Almost ready to launch public blog!

In lieu of a blog post here this month, I've been taking a lot of time writing and refining the first blog post of my soon-to-be public blog. You can check it out here!

Hopefully, I will be able to find a good cadence where I find time to do personal blogging as well as public blogging, but unfortunately that didn't happen this month.

First New Year's Resolution ever, 1 month in.

I'm not a big fan of New Year's resolutions. I feel like if at any point I find something I want to change about myself, I don't want to wait until New Year's to make it happen. As such, I haven't made many New Year's resolutions to date.

However, I did make one resolution this year.

Resolution 2015: Get my shit together.

Quality resolution, isn't it?

My goal by the end of college was to figure out what I want to do with my life (career-wise, personal life, etc.). I didn't expect to have made progress towards whatever that ends up looking like, but I at least wanted to know what direction I was going in.

I realized just before winter break that I'm lucky enough to be in a place where I have a strong sense of purpose in my life, and that's something many people of my age cannot say for themselves. In particular, I want to spend my life making people happy and improving their quality of life, but in a very surefire way. I don't mean some wishy-washy social committee-type thing. I mean scientifically rigorously looking at ways that people can attain greater fulfillment and satisfaction. I want to engineer happiness.

Even though that's still very big picture and doesn't offer much granularity, it serves as a pretty good guide for my decision-making. In fact, in the long run, it is much better to have this top piece (the why) and be able to go top-down in figuring out what I want to do rather than having a sense of what I like to do/am good at/am competent at without knowing why I continue to do it.

So why do I feel like I'm stuck and moving so slowly? Why do I feel like I'm wasting a lot of time? Why do I not feel like I have my shit together?

I spent winter break trying to figure out why this is, and I identified a couple of general things I need to do.

1) Know when to fold.

I am incredibly susceptible to the sunk cost fallacy. I place weight on past effort expended or invested in a particular activity, class, or person, but that's a naive basis to make future decisions. I get deeply attached to a lot of things. In C-'s words: just like a poker player doesn't expect to win every hand and instead must choose to commit to hands wisely, so must we be cognizant of when certain decisions didn't play out like anticipated and be willing to cut losses and prepare for other decisions we make going forward.

More concretely, this has led me to readily drop classes I attended for two and a half weeks before realizing it's not for me. I've started putting distance between me and the Stanford Robotics Club because it simply wasn't making me happy, despite what I've dedicated to founding the club and keeping it running smoothly. I've stopped watching TV shows that I no longer enoyed in later seasons. I've stopped investing time in people I don't believe care about me in the same way. I've halted job interview processes when it becomes clear that I don't want to work there, even if I was never rejected as a candidate.

This doesn't mean truths in the past were any less true. I am not any less authentic because what motivates me now differs from what once did. The past can (and should) still shape me. Past values matter insofar as how they inform or influence my current beliefs and values.

2) Commit wholeheartedly when you commit.

This is sort of the opposite of knowing when to fold. For the vast majority of choices I make, I will not have absolute certainty about at the time that I make the decision nor ever. If I wanted to wait until I had certainty on anything, I'd be completely paralyzed. Waiting for certainty is precisely that: a wait. It's passive, and relinquishes control to forces beyond our control.

That complacency leads to inaction and general sluggishness. When you have an array of good choices in front of you, and you (and the people who know and care about you) cannot determine which is the correct or best choice, chances are there isn't a best choice. Have some confidence that you'd be able to identify an obvious best choice. Instead, it's all about picking one and making it great.

(Caveat: in poker, bets are rarely just a matter of going all-in and not at all. Similarly, committing wholeheartedly doesn't necessarily mean rule everything else out, but it does mean taking ownership of whatever extent of commitment you make in any given distribution of commitment of resources. I feel like blogging has that effect for me, where by having them written down somewhere it gives my thoughts much more substance, and helps me commit and take ownership of change I want to see in myself.)

3) Do not let myself slip into negative self-fulfilling prophecies and exacerbation cycles.

