Author: jaylazzo

Acceptance before expectation

| jaylazzo

I’ve been trying to apply a little more discipline with the use of my time. I did accomplish something of minor importance: I know what the next publications will look like, and I have the texts and outline. It’s not that hard to see the end. I should have done this a long time ago. I might have come up with more publications if I did, and I would have achieved a bit more continuity with my work.

Another thing I realized is that it is not so much the amount of time spent. What I mean is, it is not so important for me to have a clear budget about the amount of time to spend on a piece of work. If I think in terms of time budgets I start thinking about a given amount of pizza and then apportioning. No. It seems that it is more important to have a slice — any slice, right here, right now. That is, the present. It is better to get on doing something than obsessing over the budget. Perhaps doing so would mean that some things would not get done — now. They could get done later. But having done something now, for say just a few minutes, could result in an output whose significance is not measured in time but in clarity. In other words, I might have achieved a lot in my work even if I just wrote one or two paragraphs of a paper a day, because that would be clear rather than remain nebulous in my dreams and plans.

I understand that this is not a universal law. But it may be an expression of this one: that it is often much better to execute. In other words, the hard thing is to execute. We could say that it is not so much about having a bias for results, but a bias for execution. Sometimes it is better to just jump in with a simple and incomplete plan. Of course, sometimes it is good to have detailed plan especially where complex coordination or other people are involved. People with contrasting interests, expectations, expertise.

That said, we could make an analogy between problems and plans. There are 4 kinds of problems: simple, complicated, complex and chaotic. Plans are the same. Any problem or plan can be cut up to some extent. A complex plan/problem could be cut up into complicated or simple components to be addressed in turn. Even if not having the complete view from the start could mean that certain outputs will eventually have to be rejected, still, something was achieved: clarity. This, incidentally, is something we see in movies. They are very well planned, but sometimes the director will take random shots, cut out great shots, etc.

A bias for action precedes a bias for results. You can’t have results without action.

So, it’s a good idea to look at your problems and your plans and then ask yourself what kind of action can be taken right now. For an experiment that could mean something like “do a PCR” or “design a primer”. That’s simple, they build up experience. A lot of the results from these “trials” were never enter the final results, but the effort is never wasted in the end.

In human relations this is even more true. Relationships are simple, complicated, complex or chaotic at various levels and perspectives. I realize most people are complex, because of different interests, individual experiences and motivations are involved.

It can be dangerous to see human relations as anything other than complex. There are chaotic relations, toxic ones, I have some of those, and for very good reasons I do not want to pursue them beyond what is official. Dealing with people can’t be boiled down to having “expertise”, nor boiled down as consisting of simple issues. People are very complex, not just complicated. Well, people themselves can be simple, but that is probably from their point of view. We can’t presume to accurately predict or read people.

So, how do we deal with them? First of all, LISTEN more than speak. When you listen take note of what is said and what is implied. It is very important in human relations to understand what a person is really asking when they ask you a question or a favor.

For example, a colleage asked me to pray for her because a typhoon was about to hit their province. On the surface it sounds like a simple request. But under that, there is an invitation to pursue a conversation. I addressed the surface request only.

When we see the world as a reflection of what’s inside us, that simplifies a lot of things, for us. We are able to assign explanations to what we observe, and even assign motivations. None of these might be correct because in fact the world is something other than a reflection of what we have in the mind.

Simplifying is convenient for looking at other people, too, with the same danger that how we see others reflects how we see ourselves.

Take this amusing example from The Office. The boss, Robert California, said EVERYTHING IS SEX. Clearly a simplification.

Robert California used sex as metaphor for the Darwinian process of natural selection. To him life is a question of advantage, competition, power, survival, people giving and taking. Standard Darwin. BUT, and he differs from Darwin here, the competition is taking place in the mind. An individual who sees the world as competition sees HIMSELF IN COMPETITION WITH OTHERS. More than that he sees a need to win. Which can be in the form of recognition, respect, being heard. If that’s what’s going on in his mind then we can describe his internal life as really a play where he is the main protagonist.

It’s very convenient and it is a strong temptation to see the world as a reflection of what goes on inside us. This can be very dangerous for all the errors in thinking this can cause. It can also cause people to oversimplify human relationship problems, reducing them to EXPECTATIONS. What are expectations if not how people correspond to your idea in the mind?

Better than EXPECTATION is ACCEPTANCE.

Do the right thing and the thing right

| jaylazzo

Action is the teacher and guide and all that makes things right. Once we start thinking we usually tend to overthink, but it’s more than that. Buddhism provides an interesting insight as to the point where we overthink. In Buddhism, when we try to be honest we cease to be honest; brave cease to be brave; diligent, diligent.

