THE LONELY DIE EARLIER

The Mirror (UK) recently published an article which stated that researchers have found that lonely people die earlier than people in relationships.

Scientists revealed why being lonely increases your chances of dying early because being lonely appears to weaken people's immune system. Researchers said their findings were independent of factors such as depression, stress and social support.

Lonely people are more likely to die early due to their immune system being weaker, according to a new study. People who do not have frequent interaction with others are 14 per cent more likely to die early as they appear to have much lower levels of white blood cells in their body.

The cells are the human body's way of battling diseases and illnesses and researchers stressed their findings were independent of other factors such as depression, stress and social support. Research shows loneliness leads to fight-or-flight signalling occurring in the body, which can lead to a drop in white blood cells for over a year weakening the immune system.

University of Chicago scientists examined gene expression in leukocytes, there are cells responsible for protecting us against bacteria and viruses. Their previous study found a link between loneliness and a phenomenon called 'conserved transcriptional response to adversity' (CTRA).

CTRA describes the effect of lonely people tending to have a weaker immune system response than those with a healthy social life. This occurs when the number of genes involved in inflammation increases and the amount of genes involved in antiviral responses falls.

The PNAS study reconfirmed these findings, but also revealed that loneliness could predict future CTRA gene expression over a year later. The researchers also found that loneliness and leukocyte gene expression appeared to provoke each other over time.

Next, research on monkeys found that the lonely primates showed higher CTRA activity.
But on a cellular level, they also found higher levels of the fight-or-flight neuro transmitter, norepinephrine.  Research conducted previously has revealed norepinephrine can provoke stem cells in the bone marrow to produce more of a particular kind of immune cell - an immature monocyte.
These particular cells have high levels of inflammatory gene expression and low levels of antiviral gene. Further tests found both lonesome humans and solitary monkeys had high levels of monocytes in their blood samples.

Finally the researchers tracked the HIV version of monkeys (simian immunodeficiency virus) in isolated primates. They found the altered antiviral gene expression in "lonely like" monkeys allowed the condition to grow faster in both blood and brain.

Professor John Cacioppo said: "Taken together, these findings support a mechanistic model in which loneliness results in fight-or-flight stress signalling, which increases the production of immature monocytes, leading to up-regulation of inflammatory genes and impaired anti-viral responses. The 'danger signals' activated in the brain by loneliness ultimately affect the production of white blood cells. The resulting shift in monocyte output may both propagate loneliness and contribute to its associated health risks."

There is a connection to LOST's main characters. Each main character had traits of deep loneliness, with associated levels of stress and depression. How each dealt with it was different; Jack dived into his work to create "miracles," while Hurley took eating to mask his depression.

But it would seem that all the main characters "died" on or about their island age (if one believes that our bodies are re-united in the afterlife after death). This contradicts Christian's statement to Jack at the sideways church memorial service. But taken the presence of the main characters have not aged, and that the survivors who left the island apparently did not re-unite with loved ones post-island (i.e. having a real, long life with new people - - - including spouses, children, new friends, etc.), the conclusion is that the main characters died early, before their time.

And the only thing that could help them move along from their "lonely" pre-island existence were the friendships and bonds created in the island time period. If LOST was really the culmination of various characters dying alone but having to make "post-life" connections on the island in order to be enlightened to make it to heaven, that is a premise that some could find comforting in relation to The End.

No one wants to die alone. In fact, many people's greatest fear is dying alone.

SOCIAL MEDIA THEORY

It's something everyone suspected, but now it's official: The under-30 crowd is addicted to their cell phones.


Those are the findings of a new survey, which showed that as millennials spend more time engaged on social media platforms, it's causing them to be less social in real life. The study, conducted by Flashgap, a photo-sharing application with more than 150,000 users, found that 87 percent of millennials admitted to missing out on a conversation because they were distracted by their phone.


Meanwhile, 54 percent said they experience a fear of missing out if not checking social networks.

Nearly 3,000 participants were asked about how they felt about social media in social settings, and found that the guiltiest culprits are often females. The study found 76 percent of females check social media platforms at least 10 times when out with friends, compared with 54 percent of males.


The most commonly used apps mentioned in social settings among millennials were Snapchat, Tinder, Facebook, Messenger and Instagram.


Julian Kabab, co-founder of FlashGap said that people are too focused on looking at social media when they're out at events, and it may be costing them in social interaction. "People miss out on parties because they want to see what's going on, on social networks, take beautiful selfies and add filters to their pictures," he told CNBC.


