When Deepak was asked a question regarding one person's dilemma that involves feeling a bit anxious and out of control on Oprah's website, his response is vague and ultimately unhelpful. Oh, the convenience of ambiguity! You can say whatever you want, toss in some common sense with a dash of spiritual claptrap and sprinkle on a coating of confidence and you, too, can sound mystically profound! Unfortunately, if you were looking for evidence-backed advice for practical daily use, you're shit out of luck!
"Stand in front of the mirror and decide when you want to get serious." Is that not why this person wrote in for help? Oh, I see: they were just procrastinating getting help. I often request advice for a legitimate problem when I'm not serious about it. "At that moment, help will come, and so will change." (Cue puff of smoke as Deepak disappears into the night)
Alright. I'll stop picking on Deepak. Maybe I'm just being too cynical? After all, he may have something here. Let's try it out and see where it goes, shall we?
I stood in front of a mirror when I felt particularly anxious about something -- the direction that my writing was going was unsatisfactory, for instance. Alright, let's get serious, then! I looked at my reflection, dead in the reversed image of my eyes, and said aloud, "I'm ready to get serious...right now!"
If there had been a cricket in the room, now would be an appropriate time to start chirping. Yeah, OK, I've established my sincerity for needing help. So where was it? Maybe I'm supposed to be outside so I can see it when it falls from the sky? Am I standing the right way? I'll try standing more to my left. Hm, nope, still no help. Would I recognize it if it came? I started imagining a small garden gnome waddling toward me with an envelope in its paint-cracked hands -- the envelope would hold the secret to my temporary writer's block. I checked around the room, giving it a once-over look. Nope, no gnomes with envelopes.
Change will come? I rolled my eyes.
Yes, of course change will come. Change always comes. Nothing ever stays the same. For instance, I'm one minute older and feel one iota dumber for having done this. See? I have changed!!
So many people get away with offering bullshit advice like this all of the time, keeping their vocabulary purposely vague to stimulate the reader's imagination. The reader, then, will see the pattern and the solution that they've just imagined, and then credit the adviser for their pseudo-spiritual nugget of advice. Genius! You mean you can write any vague, positive bullshit, conveniently omitting any specific actions one may take in order to improve their mentality or their lives, letting the reader indulge in filling in the blanks, and then get credit for having helped them?! And then these people will willingly pay you to tell them things they already know? Where the hell do I sign up??!
Showing posts with label self-help. Show all posts
Showing posts with label self-help. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Monday, April 18, 2011
Self-Help Claptrap
I am deeply critical of anyone who utilizes vague jargon such as "soul" and "spirit" and "opening up your heart." Sure, their intentions are usually to help influence a person to be kind, open-minded and loving. Their vocabulary fails to stimulate the mind in any real or lasting manner, however. The terms are completely up for grabs as far as their meaning is concerned. People may think they know what they mean, but you'll find that everyone's interpretation is at least slightly different.
These terms are used by well-meaning, dull-witted people (or business savvy people) in a bow-tied package for sale in the shapes of self-help books, CDs, DVDs, and articles. They are not practical and their effects are boiled down to an immediate sense of motivation with little to no sustaining impact. Their advice is to "open up your heart" or "search deep in your soul" or "feel your spirit." How? No fucking clue. They sure won't let you know. Is there some deeply ingrained knowledge that we all possess which allows us to understand exactly what it means to "open your heart" and how to do so? Not really, no. The reader interprets the advice in their own way, just as the writer intended with such vague claptrap, and they experience a momentary sense of hope. What happens the minute they place the book back on the shelf? That feeling dissipates and as the reader returns to reality and they are right back where they began -- with their familiar frustrations and inability to cope with difficult situations or people.
My frustration doesn't necessarily lie with the idea that I don't believe there exists a "soul" or "spirit," nor that the idea of "opening your heart" is a poorly explained approach to making use of the chemicals temporarily excreted and interpreted by the brain. It also doesn't lie with the fact that there are many successful authors out there that understand that this type of ambiguous writing sells well and that they take advantage of such a simple method of raking in the dough.
What upsets me is that so many people are gullible dolts who willingly spend $15-$25 on a single book that either explains absurdly common sense advice that people already know or that takes advantage of enigmatic vocabulary and phrases. Not only that, but they will also spend hundreds of dollars on "life coaches" and self-help "gurus" to listen to their horrifyingly inane speeches and workshops.
Why don't I get upset with the people who spread such nonsense? Partially because I envy them. They've figured out a way to make a decent living with very little work involved. Also, because I cannot fault them for helping themselves, even if it means being somewhat deceitful. Yes, of course I would love to get a chance to let them know that what they're spelling out to their audiences is complete horseshit. But they are not the source of the problem. They are merely a symptom.
The problem? The severe lack of critical thinking skills on the part of the audience. If they were smarter or if they employed their minds a little more carefully, those taking advantage of mysticism would have no audience, they would make no money, they would be forced to actually earn a living doing something legitimate. I can still get mad at them for saying stupid stuff, especially if they are some of the few who actually believe what they're saying. What really infuriates me, however, is the sheer magnitude of stupidity on the part of the masses.
Critical thinking skills. Logic. Reason. Rationality. Learn it, live it, love it.
