In French an Essay means to try. It’s a sincere effort with best intentions to convey an idea that has empowerment and clarification.
This is the longest piece I have ever written on a public space like this one. But I have gone deep on this one, felt a sense of exploration and sense now that it’s only the beginning. I hope you make it till the end, even if it takes you multiple times.
Harmony.
Who would not want that? To feel like different pieces belong to each other. Somehow the sum becomes bigger than its parts and emanates an intricate system of individual pieces that each of them seem quite distinct from each other and feel both authentic and critical to the whole entity.
One can see why a landscape can be said to be harmonious; as one can find an ecosystem of living beings seeming to have their own entwined cycles and contributing to a certain equilibrium in a seemingly elegant manner. A choir, a symphonic orchestra, or simply a group of musicians can be in harmony. A clockwork can be inspiring by how all the different pieces need to be ultra precise to the fraction of a millimetre, and robust to live through enough wear and tear and give the precise time through years, and even decades if you find a good one.
Harmony is synonymous of Beauty, but in my humble opinion, the latter convey a sense of mystery and divine that the former often does not show; even if enough time is given for study.(…Still contemplating on that one.)
But how can this virtue be applied to humans? What is to live in harmony?
What comes first to mind is perhaps a situation where a person feels like they participate to something bigger than themselves. Where they feel valued, respected, and in return they also feel like they are getting something out of it. We could say they would be in a symbiotic relationship.
With this first definition, I may then say that the simple fact of being part of a family, a sports team, a community centre, a company or a political organization would be enough for us to be consider harmonious. Where our skills would be appreciated, and both the group and the individuals would be getting rewards.
Is that enough though?
If so, the simple fact of being born would likely be sufficient to make us harmonious in our families. Being able to practice my passion at my local sports club, is that enough to make me harmonious? Getting paid for what I do at my company and or handling flyers for my local communal event would grant me the favours of being already being good enough for being virtuous?
If that’s correct, then how is that this virtue is listed as something that requires practice, wisdom and discernement? Given our last definition, not much seem to be required of us other than being initially accepted by the larger entity, and it seems like a low entry fee is required. At worst, one could say that just by being gifted, you would be harmonious somewhere at some point, you just need to keep being yourself or keep knocking on doors.
That seems odd… Why would the ancient Greeks deem being harmonious worth of being rare enough that only determinate people would be seen as role models for other to learn from, to reduce suffering and increase well being in the world?
Something is missing to my definition.
Seen from outside, a situation ceases to be harmonious if signs of strong dissonance and chaos arise. Things would show signs of falling appart. Let’s say a human body shows signs of cancer cells developing and impeding the normal rhythm of life. A piece of art would appear very confusing to the point that an observer may no longer know if that chasm is intended, or the result of being sloppy. An ecosystem starts to see that a biotope, or a species is showing significant signs of decline to the point it impacts the other members of that system, threatening the whole equilibrium.
In a sense, it’s as if those large and complex large entities that have acquired their resilience through millions of years of evolution, would loose their anti-fragile features, or being out of sync, out of balance and perhaps even showing signs of full imminent collapse.
What is it that something that was so robust, now starts to fall appart? What sort of continuous stress puts harmony in peril?
If a human organism has a single cancer cell developing, it’s usually either due to local error, or the result of something in the environment that triggers it. The organism sees that anomaly as an act of rebellion. If nothing is done, neighbouring cells will also start to rebel perhaps spread over the whole body. The long rehearsed check and balances allow the whole system to get rid of the rebellious tumour.
But in the case of a group of humans? How being harmonious one day, and then evicting a rebellious person or group from an organization the next day is that a form of virtue? From a harsh reality, one could say that top down almost totalitarian or despotic organisations could then be considered harmonious ?