It especially becomes a problem when there is alcohol involved and regrets the next morning. The survey found that 71 percent of users regret posting a picture on a social network after more than three drinks.

FlashGap's findings echo a similar study conducted in 2014, where research suggested that cell phones were increasingly undermining personal interactions.  A West Virginia University report said that "the presence of mobile technologies has the potential to divert individuals from face-to-face exchanges, thereby undermining the character and depth of these connections." 


Concerns are growing that the practical impact of mobile device use is making humans more interested in their online lives, and less interested in each other. Yet Kebab told CNBC his intent for FlashGap was to help millenials make their experiences more relevant in real life.


One of the reasons so many young people are drawn into social media circles is that they have less and less real interaction with their peers. If they are on a school sports team, they practice and play everyday so there is little to no time to interact with other kids. If they are study demons, they have little time to interact with anyone except their study group. The ease of quick instant messaging has eased the vacuum of forced scheduling of student lives has on their socialization.


One LOST fan theory was that the entire premise of the show was that it was really a fantasy, social media exchange between lonely, distant, strangers. The elements of this premise were part of the overall fabric of the show. The hook ups were cold and not meaningful like sexting. The friendships were at times impersonal to rude like commentators to trolls commenting on a personal blog. Opinion was more important than actual, verified facts which is a common complaint of the internet.


Another recent report shows that teenagers now spend approximately 9 hours each day using electronic devices. That is a staggering amount of small screen time away from doing normal things like going outside, riding a bicycle, going to a movie, hanging out at the park with friends, etc. They spend more time on their smart technology than in school or sleeping. So this technology is soaking up much of their conscious time it has to affect their dream time - - - or supplants it.


And that could be the engine for the LOST story lines, haphazard, changing, conflicting and fantasy dream constructs that led to a quick turn happy ending that most individuals want in their own stories.

LONELINESS ANSWER

One of the major themes in LOST was loneliness. Many of the major characters were traditional loners. Why people are lonely has lead to many research and literary articles. As a society and community, we believe that human beings need social interaction in order to live well-rounded lives.

There are times that some people need their "alone" time. Introverts actually need this lonely time in order to re-energize themselves for future tasks that make them uncomfortable, including work and social settings.

We may sometimes try to convince ourselves that we'd be better off if we remained alone, but why do people decide to stay lonely? New York Magazine published an article examines that question and discovers a surprising explanation.  

There are  health issues that arise from being lonely. In fact, "loneliness increases a person's risk of mortality by 26 percent, an effect comparable to the health risks posed by obesity, according to a study published this spring." Loneliness can also lead to mental health issues such as depression and anxiety.

With these risks, why would one choose to be lonely? As NY Mag notes, "One long-held theory has been that people become socially isolated because of their poor social skills and, presumably, as they spend more time alone, the few skills they do have start to erode from lack of use." 

However, with the help of recent studies, this is a big misconception. It's not that lonely people lack social skills or can't understand them; rather, when expected to use them they "choke." 

Professor Megan L. Knowles of Franklin and Marshall College conducted an experiment in order to find out why this happens. In her research,  Knowles led four experiments that demonstrated "lonely people's tendency to choke when under social pressure." 

In one experiment, Knowles and her team tested the social skills of 86 undergraduates, showing them 24 faces on a computer screen and asking them to name the basic human emotion each face was displaying: anger, fear, happiness,  or sadness.
 

When put to the test, lonely participants did much better than their non-lonely counterparts. However, this was only the case when the lonely participants were told they were taking a general knowledge test.
 

Why would lonely people be better at reading emotions than non-lonely people? It's believed that "lonely people may be paying closer attention to emotional cues precisely because of their ache to belong somewhere and form interpersonal connections, which results in technically superior social skills," according to the study.
 

So, lonely people actually don't want to be lonely — it's their desire to belong that causes them to seem like they lack social skills. They know how to be social, but they're too concerned about choosing the correct social cues to make a good impression.
 

Who would want to feel this pressure all the time? This is exactly why some people prefer to keep to themselves. Perhaps, it is just easier not to confront and control your own inner turmoil.

It may come down to confidence in themselves. Many people fear that they will say or do the wrong thing, upset other people or look foolish to strangers. Or, they may believe that people will not like them for who they are. But all people have those same fears and anxieties. It is becoming self-aware of your issues, then overcoming them through experience and growing a close group of friends that you respect, trust and who will mutually support each other. 

