on Over Analyzing.

In order to properly function in the course of our day-to-day lives, it is imperative that we analyze the various stimuli encountered therein. This is a fairly obvious concept. When we make a note that a friend is sad or keeping a secret, we know these things from the various social cues that we pick up from observing the world around us. The human ability to translate passing subtleties into informative notions about our external surroundings is truly a remarkable trait. We spend so much of our time processing every parcel of new sensory information that often times we fall victim to the pitfalls of over analyzation. This intricate abnormality in the way in which human beings interact to the world around them is in and of itself both fascinating and troubling.

Over analyzation can manifest in any number of suitably distinct ways. Most often, we over analyze when fixated on an idea or thought. The way in which one goes through a day while simultaneously and subconsciously processing every stimulus presented is almost without notice. Our brains allow us to operate routinely, often without our own realization. This allows us to function in a social setting in a manner that is appropriate to both our own means and the expectations of others without wasting half of our time in figuring it all out. Fixation occurs when an idea, conclusion, or thought does not 'fit' within the constraints of our regular, subconscious processing. Once this has occurred, we begin to actively assess the idea over and over until our conscious minds can produce a satisfying explanation that sates the part of us that finds fault with it.

The trick, if there is such a thing, is that oftentimes the things we perceive as commonplace do not hold up to rigorous scrutiny or 'logical' deduction. Take the idea of a friend that is sad. How do we know he is sad? Perhaps his face looks sad. What looks sad about his face? His eyebrows are arched and his mouth is frowning. Why are those looks associated with being sad? Most sad people have this face. What if that is just how his face normally looks? This is just a small example of the complex logic chain involved with deducing very common things. Obviously, we do not go through such a strenuous investigation every time we encounter something. Our brains use 'shortcuts' -- workarounds that allow us to get from the proverbial Point A all the way to Point Z without ever having to consider Points B through Y. Over analyzation occurs when we need to reach Point C, and along the way from A we somehow invent not only Point B, but D, E, and F as well.

The problem lies in the subjective brain. Deducing contextual clues to reveal an understood truth requires logical links between greater social concepts, reality, and assumed plausibilities. The subjective brain, unfortunately for us, is only truly certain of the third [Author's Note: I've made a case for reality before -- Link!]. Reality and social concepts or norms are both equally important in processing, but for this discussion are irrelevant as they exist (albeit arguably) outside of the subjectivity of the individual. Assumed plausibilities are what we subjectively know to be true based on all of our previous experience in analyzing our surroundings. For instance, we know that if we insult someone, they will most likely get very mad at us. In maneuvering from the conceptual Point A to whatever conclusion it is that our minds reach, we rely on assumed plausibility for our navigation. It is important to remember that 'plausible' does not equal 'certain'. We can only guess at the reactions of a world outside of our own heads, and those guesses will vary as wildly as there are people on the planet. Over analyzation is the product of this: our brains making logical connections that may not or do not exist and the struggle with the conclusions that we reach based on them.

Of course the real dilemma is not the 'why' or 'how' of over analyzing the situations we experience; it's the 'what to do'. Some obsess about every word and action; every perceived slight or hidden meaning. These people find it hard to take anything at face value. Others simply take everything they perceive exactly as it is. These people are often labeled as 'gullible' or 'ignorant'. Each has its advantages. The former often sees the world shrewdly, and avoids the various complexities of assumption. The latter is often free of the constraints of being burdened with the knowledge that what one sees is not always what is true. Perhaps the real truth is that there is no easy solution when we find ourselves over analyzing something. To rely on basic presumptions can be almost foolish, while always presuming that things are not what they seem is equally so. Maybe we are all best served when acting according to instinct. Over analyzation is simply our instinctual reaction to that which we suspect is not simple. In the end it is best to believe in ourselves throughout, because it is true what many people say: When you believe in nothing, you will fall for anything.

The Accelerating Oblivion Race with no Finish Line.

As I get older the passage of time and the sequence of events that I experience become increasingly perceptively transient. Perhaps it is a symptom of growing older, and maybe it has something to do with the age group of which I am a part. Regardless of the reason, events accelerate more and more and I find myself astounded with how quickly time passes and how trivial the actions of myself and all the people around me seem. All around people live, they get into relationships, they get promoted, they graduate, they move, they achieve and they strive to succeed. Lately all of these endeavors have left me cold in that my mind continually seems to focus on the bigger end goal -- in other words, to what ends do we toil away in our little lives? Do we work towards some benevolent 'greater good'? Are we really furthering humankind by getting a degree and working a 40 hour a week job for the rest of our lives? Is artistic expression of any more value? For every 'Mona Lisa' or 'Sistine Chapel', a thousand thousand artistic expressions will have absolutely zero effect on the rest of the world. Movies are made and given increasing importance, but what does it add? A distraction; a subterfuge to divert attention to the fact that we are all hurtling light speed towards an ambiguous ending?

