063 | Transcending Balance
Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio
063 | Transcending Balance
May 24, 2021
Minute of Transparency: Fear Factor
Today's Topic: Transcending Balance
In this episode:
Moderation In Everything?
Let's Get Philosophical
The Continua Concept
// 1. MODERATION IN EVERYTHING?
I don't know about you - but I grew up hearing the phrase, "Moderation in everything."
But I can't remember where I heard it. Because at home - my parents were more likely to say things were black and white. And the "moderation in everything" suggested an attempt to live in the middle and do a little of both.
A little of the thing you weren't supposed to do - but not enough for it to become a problem.
Example: Alcohol
Moderation in everything suggests you can drink a bit, just don't get carried away
Whereas my parents would say there is no reason to drink at all
So it mustn't have come from my parents. Although I can see scenarios where they would agree with the statement. Areas where the thing in question had no real spiritual significance. Only a matter of doing something irrelevant too much. Something like watching Netflix...my guess is that they would agree with the statement "moderation in everything."
But let's start at the beginning and not only define the words, but try to figure out where it came from.
Starting with dictionary.com we see the word "moderation" defined this way:
restraint
avoidance of extremes or excesses
temperance
And we probably don't need to define the word "everything" as we all probably understand that word…
So the phrase suggests restraining ourselves, or being temperate in everything we do...
Next, I did some research on the phrase itself.
In an article on Digital-MR.com Michalis Michael explains that a Greek man, Kleovoulos o Lindios, coined the phrase in the 6th century B.C. The phrase is in Greek so I'll spare you me trying to read it... But it is loosely translated to mean "moderation is best."
In another article I found on businessinsider.com suggested there is a Swedish word, Lagom (lar-gohm) which means: "Not too little. Not too much. Just right."
This philosophy in Sweden encourages a balanced approach to life - in everything from the number of hours we work to the amount of food we consume. And we all know Sweden is one of the happiest countries on earth - based on research findings done around the globe.
So this is at least one vote for the concept of "moderation in everything."
// 2. LET'S GET PHILOSOPHICAL
So another person that had quite a bit to say about this concept is Aristotle...
On LumenLearning.com - they reposted an article from the History of Philosophy Quarterly which discussed Aristotles views on moderation.
Now this get's pretty philosophical...as it should..right? I mean we are discussing philosophy...
I guess what I'm trying to say is this: I'll try to summarize as best I can so you don't fall asleep...
I'll post three fairly large chunks of copy in the show notes - but simply pull out the high level concepts for the podcast.
"Aristotle’s…views on [virtue] are bound up with one of the most celebrated and least useful parts of his system, the doctrine of the Mean, according to which every virtue of character lies between two correlative faults or vices…, which consist respectively of the excess and the deficiency of something of which the virtue represents the right amount. The theory oscillates between an unhelpful analytical model (which Aristotle himself does not consistently follow) and a substantively depressing doctrine in favor of moderation. The doctrine of the Mean is better forgotten."
"Aristotle develops the notion of the mean, as we have seen, as part of his account of excellence or virtue. Excellence is preserved by the observance of the mean (1104a26). The best life for a human being, then, namely one which consists of “the active exercise of his psyche’s capacities in conformity with excellence” (1098a16-18), consists in the observance of the mean. Hitting the mean is not so much a matter of hitting one particular point on a target as it is a matter of avoiding the variety of mistakes it is possible to make in a complex situation. Observing the mean — and so virtue or excellence — is primarily a matter of careful awareness and avoidance of errors. Excellence of character, like health, involves a balance of opposite tendencies to act and react, a capacity to respond in various ways when and as occasions demand. This is the crux of Aristotle’s doctrine of the mean."
"Here, I think, is where the target and archery similes are most useful. Aristotle tells us that excellence, like an archer, aims at a target. Now an archer trying to hit a target must take into account various things which would cause him to miss the mark. He must (since he cannot possibly hold his bow perfectly still) coordinate his release of the bowstring with the subtle movements of the bow. If there are strong crosswinds he must aim slightly into the wind, and the wind will blow his arrow onto the part of the target he wishes to hit. If he is aiming into the wind, he must aim high to compensate for the slowing effect of the wind. If he is aiming from the crest of a hill above the target, he must adjust for the effects of gravity. And so on. Hitting the mark involves being aware of, and adjusting for, factors like these."
Summary:
Aristotle put forth a concept he called, The Doctrine of the Mean
For those of you who love math - you'll recognize that the mean is the average in a set of data
So similar to moderation, Aristotle suggested there is merit to living in the average, or the mean - which he explained lives between two correlative faults or vices
Apparently Aristotle goes back and forth on this throughout his writings, so:
Some philosophers today throw the concept out all together
While others have studied it further and believe it was a brilliant concept - foundational to our understanding of the world around us
These philosophers believe the doctrine of the mean is actually a stepping stone for Aristotles concepts of virtue, or excellence
The author goes on to explain:
Aristotle writes, "Excellence is preserved by the observance of the mean."
And more importantly, "Hitting the mean is not so much a matter of hitting one particular point on a target as it is a matter of avoiding the variety of mistakes it is possible to make in a complex situation. Observing the mean — and so virtue or excellence — is primarily a matter of careful awareness and avoidance of errors."
