#an over-simplification: you are allowed to care for your family over everything else | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

boyfridged · 1 year

Text

i’ve been thinking a lot about what is so unique and appealing about 80s robin jay’s moral standing that got completely lost in plot later on. and i think a huge part of it is that in a genre so focused on crime-fighting, his motivations and approach don’t focus on the category of crime at all. in fact, he doesn’t seem to believe in any moral dogma; and it’s not motivated by nihilism, but rather his open-heartedness and relational ethical outlook.

we first meet (post-crisis) jay when he is stealing. when confronted about his actions by bruce he’s confident that he didn’t do anything wrong – he’s not apologetic, he doesn’t seem to think that he has morally failed on any account. later on, when confronted by batman again, jay says that he’s no “crook.” at this point, the reader might assume that jay has no concept of wrong-doing, or that stealing is just not one of the deeds that he considers wrong-doing. yet, later on we see jay so intent on stopping ma gunn and her students, refusing to be implicit in their actions. there are, of course, lots of reasons for which we can assume he was against stealing in this specific instance (an authority figure being involved, the target, the motivations, the school itself being an abusive environment etc.), but what we gather is that jay has an extremely strong sense of justice and is committed to moral duty. that's all typical for characters in superhero comics, isn't it? however, what remains distinctive is that this moral duty is not dictated by any dogma – he trusts his moral instincts. this attitude – his distrust toward power structures, confidence in his moral compass, and situational approach, is something that is maintained throughout his robin run. it is also evident in how he evaluates other people – we never see him condemning his parents, for example, and that includes willis, who was a petty criminal. i think from there arises the potential for a rift between bruce and jay that could be, have jay lived, far more utilised in batman comics than it was within his short robin run.

after all, while bruce’s approach is often called a ‘philosophy of love and care,’ he doesn’t ascribe to the ethics of care [eoc] (as defined in modern scholarship btw) in the same way that jay does. ethics of care ‘deny that morality consists in obedience to a universal law’ and focus on the ideals of caring for other people and non-institutionalized justice. bruce, while obviously caring, is still bound by his belief in the legal system and deontological norms. he is benevolent, but he is also ultimately morally committed to the idea of a legal system and thus frames criminals as failing to meet these moral (legal-adjacent) standards (even when he recognizes it is a result of their circumstances). in other words, he might think that a criminal is a good person despite leading a life of crime. meanwhile, for jay there is no despite; jay doesn't think that engaging in crime says anything about a person's moral personality at all. morality, for him, is more of an emotional practice, grounded in empathy and the question of what he can do for people ‘here and now.’ he doesn’t ascribe to maxims nor utilitarian calculations. for jay, in morality, there’s no place for impartiality that bruce believes in; moral decisions are embedded within a net of interpersonal relationships and social structures that cannot be generalised like the law or even a “moral code” does it. it’s all about responsiveness.

to sum up, jay's moral compass is relative and passionate in a way that doesn't fit batman's philosophy. this is mostly because bruce wants to avoid the sort of arbitrariness that seems to guide eoc. also, both for vigilantism, and jay, eoc poses a challenge in the sense that it doesn't create a certain 'intellectualised' distance from both the victims and the perpetrators; there's no proximity in the judgment; it's emotional.

all of this is of course hardly relevant post-2004. there might be minimal space for accommodating some of it within the canon progression (for example, the fact that eoc typically emphasises the responsibility that comes with pre-existing familial relationships and allows for prioritizing them, as well as the flexibility regarding moral deliberations), but the utilitarian framework and the question of stopping the crime vs controlling the underworld is not something that can be easily reconciled with jay’s previous lack of interest in labeling crime.

