I believe that the central feature of unhappiness is frustration. It comes in two forms - short-term frustration, as in what we feel when we keep dropping things or our car gets towed, and long-term frustration, as in what we feel when we can't find a job or meaninful interpersonal relationships. And where does frustration come from? Unrealistic expectations, plain and simple. When things don't turn out as we expect, we get frustrated. And when this happens for a long time, our frustration turns into unhappiness. Why are our expectations about life so often unrealistic? Because they are formed, at least in part, by our caveman minds, minds that were designed for an environment where social status was critically important.

I'm here to tell you that you do more in service of social status than you would ever admit. Even those who claim to be totally free from caring about what other people think are still aware of social heirarchies and where they would stand if they cared. So what to do?

Expect more from yourself and less from other people. It's an old saying but it packs a punch. In fact, I have come to expect that when I walk out my door, there is always a chance that I'm going to run into all varieties of people - smart people, stupid people, nice people, rude people, considerate people, self-absorbed jerks, crazy people, sane people, emotionally wacked people, perfectly centered people, beautiful people, ugly people, fat, skinny, and on and on. I could meet any one of these people at any time, especially when I'm in a place frequented by the general public, as in the mall or the airport. When I say meet, I guess I really mean encounter.

I have found that having this little realization at the front of mind is unbelievably liberating. When I'm driving, trying to get over for an exit and the guy in the next lane looks me in the eye and stays in my way, I don't get upset. He's a jerk - I expected him. Furthermore, when you realize that people are how they are, you are less inclined to say or do anything to react to them. As a very amateur road cyclist, I am frequently screamed at by motorists who want me out of their way. I know that their screams are their problem, not mine (unless they follow them up with a maneuver designed to run me off the road). I expect that there are people who just go around angry and lash out at whatever they can. That's their deal, not mine. I don't engage with them at all, and they don't frustrate me. This also works when you're shopping or dealing with some company's customer service. You expect that it's going to suck and go from there - cool as a cucumber.

But back to this status thing. Unrealistic expectations about ourselves also cause considerable frustration. If you won't study and you don't like to work hard, you shouldn't expect that you'll be wealthy one day. It may happen anyway, but you shouldn't expect it. If you're constantly doubting your value as a person, it is unrealistic to expect to find that others won't. Again, you may find that wonderful soul who shows you who you really are. It happens, but you shouldn't expect it. And looks, well there's truth to be found about looks.

The fact is that certain things make for what we can call the prototypical beautiful person. This is not my definition. This is what humans want to see. We know because they will, by and large, pay the most to look at pictures of and see movies with people that fit this description. Symmetrical facial features, good teeth, a full head of hair, a slim physique, decent muscle tone, height above 6' (for men), height between 5'5" and 5'8" (for women), tan skin, very little body hair, and so on. This is no surprise. We all know this. I'm not saying you can't be considered physically attractive without these qualities. What I'm saying is that, if you have them, for you, life is easier than it is for those who don't. Better said, you'll be presented with more opportunities for relationships, jobs, and liesure. This is a massive generalization. I know that. But there is truth here, and it stems, most likely, from natural selection. These physical attributes, like the peacock's bright plumage, indicate fitness. Males are tuned by evolution to match their genes with the fittest females possible, and the women, vice-versa. It is no surprise that we are visually aware of physical beauty. So what does this mean when it comes to frustration?

Take a good look in the mirror. Better yet, take a walk into a crowded room where people can get a good look at you as you walk in. If you notice people turning their heads, you've either missed a beltloop or some folks are noticing your physical appearance. If the attractive ones continue to look at you after you look at them, there's a good chance they find you attractive. If they immediately look away, chances are it was something besides attractiveness that caught their eye. If nobody seems to notice you as you walk in (which is what happens to me 99% of the time when I walk in a room), it means you're not pegging anyone's attractive meter. This is not to say you're not attractive. It just means that it is probably unlikely that you'll be sailing through life on your looks. And that's really the point of all this.

If you want to avoid frustration when it comes to expectations of self, you have to have a realistic self-image. If you're not super-attractive but you want to date super-attractive people, you're going to need a gimmick. You've gotta have some quality or qualities that offset your deficiency in the looks department. To breeder guys, I always say that your gimmick is the first thing the girl you met tells her friends when she tells them about you. "Oh he's really funny." Or, "He's the CFO of a big company." Or, "He's a musician." The reality of the situation is that looks are just like everything else - they're cards to be played in interpersonal endeavors. Look closely at your hand and then plan and act accordingly.