EXPECTATIONS

I can't imagine I am the only woman over 50, not married or in a serious relationship, that has been told by some well meaning friend that It would be so good for me to find someone. Find someone? Is there a specific spot I should look? Is there a lost and found pile I can dig through to see if someone in there belongs to me? Perhaps there's a room full of eligible smart kind men in a building somewhere I can't locate. Of course I am kidding. I know people are well intentioned when they say it. But did they ever think that people who aren't in serious relationships can still be seriously happy? 

That while it may be lovely to be with someone it doesn't mean we can't be happy without someone? My happiness is based on me liking myself and loving the time I spend with my family and my friends. I've been in relationships that tore my very soul apart and left me desperately unhappy and marginalized. But, from the outside looking in I would have been seen to have it all. A handsome man and a ring on your finger is not the arbiter of a life or love fulfilled.

I have no problems with the truth on this matter. It will be nice if or when I meet the right, good man. But for now I am most happily living with exactly the right woman. Me.

--Arlene Dickinson

Society puts expectations on all of us. Especially on women on their role in our culture.

In fact, many people still judge another person by their status - - - whether it be social, wealth or relationship.

In Asian cultures, if a woman is not married by age 30, she is deemed a social outcast, an old maid, not worthy of total respect. In America, there was a strong Puritan ethic that women should marry early, raise children and tend a household. The American Dream was defined by a suburban house, picket fence, two cars in the garage and chicken in the stove pot. 

But times change but the perceptions remain the same.

In the 1970s, women were told by feminists that they could have a career as good as men; that they did not need men to validate their lives; that they could find their own path to happiness. Women were no longer defined by the men around them.

Even so, there were expectations that women were to settle down, marry and have a "normal" life.

With the advent of no fault divorces (where the promise "until death do we part" has been nullified), more and more women find themselves at mid-life, alone and in the cross hairs of family and friend advice that happiness is sharing your life with someone new.

Some women are too hurt by their past experiences to try it again. Past pain does not equate to future unhappiness, but human minds do tend to lessen emotional risks with mental excuses and procrastination themes. Some women try too hard to find a new partner, only to change their personality to something they are not - - - and hurting both themselves and their new relationship in the process of unwinding the white lies.

In LOST, many of the women were defined in this cultural stigma. 

Juliet was a medical doctor. But she was defined by her brilliant doctor husband. She was always in his shadow. Her accomplishments were secondary to his work. He cheated on her, disrespected her and then discarded her. But her upbringing and personality keep that bond with him even after they broke up. They were never compatible because he lacked the mutual trust and respect for her.

Kate was the rural farm girl. She had the spunk and fire of a tom boy. She was adventurous and fun. But at the point where she was supposed to grow up and become a responsible woman (settle down, marry, get a stable job, raise a family, etc.) she rebelled and lashed out at her own family. She valued her freedom more than her own happiness. It made her a bitter, lonely, frightened and sad young woman with no goals, desires or dreams.

Sun was the opposite. She was the daughter of a wealthy industrialist. She grew up in the power and position of a wealthy family. She had no hardships growing up. She became bored with the life of a rich princess. She hated the fact that her parents had their own path for her life (including marrying a proper man). Like Kate, she rebelled against her parents to marry Jin, a lowly, poor, uneducated fisherman's son. To her own shock, Jin did not take to her own adventurous side - - - he quickly changed to become Sun's father's "yes man," because Jin wanted what Sun already abandoned: wealth and status. 

People have to decide their own paths. Yes, there are speed bumps along the journey of life. Some of those are created by luck, society's pressures, cultural perceptions and one's own mistaken choices. But in the end, every person must make their own decisions that are best for them and them alone. Only then can that person who is comfortable with their own life, open up to share the "real" them with another person. 

THE LIES WE TELL OURSELVES

Business Insider had an interesting article about the 14 lies our mind tells ourselves which actually hurts us by constantly tries to convince us not to take actions we know are good for us, and stops many great changes in our lives.

It is such a true statement most people do not realize that it is happening to them.

I stumbled across this article by accident. It fits in extremely well into this year's personal motto: "No Excuses. No Regrets." 

The BI author's proposition is that the cowardly mind’s excuses and rationalizations is self programmed because the mind wants comfort, and is afraid of discomfort and change. The mind is used to its comfort cocoon, and anytime we try to push beyond that comfort zone very far or for very long, the mind tries desperately to get back into the cocoon. At any cost, including our long-term health and happiness.

