Good teachers can help; they are basically a necessity and so are highly recommended, but you must do the work yourself. You must understand, and then you will have to do this again and again. Get used to it, as it can be quite an adventure.

It is sometimes hard for people to believe that right there in their experience is what they are looking for. It is right here, right now, in your own experience, in your own heart, mind and body. It is these sensations right now that are just soaked with the truth.

~Daniel Ingram, Mastering The Core Teachings of the Buddha

Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha = Kick Ass Dharma

I’m currently re-reading my paperback copy of Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha by Daniel Ingram. The paperback had just been released in the U.S. but the e-book has been available for free on Ingram’s site as PDF download and in “blook” format.

I finished reading the “blook” version on my iPhone but I still purchased the paperback so I can read and re-read it offline. I think this book will be an instant cult classic, especially to those people who are into hardcore, no-nonsense dharma.

Here’s my rundown of the contents of the book.

First of, unlike other mainstream politically-correct spiritual authors, Ingram breaks away from political correctness and egalitarianism by claiming he had already achieved Arahatship, meaning, that he is already “enlightened.” Depending on your notion of “enlightenment” Ingram could either put you off and make you stop reading the book, or it could pique your curiosity and keep you reading. I read the book from cover to cover, and I’m glad I did.

Ingram makes it clear what his intentions are in the opening of the book. He even warned the readers about his social commentaries on Buddhism in particular and mystical traditions and spiritual teachers in general. Along the way he also makes his bias transparent to the readers. Ingram’s flavor of Buddhism is rooted in the Theravada tradition, particularly from Mahasi Sayadaw school of meditation.

I’m no scholar of Buddhist literature so I’m not sure whether Daniel Ingram is representing the dharma in its purest form. However, I understand enough about Buddhist teachings and concepts to recognize that Ingram is pointing to pragmatic truth on the Buddhist path by simplifying the language and removing the dogma, cultural baggage, narcissism, and metaphysical hubris surrounding both Eastern and Western flavors of Buddhism.

The core ideas in the book which I find very powerful are: The Three Trainings, The Three Characteristics, and Models of the Stages of Enlightenment.

The Three Trainings

The Three Trainings–Morality, Concentration, Wisdom–are the sum total of the Buddhist path. Ingram explains them in simple English with minimal theorizing and philosophizing. He cuts through the chase by shedding light on the essence of the practice, its pitfalls, its shadow sides, and what to expect along the path (as taught and practiced traditionally by those “darn Buddhists” who had already figured it all out a long time ago).

I especially like how Ingram points out that training in Morality is different from realizing the ultimate nature of sensory reality. This concept alone gives the readers an understanding why some “enlightened” people continue to suck and behave like douchebags. According to Ingram, Morality is the first and last training. Even enlightenment will not magically fix our psychological and interpersonal issues and transform us into saints. So it’s better not to project our moral ideals on people who we believe are enlightened. Instead, we should focus on our never-ending training in Morality for as long as we live in this relative world.

From the perspective of spiritual practice, Ingram explains the distinction and the relationship of Concentration and Wisdom. Concentration is what practitioners cultivate to “steady the mind” and access altered states of consciousness but it doesn’t by itself bring about Wisdom. Wisdom is what brings about enlightenment, or phrased differently: Wisdom is what ultimately transforms consciousness. In other words, Concentration brings about states of consciousness, while Wisdom brings about (or makes way) for stages of consciousness.

One way to develop Wisdom is via insight or vipassana meditation wherein practitioners shift their attention on noticing the Three Characteristics of bare sensations. It’s a meta-cognition in which practitioners go beyond the content of their awareness and switch focus on the fundamental characteristics of reality passing through the six senses (sight, sound, taste, touch, feelings, and thought).

(Note: For integral geeks out there: The three trainings correspond very well with Ken Wilber’s AQAL model, particularly, States and Stages. As for training in Morality, this corresponds with the Lower and Right Quadrants (i.e. interpersonal, social, behavioral). In short: I = Training in Concentration and Wisdom; We, It/Its = Training in Morality.)