Let’s step back. There is a large difference between the million year vertebrate multi-cellular organism experience and the few years an organisation may have in existence or at most centuries old institutions. If one thing can be said about human organisations, is that even in the case of dynasties, it’s pretty rare to have more than two consecutive leaders in a row. And even that is likely dependent on how stable is the surrounding kingdoms and economical situation. Humans are precisely prone to self-deception. Often whatever positive outcomes are perceived at the top of the organization, would likely get attributed to a narrow and biased set of actions.
There is for example in sociology a concept of fundamental attribution error (FAE) that we most likely all fell for at some point: Any success in a challenging situation is likely attributed to our hard work, insights, perseverance, reactivity, etc. Instead of luck and mistakes from the other part are downplayed. While if the other part did defeat us, it was likely due to their notorious mischiefs, their borderline cheating. At best because we were out of luck and they were not. In other words, it seems extremely difficult for a human organization to recognize their own limitations and defaults to blaming others; when not simply looking for a scape goat. The last is precisely a millennial old ritual that allows such group to symbolically get rid of their negative tensions toward the leaders or the whole group and come as one behind a reinforcement of a twist in a narrative. Think Socrates after the fall of Athens against Sparta. Louis XVI for new french regime National Convention. The Jews, Roma people for rising Third Reich Germany. Invasion of Iraq in the early 2000s.
So it seems like, being Harmonious seems so far for a human being either something on one hand that they can take for granted without much control over it, because they somehow simply get absorbed by something that needs them. And on the other hand something relatively fragile that can dispose of them at soon as dissonance is perceived and the survival of the group prevails at all costs.
That does not seem something anyone would likely pursue. We either get somehow exploited or discarded like an old tissue. Does that mean that Rampage capitalism and new liberal laws combine with a certain level of totalitarian authorities are harmonious? This sounds like conformism to me at best and dystopian Orwellian nightmare at worst.
How being harmonious for a social species like ours that values transcendence can expect to spend time and effort to be harmonious when you either have not much to work on to begin with, since you offer something that you were gifted for. And could be discarded at the first sign of things turning pear shape.
***Picture this: You are applying for a job at a renowned and prestigious international organization. You successfully passed all interviews and evaluations and what seems like your dream job is now a reality.
Years pass, you are being challenged and moved up the ladder. Gained some skills and new responsibilities. You are clearly exhibiting signs of being in harmony if we believe our most current definition, as you do what you are told and things are working out for you through gaining skills, earning respect, and cultivating meaning. All good right? After all you deserved it. You worked hard, and did countless hours of overtime. You went above and beyond the call of duty and somehow managed to maintain the elusive but ultimately rare work/life balance. Is that it then? The organisation you are part of, had not been challenged since you joined it. The whole entity has broken records of performance, is a leader in their market and shows no signs of stopping. BINGO! The company exist for a few decades an has done nothing but bringing innovation and you are partly responsible for it. Can we then say that you are being in harmony? Or that you have attained corporate symbiosis? When YOU are in your COMPANY and your COMPANY is in YOU?
Hmm….
Somehow again, that does not feel right. Even when you are working hard and participating with devotion and the organisation is thriving, you cannot really call this an harmonious virtue. After all, one could say, you are devoted, a stakhanoviste, or maybe lucky. And the company’s leadership could perhaps be either saluted for their vision when harmony would be the result and not something they specially look for. What if harmony is not something they value primarily? The analysts would likely praise their strategic decision and innovation, clever acquisitions, perhaps being the most rational and maybe wise at times but not harmonious.
My new proposal is hence the following one: Being Harmonious is the cultivation of fitting and contributing to a situation in a way that is unique and authentic. Enhancing it and wishing it to keep refining itself.
In this case, there is clear dedication for the situation for the organization to do well and evolve, hopefully with you in it and getting something out of it in a symbiotic manner.
What I just described sounds more like being in service to something bigger than yourself. Cultivating meaning. Is that the same as being harmonious?
