death to communication; “man” is basically evil

OK. It’s a lost cause. I’m thousands of email behind, without cell phone or the Sidekick that keeps me sorta on top of email sometimes (or at least lets people bug me on AIM). Plus, my server crashed so i lost a bunch of email. Furthermore, i lost everyone’s phone numbers (again….). I don’t know how to be gracious about this so please accept my ungracious apologies for truly turning into a California flake about communication.

I used to send out emails to my friends in bulk telling them that i suck for being a bad communicator and promising to be better about it. At one point, i wrote out to everyone and said that there’s a low likelihood of me ever catching up or getting better abou communication and groveling. A friend immediately wrote me to congratulate me on learning to be honest with myself. Hrmfpt. He knew me all too well.

Alas…

Oh, and riddle me this. You are a robber. You have two phones in your hand. One is a Sidekick with a pretty little image that says “Web.” The other is a Sanyo operating Sprint with its slow backasswards Vision interface. Which one do you use to make web purchases? The Sprint of course! [In fact, as far as i can tell, you never figured out how to use the toy.] But don’t worry. You’re an equal opportunity credit card abuser even if you refuse the cool toy for the broken one. Of course, maybe this says something about interfaces for the masses that i just don’t get…

This incident once again affirmed my feelings on the “man” is basically good/evil discussion that got me into bigtime trouble in the 9th grade. We were stuck reading Lord of the Flies and apparently supposed to argue that it could never happen because “man” is basically good. I disagreed. I fundamentally believe that “man” is basically greedy (which converts to evil in a binary world). Those in power do whatever it takes to maintain power; those without it do whatever it takes to live the lifestyle they want to live. We live in a society that doesn’t see most forms of greed (a.k.a. capitalist success) as bad and we encourage everyone to strive for it. Ah, Protestant ethic. But lots of people never get out of the gates and thus are never going to win the race so they might as well cheat. I remember talking to a friend who worked in a retail store. 25% of the merchandise went out the door unaccounted for. Most theft was employees. Everyone paid for it.

So, here i am sitting in my overly privileged life griping about someone stealing shit from me that will probably cost me about 80 hours of hassle and a little over 1 month’s rent. I can cope. I can get a job. I have opportunities. I have job interviews.

I try really hard to think that maybe they stole that shit from me and helped out their kids or paid their rent. But the little doubter in me can’t help but wonder if my Sidekick and wallet went up their nose/arms. And the cultural pessimist in me wonders how much everyone’s experience with this little incident (since so many people apologied for letting them in) increased homophily in some way… increased intolerance and lack of openness for people different than us. ::sigh::

But i do indeed understand why people get more intolerant as they get older… the burns start to hurt more and more. This is my fourth time dealing with pain-in-the-ass theft in 2 years. It was always due to my naive trust. Let go of my purse at a friend’s loft (2 years ago). Let a AAA guy into my car. Left my car in mid-town NY. Let go of my purse at a friend’s loft (this week).

I hate not being able to resolve the “why” question… why do people do this? If you read this blog and you’ve ever stolen someone’s wallet, can you explain why (anonymously)? I really want to know…

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

22 thoughts on “death to communication; “man” is basically evil

  1. Patrik's Sprawl

    babyface

    When I was out in Berkeley yesterday heading towards the International House Caf I was stopped by a man who shouted “I recognize you” from some distance. I stopped and started to talk to him. He claimed that he recognized…

  2. Harsha

    Hey danah,
    We haven’t formally been introduced but I did run into you a couple of times at SXSW (don’t know if you remember). Anyways, here’s my two cents on the whole stealing thing (not that I’ve ever consciously stolen anything except perhaps an ocassional Rupee or two from my mom’s purse when I was a kid–which I still feel bad about).

    I think it all boils down to what you said in your post “Man IS basically evil(greedy).” Let’s face it most of us have all stolen something or the other in our lives, be it an idea or a thing. Why do we do that? Perhaps, we don’t think of it as a big deal? Perhaps we think we deserve it although it doesn’t belong to us? It’s not to say I defend stealing (cos I do believe in Karma and it’s going to catch up sooner or later). I guess most people look at things from a relativistic point of view and it sucks that there isn’t anybody who’s perfect. I am yet to meet someone who can stand up and say I’ve NEVER stolen anything from anyone ever. Sad but that’s just the way it is.

