One cup, two cup, three cup, four: dependencies are not inherently vices

Deal with it: Ask and you might possibly receive

This past winter break I flew back from a relaxing vacation on the West Coast and made a routine connection in the fine city of Cleveland, Ohio. Unfortunately, the situation quickly degraded into the typical travel clusterfuck with the onset of a major snow storm, soon to be exacerbated by the ensuing Arctic chill.
Airport monitors gradually moved from “on time” to “delayed” to “cancelled.” Hundreds of frustrated passengers formed spontaneous lines just waiting to argue with the helpless gate agents (“there’s not that much ice on the runway, come on, I need to get to ATL”). Children screamed and cried; people abandoned the last shreds of human decency, You know, the average airport nightmare. Despite all this, however, I managed to come away having learned the value of asking.
It is amazing how much the world opens up when you make your desires or intentions known to others. In Cleveland, my experience was made much easier by actively seeking out those in positions of authority or knowledge. Instead of blindly stumbling around the mountains of suitcases piled up in the terminal or waiting in a useless line, I asked a baggage handler to search the black hole that was the backroom luggage storage. Thirty seconds later, he emerged with my blue duffle. Later that night at around 3 a.m., after having looked at all sorts of ridiculous transportation alternatives (think a $600, 14-hour train ride leaving at 2:15 a.m.), I finally called and asked a rental car service if they would provide a vehicle to someone under the minimum age of 25. To my surprise, the company said yes and several hours later I embarked on an impromptu solo road trip home (the car had an iPod connector so, rest assured, Waka and 2 Chainz got plenty of playtime).

Deal with it: On intolerance of obligatory acceptance

A few weeks ago, Dartmouth College students occupied one of the campus’ administrative buildings in the hopes of promoting a rather zealous progressive agenda. The Wall Street Journal, in turn, wrote a scathing op-ed about the incident.
This small band of protestors insisted upon reforms such as formal racial admission quotas, the school health insurance plan covering sex change operations and even “censoring the library catalogue for offensive terms.”
The massive fiscal, administrative, political and opportunity costs of implementing such changes aside, the episode was an excellent example of mistaking acceptance for tolerance. The discrepancy between the two terms is very real and understanding the difference would at the very least minimize the collective amount of bitching from both leftist activists (read: bloggers) and conservatives who cherry-pick their opponents’ more extreme points.
Tolerance is the minimum amount of action that society can reasonably require from an individual. It means showing indifference toward practices, beliefs, customs and identities that are held by other groups in the population.
I’m talking about customs that are legal and do not have negative impacts on the rest of society (pedophilia would not qualify, but LGBTQ issues would). “Indifference,” in this case, means that an individual must not say or do anything that might harm these groups in any way.
This individual is free to think whatever she (he, ze?) wants concerning other people’s values. She can still comfortably exist within the bounds of tolerance so long as she does not display any negative thought in a malevolent way.
Tolerance insists that one not harm others in a group, but it also does not mandate that one push the opposite way—past the point of neutrality—and actively support, endorse or even be content with an entity. Such behavior falls into the realm of acceptance.
Acceptance moves beyond open mindedness and necessitates a change in personal opinions, views and preferences. Not only is the individual expected to peacefully coexist with other groups, but he is also expected to embrace them and all that they stand for. Thus, calling for acceptance as a baseline obliges members of society who wish to be regarded as somewhat politically correct (whatever that means today) to completely alter their personalities and characters to conform to another subjective conception of a perfect world.
Forcing or demanding that another consent to your conventions because they are more progressive or “right” is as ridiculous as it is ironic: such a hypocrite has become intolerant of others’ dissenting (but not derogatory) conclusions. Intolerance has no place in modern society. But by enforcing acceptance, the self-proclaimed liberator transforms into a tyrannical oppressor.Do not misconstrue this as an attack against the left, progressivism or related interests. This is a criticism of those who demand too much of a largely moderate majority. By not settling for any less than acceptance, certain activists are inadvertently damaging their own cause by inseparably associating frivolous complaints with more serious and legitimate grievances.
Returning to the Dartmouth example, do the bulk of those who desire gender equality (presumably a fair amount of the total population at the New Hampshire institution, and at Bowdoin as well) really also want “gender-neutral bathrooms in all facilities, including locker rooms?” I will boldly guess not.
I caution those fighting for a cause to take into account the difference between tolerance and acceptance when considering what they campaign for. They might realize that victory—widespread tolerance—can be achieved without resounding affirmation from the masses.

Deal with it

One cup, two cup, three cup, four: dependencies are not inherently vices

This piece represents the opinion of the author:

Will Powers

Columnist

February 20, 2014

Ever since coming to Bowdoin, I have steadily increased my coffee intake. At first it was fairly innocuous—two cups or so in the morning. But who can say no to 19 opportunities a week to consume remarkably average Seacoast joe? After a constant progression over the last two years, well, let’s just say I consider coffee my main source of hydration.

For the record, I do not think this is sustainable, smart or healthy in the slightest. It is not even about the caffeine anymore. I rely on the very act of drinking coffee to feel normal. I admit to having a legitimate addiction to the substance, and I entirely accept this personal vice.

It is no secret that we all have dependencies, some more serious and severe than others. While the more obvious ones range from social media to chemicals to exercise, there are also more subtle attachments out there. It is possible to be reliant on another person for their companionship, or even the vicarious use of their enviable social standing. Some people need the approval of crowds or the wider public in order to feel whole.

However, rather than spending enormous amounts of energy trying to combat or eliminate these ostensible character defects, I suggest an alternative, marginally lazier approach: recognizing and understanding how these “vices” affect various aspects of your life, and adjusting accordingly.
I should mention that this strategy extends only to habits that are not dangerous, highly illegal or plain damaging to you or others.

As with anything, use prudent judgment. This is not a warrant to rationalize brushing your teeth with Orloff every morning (or swallowing the alcoholic Listerine).

Whatever they may be, these dependencies profoundly influence our thoughts, actions and approach to the world. We tend to live in such a way that we prioritize and cater to these addictions. For example, those with a gregarious personality might pursue client-focused careers in sales. Others, who demand and rely on the presence of hard data and sure facts would be inclined towards a quantitative role in lab work or analytics.

Realizing your own dependencies can help determine for what sort of profession and lifestyle you are most adept. It also filters out wrong choices that external factors (people, life circumstances etc.) may be insisting upon. In addition, acknowledging your tendencies can provide an objective view of how you you are perceived by friends, relatives and society at large. This allows for easier social navigation since it enables you to better predict the reactions of others and to engage in a more honest self evaluation—a prerequisite to personal improvement. If you choose to fix a fault, it does not hurt to know exactly what your most flagrant weakness is beforehand.

Returning to my relatively non-serious and slightly shameful coffee dilemma, I have made a step by publically admitting (at least, to the five people that make it past the Security Report to the back page of the Orient) my attachment to coffee. Now what?

Following my own recommendations, I do not necessarily need to drop the habit.
Instead, I should examine how it influences various areas of my life and try to maximize the addiction’s benefits. Perhaps I can get away with less sleep. Maybe I know that I will not be fully functional without the substance and thus assign it a high personal value, or maybe the caffeine tolerance has made me less susceptible to Four Loko induced hospital adventures. Who knows?
I encourage all to do the same. Recognize what you are reliant upon and how it impacts your daily life, and adjust from there. You may or may not decide to give up the obsession.

Comments are permanently closed.