How Do You Know? Two Strategies

How do you know something is true? I propose that most of the time we use two strategies.

The Scientific Strategory
At its heart, the scientific process is simply, "Check to see if you got it right." Obviously scientists do sciency things all the time, what with their peer reviews, revised hypotheses, and blah blah blah. I suppose most of us use a quick and dirty version whenever we "guess and check." How do you make the best coffee? Do you french press it with 4 packets of sugar, grind it fresh and use a coffee maker, or just admit defeat and pick it up at Starbucks?

Sometimes this is a ridiculous way to think.

Me: Son, don't play in the street, you'll get run over.
Son: Thanks dad, I'm going to run a series of experiments to verify your hypothesis.

This is extra funny to me because my son is 3 months old. Here's how it really went down.
Me: Aoooooooga!
Son: (looks confused, then really happy, then concerned, then at the ceiling, then happy again, and then starts crying)

The I-Told-You-So Strategy
Something is true if an important person said it, and it sounds right. This approach is often a fine way to think. You don't jump into the hippo pit at the zoo because the internet said they can bite alligators in half. Sometimes, however, this too is a ridiculous way to think. Why? Important people are first class bullshitters. I suggest that this is in the top three things you should learn during your post high school education. The other two are probably, "Correlation is not causation," and... uh... "Waft, don't just stick your nose in the beaker." Every time I clean out my fridge I forget this rule.

Back to the point at hand, seriously, it is REALLY easy to be wrong, and important people are wrong. all. the. time. Somebody should run some sort of experiment because, and I'm going to make these numbers up, regular people are wrong 70% of the time, while important people are wrong 80% of the time.

So when exactly should you use I-Told-You-So-Reasoning? Ah, I don't know. It probably has something to do with whether you're a child, how easy the advice is to follow, how dire the consequences are, how motivated the important person is to bullshit, and how obvious the advice is. I just made that all up, frankly I'm not giving you a very thorough answer. Rather, let me answer this question:

What are three ways Americans incorrectly use I-Told-You-So thinking?

I'm glad I asked! First,

National Policy
Take this abstinence only debacle we find ourselves in. Abstinence only education was a fine guess at the time, but it turns out to be completely useless. Rather than just coming up with an idea and sticking with it because our president said so, come up with a bunch of ideas including, oh I don't know, fact based sex ed. Try them all out, see what works the best, and go with that.

Next,

Seeking Grand Cosmic Truths Through Religion
Now this is important, so pay attention. I am NOT arguing against religion in general (what an ambitious topic, but don't worry, I'll probably tackle that later). No, as far as this post is concerned, I have no problem with religion. I am going to make this much easier argument: religion is a bad way to figure out what's true. Religion is all about I-Told-You-So thinking. It kind of has to be these days, because people using scientific thinking keep chasing religious thinkers away from topics that you can check, the shape of the solar system being a prime example. Now as my friend Becky, one of my millions of readers, will point out, lots of people don't really think their religion has anything to do with discovering ultimate truths about the universe. Good, I think they're on the right track. For those who disagree with Becky, consider these arguments.

Disagree and Don't Check

1. There are a lot of old dudes in a lot of different religions standing in front of lots of people quoting very ancient books and saying very important sounding things.
2. They completely disagree.
3. There's no way to check who's right.
4. Ergo, chances are bad that anybody has any idea what they're talking about.

Motivation

1. The more arcane knowledge a religious person has about uncheckable things, the more impressive and important they become.
2. Therefore, important relgious people have a conflict of interest to just make stuff up.
3. Therefore, uh, they are more likely to make stuff up.

Finally,

Health
To be fair, I've met a lot of honest, humble doctors who listen. However, who hasn't met their fair share of doctors who know what's best for you because they said so. I imagine this was particularly obnoxious when medicine wasn't really into science yet. Sure bloodletting is a good idea! All the doctors say so! Oh wait, it killed Robin Hood. (No joke, I cried for days)

Also, let's all start a fad diet endorsed by Oprah.

In Summary
A lot of you vehemently disagree with me on this post. Lay into me in the comments.

Also, don't play in traffic. Because I said so.

Tragic Needs

I'm a little full of myself, so here's a term I've coined. Never you mind that it sounds like a romantic comedy staring Hugh Grant and Meg Ryan.

Tragic needs are more difficult to obtain the more you need them. So the very fact that you need something makes it almost impossible for you to have it. If all you have is tragic needs, then you live a tragic life, because you can never have what you most need. That's the second most tragic sounding predicament I can think of. The first is being unable to obtain what you most want only because the very person you are precludes it. For example, you're really good at rallying the Scottish troops, so even though all you want is to have a farm and raise a family, you cast yourself in the leading role of an enjoyable though wildly historically inaccurate movie and get disemboweled.