In the final analysis, our minds were not designed for the world in which we live. But getting what we want out of life is not hopeless. We just have to see it for what it is. We have to honestly look at where we are and where we want to go and then have the courage to do what it takes to get there. If we expect life to be what it is, not what we would have it be, we will find that frustration withers away, and happiness becomes easily attainable. Give it a shot. It's working for me.

Original Post (including comments)

I am constantly smacked in the face by this country’s determination to deny the truth. It has not always been this way. I can remember being a kid and being told the story of how a boyhood George Washington admitted to chopping down a cherry tree, even though he knew his father would punish him. The point of the story, though I have since heard it isn’t true, was to instill in young people one of the core values of this country – honesty. And it was key that George Washington was the protagonist of the story.

Here was a guy that embodied all of the attributes that exemplified the very archetype of the revolution-era American. He was a genuine war hero, but he was also a cultured gentleman. Most importantly, he was viewed as utterly incorruptible. He had a set of core beliefs and morals that could not be swayed by other personal interests. Indeed, had Washington not been convinced to endorse the constitutional convention when it was on the brink of falling apart, the United States of America might never have managed to come together. There were factions with differing agendas that needed an objective leader to bring consensus among them. George Washington was that leader. All parties knew they could trust him to put the interests of the country above all else. And they could trust him because the truth meant something to George Washington. As a kid, it was taught to mean something to me.

As an adult, I have come to realize more and more that it is precisely inconvenient truth that makes the concept so valuable. That, I am convinced, is a notion that is in need of serious revival these days. Take, for example, this terrorism problem. The patrons of the politically correct society have effectively erased the inconvenient truth of the situation from the drawing board. The facts are as follows:

1. The vast majority of terrorists on the planet are Muslims.
2. We are unaware of any serious threats to our security being continuously articulated by non-Muslim organizations.
3. Muslims can, for the most part, be demographically profiled such that significant proportions of the general population can be considered unlikely to be Muslim.

These three facts are unfortunate, but they are facts nonetheless. Now, when we recognize them and commit to accepting truth no matter what, we have the proper conditions to formulate an appropriate response. That response is very clearly that we have to focus the lion’s share of our threat detection endeavors on individuals that fit the Muslim profile. Once again, this is unfortunate, but it is also the most expedient course of action, especially considering the consequences of failure.

But there are those who reject this course of action because they feel that it will be offensive to Muslims. They are correct, and this is as it should be. They should be offended that individuals who identify themselves with Islam would dare conduct themselves in a way that deviates so far from its peaceful teachings. They, too, have truth to accept - the simple fact that they need to get their house in order.

Who will be the Muslim’s that typify the religion in the years to come? Will it be the fanatics? If it is, the peaceful Muslims will be met with increasing enmity from the rest of the world’s inhabitants. In short, things have no hope of getting better for them – sooner or later, the PC police will be shoved aside by angry mobs. The bottom line is simple - if the peaceful Muslims will exemplify the religion, it will be because they took a stand against the most insidious among them. Truth, in this case, is their only chance. The resistance to it is the real impediment to progress. Alas, this always seems to be the case...

We all know the question, "If a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it, did it make a sound?" The answer is yes. We know because the laws of science that dictate how the impact of the falling tree will produce sound waves do not change, regardless of whether there are human ears present. The fact that the tree makes a sound is what you could call a truth, but is it an absolute truth? It is a description of reality, but just because the laws of nature have yet to fail us, can we say it is absolutely true? No, we can't, but that is no cause for panic. We have to keep in mind that humans are only so capable of perceiving absolute truth.

We are better at starting with a foundation of things we believe to be true, and using those things to infer information about the unknown. We can call this relative truth. That man has to use relative truth to get close to absolute truth is important when it comes to determining the role truth can, and should, play in life. The philosopher, Immanuel Kant, was an advocate of the idea that man can never be certain. He was a little extreme in his beliefs in that he held that man's version of reality is a far cry from the real thing. Thanks to modern science, we know that this isn't true. But also thanks to modern science, we know that Kant was right about man never being able to certain.

Our imaginations and our abilities to perceive reality limit our ability to fully grasp it. Yes, we can see very small things with the electron microscope, but we can't see at the subatomic level. That realm is governed by quantum physics. Quantum physics is where man's perceptive faculties fall short of what is required to truly observe the absolute truth of our universe. To deal with this, we use probabilities to describe the qualities of subatomic particles. That's the best we can do, but it's more than good enough. The laws of classical physics are founded on the conclusions we've reached about how subatomic particles behave, and they have proven to be about as reliable as it gets. So what's the point of all this?

