I think…

I’ve been conflicted about starting off sentences with “I think.”

“I think” is a shield, the vanguard to my ego, protecting it from deniability.

If it’s what I think, then it can’t be wrong…because what type of monster tells someone what they think is wrong.

Even if it is…but it’s my opinion, so its not.

“I think” is a disclaimer, there to let you know that I’m not the type of person who would dare have the audacity to have convictions.

“I think” means “I don’t feel strongly enough about this to say for sure.”

“I think” means “I’m scared.”

“I think” isn’t bad, but I use it more often than I should.

At least that’s what I think.

My fear

I’ve put off sharing this blog with…well anyone (except for a few and you know who you are), mostly because by sharing it, other people might know what/ how I think (gasp). And if they know how I think, they can and will judge me based on that. This fear has overridden any confidence I’ve had that there is any value in what I’ve written and any desire I’ve had to connect with people through sharing and discussing ideas.

I’m afraid people will think that some of what I written is pathetic, or cringey, or stupid. I’m afraid that nobody will read it or nobody will be interested. I’m afraid that everyone will read it, putting me at the mercy of their judgement. I’m afraid that people will mistake my sharing of opinions with arrogance. I’m afraid not just of failure (whatever that means in this case), but of acknowledging that both failure and success come from trying and from pressing send. And I’m afraid of how much more common failure is than success.

When Han Solo told C-3PO “never tell me the odds,” that wasn’t arrogance, but rather a suppression of the fear that 3PO was instilling in him (ok, maybe it wasn’t meant to be an commentary on fear, but just go along with it). While I am not facing a violent demise at the hands of flying space rocks, I consider living in this fear an equally tragic fate…and so here we are.

So with all that said, feel free to browse old posts and stay up-to-date on the new ones. If you do read any of this, or even got this far on this post, I hope you get something out of it and, please, if you have any thoughts at all on anything I write I would love to hear them, ideally through writing them directly on the post, so others can enjoy them, or by contacting me some other way if that makes you more comfortable. And if you do think any/ all of it is stupid or arrogant, or you disagree, or if you simply have nothing to say, that is just as valid, and I encourage you to express that or call me out (or not, it’s up to you).

I’m not gonna lie, I really hope you like what you find here, but if you don’t, I get the opportunity to get over it and to not take it personally.

Now what are you afraid of?

What is your art?

Seth Godin often writes and talks about art. His art seems broadly defined, and I agree that art goes far beyond what a person does with pen, paint, or clay.  However, it’s hard to imagine where art comes into play in the medical field. I’ve always considered myself pretty creative, so for a long time I struggled with how I can bring art and creativity to a medical career. When dealing with people’s health and their lives, it’s probably not a great idea to be taking risks and trying new things. That being said, viewing the practice of medicine simply as prescribing medications, treating symptoms, and giving diagnoses, is a pretty dismal and narrow perspective.

I realized that my answer was already part of why I wanted to be a doctor; the relationships and interactions. Art in medicine can be in my interactions with patients, in doing the emotional labor (á la Seth) that improves patient compliance and outcomes. Art could also be in new approaches to healthcare as a whole or in new interdisciplinary connections.

The issue isn’t doing something that allows you to do art, it’s finding the art in what you do.

Logical

I used to think pure logic was the best way to approach any problem. It frustrated me when people didn’t think or act logically (or at least what I considered logically). As I became more acquainted with ideas about acceptance and understanding through my educational and personal studies, I became more comfortable with irrationality. Individuals do not all think the same and are not always going to behave logically, that is the reality we live in. I now acknowledge that holding pure logic as an ideal is itself illogical and irrational. In order to make progress on any issue that involves other humans, appealing to their humanity first is essential, and in some cases that comes at the expense of logic.

Being Indispensable

Started a new book this week. Seth Godin’s Linchpin. It’s all about what it means to be indispensable; what do I contribute that know one else does. While I am still just breaking the surface of the book, it has got me thinking, especially as I am working on my applications for medical school.

One idea that Seth talks about a lot is how the old economy was all about making everything replaceable, from replaceable parts to replaceable humans. Now, in an age where nearly everything is easily replaceable, there is more value than ever on the things that can’t be replaced (cheaper costs which drove the movement towards replaceable parts can go to zero, whereas fresh ideas and innovation has no limit as far as we know).

Ok so what do I have to offer to the world of medicine. On one hand I am concerned because in the world of medicine, that’s one place where you don’t want a lot experimenting going on, at least with patients. On the other hand I see it as challenge. In a career where one distinguishes themselves simply by maintaining the status quo and “following the rules”, how can I be different, where can I add myself into the mix. It’s easy* to be a good doctor, but what separates a good doctor from an indispensible one. From a medical standpoint there shouldn’t be much variation between then. I think what differentiates the two is the “emotional labor” which Seth also talks about. The work of showing patients that you care. I also think the medical geniuses are the ones who rethink the way we do medicine entirely (and who knows maybe there’s a revolution out there waiting for someone to strike the match).

