Matt Metzgar

TV vs People

Here is a longer paper(pdf) about how television viewing affects life satisfaction.  Only economists would phrase things this way, but they believe that tv replaces "relational goods" or in other words, relationships.

The paper goes on to state that tv creates a network of virtual relationships that actually replaces real social relationships.  This can help explain why rising incomes in developed countries do not lead to more happiness.  People spend their money and time on tv-type entertainment and invest less in relationships.

The Meaningful Path

Occassionally, I meet older couples who don't have children, and it always strikes me as a strange situation.  It's one thing if a couple has trouble conceiving or isn't settled yet.  But it's an entirely different situation when a couple "chooses" not to have children.

I put "chooses" in quotes because evolution really didn't set up children as a choice.  Evolution made sex fun, and then voila, children appear nine months later.  In other words, it is not supposed to be an intellectual choice; there is no mental framework for weighing the costs and benefits of children.  It is just a natural outcome of a relationship.

I used to think having children was strange, now I think not having children is strange.  Having a child around feels very, very natural.  And whatever preconceived ideas I had about children have discarded; parenting is mostly a visceral, emotional process.  And I love it.   

Seeing Red

Last weekend, I saw the local Gap store had a number of advertisements for its "Red" product line.  Red was launched in 2006 to help fight HIV in Africa.

I've read where articles which are critical of the Red effort.  They believe that companies are using the Red idea to help increase sales and build their company image.

My thought is: who cares?  It really doesn't matter why a company engages in charitable efforts, as long as they do it.  Whether it's to boost sales or its true social responsibility, the bottom line is that money gets raised for charity.

So far Red has raised over $45 million, so I would say the campaign has been successful.  How great would it be if more companies created charitable product lines?  This isn't communism, companies shouldn't be forced to give back.  But a company that is doing well should be encouraged (prodded?) to give back to the community.

Bad Philosophies

I think philosophy is an underdeveloped subject in general.  I took a couple of philosophy classes back in college, and they were pretty bad.  Rehashing Greek philosophy, lots of confusing jargon - none of it seemed very usable in the day-to-day sense.

I'm waiting for someone out there to modernize philosophy, to make it more scientific and applicable.  I do think that the beliefs that make up a person's philosophy (whether conscious or not) ultimately determine the direction of their life.  I almost think it's like a mathematical formula, such that if a person believes "x", then their life will turn out a certain way in the long run.

That's the tricky part about a life philosophy, is that you need a long time horizon to see the results of it.  Many people can achieve success in the short run, but end up disintegrating over the years.  A lot of this is predictable, too - you can see where the lack of a proper foundation/philosophy will eventually yield bad results.

Charismatic Leaders

For some time, I have had a theory about why certain "motivational gurus" are successful.  The person that first comes to mind is Tony Robbins, of late-night infomercial fame.  This guy has made millions selling his products, yet it's unclear exactly what he's selling (and why he's successful).

This research paper answers my question.  The paper shows that leaders who are masters of positive emotional expression have the most impact on their followers.  When a leader expresses positive emotion, a process of "mood contagion" takes place that lifts followers' spirits.

All this makes sense to me and gets to the core of what Tony Robbins and others are selling: a psychological pump-up.  Robbins' advice is mostly common sense, dealing with focusing on your goals, modeling successful people, etc.  I fail to see how this advice alone has led him to riches.  It is more likely that his expressive style of communication lifts the moods of those listening to him, and this does indeed have value.

After all, we're all chasing positive moods, or what psychology calls "positive affect."  This explains why the average person would much rather listen to Bill Clinton give a speech than George W. Bush, even if the words were exactly the same.  One can arouse emotion fairly well and the other cannot.

Maybe Tony Robbins should run for office....

Elvis and Evolution

I had to give a "motivational speech" at work, but I instead decided to look at motivation from a different angle.  Biologists show that all animals (humans included) have a natural drive towards "protean behavior" - or in simpler terms, creative behavior.

