Robert Greene describes the Law of Aimlessness as the tendency of human beings to wander without a clear purpose or direction. Kapeleris in 2016 (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/only-three-percent-population-set-goals-objectives-john-kapeleris) wrote that

“Numerous studies have shown only three percent of the population set goals and only about one percent actually write them down.”

J. Kapeleris, Jan 18, 2016

Greene and Kapeleris imply that this state of lacking a clear sense of purpose or direction in life can lead to restlessness, dissatisfaction, and a sense of lost potential. People often experience this when they lack meaningful purpose that resonates with them.

I do not fully agree with this viewpoint. I think that many find it rewarding to have no aims to aim for, to the point that they choose to be depressed rather than get out of their comfort zones. In other words, you might not LIKE your goal, or the goal can be DESTRUCTIVE. You can choose to LOSE.

And you’re totally winning at it.

My reasons for thinking this are two. First, because we all have this faculty called the “will” that always drives one to whatever target one chooses. And second, because all of us have what in Transactional Analysis are called “scripts” or “life scripts” by which we get rewards — payoff or strokes.

That the will is an effective faculty of reason appears to be the conclusion of most philosophers. Most important of these are Aristotle, St. Thomas Aquinas, and St. Augustine, whose concepts differ only slightly.

Aristotle’s notion of the will is grounded in the idea that human beings are rational animals who deliberate and make choices based on their understanding of what is good for them. When a choice is made, the will propels the individual to pursue the chosen good. In this sense, the will is always effective because it follows through with the chosen course of action based on rational judgment. Effectiveness here does not mean the person in fact gets good in a specific way. He might be a quadriplegic, for example, but he could still choose to love and, if only in his mind, he is able to.

St Thomas’ perspective of the will is rooted in the concept of natural law and moral discernment. When the will chooses in accordance with the natural law, it is effectively leading the individual toward the fulfillment of their moral and spiritual potential. He implies that the same faculty will lead a person to the opposite outcome, sadness and unfulfilled potential, as in the lazy person who gets all his Frito Lays and none of the wealth.

St. Augustine captured that last part a little better. He said that the will is not always effective in choosing and pursuing the stated good. He introduced the concept of concupiscence, which refers to the inclination or desire for sinful pleasures. Because of original sin, the human will is weakened and inclined toward self-centered desires that are contrary to the divine will. In other words, the will is always effective but is weakened by having multiple, often conflicting, goods to aim for. A person who wants to be rich but also wants wants to watch Netflix is much better of unsubscribing.

In all cases, the will is not arbitrary, but is guided by reason, deliberation, and the pursuit of what reason determines to be good for the person. Once a choice is made, the will is seen as effective in driving action in the chosen direction. This effectiveness is not contingent on external factors but is an inherent quality of the will itself.

Thus, a person who thinks it is good for him NOT to have a worthwhile purpose is effectively driven to SUCCESSFULLY live a life without purpose.

Transactional Analysis offers another perspective: the idea of life scripts. A script is an unconscious life plan based on early decisions made as a child. Briefly, a script is the answer to the question:

“What does someone like me do to people like you in a world like this?”

The script reinforces and brings about a basic belief, of which there are at least four:

a) I’m OK, You’re OK. That is, I am fundamentally worthy, and so are you.
b) I’m not OK, You’re OK. I’m not worthy, but you are worthy.
c) I’m OK, You’re not OK. I’m worthy, and everybody else is of inferior worth.
d) I’m not OK, You’re not OK. None of us is worth anything.

Scripts are lived repeatedly and produce predictable effects. A person who believes “I’m not OK, You’re OK” follows a script where he takes on jobs, and then does them badly, which predictably leads to a scolding — and verification that he is NOT ok. Or he may work extremely hard and even become extremely rich, but when he stops he feels worthless again. In this case, the scolding will come from himself. Or, a person who believes “I’m OK, You’re not OK” may follow a script where he lives a life of crime, then is predictably arrested, confirming that “I’m the Robin Hood here, but this worthless society put me to jail.”