What's the point?

Perhaps the point is selfish. Maybe life and all of our secret machinations should be geared exclusively towards our own subjective pleasures. Maybe we should travel the world to see everything we can. Maybe we get the degrees so that we have the money to buy all the nice things that we believe we should have to obtain a complete life. Selfishly we can pretty much have it all, or better yet anything that we define 'it all' to be. Maybe. As for me, I find that a subjective existence is perhaps personally rewarding, but ultimately meaningless. As masters of our own destinies, we are in control to the reaches of our own little confined worlds. I can see how that would be enough for some, but personally (and perhaps ironically -- subjectively) it seems hollow. Anyone can be astonishing if they're setting the bar for being it.

If I was being honest, I think I am probably complicating matters far beyond what they should be. Fulfillment is subjective. One man's success is another man's wallowing. In the end, does any of it have meaning beyond the fact that we have satisfied ourselves? Is that enough? I enjoy my life. I do things. I do as many things as I can, but instead of feeling accomplished I wonder if I fill my life with events to ignore the fact that I'm doing it because I can't handle what's left without them.

Life is a series of events chained together to create a personal and unique timeline that ends up defining our existence. What if that series of events are just an unstoppable collection of moments we blindly choose as we miss the fact that time will run out before we ever get close to putting it in perspective? The more we do the faster time ticks away and sooner rather than later we turn around and realize we're just a series of memories that may or may not matter. And by the time we've realized this, isn't it too late to get context? Time is too big and we are too small to ever understand it the way its meant to be. I probably have a lot of life left to live. Still, I can't shake the feeling that the rest of it will play out fairly predictably; universally speaking. I'm racing towards oblivion at the variable speed of time and no matter what I do I can't seem to find how that counts. Is that the point?

The Gratuity Conundrum

We've all been there. We go to a nice restaurant and we order a tasty meal. We enjoy it, we enjoy the company we've dined with, and we have a generally good time. Eventually the waiter or waitress brings the bill and the age-old ritual begins, thrusting us into a game of manners versus justifications and rationality. In many countries around the world, the gratuity added to the cost of your food is simply included with the bill as delivered. In the US, this practice has never been embraced. Instead, the obligation to pay the salary of the hardworking men and women of the foodservice industry falls to the customer. This task not only sets up an unfair expectation on the consumer, but also on the server in question.

First and foremost, is it not the responsibility of an employer to pay their workers adequately for the services they provide? It seems slightly irresponsible to shirk this expectation to the paying populace. Still, is a tip not simply a means to show that not only was the food satisfactory, but that the various other facets of servitude were exceptional to the point of deserved reward? In this regard it would make perfect sense that the diner patron humbly pay their server for a job well done. This of course leads to the second point of contention -- what if the service provided is simply adequate? Primarily, a waiter or waitress does their job simply because it just so happens to be their job. By virtue of this, one is hired to perform a task for payment from their employer. It would be strange then to consider that you would not think to tip your bus driver for doing his job and driving you to your location. Doing this is the agreement the driver made when he was hired to his position in the first place, and therefore further rewarding him would seem extraneous. So why is it that when a server performs their job and brings food that you ordered to your table that we feel we must champion these actions as both above and beyond the call of duty? Perhaps the problem stems from the employer's lack of willingness to pay their workers a favorable sum for their services. Must we then shoulder the burden of this slight and correct an otherwise unfair occurrence? The answer to this I imagine is objective, but does it not seem slightly socialistic that the everyday consumer paying for goods is all but required to pay more than is expected to ensure monetary equality for the slightly less fortunate? Obviously all cases differ, but theoretically does it not hold that were a disenfranchised service professional so inclined they could simply find a job that provided a more workable wage less dependent on the formal kindnesses of strangers?

Of course the argument can be made that the tradition of tipping your server is a long-standing and time-tested practice at restaurants, and simply by choosing to patronize such an establishment you willingly agree to partake. The logically minded consumer can make the argument that were one not willing to pay an extra gratuity on top of the fee for the meal, they could simply choose to skip going out altogether. This hardly feels like a compromise because it causes the very same iniquity that faces service professionals when considering a new employment. Even further, the whole gratuity conundrum smacks of anemic apathy. Everyone pays the gratuity because that's how it is and nothing is going to change that. We give in to a system we can't hope to change because we enjoy the convenience of being served easy to access food.