    Well, I do hope you feel better about the whole episode soon. Good luck with your research and once again, it was great listening to you at SXSW.

  3. Finn

    I once stole a candy, worth 5 rubles, from this coffee-house, because I felt that that chain of coffee-houses monopolized the cafe market and there I was standing in line of three (two were my friends, one was myself) and thinking what prank i can play on them. The woman behind the counter turned away to give order to the guy who was making coffee and i pulled out a candy from the huge jar that standed open on the counter. Every time i tell the story, people blame me for stealing, though i always grin and shrug my shoulders.

    I’ve never stolen anyone’s wallet, though the thought crossed my mind a few times solidly because people didn’t keep their eyes on their things and I’m way too needy money wise; I’d never do that because it’s just soooo wrong.

    PS 1USD = 30 rubles (back then), now it’s 28.5 rubles.

  4. joe

    There’s an idea… leave technology around for people to take/steal it and then study what they try to do with it… the choices they make (sidekick, blah!). Could we get that past CPHS?

  5. af

    There are two types of theives. There are people that steal to survive and there are opportunists. Most opportunists have plenty of money and don’t need to steal but find, in certain situations, that it’s too easy not to. It’s a lot easier to steal from a girl that leaves her purse around and is getting drunk than one that keeps her things on her body.

    Stealing is very much about having a good time at the expense of another. Pure and simple, you are getting something for free. You don’t have to work for it and it’s guilt free spending in that it’s not your money. Anyone would rather spend someone else’s money than their own.

    I have stolen a lot things in my past. I was an opportunist, if you will. I come from a very wealthy background, have a good education and never needed to steal. But sometimes, the opportunity struck and I wanted the item, or saw a sudden need for the cash. I’ve stolen merchandise from stores. I’ve taken money from people and I have stolen one purse.

    They don’t want your IDs and probably really didn’t want the phone or sidekick. All of those items are easily traceable and will probably get dumped first. I find it really interesting that they even messed with the phone.

    They were going after cash. Money is the ultimate gain, in that you can do anything with it, it’s non-traceable, and it’s rather quick to dump.

    I read this entry before going out to the bar last night with a friend and I couldn’t stop thinking about it. I felt really bad for you.

  6. Lawrence Krubner

    Paraciticism is the enemy of openness, yet all openness increases survival/adaptability (in human societies, economic growth). Look at any eco-system and you’ll see the same pattern. Trying to find the find the right balance is futile because everyone involved, including the paracites, are dynamic actors, changing their behavior in response to changing conditions. Too much openness rewards paracitic behavior so the paracitic populations grows, which leads to a reaction that closes down that openness, which causes a decrease in paracitic behavior, because then there is less reward in it.

    You’ve a good life (from what I can see, not that I know you) with a reasonable chance at real affluence and happiness. Your trusting nature has surely been part of why you’ve done so well. You’re open in many ways, including intellectually curious. All of which is going to reward to occassional paracitic attack. But all of which is part of why you’re doing well.

    Apologies if I’m being overly theoretical about the hassle and hurt this incident has inflicted on you.

  7. zephoria

    AF – thanks for this. Actually, they did indeed want my phone, my keys, my IDs. They raided my bag in the bathroom, grabbed the cash, left the wallet, grabbed the folder of IDs, grabbed the spare CC (but left its container), grabbed my keys, the USB device, the phones, a pack of gum, a pack of cigarettes, my SXSW ID. They left my medication (which is worth more on the street than my phones). They left all of the lipbalm, handcream and random other crap. They did take my “Vagina Friendly” button off of the outside of my purse.

  8. af

    They took gum… interesting.

