Balance

[Doktor Howl]

This is all excellent stuff.

I've learned to stop speaking of balance and start speaking of compromise (in the sense that compromise is a solution that pisses off everyone equally)  and to keep such chatter exclusively in the realm of "applied" problems, where I am trying to maximize two mutually exclusive traits and need to find a least miserable middle.

A great example of this is looking for work. Ideally you want to be paid like a CEO for the work of a stoner kid on weekend nights (and ideally only a few minutes of even that), and you want it to require the qualifications of a lobotomized goldfish.

This is when "compromise" comes into play. In reality, none of these things coexist. You have to look for the maximum wage with the best qualifications you can muster and the fewest hours and least difficulty, risk or just plain madness you can find.

Everyone will find different answers, and unless they enjoy the existential crises of life and are a Doktor, everyone will be miserable.

Not really, though.  Ideally, I'd get paid like pharaohs, but my work would be very challenging, and HR would just be a bad dream.

Instead I have okay pay, moderate challenge, and the HR beast constantly plotting.

[altered]

This is all excellent stuff.

I've learned to stop speaking of balance and start speaking of compromise (in the sense that compromise is a solution that pisses off everyone equally)  and to keep such chatter exclusively in the realm of "applied" problems, where I am trying to maximize two mutually exclusive traits and need to find a least miserable middle.

A great example of this is looking for work. Ideally you want to be paid like a CEO for the work of a stoner kid on weekend nights (and ideally only a few minutes of even that), and you want it to require the qualifications of a lobotomized goldfish.

This is when "compromise" comes into play. In reality, none of these things coexist. You have to look for the maximum wage with the best qualifications you can muster and the fewest hours and least difficulty, risk or just plain madness you can find.

Everyone will find different answers, and unless they enjoy the existential crises of life and are a Doktor, everyone will be miserable.

Not really, though.  Ideally, I'd get paid like pharaohs, but my work would be very challenging, and HR would just be a bad dream.

Instead I have okay pay, moderate challenge, and the HR beast constantly plotting.

Compromise, then.

[Cramulus]

mittens to the OP

"Balance" is one of those words like "Nature" that gives people a stiffy... they think it's somehow connected to "what things should be like" and want to get on board. There's this perception that there is a balancing energy in the universe, and if you align yourself with it, you can dodge harm.

It's a construct though. Look at forests... we used to believe them to be these perfectly little homeostatic ecosystems. The wolves and deer have this natural "balance"-- too many deer, and the wolf population grows and brings it back down. Too many wolves, and the deer population decreases, which also caps the number of wolves. As long as they stay "in balance", this can go on forever.

But dig into the soil. You can see evidence that it hasn't been going on forever, it's just that we generalize the present conditions into infinity. The border of the forest expands and shrinks. History is chaotic. If things are "balanced", it's usually a temporary condition. Sometimes dynamic systems careen out of control. This isn't a violation of a balancing principle, it's also "what things are like".

If you're a wolf, you eat the deer. If you're a deer, you try not to be eaten. There is no law that these things balance each other, it's just how the chips land when the conditions are just right.

We are wrecking the environment. You could say we're violating the balancing principle, disturbing the natural rhythms and this is causing a spiral into disorder. Beavers build a damn and it permanently alters the landscape. Humans wrecking the environment is a "natural" outcome too.

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

CNO, would you be cool with me mashing some of what Cram wrote into your OP and turning it into some Holy Nonsense pages?

[LMNO]

PREACH

[chaotic neutral observer]

CNO, would you be cool with me mashing some of what Cram wrote into your OP and turning it into some Holy Nonsense pages?

Go for it.  You can hack out/rewrite/replace the Star Wars bit if it helps with the flow.  I was trying to put in an easily recognized example of false balance, but that is the best my sleep-deprived brain could come up with, and it felt a bit forced.  I think Cram's wolf/deer bit is more interesting.

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

We all seek balance in our daily lives.  Life-work balance, a balanced diet, balancing the needs of family and friends, balancing exercise and relaxation.

Balance is also needed in the world at large.  Balance between order and chaos, right and left, liberal and conservative, light and dark, good and evil, peanut butter and jelly.

What a crock of crap.

"Balance" is one of those words like "Nature" that gives people a stiffy... they think it's somehow connected to "what things should be like" and want to get on board. There's this perception that there is a balancing energy in the universe, and if you align yourself with it, you can dodge harm.

It's a construct though. Look at forests... we used to believe them to be these perfectly little homeostatic ecosystems. The wolves and deer have this natural "balance"-- too many deer, and the wolf population grows and brings it back down. Too many wolves, and the deer population decreases, which also caps the number of wolves. As long as they stay "in balance", this can go on forever.

But dig into the soil. You can see evidence that it hasn't been going on forever, it's just that we generalize the present conditions into infinity. The border of the forest expands and shrinks. History is chaotic. If things are "balanced", it's usually a temporary condition. Sometimes dynamic systems careen out of control. This isn't a violation of a balancing principle, it's also "what things are like".

If you're a wolf, you eat the deer. If you're a deer, you try not to be eaten. There is no law that these things balance each other, it's just how the chips land when the conditions are just right.

Beyond just being a construct, it's a useless one in almost every context.

Balance between good and evil?  That's like asking for balance between being punched in the balls and not being punched in the balls, or a balance between being disease-free and terminal tuberculosis.  Good and evil don't need to be balanced.  That's a bunch of cosmic yin-yang hippie bullshit.

Star Wars said there needed to be balance between the light and dark sides of the force, but what was the real choice you were being presented with?  Between a bunch of pretentious weirdos in funny robes and a guy who thought it was smarter to blow up planets than to conquer and tax them.  They don't need to be balanced, they need to be institutionalized.

"Work-life balance"?  That's just code for "I hope my company understands that I need to leave the premises sometimes."  You're not taking time off from your job to rest, you're taking time off from your life to work.  You don't need to balance the amount of work you do, you need to minimize it.

You think "smart" and "stupid" need to be balanced?  You think both sides of the argument always deserve equal time?  No, if you're asking for balance, you probably just mean "the other guy is winning and it's making me feel bad so please listen to me".

But if you're here looking for answers, I don't have any easy ones for you. We are wrecking the environment. You could say we're violating the balancing principle, disturbing the natural rhythms and this is causing a spiral into disorder. Beavers build a damn and it permanently alters the landscape. Humans wrecking the environment is a "natural" outcome too. But we're not going to solve any of that with calls for "balance," or somehow "balancing" our insatiable thirst for consumer goods and energy-intensive entertainment with our desire not to render the world uninhabitable for humanity. Nobody seeking balance ever achieved anything notable.  You want to be somebody, you want to do something, you gotta go to the limit.  Balance is for flywheels, gymnasts and chemical equations.

Cram, CNO, look ok?

[hooplala]

Yes.  The only reason to watch star wars is because, unlike real life, things are nice and black & white, the good guys are good and the bad guys are bad, and you can solve all of your problems by chopping people in half.

Wait...you mean chopping people in half doesn't solve all your problems?! 

It's worked for me thus far.

[Cramulus]

love it, QGP 

[chaotic neutral observer]

Cram, CNO, look ok?

That splices together better than I thought it would.
Ship it.

[Cramulus]

my one piece of Flow feedback is that that the line "Beyond just being a construct, it's a useless one in almost every context." is a little confusing because it's easy to miss that "it" refers to balance.


and my own bad grammar -
"perfectly little homeostatic ecosystems"

should be "perfect little homeostatic ecosystems"

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

[LMNO]

Note to self: Hire QG as layout editor when next book happens*.







*approximately in 300 years.

[Cramulus]