So assume that one accepts tipping as a practice and finds oneself eyeing the bill at the end of dinner. Growing directly out of the fact that one is all but required to pay the disparities in a waiter's wages comes a gross and confusing social stigma. The amount that is chosen above the legally required fee for goods consumed can label one as either generous and morally just or cheap and uncaring. This unfortunate delineation would be much easier to avoid were it not for the extremely nebulous rules of etiquette associated in the entire tipping process from the get-go. For a time, offering a 15% gratuity on top of the total owed was considered in good taste. With a steadily worsening economy and the value of a dollar not going as far as it used to, I have come into contact with those who believe in order to not be seen as petty or cheap that 20% is mandatory. Now, should one simply sit by and accept the social expectations of the otherwise but not-so-blatantly optional ritual of tipping, or is it not pertinent to evaluate the level of service provided? If a server simply takes an order, delivers the food and stops by once or twice to query the level of satisfaction; does that exceed the purview of their employer's mandate? What if the service provided is downright poor? Most have encountered a waiter or waitress who struggles to bring the right order to you and often times fails to do so in a timely manner. Does such a person not deserve a tip, or to go even deeper, not deserve to make even minimum wage (of which they will not without your 'donation')?

It is clear that the situation in and of itself is more complex than it seems initially. So what would be the most amiable solution? Like many things in this world and in the United States government, people are much less likely to complain when they are being charged more in secret. What am I trying to suggest? Simply that perhaps by raising the prices of foods in menus that we can forgo the remotest possibility that a server would be tipped less than they felt they deserved or in extreme cases nothing at all. By including the gratuity in the total that one already pays, the problems both social and moral evaporate and even though everyone is subjected to increased prices at the very least it is universally fair. It may not hurt to consider as well the fact that perhaps companies should take to paying service professionals a salary tantamount to that which they make when receiving tips. As for me, I'll continue to take tipping on a case by case basis. Unless I am faced with overwhelmingly bad service, I have much more pressing things to attend to than worrying about an expected donation for a person simply doing their job. Still, from time to time it is hard to justify that which you have little to no control.

An Additional Insight by Jill Scerpella
via Facebook

"To go further, it's not just the food service industries any longer that maintain this practice. Do we not feel the need to tip our cab drivers upon the satisfactory delivery to our destinations? (I suppose nothing short of an accident would negate the need for this monetary 'thank you.') But what about the bus driver? Is his/her job not almost entirely the same as the cabbie? Yet taking a tip would be frowned upon and possibly even a terminable offense on the part of the driver who does accept such remuneration. And what about the hair stylist, manicurist, pedicurist -- and isn't it the secret concern among patrons that, if a tip is not "adequate" or even forthcoming, the service in the future may not be up to snuff. Or even that some misguided service provider may, in the absence of his due tip, even seek revenge upon the patron during subsequent encounters? (we all know the urban legend of the spit in the soup, the unwashed hands making the food, etc).

Yes, we all question the validity of the practice, yet aren't we all judged at work by the quality of our work. As a longstanding customer service professional, I have been happy to take my "reward" from my employer for a job well done in the form of a yearly bonus, or other sort of reward. Often simply a word of praise from a client/customer is reward enough. So, if I choose to be a service worker, I choose not to be one in a chosen industry that supports the "tip". Perhaps the commission should be something incorporated into the industries that rely on tipping. This would be based quantifiably on "production" as opposed to culpably, which is left up to the perception of the consumer. Some people might gauge the same interaction as poor, while others as exceptional. Maybe if I have a server coax me into an appetizer and then desert because of the server's powers of persuasion or the uncanny descriptive abilities to make me imagine the chocolate death dessert, by virtue of his/her quantifiable success at doing what his employer wants - selling more food - both I and the server as well as the employer are gratified. (AND the employer is able to delineate good servers from average by their production.)

It's not an easy call . . . . there are those who tip no matter what. I also, take it at a case by case basis - tipping when service is above the average, and NOT tipping when it falls short. I would expect nothing less if I were the server doing an honest job for a sometimes less than honest wage. And if someone doesn't have the means to give their last $5 as a tip, that shouldn't mean that they cannot partake in the occasional dinner out without rebuke for leaving nothing but a hardy THANK YOU -- you were very pleasant and helpful, let me let your boss know. But that's just one opinion!"