That is, in certain things there is no need to rationalize or explain. Every time we have to explain, we are likely to be telling a lie anyway. We may be required to explain our actions sometimes. Buddhism says that the attitude to take is that the action we took is part of the natural course of events. Meaning, there is a natural response to a situation, a natural solution to a problem, a natural decision to a matter at hand. There is objective morality in the situation itself, without at the same time being casuistic about it. The situation is defined by Aristotelian moral components: the matter, the intention, and the circumstances, and there is no faster way to think through that besides intuition. I intuit the expedient then go. Simple as that.

Thus, the best explanation for a decision is to describe how you envisaged the event to develop. This requires data. It also requires estimating where the decision is within this continuum we call the EVENT.

The I Ching is another case in point: it provides one with randomly generated models. That is to say, all models are valid! But, choosing an oracle means choosing the path an event will develop. And here’s the great beauty of it: each oracle describes a “logical” or natural sequence. Once an oracle is chosen, one also chooses the natural sequence. Since there is no concept of time, one can think of looking forward (prediction) or backward (analysis) or at the here and now (perspective). The point that I find most interesting about the I Ching’s oracles is that there is not fixed “objective” nature to an event. Rather, the event is conditioned by how we look at it plus the matter, the intention and the circumstances.

I add a final component to that equation. The two points of view I mentioned about, Aristotelian and Taoist pertain to doing the right thing. There is, however, the point about doing things right. This is more the subject of art, but the equivalent in moral actions I would put under the heading “ritual”. This could be Confucian, custom, legal, administrative procedure.

In short, to think wholly about a situation we have to do both the right thing and the thing right:

  1. Doing the right thing is to follow
    a. Aristotelian moral variables: matter, intention, circumstances
    b. Taoist natural sequence: I Ching oracles
  2. Doing the thing right is to follow Ritual: law, custom, protocol.

I said that the fastest way to go through all of that is to intuit the action. Of course, one must use all the science and skills at one’s disposal to synthesize available information etc. But I realize that one must not forget that one can choose any point of departure for the point of view and merely follow the sequence. Hence, the I Ching. I should be using the I Ching more often. I do have a notebook. I should use that to record my decisions. Again, “How to do the right thing and the thing right.”

This, however, is a rather personal kind of ethics. I do not imagine that other people will be comfortable with the I Ching, and I’m not eager to advocate its virtues.

The I Ching to me is not fortune telling. It’s all about setting the starting point. For a modeling exercise.

Magis

| jaylazzo

I gave some welcoming remarks at an event earlier. I didn’t really think much about it, faithful to the habit of not giving a fuck. People do not really remember what we say. Pointless, therefore, to ruminate. Next time I’ll get a timer, a person who will remind me. Having to think about time can damage RHYTHM, which is almost as important as the CONTENT itself.

But overall, not very productive today; but hey, one objective met is better than no objective met. I should be happy. I could strive for more tomorrow, which I think I will. Maybe read an article or three.

The hardest workers get the most rewards. Which would be a great thing if the reward they get is the reward they want. It’s not the same if the reward you get is not the reward you will enjoy. If getting a huge amount of money doing something you don’t like pleases you, then doing that thing is worth it. So my problem at this point is that I do not find pleasure in most of the rewards I get by being productive, mainly, recognition. I’m more interested in financial rewards, not because of the money itself, but because I like to keep a numeric score. My favorite video game has always been TAIPAN. It’s part of my shadow that I probably should integrate rather than reject.

I don’t enjoy science or administrative work as much as some people do. But at least I get the chance of doing things that are unique. Classes are often interesting, especially with very bright students. Making simple discoveries in science is itself a nice thing. It might have pleased me to remain a computer scientist; I tend to regret choosing biology, and then choosing a research career. But then again, maybe this is the best place. I don’t quite agree with that when I’m tired and frustrated.

Recall so as not to forget:

  1. Don’t give a fuck.
  2. Count 54321.
  3. Ask: What if I win?
  4. Ask: How can I do magis here?

These habits ordinarily presume that I have a good idea what the will of God is. That’s because the ordinary will of God is in the ordinary things comprising the usual roles and responsibilities. Occasionally that will is not clear, or it might require heroic action. And almost always, whether considering the will of God or the will of one’s boss, they are not comfortable for oneself. The 4th in particular proposes that I can always do more and better in whatever I do and for the glory of God (“magis” is the motto of the Ateneo De Manila University, a Jesuit school.). Doing better often means going out of one’s comfort zone, comfort methods, comfort standards.