One time you see you can do more than what is normally required of you, another time you step back to let others express themselves. You, are a hub between departments or teams and are like the oil in a well run engine. You make things happen. Is that enough to be harmonious? Being in full participation and ALL IN like the CEO would like us all to be?
Can it be that you landed in the perfect organisation? They never take themselves too seriously despite their impressive tracking records. They invest in their people and the people invest themselves in it. Surely there must be a gremlin somewhere. I am usually cynical, but if no human is perfect, certainly no organisation is perfect. And if they are, usually it would not resist the proof of time after a couple of CEO s. Sooner or later something odd will cross your scrutiny. Especially if you are so diligent at what you do. Sooner or later a conflict of interest will come to your attention. Perhaps it comes in the most unexpected ways like a well researched documentary from a renowned news channel saying that perhaps some of the practices may well be legal or sneaky, like using off shore companies in tax heavens to avoid certain taxes. Or finding out that the conditions of the workers in the emergent countries that perform most of the work in the outsourced partner companies live and work in extremely dire conditions. Or perhaps, suddenly a friend helped you realize that working for a company that produces a key component that is being used for weapons that are being sold in a country far, far away and contributes to a genocide, Avatar style.
Are we still being harmonious then? Are we still winners?
If something is common to most, if not all ancient Greek virtues, is the constant of being able to use, and cultivate discernement and encourage others near us to do the same. And being diligent at work without rehearsing ethics seems more like being ant-like. Dare I say almost, Zombie-like.
Clearly there must be a fair amount of BS (excuse-me..) self-deception for the diligent designer of heavy artillery in Pennsylvania.
Clearly there must be a fair amount of self-deception for the diligent member of a cult-like spiritual group that prepares the summer ritual where the Supreme Leader is about to abuse a young adolescent for a transcendent celebration for the good of Mankind.
Clearly there must be a fair amount of self-deception in the head of an AI designer and tester when it simply keeps following all those team meetings about how faster they need to still have their new versions out before Q3 so they can get the first mover advantage over the next competitor, even if it means accelerating an arms race that feeds Moloch, the God of Unhealthy competition.
My proposal now is that being part of a winning team with devotion in a symbiotic relationship is almost too easy. And yes, you should be lucky to just have a permanent contract these days. But that does not mean that every employee that is part of an organization that makes profit is harmonious. You have to be able to express critiques that keep the organization aligned with what is right independent of the law in vigour in the country of operation.
Therefore, I strongly believe that an harmonious individual is the one that not only cultivates their sovereignty in a situation in a way that is authentic. But also enhances it and wishes it to keep refining itself. And always has an option to alert and challenge hierarchy, opts out of the organisation, or even may decide to sabotage it if it's safe for them to do so.
If the situation arises, people should be allowed to express that their emperor has no cloths.
If the King is being unreasonable, there should be a jester to call how foolish they are.
If a department, VP or CEO refuses to address a scandal, a whistle-blower should be protected and be allowed to let a wider audience know what has happened.
Instead of being praised for conformism, strong work ethic, professionalism or intelligence, one should be able to be a sincere mirror so that the organization can live up to their standards. And when the situation does not allow us to come forward and be protected, we should leave that organization, and seek shelter and meaning elsewhere. If it’s safe to do so, if our values of Truth and Justice are dear to us, and our families can also be safe or take the risk and support us in our stance, then we should consider offering a stronger act of resistance for the Greater Good.
A more frequent use case may be that the situation in an organization may be so full of itself that the atmosphere becomes toxic. Either because of its negativity or because of its enduring foolish positivity. The conformism can simply turn their endeavour into sheeplike group thinking. Which leads to situation where an elephant in the room is not acknowledged and addressed and every member is zombie-like and not helping in raising any potential concerns in time.
So being the Trickster for the Greater Good seems like the thing a virtuous person should do. They may do it through caricature, irony, provocation, or through blowing the whistle, and their hope would be that their sincerity gets picked up and a change of direction occurs. Will they always succeed, is not at all guaranteed. But there is a chance at least someone will be inspired and resonate with that intention.