    I find it really odd that they took your IDs. The last thing I would ever want to get busted with is someone’s ID, for sure. I’d hate to admit it, but I’d have taken the button as well. I’m pretty ‘v friendly’. It actually sounds like a first theft considering the things they took and the fact that they didn’t leave with the purse. I don’t know how big your bag is, but I would never raid someone’s shit when they’re within feet of me.

    I’m so sorry, danah. I was feelin bad for you all night. Thanks for the opportunity to confess.

  9. emilio

    I don’t think the “opportunists” (people that steal that don’t need the money to survive) do it for the profit (to have a “good time at the expense” of others.). My experience has been that they are taking the opportunity to satisfy other needs- commonly regarding self-validation. For example:

    * Troubled teens with unclear roles/future in a grown-up society or lack of appreciation from their families that steal as a way to rebel or fit with their group.

    * Have-not (e.g. class minorities) that steal from those that Have that find justifiable and commendable as a way to protest against the established system that oppresses their community.

    You will probably not find a satisfying answer to “why”; though you may find lots of related research in Philosophy’s moral or ethics studies. All that said- I am really sorry that you going through all of this.

  10. mooks

    Greedy ….
    Perhaps creatures of ease and convenience . Greed being a symptom.The fine print of that luxurious lifstyle of ease . Inadvertantly creating a paradox of pressure and stress to achieve the financial goals required for the life of comfort .
    Greedy ? No. just easily duped .

  11. af

    emilio.. I’ve never met a thief that, after or prior to snatching something, said “damn the man” or “hey, this makes me valid.”

    Thought and education makes people valid, not theft.

  12. peg

    “Ah, Protestant ethic”: evidently, this is the phrase that got me here — a search as part of some researching I’m doing. The CPWE — Christian-Protestant Work Ethic — is that what you’re referring to, in your post? I’m thinking it is, though I’m wondering if maybe this is two different things… it certainly could be, I feel, after reading through your entry. But putting that aside for the moment, let me admit to first not reading thoroughly all the comments here — definitely not taking time to digest or absorb or reflect. So, off the cuff, this is. Disclaimer done, I want to say that I wonder truly if the real question for you is:

    I hate not being able to resolve the “why” question… why do people do this? If you read this blog and you’ve ever stolen someone’s wallet, can you explain why (anonymously)? I really want to know…

    or is the question why buried underneath that — why you, perhaps, or at least, that’s the sense I get from this post — you mention a “naive trust” and as well enumerate other episodes in which you’ve had that exploited, right? So, maybe the question is more about why when you have had experiences that tell you that indeed “naive trust” is not the way to go, why you haven’t altered your behavior accordingly.

    I really dislike knowing that this may come off sounding like blaming the victim, especially since you don’t know me and I don’t know you and here I am an unknown entity asking or saying something that seems at first blush to not sound empathetic or sympathetic in the least. The truth is that I do feel both empathy and sympathy. First. But then, beyond that, as is my nature (which I also find hard sometimes to like) is this sort of sense of: okay, let’s get pragmatic here, then; what can you do to avoid any more episodes of this nature? Assuming that you want to — I mean, you’ve obviously had enough experience by now to see what the world is that you’re living in is like, so what are you going to do to live within it?

    What I really want to say, though, more than anything, is that what struck me most about everything that I did take in here is that it all presupposes a certain level of awareness or consciousness, assigned to all parties concerned. It’s never that simple. It’s not a duality of either opportunity or survival, any more than it is a state of naive trust flying in the face of experiences that prove otherwise. Taking or stealing often happens in a state of consciousness that is far far removed from the taker’s ability to even be aware or present in that moment — jingo/lingo-istically you can say it is a symptom — but regardless of how called, the truth is that the taker’s “core” or “essence” is far removed, detached from the behavior at hand. Similar to how we make available “absentmindedly” our goods for the taking even though we ought to have the presence of mind to know better based on our experiences.

    Again, this is not about blame or who’s at fault, etc, or even letting anybody off the hook, or saying who should be held accountable … it’s just saying that the constellation of our experiences and even those before us from whom we get our bio- physiology components in combo with so much more cultural, environmentally, physically (the research on nutrition/lack thereof and effects on brain function is amazing!) preclude our ability to satisfactorily assign accountability in any superficial-simplified way. It’s complex; what is most complex about it is that these things happen: carelessness, taking, et al on a level of our consciousness that we don’t, in the moment, have access to.