The article then details 14 "mind" excuses which stops a person from acting outside the sheltered norms:

1. I can’t do it
If something seems too hard, we default to decide not to change. It is a manifestation that we don’t believe in ourselves.

2. He/she can do it, but that doesn’t apply to me 
We look for reasons other people can do or accomplish things  but we can’t — a negative reinforcement that we are somehow "different" for an unknown reason.

3. I need my ___
W fill in the blank with a variety of crutches: I need my coffee, my cheese, my soda, my TV shows, my car, my shoe collection … these are things we convince ourselves we can’t live without, so we can’t make a change like exercising, eating healthier, starting a hobby, reading a long book, taking a vacation, or  simplifying our lives. If one really examines those excuses, they are justifications for all  lies. The only things you really need are basic food, water, clothing, shelter, and other people for social needs. Everything else is not a real need.

4. Life is meant to be enjoyed
Everyone agrees with this statement  but the problem is this is used to justify all kinds of crappy behavior. Might as well scarf down junk food because it tastes good, because hey, life is meant to be enjoyed, right? No. You can do without junk food and still enjoy life. You can exercise and enjoy it. You can give up pretty much anything and still enjoy life, if you learn to see almost any activity as enjoyable.

5. I need comfort
As young children, they cling to a security blanket because it gives them the sense of relief and comfort. However, as we grow older we have can push ourselves into uncomfortable situations so that we can learn to believe in ourselves.

6. I don’t know how
This may be true, but everyone can learn. Start with a little at a time, and learn how to deal with this new change. If the problem is that you are a social wall flower, you can do some research online. There are various websites that examine social anxiety.  Ask people how they dealt with it. This is easily overcome with a little effort and practice. In fact, if you do it now, and learn a little at a time, then you’ll be able to do away with this pesky excuse.

7. I can do it later
You can always put off to tomorrow what you can accomplish today. But why should your later self be more disciplined than your current self? A habit of procrastination and actually making is less likely that your future self will be more disciplined. Unless there’s something more urgent or important that you need to do … don’t let yourself slide just because you don’t feel like it. It will lead to more stress and pressure as you create a personal traffic jam of uncompleted tasks or goals.

8. One time won’t hurt
This is so tempting, because it’s kind of true — one time won’t hurt. Assuming, that is, that it’s only one time. One bite of chocolate cake, one missed workout, one time procrastinating instead of doing work. Unfortunately, it’s never actually just one time. One time means your brain now knows it can get away with this excuse, and the next “one time” leads to another, until you’re not actually sticking to something.

9. I don’t feel like it
Feelings can be a defense mechanism. There is an internal resistance to doing something that we think is hard, difficult, new, or potentially hurtful. Letting the excuse of “I’ll do it when feel like it” dictate your life means you’ll never go out and meet new people, learn about new things, write that great American novel you dreamed of as a kid, never build a business, never create anything great, never have healthy habits. It is easy to create a plan that’s doable, and then execute it.

10. I’m tired
Everyone gets tired on a daily basis. It is the biological cycle. We allow that cycle to macro-manage tasks into pigeon holes. When you get home from a long day at work (they call it work for a reason), you may not feel like cooking, cleaning or exercising. You would rather "rest,"  but this is usually the mind trying to weasel out of something uncomfortable. There’s a difference between being exhausted and needing some rest, and being the little tired we all feel every afternoon. One way to combat this is to multitask - - - for example, exercise while watching TV. You may trick your mind that watching TV is relaxing while you accomplish something important off the couch.

11. I deserve a reward/break 
Daily life presents us with many risk and reward situations. But not every completed tasks deserve a reward.  But if you don't curb this rationalization your rule, you’ll always be on a break. You’ll always be giving yourself rewards, and never sticking to the original plan to get a more meaningful reward such as a job well done is its own reward.

12. Wouldn’t it be nice to stop?
This is our mind wanting to run from discomfort, and of course it’s true — it would be nice to stop if you’re pushing into a discomfort zone for too long. The thing is, the implication is that it would be better to stop, because it would be nice … but that’s a lie. It would be easier to stop, but often it’s better to continue pushing through to the end goal. 

13. The result you’re going for isn’t important
Your mind is already sabotaging a goal that you have set for yourself.  If you stick with a process that will be better for you in the long run, then you will be better off. But if you let yourself go just because you are uncomfortable and at this moment care more for your comfort than the goal you set out for, you’ll have lots of problems. The goal isn’t important, but learning to stick to things when you’re uncomfortable is extremely important. For example, if  you’re trying to run a marathon, in the middle of it you may think “It’s not that important that I finish this" because of the pain and effort required to finish. And while the result might not be that important, the truth is that the process and the goal is very important to bolster one's self-worth, self-esteem and peace of mind.

