And a large part of my overthinking is about, well, life in general, from a big picture scale to even some trivial stuff. I wonder many things. I wonder where humanity is going to go next. I wonder what happens when the universe reaches maximum entropy. I wonder about the types of life forms out there in the universe. I wonder what sort of legacy I can leave behind. I wonder whether Superman would beat the Hulk in an all-out punchout. Many things.
With this sort of hyperanalysis, it makes thoughts easier if they could be summarised into some general theories or some general hypotheses in which to understand observations. I may have launched into discourse/rammed it down your throat before on some of my theories. Some theories are more simple in nature, such as the "Why Good-Looking People Tend to be Assholes." (Hint: They get through life through looks without having to develop other aspects of themselves). And for those of you all set with your counter-examples, I'm well aware that these are generalisations and there are always exceptions to the rule. Regardless, it's my hot blog, I'll do what I want and so I thought I'd take this chance to formalise some of the bigger theories I have.
Pseudo-Theory of Life 1 - "Optimism > Pessimism" or "If you have AIDS, don't just be Positive, be HIV Positive"
Onward, ho!
Utility (U) = a (Beliefs) + (1-a) (Reality)
Where 0< a <1
I would love to be a bit more of an elitist bastard, but I don't know how to type in alpha in place of a.
So, the overall idea is that we get utility (satisfaction) from how we view the world. No one is completely idealistic (a=1) and no one is completely a realist (a=0). As long as one has hopes and dreams, a cannot be = 0, and as long as one realizes that one will die one day, a cannot be = 1.
So, the idealism aspect is measured by the Beliefs variable, while the realism aspect is measured by the Reality variable. And how idealistic or realistic you are depends on a. A very idealistic person will have a high a, whereas a very realistic person will have a very low a. Essentially, we can think of a and a-1 as weights on the variables. So, yeah, how idealistic you are is based on how much you weight idealism and how realistic you are is based on how much weight you put on realism.
The Pessimistic/Optimistic part of the definition comes in next. These notions are reflected in the Beliefs variable. If you are more optimistic, your Beliefs variable is of a higher magnitude (POP POP!). Similarly, if you are more pessimistic, your Beliefs variable is of a lower magnitude (POP POP!). These things aren't reflected in the Reality variable because that doesn't change for everyone in a given state. Reality is reality.
Thus, holding a as equal, a person with more happy beliefs will have greater satisfaction over a person with a lower magnitude (POP POP!) in the Beliefs variable.
We cool here? Following me so far? Excellent.
Pseudo-theory of Life 2: "The Pyramid Theory of Friends" or "Some Friends are just better than Others. Admit it."
This idea is redefined from Bill Simmons' Hall of Fame Pyramid, which ranks the greatest basketball players of all-time. I modified it a little such that it reflects friendships.
There are 5 levels to the Pyramid, 1 lowest and Pantheon highest. So, you enter at the base, Level 1. This is where most people you know fall into. I call this the 'Acquaintances" Level. In it are the people you say, "Hi-Bye" too but you don't really actually care about them nor do you see a need to maintain contacts with them.
Next, we go to Level 2 - Contacts. They're people you don't actually care about but for some reason or other, you need to maintain good relations with them. Say like, this guy's a plumber or that girl's an interior designer or that guy is an economist with the EPU (sadly, this is where I fit in most people's pyramids).
Now, we move to Level Three, or what I call the "Buddies" level. From now upwards, every friend is someone you genuinely care about. So, on this level, you have people you hang out with on a regular basis, you enjoy doing similar things (board games, futsal, laughing at people etc etc) but you don't really discuss personal matters. You enjoy each other's company but it doesn't really get much more personal than just hanging out.
The next floor is rather creatively named Level 4. This is where you'll find close friends. People with whom things get a bit deeper, and someone you feel comfortable sharing your personal thoughts with, but probably not your personal feelings.
Now, we take an escalator up to the top of the pyramid. We're here at the Pantheon level. The scenery's great, you can see the landscape for miles. But yeah, here's where you have your very best friends. Ones you're comfortable sharing your feelings, thoughts, emotions, whatever with. And it's the sort of friendship where, you know the other person will be there for you unless he/she is dead.
Of course, there is friend mobility through the levels. A Level 1 could conceivably rise to the Pantheon, while a Level 4 could drop to a Level 3. It's as flexible as Mr Fantastic.
Pseudo-theory of Life 3: "The Well-Ordered Life Partner" or "If you're a logical perfectionist, you can never settle down."
To the 2 people who have read through so far, congratulations. You're now about to read my latest theory, crafted maybe an hour ago, essentially. Anyway, onward ho!
Imagine you're you. And that there are 6.8 billion people in the world today (World Bank, 2010). So, for the purposes of this post, let's assume you're heterosexual. And let's also assume that there's a 50-50 men-women demographic split. Therefore, there are 3.4 billion people of the opposite sex for you. And let's remove members of the opposite sex who are homosexual (say 10%) and we're left with 3.1 billion people.
Now, assign each person of that 3.1 billion people a number from 1 to 3,100,000,000. By pure logic, there is one person who is definitely the best match for you in the world. And there is another who is definitely the worst match for you in the world. And there's a crapload of in-betweens.
Now, assume you're a logical person and you recognise this truism. And now let's also assume you're a perfectionist. And let's also suppose you're dating someone. Now, the probability that that person, who you met purely by chance (you have to meet by chance whether the person happened to go to the same school as you, the person happened to be reading Palahniuk in a coffee house you frequent etc etc), is the person with the best match for you is 1/3,100,000,000. Hint: Really small.
And let's say we rank the matches for you. What if the person who's a best match for you lives somewhere you'll never visit? Or that person is married? Or that person is 80 years old? Now, let's suppose you're fairly lucky and the person you're dating is the #105th best match for you. And out of 3.1 billion people, landing #105 is already pretty fricking good.
Now, if you're a non-perfectionist, then fine, you can deal with the fact that there are 104 people out there in the world who are better-suited to you. However, if you're a logical perfectionist, you'll realise that no matter who you date, the probability of there being someone better is spectacularly high. And if you play by probability and you refuse to settle for anyone who's not #1, then whoever you date, you will always wonder if there are 100 people or 1,500 people who are better for you than that person. And so, if you're a person who never settles for anything but the best, there's no way you can date that person and be satisfied, given the probabilities.
And so, you're forced to keep searching, only to keep wondering if for whatever you find, there are 150 people better for you. So, basically, there are two ways to be okay with this. Either be
a) Illogical (and not worry about the Well-Ordered Principle)
or
b) Willing to Settle
Quite the conclusion huh? Anyway, I have a bunch of others theories, shorter ones, which I could have (and maybe should have) articulated. But, when have I ever picked a shorter route when I need to say something?
Anyway, would love to know what you think. If you didn't read the post, well, screw you asshole!
No comments:
Post a Comment