The Three Characteristics

In classical enlightenment, it is Wisdom (or insight) practice which transforms consciousness. Wisdom practice is like training to become a “microscope” for one’s subjective experiences. Regardless of the content of awareness whether be it ordinary waking state, mind-blowing altered states, peak experiences, kundalini fireworks, lucid dreams, astral travels, near-death experiences, vision of inter-dimensional beings, or what have you, the focus of Wisdom practice is to recognize the three characteristics of all experiences at the sensory level. These three characteristics are: Impermanence, Suffering,  No-Self.

Ingram explains it very succinctly:

For day-to-day reality, the specifics of our experience are certainly important, but for insight into the truth of things in meditation they largely aren’t. Said another way, it is neither the object of meditation, the causes of the object of meditation, nor the significance of the object of meditation, but the truth of the sensations that make up that “object” which must be understood. Once you can tell what is mind and what is body, that’s for the most part enough. So don’t make stories, but know this: things come and go, they don’t satisfy, and they ain’t you. That is the truth. It is just that simple. If you can just not get to caught up in the content and know these simple, basic and obvious truths moment to moment, some other wordless and profound understanding may arise on its own.

Ingram covers different techniques to develop “access concentration.” He highly recommends breathing as the object of meditation. As for Wisdom practice, his favorite is “noting” meditation.

Models of the Stages of Enlightenment

In the latter section of the book, Models of the Stages of Enlightenment, Ingram spends a great deal of time debunking people’s misconstrued notions, projections, and delusions on the idea of “enlightenment.” This part of the book is very ballsy. Remember that Ingram is not shy about claiming Arahatship (meaning realized, or enlightened). His tone is oozing with mojo and non-idiot compassion. This might come across as arrogant for some readers but I personally like his treatment on this topic.

Most likely readers would recognize their own idealistic model of enlightenment while reading this part of the book. I’m guilty as charged when it comes to some of my own projections on “enlightened” beings. At one fell swoop Ingram demolished my deluded notions about enlightenment, and I feel fine.

To sum it up, Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha is a must-read for those who want to take a pragmatic spiritual path. This book reflects my own temperament when it comes to the dharma and spiritual practice. It has less fluff, no dogma, and more substance compared to other mainstream feel-good spiritual books I’ve read. In short, this is my kind of kick ass dharma!

Read it . Do the practices. And open yourself up to the Grace of Awakening.

P.S. I define “kick ass dharma”as dharma free of dogma, boomeritis, cultural baggage, metaphysical hubris, institutionalized nonsense, and idiot compassion.

P.P.S. Thanks to my dharma homeys, the Buddhist Geeks, for turning me to Daniel Ingram. See Daniel Ingram’s interview on BuddhistGeeks.

“Vincent Bugliosi argues
that President Bush and his administration are responsible for
murdering thousands of U.S. soldiers and over 100,000 Iraqi civilians
in Iraq.  Mr. Bugliosi says that by taking the country to war under
knowingly false pretenses, President Bush has committed the most
serious crime in U.S. history.  He spoke at an event held at the Venice
Center for Peace with Justice and the Arts in California.” [read more]

This has got to be the most explosive news that mainstream media continue to downplay and ignore (while distracting us with senseless election trivia). Why? FEAR — fear of the powers that be, fear of being implicated in the greatest crime in American history. American journalism had succumb to fear, corruption, and the stupid notion of patriotism in the coverage of the Iraq war. American journalism died with over a million Iraqi casualties and the thousands of American soldiers who lost their lives See the other meaning of WMD – Weapons of Mass Deception.

So here’s my request. If you’re a (lowly) blogger (like me) or a social media superstar, check this and this. If the message speaks directly to your soul, then spread it far and wide the internet. The only way that mainstream media would be forced to pay attention is when this news spread like wildfire in cyberspace, like some stupid viral video on Youtube.

The TV networks and mainstream press jumped all over Scott McClellan’s memoir, but mainstream media continues to ignore this book. Talk about spineless.

And so I’m putting my money where my heart is by ordering this book.
All the debates about the Iraq war and foreign policy in this
presidential election are political distractions. Let’s go back to first principles.