I do not question the standards of my profession even if practitioners don’t see these standards in the same way. This is consistent with having values arranged in a personalized hierarchy. There is no question that being the best in one’s profession is a good thing, but that could pale side by side against being the best at running a family and raising children.

Perhaps in the end what is really important is that a person finds himself, and becomes genuine and truly expresses his values. In the end, that’s what makes destiny, and any other way of acting is living a half life. I’m perfectly OK with the idea that I will never be a great scientist, but at least I should strive to not be a bad one, and perhaps a very good scientist-administrator, and scientist-communicator. Most people could be among the best in these “hyphenated” fields, especially when they are already in the top quartile of the hyphenated components.

Start the day with writing blogs

| jaylazzo

I feel overwhelmed by the task of writing some reports. I want them to be great. But, how can everyone be excellent? Statistically impossible, so there’s no shame in doing only what one can even if that was not excellent.

But this report is different: I have only a few months to produce something that can be shown to Congress.

And there are others. This is the publication plan.

  1. Finish the imaging flow cytometry paper and send it to Cytometry first.
  2. Target publishing one of our bacteria (Asia’s) in MRA (GA) including epigenetic induction and BGC mining plus a few other characterizations. Frontiers might work, too. Target that everything for which she has a) antibiotic production phenotype; b) whole genome sequence; c) BGC mining; d) 16S showing novelty; and e) general features like growth curve and Biolog data will be published.
  3. Publish the agglutination assay with Poy and Roanne.
  4. Aedes.

Now, long term,

  1. Exploit the novel bacteria for publications in Frontiers and MRA.
  2. Use the malaria facility to get co-authorship in various papers.

These are where I will publish, and only in these areas.

Now, the plan to work using “work” as “distraction” may not be optimal if I put equally important work on the plate. I think, though, that it could work when one item is almost urgent, if I have a second item that is strategically important (publication), and one or two items of minor importance, for rest. A typical list would include

  1. Almost urgent reports.
  2. Manuscripts
  3. Minor important: blogs, music practice, cultural reading, administrative papers

Looking at this list I see that it is not optimal. The reason is that it begins with activities that, though urgent, are also painful. I think the optimal way is to start with a relatively simple and somewhat enjoyable activity that “sets the mood” for everything that follows. The first activity might therefore be to write for the blog:

  1. Begin with writing blogs then posting.
  2. Segue into the academic writing.
  3. Carry out research tasks as planned and as indicated by the writing.

And if I get engrossed with an activity, no worries. In the end, the point is to enjoy work.

Don’t Stop even when distracted

| jaylazzo

This method works for Elon Musk. He works on several things at the same time. When he gets tired, he shifts, then goes back. Maybe five things; I think that could be a max. I tried it, and I think it can work for me. It’s another way of resting. The point is to get things done. Rest allows one to get things done.

I used to draw everyday for two years. I worked on more than one drawing and learned to draw fast. I’m became less intimidated by drawing even complex stuff. The trick is to do work from big shapes to small beginning with the most interesting subject and then adding details, all without stopping. At the sketch stage, it also means not lifting the pen from the paper, drawing even while looking at the object.

I follow a similar technique with writing.,

Why am I bringing this up? Because it positively impacts work. I just need to be a tad more productive per day to be much more productive in the long run. And I should not be stopping projects! I should be writing an health technology assessment (HTA) report, an imaging flow cytometry paper, other stuff, without stopping. I should be managing the school, setting visions, strategizing, talking to people, putting the HTA and the Cell Society (PSCB) work into it as well, without stopping. Sometimes I can compartmentalize, telling myself that this day and hour I will only do PSCB or HTA or my research. I should be capable, when appropriate, of doing several things, keeping totally focused for a length of time on whatever it is I’m focused on at the moment. At some point I will get tired and I will appreciate the rest provided by the other projects. And if I walk, it is to manage by walking around.

It all works for the greater good of all. I know it worked for me with weightlifting, drawing and guitar. I could fall into overworking some activities, but I think I’ll know when I’m not giving sufficient attention to some. Everything should work out in the end.

Conclusion: it’s not important how I got to where I am, but how I work now that I’m here. That’s protection against lack of talent and energy. I’m not the best manager or researcher or teacher, but maybe when we combine any two I might turn out to be quite OK. What else can explain the fact that I still have a job?

