Just as the dictionary is only as good as itself, this post will only survive as long as those who read it give its words definition within their own minds.
Comedians have often exposed the inconsistencies within our society; things like having an invisible fence, why not have an invisible dog?
Here is another inconsistency: definition. Is it high definition, standard definition, normal definition, medium definition, or low definition?
Advertising is a major force attempting to compel common language. Who would ever choose low definition, or even standard definition, given the option of high definition? Why would anyone choose a payment up front, given the choice of delayed repayments, however frequent or inconvenient? Why would anyone choose freedom, given the option of security or luxury or peace?
It’s not surprising that “high definition” is (becoming) a way of life. We want the best. As humans, we strive for the best. Advertisements seek to entice us with “the best.” And the culture of being advertised to also influences every decision. It isn’t just about who our friends or parents or schoolfellows or coworkers are anymore. It’s about who advertises to us. This has been true as long as “Mad Men” has been a reality, and probably before that. It’s about what Hollywood advertises, as much as what our families think of that perspective. It’s about what our politicians and neighbors with political interest advertise, as much as about the real issues at hand.
But what *is* the best? How shall we know that we really have what is best for us? Is it possible to quantify the idea that “now, I really have what is best for me”? If so, why would we seek anything else? Expense (monetary, familial, friendship, etc.)? Laziness?
In my opinion, it is always the latter. We, as humans, are always lazy. It does not matter whether we are type A, type B, or type Z. Everyone is lazy. It is always easier to commit to something familiar than what is unfamiliar. It is always easier to listen to the advertisement voices that have been shouting for generations than to listen to the still, small, inner voices that have been there for eternity. It is always easier to grasp the fad and the common thread than to search, and seek, and find the truth of every contrary voice that arrives. It is always easier to “give in” than to strive.
So what is our definition? What does it mean to be human? Is it reasonable to give in, and allow something that is not “the best” to be a part of our experience? Is it possible that something better, but much more difficult, is actually worth our time and consideration? Do we have time and consideration to offer to something or someone that might be “the best” for us? Will we someday “arrive,” or have we been attempting to “arrive” for centuries, and as humans we can never “arrive” on our own?
If it isn’t the best, why strive for it? If it is better than anything else you can see or imagine, why not put forth every effort to make it a reality?