"Bugliosi, in a recent interview by telephone from his home in Los
Angeles, said he had expected some pushback from the mainstream media
because of the subject matter – the book lays a legal case for holding
Bush "criminally responsible" for the deaths of American soldiers in
Iraq – but did not expect a virtual blackout.

"His publisher and publicist said they expected Bugliosi’s
credentials to ensure coverage. He is, after all, fairly mainstream.
His last book, a 1,612-page doorstop on the Kennedy assassination,
"Reclaiming History," which was published last year, sought to debunk
the conspiracy theorists and is being made into a 10-hour miniseries by
HBO and the actor Tom Hanks.

"Bugliosi said that bookers for cable television, where he has made
regular appearances to promote books, have ignored his latest offering.
MSNBC and Comedy Central were two outlets Bugliosi thought would show
interest, but neither did.

""They are not responding at all," he said. "I think it all goes back
to fear. If the liberal media would put me on national television, I
think they’d fear that they would be savaged by the right wing. The
left wing fears the right, but the right does not fear the left."" [read more]

But in fairness to MSNBC, I discovered this book on the Morning Joe program (watch the video here).

Notice how irritated and defensive Joe Scarborough was even with the evidence presented by Bugliosi. Bugliosi also managed to receive some airtime on CNN.

I’m hoping that the book gets the attention that it deserves on the Internet (blogosphere, social networks, etc.) so that the mainstream media would have no choice but to pay
attention. I’m looking forward to see Bugliosi on Charlie Rose, Larry King Live, Countdown with Keith Olbermann, O’Reilly Factor, Hanniy & Colmes,
The Situation Room, The Daily Show, and Colbert Report. In the meantime, you can watch an exclusive video of Bugliosi on Hot Potato Mash.

In other news, the impeachment resolution marches on, but the mainstream media is ignoring it too. Ah, well.

"People say to me: How can we afford to transform our whole economy in order to prevent climate change when climate change could turn out to be a hoax?

"To which I say: If climate change is a hoax it is the most wonderful hoax ever perpetrated on the United States of America because transforming our economy to clean power and energy efficiency to mitigate global warming is the equivalent in training for the Olympic triathlon. If you make it to the Olympics you have a much better chance of winning because you have developed every muscle. If you don’t make it to the Olympics you’re still healthy or stronger, fitter and more likely to live longer and win any other race in life. And like the triathlon you don’t just improve one muscle or one skill but many which become mutually reinforcing and improve the health of the whole system." [watch the video of Friedman's keynote]

Exactly. I’m now looking forward to reading Friedman’s book.

And speaking of energy efficiency, here is an excerpt from Friedman’s NYTimes article, The Power Green.

"Because a new green ideology, properly defined, has the power to
mobilize liberals and conservatives, evangelicals and atheists, big
business and environmentalists around an agenda that can both pull us
together and propel us forward. That’s why I say: We don’t just need
the first black president. We need the first green president. We don’t
just need the first woman president. We need the first environmental
president. We don’t just need a president who has been toughened by
years as a prisoner of war but a president who is tough enough to level
with the American people about the profound economic, geopolitical and
climate threats posed by our addiction to oil — and to offer a real
plan to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels." [read more]

Now check out who’s greener, Obama or McCain. Ok, Nader looks green too.

When I saw Fareed Zakaria’s interview with Charlie Rose I immediately got interested on reading, The Post-American World. I got my order last week from Amazon and I’m currently reading it. It’s now part of my creepy library.
Very fascinating, eye-opening, and informative. It’s a must-read
for those who are interested to have an overview of the current state
of geopolitics and economics in our globalized landscape.

I’m not suprised that Obama is also reading it. Based on this photo,
it looks like me and Obama are on the same page. It’s good
to know that the future president of the U.S. is gearing up for a
post-American world, while looking like a rock star.

