2024 Turkey: Anatolian Museum of Civilization (I)

 As hopefully you have seen from these past months, Turkey is a country rich in history - in some ways, perhaps the richest in history I know of (or have certainly been to).  Its history goes back at least 12,000 years, dwarfing anything I have ever been to.  

An attempt to bring that history together is found at the Anatolian Museum of Civilization in Ankara.

The museum encompasses artifacts from all parts of Turkey:  Neolithic, Bronze/Iron Age, Phrygian, Lydian, Greek, Roman - all have representatives here.

Uratu column element, 7th Century B.C.:

Neolithic Tools and weapons:

Reconstruction of an early sedentary house, 9,000 years or so B.C.:

Cave drawings:

2024 Turkey: Atatürks Tomb (II) Changing of the Guard

The responsibility of guarding Atatürk tomb falls to the Turkish Armed Forces, a combination of the Turkish Land Forces, the Turkish Naval Forces, and the Turkish Air Forces.  Like many such national monuments, they have changing of the guard ceremonies.  We were fortunate enough to be there for one.

On Packaging Waste

 One of the rather interesting perspectives one gets as one travels across several countries in a short time is how waste is handled.

I know; it is a pretty obscure subject.  The thing that brought it to mind was coming home and being subjected to how the U.S. does it.

In Japan, at least where we were, items are separated into cans, plastic bottles/PET, and burnable trash.  In Europe, it was cans, Plastic/Pet, Paper, and "other".  In the U.S., it is separated into cans/bottles, generic "recyclables", and non-recyclable waste.

I suppose that it is of interest to me because we (of the Industrial and Post-Industrial revolution) are the first human civilization that has to meaningfully deal with this.

Plastic, of course, is probably the biggest difference. I did not think about plastic in great detail until a visit some years ago to Colonial Williamsburg.  There, the living historian in the leather shop pointed out that until the 20th century, leather served the purposes that plastic now does: it was available, readily malleable, and could be used for a variety of purposes (arguably, wood filled different niches but the same function).  The difference between us and them, of course, is that leather and wood are biodegradable.  Plastic, not so much.

When I purchase any typical item anymore, I have to go through at least one, possibly two, and maybe three levels of packaging to get the item.  That packaging has no inherent value after its initial use except in some odd situations, like building a cardboard fort or saving packing paper to use for rabbit cage lining.  That becomes even more pronounced in the food industry or my own industry of biopharmaceuticals, where we not only want the material packaged, we would prefer the packaging to protect the food from adverse substances or the materials used to make drugs to be sterile.

It interests me because, for all of the cry of "too much packaging" (and there is quite a lot), we have yet to strike the balance of what needs and does not need packaging.  Does my furniture from IKEA? No, probably - unless I want undamaged furniture when I get it.  Does my food need it?  Yes, probably - think of the issue of fruits and vegetables handled by everyone put to the extreme of every food.

I can cut down on the packaging I try to use, but every time I order something or purchase something - especially online - it will more often than not come in packaging that is oversized for the product.

Now, add to that all the money to manufacture the packaging - to make it from new or recycled materials, to form it, to label or mark it, to ship it to where it needs to be used, and then to dispose of it - and I suspect we are starting to talk about significant numbers.

Is there a solution?  I am not sure.  But it certainly seems like an area ripe for some kind of innovative thinking.

A Year Of Humility (IX): A Job Application

 Recently I applied for a higher level position at my current company.

I was notified that it was coming and "encouraged" to apply (if I read my personal interaction cards right).  I went through the process like anyone else - updated CV, Letter of Interest - and off it wandered into the world of computer applications (on the bright side, at least I know it will not get washed out in the initial pass).

At the time of this writing, the outcome is unknown - but there are only three possible ones.  The first is that I get the job.  The second is that someone else in my department gets the job.  The third is that someone from outside our department or the company gets the job.

Of the options, the first is and third are relatively easy to understand and follow up with - the first for sure of course (who am I to complain about me getting a promotion) and the third (someone undoubtedly brought in for greater experience and/or specialized expertise).  But the second - someone else - is the part of today's meditation because it brings up the following question: How do I serve in a current position when I have been passed over internally?

Before you dismiss it as a simple question, I urge you to think back to your own career - to yourself, or someone that you had worked with whom applied to an internal position.  You can remember the angst and concern as they went through the process - and often, the burning blow they felt when they were "rejected" for someone else.

There are one of two reactions we can have in such situations.  The first is the reaction of being embittered, of being angry, of constantly arguing about the person ("X had all the ins") or the process ("They never really considered me") or the company ("They have no intent on moving people like me [whatever "me" is] up the ladder").  The difficulty here - beyond just the initial reaction - is the fact that this attitude bleeds itself into every aspect of work, given time.  I have almost never seen an employee who felt they were (legitimately or illegitimately) passed over not become somehow embittered over time.

The second reaction is that of humility.