Still, there are some things that I probably should work on that will improve my chances of growing in all those areas. I’m trying to be productive by NOT THINKING. That is: to fully focus not by thinking, but by doing. That’s like not lifting the pencil from the page. When I plan, things slow down and sometimes stay slow. There are times when planning speeds things eventually, but that’s usually when I plan the day itself, or when I’m planning a complex procedure. Still, even when planning, the focus is not so much on thinking while thinking but thinking while doing. I guess that’s what all the productive people do.

And it’s what I hope to do. Perhaps this would involve some kind of kinesthetics. Some of my colleagues would stand up, talk louder, say jokes. I could walk around while I let discussions take place at the table. As long as I’m doing something, maybe even if it is not obviously productive. The whole hour or day can be viewed this way. I’m typing now, but I’m also thinking. And I think better. It’s like a conversation, which often leads to good insights, just because I have those conversations. In big matters or in small, writing, conversation, walking around, performing procedures lead to insights because one thinks while doing.

And praying. True prayer is not planning, or daydreaming, but conversation. Praying while writing is like writing to God. That could be true for activities other than writing. One can pray by working.

Whatever I do, many of them are beautiful; more often, they are mediocre, and sometimes they are bad. But that’s not so bad. The more I fail the more I succeed.

So, the real point is to keep working.

(21 Jan 2020)

Rechristianization and men

| jaylazzo

Once upon a time in the Savannah of Africa there lived a Lion. He was a fierce and majestic creature. There also lived a Farmer. The Farmer had a beautiful Daughter. One day, the Lion saw the farmer’s Daughter and instantly fell in love with her. So he went to the Farmer to ask for his Daughter’s hand in marriage.

But the Farmer was terrified of the Lion. He told the Lion, “You may have my Daughter in marriage, but first you have to remove your claws.” So the Lion went to some rocks and then scratched and scratched and scratched until his claws were worn and gone.

The Lion returned to the Farmer, “See, my claws are gone. May I have your Daughter in marriage?” But the Farmer was still afraid. “One more thing,” said the Farmer. “You can have my Daughter in marriage if you remove your fangs.” The Lion thought about this. Then he bit into some rocks and crunched and crunched and crunched until his fangs were worn and gone.

The Lion returned to the Farmer. But seeing that the Lion was no longer a threat, the Farmer took out his AK-47 and shot him to death.

Moral of the story: Do not surrender so easily what makes you a man.

So I asked myself, what makes a man a man? I remembered this film from 1997, As Good As It Gets, starring Jack Nicholson and Helen Hunt, who won the Oscars for best actor and best actress the following year. In the movie Nicholson plays Melvin Udall, a very successful writer of romantic fiction but is very rude to everyone. One day Udall meets with his publisher. The receptionist was swooning as she watched.

“Mr Udall,” the mesmerized receptionist said as Udall was leaving, “You can’t imagine what your work means to me.”

“What does it mean to you?” he asked.

“How do you write women so well?” she asked.

“I think of a man. Then I take away reason and accountability.”

I remember the movie because of that line.

I think so many men in our world today have sacrificed reason and accountability in exchange for trifles: position, comfort, being liked. Men sacrifice reason when they do only as they feel, when they compromise their principles, when they lie to themselves and to others, and when they give their lives to an ideology. Men sacrifice accountability when they make excuses, saying one word more than a yes or a no where no explanations are asked for, when they avoid responsibility and avoid work, when they blame and look down on others, while contributing nothing themselves.

Men can also fail by excess, when they overthink, or fail to forgive or when they say yes to everything. Men also fail by getting stuck in the past or in the future. Past accomplishments are irrelevant. Whatever great things the Lion may have done in the past, none of it saved him, nor did dreaming of his future wife.

I believe like many others that the rechristianization of society begins with making men masculine, and women feminine. This is not to restrict the problem to gender, even when talking high level about the theology of the body. It is about bringing back the claws and the fangs that SHOWED the ancient Romans and the barbarians that Christian men and women meant business, and as a consequence, attracted them to God. Christianity is NOT about being nice. Jordan Peterson said that “Nice guys are more agreable, and agreableness is generally not a good trait if you want to come far in life.” He did not mean we should be rude like Melvin Udall, but that we should be dangerous.

Dangerous against the forces of evil. How can you be a danger to ignorance? By telling the truth! How can you be a danger to mediocrity? By working hard and well. How can you be a danger to cruelty? By forgiving. How can you be a danger to blasphemy? By doing the norms especially when they are most inconvenient. Indeed, the Cure of Ars was gentle and patient and meek and humble and holy, but he was dangerous on his death bed. In fact he was so dangerous that the Devil, that roaring lion who himself had never given up his fangs and claws, had to do something. He did manage to burn his table — we saw the marks when we went on an excursion to Ars — but Jean Marie Vianney was not intimidated.

