"Hoping for the best, but expecting the worst."

Does this phrase even make sense? We hear it all the time. I know I've uttered it more than once. But isn't it impossible? Isn't that phrase a contradiction of terms?

Now I'm no linguistics expert, but it seems like English has the luxury of two different words (which have roughly the same meaning) to make this phrase work. In Portuguese (and probably Spanish) the word "esperar" means both "to expect" and "to hope." So in Portuguese, the phrase would be "Esperando o melhor, mas esperando o pior." Obviously, a direct contradiction.

Perhaps a better word would be "wanting" the best, rather than "hoping." I can wrap my mind around that a little easier. But even then, I think the whole expectation of the worst possible outcome can handicap one's ability to avoid that outcome. Imagine you have a big exam coming up. If your mind is consumed with the expectation of failure, you'll have less mental faculties to devote to your studying, and thus you might perform more poorly.

Defensive Pessimism is what psychologists have come up with to describe the chronically pessimistic. A defensive pessimist always expects the worst, so that if it does happen, then hey no biggie: that's what he/she already expected. On the other hand, if something better than the "worst" happens, then the defensive pessimist may see it as a pleasant surprise. I think there's value to such an approach, but not in every situation.

I think the distinguishing factor that determines when defensive pessimism is appropriate is the degree of control you have over the situation. In the case of the upcoming exam, you are in nearly complete control over how you will fare, depending on how much you study. So in that scenario, I don't think defensive pessimism is helpful. To the extent possible, I think it's best to just put the "outcome" out of your mind altogether and focus on the task at hand--studying. This is one reason my friends in law school rarely found me anxious about exams. In my mind, that anxiety isn't going to help me, so why bother?

Now fast forward a bit: you have just finished taking the exam. There's absolutely nothing more you can do that can affect the outcome. Here, I think, you might have a better argument for indulging in a little bit of pessimism. At this point, there's no personal performance you can handicap. The only thing you can change is your state of mind. If you walk out of the exam thinking "I maybe got an average score," then your mind will be insulated from the disappointment that might ensue if you think you aced it, when in fact your performance was average. On the other hand, if you really did ace it, well then what a pleasant surprise. Everyone likes surprises, right?

That's one clear-cut example. In the case of an exam, it's easy to determine when everything you can do has been done and is in the past. Other situations won't be so clear. That's why it's important to do your best to cover all your bases, and do everything you can, before lowering your expectations (i.e. being pessimistic). I can envision this process introducing a whole new array of obsessive-compulsive thinking for the anxiety-prone, so obviously it shouldn't be taken too far. For instance, in a first-date scenario with a person you're very interested in, during the date you want to make sure that you do all the right things to increase the chances of a second date. After the date is when you can go ahead and not expect there to be a second date (defensive pessimism). However, becoming pessimistic before the date is over will probably lead you to do things that will increase the likelihood of that negative outcome.

In Mormon circles, I've heard the phrase "Work like it's all up to you, and pray like it's all up to God." This is the same idea. Even for people who don't believe in God, they might ascribe the nebulous forces of the unknown to "Fate" or the "Universe."

I admit, it's kind of a cognitive trick you have to play on yourself. But to the extent you can do it successfully, in appropriate situations, it may actually insulate you from some unhappiness in life, and possibly generate happiness you wouldn't have experienced otherwise. Happiness is all about your perspective, anyway.

So I was bored one night

And had the following conversation with an automated spam-bot on msn:

