Parts 1 and 2
himself. What was it that drove him to go to war against nature, a battle that the inferior are destined to
lose? Why did he refuse to accept his place for so long, instead opting to prolong his misery by
overstaying his welcome?
There could only be one explanation: Innate to all men is the desire to cope, in addition to survival and
passing on the gene.
There are vast and infinite ways in which a man copes with the world, but from John's observations,
they could be encapsulated into two parent categories. Although neither of them have official names,
the first could be described as overt strategies, and the other in contrast as covert strategies. The first is
designed to bring one closer to achieving actualization, while the other exists for those for whom such
achievement has been denied.
Overt strategies form not only the basis for personal self improvement, but also form the foundation of
any given society at large. Whether the goal is to lose weight and get fit, to maximize ones income and
accumulate wealth, to overcome addiction or even attain spiritual enlightenment, the means in which
people resort to in order to reach these goals are all, at least in part, comprised of overt coping
strategies. Even hobbies and leisure activities could be described in this way.
It is not abnormal for a person to completely surrender to a single overt strategy, allowing it to engulf
almost every area of their lives. Such people often champion their cope of choice, becoming one of its
loudest advocates, or will wear it on their sleeve and thus advertise their endorsement. If one does this
in regards to their hobbies, they are called an enthusiast. Likewise, if their cope is ethereal in nature,
usually ranging from spirituality to partisan politics, then such champions may often be referred to as
zealots.
Regardless of whatever practice or lifestyle it happens to endorse or prescribe, most overt strategies are
based on a two-pronged predication: the myth of control, and the religion of effort.
The first is the belief that man is the arbiter of his own destiny, with partial or full control over his
overall outcome in life. The second states that through both hard work and strenuous consistency, one
is able to bring about whatever outcome they desire. No mater the limitations of their physical ability,
their economic status or their living condition, this worldview asserts that all men can accomplish
whatever it is that they set their mind to. Both of these elements in tandem are a required prerequisite,
and if combined form the bedrock of behavioral determinism; without them, an overt strategy simply
cannot exist, or qualify as such.
While there are exceptions, most of the overt strategies on offer to the public – be they sold as books or
taught by way of oratory – are often the personal anecdotes of the advocate in question. One individual
achieves success, and self-extrapolation is quick to follow; the most proximate or consistent
correlations (the thoughts and deeds that they possessed when their desired outcome finally occurs) is
propped up and hailed as the secret to their success. The advocates then project themselves onto the
world, and take their own experiences and turn them into a brand (It worked for me, therefore it is law!
If this gave me results, it must work for everyone else!). Their personal lifestyle is now available for
sale, but also attached to it is both their ego and their pride.
In the event that an overt strategy fails to yield results, it is not uncommon for their advocates to heap
blame on the consumers. Some may resort to egregious hyperbole (doing only ten push ups will not
make you fit!). Yet those eager to make more money will simply pile on more stratagems. In the case of
the latter, the original formula to achieve success has been elongated over time with a myriad of
intermediary steps; now, to gain one thing, one must first do a thousand. By doing this, the advocates
maintain their relevance and pocket more wealth, capitalizing on their brand or overt strategy of choice.
In the modern Western world, this practice is generally referred to as self help.
Eventually, a pattern is set. The common man is trapped in a cycle of improvement, and those who
advocate the path to success now have mastery over him, sometimes monitoring or gate-keeping his
efforts at every turn. He is now like Sisyphus, the wretched king of Corinth, pushing a boulder up a hill
for the remainder of eternity. Yet suppose the hill was merely a ledge at the base of Olympus Mons; the
closer one gets to achieving actualization, the further away it soon turns out to be. The definition of
insanity has been redefined as perseverance, and such a man is no longer free, but a slave, both to the
myth of control and the religion of effort.
What if there is no strategy to achieving actualization, and those that do so were simply born naturally
superior?
John had tried and tested the overt strategies of the world, but none of them gave him the results he
wanted most. Building large and toned muscles didn't make him any friends, and learning new
languages had failed to earn him acceptance. He was taught how to be confident, but he came across as
arrogant; confidence was the by-product of success, but not its cause.