#fyi i'm ignoring a single panel in which jay says 'evil wins. he chose the life of crime' because i think there's much more nuance to that #as in: choosing a life of crime to deliberately cause harm is a whole another matter #also: inb4 this post is not bruce slander. please do not read it as such #as i said eoc is highly criticised for being arbitrary which is something that bruce seeks to avoid #also ethics of care are highly controversial esp that their early iterations are gender essentialist and ascribe this attitude to women #wow look at me accidentally girl-coding jay #but also on the topic of post-res jay.#it's typically assumed that ethics of care take a family model and extend it into morality as a whole #'the ethics of care considers the family as the primary sphere in which to understand ethical behavior'#so #an over-simplification: you are allowed to care for your family over everything else #re: jay's lack of understanding of bruce's conflict in duty as batman vs father #for jay there's no dilemma. how you conduct yourself in the familial context determines who you are as a person #also if you are interested in eoc feel free to ask because googling will only confuse you...#as a term it's used in many weird ways. but i'm thinking about a general line of thought that evolves into slote's philosophy #look at me giving in and bringing philosophy into comics. sorry. i tried to simplify it as much as possible #i didn't even say anything on criminology and the label and the strain theories.#i'm so brave for not info-dumping #i said even though i just info-dumped #jay.zip #jay.txt #dc #fatal flaw #core texts #robin days

203 notes · View notes

bookandcover · 3 years

Photo

The first book I finished in 2021! I’ll keep track more closely of how many books I read this year because these late update posts make everything funky....

The December book for our family’s Anti-Racism Book Club, “So You Want To Talk About Race,” felt quite different than the other books we’ve read so far, and its different purpose is clearly stated in the preface. Ijeoma Oluo writes that this book to made to be used, like a manual, like a playbook, enabling fundamental, necessary, and numerous conversations about race.

At first, I admit, this put me off a bit (please stay with me, I’ll explain how I examined this reaction in myself). The simplification of the purpose of the book initially rankled; the statement that these were answers to questions about race, definitions without room for debate, caused me to want to push back to say, “while surely there are many perspectives on these topics among Black writers, thinkers, activists, and political leaders.” That rankling was something this book caused me to examine in myself. To what extent was my “high bar” for these kinds of conversations, my conviction that any writer ought to admit she’s offering her perspective while others may disagree, born of my deeply-ingrained, racist viewpoint? What are my assumptions about what scholarship and scholarly conversation look like? Because those very assumptions are developed within a white supremacist educational framework.

As I moved through this book, I increasingly saw Oluo’s direct approach as a tool. Throughout she uses strong and persuasive language, and in not allowing room for debate or complex variations, she presents a persuasive dialectic (which is, I should note, a tool used by white men through generations of writing, and not something I had any right to call out in Oluo). This approach also fits the purpose of her book. She does not intend to cover any topic exhaustively. This book is a starting point. It sets some ground rules and then it sparks conversation. This is the kind of book that needs to be persuasive and pervasive, that needs to exist as an universal starting point. Did I want more involved discussion of intersectionality? Absolutely. Can I get that by seeking out the work of other Black Feminists who intend to be exhaustive in their approach? Absolutely. Can I use the Works Cited pages of “So You Want to Talk About Race?” as a reading guide? Absolutely.

I saw the ways in which my assumptions about direct address were my own brand of—subversive, dangerously subtle—tone policing. I wanted this talking about race to look like the academic discussions I’ve been trained to expect (again, by that white supremacist educational framework).

In a similar vein, I also, at times while reading this book, said to myself “this is a strong perspective, a lot of other Black people must have varied perspectives on this topic.” And while this is undoubtably true—there are varied perspectives on everything—what was it in me that made me need to say this to myself? To counter, or soften Oluo's perspective? That raises a lot of alarm bells about myself and my thinking. Do I expect more “couching” of one’s perspective, more acknowledgement that this is “a perspective” from Oluo because she’s a Black woman? Would I excuse directness and persuasive language differently in someone else? Is her perspective actually strong or extreme, or am I just seeing it that way?

Trying to answer some of these questions, I spent time digging through Oluo’s R Kelly tweets (which she refers to in passing in the book) and reading the comments responding to her, looking at the profiles of these responders and trying to assess the thoughts of other Black men and women on this topic. There was a lot of variation in perspective. I thought about how the perspectives of her responders are also shaped and influenced by their contexts (we all have internalized racism and sexism). I came to the conclusion, ultimately, that someone needs to present the perspective Oluo offers, and even if not everyone agrees, there is meaningful discussion that occurs because she takes a directly-worded stance. I’m still examining this conclusion in myself, though, as I know there is a lot buried, ingrained, and assumed here. And, one clear sign of how deeply ingrained my racism around tone and academic approach is is the fact that tone and approach are things I thought about a lot while reading this book and that we talked a lot about in our family discussion. Not the content of the book (although we did cover a lot of that), not what we can do (although we did eventually get to that, but in too passing of a way), but the tone and the approach of the book was the first focus of our discussion…that’s concerning.