    Or (maybe)as Prurock said, “Oh, why ask why…”

    (PS Sorry your stuff is gone; it sucks.)

    P@Peg Alford
    Fiction editor
    identitytheory.com

    Peg Alford’s Blog:
    http://www.identitytheory.com/alford/index.html
    . . . Your open door to all things fiction writing and the creative life . .

  13. peg

    “Ah, Protestant ethic”: evidently, this is the phrase that got me here — a search as part of some researching I’m doing. The CPWE — Christian-Protestant Work Ethic — is that what you’re referring to, in your post? I’m thinking it is, though I’m wondering if maybe this is two different things… it certainly could be, I feel, after reading through your entry. But putting that aside for the moment, let me admit to first not reading thoroughly all the comments here — definitely not taking time to digest or absorb or reflect. So, off the cuff, this is. Disclaimer done, I want to say that I wonder truly if the real question for you is:

    I hate not being able to resolve the “why” question… why do people do this? If you read this blog and you’ve ever stolen someone’s wallet, can you explain why (anonymously)? I really want to know…

    or is the question why buried underneath that — why you, perhaps, or at least, that’s the sense I get from this post — you mention a “naive trust” and as well enumerate other episodes in which you’ve had that exploited, right? So, maybe the question is more about why when you have had experiences that tell you that indeed “naive trust” is not the way to go, why you haven’t altered your behavior accordingly.

    I really dislike knowing that this may come off sounding like blaming the victim, especially since you don’t know me and I don’t know you and here I am an unknown entity asking or saying something that seems at first blush to not sound empathetic or sympathetic in the least. The truth is that I do feel both empathy and sympathy. First. But then, beyond that, as is my nature (which I also find hard sometimes to like) is this sort of sense of: okay, let’s get pragmatic here, then; what can you do to avoid any more episodes of this nature? Assuming that you want to — I mean, you’ve obviously had enough experience by now to see what the world is that you’re living in is like, so what are you going to do to live within it?

    What I really want to say, though, more than anything, is that what struck me most about everything that I did take in here is that it all presupposes a certain level of awareness or consciousness, assigned to all parties concerned. It’s never that simple. It’s not a duality of either opportunity or survival, any more than it is a state of naive trust flying in the face of experiences that prove otherwise. Taking or stealing often happens in a state of consciousness that is far far removed from the taker’s ability to even be aware or present in that moment — jingo/lingo-istically you can say it is a symptom — but regardless of how called, the truth is that the taker’s “core” or “essence” is far removed, detached from the behavior at hand. Similar to how we make available “absentmindedly” our goods for the taking even though we ought to have the presence of mind to know better based on our experiences.

    Again, this is not about blame or who’s at fault, etc, or even letting anybody off the hook, or saying who should be held accountable … it’s just saying that the constellation of our experiences and even those before us from whom we get our bio- physiology components in combo with so much more cultural, environmentally, physically (the research on nutrition/lack thereof and effects on brain function is amazing!) preclude our ability to satisfactorily assign accountability in any superficial-simplified way. It’s complex; what is most complex about it is that these things happen: carelessness, taking, et al on a level of our consciousness that we don’t, in the moment, have access to.

    Or (maybe)as Prurock said, “Oh, why ask why…”

    (PS Sorry your stuff is gone; it sucks.)

    P@Peg Alford
    Fiction editor
    identitytheory.com

    Peg Alford’s Blog:
    http://www.identitytheory.com/alford/index.html
    . . . Your open door to all things fiction writing and the creative life . .