14. I’m afraid
Now, this is the most honest excuse there is — most of us don’t want to admit we’re afraid to pursue something difficult. But it’s also a weaselly way out of discomfort — just because you’re afraid doesn’t mean you can’t do something. For example, Deipnophobia is the fear of dinner party conversations. How do you overcome that fear? You go to parties where you know a few good friends and learn to mingle. When trying something new, everyone worries about failure.  The fear of failure is an early learned experience. Failure has negative connotations in society. But some of the smartest, richest and happy people on Earth will tell you that before success they failed over and over again. It is learning from failure that breeds success. And confidence is the one trait that can extinguish many or all of the mind excuses which holds us back.

SHANNON PORTRAIT

Shannon may have been one of the best characters to symbolize low self-esteem. All the money in the world, or even a doting parent, her father, could give her the independent character to survive on her own.

Shannon had a reverse daddy issue. Her father spoiled her. He gave her money. He protected her against the real world. He got her out of trouble. When he remarried, he was the buffer between his daughter and her step-mother. But when in the emergency room, Jack made the choice to "save" Sarah instead of Shannon's father (since both were critically injured), this set Shannon's life on a slow, downward deadspin.

It appears she never held a real job. Being a cute girlfriend, a rich bitch or a party girl were not lasting career choices. She did have the gift of flirtation and sexual promise. But as in the series itself, she was more a cardboard cut-out, a centerfold without a soul, a wasted opportunity to have an interesting life story.

After her father passed away, Shannon was left on a family island. Her stepmother treated her poorly. She was put down. She had no place in the family business. Shannon was not a hard worker because her old life had been handed to her. Without a drive, personal goals or dreams she would wander aimlessly from bad boyfriend to bad relationship.

Lostpedia summarized her as follows:

Before the (Flight 815) crash, her father had died in a car crash and she had been cut off by her stepmother, who also refused to give her any of her father's money. She used men, especially Boone, to get what she wanted, which eventually led to a one night-stand with Boone. After the crash, she was very selfish at times, refusing to help the other survivors, as she insisted they would be rescued. However, she assisted in trying to get a signal on the transceiver, and used her French skills to translate Rousseau's signal. She also had an asthma attack when her inhaler ran out, but Sun eased her symptoms. She eventually formed a romantic relationship with Sayid which helped her realize her selfishness and led to a change in attitude. As she and Sayid went for a picnic, Boone fell out of a plane and died of injuries. After Boone died, Shannon sought revenge on John Locke, attempting to shoot him, but Sayid interfered. She eventually forgave Sayid, but began to have strange visions of Walt who she thought was on the raft. On Day 48 she ran from camp with Sayid to search for Walt; however she collided with the Tailies and was unintentionally shot in the stomach and killed by Ana Lucia Cortez after chasing another image of Walt.  She died in Sayid's arms having finally gained his confidence and belief in her. 

Many viewers did not find Shannon's character compelling; many felt that the death scene was merely an actor's clip reel (since so many of the characters would succumb in the next episodes). She was a "taker" and not a giver. She had to rely on other people (Boone, Sun, Sayid) in order to cope with the very basic daily routines most people take for granted. Her loss was not taken as a great defining moment in the series. 

Even after her death, her character drew ire from some fans. Why would a week long island affair be more important to Sayid than his lifelong quest to find his true love, Nadia? When Sayid wound up with Shannon in the after life, most fans were disillusioned because it really made no sense. Shannon had made no great leap or redemption in the sideways world to merit "a reward" of companionship in the next world. Further, it upset people that Shannon got what she wanted (a man to care for her forever) while Boone sat alone in the sideways church. Boone, the guy who cared and loved Shannon, and who died trying to get her rescued, got nothing for his effort.

It is a sad commentary that Shannon, the spoiled rich girl can be the Cinderella in the end by not doing anything.

SOCIAL REGULATION

In the past few weeks, there have been many international stories revolving around the concept of free speech, its regulation and concepts of political correctness. As one commentator put it, the world is wired together but torn a part by the notion of the apparent need for "social regulation."

In the U.S., the FCC turned the internet into a telephone utility by enacting 400 pages of new rules which will be challenged in court. Internet advocates wanted the FCC to make certain that the internet be neutral, i.e. that service providers could not block content, charge extra for higher speeds, or throttle down heavy users like video streamers. That is all well and good, and opponents said market forces already regulate business plans (such as the cellphone data plan changes and unlocking of phones from contracts).

