Phillip Lopate on Essays and Doubts

The essay titled "Essay, an Exercise in Doubt" by Phillip Lopate, was published in NY Times online opinion pages during February 2013. Here, the author explains how an essay and doubts are essentially related.

He begins by talking about his personal viewpoint as an essayist - about his child ambitions to become one, and how essays are less glamorous than fiction or poetry, and about the freedom that comes with lower expectations. Although there have been warnings about the demise of essays, he speculates that it has in fact been resurgent in the recent years, maybe as we are all ultimately unsure and divided, which is what feeds an essay.

The author then goes into more detail about what an essay could mean - something that invites contradictions, self-doubt and one to keep track of consciousness, after which you'd find yourself doubling back. He mentions Theodor Adorno who said that basic law of an essay is heresy, but its also something that makes people uncomfortable, and hence is usually opposed.

Lopate also talks about how essays have found their way into school or college applications, and hold a certain importance. There are tutors willing to work on specifically this, but according to him all of this leads to a problem - the student is expected to "advertise" himself, thereby going around the self doubt and uncertainty that drives an essay. He mentions about the troubles his own daughter faced in school - an essay about ideas of melancholy, and another that argued the validity of both sides of an argument, were reproved by the higher authorities.

He goes on to encourage doubt, first by making a sensible point that arguments must be with oneself, especially for young writers so that they get past their self righteousness and defensiveness that are common during such an age. Then he talks about how doubt plays a role in his life, like a companion, and fills his mind with "if's" and "but's", constantly leading to second guessing himself; he believes that there's a part of him that always assumes he's wrong. So one should embrace doubts, he says, it makes one takes risks and its an integral part of life.

The author concludes by pointing out the only danger in living this way, that is to become smug about one's capacity to doubt, and ends in a seemingly negative manner, because when he says that it allows him to 'forgive himself in advance for falling short of the mark', he vouches for mediocrity.

Lopate's style of writing is simple and easy to understand and follow. The arguments, although very few, sufficiently support his case. He appears to be against the rules and conventions of the society, that  are basically against anything different, but then he looks at them objectively as well. I'd guess its one of, if not the only, the right ways to put forth an argument. His notions about doubts being a big part of life, and not just essays, is something I agree with - for how does one come to a conclusion if certain arguments are ignored?

Brain Jay Stanley on Mind and Body

observing the surface - face

point - mind body separate

going deeper - mind is matter

flesh

prejudice against flesh - obesity

shame - clothes

shame against insides of body

sqeamishness of bodies - fear of death

but matter lords over mind

but matter is not stupid - does a better job with body than a conscious effort woudl have

beneath all this - is unintelligence

The essay titled "I Am Not This Body" by Brian Jay Stanley was published in May 2013 on the NY Times online opinion pages. Here, he talks about the apparent separation of the mind and body, and the anxiety and stress that goes along with it.

He begins by observing the surface of the body - his face - and compares it with an alien planet. He sees his mind and body as two separate entities, and the relationship between the two is awkward. Going under the surface, he explains how his mind is nothing but matter, and talks about a past experience when he was dissecting a pigs brain.

According to Stanley, there seems to exist a prejudice against "flesh", stating his case by taking the example of how obesity is judged. He also mentions the feeling of shame associated with exposed flesh, and the insides like mucus or gas. X-rays reveal even more seemingly chaotic assembly of the different parts inside.

This nervousness about the physicality, he says, has a direct influence on how we see death -  the decay exposes the insides, causing one to fear, or prefer being cremated so as to not be seen. But despite all this, matter seems to rule over mind - minute organisms can make complete changes to plans, brightest of minds are easily killed by hard surfaces, and the body seems to do a better job of taking care of itself compared to a conscious effort.

The author's style is very descriptive, and appears to paint dreary pictures using long and detailed sentences. He makes efficient use of symbolism, like in the final paragraph where he compares the complex structures of a computer to the human body - its alienating he says, how beneath all the intelligence is only the unintelligent "stupid" matter.