The sections of the book I thought the most about were the sections on checking your privilege and on tone policing (relevant to the above). In the section on police brutality, I had the horrifying realization that, multiple times over the past several years, I have gleefully told people “I’ve never gotten a speeding ticket! I’ve never even been pulled over.” I’m 30 years old and I’ve been driving for 14+ years. This statement implied, for me, “I’m a good driver.” And it NEVER ONCE occurred to me that the correct logic is, in fact: “I’ve never been pulled over! And that’s because I’m white.” I tried to think back to who I’ve said this in front of or to. I thought about how Oluo would feel hearing this statement from me when she, probably also a good driver, has nevertheless been pulled over a lot. I know said “I’ve never been pulled over” like I thought this was something to brag about. So, that was an important realization.

In the section on checking your privilege, I was incredibly inspired by the idea—and I never thought about it in quite these terms before—that in examining your privilege you should be aware that, in the areas where you have the most privilege, you can make the biggest positive impact for others without that same privilege. “Check your privilege” doesn’t need to only mean “stop rubbing it in others’ faces.” It can mean check in with it, understand it, and use it. Wherever you are privileged, you are powerful. You can use that power to make a difference. I had a lot of thoughts about ways I can do this. This also built my confidence a lot. I know I have a lot of privilege. I’ve been so often someone who is listened to and I have so many opportunities to lever that—both in speaking up and in creating spaces for others to speak, to listen with attention that makes other white people follow my lead in listening, to talk about racism actively with other white people, to work on projects in my community that need care and time and energy. I found this really motivating!

I’m grateful for Oluo’s book and grateful for this as a reading cornerstone of our Book Club. I’m also grateful to my sister, who chose this book for us to read, because that is the value of a book club…you are not always the book chooser. I don’t think I would have chosen this book—that, again, worth noting to myself—and I’m glad I was asked to read it.

[Note: I write these Book and Cover posts for myself, but I’ve continued to put them on the internet…that means they have the potential to be visible to others. If I’ve written something here that you disagree with, or that you want to discuss, I hope you feel you can reach out to me. I never want to ask that of someone else. But I do want to at least say, a small thing, that I would like it if you did. I know I am out of my depth here, in so many ways I can’t even see.]

#so you want to talk about race #ijeoma oluo #anti-racism #important reading #check your privilege #tone policing #tw: discussions of white supremacy #first book of 2021

1 note · View note

meraenthusiast · 4 years

Text

The Geometry Of Wealth – How Money Figures In A Joyful Life

The Geometry Of Wealth

I love to read. It’s also my #1 prescription for anyone that suffers with insomnia. I typically average 5-7 books a month and usually get a list of book ideas from either the books I read (they reference other books) or from other people.

When I met with Dr. Cherry Chen (The Real Estate Physician) in Dallas a few months ago, I asked her what she was reading.

She immediately told me to buy “The Geometry Of Wealth.” Within about 60 seconds, Amazon claimed that a new copy would be at my doorstep in two days with Free shipping! I love Amazon.

Dr. Cherry was right, The Geometry of Wealth by Brian Portnoy was a great read and I’ve included the highlights in case you decide to forgo reading it yourself.

A Story In Three Parts

The Geometry of Wealth is a story told in three parts, which as you can probably tell from the title, has to do with shapes:

Circle – Define Purpose

Triangle – Set Priorities

Square – Tactics

These represent the journey from purpose to priorities to tactics. Each step has a primary action associated with it.

The first is adaptation.

The second is prioritization.

The third is simplification.

The framework builds a bridge from mindset to action.

Money Life

Portnoy uses the term “money life” throughout the book which has four dimensions that we’re all familiar with:

Earning

Spending

Saving

Investing

He states that with money, it’s an isolating event as most of us try to figure it out ourselves which causes us to face three challenges:

We have more control over our own finances.

We are wired to make BAD money decisions.

WE have less room for error.

Let’s take a look at each one in more detail…

Challenge #1: You’re in charge – like it or not

With a deluge of information readily available at our fingertips, it’s now easier than ever to find out virtually anything you can imagine. No more getting down the encyclopedia off the shelf. We simply grab our smartphones and voila, we have our answers.