“Dominus fortitudo mea, et illuminatio mea, et salus mea, quem timebo?” Perhaps we have few vocations because there are fewer and fewer real men (and more and more emasculated men). “Dominus fortitudo mea, et illuminatio mea, et salus mea, quem timebo?” Do we really mean that? But then, it only takes a few good men to make the whole dough rise, as long as those men are stubborn, do not give up their claws and fangs, and live their faith. These are the ones who spend most of their time hunting in the streets or confessionals, or sharpening their claws and fangs in some office or classroom.

The Christian world began with 12 good men who drew their strength from God.

Trivia. As Good As It Gets was nominated for Best Picture in 1998, together with Titanic, Good Will Hunting, The Apostle, LA Confidential, and The Full Monty. The winner was Titanic, starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslett. Kate Winslett is from a small town west of London called Reading.

Friendship and indifference

| jaylazzo

It is natural that we give our best gifts to those we call friends. A friend is the same soul in two bodies. Our gift to them will in essence be our lives. We give them ours, they give us theirs.

There are other people in our life who are not at that level. These we call associates, assignments and mentors.

Associates are those with whom we share schedules, common goals and interests. These are the guys you will take coffee with but not invite you to your house, nor you they. We do not give our life to them, but we do give them time and vice versa. Some of them will become friends later. Ask the Holy Spirit to mark them out. In fact, He is already doing that by putting some of our associates in a position where we could take a step or two towards friendship.

Then there are two kinds of people where the gift giving is one way. Assignments are the people we are tasked to help. Like the demoniac of was to Jesus, you know, that incident with the pigs. Assignments don’t give us gifts other than the joy of knowing we made some difference in their life. And there are the mentors, who give us the gift of their expertise; the gift we give them is the joy of seeing that we listened. Assignments and mentors do not often become friends, but we can do a great apostolate with them. Just think of your mentee as that demoniac who Jesus turned into a disciple without being his friend.

We don’t treat everyone the same, but we treat everyone right. The opposite, the worst way to treat people is to be indifferent.

The devil hates what we are doing. Seeing that most of us will not be tempted to do great evils, he instead chooses a much more effective tactic: he will tempt us to be indifferent.

Indifference means “no difference”. It is a state where the line is blurred between good and evil, between useful and useless, where we look on a suffering victim and don’t care. Indifference turns the victim’s suffering into nothing; not a good thing or a bad thing, just nothing. With enough indifferent people you get a society like Nazi Germany.

Hence, this quote from Elie Weisel, Romanian-American author and survivor of the Auschwitz concentration camp: “The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness, it’s indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it’s indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it’s indifference.”

Indifference is worse than ignorance.

The devil has many points of attack. There’s pride and its progeny: fear of ridicule, fear of rejection. There’s natural tiredness. And, least problematic are lack of knowledge, competence and of means. I say this is the least problematic of all because Jesus proved it in the feeding of the 5,000: he fed them with truth as well as bread. Our Father proved it, and the proof is sitting on your left and on your right.

How do we reverse indifference? Bring back the fun. And not just the fun: bring in the sadness, the rage, the excitement, the nerves — all the colors and emotions that prove you HAVE a LIFE. Three ways.

First, work like a painter. Indifferent people are worried sick about making mistakes. A good painter in contrast keeps the brush moving regardless. We just keep on dealing with people and running our projects, making adjustments along the way. We keep fighting our interior battles without obsessing over every outcome. Action is the best motivator.

Second, work like a hunter. Indifferent people are in a way lazy. The devil is not; he is a roaring lion always on the hunt. We can’t be anything less. We must learn lion tactics. Lions plan in broad strokes leaving the tactical details open to circumstances. “Do not worry about how or what you are to say,” Matthew 10:19. Another lion tactic: they do not use drones. Instead, they apply all their physical, intellectual and emotional resources to the hunt directly. It’s dangerous work, they only capture 47% to 63% of their prey and a kick from a gazelle can shatter the jaw. What follows is death by starvation. Man, a lion’s SOUL is rivetted to its WORK!