Interesting... Apparently Aristotle used the illustration of archery to get his point across:
"...an archer trying to hit a target must take into account various things which would cause him to miss the mark. He must (since he cannot possibly hold his bow perfectly still) coordinate his release of the bowstring with the subtle movements of the bow. If there are strong crosswinds he must aim slightly into the wind, and the wind will blow his arrow onto the part of the target he wishes to hit. If he is aiming into the wind, he must aim high to compensate for the slowing effect of the wind. If he is aiming from the crest of a hill above the target, he must adjust for the effects of gravity. And so on. Hitting the mark involves being aware of, and adjusting for, factors like these."
And this is why I got philosophical there for a second...because I believe Aristotle nailed it!
In a nutshell:
Moderation is less about finding the dead center between two extremes
And more about understanding the pitfalls involved, and avoiding them - in order to live with virtue and excellence
// 3. THE CONTINUA CONCEPT
Let's go back to the article from Digital-MR.com.
After explaining where the phrase "moderation in everything" came from, the article goes on to discuss something I 100% resonate with.
Michael refers to this concept as Continua.
It's pretty simple really. He explains that almost everything in life, every idea or ideology can be expressed using a continuum.
A continuum has two extremes - one on each side - and a myriad of graduated possibilities in between
He refers to it this way: You have black on one side, white on the other, and multiple shades of gray in between
He then goes on to offer examples like:
"The Eating Continuum." People who eat only fruit on one side and cannibals on the other
"The God Continuum." People who believe there is a God on one side and people who believe there is no God on the other
And this is why I resonate with it so much.
For those of you who have been around the Transcend Human Podcast for any length of time - you probably recognize this.
In multiple episodes I have taken a concept and placed it on a continuum. Weighing the pros and cons and suggesting the "transcendent" thing to do.
And this is where things get really crazy!
After Michael offers some examples, he immediately offers what I consider the punchline - the climax - the mountain top idea.
Which is this: "When you take some time to absorb the 6 examples shared above, you will realize that not all continua are created equal."
Yes! Did you catch that?
On the one hand - we can place everything on a continuum - but not all continuums are equal!
Which means...
"Moderation in everything" cannot be a valid concept. These two ideas are mutually exclusive. They can't both be true:
You can't say moderation in everything is your life motto
And also believe that on some of the continuums, the mean (or moderation) is not a good thing
Let's illustrate this way. I threw a bunch of continuums together as examples - so let's run through this list real quick:
Growth vs. Comfort
Here and now vs. Then and there
Me vs. We or Self focused vs. Others focused
Dictatorship vs. Democracy
Far right vs. Far left
Trusting ourselves vs. Trusting God
Capitalism vs. Environmentalism
Alcoholism vs. Sobriety
Vegetarians vs. Carnivores
Morning people vs. Night people
Introverst vs. Extroverts
And obviously the list goes on and on...
Now just looking at those continuums - we can see that a "moderation in everything" approach doesn't work evenly in every scenario.
According to Michael, it's because of the following:
When you look at every possible continuum that exists:
There are some where both extremes are bad
There are some where both extremes are acceptable
There are some where one extreme is good and the other is bad
There are some where moderation is the combination of the two extremes
And there are some where moderation is a standalone option that has nothing to do with the two extremes
So where does that leave us?
I would suggest we go back to Aristotle...who told us moderation is not the goal.
The goal is to look at all of the continua in our life, and to do an honest assessment of each:
Like the archery example: Determine what the target is on each continuum
Next, determine all of the pitfalls, and dangers on each continuum - basically what should be avoided
Then move your slider to that point on the continuum - the place where you find virtue and excellence
I used the word slider - because when I think about this I picture a large sound board at a concert. A massive board with hundreds of sliders. Before the show starts - they do a sound check, and each of these sliders is moved up or down to find the perfect combination of sound for the event.
Not every slider is right in the middle - in fact some are all the way up and others might be all the way down.
But they work together to form the best quality sound.
Another illustration I love to use is SCUBA Diving.
When diving - there is this thing called "Neutral Buoyancy" and when you achieve it everything feels right. You wear additional weight, but also add air or remove air from your BC (or Buoyancy Compensator vest) in order to reach a place where you are neither ascending or descending. You're simply floating there in the water column with no movement.
The reason I love this illustration is because Neutral Buoyancy can be achieved anywhere in the water column:
You can be Neutrally Buoyant at the surface
You can be Neutrally Buoyant 150m down
You can be Neutrally Buoyant at the bottom
And this is a perfect illustration for us - trying to determine where our slider should be on a specific continuum in our life:
Working on our Neutral Buoyancy is us trying to determine the pitfalls, and dangers that exist in any given continuum
Where we're at in the water column is the place we know we want to be - the place where we’ll get the most out of the dive - and see the awesome things we came to see
Let’s Land the Plane:
This week, ask yourself the following questions:
Have you been living a life where "Moderation In Everything" is your mantra?
If so, how has that worked for you?
Can you identify the important continua in your life?
The continuums you live on?
The ones that have the ability to make or break you?
If you stopped looking for the middle point of every continuum and instead took Aristotles approach - what would that look like?
If you first looked for pitfalls and dangers, then chose the point where virtue and excellence existed
Would you do things differently? Make different decisions?
And finally, from our Minute of Transparency, I'll ask again:
Is there something in your life you know you could do - but fear, self-doubt and intimidation have kept you from doing it?
If so, what would it look like to pull it out, dust it off and give it another go?
I hope our time together this week was helpful. I know it got a little deep there in the middle, but at its core, Transcend Human is a philosophical approach to life. It's stopping to think, learn and view life differently in order to transcend the Human Condition.
I want to thank you again for choosing to be with us each week. Life is better together.
Have a great week, move some sliders for me, and keep Transcending Human!