Yesterday I went to Barnes & Noble to check out the book, The Post-American World. I got interested with this book after watching Fareed Zakaria on Charlie Rose. But since the book is still in hardcover it’s a bit pricey ($25 bucks in store). So I opted to just order it from Amazon, saving me more than $10. How very American of me

I’m looking forward to reading this book to have more detailed understanding of Zakaria’s thesis: the Rise of the Rest.
Growing up outside of the U.S. and having had an experience living in
Europe, my gut feeling tells me that Zakaria’s thesis is very sound.
But the devil, as they say, is in the details.

That said, my
first impression on this book is favorable. Other political books are
too politically divisive, too much engaged in partisanship, too
conservative, too liberal, too American-centric, or too anti-American.
What I like about this book is that it’s neither American-centric nor
anti-American. It does critique American leadership (i.e. GW Bush’s
failed foreign policies) but all in all it’s a constructive criticism of
U.S. foreign and economic policies, as well as a peek on what’s
happening around the world. Coming from someone who is constantly
exposed to international issues (Fareed Zakaria is editor of Newsweek International) this book looks promising.

But I’ll withhold the rest of my praise or critique until I’ve read the book. Will post my review soon.

For those of you who have already read it, feel free to share your thoughts in the comment section.

Speaking of Second Life (and virtual worlds in general), Philip Rosedale is scheduled to appear at the first U.S. hearing on virtual worlds. Now that’s Mirrored Flourishing in action!

I started reading two books. But I ended up finishing just one. I just can’t put the damn book down. I’m talking about the book, The Black Swan. I felt instant connection with the author, Nassim Nicholas Taleb. I jive with his philosophy on improbability, no-nonsense “skeptical empiricism” and his audacity. He took me on an intellectual thrill ride into chaos, uncertainty, and serendipity. In this review I will share a portion of that journey.

Taleb started out with a very short autobiographical account (Chapter 1: Apprenticeship of An Empirical Skeptic) to give the reader a sense of where he’s coming from — his roots and cultural background, education, experience, profession, passion. Immediately, I get the sense that I’m not just reading another author. This author is a polymath — speaks and writes fluently in different languages, is educated with the classics (Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Aramaic), accomplished mathematician, a proud skeptical empiricist (in the tradition of Sextus Empiricus), had been a trader by profession, and has now dedicated his intellectual life in doing research on chance & improbability. He calls highly improbable events as, Black Swans — after the discovery of Black swans in Australia wherein prior to that people believed that all swans were “white.” A Black Swan event has the following three attributes: “rarity, extreme impact, and retrospective (though not prospective) predictability.”

The basic thesis of the book is this: Our human tendency to categorize (Platonicity) and explain the causes of everything with theories (narrative fallacy) backed up with partial evidence (confirmation bias; fallacy of silent evidence) while concocting models of reality (ludic fallacy) make us blind to Black Swans.

Sounds like a bunch of philosophical jargons, eh?

But where Taleb really shines is in his style of writing, and his intellectual audacity. As much as he dislikes narratives, he used narrative “for good” — using literary craft by mixing narrative, semi-autobiographical fiction infused with philosophical, scientific and technical knowledge backed up with empirical research.

Parts 1 and 2 of the book were dedicated to dispel our delusions that we understand reality while disregarding random events. To explain the two problems of randomness, Taleb resorted to metaphors of two worlds:

Mediocristan — a utopian province dominated by the mediocre (such as economists, politicians, historians, philosophers, and social scientists) where “particular events don’t contribute much individually–only collectively.” This world represents the soft problem of randomness.

Extremistan — a scalable world where extreme, unpredictable and highly improbable events occur. This is the world of the Black Swans. This world represents the hard problem of randomness.

According to Taleb, in reality, we all live in Extremistan. What pisses him off is that our economic models, scientific and mathematical tools (i.e. Gaussian Bell Curve–which Taleb calls,”that great intellectual fraud”), politicians, journalists, and even vanguards of knowledge, the philosophers, view and approach our world as if we’re living in Mediocristan! In short, we just can’t predict extreme random events.

But this book is not all rant. In Part 3, Taleb proposed a solution on how to adapt to the impact of Black Swans, even if we’re powerless to predict them. He championed the Mandelbrotian fractals over the Gaussian model because fractal representation is a more useful way of approximating randomness. With the Mandelbrotian factals, “We can turn these Black Swans into Gray Swans… reducing their surprise effect.”