With more information comes more control. It seems that many people are using this to manage their long-term financial health which is also increasing anxiety.

Even though information is abundant, it seems that our overall confidence in being able to enjoy a comfortable retirement is low.

Research shows that only 18% of workers were “very confident” about having enough money after they stopped working.

Challenge #2: You’re doing it backwards

The second problem is even bigger: It’s ourselves.

We’re wired to steer us towards making lousy financial decisions.

A perfect example of this is regarding the stock market. When the market drops, we feel less secure. Humans have a stronger tendency towards losing something rather than gaining.

We worry that the market will continue to fall and many times sell low but don’t have a problem buying when the markets are going up.

Would you ever race to Target when they mark up something you want to buy but avoid it when it goes on sale? Of course you wouldn’t but we do it everyday regarding the stock market.

Don’t worry, it’s not your fault! We can’t help how God made us.

Challenge #3: You don’t have much room for error

It’s gotten harder to make a good living. This is one of the key shifts and is the consequence of automation in the workplace.

A perfect example of this is what orthodontists are up against…..The Smile Direct Club. Now consumers can bypass having to see an orthodontist to get straight teeth…heck they don’t even have to leave their homes as everything that’s needed is shipped to them.

Many service professionals such as law and medicine are now seeing a stagnation of incomes and thinning ranks.

Are these three challenges causing us to be unhappy? You’d actually be surprised at what really drives up to happiness.

The 40% Solution

Sonja Lyubomirsky, a professor of psychology at the University of California, argues that there are three factors which determine human fulfillment. These are:

Disposition: Who you are. (Genetically speaking)

Circumstance: What you face.

Intention: What you do.

Disposition

According to the pie chart below: our built-in genetic disposition drives about half of the happiness (moods generally) we experience.

I’d agree to this as I’m more of a homebody keep to myself person, which makes me happy, but my wife is the outgoing, hanging out with people person which makes her happy.

I guess what they say is true, “Different strokes for different folks.”

Circumstance

Only a small portion of our contentment (10%) is determined by life’s circumstances. So it really doesn’t matter if you live in a mansion or shack, you have a great family life or going through a nasty divorce, or whether you’re an all-A student or the bottom of your class – these and other examples have only a slight impact on our happiness. Say it ain’t so!

The reason for this goes back to how we’re hard wired. Our brain as the amazing ability to adapt and grow accustomed to everything, whether good or bad. It’s actually a remarkable defense mechanism as it allows us to transcend most setbacks in life.

Remember, “it ain’t how hard you hit, it’s how hard you get hit and keep moving FORWARD.” So pain and misfortunes are rarely going to hold us back because of this.

This is also true on the flip side of things. Our great outcomes and highs in life (buying that brand new car!) evaporates very quickly which is also known as “hedonic adaptation“.

Intention

According to the research in The Geometry of Wealth, it appears that we DO have some control over our destiny – about 40%.

Your choices of THOUGHT and ACTION make a big difference.

I’ve discussed this in the past with these two articles:

The 10X Rule – Grant Cardone

Scarcity vs Abundant Mindset

Lyubomirsky states that knowing that there’s always a balance between what’s in our control and what’s not alleviates some of the pressure of believing that through raw willpower, we can become someone we’re not. So there’s no need to abide by unachievable standards.

The Circle – Purpose

The first step in “The Geometry of Wealth” is figuring out where you want to go. Money serves to push us in that direction. Sorry, you can’t get this from anyone else but yourself.

Only you know where you REALLY want to go in life. As you know that life is a journey of constant ups and downs and the circle symbolizes that we’re never done figuring it out.

To me, one of the biggest joys of life is sitting back and enjoying the ride.

What Matters

There is no joy in life without struggle and “The Geometry of Wealth” lays out the four sources of a joyful life:

1) Connection

Humans are social creatures and harbor an unwavering need to belong. We are wired to be social (some more than others).

Psychologist Timothy Wilson suggests that, “Happiness research will tell you the number one predictor of how happy people are is the quality of their social relationships.”

Social connections are a deep source of meaning.

2) Control

We all crave control and want to determine our own destiny. We don’t want others to tell us what to do. (Just ask my kids!)

