Love, Death, and Robots

So far in this book, by analyzing the six types of businesspeople, we have exposed some key components of the model. One central point is that all through our lives we are very much in need of love and affection. The need is built right into the species because it affects our chances for long- term survival. If the species effectively provides security for its young, then it is healthy . If it does not, then it is at risk of demise.

Often we are not satisfied in our quest for affection. In that sense, many children are on tenterhooks. They are vulnerable to swings in the amount of attention and affection they receive. If affection is conditional, then a pattern of aiming to please sets in. If the effort to please fails, then the child might experience anger as a result. If the effort to please sometimes succeeds and sometimes fails, then concern over getting control of the source of security sets in. We worry about being secure and we work hard at guaranteeing our security.

Also touched on through the exploration of the types is that when we accept this insecurity about our lives, we are less at battle. This is counterintuitive, of course, because we are already attempting to avoid battles within and without by avoiding insecurity. But we are so busy in our avoidance that we become obsessed in one way or another.

• The worrier is obsessed with thoughts about what needs to be avoided.

• The controller is obsessed with maintaining a state of security.

• The fake is hiding from insecurity.

• The attention-seeker is compensating for insecurity.

• The victim is defending against insecurity.

• The prisoner is wrestling with the insecurity that has invaded his consciousness.

Whatever form it takes, this obsession operates on the illusion that insecurity is not a necessary condition, that it can be avoided. But we cant avoid it. At least, we cant seem to avoid it in most cultural scenarios. Insecurity is, in this sense, the name of the game. Yet we fight it.

There are other reasons we cant beat insecurity. In a sense, it is a part of nature. We are, after all, going to die. That tends to evoke insecurity. Right off the bat there is a need built right into our value system. We need to live forever because, presumably, death is the end of what we love. Life is the name of the game. Death is the loss of the game. We must die. So we must be losers. We fight so hard not to lose!

We are also insecure because our feeling of self, of being distinct entities, cuts us off from the whole. So often I have looked at a mountain range and bemoaned my inability to be one with it. My individuality cuts me off from my participation in a oneness. Again, insecurity is the name of the game.

The model suggests that we can embrace this fact of life. We can own our humanity. We can accept our insecuritythat we are not likely to ever feel full forever, that we will die, that not all our goals can be met, that we cant quite merge with the universe because of our separateness. The suggestion is that if we accept ourselves for what we are, then we are no longer struggling against the facts of life. We can find peace . In fact, if we stop spending our mental energy addressing insecurity, we can come face-to-face with the possibility of fulfillment in the present.

However, reducing how hard we work at insecurity does not mean, for instance, that we become less capitalistic or that we lose our core motivation. It means that we are not so robotically inclined to do what we do. As a matter of fact, it opens us to the possibility of choice. We can choose to work like crazy people or to become like the laziest of people its our choice.

Owning our humanity partly means realizing that much of what we do is a reflection of how we are programmed to fill the gaps of insecurity. When they are engaged in their defining behaviors, the worrier, the controller, the fake, the attention-seeker, the victim, and the prisoner are engaged like automatons in seeking security and avoiding insecurity. These people know that the behavior is not something they do with conscious purpose (though there is unconscious purpose). That is why they sought help in the first place. This programming has the noblest intention of helping us find the nourishment we need for a healthy species. But it also robs us of the capacity to operate at a higher level. Instead of sidestepping our robotic impulses, we are trapped in them.