It is certain that one cannot always know all of the factors that go into a hire (having been a hiring manager and having been on multiple hiring teams, there are a great many things that make up a hiring choice).  And while I like to believe that teams get it right for the right reasons, that is not always the case - nor should it matter.

It goes back to that somewhat nagging line in Philippians 2:3-4:  "Do nothing from selfishness or conceit, but in humility of mind count others better than yourselves.  Let of each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others." (RSV).  "Nothing" there simply means "nothing" - Not one thing.

What are the interests of others here?  That I do my job competently and joyfully (or at least with as much joy as I can muster).  That I do not hold back one thing that I was doing before I had applied to after the decision.  That I work for my new manager just as hard as I worked for my previous one (who will still be around).  That I do my best to make my new manager look just as good as I did my previous one.

Ultimately, that there is no interruption in the work no matter who is managing me or what position I have or do not have.

It is easy enough to say that for a single position.  It becomes endlessly more difficult when one puts aside the idea that one may never move forward in this job.  And then extrapolate it to every position or role we play in our lives.

Modern society only, ever, has us on an upward track.  Humility says something far different:  "It matters not what you are or what you are doing or even whether the situation gets better or more agreeable.  Humbly work and serve as if God Himself were your employer or manager."

Which ultimately, of course, He really is.

On Electronic Books

 As you might recall, last month I acquired a library card from my local county library, something that I had not owned for some years.  And while I physically checked out a couple of books, the equally interesting benefit to me was the fact that I could get books electronically and read them on my phone.

The interface was surprisingly better than I had thought it would be on my phone: the book was readable and in some cases were far more readily accessible than waiting for the hard copy to arrive and at least in one case, was the only copy that existed.  And so I have experimented with reading books on my phone as an alternative form of reading.

That said, having completed what is the initial "trial run", it is not something I think I will do on a regular basis.

The problem is not really with the actual technology - it is easy enough to use and the book downloads on your phone quite readily and is thus available anywhere.  The real issue was pushed to my mind during a read of Cal Newport's book A World Without E-mail, a bit ironically about how e-mail has made us less communicative, not more.  What I realized, as I held my phone in my hand and read it, is that while I was reading, what I was really doing was training myself to spend more time on my phone.

If anything, I already spend too much time in front of screens. Between work, writing, and the inevitable "just checking" things on my phone, I could easily argue that half of my day is spent looking at a screen of some kind.  That strikes me as not being good for a lot of things:  my ability to concentrate, my vision, even my sleep patterns.

More importantly perhaps, it disrupts my ability to concentrate.

When reading a physical book one has to concentrate on the book - primarily of course because it is contained in one's hands. It is not easy to just "flick over" to e-mail or social media or a bank account; one has to put down the book and go to the next task.  This is true of any physical activity of course:  it is the thing that we are doing and cannot be easily turned away from without stopping the activity entirely.

Reading a book on my phone simply enforces my bad habits of multi-tasking, which themselves are exercises in failure.  It also reinforces the idea that I can split my attention between things and somehow maintain the same level of concentration.

I have three books currently to read and one in waiting.  After that, I believe I will be returning to the "old-fashioned" theory of the physical book on a more frequent basis.  It may not be as convenient, but convenience is not really a thing I need at the moment.  Focus, concentration, and engagement are.

Essentialism (VIII): Essence Of The Essentialist: Choose

McKeown starts this section of the book with a story.

He found himself - at some point years before in his graduate career - at an unexpected crossroads.  Enrolled in law school, he found that he was not really engaged in it.  He was going through the motions, but it did not engage him in any way - it was a "safe" option he was told, that gave him other options upon graduating.

Traveling to the U.S. for a friend's wedding, he found himself stunned by a conversation with a non-profit executive, who made the passing statement "If you decide to stay in America, you should come and join us on the consultation committee."

This comment stuck in McKeown's brain.  It stuck because, as McKeown relates, "he (the executive) saw the choice (to stay) as a real option".  This in turn got him to thinking, which led to him writing out the question "If you could do only one thing with your life right now, what would it be?" Upon finishing, he noted that "law school" appeared nowhere on the paper.

A few weeks later, he quit law school and moved to the US to pursue writing and teaching.

Often, says McKeown, we think of choice as a thing.  But choice, he points out, is an action.  It is a thing we do:  "This experience brought me to the liberating realization that while we may not always have control over our options, we always have control over how we choose among them."

But he - and we - often feel conflicted. "I cannot do this" we say, "but have to do that".  And so, day by day, bit by bit, we give up our power to choose, until all our choices become dictated by something or someone else.

"For too long we have overemphasized the external aspect of choices (our options) and underemphasized our internal ability to choose (our actions).  Options are things which can be taken away, but our ability to choose (free will) cannot."

So how do we lose our ability to choose?

McKeown relates an experiment by Martin Seligman and Steve Maier, which demonstrated that the phenomena of "learned helplessness" exists.  In short, it could be demonstrated that when the power of our ability to affect our environment is lost or forgotten, we simply learn to accept whatever comes our way.  We feel we have no choice in the matter.