Seth says we all have the capacity to be geniuses (some of us very stable ones), and that even those that we regard as some of the most the revolutionary minds of our time only spend about 5 minutes of their day as a genius, the rest is just work that anyone could do. Genius doesn’t mean everyone will like it, it means only you can do it (or at least you are one of the few can).

 

*Of course it’s not easy, but it is something that you can develop with practice.

Here’s another article that I think is worth checking out:

Being my own biggest advocate

“Hell is Other People”

This is a quote from French philosopher Jean-Paul Sarte that I came across while reading Algorithms to Live By (Yes I am still reading that, just about to finish get off my back).

What Sarte means by this is not that people are evil, but that the influence of other people’s perceived perceptions on our own perception can be exhausting and frustrating. In other words, we base our ideas of ourselves in part on how we think others perceive us.

The authors of Algorithms to Live By offer a solution that I thought was encouraging. In the chapter on game theory they bring up the idea of dominant strategies (that which makes the most sense individually) vs optimal strategies (that which leads to the best outcome overall). They talk about changing the “game” to restrict the players to choose optimal strategies. They talk about the Vickrey auction in which the optimal strategy is to be honest about what you believe that value of a particular item is.

The chapter ends on this: “Seek out games where honesty is the dominant strategy. Then just be yourself.”

We are often in control of the games we play, I want choose the ones that allow me to live authentically.

 

You’re not bad, you’re just ignorant!

A lot of times I write off my shortcomings by saying that I’m bad at “it”. I’m bad therefore I can never be good, at least never as good as those who are good at “it” already.

Of course I’m bad at it, it’s either among my first tries or I’ve never tried at all. That doesn’t mean I am ultimately bad, it just means I’m ignorant. I haven’t explored it yet. I haven’t tried and failed over and over yet. Doing that takes time though, and I only have so much (though admittedly more than I use responsibly), and so is it worth exploring my shortcomings.

Then we can get into a whole discussion about explore vs exploit, so I’ll stop there for now.

Bottom line, you won’t know unless you try…over and over, so if it means that much to you, respect it.

The Invisible Gorillas of Life

There’s a popular video that asks you to observe basketball players and count the number of passes by a certain team while ignoring those of the other. If you haven’t seen it check it out here.

_______________________________

Most people so focused on the task that they don’t notice the gorilla. There are many variations on this experiment and some are better than others, but that’s beside the point. Lucas Miller, in his book Beyond Brilliance, points out that this is not only a fascinating experiment on human attention, but also it says something about our individual perceptions and attitudes. We are often so focused on our own various tasks and goals we ignore that which doesn’t pertain to completing or achieve them. This makes our perceptions often times very limited. There’s not much we can do to fix that except just acknowledging that reality. We never have the full picture, but we should strive to see as much of it as we can. Keep an eye out for all those invisible gorillas in your life.

Self-Help

“Self-help” books or “educational” books are interesting. Most of them are written with the underlying assumption that there is a better version of you yet to be realized. But what defines a better version of yourself? Money? Intelligence? Friends? Status? Health? Ultimately I would say this “better” version is supposed to simply be a happier version, and those things that I mentioned are what these books often offer as the solution. Is it wrong to want any of those things? No (but also what is “wrong”). Will those things necessarily make us happy? Also no. Does that mean we should just be content with ourselves and not seek change? I would like to say heck no, but at the same time I’m not at all sure and my current perspective may even tend toward yes. More on this cognitive dissonance later. In a bit of a crisis right now, but a good one… I think.

Thoughts on Learning

  • What does it mean to you? Learning is way to obtain information and become more knowledgeable about a topic. I enjoy learning for the most part; it’s a way to satiate curiosity (briefly).
  • When is it easy for you? Difficult? It’s easiest when I am genuinely interested in whatever it is I’m learning about, and difficult when I’m not.
  • Outside of school, what do you enjoy learning most? Why?  I like learning new skills because those often have practical uses.
  • Why do you think some people are better learners than others? I think for some people circumstance has forced some people to develop good learning techniques and some to develop poor ones. I do believe also there is at least some genetic component that can offer some advantages/ disadvantages.
  • How do you think you can stack the deck in your favor when it comes to learning? Studying early. Good scheduling. Make good habits. Be healthy.
  • Who has taught you the most in life? Do you have any mentors? Of course my parents are probably the ones who have taught me the most (is my privilege showing?) as well as family. I have also learned plenty from friends and also just from my own personal experiences. No one person comes to mind when it comes to mentors, or at least for the picture I have in my mind for mentors.