Third, work like an athlete. Indifferent people are proud and self sufficient. But, a good athlete is disciplined and reflective. Work even though you don’t feel like it. Show up for the mass in the morning even with a hangover, show up for your appointments even if you have to i dunno what. Like David before Goliath, face your demons man with all your defects, tiredness, incompetence, and fears. Let’s examine our conscience. Then let us open up to our coaches and let us accept correction especially on those points we think we are already good at. Notice which of your team mates needs help. Assist. Sub. Recruit. Spot. Gino talked about much of this yesterday. Heard of the phrase “lift to failure”? It comes from weightlifting. Its when a lifter, on his last rep, goes for a weight that he is likely to fail 50 50. Its usually something done in training. What was remarkable about Heidilyn Diaz when she won gold was that she used it in COMPETITION. On her last attempt she went for broke and lifted a weight that was heavier than anything she had lifted before even in training. But she was also lucky in that the Chinese frontrunner failed her last 2 attempts. Weighlifting requires absolute focus. Miss China was probably thinking about Xi Jin Ping.

Painter. Hunter. Athlete. Bring the fire back to the fight. More you fight, more you fail, more you win.

Having ended with athletics, let us now begin to wind down this talk with a story that takes place where many athletes train. On a beach.

Once upon a time a young man was walking along a beach. There were many starfish on the dry sand. He picked up one and threw it back to the sea. Then he picked another and threw it back to the sea. And so on.

Sitting on a piece of driftwood was a young boy. He was watching the man and became very curious. The boy went up to the man and asked him, “What are you doing?”

“I’m saving this starfish’s life,” said the man, holding up the starfish that was in his hand.

“But what does it matter? You can’t save all of them!” exclaimed the boy pointing to the vast expanse of sand and starfish.

“I know,” said the young man. “But it matters to this little guy” and throws the starfish to the boy’s face.

We spoke about the world, about our region, about our place at work and our mission in it as members of the Work. Make no mistake: God wants good works and therefore He wants zealous action. Ask: Dear Holy Spirit, what problem in the world do You want me to solve, ecce ego and have mercy on me for my past irresponsibility. Grant me your grace to acquit myself honorably before you should I die today. Wrote the Brazilian poet Vinicius De Moraes: A coisa mas que linda que ha no mundo e viver cada segundo como nunca mas. The most beautiful thing in this world is to live every second like it was your last.

Trivia: Goliath was absolutely terrifying from a distance but not up close. Since the first article in the Indiana Medical Journal in 1960, experts think he had acromegaly. This form of gigantism is caused by a tumor of the pituitary gland. The tumor also compresses the optic nerve causing double vision and extreme nearsightedness, consistent with the biblical account. David, the shepherd, could see from afar that this beast was no wolf. Still, he could not have beaten Goliath in hand to hand combat. He used artillery instead. Not the puny slingshot kids use. David’s sling was 5 feet long that you swing like this. It is accurate and deadly. Experts have killed birds in flight, and killed or maimed enemies to about 200 yds. Glued to his spot by 100 pounds of arms and armor and unable to use his strengths, Goliath was a sitting duck.

Family Gatherings

| jaylazzo

One of my favorite media personalities is Michael Franzese. Franzese, 71, was a former boss of the Colombo crime family in the 80’s in New York. Taking advantage of a loophole, he used to make about $8M a week defrauding the government of taxes from every gallon of gasoline sold by his associates. After serving 45 years, he became a writer, motivational speaker, and influencer with 975K subscribers on his Youtube channel.

Franzese has 7 children. What comes to my mind is this: “Does he run his blood family like his crime family?” Interestingly, there are things in common. In particular, both families have a similar way of resolving issues. They have what he calls sit-downs.

A sit-down is when a group of people sit or stand around a table or water dispenser, or in a car, they smoke, eat, whatever, and discuss. A sit down is quite informal. It is a scene of both humor and high drama, but it is efficient because you have clarity on the issue, cut to the chase, and reach a resolution. In his book “I’ll Make You An Offer You Can’t Refuse” Franzese says that the mafia do not practice what we usually consider meetings: written agendas, Robert’s Rules of Order, etc. Another thing unique to a sit-down is that everyone invited has a direct stake in the issue at hand and contributes directly to the outcomes.

As Franzese explains, mastering the sit-down involves five simple steps:

Do as much research as you can of what the other party cares about.

Think before you speak.

Do not let your ego get the best of you.

Listen more, talk less. Be strategic on when to comment.

Be respectful.

You realize that’s how good family get-togethers work. That’s where the creative ideas begin. That’s where commitment is sealed. Parental meetings are for strategy and logistics, but tactics, where the rat bites the dust, that’s for the sit-downs.

Family gatherings, which include meals, mass, rosaries, reunions, build trust, friendship, they let you know who needs help, who’s having problems, who has solutions. They let you see how people think and react, helping you optimize how you think and react, and how you persuade and comfort. They remind you that there are people who have your back! If families were all about having a place to stay and people to meet, they wouldn’t be attractive; they would not even make personal interior struggle safe. They wouldn’t be effective in forming character. Without family gatherings one loses touch, one loses people, one loses soul. At worst, one can become hikikomori.

