F**k the Zero

The grip of addiction

One thing you can’t recycle is wasted time

Sometimes life seems really short, and other times it seems impossibly long. But this chart below helps to emphasize that it’s most certainly finite. 

It's based on the Your Life in Weeks post by Tim Urban, from Wait But Why.

Learn to appreciate what you have, before time makes you appreciate what you had. 

Try it out yourself at the following link: Your Life in Weeks - Interactive

These are your weeks and they’re all you’ve got. 

The Boiling Frog

The boiling frog is an apologue describing a frog being slowly boiled alive. 

The premise is that if a frog is put suddenly into boiling water, it will jump out, but if the frog is put in tepid water which is then brought to a boil slowly, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death.

The story is often used as a metaphor for the inability or unwillingness of people to react to, or be aware of, sinister threats that arise gradually rather than suddenly.

Scientists point out that real frogs don’t actually behave this way - they usually try to escape rising heat. But the story remains powerful because of what it represents. In life, problems rarely appear all at once. Sometimes they grow slowly: small stresses, unfair situations, unhealthy habits, or toxic environments. We tolerate them bit by bit, convincing ourselves we’ll deal with it later. But waiting too long can drain our energy and confidence.

The lesson isn’t about frogs. It’s about awareness. Notice when something feels wrong. Set boundaries. Make changes early while you still have the strength to act. Because protecting your peace often means knowing when it’s time to jump.

Live Your Best Life

I'm not sure where I seen the below passage, but it is extremely grounding.

Are we meant to mourn forever?
There is something sobering about how quickly the world moves on when a person dies. 

It reminds you that applause is brief attention is fleeting, and the crowd does not stay long.
So laugh while your lungs are strong enough to carry it.
Cry when you must.
Love deeply and allow yourself to be loved in return.
Travel if you can.
Eat good food.
Sit with friends and be merry.
Forgive quickly.
Carry no hatred in your chest; it is too heavy for such a short journey.
Do that thing you have been postponing. Stop telling yourself “One day".
Help someone.
Share what you have.
Give, even if it is small.
All we truly have is now. The present hour.
Make every second, minute, and hour count.
Live your best life.

The Paradox of the Heap

In Oppositions and Paradoxes John L. Bell explores a variety of mathematical and scientific paradoxes with philosophical precision, while retaining a great sense of humour in his investigations. In this excerpt, Bell formulates and works through “The Problem of the Heap,” asking: how many grains of sand does one need to make a heap, exactly?

The paradox of the heap or sorites paradox (from the Greek sōritēs “heap”) - attributed to the ancient Greek philosopher Eubulides of Miletus - arises from the vagueness of certain predicates in ordinary language. In a typical formulation, we consider a heap of sand, from which grains are removed one by one. The paradox arises when one considers what happens when the process is repeated sufficiently many times. For suppose we make the natural assumption that, if we remove a single grain from a heap, we are still left with a heap. Then eventually just a single grain remains: is it still a heap? Or are even no grains at all a heap? If not, when did the heap change into to a non-heap?

We can turn the paradox on its head by starting with a totally bald man, and, noting that any man with just one more hair than a bald man is still bald, conclude that every man must be bald. For a man with no hair is bald, so a man with just one hair is bald, and thus a man with two hairs is bald, … whence a man with any number of hairs is bald.

A related formulation of the paradox is to suppose given a set of coloured chips such that the variation in colour of two adjacent chips is too small - a difference in wavelength of 1 nanometre say - for the human eye to be able to distinguish between them. Suppose that the first chip is coloured violet, which has a wavelength of about 400 nanometres, and the last chip is coloured red, with a wavelength of 650 nanometres. If we assume, as in the case of the bald man, that a chip whose colour differs in wavelength by one nanometre from a violet coloured chip would still be seen as violet, then the ‘bald man’ argument leads to the conclusion that the red chip would also have to be seen as violet.

The paradox can be reconstructed for a variety of predicates—all of which can be seen to be vague - for example, with “short,” “poor,” “young,” “red,” and so on.

A natural response to the paradox is to introduce a “fixed boundary” to the concept of heap by defining a “heap” to be a set of grains containing at least a certain fixed number - 10000, say - of grains. In that case, a set of 9999 grains is not a heap but one of 10000 is. This seems unnatural since there would appear to be little significance to the difference between 9999 grains and 10000 grains. Wherever the boundary is set, it remains arbitrary. A more acceptable, if radical solution would be to call any collection of two or more a heap!