Over break I noticed that 1/13 marked the day that I've been out of my relationship with E- longer than I had been in it (barring some technicalities in counting). I think I've figured out what was holding me back from moving on: I have this flawed model of how what is meaningful or important to me is allowed to change over time. If you imagine a graph of time vs. importance, I've only allowed myself to say that how important any given thing is always monotonically increasing or decreasing.

This model is problematic in three ways. One, it assumes my assessment is perfect, which it is not. It doesn't not allow me the opportunity to revise first impressions once they're on track to be monotonically increasing or decreasing. Secondly, my assessment has nothing to do with a reciprocal such assessment, and reciprocity (as my own psychology research has shown, hah.) plays a huge role in determining socializing or altruistic behavior. Thirdly, it means that anything that grows in importance to me can never be less important ever. In particular, this third piece has left me feeling suffocated by guilt, unable to accept that someone I have cared for deeply in the past can acceptably be cared for less, and unable to bear the pain of being less important than I once was to someone.

Borrowing from romcoms, I've realized why it is so important to commit wholeheartedly to something. Romcom protagonists often seem absurd because they go to ridiculous lengths in their unconditional love. Sure, it's not a guarantee that all of your wholehearted commitments will pay off the way every single romcom protagonists' seem to. But the reality is that you cannot have those romcom moments if you don't try. If you fail, then you are just someone whose grandiose whathaveyou did not bear fruit, as everyone would expect; if you succeed, then you do become the stuff of legends/Hollywood. Seems like a reasonably good risk-reward to take to me.

Aside: To some extent, being able to take that stance comes from a place of privilege in more ways than one. I can't deny that. I was raised by a mother who has left me with a secure enough (though not 100% secure) attachment style that I can withstand potential emotional setbacks if putting myself out there and making myself vulnerable leads to hurt. I happen to have skill sets that employers are willing to pay good money for, and that gives me the financial means to be fairly liberal in the capacity in which I commit to things wholeheartedly. It is a privilege I have, and, equal or not across everyone, I should use this to the best of my ability.

Romcom protagonists--at least in their moments of emotional triumph, anyway--tend to have very short-term memory for the setbacks they encounter while maintaining saliency in memories of elation or happiness. For the same magnitude of positive and negative emotions, the positive emotions always last much longer while negative emotions become transformative forces from which they draw strength and courage and spunk. This kind of mindset keeps them optimistic and protects them from negative self-fulfilling prophecies. The best way to make your life a real romcom, it seems, is to believe and live as if it already is. If you feel like the world is falling apart around you, just think to yourself that romcoms virtually all have happy endings, so you can't be at the end. Keep looking for the next thread of storyline to chase.

------------------

What am I trying to do more to be consistent with those 3 things above, aka getting my shit together?

1. Read more, especially stuff that makes me think. The more thoughtfully I can think about my own actions and the people and world around me, the better I can fold or commit appropriately.
2. Be open about myself. I've been trying to make myself vulnerable to people again, mainly in the form of demonstrating how much I care about them even if I feel silly or uneasy or unsure how they'll receive my expression. In professional contexts, I've made a personal website that attempts to inject my character and personality into what otherwise would be just a distilled professional profile (i.e. resume) (I say "attempts" because it's a work in progress, and would love to hear your thoughts on the website).
3. Disregarding norms or rules when I see fit. I've always trusted my judgment, but I've often acted against my best judgment to be consistent with norms or rules. I've been trying to be very clear to myself what it is that I actually want, as opposed to stuff I want to want only because there is some level of external social, financial, or whatever prestige associated with getting that.
4a. Stand up for myself. Give myself space and alone time when I need it. Act on what is important to me, rather than what will maintain peace and harmony among the people around me. Be able to recognize when I have every right to believe that I am right.
4b. Be humble. Confidence and self-assurance is good, but over-confidence is not. Being mindful of when what I have once stood up for is flawed, and graciously and openmindedly reconciling the differences when appropriate.

The skies are crying in solidarity with my heart.

Again... maybe I can single-handedly end the drought, in the most Omelas of fashions.
(As it turns out, that apparently is not too deviant from my personality anyway.)

Loneliness

A couple days ago, someone posed the question: "Are ENFJs lonely?"