What are hikikomori? These are people who have withdrawn from society. In Japan, they number between 1.5 to 10M. Aspects of Japanese culture, like extreme competitiveness, contribute. Covid made it worse. Hikikomori are mostly men, loners, spend all their time locked up in their rooms playing video games, watching manga or worse, unemployed, talk to no one, take their meals from plates left outside their doors by their parents, who on their part have income or savings. This lifestyle brings significant slowly strangles mind and body. Hikikomori contribute nothing, solve nothing, the economic losses are inestimable.

I would rather be of a good family than Cosa Nostra. Mafiosi HAVE a LIFE, good families have LIFE ITSELF! But I would rather be mafia than hikikomori: hikikomori live just to breathe.

They bring to mind a song, “Believe” by the British rock group Bravery. One verse goes:

There’s a smell of stale fear
And it’s reeking from our skins
The drinking never stops
Because the drinks absolve our sins
We sit and grow our roots into the floor
But what are we waiting for?
What are we waiting for?

Boredom, followed by despair. In the ultimate, physical suicide follows spiritual suicide.

Once, a student came to me for advice after a Zoom class. Her name’s Lyra, a fan of anime, an introvert; for all these reasons, a potential hikikomori although she’s worlds away from becoming one. I emphasized to her that the most dangerous thing is to live inside one’s head. I said, even with this pandemic, you must find time to be with friends! If you don’t externalize what’s in your head, it will rot there and one day it will kill you.

Love the sit down, in whatever form it comes. Thank God for giving us this priceless treasure of family.

I began with one mob boss, I’ll end with another.

It’s a scene at the start of Godfather I. It’s Don Vito Corleone’s daughter’s wedding day. On this day, a person may ask the Don any favor and the godfather would grant it.

Of those lining up, the most colorful by far is Luca Brasi, a giant of a man, the most violent, most diabolical mafioso who ever lived, but who is so intimidated by the Godfather that he stutters and has to read from a piece of paper what he had to say — Brasi doesn’t know that he is the only man in the world the Don himself is afraid of. Next to ask a favor is Johnny Fontane. Fontane is the Don’s godson, a singer and actor. He comes to ask the Don to use his influence to get back his role from a movie producer who fired him and who was determined to keep Fontane out of Hollywood forever.

The Don asks for the name of the producer. After giving it, Fontane says in despair, “I don’t know what to do.”

The Don takes Fontane by the shoulders, shakes him violently, slaps the guy: “YOU CAN ACT LIKE A MAN! What’s the matter with you? Is this what you’ve become, a Hollywood finocchio who cries like a woman? “Oh, what do I do? What do I do?” What is that nonsense? Ridiculous!”

Then, with affection, he quietly asks Fontane, “You spend time with your family?”

“Sure, I do.”

“Good. A man who doesn’t spend time with his family can never be a real man,” says the Don. Then he tells Fontane, “I will make him an offer he can’t refuse.” We know something violent is about to happen.

There’s a part of that scene that I think should be mentioned. Just before he asks Fontane about his family, the Don made sure that his son and successor, Sonny, was in the room. He wanted Sonny to see that family was the keystone in all of his thinking.

Thus, even in his twisted way, the Don espoused the sure conviction that he will kill or be killed for his family. How many honest, God-fearing people can say that, figuratively of course, about their families?

Trivia: the actor who played Luca Brasi was a real life mafioso named Lenny Montana who specialized in arson. He told the cast and crew of The Godfather how he would tie a tampon to the tail of a mouse, dip it in kerosene, light it, and let the mouse run through a building, or he would put a lit candle in front of a cuckoo clock so that when the clock’s bird would pop out the candle would be knocked over and start a fire. A professional wrestler before joining the Colombo crime family, he had always wanted to become an actor. Montana was so awestruck by Marlon Brando that in this scene his nervousness and stuttering were genuine. After the Godfather he became a full time actor. Lenny Montana died of a heart attack in 1992 age 66.

Mind Movies

| jaylazzo

I learned a new concept today: the Mind Movie. This refers to a “movie” that depicts me in my ideal world with ideal conditions and ideal relationships. I play this movie regularly.

It’s my biggest obstacle to growth.

How would I describe me in that movie? There I get everything done in a short time. Everything works! My understanding is perfect, my reasoning is perfect; when I conclude I’m right I AM right. Plans go as planned, people perform as expected. People are nice and respectful. I am listened to and appreciated, applauded. Nature cooperates. God solves all my problems.