  14. peg

    “Ah, Protestant ethic”: evidently, this is the phrase that got me here — a search as part of some researching I’m doing. The CPWE — Christian-Protestant Work Ethic — is that what you’re referring to, in your post? I’m thinking it is, though I’m wondering if maybe this is two different things… it certainly could be, I feel, after reading through your entry. But putting that aside for the moment, let me admit to first not reading thoroughly all the comments here — definitely not taking time to digest or absorb or reflect. So, off the cuff, this is. Disclaimer done, I want to say that I wonder truly if the real question for you is:

    I hate not being able to resolve the “why” question… why do people do this? If you read this blog and you’ve ever stolen someone’s wallet, can you explain why (anonymously)? I really want to know…

    or is the question why buried underneath that — why you, perhaps, or at least, that’s the sense I get from this post — you mention a “naive trust” and as well enumerate other episodes in which you’ve had that exploited, right? So, maybe the question is more about why when you have had experiences that tell you that indeed “naive trust” is not the way to go, why you haven’t altered your behavior accordingly.

    I really dislike knowing that this may come off sounding like blaming the victim, especially since you don’t know me and I don’t know you and here I am an unknown entity asking or saying something that seems at first blush to not sound empathetic or sympathetic in the least. The truth is that I do feel both empathy and sympathy. First. But then, beyond that, as is my nature (which I also find hard sometimes to like) is this sort of sense of: okay, let’s get pragmatic here, then; what can you do to avoid any more episodes of this nature? Assuming that you want to — I mean, you’ve obviously had enough experience by now to see what the world is that you’re living in is like, so what are you going to do to live within it?

    What I really want to say, though, more than anything, is that what struck me most about everything that I did take in here is that it all presupposes a certain level of awareness or consciousness, assigned to all parties concerned. It’s never that simple. It’s not a duality of either opportunity or survival, any more than it is a state of naive trust flying in the face of experiences that prove otherwise. Taking or stealing often happens in a state of consciousness that is far far removed from the taker’s ability to even be aware or present in that moment — jingo/lingo-istically you can say it is a symptom — but regardless of how called, the truth is that the taker’s “core” or “essence” is far removed, detached from the behavior at hand. Similar to how we make available “absentmindedly” our goods for the taking even though we ought to have the presence of mind to know better based on our experiences.

    Again, this is not about blame or who’s at fault, etc, or even letting anybody off the hook, or saying who should be held accountable … it’s just saying that the constellation of our experiences and even those before us from whom we get our bio- physiology components in combo with so much more cultural, environmentally, physically (the research on nutrition/lack thereof and effects on brain function is amazing!) preclude our ability to satisfactorily assign accountability in any superficial-simplified way. It’s complex; what is most complex about it is that these things happen: carelessness, taking, et al on a level of our consciousness that we don’t, in the moment, have access to.

    Or (maybe)as Prurock said, “Oh, why ask why…”

    (PS Sorry your stuff is gone; it sucks.)

    P@Peg Alford
    Fiction editor
    identitytheory.com

    Peg Alford’s Blog:
    http://www.identitytheory.com/alford/index.html
    . . . Your open door to all things fiction writing and the creative life . .

  15. peg

    “Ah, Protestant ethic”: evidently, this is the phrase that got me here — a search as part of some researching I’m doing. The CPWE — Christian-Protestant Work Ethic — is that what you’re referring to, in your post? I’m thinking it is, though I’m wondering if maybe this is two different things… it certainly could be, I feel, after reading through your entry. But putting that aside for the moment, let me admit to first not reading thoroughly all the comments here — definitely not taking time to digest or absorb or reflect. So, off the cuff, this is. Disclaimer done, I want to say that I wonder truly if the real question for you is:

    I hate not being able to resolve the “why” question… why do people do this? If you read this blog and you’ve ever stolen someone’s wallet, can you explain why (anonymously)? I really want to know…

    or is the question why buried underneath that — why you, perhaps, or at least, that’s the sense I get from this post — you mention a “naive trust” and as well enumerate other episodes in which you’ve had that exploited, right? So, maybe the question is more about why when you have had experiences that tell you that indeed “naive trust” is not the way to go, why you haven’t altered your behavior accordingly.