Just the very existence of that question makes me realize that I am lot more lonely than I try to let myself feel.  Of course, you could argue that you aren't lonely if you don't let yourself feel lonely, but I don't think that's how it works.

This response to that question was by far one of the best-articulated self-reflection I've seen from anyone:

At a certain point every ENFJ stops, and wonders, and becomes deeply saddened by the realization that they are trying to be the one selfless person for everyone in their life, and that maybe there never will be somebody to give that genuine selfless impulsive love to them. We dont boast unless people allow us the moment to, but we recognize the love we give, we know how much effort we put into it, our dream is to see somebody have that passion for us. Im kinda sad thinking about it now to be honest. It feels a bit like martyrdom. We will never ask for this, we simply dream of a day where this amazing dreamperson waltzes into our lives like we do other people. 

Yes, we wholeheartedly and to our very core, appreciate people. It is our love, acceptance and appreciation for other HUMAN BEINGS that drives us to be givers. Because... Encompassing ENFJ Quote Incoming: "Everybody deserves it."

There are only a few people who we will truly open up to, and whether we choose you or not is not personal at all. We simply know who have the capacity to understand the complex love-melancholy duality we share with life. We like many NFs, have the desire to be understood. 

Yes, we feel lonely, its a strange detached lonely... let me explain. We will be there for a lonely friend, and at the end of the day we feel less lonely because that person is less lonely. In the big picture the world just became less lonely and thus we feel as such. In reality we did nothing for ourselves to actually deal with our own loneliness, we know this, but somehow we are still content. Understanding this rationale is difficult even for us.

I wholeheartedly agree with just about all of it. I don't think the first paragraph quite does justice to non-ENFJs (I absolutely think other types can be selfless too), but other than that, I am awestruck at how much I relate to this raw piece of writing.

Even though I feel like I have many people to surround myself with, my feelings of loneliness become magnified in social situations because the quality of interpersonal interactions become reduced. I thrive on intimate, one-on-one relationships. My emotional sustenance comes from empathizing with other people, not merely talking to or being in close physical proximity of others. I can feel closer to someone quietly minding my own business in a serene, peaceful room meters apart than grinding up against someone at a dance or party.

I'll have to chew this over in my head more, but I've definitely felt just so distant to so many people recently. Of the maybe 5 or so people I feel closest to right now, only one of them are among the 5 people I felt closest to at the start of the quarter.

Physical vs. Emotional Intimacy

This quarter, I'm taking a class called Love as a Force for Social Justice, and it's making me think critically about what it means to be "in love," different types of love, and how love is expressed more than I ever had. This'll mostly just be a collection of scattered thoughts I've had in the past couple of weeks.

First and foremost and actually totally unrelated to love, my dad needs to fucking stop sending me emails asking me to add him on Facebook. The reason I'm so desperately looking for a job or internship over the school year and summer is because I can't wait to be financially independent and not have to depend on his ass to help with tuition. I've gotten to a point where I've wondered if it's possible to get a restraining order on a family member. A quick Google search said yes, it is.

Now then, love. (Because that paragraph wasn't.)

In my Love class, we read an article about types of love. In a nutshell, the article classified six different types of love:

• Storgic love: founded on rapport, interdependency, and mutual need fulfillment. Good friends who have grown in intimacy, appreciate even mundane activities with each other, does not have a "falling in love" phase but rather realizes it after some time. Temporary separations are manageable due to mutual trust. Very similar to siblings.
• Agapic love: Centered around selfless devotion to the partner. Will put him or herself through various pains for the good of the object of his or her affection. There is no "falling in love" in the sense that their happiness is derived from a love object accepting the affection or love they're always willing to give.
• Manic love: Characterized by obsession with love object, sometimes beyond rationality. Jealousy and manipulation can be common, and separation is difficult. Usually very anxious/reflective about what can/did go wrong in a relationship. Can be associated with low self-esteem.
• Pragmatic love: Love based on investment of self. They assist the loved one in fulfilling each other's potentials, but is very business-like in the motivations. For instance, a pragmatic lover might think about compatability, future family size, financial security, and education all in context of how the relationship will affect it. Sex is not unwelcome, but might be done, for instance, to relieve sexual tension and sleep better rather than for physical pleasure.
• Ludic love: Love is like a sport, and the compatibility of partners is centered around how well the partners satisfy his or her wants. Love is like a challenge, and self-fulfillment is had when he or she is successful; partners are like conquests. Love affairs are considered natural.
• Erotic love: Extremely romantic, usually monogamous, incredibly explosive and escalates quickly. Usually very idealistic, risks that might harm the relationship are not afforded. Certainty in reciprocation is absolute, and partners rarely spend time apart. Physical intimacy happens early, and displays of passion are varied and frequent. Usually more common in people who have had a secure and happy childhood, especially those with happily married parents.