This discussion implies that every script has potentially an ultimate and extreme outcome or payoff that is sought often unconsciously, even if unpleasant. The ultimate end for

a) “I’m not OK, You’re OK” is a life without love, filled with a constant, unsuccessful quest for a successful and loving relationship. At worst, we’re looking at suicide.

b) For “I’m OK, You’re not OK” the ultimate end is a life without joy, perhaps a life of crime or drug addiction. The person is out of touch, incapable of feeling love, ecstasy, crying, or hating, living in their heads, always thinking, thinking, thinking.

c) And the person who says “I’m not OK, You’re not OK” is headed for life in a mental institution, from an inability to cope in the world, with no control over one’s life, not knowing what he wants, the capacity to think devalued.

Those scripts suck. But the fact that there are so many loveless, joyless, and insane people in the world supports the idea that people prefer to live their scripts than change them.

I therefore conclude from philosophy and psychology that most people are winning at being losers.

And so I think what Greene is describing as aimlessness is to not fulfill a contract one has made with oneself and with society: a stated, or written out, purpose. A person who sets a goal for himself is making a contract that “I will work hard to provide society with a service, society will pay me, and I will be rich.” Or “I will study, get my PhD, train students, and contribute to the good of the world.” As social creatures, we all make such contracts, and so there is a “public” definition of aimlessness, which I think is what Greene and Kapeleris are referring to.

There are numerous examples of failure to fulfill such a contract.

Post-retirement uncertainty, After retiring from a lifelong career, some might experience aimlessness. The routine and purpose provided by their jobs are suddenly gone, leaving them with a sense of emptiness and a lack of direction. They have lost a sense of contributing to society — e.g., their own family. But not all retirees go through this, underscoring again the idea that people who lived life with positive scripts, e.g., stemming from the belief that “I’m OK, You’re OK” find ways to remain relevant and happy in the now.

Quarter-life crisis. Young adults in their 20s can sometimes face a period of aimlessness. The transition from school to the professional world or other life changes can lead to uncertainty about one’s purpose and future goals, resulting in feelings of being adrift. However, many young people recognize that youth is the time for trial and error. If they work in places where failure is tolerated then they’re better off. Though not every workplace is this understanding, everyone can make lemon from lemonade.

Midlife crisis. People in middle age might experience aimlessness as they reevaluate their life choices and accomplishments. They might question the direction they have taken, leading to a search for new meaning and purpose. Again, many people have succeeded through mid-life career changes. A famous example is Col. Harland Sanders, who spent many years doing all kinds of work, including serving in the military. Then at 40, hit by financial difficulties, he quit his job and sold chicken in Kentucky. He was just surviving, but he kept at it. When he was in his 70’s his original recipe suddenly took off, and that’s when Kentucky Fried Chicken became famous.

Here are a number of ways to manage the Law of Aimlessness.

Set meaningful goals. Define clear and meaningful goals for various aspects of your life in society. Having specific targets to work toward can provide a sense of purpose and direction.

Reflect on your core life beliefs. Answer the question “What does someone like me do to people like you in a world like this?” Seek in this answer whether you have an OK idea of yourself and of others. See whether you have an idea that the world has many good things for the taking. Reverse any idea that you and/or the other are worthless, with the idea that you and the others, even with all your faults and weaknesses, are worthy of the good things in life. Reverse the idea that only certain members of our population have the right to enjoy the gifts of the world.

Explore your passions. This is a way for asserting your worthiness to enjoy the good things life has to offer. Get out of your comfort zone! Engage in activities that you enjoy, even when you’re enjoying it alone.

Learn new things. Part of having a sense of worth is being competent in something, or becoming knowledgeable in something, no matter how trivial it might seem. Knowledge and skill build on previous learning. Do this all your life.

Seek competent mentors and guides. This kind of serves as the umbrella resolution. Mentors can help you navigate times of uncertainty, encourage you in times of failure and difficulty, and push you to become better.

Contribute to others. Be conscious of making and fulfilling a contract with society. Engage in acts of kindness, of service, working for causes you care about.

Be mindful. Stay in the present. Most negative attitudes in life come from guilt about the past or worries and anxieties about the future. The past and future also have useful lessons; so, this is an invitation to choose what are useful to addressing your challenges right now.

Next up, the Law of Conformity.

(Q.C. 230822)