~ From The Paradox of the Heap, from John L. Bell’s Oppositions and Paradoxes - Broadview Press

If you can’t be a good example – be a warning

No one put things more starkly and more bleakly that the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer, often referred to as the “philosopher of pessimism”.

In early youth, as we contemplate our coming life, we are like children in a theater before the curtain is raised, sitting there in high spirits and eagerly waiting for the play to begin. It is a blessing that we do not know what is really going to happen. Could we foresee it, there are times when children might seem like innocent prisoners, condemned not to death, but to life, and as yet all unconscious of what their sentence means. Nevertheless every man desires to reach old age; in other words, a state of life of which it may be said, “It is bad today, and it will be worse tomorrow— and so on till the worst of all.”

If you try to imagine as nearly as you can what an amount of misery, pain, and suffering of every kind the sun shines upon in its course, you will admit that it would be much better if on the earth as little as on the moon the sun were able to call forth the phenomena of life; and if, here as there, the surface were still in a crystalline state.

Again, you may look upon life as an unprofitable episode, disturbing the blessed calm of nonexistence. And in any case, even though things have gone with you tolerably well, the longer you live the more clearly you will feel that, on the whole, life is a disappointment, nay, a cheat.

If two men who were friends in their youth meet again when they are old, after being separated for a lifetime, the chief feeling they will have at the sight of each other will be one of complete disappointment at life as a whole; because their thoughts will be carried back to that earlier time when life seemed so fair as it lay spread out before them in the rosy light of dawn, promised so much — and then performed so little. This feeling will so completely predominate over every other that they will not even consider it necessary to give it words; but on either side it will be silently assumed, and form the groundwork of all they have to talk about.

He who lives to see two or three generations is like a man who sits some time in the conjurer’s booth at a fair and witnesses the performance twice or thrice in succession. The tricks were meant to be seen only once, and when they are no longer a novelty and cease to deceive, their effect is gone.

If children were brought into the world by an act of pure reason alone, would the human race continue to exist? Would not a man rather have so much sympathy with the coming generation as to spare it the burden of existence? Or at any rate not take it upon himself to impose that burden upon it in cold blood.

- From Studies in Pessimism (1913)

The problem with being on time is that nobody is there to appreciate it

Try to imagine a life without timekeeping.
You probably can’t. 

You know the month, the year, the day of the week. 

There is a clock on your wall or the dashboard of your car. 

You have a schedule, a calendar, a time for dinner or a movie. 

Yet all around you, timekeeping is ignored. 

Birds are not late. 

A dog does not check its watch. 

Deer do not fret over passing birthdays. 

Man alone measures time. 

Man alone chimes the hour. 

And, because of this, man alone suffers a paralyzing fear that no other creature endures. 

A fear of time running out.

- Mitch Albom, The Time Keeper

Spiral of Silence

The spiral of silence theory (Maibach et al., 2016) posits that humans are less willing to express their opinions when they believe that they are not shared by others, and this unfortunately influences public opinion.

Specifically, the perception that one’s opinion is unpopular tends to inhibit or discourage one’s expression of it, while the perception that it is popular tends to have the opposite effect. Developed by German survey and communication researcher Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann in the 1960s and 1970s, the spiral of silence theory more broadly attempts to describe collective opinion formation and societal decision making regarding issues that are controversial or morally loaded.

According to the spiral of silence theory, most people have a natural and mostly unconscious fear of social isolation that prompts them to constantly monitor the behaviour of others for signs of approval, or disapproval. People also issue their own “threats” of isolation—mostly unconsciously—through behaviour such as criticizing someone, turning away from someone, scowling at someone, laughing at someone, and so on. To avoid isolation, people tend to refrain from publicly stating their views on controversial matters when they perceive that doing so would attract criticism, scorn, laughter, or other signs of disapproval. 

Conversely, those who sense that their opinions will meet with approval tend to voice them fearlessly and at times vociferously. Indeed, speaking out in such a way tends to enhance the threat of isolation faced by supporters of the opposing position, reinforcing their sense of being alone. Thus a spiraling process begins, the dominant camp becoming ever louder and more self-confident while the other camp becomes increasingly silent.

Some are just better able to deal with the daily punches of life

Pain or damage don’t end the world, or despair, or f**king beatings.
The world ends when you’re dead, until then, you got more punishment in store.
Stand it like a man, and give some back.