    I really dislike knowing that this may come off sounding like blaming the victim, especially since you don’t know me and I don’t know you and here I am an unknown entity asking or saying something that seems at first blush to not sound empathetic or sympathetic in the least. The truth is that I do feel both empathy and sympathy. First. But then, beyond that, as is my nature (which I also find hard sometimes to like) is this sort of sense of: okay, let’s get pragmatic here, then; what can you do to avoid any more episodes of this nature? Assuming that you want to — I mean, you’ve obviously had enough experience by now to see what the world is that you’re living in is like, so what are you going to do to live within it?

    What I really want to say, though, more than anything, is that what struck me most about everything that I did take in here is that it all presupposes a certain level of awareness or consciousness, assigned to all parties concerned. It’s never that simple. It’s not a duality of either opportunity or survival, any more than it is a state of naive trust flying in the face of experiences that prove otherwise. Taking or stealing often happens in a state of consciousness that is far far removed from the taker’s ability to even be aware or present in that moment — jingo/lingo-istically you can say it is a symptom — but regardless of how called, the truth is that the taker’s “core” or “essence” is far removed, detached from the behavior at hand. Similar to how we make available “absentmindedly” our goods for the taking even though we ought to have the presence of mind to know better based on our experiences.

    Again, this is not about blame or who’s at fault, etc, or even letting anybody off the hook, or saying who should be held accountable … it’s just saying that the constellation of our experiences and even those before us from whom we get our bio- physiology components in combo with so much more cultural, environmentally, physically (the research on nutrition/lack thereof and effects on brain function is amazing!) preclude our ability to satisfactorily assign accountability in any superficial-simplified way. It’s complex; what is most complex about it is that these things happen: carelessness, taking, et al on a level of our consciousness that we don’t, in the moment, have access to.

    Or (maybe)as Prurock said, “Oh, why ask why…”

    (PS Sorry your stuff is gone; it sucks.)

    P@Peg Alford
    Fiction editor
    identitytheory.com

    Peg Alford’s Blog:
    http://www.identitytheory.com/alford/index.html
    . . . Your open door to all things fiction writing and the creative life . .

  16. peg

    “Ah, Protestant ethic”: evidently, this is the phrase that got me here — a search as part of some researching I’m doing. The CPWE — Christian-Protestant Work Ethic — is that what you’re referring to, in your post? I’m thinking it is, though I’m wondering if maybe this is two different things… it certainly could be, I feel, after reading through your entry. But putting that aside for the moment, let me admit to first not reading thoroughly all the comments here — definitely not taking time to digest or absorb or reflect. So, off the cuff, this is. Disclaimer done, I want to say that I wonder truly if the real question for you is:

    I hate not being able to resolve the “why” question… why do people do this? If you read this blog and you’ve ever stolen someone’s wallet, can you explain why (anonymously)? I really want to know…

    or is the question why buried underneath that — why you, perhaps, or at least, that’s the sense I get from this post — you mention a “naive trust” and as well enumerate other episodes in which you’ve had that exploited, right? So, maybe the question is more about why when you have had experiences that tell you that indeed “naive trust” is not the way to go, why you haven’t altered your behavior accordingly.

    I really dislike knowing that this may come off sounding like blaming the victim, especially since you don’t know me and I don’t know you and here I am an unknown entity asking or saying something that seems at first blush to not sound empathetic or sympathetic in the least. The truth is that I do feel both empathy and sympathy. First. But then, beyond that, as is my nature (which I also find hard sometimes to like) is this sort of sense of: okay, let’s get pragmatic here, then; what can you do to avoid any more episodes of this nature? Assuming that you want to — I mean, you’ve obviously had enough experience by now to see what the world is that you’re living in is like, so what are you going to do to live within it?

    What I really want to say, though, more than anything, is that what struck me most about everything that I did take in here is that it all presupposes a certain level of awareness or consciousness, assigned to all parties concerned. It’s never that simple. It’s not a duality of either opportunity or survival, any more than it is a state of naive trust flying in the face of experiences that prove otherwise. Taking or stealing often happens in a state of consciousness that is far far removed from the taker’s ability to even be aware or present in that moment — jingo/lingo-istically you can say it is a symptom — but regardless of how called, the truth is that the taker’s “core” or “essence” is far removed, detached from the behavior at hand. Similar to how we make available “absentmindedly” our goods for the taking even though we ought to have the presence of mind to know better based on our experiences.

