Of course, we—that’s you and I—are a complex mixture of needs and desires, and we don’t like them foiled! We have hopes and a sense of how life should be. Even if they’re not fully articulated, we are disappointed, irritated or infuriated when someone, or the situation as we had imagined it playing out, doesn’t measure up.
In fact, if we are seen angry, irked or outraged, odds are someone has not measured up. Maybe she’s been willful, or he stubborn, or she selfish and irresponsible, or he egoistic and incompetent, or she a big-mouthed know-nothing or he a pretentious know-it-all, or she manipulative, immature and cheeky or he domineering, obstinate and just plain wrong.
And that’s the mild version. The clash of wills can become vicious. We can’t help but overhear (or get pulled into) heated battles between parent and teen, husband and wife, siblings, partners in love or law, Little League coaches and the kids’ dads or moms, neighbors, politicians or ordinary voters. In today’s free-for-alls in the civic arena, what used to be genially referred to as the loyal opposition is now often characterized as evil incarnate. And in the domestic arena, what used to be private matters may now be much-publicized gladiator-inspired matches.
What we forget at these adversarial moments is that the people we had counted on to make our lives successful are themselves a complex mixture of needs and desires. And they don’t like them foiled! Practically since the day they were born, they, too, want what they want; what WE want is rarely their primary concern.
Half of us want to live the unexamined life, moving, moving, moving, assimilated naturally and easily into the culture, the conventions and the perks of the time. And half of us don’t. We want to write our own marching orders, to look and ponder, to surmise and reevaluate; we don’t mind rewriting. But all of us are inevitably the central character in our own drama, and its prospective storyline privileges our own agenda.
Hundreds of sit-coms, films, plays and video games as well as countless articles, blogs and books portray the clash of wills. But few of these, entertaining, ironic, gross, remorseful or villain-filled, actually expose the roots of the clash.
First, willfulness is an ancient reflexive, bred-in-the-bone, aggressive and defensive response to being in the world. And we’ve not shed this rivalrous impulse as evolutionary baggage unnecessary in these modern times. In fact, we’ve identified its fierce presence as the very core of who we are and don’t want to betray it. I discussed this in my post dated September 8, 2009.
More recently, this very same impulse has been appropriated and honed by the Scoreboard. It drives us to acquire the stuff and status that symbolize the righteousness of our willfulness. Read more about Scoreboarding in my post.
Second, the clash of wills is inevitable because the rational facts of everyday life don’t really affect that cognitive space where what attracts is held dear, and what contradicts is held to be a personal affront that warrants much animosity.
Animals roaming the plains don’t know where their motivations come from, and much of the time we don’t either. In our flesh and blood, we carry the cellular codes for thousands of years of adaptive life. The modern brain is layered over, but doesn’t necessarily dominate, the eons-old, still functioning systems that power rats and reptiles. We don’t now and may never understand all the characteristics we have inherited by birth or adopted as culture’s norms were imposed upon us. Sometimes we are strangers unto ourselves.
Yes, we’ve been trained by language and history to describe in culture-specific ways the motivations, the moods that feed on them, the practices we’ve grafted onto them, and the anxieties they produce. But, according to scientists, upwards of 90% of our reckonings are unconscious! We don’t necessarily know-in-fact what rules we obey, what authorities we defer to, what sensibilities and yearnings we protect, what causes we are at the effect of.
So, no matter how often the facts of everyday life contradict that which we feel are core structures representing what’s true, valuable and vital, we can’t or won’t accommodate the facts. Actually, in this reflexive mode, reconciliation and transcendence can seem like a sell out. And in this mode, give and take—the mutual cooperation and understanding between people often involving concessions on all sides, or settling for modest joys and simple comforts can seem like losing, big time.
Third, this unrealistic state of mind and heart is kept viable, excitable and “explainable” by what I call the ego-protection program. You can read about it in my August 7, 2009 post.
It’s important to remember that this dug-in, teeth-clenched, clash of wills is not unique to you, or to me. Virtually everyone we know is similarly dug-in. Some do it with some grace, their grim determination somewhat under wraps. Some do it with a lot of spin; they’re convincing when it comes to why their will should be done. Some menace. Some cajole. Some tantrum. Some pretend to cooperate. Some accuse and misrepresent. And on and on. That IS the way that everyday life IS.
For the time being, let’s set aside will-to-power culture-changing clashes, those between god and king, or dictator and subject, or railroad builder and indentured servant. For the time being, let’s address the “he said, she said” clashes of will that make so much of everyday life contentious and dispiriting.
In my last post, I discussed affinity and the reconciling reach of its attractive force. Its force permits us, despite the inevitable clash of wills, to enchant and describe our world with transcendent or sacred, traditional or humanist values such as understanding, flexibility, tolerance, gentility, forgiveness and fair-minded, morally construed operating principles.
We can create an affinity for the love and pursuit of moral strength and a talent for acquiring the resources of the intelligence, heartfulness or generosity and competence that we find in such a quest. Through these dedicated efforts, we can create an existential freedom and will, born of expansiveness, gratitude and humility—each an elegant mark of manner and expression that distinguishes our commitment to what is decent and humane. In each case, the rivalrous brute willfulness built into the immediate living system is transcended in favor of affinity, affection and attraction. Why do it? Because morally it is the right thing to do.
Though we can’t fully understand the laws of nature and how the universe works, we can command how we will act. For the most part, we don’t get split-second control over how we show up in immediacy—in the very first flush of untamed nature’s call! But we are gifted with the ability to pause, reflect, create and get over or transcend the roiling nerves and blood—all in the hope that we will gain some traction and play out our lives in this puzzling world with more mercy, kindness, compassion, timeliness and contribution.
Moreover, we can improve upon our ability to communicate, to convey our love and gratitude, to ethically persuade, to convince, to balance the favor bank, to exchange equivalent value, to pick our battles, to choose playing fields where we can show up competently and resourcefully. These skills, useful in the clash of wills, will be the focus of a future post.
You might find my post titled, The will to transcend, there’s life after everything the perfect read right now.