“Fractals should be the default, the approximation, the framework. They do not solve the Black Swan problem and do not turn all Black Swans into predictable events, but they significantly mitigate the Black Swan problem by making such large events conceivable.” (p. 262)

That is the gist of his (technical) solution, specifically for economic, political, and scientific domains in the business of “prediction”, or forecasting.

When it comes to the practical and personal domain, I ride with his philosophy.

“Prediction, not narration, is the real test of our understanding the world.” (p. 133)

“…have the integrity to deliver your “because” very sparingly; try to limit it to situations where the “because” is derived from experiments, not backward-looking history.” (p. 120)

“…be human! Accept that being human involves some amount of epistemic arrogance in running your affairs. Do not be ashamed of that. Do not try to always withhold judgment — opinions are the stuff of life. Do not try to avoid predicting — yes, after this diatribe about prediction I am not urging you to stop being a fool. Just be a fool in the right places. What you should avoid is unnecessary dependence of large-scale harmful predictions — those and only those.” (p. 203)

“…be prepared! Narrow-minded prediction has an analgesic or therapeutic effect. Be aware of the numbing effect of magic numbers. Be prepared for all relevant eventualities.” (p. 203)

“Put yourself in situations where favorable consequences are much larger than unfavorable ones.” (p. 210)

In short, “maximize the serendipity around you.” I like that. Very Zen. As regular and long-time readers of this blog already know, I’m a sucker for serendipity

However, my gripe with Taleb is not what he’s written in the book, but what was left unsaid. Although he cited the 1987 stock market crash (this single event vindicated him when he was still in the trading profession), 9/11, and World War II as examples of Black Swans, I feel that he intentionally left out the biggest and most controversial Black Swan of all: Global Warming. There was no mention of it in the book. I think Taleb avoided this controversial topic since his book is already controversial in the domain of business and economics. Adding the controversy of Global Warming will only take away the attention from his main point. And besides, Global Warming is a long-term predicted event that had already sunk in the collective consciousness of masses. It’s a Black Swan either way — the prediction coming to pass, or *not* coming to pass.

In any case, due to Taleb’s withholding of opinion on Global Warming, I can only speculate that, with his distrust of models and narratives, he  would fall on the Michael Crichton side of the Global Warming debate
spectrum. Crichton’s argument on nonlinearity, unpredictability, and unreliability of global climate models fit well with Taleb’s thesis (see Crichton’s interview with Charlie Rose). Simply put, on the topic of Global Warming, compared to Crichton, Taleb’s audaciousness (or in this case, foolishness) didn’t live up to my expectation.

But I still like the guy. After reading the book, I found an intellectual hero in Taleb. I groove with his skeptical empiricism, and his no-nonsense philosophizing. However, this somewhat puts me in a state of cognitive dissonance since I also have an affinity with Ken Wilber‘s integral philosophy (aka AQAL) which “explains” events and perspectives via a meta-map called, Four Quadrants. I wonder how Taleb would receive integral theory. Would he consider this as another instance of Platonicity? Or will he groove with it, like me? Likewise, what is the place of randomness and uncertainty within the integral model? Based on my understanding, even randomness is included in the integral model (i.e. philosophy of “oops”). However, Wilber’s propensity is to map out models and do extemporaneous narration based on those models. So I suspect that there would be an intellectual clash between Taleb and Wilber. This remains to be seen. But consider these quotes from Taleb and you’ll get an idea where he stands when it comes to grand sweeping theories.

“The way to avoid the ills of the narrative fallacy is to favor experimentation over storytelling, experience over history, and clinical knowledge over theories…. Being empirical does not mean running a laboratory in one’s basement: it is just a mind-set that favors a certain class of knowledge over others.” (p. 84)

“I care more about premises more than theories, and I want to minimize reliance on theories, stay light on my feet, and reduce my surprises. I want to be broadly right rather than precisely wrong. Elegance in the theories is often indicative of Platonicity and weakness–it invites you to seek elegance for elegance’s sake. A theory is like medicine (or government): often useless, sometimes necessary, always self-serving, and on occasion lethal. So it needs to be used with care, moderation, and close adult supervision.” (p. 285)

Bottom line: this book is a must-read. It’s a literary crash course on the uncertainty in economics, science, politics, and philosophy, all rolled into one. When I picked up the book I didn’t know it was the #1 Highest Selling Nonfiction book in 2007 on Amazon. So there goes another serendipity. This book is, literally, a Black Swan.