If we accept that we can never be certain, we cannot make the mistake of thinking that this entitles us to embrace whatever version of truth happens to be convenient from moment to moment. There is a method, critical rationalism (sort of a lite version of the scientific method) that can and must be used when we're seeking truth. It relies upon the process of proposing hypotheses, testing them, eliminating the ones that do not pass, and choosing the most preferable from among what remains. This is the technique that scientists have used for centuries to get us as close to absolute truth as we are today. The problem is that far too many among us do not recognize the necessity of endeavoring to get as close to absolute truth as possible. It's absolutely essential to eliminating long-term frustration in life, and it isn't always easy.

Take, for example, the current obesity problem. Here's the truth of the matter, the one that stands up to any scrutiny that can be hurled its way - the human body maintains its weight when the calories consumed are more or less on par with the calories expended. It's that simple. Of course, some folks have faster or slower metabolisms, but the variation there isn't as wide as some would like to believe. Nevertheless, obesity is competing with smoking as the number one cause of health problems in the US. What could possibly explain this? The resistance to truth. Period.

Our population is strewn with individuals who refuse to accept this fact. They see ads for junk like Cortislim and for diets that claim to drop weight by several pounds a week, and they become hopeful that somehow science has rewritten the laws of nature. But even if these work, and I have seen no real evidence that they do, the reality is they don't work for long. As soon as the diet is abandoned, the old rule kicks in and the fat returns. And then there are diets like Atkins and the South Beach diet. But these are simply designed to control appetite by controlling blood sugar. That's why they work - they're based on the fact above. Again, however, as soon as the diet is abandoned, the pounds return. And there's always gastric by-pass surgery. It works, too, because it limits caloric intake. In the end, there really is only one solution - lifestyle change, whether it is accomplished by sheer determination or with the assistance of medical science.

People who are overweight have two choices. Either drastically reduce the number of calories consumed or drastically increase the number of calories expended. That's it. So, the key is to choose which of these will work best and then commit to living a life that adheres to it. But that isn't going to be easy, especially if the people in question have let themselves get severely overweight. Be that as it may, the truth is still the truth. The sooner folks start accepting it and living their lives accordingly, the better off they'll be. Resisting truth, in this case, is a fast path to all of the health problems that come with obesity. It all comes down to what role truth plays in life - either you seek it correctly and accept what you find or you don't. Remember that the next time you step on a scale.

Original Post (and comments)

Over time, I have become increasingly convinced that maturity is a function of how much considerations of the future play into one's decision-making process. Now that I am a father and am able to witness the development of a little human from birth, my belief is stronger than ever. My nine month old son is light years from mature, and it shows by the fact that his actions are dictated entirely by whatever happens to be occupying his attention at any given moment. As he grows, I expect that he'll start to develop the ability to see into the future to predict the consequences of his actions. This will happen as he learns the physics of this world - action and reaction. Right now, he presses keys on the piano to make a sound. Before long, he'll press specific keys to make specific sounds. Then he'll transition into being aware of time. This, in my view, will be the real start of his maturity, and it will continue to progress as the time horizon of his considerations gets longer and longer.

My job as a parent, beyond seeing to it that my son knows he is number one to me and my wife, is primarily to ensure that he grasps the concept of consequences, but not just immediate consequences. If he is to reach maturity, he will have to develop the ability to consider both the long-term and short-term consequences of his actions, which implies that he'll be concerned about the future. The short-term consequence of doing something dangerous may be having a good time. However, the longer-term consequence is likely to be a severe beating. Just kidding. He'll actually be facing some sort of undesirable punishment, and the nature of that punishment will have to be consistent with his concept of time if it is to be effective. I can't expect a three-year old to be swayed by the threat of missing a birthday party that is a week away. Five minutes of time-out (man, do I hate that phrase) will do nicely. The point of all this is that our society is chocked full of immature individuals, individuals who have a very short time horizon.

It is a commonly held view in many circles that poverty is a mental problem. I am inclined to agree. The vast majority of individuals who are poor are that way because of the choices they have made in life. But the point that I never hear about this is that the root cause of their poor decisions is their inability to see far enough into the future. For whatever reason, these people do not respond to arguments such as, "If you don't study for the test you have tomorrow, you won't be able to get a job that is years away." This, to them, is no different than threatening a toddler with punishment that will not take place for a week. So, it isn't helpful to just point out that these people chose to goof off when they should have been studying. And since the problem is deeper than that, so must the solution be.