I decided to do a Powerpoint about the natural urge for creativity and the problems that can happen when that drive is blocked, such as in the life of Elvis Presley.  Here's the short Powerpoint. 

Making Changes

I'm fairly certain my neighbors are alcoholics.  Twice a week I see their trash can out front loaded with empty beer bottles.  Whenever they're out on their porch, I hear the clang of beer bottles. 

Do people like this ever change?  And how did they end up down this road in the first place?  You read about Alcoholics Anonymous and how it helps people.  But a couple of years ago I dug a little deeper and found this not to be true.  Though the media promotes AA as successful, the numbers say otherwise.

One thing I do remember reading is the process of people who were successful in cleaning up.  It was often a gradual process, where the person would drink less and less, and still occassionally have a few beers.  But these people were successful in bringing their drinking down to a normal, social level. 

I think the idea that alcoholics should stop drinking cold-turkey is flawed.  It may work for some, but it probably fails for most.  It's very reasonable to make changes in small, measured steps.  To completely remove an ingrained habit is not only difficult, but the burden of trying to do it all in one fell swoop may make it virtually impossible.

Guru-less

I think one of the hardest things to do in modern life is to listen to your own internal promptings.  With the internet and other modern forms of media, there is so much information and countless points of view.  I would think a century ago a person's possible influencers were much fewer.

One of the worst parts about the internet is that you can find "sources" to back up whatever viewpoint you like.  Take running for example.  I can find sources that show how healthy it is, and I can find sources that say the contrary.  It's just too easy to rationalize what you do by only looking for supporting evidence.

Not only can you find whatever evidence is convenient for your truth, you can find a guru who espouses it.  It seems the world has an infinite supply of people who are short on knowledge but long on confidence.

Our natural instincts, while not always correct, have guided us properly through millions of years of evolution.  It should be obvious that they are more valuable than the sales pitch of some charlatan. 

The Natural Drive To Work

With technological progress, there are now a lot of jobs that just aren't that exciting.  I think men, due to their psychology, suffer the most in this type of environment.

For millions of years, men were the hunters.  Every other day or so, they would go out together in a band of men and hunt down prey.  Each person played a role on the hunt based on their special skills.  The judgement of their work was simple: either they acquired food or they didn't. 

Now put that same male mind in a 21st centruy job.  He often works alone, not with other male companions.  The job tasks are usually mental (computer-based), not physical.  And how is his work judged?  Others often don't know, don't understand, or really don't care about his work.

I think what modern employers don't get is that men (and women to a lesser extent) have a natural desire to work, to produce something of value.  Only a few people would be happy being a beach bum all their lives.  Even those who are independently wealthy continue to work.

To me, there has to be a better way to set up work so it coincides with the male psyche better.  I see so many adult males that look beat-down, and I think work is the main issue.  I used to think that health was the issue, but now I think it's secondary.  If someone has a strong purpose, they can keep going even if their body is falling apart.  Employers need to set up environments that give men the freedom to produce something of value.

When Success Isn't Success

I've run into a number of people in life who personify the title of this blog post, "when success isn't success."  These people have all the trappings and outward signs of success, but in reality, have accomplished very little in life.

The corporate ladder is rife with people such as these.  They may hold prestigious sounding positions and make a good amount of money.  But actually, their contribution to the company may be minimal, or the contribution the company makes to society is very little.

How about an executive for a tobacco company?  Is there anything redeeming about a position such as this?  They promote poisonous, additive substances to the masses.  Isn't it strange that society looks down at drug dealers, but an executive for a tobacco might garner respect in some circles?

The tobacco industry is an extreme example, but there's many other companies whose contribution to society is minimal.  They may get work through favors and contacts, yet the work they produce may actually be of no value.  But from the outside, the company's employees appear successful, driving the fancy cars and showing up in all the right places.

I bet there are people working for non-profit agencies who produce 100 times more value than a high-paid executive in your average company.  I wish these people received more attention, press, and compensation.