These terms are used by well-meaning, dull-witted people (or business savvy people) in a bow-tied package for sale in the shapes of self-help books, CDs, DVDs, and articles. They are not practical and their effects are boiled down to an immediate sense of motivation with little to no sustaining impact. Their advice is to "open up your heart" or "search deep in your soul" or "feel your spirit." How? No fucking clue. They sure won't let you know. Is there some deeply ingrained knowledge that we all possess which allows us to understand exactly what it means to "open your heart" and how to do so? Not really, no. The reader interprets the advice in their own way, just as the writer intended with such vague claptrap, and they experience a momentary sense of hope. What happens the minute they place the book back on the shelf? That feeling dissipates and as the reader returns to reality and they are right back where they began -- with their familiar frustrations and inability to cope with difficult situations or people.
My frustration doesn't necessarily lie with the idea that I don't believe there exists a "soul" or "spirit," nor that the idea of "opening your heart" is a poorly explained approach to making use of the chemicals temporarily excreted and interpreted by the brain. It also doesn't lie with the fact that there are many successful authors out there that understand that this type of ambiguous writing sells well and that they take advantage of such a simple method of raking in the dough.
What upsets me is that so many people are gullible dolts who willingly spend $15-$25 on a single book that either explains absurdly common sense advice that people already know or that takes advantage of enigmatic vocabulary and phrases. Not only that, but they will also spend hundreds of dollars on "life coaches" and self-help "gurus" to listen to their horrifyingly inane speeches and workshops.
Why don't I get upset with the people who spread such nonsense? Partially because I envy them. They've figured out a way to make a decent living with very little work involved. Also, because I cannot fault them for helping themselves, even if it means being somewhat deceitful. Yes, of course I would love to get a chance to let them know that what they're spelling out to their audiences is complete horseshit. But they are not the source of the problem. They are merely a symptom.The problem? The severe lack of critical thinking skills on the part of the audience. If they were smarter or if they employed their minds a little more carefully, those taking advantage of mysticism would have no audience, they would make no money, they would be forced to actually earn a living doing something legitimate. I can still get mad at them for saying stupid stuff, especially if they are some of the few who actually believe what they're saying. What really infuriates me, however, is the sheer magnitude of stupidity on the part of the masses.
Critical thinking skills. Logic. Reason. Rationality. Learn it, live it, love it.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
The Secret to the Meaning of Life (for only $11.99 +S&H)
When someone like Rick Warren, author of a (somehow) nationally well-received book, The Purpose Driven Life: What on Earth am I Here For?, states that the secret meaning to life is to serve and obey god (the Christian one, of course), from where did they derive that information? What life are they talking about? All of life, or just the modern homo sapiens? Did homo neanderthalensis or homo erectus have the privilege of being god's creations, made for god's intention to have a species serve him (again, the Christian one)? Or were they failed experiments? Or perhaps just too boring?
Do these people who believe that the meaning of life is to be their god's slave get this information from the bible? Or did their god conveniently speak to them in private, far away from other people's ears? In either case, it seems this "hidden" meaning of life -- specifically the life of those species capable of conscious self-awareness -- must stand trial and answer some pretty basic questions in order to hold any credibility.
The fact that so many U.S. citizens slurp this condescending and questionable information up like so many Catholic priests at an altar boy field trip is ridiculous. Take two minutes to question the origin of this information, and you'll likely find that an overall, ultimate "meaning of life" is a bullshit concept to begin with, let alone that any answer given by someone who is clearly biased in their perspective (or is trying to make bank on a half-assed-written self-help book) is probably going to be full of shit as well.
Do these people who believe that the meaning of life is to be their god's slave get this information from the bible? Or did their god conveniently speak to them in private, far away from other people's ears? In either case, it seems this "hidden" meaning of life -- specifically the life of those species capable of conscious self-awareness -- must stand trial and answer some pretty basic questions in order to hold any credibility.
1. How reliable is the source of the claim (the claim being that the meaning of life is to serve and obey the Christian god)?
2. Does this source often make similar claims?
3. Have the claims been verified by another source?
4. How does this fit with what we know about the world & how it works?
5. Has anyone, including and especially the claimant, gone out of their way to disprove the claim, or has only confirmatory evidence been sought?
6. In the absence of clearly defined proof, does the preponderance of evidence converge to the claimant's conclusion, or a different one?
7. Is the claimant employing the accepted rules of reason and tools of research (i.e. - scientific method), or have these been abandoned in favor of others that lead to the desired conclusion?
8. Has the claimant provided a different explanation for the observed phenomena, or is it strictly a process of denying the existing explanation?
9. If the claimant has proffered a new explanation, does it account for as many phenomena as the old explanation?
10. Do the claimants' personal beliefs and biases drive the conclusions, or vice versa?
(Thank you, Michael Shermer, for this very useful list)
The fact that so many U.S. citizens slurp this condescending and questionable information up like so many Catholic priests at an altar boy field trip is ridiculous. Take two minutes to question the origin of this information, and you'll likely find that an overall, ultimate "meaning of life" is a bullshit concept to begin with, let alone that any answer given by someone who is clearly biased in their perspective (or is trying to make bank on a half-assed-written self-help book) is probably going to be full of shit as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)