The very people who taught him how to feel better about life were the exact same people who had
made him feel worse. Was he truly on a mission to improve himself, or was all of this a penance for
him not being good enough? All this overcompensation was never seen in his superiors, those that
nature had crowned the apex of his species. They did not need to exert themselves in the same way that
John had, or waste years trying to formulate success they were already enjoying.
Where is this control that man claims to have within the cosmos, and at what point in ones life does it
start to manifest? No one can decide on what day they are born, or for that matter whether or not they
are even born at all? What should one say to the stillborn, the challenged or the retarded? Where was
their control over their outcome in life? Who can control if they are born male or female, sickly or in
health, or with black skin or white? If a man is born blind, is that his fault, and if one dies in an
earthquake, should that person hold all the blame?
If all of mankind accepted their limitations, and innately understood the role of the biology that forms
them, then such a revelation would doom the species to despair, and the course of such awareness could
turn fatal as a result. This is why the myth of control and the religion of effort are so deeply embedded
into human psychology. It is not hope personified – as some might believe – but a protective measure
against the loss thereof. Any disturbance to this mindset is met with the strongest of resistance; Most
people will exist in varying degrees of insularity, and apply self-censorship to preserve their convictions. If
anyone in their inner circle does not think as they do, thus threatening to undermine the beliefs that they cherish,
the latter may be kept at a distance, or fully ostracized as a result.
Hope: that is the purpose of all overt coping strategies. They were never designed or intended to give
people actualization, but rather to convince them that acquiring it was possible. This is why they
universally emphasize a man's behavior, while almost always failing to take his genetics into account.
After a man has exhausted numerous overt coping strategies, the sun may set on hope, and he might
lose all incentive. In the case of John, he was no exception; the joy of discovering new hobbies or
developing new skills was only felt when he saw these tasks as a bridge to actualization. Soon,
however, these tasks devolved into a painful chore, and what was once brought elation now felt more
like punishment. For this reason, John turned his attention to the covert strategies of the world.
III
In his private reflections leading up to his demise, John looked back on his life and pondered to
himself. What was it that drove him to go to war against nature, a battle that the inferior are destined to
lose? Why did he refuse to accept his place for so long, instead opting to prolong his misery by
overstaying his welcome?
There could only be one explanation: Innate to all men is the desire to cope, in addition to survival and
passing on the gene.
There are vast and infinite ways in which a man copes with the world, but from John's observations,
they could be encapsulated into two parent categories. Although neither of them have official names,
the first could be described as overt strategies, and the other in contrast as covert strategies. The first is
designed to bring one closer to achieving actualization, while the other exists for those for whom such
achievement has been denied.
Overt strategies form not only the basis for personal self improvement, but also form the foundation of
any given society at large. Whether the goal is to lose weight and get fit, to maximize ones income and
accumulate wealth, to overcome addiction or even attain spiritual enlightenment, the means in which
people resort to in order to reach these goals are all, at least in part, comprised of overt coping
strategies. Even hobbies and leisure activities could be described in this way.
It is not abnormal for a person to completely surrender to a single overt strategy, allowing it to engulf
almost every area of their lives. Such people often champion their cope of choice, becoming one of its
loudest advocates, or will wear it on their sleeve and thus advertise their endorsement. If one does this
in regards to their hobbies, they are called an enthusiast. Likewise, if their cope is ethereal in nature,
usually ranging from spirituality to partisan politics, then such champions may often be referred to as
zealots.
Regardless of whatever practice or lifestyle it happens to endorse or prescribe, most overt strategies are
based on a two-pronged predication: the myth of control, and the religion of effort.
The first is the belief that man is the arbiter of his own destiny, with partial or full control over his
overall outcome in life. The second states that through both hard work and strenuous consistency, one
is able to bring about whatever outcome they desire. No mater the limitations of their physical ability,
their economic status or their living condition, this worldview asserts that all men can accomplish
whatever it is that they set their mind to. Both of these elements in tandem are a required prerequisite,
and if combined form the bedrock of behavioral determinism; without them, an overt strategy simply
cannot exist, or qualify as such.