Now let’s try another approach with a concrete example.
Is Ed Snowden a virtuous Harmonious man acting for the greater good or an innocent fool that over-exposed sensitive classified information without discernement?
If you ask him, he seems sincere and humble enough to say, that he could not make the decision of what what too much to share with the world, so he trusted key international publications to make that ethical decision for him. While if you ask the US government, that alone is synonymous to treason.
What I mean is that the boundary of what seems right can only be understood when enough time has past for an historian, philosopher or lawyer analysis and only after a significant amount of damage has occurred. Can we be harmonious and sabotage a situation for the greater good?
In other words:
When trying to be harmonious, how do we determine when the group and the greater purpose are in sync or not? It’s also entirely possible that the lone ranger would also be fooling himself?
If we ask Unabomber, he was the one acting for the Greater Good and sabotaging and killing people in a very elaborate way in order to save Nature from Capitalism and Moloch. He was a brilliant academic with a mathematical brain that lead him to insanity. If it wasn’t for his brother that had recognized a few key expressions in his manifesto, the investigation from the authorities would have likely taken much longer.
When one takes radical action, especially against a large group or organization, there are whole sets of externalities than can appear bad on the short term but good in the long… and vice versa… Only time tells.
Think that perhaps the weapon that has destroyed the most lives in August 1945 may have brought an arm race but also arguably peace or stability among industrialized nations in the last seventy years. But what about the fifty years after that?
A dialectic seems to occur, to the point where I wonder:
Why should we get involved at all?
I can understand being Harmonious for most situations of daily life, like organizing a block party, a celebration at school, artists collaborating together. But given the finite nature and the short term commitment almost seems inconsequential. For most of our commitments in our families, being harmonious is heavily tainted by the strong bonds and unless we are victims of abuse, leaving seems more related to survival than virtue. Any other interactions seems of low impact, unless we are competing for inheritance. If we are talking about a local community organization or sports team or hobby, I would say that being thrown out of those circles are also of little impact and being a conformist is the norm. At work, given the current market place in our latitudes, being harmonious for most of us little pawns is likely not something to fight for unless one has rare and well sought skills. And in the political sphere, we saw that even for the United States, being Harmonious does not seem to pay much for Ed Snowden, nor Socrates.
Again…why being involved at all?
This seems so far a virtue only for the noble men. The person who’s already wise. The Nietzsch’s Superman. I may be missing key elements, but it seems that being Harmonious has either low to no stakes for most of us. Or is a virtue for the 0.01% who can die for their ideals and still with History judging them thirty plus years later on the validity of their actions.
This is when my current state of aporia lies. Harmonious for short terms group initiatives for our community seems the one we should all be working to refine.
But according to Mo Gawdat (ex- chief of innovation for Google X), the aim is Alignment between our values and the Greater Good. And for that, he quotes Sufism (cult that inspired Ancient Greeks, Stoics, Gnostics, and early Christians) One has to die before we die, so that when we die , we do not die. And being in tune with the Mysteries, being in tune with the Divine is what should drive our actions. And being Harmonious is the embodiment of all that, regardless of the consequences. Most likely being Harmonious will not drive us to radical extreme actions, but will instead inspire others to pursue what is that makes us in alignment in our own authentic way for the Greater Good. And the answer seems that once we die, at least symbolically, a shift in us occurs, and a dynamic takes places where the Harmonious actor is no longer operating on a well rehearsed and almost predictable script but in a journey of confusion, discovery, deep gratitude and wonder and sense of optimism and hope that is real but acquainted to faith. Not the caricature of the fundamentalist evangelist, but the faith of the Sufi/Gnostic. An actor that had lost something dear to them and processed grief and somehow found a deep treasure within that ignites their actions with power and a strong sense of direction.
The faith that reminds them that: Every thing is going to be al right…