice it more quickly in my real life than in my work life and correct it immediately.
Perhaps it's a question of goals. My goals are not to be rich or to be powerful. My goals are more tempered: to be comfortable and to be happy. Those goals mean that I need to achieve a good work-life balance to stay happy, but at the same time I realise that I need to work hard to provide the financial security that will make me (and my family) comfortable, and that is where my work ethic comes from, and that's what keeps me serious about serious things. It's the easiest way for me to achieve my goals.
Suppose, though, I didn't know what my goals were. How could I be anything more than half-assed since my work ethic would have no basis to build upon? How could I be more than half-assed if many serious choices became arbitrary to me, because their outcomes had no forseeable relevance to my own life? I might as well then accept a C or a D: I don't have to make an effort (more time to watch TV!), and it doesn't make any difference to me anyway.
In other words - yours in fact - the reason that I have any sort of work ethic is that I believe strongly enough in what I'm doing to do it well. Maybe the half-assed people in the world need to be taught how to choose goals in their lives. The rest is automatic after that. Champion atheletes don't win because they train hard every day. They win because they make winning their goal, and training hard every day becomes the easiest way to achieve that goal.
Usch... I'm writing in circles now; I probably need some coffee.