Right, back to the point at hand. Here are some examples.

• Sleep to many an insomniac. It's 5am, and you just REALLY REALLY need to get some sleep, so of course you can't because you're too worried about it.
• A good deal. The number one way to get a good deal is to not need whatever you're dealing for in the first place.
• Affection. This one's a little trickier, but the variety I experience most often. You need somebody to like you, or you need physical affection from somebody. The more you need it, the more neurotic and weird you are, and the less lovable you become. How miserable.

So what do you do about tragic needs? Well, I think the first step is naming the beast. Then you can start to figure out what comes next. I imagine it will, ironically and tragically, involve getting yourself to a place where you just don't need it in the first place.

It's 5am and you can't get to sleep. You say, "Fuck it," get up, move to the couch, read a book, and admit you may or may not get any sleep. You fall asleep.

The cute girl is all you ever wanted in the world. You ignore the cute girl and start a band. You find three even cuter girls that like you. You hang out with your girl, but you tease her, flirt with her, and play hard to get. You get around to asking her out and you're irresistible.

Now this idea is almost certainly out to lunch, or at most, a very incomplete piece of what it is to desire something. Still, when something you need is driving you insane, consider whether it's a tragic need, and let me know how it works out.

Having Your Feelings Hurt Gracefully

The other day I had a bit of a falling out with a friend. Here, in essence, was the conversation:

Friend: You can't come to the party.
Me: I really really want to come.
(repeat ad nauseam)
Friend: I feel like I'm talking with a six year old.
Me: I feel like I'm talking with a nazi.

Just kidding, I had no such presence of mind towards the end there. It went more like this.

Friend: I feel like I'm talking with a six year old.
Me: ...
Friend: Are you going to cry?
Me: Probably.

So my feelings were quite hurt, though to my friend's defense, the dynamics of our relationship did not make that clear. Perhaps you could describe my friend is a teaser, and me as... the guy who gets teased in a long suffering, gracious, humorous way. Normally this is a fine, fun arrangement. I've been a little unstable lately though. In this case I went home bummed out, thought it through, and called back with this gem of a conversation (in essence):

Me: You really hurt my feelings. Fuck you, I'm coming anyway.
Friend: Fine, do what you want, but you do not get to talk to me that way.

And you know what? My friend was absolutely right because there is a big difference between teasing someone / giving them a hard time, and intentionally trying to hurt them. I was an asshole, and that sucked for my friend. Moreover, it sucked for me, because as Bobby Bare, Jr. points out, the blame is better to give than it is to get.

Take a moment to let the jam packed wisdom of that last paragraph sink in.

We've both since apologized, said some nice things, and otherwise got the ship more or less on an even keel. It was painful and weird though, and it always bums me out to realize I was the asshole, so it's something I hope to avoid in the future. As is my wont, I over-thought it for a couple of days solid and here's what I came up with: a strategy for having your feelings hurt gracefully.

When a friend hurts your feelings, take a moment to piece together what exactly it is that's rubbing you the wrong way. Then, say something along these lines:

You're really hurting my feelings. (Clearly and concisely explain why)

For example, "That comment makes me look stupid. It really hurt my feelings," or "You are really hurting my feelings. That's a dumb reason to exclude me from a party I am so excited about."

Then, I suppose the conversation could go one of two ways. Your friend may grasp how important the situation is to you, and like the decent friend they are, apologize and make it right. If so, wonderful, you go about the business of enjoying each others company.

Or, your friend may turn out to be human, and not have the presence of mind to change direction, or may have other reasons, or whatever, and stick to their guns. In this case, my guess is that you need to take off and regroup. Then as soon as you can do so calmly and without malice
1. Ask for their side of the story
2. Explain yourself more thoroughly
3. Describe what they need to do to make it up to you.
Like I said earlier, don't do or say anything you're going to need to apologize for later. That's for everyone's benefit, but mostly yours. Let's all just admit that Bobby Bare, Jr. is absolutely right.

If that still doesn't work, I suppose you have to sit it out, or try to have fun with them to smooth it over (more on that later). But hopefully they're a good friend and they'll apologize and make it up to you (more on that too).

Now it's got to be pretty difficult to have the presence of mind to follow through on that plan when you're in the thick of having your heart broken. I'm going to guess that like anything difficult in life, you really need to practice if you want to get it right. Good luck with that.

Anyway, now I really want to try this out, which puts me in the strange position of wanting somebody to hurt my feelings.