“I’d like to tall to you about the strangest secret in the world,” never has there been a more interesting introduction to a radio program. Earl Nightingale first spoke those words (on record at least) in 1959, when the self-help market of literature (which later on became inundated with quacks and con-artists) was still emerging.

When I look at these kinds of texts to try and find meaning, that is something that may help me in my reflective process which is ultimately the step before successful action, I try to find a book that is older. Some classic examples include Napoleon Hill’s Think and Grow Rich.

But an even older brand or fashion of self-help really can be traced back sometime to the years of American Heritage.  Self-Reliance by Emerson comes to mind, as do many of the great works of other cultures. As of late, I have familiarized myself with Von Goethe, much of Feodor Dostoevsky and hopefully next, Tolstoy. That’s not to discount Miyamoto Mushai. While it has somewhat “hip” since the 1960s to study Eastern Philosophy, due the the arrogance of the hippies; I find the fetishistic obsession with eastern wisdom, quite gauche.

That does not mean I do not appreciate the Vedas, Upanishads and various related myths. The story of how Lord Indra became covered in 1000 eyes, is quite… interesting.

To be stated plainly; I once knew an idiot baby boomer, a full professor at SFSU (yes, with PhD), who indicated her interest in certain eastern philosophies and alternative therapies. One of which was “Primal Scream Therapy” which seemed rather foolish to me. Rather than spending thousands of dollars with a quack psychologist, just spend that money on a single Meshuggah concert.

 

Which goes leagues, I would think, in proving that no amount of education can not save a fool from themself.

 

I think the skepticism of self-help, education and alternative instructional materials warrant a degree of skepticism to this extent. For all the videos I have produced (about 170 on my main channel totaling about 500 hours of content); how useful is it all, really?

And that’s not to be nihilistic, but rather mindful of the fact that this does need to eventually add up to something.

But I think what it adds up to, is really up to me. That is, if I were doing all of this for someone else’s sake entirely, this wouldn’t be the best way to go about it. Which leads me to better understand, why it is I understand so little from the various tutorials I watch. The person teaching is really half-hearted in the best of circumstances and that’s not meant as a criticism.

That same can be said of myself and my own YouTube content. Much of my own video work is, well, content. For lack of a better way of explaining, consider the following.

Public Education—specifically in the context of SPED where things like an IEP under Federal Law such as IDEA, Child Find and FAPE—struggles to provide a modicum of meaningful instruction. It can be “individualized” but even then, instruction does not always manifest in a desired outcome.

And that’s again not a lack of faith but rather an observation about a lack of understanding towards what the problem is. Again, returning to self-help and the various other inspirational texts of history & culture; there is a clear lack of understanding towards the underlying issue.

No amount of education can save a fool from themselves.

If you are a fool, you will remain a fool, until you cast off your foolishness.

And I do not mean fool, in the sense of child-like wonderment and awe, that is all necessary in preservation of the self and the whole spirit.

But fool & foolish in the sense of ignorance.

I think the best I can, or anyone else for the matter, is try to make something that half serves the community of interest and half serves the creator. Without a driving self-interest in one’s own work, one is not motivated to work. And if one manages to force oneself to work, the work is of poor quality and it’s shoddiness is self-effacing.

You can’t expect an educator to go all in, it’s really not possible for them to do it. But you can ask them to go half way and try to meet them there.

So to the title.

After Raskolnikov commits his murder, he feels an immense paranoia and guilt for his actions. Everything within his psychological state of being, rebels against him and undermines his public appearance. Which ultimately draws unwanted attention to himself. That’s about where I’m at so far in the audio book.

So what does this mean in the context to this subject at hand?

Well, I think it’s a matter of self-regulation. The guilt we feel is from a lack of service. Or rather from failing to provide others with the services we promise them as advertised.

It’s something of a disappointment to be advertised one thing and then to receive an entirely different service, or any service for the matter. And while it’s true that we have a tendency to more clearly remember (and ruminate over) the times we were snubbed than to remember the times that we were honored, we can somewhat moderate these feelings of resent and guilt.

As Earl Nightingale said, our reward is in direct proportion to our service to others.

I agree.

This is the only means of galvanizing ourselves from the voice of self-doubt. Moreso from the external voice of doubt, when others question our value our very being, meaning and purpose is not just questioned but also insulted.

And in this insult we make haste to our anger. Which shortens the frame of mind one may have towards this life and it’s rewards. So how does one manage all of this?

By trying to be mindful of what it is they are contributing. At best you can only give 50%—the other half has to come from the other half—but if you owe a debt.

Pay it in full. Always.

Otherwise, you become a Raskolnikov, plagued by your inability to act appropriately and haunted by what actions you can muster.

If you owe a debt.

Pay it in full. Always.

Even if only half of that debt is yours, pay your half and never-mind the rest. The rest is existential noise.