Matrix is defined as something within or from which something else originates, develops, or takes form. Also, it can be defined as the set of conditions that provides a system in which something grows or develops. There is, of course, a mathematical definition where the matrix is a collection of numbers arranged into a fixed number of rows and columns; however, this one is not of much interest to me with regards to the question in this post. And lastly, there is Matrix in popular culture.
This is the one that probably came to your mind while reading the question in the headline of this post. This idea hypothesizes Matrix-like computer simulation of reality created by more advanced, possibly post-human beings. While this is a rather interesting idea, and I spent numerous hours reading about it, this is not what I was thinking while noting down the question at the beginning of this post. Namely, here I would like to express my thoughts when observing day-to-day activities and patterns of human beings during their personal and business lives and how those activities seem like we’re all creating our little matrixes, boxes, and boundaries, thus limiting our own human potential.
Most days of almost any human life is basically the same pattern. Let’s say you live for 79 years on this planet. Out of those, you spend around 33 years or 12045 days in bed. Sleep counts for 26 years, and the other 7 years are spent trying to sleep, reading a book, or some other activities. The average person spends on work around 13 years and 2 months. Of course, some people work less, some work more, but this is ballpark value for most people. The average human mammal also spends astonishing 11 years and 4 months watching different screens (TV, mobile phone, PC). On eating, we spend around 3 years and 1 month. Romantic activities aren’t completely gone yet, as we spend around 395 days practicing them in one way or another. Herby, use your imagination on what activities romance can include.
There is a lot of other statistical data on how we are spending our life, but you get the point. I just wanted to paint a picture mathematically that we’re mostly doing the same activities all day, every day. What do you think how many days or hours during your life you’re doing something that will be really remembered? Either by you or someone else. Actually, especially by you. We all know that feeling that something is a significant event, whether it is a bad or good one and whether it is small or big. And we know that we will probably remember it for the rest of our life. It is sort of stuck in our brains forever. I remember simple silly things from my childhood while I can’t really remember some (or the majority) of so-called Big Events. Those silly things were such a big deal at that time that I remembered them for some reason.
One could say those got written down somehow in my matrix, whatever the matrix is at this point. One such example happened during Winter Holidays while I was sitting with my family, having a completely ordinary and happy lunch. All of us together in a good mood, talking about what we normally talk about. I was around 10 years old. Then something extraordinary (for my young life) happened. One known village drunk came into our house, and he literally grabbed carrot or part of chicken from our chicken soup which was on the table in a bowl. My father reacted by grabbing him and dragging him immediately outside. I remember this event like it was yesterday for some reason. I believe this event, even though not significant at all, stuck with me for so long because it was extremely awkward, and it disturbed our peaceful lunch. I wasn’t used to that, and I wasn’t expecting it.
Although this may be a silly example, it is a prelude to the point I want to make. Only extremes in our lives stay written down in our brains, perhaps for life. Some of those extremes happened to us without any of our influence or activity, while others happened because we did something. Going parachuting out of the bloom would be an example of the latter one. For sure 1st time parachuting stays with us for most of our lives. Now, if we extrapolate those to our day-to-day life, both personal and business, we can notice that majority of people are constantly riding the same bicycle and the same path, sort of speak. There are a set of rules people follow, which makes them run in their own little matrix for their whole life.
Take any profession or any professional. The majority are constantly discussing topics that are solely in their domain. Most for their whole life. People they socialize with are then again in the same (or similar) domain. Not necessarily professionally but like-minded in some way. This leaves no space for extremes in the discussion, a difference of opinions or behaviors. According to settled unwritten rules of life, it is almost always expected that people choose one career and professional path and pursue it till the end. And it is not only for poor people or the middle class, as the majority of rich also behave the same way.
How many musicians can you name that completely changed their music style and not just once but a couple of times? There are some, of course, but the majority didn’t. The same goes for many different artists. And for sure, the same goes for people pursuing so-called standard careers. By standard careers, I mean lawyers, doctors, economists, different business professions, et cetera. Of course, it is hard to leave the profession for which you studied many years and spent an additional 20 in perfecting it. This is understood, but most people won’t even try anything different just for fun. It doesn’t have to be a complete change of profession. The profession can still be the main focus, but not trying anything else in whole life is something that really shouldn’t happen so often in society.