The narration is simple and organised, with each paragraph making a single point, before moving on to the next one. While the conclusion is apt and more personal than a general viewpoint, the style and the way points are put across are creative, and gives me content and ideas to use for my own purposes.

David McRaney on Survivorship Bias

Next essay in this list is by the journalist David McRaney, who is the author of the blog and book named You Are Not So Smart. The essay was published in May 2013, and here he talks about the common misconception, that you should focus on the successful if you wish to be successful, otherwise known as the "survivorship bias".

David McRaney begins with a story, giving only minimal details, thereby inducing suspense; I'm immediately hooked. Then after elaborating different threads, he comes to the actual point, that of a statistician called Abraham Wald. We get an overview as to what kind of a person he was, and how he liked to solve problems, before going into the plight of air bombers in wars - their chance of survival out on the field was fifty-fifty. The author then explains how Wald's insight helped in solving this problem - he took into account not only the planes that survived, but also the ones that didn't make it back, successfully preventing the survivorship bias.

This bias is then detailed further, about how it makes one neglect information that aren't immediately visible due to its failure to attract the limelight. The author makes his point by taking examples from successful restaurants, books and companies, and also quotes a psychologist and a Google engineer. He then explores the role of luck that plays into this topic, with the help of an experiment done by a psychologist Richard Wiseman.

McRaney explains how the bias also skews ones vision of success, by mentioning how people generally consider older things - like cars, paintings and even old age people - to be better because they survived. He says one succumbs to this bias because you are terrible at statistics, and the advertisement companies at times take advantage of this fact, by giving the limelight to only the one off cases to make far fetched claims. The bias is not just within you, he says, but also in institutions, and its difficult to detect.

The author uses short sentences interspersed by the occasional longer one, and effectively makes use of examples from wide ranging domains, strengthening his case against this bias. He makes arguments taking real world stories, and uses sufficiently researched materials. The style is simple and semi formal.

He concludes suggesting how this bias can be fought, by being aware of all the aspects and not just the immediately visible ones, and by being open to chance and randomness. He also gives closure to Wald's story, by explaining his further achievements, and how he is seen today.

The essay reminds me of all the times I succumbed to such a bias, without even being aware of it. It does a good job of explaining how and the different ways it works, giving me insight into how it must be tackled.

This is a journal that is to be a record of my daily reading - a typical case of the cycle of consumption followed by production. It is something I've been meaning to do for a while, but the fact that it gets materialised only now due to it being a part of my post graduation studies, could be an indication for the struggles to come. Either way, this should make for an useful experience.

22 June '13
#1: Paul Graham on Writing and Speaking

This essay by Paul Graham, who is the founder of the startup incubator Y Combinator, was published in March 2012 on his personal website. Its about exactly what the title says - a small comparison between writing and speaking, or rather, why he prefers writing over speaking.

He makes the argument by reflecting on personal experiences from his past, both as an observer and a participant. With an informal style, and use of relatively short sentences and paragraphs, he effectively separates out the intricacies of writing and speaking, when it comes to putting your idea across. He also has side notes to further explain a few points so as to not give any room for contradictions or conflicts, making it easier for the reader to understand.

Paul Graham begins with his verdict itself, something that one usually finds at the end, about how writing is a better medium to clearly articulate ideas, and I'd agree, as "good speaking" is more direct and instant - you get a reaction immediately, and one needs to be on his toes constantly. He openly admits that he is not a good speaker, and also that he'd rather be a good writer than a good speaker, indicating the importance of getting ideas across, than merely engaging an audience.

He goes on to explore other aspects of speaking, like the audience, which although have roles in both, it has a steeper affect on speaking. He concludes by mentioning a couple of advantages of speaking, one being that of mass motivation - public speaking can bring about a force much more powerful than writing could do, the famous speech "I Have A Dream" by Martin Luther King being the most obvious example.

The points are simple, clear, well explained, and largely derived from his own experiences, and they are for the most part in line with my thoughts regarding this topic. I would definitely look back on this whenever scoping for information or guidance.