How does this manifest itself?

"When people believe that their efforts at work don't matter, they tend to respond in one of two ways.  Sometimes they check out and stop trying, like the mathematically challenged child.  The other response is less obvious at first.  They do the opposite.  They become hyperactive.  The accept every opportunity presented.  They throw themselves into every assignment.  The tackle every challenge with gusto...These people don't believe they have a choice in what opportunity, assignment, or challenged to take on.  They believe they "have to do it all".

Choices, points out McKeown, are hard - especially in a world where there are so many.  But the Essentialist not only remembers they can choose, they cultivate a heightened sense of their ability to choose.

The alternative?  "When we forget our ability to choose, we learn to be helpless.  Drip by drip we allow our power to be taken away until we end up becoming a function of other people's choices.  In turn, we surrender our power to choose.  That is the path of the Nonessentialist."

The Essentialist, says McKeown, celebrates the power of choice, knowing that when the right to choose is surrendered, it "gives not only the power but explicit permission to choose for us."

Application:

The lesson of learned helpless, especially in the work environment, was an eerie reflection of how I approach every job I have had for the last 15 years at least:  I feel like I have to do everything.  It is often, more often than I care to admit, true of the rest of my life as well.  Too often I feel I have no choice, when in point of fact I have simply surrendered any power of choice to everyone else.

"Options are things.  Choice is an action."  That struck me as a powerful thought.  A choice is not just a thing.  Things can be taken away.  But one should never lose one's free will.  Perhaps in this sense, Essentialism is not only teaching ourselves to focus on the important things, it is training us in the exercise (and preservation) of our own free will. 

The Collapse CLXXXI: After Judgment

15 October 20XX +1

My Dear Lucilius:

Cataline, his wife, and indeed all of the trailer park inhabitants are gone.

The day after the trial was, as you might imagine, a bit tense. I half expected some kind of event to occur. You know, the old “stone through the window” or “shot through the window” or even “shot through my head” scenario. None of that manifested, of course – partially, as it turns out, due to a watch set by Xerxes and The Colonel to make sure nothing of that nature occurred (and without my knowledge, of course).

I followed up by going to the trailer park. Here, too, a guard had been set, both by Young Xerxes and the inhabitants themselves. I passed through the guard without incident, receiving a series of head nods on the way. I saw neither Cataline nor his wife; another of the inhabitants brought me a bag with what I was assured were all the items remaining from Terentia’s husband. I did not bother to open the bag; likely any arguments at this point could neither be proven one way or the other nor could they results in anything good.

Armed with the bag in one hand and the wheat in a bucket – older wheat from my stores set aside long ago – and with guards yet again, I walked to the other side of town.

I was met far before the house by The Fashionable Woman and a group which I could only assume were relatives and friends of Terentia. The looks were hard – but not so hard that they did not take both the bag and the bucket and stalk off.

The rest of the day passed in relative obscurity and silence. Once again, Pompeia Paulina and I made calculations with the loss of the wheat. We were still fine, she assured me; there were still supplies at the house of Statiera and Young Xerxes which we could use. We would be tight, but fine – I had better increase my appreciation of gruel as it was going to become more common.

The next morning when I awoke and started to go out to check the greenhouse, a note fell out of the door where it had been thrust. It was simply addressed to “The Judge”.

The handwriting was of a quality that I had not seen in long years, the sort of thing that makes one long for the days when penmanship was an art and an indicator of an individual. It was written by Cataline’s wife, thanking me for a judgment that was as fair as it could have been.

They were leaving, the note said. Even with my admonition that the matter was “settled” they believed – probably rightly – that the matter was very much not settled. And so, that night, they were taking the last precious fuel they had saved and they – the entire encampment and even the owners – where heading six miles up the road to Kentucky City.

They had been extended an offer from The Colonel, it seemed. He did not particularly care about backgrounds; what he passionately cared about were live bodies to help with food gathering and with defense. He had places for all of them; they needed only come.

Out of curiosity, later that day I went to the RV park. Sure enough, there was no-one there, only a series of spaces where the RVs had been. Even the main building, with its bar and restaurant, looked darker and colder than usual. “Closed for Good” said the sign on the door. I did not bother to go in; I assumed that anything of value had gone with them.

On the one hand Lucilius, this indirectly solves a great many problems. There can be no feud where there is no-one to feud with. And while the aggrieved party of Terentia could be offended, they took the settlement without argument.

On the other hand, we are now down another 20% of the inhabitants of this small burg. And beyond that, the burg itself is slowly separating into two halves, with most people on one side and a few people – ourselves included – on the other. Kentucky City has grown at our expense.

It was Young Xerxes, later that day, that let me know from the little he had heard, the general opinion was that the judgment was the best that could be done, given the circumstances. And no-one he had heard from seemed to support any kind of movement against Cataline – or indeed, me. No-one could say I had not been willing to put my money where my judgment was.

Which, to be fair, was the whole point.

Your Obedient Servant, Seneca