And so when I fail or it’s pointed out to me that I did something wrong, I am hurt. I avoid occasions where this vision of perfection is threatened. I know I’m not perfect. Like I know that the actors in a movie are flawed, but their roles are perfect, they say the right things, and everything works out in the end. There is as much justice in my movie as there is in fiction.

The reality is very much different. Yet it still bothers me that the world can be so flawed and unfair, that I could be wrong and worse than wrong: unquestioned. I know I’m not that good, but I try to avoid situations like corrections and reviews or even simply being questioned that would expose my flaws, especially in public.

I really don’t know how to get rid of this Movie. Is it programmed? Is it ingrained? Can I erase it and write over it?

I think that much of it is programmed and may be difficult to reverse. However, I could attack SMALL areas. For example, I could deliberately seek correction and criticism during meetings. I always ask at the end “Did I forget anything?” Another way is to thank people for their corrections; better yet, work my way towards actively seeking correction.

Validation is just another word for reality matching the movie. I could try not to seek validation. This would mean experiencing the world just as it is, accepting it for what it is, and being THANKFUL just for being in that world.

I don’t know if it’s better to replace one fiction with another. Still, that’s a powerful thought: I’m ultimately just substituting one value for another. Maybe a movie is just a summary of our values at a given time. It seems to me that a more “natural” way of growing is to 1) experience the current movie for what it offers; 2) make slight adjustments; and 3) use the new version as the start of a new iteration. I probably will fail better by balancing rather than eliminating the movie.

Balancing probably begins by identifying what a new situation would be in the movie and accepting that it’s just as good that it NOT match the script. For example, what goes in in my head when I begin to ask for something: I always imagine getting it. Don’t take no for an answer. Which is usual answer, of course. But the point is it may be better not to expect anything at all. Tell myself that I’m not there to persuade, but to express my needs, opinions, feelings, and probably learn a thing or two from feedback — including a rejection.

Bern’s theory of Transactional Analysis sheds light on a way forward, by providing a taxonomy of scripts. We all understand “games”, “rituals” and “pastimes” instinctively. But it might be helpful not just to identify that I’m engaged in a pastime, but that it has a script. Maybe I’m misidentifying scripts or the script is wrong. Then path to growth is to simply identify where the cross-talk is taking place.

Transactional analysis begins with the idea that we may communicate with another as a Parent, an Adult, or a Child. It’s convenient to think of Adults as rational, Parents dogmatic, and Children emotional. In a communication setting or transaction, one party may speak to another as a Parent (dogmatically) and the other party might respond as another Parent or like a Child (emotionally). A cross talk happens when A speaks to B as a parent speaks to a child, but B responds to A as an adult responds to another adult. According to transactional analysis theory, this so-called “cross-talk” is the beginning of miscommunication.

Miscommunication can also come from not following standard communication practice. For instance, when a service is requested, an Adult-Adult script that calls for negotiation is the rule. However, that could turn into a cross talk when the one requesting for the service responds as a child when suddenly he is asked for more information! A child normally asks and then gets; a thesis defense he does not expect. Many children do not manage to get out of that script even years into adulthood. I’m happy though that a negative reaction to being asked for more information may simply be a script about the response of a Child to a request by an Adult. One adjustment is to come with a script on negotiation, an Adult-Adult interaction.

I don’t know how to best incorporate this system of identifying, learning, and adjusting scripts. But the basic idea is there: know how to identify, then adjust. Avoid the cross-talk.

How else might I use this understanding?

First, I’m a Child in my Movies! I think “Child” is the more common result of programming from parents. I feel this most acutely in the presence of authority, again evidence of programming. On the outside I might act and think and feel as a Parent or Adult, but my feelings may still those of a Child whose parents always cleaned up after him, who didn’t have to work, and whose mistakes were corrected by others.

There. I don’t think there’s really much more outside of that.

Another evidence of a different kind programming, one that comes from inborn character traits, is that I feel attracted to situations that a Child would be attracted to, like brainstorming and innovation, creativity and imagination. But I’m uncomfortable when reality sets in, as in when I have to clean up the mess and put the finishing touches. I also become uncomfortable when my “toy”–my plan, my idea, my instrument–becomes another’s. Then I get rid of the toy. When things start to become difficult, as any Adult would expect, I also tend to become detached. I try my best to delay and procrastinate, because the issues are too large for a Child.

Faced with ‘genetic’ roots, the best way to respond is simply to adjust.