But with the FCC rule making comes with it the first government step to regulate content on the internet, something net neutrality advocates failed to understand. The FCC has "content" rules for broadcasters, what can be said when, on television using the public airwaves. Cable got around some of those restrictions because it was a private, pay service. But even then, regulators got involved mandating parental controls and v-chips to limit certain content access.

FCC utility regulation also can involve regulations which raise the cost to consumers, such as forcing internet providers and broadband services "open access" to their networks, i.e. subsidizing poor rural areas or consumers. Those costs will be added to everyone's bill.

Also in the U.S., there have been an assault on college free speech. Under the constitution, free speech is immune from government regulation or censorship. Even what some people would consider offensive or politicially incorrect speech is protected under the law. Some college administrators and some students themselves, have been trying to limit the type of speech on campus. One incident was the vote to ban the display of the American flag in campus buildings.

Social media has ratcheted up the amount of public intolerance to other people's opinions. We no longer have civil debates on important public issues by discussing facts. Today, social media are bursts on condensing snipes and snark aimed at shaming another person or organization to change their point of view. This builds a culture based on intolerance.

The waves of social regulation has to erode the pillars of society over time. Culture can overwhelm and undermine the basic moral and political foundations of a civilization.

With this current background, one can look back at LOST to see if the setting, character dynamics and stories foreshadowed today's current culture clashes.

There was always a heavy shadow of authority in the series. At one early level, the authority figure than seemed to repress, control and dominate the characters lives were fathers. The "daddy issues" element seemed to dominate many characters' focus. Jack was only on Flight 815 because of guilt over his unresolved daddy issues. Kate was on the flight as she was running away from her crimes based in part on bad daddy issues. Locke was also running away from his daddy issues by trying to become an outback fantasy survivalist. Claire was abandoned by her baby father, so she was in the midst of abandoning her own baby.

The next authority figure on the island was Dharma. It had a paramilitary bent to dominate and control the island over the alleged "native" population, which probably were taken over and destroyed by the Others (the remains of the potential candidates from Jacob's game with MIB.) Since only Jacob could allow people access to the island, everyone of the island was subject to Jacob's power (whether they realized it or not). Within Dharma and the Others camp, there was an internal struggle for power and control by leaders. It took Ben's sociopathic mass murder of the Dharma folks to solidify his complete dominance of the island. Ben's mental breakdown and quest for power has to be considered in his hatred for his own father blaming him for killing his mother.  Just as the Others felt distrust and anger toward Dharma, the Others turned on the castaways in order for Ben to control "his" island (again, even though Jacob brought the 815ers to the island as candidates to replace him.)

Even if Ben felt Jacob was his surrogate father, Ben turned on him by murdering him in a classic manipulation by Flocke. Once Ben killed Jacob, his power base was destroyed and only the mercy by one of Jacob's last followers spared Ben's own life. It was probably the harshest lesson of humility on the show, if you don't count Locke's life.

Locke continually lashed out against authority. "Don't tell me what I can do!" was his personal battle cry. But Locke never understood himself. He felt he was a strong, leader, a popular jock, a man people would look up to, respect. Except, in reality, Locke was a follower. And since he could not come to terms with his own conflicted personality, he became a fool.

Locke died a meaningless death after living a meaningless life of his own creation. In physics, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In humanity, a person's action will elicit a reaction. It is how a person deals with those reactions is how he or she fits into her social circle.

Locke did not fit well into the survivor's camp. The Hatch and the dumb Numbers input gave Locke an actual purpose. But when he got fed up with that, he thought he knew better - - - but he was wrong and the station went critical and time flashed the island setting off dominoes to his own demise.

The characters on the show pretty much said their own minds. Sawyer was as politically incorrect and verbally cruel as one could get . . .  but since there were more important risks to be met, his behavior was secondary to survival. One could say the more comfortable one is in their life (emotionally, financially, etc) the more one has time to criticize others. Like an old aristocratic parlor game of dunning and belittling the lower classes.

The beach camp did have his own high school-ish clique system. You had the "cool" kids (Jack, Kate, Sawyer), the nerdy outcasts (Hurley, Charlie, Sayid), the cheerleader-jocks (Boone, Shannon, Claire) the foreign exchange students (Sun, Jin) and the hip faculty (Rose, Bernard). But just in high school, these groups did function at one level together, but socially operated separately.

