The Mod Squad
"Moderation has been created a virtue to limit the ambition of great men, and to console undistinguished people for their want of fortune and their lack of merit."
- François, Duc de la Rochefoucauld
I've always liked the Duc de la Rochefoucauld. François was a generally active political guy, was ballsy enough to make fun of the courtiers to Louis XIV. He's good with the quips and I'm the last person to fault someone for a good one liner. Restrained cynicism is super sexy. Plus he suffered from severe gout, and man you have to admit, gout is a way cool disease. Crystals form in your joints. Crystals!
But while I understand the point he's trying to make above, I have to say that on this issue, I just disagree.
Moderation is not a bad thing. I think that in my admittedly anecdotal experience of the world, moderation is severely lacking. Everywhere you look things are supersized or minaturized. Extreme viewpoints, excessive activity are the norm not the exception. Why should I need a phone the size of my fingernail and a burger the size of my head? I don't. But the fact is, if I wanted it I can have it. And to me that's not reason enough.
Faster, stronger, higher tech, these are the words we're constantly bombarded with every day. And after a while I start to feel like a mouse on a treadmill. I'm old fashioned about a lot of things. I like to hand write letters once in a while. I like to walk to work even if it takes me 45 minutes. Some people think I'm weird for doing so. "Why take more time when you don't have to?" I can't put a finger on it really. Maybe I like to really sit down and do the thing I'm doing. Because while driving and emailing are convienant I always have the nagging sense when I do either that I'm really half someplace else. When I walk I just look at the trees. I find a new street I've never been down. When I write a letter I have to pay attention. I can't just scribble down the first thing that pops into my head.
Moderation is great because it provides some sense of perspective. I like junk food. I also think it's important not to throw tons of crap in your body. It would seem I have a bit of a disjunct in philosophy. Oh ho! But for moderation. Moderation says that I can both generally try to eat healthfully and be good to myself but understand that it's just as important to break the rules once in a while to ensure that life stays worth living. Moderation in viewpoint allows one to be able to see both sides of an argument.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I want to be a wet blanket. There are some arguments where no argument is needed. Sometimes you just believe an extreme view unequivocally. Which is important too in its way: Everything in moderation, including moderation. Sometimes you have to be a hardass and stick to the end of the spectrum point you want to make. Because I think extremes are ok once in a while, but pick your battles. An extreme point of view stops having meaning when everything you do is taken to, pardon the pun, the extreme. And as such I don't think it would be a good thing if extreme points were easy to hold. To be as far out on a limb as you can possibly be is, and I think should be dangerous. The danger, the risk, is what proves how important the view must be. It's admirable and at times needed but you certainly can't hang out there forever. Use it with caution and only when necessary people, extremes are at the end of the bell curve for a reason.
At the end of the day I think moderation doesn't comfort anyone who hasn't tried to accomplish anything. Moderation doesn't mean apathy. If anything it means choosing more carefully what you expend your energies on. Thinking harder about the position you're going to take. I don't think moderation limits great men. I just think it makes them work hard for the thing they want to be great at. And don't you sort of think whatever these great men are doing wouldn't nearly as great if they hadn't had to work so hard to do it?
Then again, who am I to talk? In the words of our good friend François: Nothing is given so profusely as advice.
- François, Duc de la Rochefoucauld
I've always liked the Duc de la Rochefoucauld. François was a generally active political guy, was ballsy enough to make fun of the courtiers to Louis XIV. He's good with the quips and I'm the last person to fault someone for a good one liner. Restrained cynicism is super sexy. Plus he suffered from severe gout, and man you have to admit, gout is a way cool disease. Crystals form in your joints. Crystals!
But while I understand the point he's trying to make above, I have to say that on this issue, I just disagree.
Moderation is not a bad thing. I think that in my admittedly anecdotal experience of the world, moderation is severely lacking. Everywhere you look things are supersized or minaturized. Extreme viewpoints, excessive activity are the norm not the exception. Why should I need a phone the size of my fingernail and a burger the size of my head? I don't. But the fact is, if I wanted it I can have it. And to me that's not reason enough.
Faster, stronger, higher tech, these are the words we're constantly bombarded with every day. And after a while I start to feel like a mouse on a treadmill. I'm old fashioned about a lot of things. I like to hand write letters once in a while. I like to walk to work even if it takes me 45 minutes. Some people think I'm weird for doing so. "Why take more time when you don't have to?" I can't put a finger on it really. Maybe I like to really sit down and do the thing I'm doing. Because while driving and emailing are convienant I always have the nagging sense when I do either that I'm really half someplace else. When I walk I just look at the trees. I find a new street I've never been down. When I write a letter I have to pay attention. I can't just scribble down the first thing that pops into my head.
Moderation is great because it provides some sense of perspective. I like junk food. I also think it's important not to throw tons of crap in your body. It would seem I have a bit of a disjunct in philosophy. Oh ho! But for moderation. Moderation says that I can both generally try to eat healthfully and be good to myself but understand that it's just as important to break the rules once in a while to ensure that life stays worth living. Moderation in viewpoint allows one to be able to see both sides of an argument.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I want to be a wet blanket. There are some arguments where no argument is needed. Sometimes you just believe an extreme view unequivocally. Which is important too in its way: Everything in moderation, including moderation. Sometimes you have to be a hardass and stick to the end of the spectrum point you want to make. Because I think extremes are ok once in a while, but pick your battles. An extreme point of view stops having meaning when everything you do is taken to, pardon the pun, the extreme. And as such I don't think it would be a good thing if extreme points were easy to hold. To be as far out on a limb as you can possibly be is, and I think should be dangerous. The danger, the risk, is what proves how important the view must be. It's admirable and at times needed but you certainly can't hang out there forever. Use it with caution and only when necessary people, extremes are at the end of the bell curve for a reason.
At the end of the day I think moderation doesn't comfort anyone who hasn't tried to accomplish anything. Moderation doesn't mean apathy. If anything it means choosing more carefully what you expend your energies on. Thinking harder about the position you're going to take. I don't think moderation limits great men. I just think it makes them work hard for the thing they want to be great at. And don't you sort of think whatever these great men are doing wouldn't nearly as great if they hadn't had to work so hard to do it?
Then again, who am I to talk? In the words of our good friend François: Nothing is given so profusely as advice.
posted by A at 10:26 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home