As Robert Heinlein famously said in his novel Time Enough for Love:
“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”
I really like the last sentence – specialization is for insects – as it greatly paints how humans have so much more capabilities and possibilities in their life, but they mostly focus on (or specialize) only one thing. This is significant in many ways. If most people are not even trying to dive in slightly into their own possibilities and potential, whether those are physical or mental, then what kind of global society are we living in. If aliens were to spectate us for a couple of days, they would probably return back immediately to where they came from. Just think about it for a second. Looking at human society from the above (alien) perspective, it would seem we’re little ants following the same path strolling in limits of our own matrixes. You go to school, you go to an additional school, then you go to work, then you have children, then you work some more, and then you die. Throw into that equation dozens of short vacations that every human being will have during their lifetime, and you receive an average life mixture. Now don’t get me wrong, some stability and structure are reasonable and necessary, but society should enable more for most people.
Maslow’s hierarchy
Therefore, let’s use Maslow’s hierarchy of needs as a mirror to see whether, as a society, we live in constraints and ‘matrixes,’ or we blossom to our highest potentials. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is a theory and framework in psychology encompassing a five-tier model of human needs, often described as hierarchical levels within a pyramid. From the bottom of the hierarchy upwards, the needs are: physiological (air, water, food, shelter, sleep, clothing, reproduction), safety (personal security, employment, resources, health), love and belonging needs (friendship, intimacy, family, sense of connection), esteem (respect, self-esteem, status, recognition, freedom), and self-actualization (desire to become the most that one can be). Needs lower down in the hierarchy must be satisfied before individuals can attend to the needs higher up. Basically, it could be described as levelling up in video games. And while many successfully level up in video games, it is not the case in real life, unfortunately. Stating that, it would be interesting to see what percentage of society is constantly levelling up and what percentage is stuck in, let’s say matrix (or level) number 2 for their whole life.
Here by no means, I refer to financial levelling but mostly on intellectual, spiritual, and overall explorational. While self-actualizing (Maslow Hierarchy) is a process that for most span lifetime many do not achieve it at all nor reach near to it. Self-actualization is achieved when you’re able to reach your full potential. However, being genuinely self-actualized is considered the exception rather than the rule since most people are working to meet more pressing day-to-day needs. Having said that, one rather important characterization of self-actualization is getting frequent peak experiences. According to Maslow, a peak experience involves:
“Feelings of limitless horizons opening up to the vision, the feeling of being simultaneously more powerful and also more helpless than one ever was before, the feeling of ecstasy and wonder and awe, the loss of placement in time and space with, finally, the conviction that something extremely important and valuable had happened, so that the subject was to some extent transformed and strengthened even in his daily life by such experiences.”
Is this “ecstasy” something that many people can achieve? I mean for sure, with the help of recreational drugs such as MDMA or its street name ecstasy, but I am not here talking about that kind. There aren’t many analyses and papers published to see how many people are self-actualized, but one can conclude it is fairly low since most of humanity is, as we stated, grinding in their own little matrixes.
Maslow agrees with that as he states that only a small percentage of the population reaches self-actualization. The concept of achieving those higher levels offers a variety of interpretations because it differs based on each person. One individual may feel that their maximum potential is to be the manager of a local clothing store after steadily climbing the ladder following high school graduation. For this person, this achievement will provide all the happiness he or she needs, and the person will be fulfilled. Another person may feel that a position of local manager is below his or her potential, so getting the title would not be adequate for happiness. This logic goes to all levels and all positions, career-wise. Perhaps the CEO of a really big company thinks of himself as truly self-actualized, but in many cases, it is the exact opposite. Many people are simply far too under-motivated to achieve the peak of their potentials in different categories, not just in one like being CEO of a company.
Happier society?
So, what can be done about that? How could we enable a society where more people would be happier, achieve their true selves, and escape their little matrix. Those questions are hard and almost impossible to answer, but since society is constantly developing, it can be expected that in a hundred or more years, humankind will reach that kind of consciousness that we would create building blocks necessary for every human to reach their true potential.
Perhaps a potential solution could be to reshape society in a way where people could have many different careers throughout their life. Not that it isn’t possible today, albeit only a few succeed. There are many reasons why it is so, but societal constraints and matrix models of current schooling, business, and economic establishments are the first that leap to mind. Nevertheless, I think political figures and decision-makers should spend more time thinking about how to make such a society possible. Because wandering around like NPC’s (Non-Player Characters) through life for sure is not the best way for humans to spend their time on this planet. One can draw attention here to the non-equilibrium analysis stating that: without any substantial reorganization of the system, the oscillations will swing more and more wildly until such a reorganization is achieved via collapse (see Sex Robots post). Perhaps collapse will, in turn, reorganize society so that every person achieves their full potential. Perhaps it will be the complete opposite, but one thing is for sure – we all need to try our best to create a society where more people are happy. Happy with themselves and their own mind.
“We have two lives, and the second begins when we realize we only have one.”
CONFUCIUS
