This essay,
Catastrophize,
was written at the same time as
Render Unto Cæsar.
I am indebted to Paige Rose PhD who contributed material for this
conversation.
You wouldn't be alone (I promise it's not just you) if the conclusion
you're drawing from what you're
seeing on the news
and hearing on prime time
talking heads
shows,
is that
the world
is not in a good place right now. And in justifying that, you won't
even have to resort to opening the twin Pandora's boxes of accusations
of political bias, or that it's strictly business (bad
news
sells) which goeswith concluding it (as
Alan Watts
may have said). Left to all our own devices in the absence of any other
possibility, we'll conclude "We are in dire straits.". That's actually
our
default context.
And I really want you to get this: there's no erudition
or intelligence in concluding it. Concluding it, is just what human
beings do. We conclude
"something's
wrong".
We are in "Panic 101".
If you look closer,
unflinchingly
and
rigorously,
you may discover what's missing from the overall doomsday scenario
context which has become de rigueur and in which events
are construed as catastrophes, and catastrophe after catastrophe is
cited as evidence that
something's wrong.
And in the absence of another context aside from
this default,
what we're likely to do is continue to catastrophize
(there really is such a verb in the
English
language) endlessly.
Definition
catastrophize
verb
to think
about the worst things that could possibly happen in a situation;
to consider
a situation as much worse or much more
serious than it really is
<unquote>
When we catastrophize, we respond to
world
events as they unfold with no responsibility for the context in
which they unfold. Be clear
the world
doesn't create the context in which its events unfold,
the world
doesn't create the quality of its events as they occur for us, and
the world
certainly doesn't create the context in which the quality of its events
occur for us. Like it or not, we do. In the absence of
creating a context in which the quality of
world
events occur for us, things look dire. So when we catastrophize, it's
not so much a response to what's happening, as it's a function of our
failure to be responsible for the context in which the quality of
what's happening, occurs. "But wait" you say, "Bad things
are happening Laurence.". No, things are
happening, to which we add (we embellish with) "bad" when we
catastrophize. That's a tough distinction. But this is a
graduate
conversation:
very
Zen,
and very down.
Now look: maybe (just maybe) we don't have to be stuck with this; maybe
(just maybe) it doesn't really have to be this way; maybe (just maybe)
there's something else that's missing which if present, would
make a difference
- like a missing
view.
So with all of that said, here's my version of "catastrophize":
Definition
catastrophize
verb
to compulsively ascribe bad outcomes to life turning out the way it
turns out, while not being responsible for the context of the
quality of life, and
eschewing
the possibility of
making a difference
anyway
<unquote>
The view
we may be missing is life turns out just and only the way it turns out,
and never any other way. Ever. Period. It's been doing it for
millennia. It will be doing it for millennia to come, no matter what we
think
or say about it or
opine
or prefer.
The view
we may be missing is:
world
events are not bad (nor good, for that matter), they're just life
turning out the way it turns out. What we
think
or say about it or
opine
or prefer makes no difference.
The view
we may be missing is although it makes no difference what we do
in the face of
life turning out the way it turns out, that doesn't preclude the
possibility of us
making a difference!
Yes it sounds like an irreconcilable contradiction. It's not. It's a
tough distinction. This is a
graduate
conversation,
very
Zen,
very down.
Using life turning out the way it turns out to justify not
making a difference,
is inauthentic at best,
Self-defeating
at worst, and may be the real catastrophe.