Finally, upon reading the book, this classic Rumsfeld quote ceased to be funny; it actually makes sense.

“Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are “known knowns”; there are things we know we know. We also know there are “known unknowns”; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also “unknown unknowns” — the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”

Here’s to chaos, uncertainty, and serendipity!

UPDATE: 11/08/2008 - Just read this essay by Nassim Nicholas Taleb: “Real Life Is Not a Casino”. In it he expressed his stance on Global Warming. Here’s the relevant quote.

Let us apply the point to the current debate on carbon emissions and climate change. Correspondents keep asking me if the climate worriers are basing their claims on shoddy science and whether, owing to nonlinearities, their forecasts are marred with such a possible error that we should ignore them. Now, even if I agreed that it was shoddy science; even if I agreed with the statement that the climate folks were most probably wrong, I would still opt for the most ecologically conservative stance. Leave Planet Earth the way we found it. Consider the consequences of the very remote possibility that they may be right—or, worse, the even more remote possibility that they may be extremely right.

Exactly.

“You’re addicted to books,” ~myDakini said as we passed by the counter.

“Yeah, I am,” I said with a proud smirk. “But be thankful I’m addicted to books, and not with booze, drugs, or women!”

“Fine. But you’re still addicted to books.” She’s right.

I
went to the new and best sellers section to scout for more books that
would peak my curiosity. Most books in front of the store are fiction,
celebrity biographies, and cheesy feel-good stories. Europeans (at
least here in Ireland) are obsessed with celebrities and stories
(judging by the placement of celebrity magazines, biographies, and
fiction in bookstores.) I like stories and fiction, but I groove with
nonfiction the best. If I want a good story I go to the movies. When I
read books I want ideas not stories. Scanning the book section two
books grabbed my attention.

The first was Affluenza, by British psychologist Oliver James. This book tackles the “global” social epidemic called, affluenza,
which is “a painful, contagious socially transmitted condition of
overload, debt, anxiety and waste resulting from the dogged pursuit of
more.” The other book was The Black Swan, by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. All I knew about this book was that it’s about the Black swan theory (i.e. uncertainty and unpredictability) and that it’s popular among LongNow and Edge
thinkers. So I picked up the books and paid for it by credit card. Expensive. I wish I were in Seattle right now ordering from Amazon.com instead.

On the way home I felt like I was coming down with a flu. The weather here is still very cold and my body is not good at coping. By the time we got home I already had a runny nose and a slight fever. In the meantime, ~myDakini boiled hot water for my Lemsip medication. Great. This flu is a perfect excuse to stay in bed all day and read my books! I know. Very sleazy. But hey, it works!

So I did nothing but read my books the whole day until past midnight. At first I thought the two books were completely unrelated,
but upon reading them in parallel I caught a of glimpse of
serendipitous connection. (Note: I often read multiple books in
parallel; a few chapters from one book and a few from another. The more
engaging the book, the sooner I finish it.)

Here’s the serendipitous connection.

So
far I have only read the first few chapters of Affluenza, but it is
quite clear that James had already made up his conclusion in
the Prologue. For James, Selfish Capitalism is the root cause
of the Affluenza Virus. James wrote,

“The Affluenza Virus is
a set of values which increase our vulnerability to emotional distress.
It entails placing a high value on acquiring money and possessions,
looking good in the eyes of others and wanting to be famous.” ….

“…my new theory is that the nasty form of political economy that I call Selfish Capitalism caused an epidemic of the Affluenza Virus, accounting for much of the increase in the distress since the 1970s.