And these sub-social groups did start to regulate conduct amongst themselves. The cool group began to dominate the planning and execution of missions and priorities. The beach camp extras like Artz and Frogert, who may have been intelligent and had certain skills, had their opinions neutralized by the dominate voices of Jack, Sawyer or Kate. Jin and Sun took a secondary role because they knew they did not fit in with the Americans. Rose and Bernard slowly worked their way out of the politics and danger of the games the leaders were playing to set up their own retreat in the jungle.

If Jacob and MIB were the puppet masters in their island theater, they regulated the actions and interactions between the various competing social groups. There was placed in many minds that the other group was "dangerous" or "out to get them."  This mistrust was a foundational story element. Even if it was irrational and being manipulated by the shadows, it was a form of social regulation. The rules (unwritten and confusing) were the rules. But that order often created disorder.

The beach camp may have began as a democracy with everyone allowed to speak their own mind. But in the end, a new caste system emerged from the dominant personalities instilling their own cues on the rest of the group. Peer pressure may have ultimately fused followers to leaders out of a sense of necessity. In the Others camp, Ben's followers walked on egg shells around him because one offensive remark or action could lead to their own death.

It is said that television mirrors modern society. In some respects, LOST did show that even in a diverse cast of characters, a clear pecking order will emerge in any society. And once that dominance is established, social regulation certainly follows.

A KEY TO A LOCK

John Locke was one of the most compelling characters early in the LOST saga. However, after he turned the frozen donkey wheel and teleported off the island, Locke became a throwaway character.

As such, were all the Locke story lines and subtext rendered meaningless?

Much has been written about Locke's name being tied to a English sociologist-writer.

John Locke (b. 1632, d. 1704) was a British philosopher, Oxford academic and medical researcher. Locke's monumental An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689) is one of the first great defenses of empiricism and concerns itself with determining the limits of human understanding in respect to a wide spectrum of topics. It thus tells us in some detail what one can legitimately claim to know and what one cannot.

Locke's association with Anthony Ashley Cooper (later the First Earl of Shaftesbury) led him to become successively a government official charged with collecting information about trade and colonies, economic writer, opposition political activist, and finally a revolutionary whose cause ultimately triumphed in the Glorious Revolution of 1688. Among Locke's political works he is most famous for The Second Treatise of Government in which he argues that sovereignty resides in the people and explains the nature of legitimate government in terms of natural rights and the social contract.

He is also famous for calling for the separation of Church and State in his Letter Concerning Toleration. Much of Locke's work is characterized by opposition to authoritarianism. This is apparent both on the level of the individual person and on the level of institutions such as government and church. For the individual, Locke wants each of us to use reason to search after truth rather than simply accept the opinion of authorities or be subject to superstition. He wants us to proportion assent to propositions to the evidence for them. On the level of institutions it becomes important to distinguish the legitimate from the illegitimate functions of institutions and to make the corresponding distinction for the uses of force by these institutions. Locke believes that using reason to try to grasp the truth, and determine the legitimate functions of institutions will optimize human flourishing for the individual and society both in respect to its material and spiritual welfare. This in turn, amounts to following natural law and the fulfillment of the divine purpose for humanity.

Locke, from a historical aspect, represented the following qualities:

1. Man is limited to understanding a wide range of topics or subject matter.
2. He believes in the Social Contract theory of government, where the nation's power resides with its people and not in its rulers. Legitimate governments need to adhere to principles of natural rights of the individual.
3. The Church must be separately from the State to avoid oppression by authoritarianism.
4. One must be aware of legitimate and illegitimate institutions.
5. One must look to reason rather than opinion or superstition to find the truth.

The writers may have started off with those qualities in mind for LOST's Locke, but it quickly got inverted into a less aware character. We saw a beaten down Locke who miraculously was able to walk after a plane crash. He tried to create a new persona on the island. He wanted to be respected, he wanted to be admired, he wanted to be a leader. The more he tried, the more he failed.

He spouted off on a wide range of topics, but he was not very good at any of them. If one looks back, Locke's first boar catch may have been the only tangible thing he did for the survivors. He also did not believe in the beach camp "electing" Jack to be the de facto leader. He wanted to lead with the iron fist of a warrior. But since the island "healed" him, his mind wandered toward becoming a enlightened spiritual crusader - - - abandoning logic, reason or common sense, for a answer of destiny. He tried to convince Jack of this philosophy, but he was rejected as being a fool.