But with more control comes more choices. The more we have, the more miserable we become.

A perfect example of this is when someone is hungry and goes into a restaurant for a good ole burger and fries. You used to be able to say, “I want a cheeseburger and fry” but now there are too many choices that the restaurant must ask you:

What do you want on your burger? Cheese? Lettuce? Ketchup?

What type of bun? Regular, wheat or jalapeno?

Fries? Tater tots? Sweet potato fries? Onion rings?

What size?

Drinks?

After all those choices, you may not be as hungry as you started off as.

The ability to define one’s own predicament, control one’s attitude, and respond to adversity can be an incredible source of inner strength.

People with a good story about who they are and where they’re going are MORE content than those without one.

3) Competence

What’s the first question a stranger usually asks you? Most of the time it has to do with what we “do”.

For most of us, work means something more than just getting a pay check. What we “do” in life is a deep source of meaning. It defines us.

Being good at something you care about is one of life’s most profound sources of fulfillment.

4) Context

If you were to picture the three C’s above as intersecting circles, then context is the larger circle surrounding them.

Context is a sense of purpose. We find joy when we serve something beyond ourselves.

The Triangle – Priorities

The strategy for achieving wealth starts with mapping priorities represented by triangles, the three points of which illustrate three steps.

To grow and stay wealthy, we should:

Protect – Think risk first.

Match – Keep resources in balance.

Reach – Always aspire for more.

Protect

Remember, the pain of losses is GREATER than the pleasure of gain. This is called “loss aversion.” We are wired this way. There’s no way around it. Psychologists have found that our sensitivity to losses is about twice as much as it is to gains, a roughly 2:1 ratio.

An example of this is that a $100 loss feels about twice as bad as a $100 gain feels good.

All in all, we like risk, we just don’t like losses. In life, successfully managing the daily balance between risk seeking and risk aversion is the first key to wealth.

Match

Portnoy calls mapping our money goals “matching.”

He states that we have two types of goals:

Terminal goals – usually have a fixed amount attached to it such as a mortgage.

Flow goals – the example he uses is retirement. Most people make the mistake and count retirement as a terminal goal (they want to accumulate X to live off of after they stop working).

Financial planning guru, Michael Kitces, says that “The fundamental challenge of goals-based investing is that we don’t really have a clue what our goals actually are.”

We’re poor at predicting what we want in the future. We assume that what we prefer now is what we’ll prefer down the road, that our values will go unchanged and that life’s unpredictable events won’t upend our assumptions.

Portnoy recommends that we target our goals appropriately and adapt as necessary.

Reach

Achieving the “reach” stage should bring us pride and joy as we’ve won the money game. Remember that wealth is funded contentment. We’re now able to reach for more by remaining aspirational still striving to get better.

The Geometry Of Wealth states that a critical ingredient in the recipe of growing and staying wealthy is expressing gratitude.

Think about it, are you happier during times of receiving or giving. I find the most joy when I know I can help better someone’s life by the giving of my time or money.

The Square – Simplify

The four corners of a square are used to illuminate the four primary considerations of reasonable investment outcomes:

The growth we hope to achieve

The emotional pain and/or sacrifice of achieving that growth

How any additional investments fit into your existing portfolio

The flexibility to change one’s mind about any particular decision

Portnoy believes that these four corners should form a template for any investment decision.

Cocktail Party Summary

At the end of The Geometry Of Wealth, the author gives a nice cocktail party summary:

Does money buy happiness? The answer to this timeless question hinges on the distinction between being rich and being wealthy. One is the quest for more money, the other is funded contentment. Both modern neuroscience and ancient philosophy demonstrate that the quest for more is an unsatisfying treadmill.

Meanwhile, the ability to underwrite a meaningful life is achievable for anyone who combines the right mindset and the right plan.

The Geometry of Wealth shows the three steps to doing so, centering on adaptation, prioritization, and simplification: Flexibility defining one’s purpose, employing the right strategy, and focusing on the right decision.

Three basic shapes – a circle, triangle and square – simplify the details of these three steps.

The post The Geometry Of Wealth – How Money Figures In A Joyful Life appeared first on Debt Free Dr..

from Debt Free Dr. https://ift.tt/2UpMSrT via IFTTT

#IFTTT #Debt Free Dr.

0 notes