Megan says: (12:56:41 AM)
hello..?
Aaron says: (12:56:48 AM)
hi
Megan says: (12:57:03 AM)
Hey I saw you on hi5? i dont remember if we are friends.
Aaron says: (12:57:16 AM)
yeah, we are
Aaron says: (12:57:19 AM)
long time no talk
Megan: (12:57:31 AM)
so whats up with you today?
Megan says: (12:57:45 AM)
yeah im just a lil bored have off of work today
Aaron says: (12:57:48 AM)
horrible, my family was killed in a shark-eating accident
Megan says: (12:58:03 AM)
currently im working for a fashion design company
Aaron says: (12:58:34 AM)
how boring
Megan says: (12:58:48 AM)
im entered in a fashion and talent contest and your rating would mean alot to me
Aaron says: (12:59:04 AM)
no, I think you have terrible fashion sense
Megan says: (12:59:19 AM)
I have a bunch of lingirie to choose from... whats your favorite color? im tryin to decidelol
Aaron says: (12:59:45 AM)
just keep your clothes on, fattie
Megan says: (1:00:00 AM)
hmmm.... lol I think i might be able to do that, go to http://www.myhomecamnetwork.com/swtmegan scroll ALL the way DOWN to the bottom u will see "Friends of Megan", tell me when you get the password page!
Aaron says: (1:00:31 AM)
yeah right! why would I want to see your fat ass in lingerie
Megan says: (1:00:45 AM)
put in the password: myfriend4
Aaron says: (1:01:18 AM)
I'll pass, I don't like viruses on my computer
Megan says: (1:01:33 AM)
yea, fill out your info,first and last name, make sure you put your correct b-day k?
Aaron says: (1:01:51 AM)
why? so you can steal my identity?
Megan says: (1:02:05 AM)
kk, if you entered as our friend, it should say 0.00 at the bottom, if so you are good for our friend's pass
Aaron says: (1:02:28 AM)
no, I'm your enemy, actually. it was your shark that ate my family
Megan says: (1:02:43 AM)
CC is just to verify your age hun,its the sites policy, we had to to do the same thing .. it won't charge, u got the free password
Megan says: (1:03:25 AM)
Where did you go?
Aaron says: (1:03:47 AM)
oh sorry, I was finding an old expired credit card to use
Aaron says: (1:03:58 AM)
if you're not going to charge me, I guess it won't matter
Megan says: (1:04:02 AM)
I just found some booty shorts lol i think im gonna put a skirt on!!!!!!!
Megan says: (1:04:16 AM)
k let me know when you get in so I can invite you directly to my room cam.
Aaron says: (1:04:51 AM)
oh dear, I had no idea they made booty shorts that big
Aaron says: (1:05:02 AM)
you do realize that "booty" is a diminutive term?
Megan says: (1:05:06 AM)
k, you in yet babe?? Don't keep me hot stuff!
Aaron says: (1:05:18 AM)
heck no, I just ate
Megan says: (1:05:20 AM)
sweet k
Megan says: (1:05:33 AM)
when u login click LIVEWEBCAMS k?
Aaron says: (1:06:03 AM)
no, you
Megan says: (1:06:18 AM)
alright, i am in the middle section, its the 3rd one down in that section, the cam name is random so i dont know what it is till i get in
Aaron says: (1:06:51 AM)
yeah I feel sorry for your next victim
Megan says: (1:07:06 AM)
yup
Aaron says: (1:07:12 AM)
yup indeed
Megan says: (1:07:27 AM)
yeah im the one laying on my bed, do you see me?
Megan says: (1:08:09 AM)
...?
Aaron says: (1:08:22 AM)
that poor bed
Megan says: (1:08:37 AM)
k babe talk to me in the chat
Aaron says: (1:08:46 AM)
no thanks
Megan says: (1:09:00 AM)
Whats your username so I can send you an invite?
Megan says: (1:09:42 AM)
...?
Aaron says: (1:10:10 AM)
"sharksatemyfamily"
Megan says: (1:10:25 AM)
My msn lagging out... ill be on my site... the link again is http://www.myhomecamnetwork.com/swtmegan (secret code myfriend4) once you sign up you will see me on the front page
Aaron says: (1:10:58 AM)
about time

Reality TV: anything but real

I still don't know why this whole "Reality TV" thing has gotten so popular. There is little if anything "real" about it.

Let's take the bachelor/bachelorette. They take one man/woman, and then hire a bunch of starving actresses/actors trying to get their break in Hollywood to compete for that person's affection. That's right, I said hire. Hopefully you aren't so naive to think that they're actually doing that for FREE? Of course not. Each of them is getting paid, probably according to how long they are able to stay on the show. Most of them probably have little or no interest in the actual bachelor/bachelorette. Now tell me, where can I find such a scenario that naturally occurs in the REAL world? Nowhere.

To subtract even further from the reality of these shows, you've got cameras everywhere. Do people behave exactly how they would naturally when they're being filmed? What if there were cameras all around your house and office? Would you do anything different?

The only reality TV that ever came close to being real was shows like "Punk'd" and "Boiling Point." These shows relied on hidden cameras, and the "actors" didn't know they were being filmed. Furthermore, any compensation that the actors received was only offered after they were informed that it was a setup.