While S- pointed out that the article clearly gave preference to storgic love, I nevertheless felt that it was reasonably fair towards the other types of love, and I still prefer storgic love to the others. What I want out of a romantic relationship is not financial security, or the thrill of "conquering" a romantic partner by winning their heart. I want to establish a deep, meaningful connection.

The first assignment in my Love class was to define "love," or explain why it couldn't be defined. While it was extremely open-ended and more or less ended up being a lot of students just sharing their thoughts on what love is, there were two ideas that particularly stood out to me.

First, one student defined love as a region on the high end of a continuum of how much you care for someone. On one end is total indifference, and then maybe 70% of the way up you've reached the part of the spectrum that contains your friends, and then maybe the top 5% are things or people you love. That makes sense to me; it doesn't strictly define what love is, but provides an operationalization of love such that you can sort of quantify love, or compare two things against each other and determine which you love more or less.

Second, one student suggested that you cannot be in love without leaving yourself vulnerable. To be in love is to fully put your emotional well-being into the hands of your love object, and trusting that they will not only do no harm, but might actually improve your emotional state.

In the context of those two ideas, I can elaborate on what I mean by a "deep, meaningful connection." I want this connection to be made between me, in my most honest and thus most vulnerable state, and my partner's most honest and thus most vulnerable state. When you meet someone, you don't just tell them anything; only after becoming close and building trust do you start to divulge more personal details about your life. That explains why I struggle with falling for people I don't know well, and believe I need to be close friends with someone before I can begin to consider them a possible romantic partner. What good is an emotional connection between the person you are when your walls are still up you're still on guard with anyone else? You need to have made the step to reveal everything about you first.

So if this is so straightforward, what is up with society that has obscured this clarity?

I had a pretty heated conversation with S- today wherein she told me that, as far as romantic endeavors are concerned, I'm essentially a middle school student because (spoiler alert) I've never been kissed on the lips.  At first, I was pretty offended. Who was she to evaluate on my behalf how meaningful my past relationships are? Who was she to tell me that, because I didn't slobber all over my past girlfriends, my relationships were meaningless? I'm convinced I've grown more as a person and learned more on how to partake in the miracle that is human-to-human interaction, including romance, from my relationships in middle school than many adults have.

But then I realized the underlying meaning that S-'s contempt carried: our society measures relationship success by physical intimacy, more specifically making out and sexual activity.

The ultimate end result of romantic relationships (in the western, American culture that I'm familiar with anyway) is to find "the one," the person you're meant to be with for the rest of your life and live happily ever after with, basically. As discussed earlier, that person is the partner with whom you have that ridiculously strong emotional connection to. In that process of building that emotional connection, it is common that you will do something physical, like making out or having sex. That does not mean that physical intimacy causes emotional intimacy/you to find "the one". There is a correlation, not causation.

Physical intimacy in cases where emotional intimacy is also present can simply be one of many ways to communicate passion. It is no different than giving flowers, or serenading, or making breakfast in bed, or holding hands, or cuddling on a couch watching a movie, yet it is blown so wildly out of proportion by popular culture.

And what is with "Facebook official" and being able/the right to use to phrase "boyfriend" or "girlfriend" to describe your romantic partner? While certainly some people see being in a relationship as a thing of pride and a thing to gloat about, I know plenty of couples in relationships that are not, say, Facebook official. In those cases, the purest way to think about it is that officiation is also a way to communicate passion. Homosexual couples have been living together for decades, yet the fact that they can get a marriage license with their names on it now is such a strong, symbolic milestone in their relationship (just like with any other marriage, I might add). It strengthens that emotional connection that we all, in theory, seek to make.

