Life is a Balance.
Written on 25 July 2010
Life is a balance of things. To be happy and successful, you need to accomplish a lot of things at the same time – you have to survive: food, shelter, clothing, etc.; you have to maintain relationships with those around you: family, friends, lovers; you have to manage your own happiness: your spiritual well-being, your hobbies, the things that bring you joy.
Well consider this: there are pre-set ways to do this already out there in life. Tested and proven ways that will provide you with answers to life’s most difficult questions: how to fit in to society, how to treat your parents, how to date, what to do for work. These pre-set methods are provided by culture or society, by religion, or by your parents. If you just accept one of these, its tenets or guidance will enable you to balance the complexities of life — and be happy!
But what about those of us that are caught at the edges? At a time when culture is shifting or religions are battling? At a time when there are so many religions to choose from and belief in religion is being challenged by a belief in cold, hard science. What about those of us that see the future as being guided by something tangibly different from the past? Are we doomed to live unhappy – always searching for new ways of doing things? Always trying to figure out how to balance our own lives, with no one to turn to that can provide useful or functional answers?
What about those that see our current culture as broken and want to do something about it? Want to forge new trails of work and love to provide new answers, new methods – a new culture for others to follow.
I suppose the harsh realities of life dictate that some of us will be successful and happy and others will not. Some of us will find a path that works for us, and others will toil our entire lives, seeking comfort and happiness — seeking a balance that brings our hearts and minds together and puts them at ease.
What to do?
So let’s consider what this might take to accomplish. I’ve heard that there are three areas of life: work, play, and love (I believe this came originally from a quote by Lady Bird Johnson – Lyndon Johnson’s wife). Let’s start by considering if these cover all areas of life:
- Work: This could be construed as everything that is required for survival: food, clothing, shelter and whatever it takes to ensure your continued ability to acquire these things. In our culture today, this primarily means money. How do you get it? How do you hold on to it? How do you keep it coming?
- Play: All work and no play make Jack a dull boy. What rejuvenates you? What feeds your heart and soul? What makes it worth getting up in the morning or staying up late at night? What do you live for?
- Love: Family – the one you’re born into and the one you form on your own, relationships, community, friends, and lovers. When I think about love in this context, I don’t see it as being about romantic love or passion, it’s more about how you relate to the people around you. It’s about love for your fellow man, compassion perhaps. To put it another way, it’s about furthering the human race. It’s about ensuring that “we” continue to get better — and by better, I mean more capable of surviving. This may include having children, being nice to people, or doing community service. It also may include creating art that inspires others, or books that educate, or science that furthers technological advancement.
In retrospect, I don’t know that my three initial terms are accurate. Let’s choose another three based on the descriptions I gave for the first three:
- Survival
- Passion
- Community
I think these terms better capture the descriptions that I wrote above, although they’re not quite as catchy. I suppose either will work.
But that still leaves the question: is that everything? If you balance survival, passion, and community in your life; have you done it? Are you happy? Is that all there is to it?
Another way to consider this from would be our need to satisfy our intellect, our emotions, and our spiritual side. Is that included in this balance? Where does religion fall in my proposal?
I would argue that our intellect’s job is to solve problems, and their is a great problem laid out here – balancing these things. So the intellect should be kept busy and happy. Emotions are a direct driver of the Passion element, and therefore should also be taken care of. This only leaves spirituality – and what is that anyway? I find it very difficult to define in words in our Western culture. My feeling is that it falls somewhere between and amongst Passion and Community, although Survival (and challenges to it) seem to put us in direct contact with our own spirituality. I believe we should be passionate about our spirituality, but our spirituality also connects us with others, and is therefore a big factor in the community that we build around us.
Close
I’m not going to pretend that I’ve solved any of the world’s problems here, but maybe I’ve at least helped myself. I understand that what I’ve laid out is my perception of how to balance my own life. It’s funny isn’t it? I set out to figure out a fundamental explanation of what is required to balance one’s life and be happy. If I was successful, any religion or culture could be described and compared based on how it guides its followers or members to fulfill on these three areas of their lives: Survival, Passion, and Community.
Whether I have accomplished that or not, I would like you to tell me. Perhaps all I’ve done is create another means by which to determine how to fulfill those areas for yourself – a competing culture or religion, if you will.
Let me know what you think, and specifically let me know if you think I’ve correctly identified the three areas:
If you balance Survival, Passion, and Community, will you be happy?
Filed in: Philosophizing,Relationships,Self-Improvement.
Let me start by asking this question: is the solution to this problem in any one instance, transferable to other instances? Does one person’s solution enlighten another? Are we solving a disease, which has a single answer, or a virus which mutates as it passes from one individual to the next? The answer need not be either/or. If it is not, then to what extent does solving the problem for one help another? Maslow has his hierarchy of needs, with self-actualization at the top. Does the bottom of that triangle then represent those solutions which are useful across human beings and the top, self-actualization, involve factors unique to each individual? Thus, then, with respect to this triangle, there remains the requirement, documented in books such as Joseph Campbell’s The Hero Has A Thousand Faces (http://bit.ly/VQd22), that the individual sets off in search of his Existentialist Holy Grail, taking the risk that he may never find it.
Thanks, Arasmus.
I agree this is one of the complexities of understanding ourselves – the duality of being the same and different simultaneously. We definitely desire to determine which is which, but it may be a useless pursuit at the end of the day.
It hadn’t occurred to me before, but as we innately prefer a black and white (or categorized) view of the world, perhaps these questions hint at a need to move beyond this. Let me rephrase – we define the world based upon our experiences within it, but there is so much more going on than we personally experience. Our capacity is limited in this way. Similarly, the information that we do receive, we primarily parse into categories – initially confirming the views that we already hold, and only when all of our current models completely break, do we create a new model. However, the reality is that we are still stuck within the need to view the world through a paradigm that we define – a paradigm that enables us to comprehend, define, classify our experiences.
What if we could stop classifying and simply experience with new eyes. Ha!! Now that I’ve gotten here, it’s all quite Buddhist, isn’t it? Live in the moment, no judgements, etc…
Ah life, where everything new is old…