    Again, this is not about blame or who’s at fault, etc, or even letting anybody off the hook, or saying who should be held accountable … it’s just saying that the constellation of our experiences and even those before us from whom we get our bio- physiology components in combo with so much more cultural, environmentally, physically (the research on nutrition/lack thereof and effects on brain function is amazing!) preclude our ability to satisfactorily assign accountability in any superficial-simplified way. It’s complex; what is most complex about it is that these things happen: carelessness, taking, et al on a level of our consciousness that we don’t, in the moment, have access to.

    Or (maybe)as Prurock said, “Oh, why ask why…”

    (PS Sorry your stuff is gone; it sucks.)

    P@Peg Alford
    Fiction editor
    identitytheory.com

    Peg Alford’s Blog:
    http://www.identitytheory.com/alford/index.html
    . . . Your open door to all things fiction writing and the creative life . .

  17. peg

    “Ah, Protestant ethic”: evidently, this is the phrase that got me here — a search as part of some researching I’m doing. The CPWE — Christian-Protestant Work Ethic — is that what you’re referring to, in your post? I’m thinking it is, though I’m wondering if maybe this is two different things… it certainly could be, I feel, after reading through your entry. But putting that aside for the moment, let me admit to first not reading thoroughly all the comments here — definitely not taking time to digest or absorb or reflect. So, off the cuff, this is. Disclaimer done, I want to say that I wonder truly if the real question for you is:

    I hate not being able to resolve the “why” question… why do people do this? If you read this blog and you’ve ever stolen someone’s wallet, can you explain why (anonymously)? I really want to know…

    or is the question why buried underneath that — why you, perhaps, or at least, that’s the sense I get from this post — you mention a “naive trust” and as well enumerate other episodes in which you’ve had that exploited, right? So, maybe the question is more about why when you have had experiences that tell you that indeed “naive trust” is not the way to go, why you haven’t altered your behavior accordingly.

    I really dislike knowing that this may come off sounding like blaming the victim, especially since you don’t know me and I don’t know you and here I am an unknown entity asking or saying something that seems at first blush to not sound empathetic or sympathetic in the least. The truth is that I do feel both empathy and sympathy. First. But then, beyond that, as is my nature (which I also find hard sometimes to like) is this sort of sense of: okay, let’s get pragmatic here, then; what can you do to avoid any more episodes of this nature? Assuming that you want to — I mean, you’ve obviously had enough experience by now to see what the world is that you’re living in is like, so what are you going to do to live within it?

    What I really want to say, though, more than anything, is that what struck me most about everything that I did take in here is that it all presupposes a certain level of awareness or consciousness, assigned to all parties concerned. It’s never that simple. It’s not a duality of either opportunity or survival, any more than it is a state of naive trust flying in the face of experiences that prove otherwise. Taking or stealing often happens in a state of consciousness that is far far removed from the taker’s ability to even be aware or present in that moment — jingo/lingo-istically you can say it is a symptom — but regardless of how called, the truth is that the taker’s “core” or “essence” is far removed, detached from the behavior at hand. Similar to how we make available “absentmindedly” our goods for the taking even though we ought to have the presence of mind to know better based on our experiences.

    Again, this is not about blame or who’s at fault, etc, or even letting anybody off the hook, or saying who should be held accountable … it’s just saying that the constellation of our experiences and even those before us from whom we get our bio- physiology components in combo with so much more cultural, environmentally, physically (the research on nutrition/lack thereof and effects on brain function is amazing!) preclude our ability to satisfactorily assign accountability in any superficial-simplified way. It’s complex; what is most complex about it is that these things happen: carelessness, taking, et al on a level of our consciousness that we don’t, in the moment, have access to.

    Or (maybe)as Prurock said, “Oh, why ask why…”

    (PS Sorry your stuff is gone; it sucks.)