The obfuscation of relationship success by society, then, is because a relationship, perhaps back in the mid-20th century, would only reach a stage of physical intimacy after the emotional connection is established, and thus physical intimacy was associated with relationship success. However, in today's society where those in my parents' and grandparents' generation look and shake their head at my generation's liberal, gratuitous relinquishment of lip (and other) virginity, that is no longer the case. Relationships that are founded on physical intimacy, with or without emotional intimacy, are a thing in today's culture. (Especially because Hollywood says so.)

It seems to boil down to whether physical versus emotional intimacy comes first. I certainly prefer establishing an emotional intimacy first; physical intimacy is something that comes after the emotional connection is made. Unfortunately, emotional intimacy is less obvious or visible, and I think this might be why measures of physical intimacy (e.g. kissing, sex) are more often viewed as benchmarks for evaluating the development of a relationship. It might also explain cultural phenomenons like the friend zone and being led on, when the two involved parties see different levels of emotional intimacy.

Holy shit this was a long post.

Stanford so far

This past Wednesday, I went back to Interlake to visit friends and teachers. Some of the interactions I had today were downright appalling. Others were simply incredibly thought provoking. The highlights, some of which are arguably lowlights:

• Mr. D-: I walked in on his gifted junior government class on an exam day, so while he was passing out scantrons and exams he offered the class a chance to ask me questions about college. He framed it as "a rare opportunity to talk to someone who just came out of your program [the gifted program] and is at a college that some people might consider decent." He himself posed the question "If you could go back and tell yourself one thing first semester junior year [the age of the class I was in], what would it be and why?" I couldn't answer it immediately, but I came back 5 minutes from the end of class and after a good amount of reflection, I decided it was to read more non-fiction. Not necessarily from books, but from blogs, newspapers, anywhere I could find anything that interests me. I then made the claim: "If you don't know what to write for a college essay, you have not read enough." In retrospect, I don't know if I agree with that, but it sounds good.
• Mr. D- and I both came to the conclusion that even though the enrollment in CS106 courses are up 1100/year in the last 4 years at Stanford, as per Mehran, we're not actually achieving what the American economy truly needs. When pundits say we need more people in STEM jobs, they mean for colleges to crank out more engineering and science majors, but honestly we're just creating another labor source that requires immense training. Talented, but still a mindless labor force. It's unnerving that there is such an elitism surrounding the culture of techies and condescension towards fuzzies, because as far as I'm concerned in no job will you not benefit from being well-rounded and educated in not only the technical details but also leadership, communication, and rhetorical skills, for instance. I am damn proud to be a fuckie, and we need more people who will embrace both dimensions of intellect to actually transform our economic landscape.
• Mr. C-: He asked me to describe my Interlake experience in one word. I said "limiting." In spite of having an internship built into my senior year, in spite of IB being offered in sophomore and junior year such that I'd have my diploma in hand when I applied to college, in spite of over 10 AP classes being offered, in spite of a student population in which 49 languages and all major religions were represented, I said limiting. What? Looking back, I can immediately see why he was so shocked, because I clearly took a lot for granted. However, I definitely still stand by my choice, because the homogeneity of the gifted program, and my being too ignorant and naive and complacent to expand my horizons to interact with others beyond the gifted program meant I had a very lopsided worldview throughout my last 7 years, and coming to Stanford opened my eyes wide. Very, very wide. In fact, I know Asians are supposed to be a minority, but I've never actually felt like a minority until today, when we took a gas stop at Vancouver, WA, and also back in the dorm when a lot of the Asian snacks were totally foreign, and being able to speak fluent Mandarin is considered exotic.
• At the same time, Mr. C- also pointed out that there were easily a lot of people impressed by what I accomplished in high school. I never thought about it this way, since a large number of people seemed to have fantastic internships, and go off to amazing schools. Huge culture shock.
• I told S-, A-, and P- that they were boring. They were among some of my closer friends back in Washington, but honestly their ability to fuel thought-provoking, exciting, intellectually stimulating conversations pale to a degree that I never imagined compared to those at Stanford. Don't get me wrong, they're not any less intelligent than Stanford kids (you get into PRISM by passing an IQ threshold after all), but rather their collective experiences are just far more underwhelming and far less diverse, to no fault of their own.