I believe our educations systems need a time-horizon component to them. At the beginning of every school year, children need to be reminded that each advance in grade brings with it a requirement for more consideration of the future. Again, they should be held responsible for considering time horizons that are realistic for their ages. But the key is to make sure that the concept of time horizons is one that is pounded into their heads on a continuous basis. When children engage in actions that demonstrate their failure to sufficiently consider the future, they need to be counseled immediately. But this has some implications that our current educators seem unprepared to accept.

The current trend in education is focused on the self-esteem of all students, and it is virtually guaranteeing that the children emerging from US schools will be the most immature that this country has ever seen. If failing makes kids feel bad about themselves, and feeling bad about one's self is unacceptable, the only option is to see to it that no one fails. That is exactly what is happening. Unfortunately, the real world doesn't care about self-esteem. It cares about results. That means we have to abandon this touchy-feely approach to education, and we have to do it right away.

The consequences for failure as a child are minimal. So what if you fail a spelling test in third grade. In fact, failure, in the presence of skilled educators, is a good thing. It makes for the best possible object lessons. Kids should be allowed to fail so that they can be instructed as to what they did wrong and how to avoid failing the next time. It is a mistake to assume that failure automatically means feeling bad about one's self. That's where skilled educators come in. When a child fails, he or she must be made to understand that failure is explicable. Rarely does it boil down to inherent inferiority. It is almost always a function of effort, education, or mindset. The educator's job is to figure out which is the culprit and then to guide the student to the solution, all the while reinforcing the time horizon component of the equation. If this simple little change happens, we'll see our test scores relative to the rest of the world come up dramatically in almost no time. More importantly, we'll graduate students with the ability to understand the long-term consequences of their actions. Given the aging population and the fact that when these kids are adults, there will be more retired people than working people, this is something that we simply cannot live without.

I know a Brazilian girl who is attractive, smart, and has a great personality. She's down to earth, open-minded, and accepting of everyone. The problem is that she doesn't know it. Or maybe she knows it, but it doesn't matter. There is something else that hinders her ability to realize her value as a human being. She comes from a poor family. In other words, she started life with very little status, and this has given her an inferiority complex that plagues her even to this day.

The current in thinking in evolutionary psychology is that the human mind was designed by natural selection to be very cognisant of status within social groups. In caveman days, when natural selection was in full force shaping man's ability to survive, being high on the social totem pole translated into a direct reproductive advantage. The humans that survived, therefore, were the ones who had a genetic predisposition to seek and obtain status. They were our ancestors, which means that we share their genetic quest for status. However, now that status is unncessary for survival, the mind's tendency to seek it is causing all sorts of problems. My Brazilian friend is a perfect example.

She is a first generation American. Her family moved to the US when she was very young. Her parents have worked tirelessly to give their daughter opportunities that they never had. So, by seeing to it that she was able to attend college, they are still poor. And because she is human and status is important to her brain, she feels inferior to people who come from more wealthy families. She dates a guy whose father is a doctor. She admitted to me once that she often feels uncomfortable around him, especially when his parents are present. It is as if she feels unworthy of him. She suspects that his family would prefer him to date someone with a better background. This is truly sad.

The fact is that our standing at birth is absolutely irrelevant in today's world. The notion that some people are better than others simply because their families have more money is ludicrous. Yes, it is true that those born into wealth have access to better education. They often have more opportunities in life. However, to suppose that this somehow translates into human value is a tragic mistake.

If you want to see what makes for a valuable human being, go to a cemetary and read some grave stones. Rarely, if ever, will you see, "John Smith 1935-2004, Largest Landowner in the State." They say things like, "Loving father of three" or "Friend to all people." The point is that human value can only be based upon ethics. What do we as people hold as the core of our values? Do we respect others? Are we honest? Do we value fairness and justice? Do we seek knowledge? In the end, this is what brings love to our lives, and this, in my view, is what it's all about.

So, to my Brazilian friend, I say this. Forget about where you come from. Concentrate on who you are as a person. Most importantly, demand that others do the same. Those who would hold your background against you are not worthy of your time, no matter how much money they may have. It is the fact that you are a good person that matters. All else is trivia. Your mind is indeed wired to respond differently, but this is not beyond your control. As a rational, conscious being, you can choose to follow your emotions or you can choose to reason your way to a positive self-opinion. And the good news is that once you start down the road of rejecting those emotions that make no sense, life becomes a much larger place. It gets easier with every passing day to cling to what you know makes for a good person and to reject status-oriented assessments of yourself. When feelings of inadequacy pop into your brain, you simply escort them out, knowing that they are artifacts of our collective human history that have no place in today's world. Pretty soon, those thoughts will be gone for good.

The plain and simple truth is that those who emphasize status above ethics are the inferior ones. Leave them to their games and get on with your life.