    P@Peg Alford
    Fiction editor
    identitytheory.com

    Peg Alford’s Blog:
    http://www.identitytheory.com/alford/index.html
    . . . Your open door to all things fiction writing and the creative life . .

  18. peg

    “Ah, Protestant ethic”: evidently, this is the phrase that got me here — a search as part of some researching I’m doing. The CPWE — Christian-Protestant Work Ethic — is that what you’re referring to, in your post? I’m thinking it is, though I’m wondering if maybe this is two different things… it certainly could be, I feel, after reading through your entry. But putting that aside for the moment, let me admit to first not reading thoroughly all the comments here — definitely not taking time to digest or absorb or reflect. So, off the cuff, this is. Disclaimer done, I want to say that I wonder truly if the real question for you is:

    I hate not being able to resolve the “why” question… why do people do this? If you read this blog and you’ve ever stolen someone’s wallet, can you explain why (anonymously)? I really want to know…

    or is the question why buried underneath that — why you, perhaps, or at least, that’s the sense I get from this post — you mention a “naive trust” and as well enumerate other episodes in which you’ve had that exploited, right? So, maybe the question is more about why when you have had experiences that tell you that indeed “naive trust” is not the way to go, why you haven’t altered your behavior accordingly.

    I really dislike knowing that this may come off sounding like blaming the victim, especially since you don’t know me and I don’t know you and here I am an unknown entity asking or saying something that seems at first blush to not sound empathetic or sympathetic in the least. The truth is that I do feel both empathy and sympathy. First. But then, beyond that, as is my nature (which I also find hard sometimes to like) is this sort of sense of: okay, let’s get pragmatic here, then; what can you do to avoid any more episodes of this nature? Assuming that you want to — I mean, you’ve obviously had enough experience by now to see what the world is that you’re living in is like, so what are you going to do to live within it?

    What I really want to say, though, more than anything, is that what struck me most about everything that I did take in here is that it all presupposes a certain level of awareness or consciousness, assigned to all parties concerned. It’s never that simple. It’s not a duality of either opportunity or survival, any more than it is a state of naive trust flying in the face of experiences that prove otherwise. Taking or stealing often happens in a state of consciousness that is far far removed from the taker’s ability to even be aware or present in that moment — jingo/lingo-istically you can say it is a symptom — but regardless of how called, the truth is that the taker’s “core” or “essence” is far removed, detached from the behavior at hand. Similar to how we make available “absentmindedly” our goods for the taking even though we ought to have the presence of mind to know better based on our experiences.

    Again, this is not about blame or who’s at fault, etc, or even letting anybody off the hook, or saying who should be held accountable … it’s just saying that the constellation of our experiences and even those before us from whom we get our bio- physiology components in combo with so much more cultural, environmentally, physically (the research on nutrition/lack thereof and effects on brain function is amazing!) preclude our ability to satisfactorily assign accountability in any superficial-simplified way. It’s complex; what is most complex about it is that these things happen: carelessness, taking, et al on a level of our consciousness that we don’t, in the moment, have access to.

    Or (maybe)as Prurock said, “Oh, why ask why…”

    (PS Sorry your stuff is gone; it sucks.)

    P@Peg Alford
    Fiction editor
    identitytheory.com

    Peg Alford’s Blog:
    http://www.identitytheory.com/alford/index.html
    . . . Your open door to all things fiction writing and the creative life . .

  19. Person

    What kind of stupid 9th grade English class were you in? You think you’re special because you read Golding’s The Lord of the Flies and argued the point that man is basically evil? And somehow that makes you different? Clearly your English teacher was just on crack, and don’t give yourself too much credit for not conforming. Plenty of people interpretted the book as proclaiming the opposite of what you learned in English class. Actually, it’s a book to make you think, so there is no right answer, and you’re not somehow different or special for going against the supposed norm.

  20. zephoria

    Person – i know that many people thought differently, but such a perspective was not welcome where i grew up, even though the book was state mandated to have precisely that conversation. Sorry that your misreading got you so upset.

Comments are closed.