These last two months have easily been the best two months of my life so far. Maybe it's just relative to my last two years these months have been monumentally better, but I don't think so. Being surrounded by people who are genuinely excited and take pride in being intellectual is a fantastic experience. That doesn't even happen in all institutions of higher education, but merely the higher caliber colleges. I have never been around so many people intrinsically motivated to learn--not necessarily for a higher salary, or because their parents demanded it, but those can be factors too--than here. And when glimmers of this abundance of and yet still thirst for knowledge show up even in everyday activities like movies, or music nights, or small talk over meals, it is simply intoxicating. I've got to say that must be the reason Stanford on the whole, academics or otherwise, have been great.

(Oh, did I mention my dormmates are incredible? There are people in everywhere on the relationship closeness continuum of acquaintances to familial with a hint of romantic...)

[Re]Open Your Eyes

For the past 5 days, I was in Salt Lake City for the 2012 International Career Development Conference for DECA, competing in Accounting Applications. As far as the competition goes, nothing too exciting happened. I made it to the finals (Top 16) but performed poorly on the final role play. We saw the Jabbawockeez perform live, though I believe it was their B team; still really cool nonetheless, especially the Kiss the Girl and Single Ladies segments.

The more memorable part was definitely the experience shared with the people there. I got to know a few students with whom I've been classmates with for 7 years now way better, and I'm glad I got to see this side of them before graduating with any misconceptions about them as people. Not really misconceptions--they still are who they are when they behave as they do at school--but just another side of them, a sensitive side that they try to hide.

In the meantime, I also bonded a lot more with people I hadn't known until this year. I kind of wish I learned more about them, and I feel like I kind of dominated the conversation perhaps, getting carried away with things and people in my life. Hopefully, I don't come across at self-centered. Even more hopefully, we'll still keep in touch after I graduate, because if in just 8 short months they've become among the close friends who I trust the most, who knows what could happen with years more? There's no doubt in my mind that I'll miss two of these albeit relatively new friends of mine way more than others I have known for about half my conscious life.

I was thinking about what made me click with them. What made me so comfortable sharing some of the thoughts I usually tuck away for personal introspection? I don't really know. For sure, it seems that I can really connect with people like me. Not to let my life be dominated by MBTI or anything, but of the 6 people I trust most, 4 are ENFJs (the other three are ENTP, ISTJ).

Furthermore, it seems that at some point, we always have a conversation about my past. It can be really embarrassing depending on the details we delve into, but it always leaves me rather melancholy. Yet, I enjoy talking about it a lot. Why? I'm not a masochist in any way.

This is where this post was going. The phrase "open your eyes" is used almost to the point of cliched-ness. But talking to new people about my past--people with some level of maturity, open-mindedness, and capacity for empathy anyway--reopens my eyes. There are a lot of little things in my life that I'd hate to forget, and I have a tendency to regurgitate those when I talk about what has made me me (not at the superficial level, but at a deep level that I care to talk about only when my conversational partner exhibits genuine interest or concern). I'd like to emphasize that parenthetical statement, because I have pretty high standards, I feel, about when to trust people and tell people stuff, but it's also always based on a gut feeling; I don't open up to everyone, but when I do I always do it with utmost confidence that what I tell them will not fall upon deaf ears, and will be respected. Anyway, whenever I revisit these memories with new people, I feel like I see things ever so slightly differently, but end up learning more about myself when I reflect on the conversations.

In the meantime, I read an article on a fantastic new product concept: http://www.fashioningtech.com/profiles/blogs/touchy-the-human-camera

It is literally a physical manifestation of someone else "opening your eyes." I absolutely love the whole concept, and I feel like it would really enhance social interaction or relationships (not necessarily just romantic ones). Especially for me, recalling that my dominant love language is physical touch followed closely by quality time, this is an invention I really need to have. The pictures it stores seems a perfect way to capture the little things, not the grand big things. I like that.