- Al Swearengen (Ian McShane) on HBO show Deadwood; S02 E07.

The arc of history runs towards progress, but it’s not a straight line.

An arrow can only be shot by pulling it backwards. When life is dragging you back with difficulties, it means it’s going to launch you into something better. So just focus, and keep aiming.

The Backwards Law

The Backwards Law (Alan Watts): the idea that the more you pursue feeling better all the time, the less satisfied you become, as pursuing something only reinforces the fact that you lack it in the first place. 

The more you desperately want to be rich, the more poor and unworthy you feel, regardless of how much money you actually make. The more you want to be sexy and desired, the uglier you come to see yourself, regardless of your actual physical appearance. The more you desperately want to be happy and loved, the lonelier and more afraid you become, regardless of those who surround you. 

Thus, wanting positive experiences is a negative experience – and accepting negative experiences is a positive experience.

The first step in solving a problem is recognizing that there is one.

 

The Two-Headed Calf

- by Laura Gilpin

Published in 1977 in her award-winning poetry book, The Hocus-Pocus of the Universe, this poem invites readers to delve into the profound depths of its verses, grappling with themes of identity, acceptance, animal-rights concerns, and the inevitability of change.

There are so many metaphors and meaning in it.

So simple. So perfect.

Box Breathing

Box breathing is a simple technique that a person can do anywhere, including at a work desk or in a cafe. It is called box breathing to encourage people to think about a box as they do it.

Favored by Navy SEALs, this technique involves structured breathing that anyone can practice to enhance mental clarity and emotional wellbeing.

Also known as "square breathing" or "four-square breathing," this controlled breathing practice is based on pranayama, an Ayurvedic form of breathwork that originated in India. Box breathing is known for improving physiological responses, helping to calm the mind, and bringing focus.

Box breathing stands out due to its simplicity and accessibility. Unlike some techniques that may require special equipment or environments, box breathing can be practiced anywhere, anytime.

Box breathing involves four basic steps, each lasting 4 seconds:

1. Breathing in

2. Holding the breath

3. Breathing out

4. Holding the breath

Ideally, a person should repeat the three steps for 4 minutes, or until calm returns.

Apologies trip lightly from the tongue. Accountability is what’s needed.

You cannot continue to wait for someone's apology as your permission slip to move on. 

Sometimes – and this is a hard pill to swallow – that apology will never come. Of course it would be nice if they at least recognized how much pain they've put you through. But you cannot continue to put your life on hold, waiting for something that may never come. 

If you continue to live in the ''what could be'', you will never get to experience the ''what is'' of the present moment.

Chekhov’s Gun

Any detail in a story should have a purpose in the overall narrative.

Chekhov's Gun is a narrative principle where an element introduced into a story first seems unimportant but will later take on great significance. The principle postulates that any seemingly unimportant element introduced into a story - an object, a character trait, a backstory, an allergy - should later have relevance.

Chekhov liked to use guns to illustrate his point, but his advice is not about the weapons at all. Writers create a sort of unspoken contract with readers, according to this principle. That contract states that we include details because they’re important. Readers can trust that if we’ve drawn attention to something, it has significance.

Examples from Movies and TV (warning spoilers):

• In A Song of Ice and Fire, Daenerys receives three dragon eggs as a wedding gift. They are supposed to be fossils. Later, they hatch in Khal Drogo’s funeral pyre, and Daenerys becomes the Mother of Dragons.

• Aliens in 1986. Due to her toughness, intelligence, and ability to think quickly on her feet, Ellen Ripley was the only survivor. People scoff when she offers to assist a crew of guys in loading the ship they will be traveling in soon. Instead, Ripley climbs into a power loader and effortlessly maneuvers around important things to demonstrate her abilities. The scene’s apparent objective is to reaffirm her competency while also providing a laugh by showing how she corrects the boys. Cut to the end of the film, a gigantic, towering Xenomorph is threatening Little Newt. Ripley jumps into the power loader, warns the creature to stay away from the girl, and then beats it with the machine.

• Egon Spengler issues a stern warning when the proton packs are first presented in Ghostbusters: “Do not cross the streams.” Egon makes it plain that this is not a good idea. The movie’s final act pits them against an unusual foe: a 100-foot-tall incarnation of the Stay-Puft marshmallow man. They have tried everything to stop it, so they decide to break the single most crucial proton pack rule. The crossing streams hit the marshmallow man, causing him to explode.