You know, some of these shows do occasionally have glimmers of reality. Take that ridiculous "Kendra" show, for example. It's all about the life of air-headed Kendra, former girlfriend of Hugh Heifner. I was at a friend's house a while back and she and her sister sat in rapt attention as this bland and boring show went on and on. At one point, it was Kendra, her fiance, and her friend sitting around the table having a really uninteresting conversation about their dog or something. I looked at my friend and her sister, perplexed that they were deriving entertainment from what was on the television. (From a male perspective, the only part of all this I found even remotely interesting was the fact that Kendra got a huge boob job and wasn't wearing a bra.) I thought to myself "I could probably have a more interesting conversation about the federal rules of civil procedure." You know it's bad television when law students (who have a very high tolerance for boring subjects) are bored stiff. So yes, THAT is reality. People sitting around a dinner table discussing topics in which you, an already disinterested third-party, have absolutely no interest. It also makes for horrible television. Which is why I think reality TV sucks.

Another problem with reality TV is that the cattle-like audience that finds a way to be entertained by such drivel might also be misled into thinking that it actually depicts reality. Then you'll get brides-to-be going absolutely crazy because they think that's okay and normal after watching "Bridezilla." Perhaps they don't realize that the producers are paying for the extraordinary antics. I had a roommate who told me that he had a really good relationship with a girl one time, and after a few months, she remarked that they never fought about anything, and wanted to know what was wrong. Seems like she was under the false impression that a normal relationship requires fighting, and if there hasn't been any, then it's not normal. It's false messages like these that reality TV sends to us. I just feel sorry for the people who actually believe them.

Not convinced? See here.
And here.
This too.

(Google is a wonderful thing.)

Is this so wrong?

I think you can tell a lot about a person by their favorite movies, or the movies they tend to watch. It speaks to how they are entertained. I imagine there's a big scientific explanation for what happens in the brain when someone is entertained. As I see it, you're entertained through some combination of empathy and understanding of whatever it is that is entertaining you. As you're watching a comedy flick, you see the exaggerated ridiculousness of the scene, recognize the why and how, and laugh accordingly. In a suspense thriller, you recognize the tension and imagine what the main character must be experiencing, and thus have a vicarious experience through her.

Some movies require more effort on your part in order to empathize with the characters or understand what is going on in the plot. Let's take the Matrix trilogy as an example. Everyone loved the first one. The plot was straightforward and the themes were simple (although if you watch the commentary you'll discover how replete the film was with philosophical nods and references): it's man vs. machine. Good vs. evil. Simple love story. Zero to hero. But then everyone hates the second and third parts of the trilogy. You've still got plenty of action. It's still man vs. machine. You've got the love thing going on. But now it's getting deeper. The producers are trying to communicate more of the history and background to their story. They're building up the "Christ" theme that culminates at the end of the third movie. But come on, people don't want that crap! Stuff like that requires way too much effort, empathy, and understanding. Thus, the connections are not made and people are not entertained.

I had a friend who didn't like the second and third movies. He also loved all the fast & furious movies. Does it mean anything? Am I wrong to make any sort of inference about his I.Q. on that basis? Is it all just a matter of varying interests? Could be.

What about the person who only likes horror films? What does that say about the person? The way I see it, it requires minimal mental faculties to empathize with or understand the entertainment value of a horror film. Horror films provide entertainment in the form of shock and surprise. Anyone can get scared. Even animals feel fear. But animals don't possess higher reasoning capabilities. They also don't crack jokes (as far as I know). So if someone only likes horror films and can't appreciate comedies or other genres, what does that say about them? Am I again wrong to infer that they may not be the sharpest tool in the shed?

I often pride myself on being non-judgmental. This post may make me a hypocrite. But let's face it, we make judgments as to someone's character based on all sorts of things. If someone derives entertainment/pleasure from killing kittens, then most of us would make a negative character judgment of him/her. My personal favorite is whether a person likes "The Office." If someone doesn't like the office, then I feel like I can at least conclude that we have drastically different senses of humor. If I'm feeling evil then I'll further conclude that they're not too bright. The Office, like most humor, is funny because it satirizes and exaggerates familiar, everyday occurrences. But to appreciate satire, one has to make the connection between reality and exaggeration. If you don't make the connection, you don't "get" the humor. It takes some mental effort, sometimes, to make such connections. I think you see where I'm going with this. :)