While there are exceptions, most of the overt strategies on offer to the public – be they sold as books or
taught by way of oratory – are often the personal anecdotes of the advocate in question. One individual
achieves success, and self-extrapolation is quick to follow; the most proximate or consistent
correlations (the thoughts and deeds that they possessed when their desired outcome finally occurs) is
propped up and hailed as the secret to their success. The advocates then project themselves onto the
world, and take their own experiences and turn them into a brand (It worked for me, therefore it is law!
If this gave me results, it must work for everyone else!). Their personal lifestyle is now available for
sale, but also attached to it is both their ego and their pride.
In the event that an overt strategy fails to yield results, it is not uncommon for their advocates to heap
blame on the consumers. Some may resort to egregious hyperbole (doing only ten push ups will not
make you fit!). Yet those eager to make more money will simply pile on more stratagems. In the case of
the latter, the original formula to achieve success has been elongated over time with a myriad of
intermediary steps; now, to gain one thing, one must first do a thousand. By doing this, the advocates
maintain their relevance and pocket more wealth, capitalizing on their brand or overt strategy of choice.
In the modern Western world, this practice is generally referred to as self help.
Eventually, a pattern is set. The common man is trapped in a cycle of improvement, and those who
advocate the path to success now have mastery over him, sometimes monitoring or gate-keeping his
efforts at every turn. He is now like Sisyphus, the wretched king of Corinth, pushing a boulder up a hill
for the remainder of eternity. Yet suppose the hill was merely a ledge at the base of Olympus Mons; the
closer one gets to achieving actualization, the further away it soon turns out to be. The definition of
insanity has been redefined as perseverance, and such a man is no longer free, but a slave, both to the
myth of control and the religion of effort.
What if there is no strategy to achieving actualization, and those that do so were simply born naturally
superior?
John had tried and tested the overt strategies of the world, but none of them gave him the results he
wanted most. Building large and toned muscles didn't make him any friends, and learning new
languages had failed to earn him acceptance. He was taught how to be confident, but he came across as
arrogant; confidence was the by-product of success, but not its cause.
The very people who taught him how to feel better about life were the exact same people who had
made him feel worse. Was he truly on a mission to improve himself, or was all of this a penance for
him not being good enough? All this overcompensation was never seen in his superiors, those that
nature had crowned the apex of his species. They did not need to exert themselves in the same way that
John had, or waste years trying to formulate success they were already enjoying.
Where is this control that man claims to have within the cosmos, and at what point in ones life does it
start to manifest? No one can decide on what day they are born, or for that matter whether or not they
are even born at all? What should one say to the stillborn, the challenged or the retarded? Where was
their control over their outcome in life? Who can control if they are born male or female, sickly or in
health, or with black skin or white? If a man is born blind, is that his fault, and if one dies in an
earthquake, should that person hold all the blame?
If all of mankind accepted their limitations, and innately understood the role of the biology that forms
them, then such a revelation would doom the species to despair, and the course of such awareness could
turn fatal as a result. This is why the myth of control and the religion of effort are so deeply embedded
into human psychology. It is not hope personified – as some might believe – but a protective measure
against the loss thereof. Any disturbance to this mindset is met with the strongest of resistance; Most
people will exist in varying degrees of insularity, and apply self-censorship to preserve their convictions. If
anyone in their inner circle does not think as they do, thus threatening to undermine the beliefs that they cherish,
the latter may be kept at a distance, or fully ostracized as a result.
Hope: that is the purpose of all overt coping strategies. They were never designed or intended to give
people actualization, but rather to convince them that acquiring it was possible. This is why they
universally emphasize a man's behavior, while almost always failing to take his genetics into account.
After a man has exhausted numerous overt coping strategies, the sun may set on hope, and he might
lose all incentive. In the case of John, he was no exception; the joy of discovering new hobbies or
developing new skills was only felt when he saw these tasks as a bridge to actualization. Soon,
however, these tasks devolved into a painful chore, and what was once brought elation now felt more
like punishment. For this reason, John turned his attention to the covert strategies of the world.