And Locke played the fool for many people in the series, none more than Jacob and Ben. Locke had been the perfect mark from the day he was born. He was naive but angry. He wanted to change but could never be happy with any situation. He tried to find family but those close to him would eventually turn on him. He would begin to blame others for his miserable life. His self-pity became paramount when he failed to get one person to go back to the island. He was a miserable failure, a rejected pawn who died an undignified and basically meaningless death.

He was not resurrected as an avenging angel when his body returned to the island. There was no rule or need for MIB to have dead body on the island to mimic. (When Locke was buried by Ilana and Ben, that dissolved the theory that MIB could only take the shape of non-buried bodies). Locke's body never had to come back to the island, since MIB merely took his form after the Ajira plane landing to mingle with those survivors.

So what was Locke's purpose in the main story line? To be a counter-foil to Jack? In reality, they never had a lot of critical scenes together; each was off on their own missions, trying to find the answers to their own demons. Was Locke meant to represent part of the fan base who consider themselves lonely, abused by the system, and entitled to a better life? There were many other characters that could have substituted for those characteristics.

And finally, Locke's character had no bearing on the final resolution of the island's alleged conflicts. And Locke's sideways story line was tedious and unbelievable, which makes sense now because it was all a fantasy purgatory wait station. Locke was never the key to solve the island story lines. He just played the fool to enhance the evil elements of other characters.

DISASSOCIATION

There has been a trend in Japanese society where its youth disassociate themselves from their culture to escape into their own fantasy worlds, such as anime. It may be based upon economic conditions, the lack of work, or burn out from educational stresses to pass exams. America had a similar bout with a "drop out" culture.

While this may be a temporary delay in finding oneself, it does have the possibility to create self-delusion.  While extreme self-delusion within literature certainly dates back to at least Miguel de Cervantes’s 1605 novel Don Quixote, the recent prominence of anime that specifically concentrate on the the tendency of Japanese youth to disassociate with reality or create false personas has to be accepted as a deliberate observation of an existing trend. People are trying to find out what is  motivating Japanese youth to disengage from everyday reality. Is it willful psychological disassociation?  Or is illustrating real-world causes and impacts to a teen's cognitive disassociation?

As a matter of social commentary,  LOST did not hit the big pivot points like poverty, environmental issues or morality. Since TPTB keep saying that it was all about the study of the characters and character development, it may mirror the functional disassociation within American society norms.

The series did contain more than one psychopath. The unyielding quest for unmentioned and unobtainable power drove many characters like Ben and Widmore into killing rampages. Megalomania is a form of psychological transference of one's meek reality into some grand self-righteous plan (usually with the tenor of a destiny or a righteous position to uphold). When Ben kept telling us he was one of "the good guys," did we ever believe his banter?

Many of the characters were disillusioned by their mainland lives. Collectively, most of them were going no where fast. There was no mention of an American Dream goal. And even if they had a chance to start one, like Kate in Florida with her husband, she screwed it up and fled at the first hint of trouble. Criminals have a built-in distaste to follow the norm placed on individuals in society. Likewise, creative people seek to break the normalcy to shock people into recognizing their self-belief genius. Some succeed, but most fail. It used to be that failure was a good thing (you would learn more from your mistakes) but in the new uber-competitive sports culture, failure is no longer an option. You have Tiger Moms creating home educational sweatshops so their child can get into the "best" schools. You have Soccer Moms treating their athlete kids like full time professional ball players. Society's value system can easily be skewed from generation to generation.

The island really had no value system. It did not value life over death. It did not value trust over distrust. It did not value success over failure. If the island was a brain of a teenager, it would be an apathetic, escapist video game console.

What is really sad is that the characters in LOST thought that their miserable time on the island "was the most important part of their lives."  How shallow and desperate is that conclusion? The prospect of being killed in a horrible place trapped by monsters and demons was more appealing than an American middle class upbringing to the freedom of young adulthood?

The island did give some characters the ability to "re-create" themselves in their fantasy images, such as Locke as the outback survivalist. But it also allowed others such as Kate to re-stage herself as the "girl next store" flirt to cover her criminal secrets. Both Locke and Kate disassociated themselves from normal society long before they landed on the island. In some respects, they had already given up their lives prior to the crash. They did not take the crash as an opportunity to change their lives, but to fantasize what could have been. Escape to an island where one's own perceived genius and wit can outsmart and out maneuver anything that comes in your way is a compelling fantasy scenario for those persons who have lost their will to become a productive member of society.