• M. Night Shyamalan had a good one in the film Signs, where it is mentioned that Phoenix's character used to be a baseball star and you see a bat in the corner in a shot. All works out.

• Kill Bill: Volume 2 - Beatrix Kiddo is on a mission to find Bill, the man who attempted to murder her on her wedding day with his team of assassins, in Quentin Tarantino’s Kill Bill. She works her way through those assassins throughout two flicks, brutally executing them as she comes closer to her ultimate victim. In one flashback sequence, Bill cites Pai Mei’s supposed Five-Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique. It is a death blow in which someone uses his fingertips to strike you at five different pressure spots on your body and then walks away. After five steps, though, your heart explodes inside your body, and you collapse to the floor, dead. Beatrix finally reaches Bill after much bloodshed, realizing that the girl they conceived is still alive. For a brief time, it appears as if she would forego her vengeance mission to form a family with him. However, this is only a decoy. In the end, Beatrix uses the Five-Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique on Bill, causing him to collapse and die a short time later.

• Nearly all James Bond films - when Q introduces the latest gadgets and weapons to Bond, each of which inevitably come into play at a critical point later in the film.

• Home Alone (1990) Kevin watches TV, consumes junk food, and snoops through his brother’s room when his family leaves for vacation without him. He discovers Buzz’s pet tarantula, Axl, inside. After failing to ascend a shelf, Kevin unintentionally releases it from its tank and crashes to the ground. Marv and Harry, two novice burglars, later break into the house. Kevin foils their disastrous plans with a series of improvised booby traps. Both males are severely beaten and bruised as a result of the incident. However, when Marv grips Kevin’s leg, the tables are about to turn. When the child notices Axl wandering around, he grabs the tarantula and places it directly on Marv’s face. The thief cries in terror, and Harry tries to smash it with a crowbar but ends up hitting his partner.

• The ferret in Kindergarten Cop. Shows up in the first act, you think that it’s purpose is to help teach the kids by being the classroom pet in the second act, then it bites the bad guys hand in the climax of the third act which distracts him long enough for Arnie to pickup his gun and shoot him. 

• The Shawshank Redemption written by Stephen King. The film follows Andy, played by Tim Robbins, who is convicted of murdering his wife and her lover and is sentenced to life imprisonment in Shawshank State Penitentiary. He is befriended by Red, played by Morgan Freeman, who also serves a life sentence in the same prison. Andy is regularly harassed by his prison mates and finds solace in his friendship with Andy. Red arranges a poster and a rock hammer for Andy, which becomes integral to Andy’s life in prison, revealed in the third act of the film.

• Austin Powers' Swedish Made Penis Enlarger Pump. It ends up getting used to defeat 'Random Task' at the end of the movie!    

Chekhov’s Gun is all about making and honoring promises to the audience. It all boils down to plant and payback. When a writer draws the audience’s attention to something, such as a gun, the expectation is that the character will use the gun at some point during the story. If the pistol is not utilized, viewers will be upset, wondering why there were so many close-up shots if it was unnecessary to the plot.

Chekhov’s gun works for viewers because it builds and meets expectations.

Source for comic: Too Much Coffee

Peace isn't just a feeling - it's a currency

 If it costs your peace, it’s too expensive.

Maturing is realizing how many things don’t require your comment.

Disenfranchised Grief

Disenfranchised grief is a natural emotional reaction following a loss that is not openly accepted by society.

What sets disenfranchised grief apart is that it does not bring out sympathy or empathy in others. This sends the bereaved person a message that it is not acceptable to feel or express their pain and emotions.

According to Ken Doka, the American Grief and Loss expert who defined this grief in 1989 “Disenfranchised grief refers to a loss that’s not openly acknowledged, socially mourned or publicly supported”.

He stated that there are five categories of this type of grief. These are when:

• The loss isn’t seen as important by others.
• The type of loss isn’t acknowledged or is stigmatized.
• Some people are not seen as entitled to grieve.
• The circumstances of the death are denied.
• The way grief is expressed is judged by others.

It is normal and expected to grieve after any loss, but not all losses are viewed equally by those around us. Not feeling welcome or comfortable to outwardly mourn or express the emotions that come with a loss can be isolating and can prolong and complicate the grieving process.

Have a look below at Jimmy Stewart reading a touching poem about his dog 'Beau' on the Carson Tonight Show.

All grief is most certainly valid...

Take a break and let the world do its own spinning