“By
Selfish Capitalism I mean four basic things. The first is that the
success of business is judged almost exclusively by their current share
price. The second is a strong drive to privatise public utilities, such
as water, gas and electricity, or in the case of America, to keep them
in private hands. The third is that there should be as little
regulation of business as possible, with taxation for the rich and very
rich so limited that whether to contribute becomes almost a matter of
choice. The fourth is the conviction that consumption and market forces
can meet human needs of almost every kind. America is that apotheosis
of Selfish Capitalism, Denmark the nearest thing to its Unselfish
opposite.”

(I told you it’s interesting to read contemporary books from European perspective. Americans should do this from time to time )

In the very beginning of the book (before the Prologue) there is a self test — “Have you contracted the Affluenza Virus?”
– in which, “If you answered ‘yes’ to any of the questions, then you
have, like most people in the English-speaking world, contracted the
Virus. The more you answered ‘yes’, the more infected you are and the
greater your likelihood of becoming emotionally distressed.”

I
answered ‘yes’ on the very first statement which is, “I would like to
be a very wealthy person.” I think this question is very vague and misleading
because “very wealthy” is a relative term. For example, for me (who grew up in a developing nation), people who make $200,000 a year, own a car, and a decent house are very wealthy. Multi-millionaires are appallingly wealthy. Billionaires are mindblowingly, appallingly wealthy (with the exception — on the appallingly — of Warren Buffett as my ultimate role model of uber-compassionate-wealthiness). Nonetheless, I answered
‘yes’ and then I answered ‘no’ on all the remaining questions. This means
that by James’ definition, I’m mildly infected with the Affluenza Virus. Fine. So be it.

After
reading a few engaging chapters of what James called, “mind tour” — he
went around the (industrialized) world interviewing appallingly
rich, middle-class, and low-income people, with focus on those who are
afflicted by the said Virus — I switched to The Black Swan. The
Prologue of the book is very engaging. I’ve always been fascinated with
uncertainty, chaos (hence my pseudonym), impermanence, and
serendipity. In short, the Black swan theory is very appealing to me.

The
first chapter of the book is a very short autobiography of the author which
put in context his being a “skeptical empiricist.” But what I connected
with best with the author is his attitude on learning and money. Based
on his own account, Nassim Nicholas Taleb is not infected with the
Affluenza Virus. Here’s how he described what he calls “f*** you money”. (emphasis by the author)

“It
was hard to tell my friends, all hurt in some manner by the
[stockmarket] crash, about this feeling of vindication. Bonuses at the
time were a fraction of what they are today, but if my employer, First
Boston, and the financial system survived until year-end, I would get
the equivalent of a fellowship. This is sometimes called “f*** you
money,” which in spite of its coarseness, means that it allows you to
act like Victorian gentleman, free from slavery. It is a psychological
buffer: the capital is not so large as to make you spoiled-rich, but
large enough to give you the freedom to choose a new occupation without
excessive consideration of the financial rewards. It shields you from
prostituting your mind and frees you from outside authority–any
outside authority. (Independence is person-specific: I have always been
taken aback at they high number of people in whom an astonishingly high
income led to additional sycophancy as they became more dependent on
their clients and employers and more addicted to making even more
money.) While not substantial by some standards, it literally cured me
of all financial ambition–it made me feel ashamed whenever I diverted
time away from study for the pursuit of material wealth. Note that the
designation f*** you corresponds to the exhilarating ability to pronounce that compact phrase before hanging up the phone.”

In one paragraph, Taleb eloquently summarized my own attitude towards money. For instance, I’m not too crazy about getting very wealthy. What I actually want is to have f*** you money
so that I could provide the needs of my loved ones, spend time with
them, while pursuing my interests without fear of financial
repercussions. From this perspective, I’d like to think that I’m *not*
afflicted with the Affluenza Virus. Then again, I’ll revisit this
self-assessment after I’ve read both of these books.

In
the meantime, check out these books if you haven’t read them yet. I’ll
post my review as soon as I’m done reading them. I think
that it would be interesting to riff on important and polarizing
issues, such as health care in America, using the Selfish Capitalism
perspective, as well as look at Global Warming using the lens of the
Black Swan theory.