The advice to “Make your Bed” has recently been extolled by Admiral William H. McRaven and the controversial Dr. Jordan Peterson. This singular piece of advice has been heralded as life changing. McRaven initially presented his advice at a 2014 University of Texas commencement address [1,2]. McRaven’s book, entitled Make Your Bed, became a New York Times bestseller [3]. Jordan Peterson recently wrote a book entitled 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote for Chaos [4]. The book did not make the New York Times Bestseller’s list only because it wasn’t considered since the book was published by a Canadian company [5]. Nevertheless, it is an extremely popular bestseller worldwide [5.1].

Why is this seemingly trivial piece of knowledge getting so much attention? Why are people responding so enthusiastically (or with vitriol [6]) to this simple statement?

The answer may come from the words around (and the complete explanations surrounding) the advice. Admiral McRaven’s complete statement is “If you want to change the world, start off by making your bed”. One of Peterson’s statements is that you have to figure out what you’re going to do and then your room has to be setup properly to serve that purpose otherwise you will be unhappy [7,8].

This advice capitalizes on a profound truth associated with your bed (or your room): you are in control of it. It is a physical reality where you can’t bargain, delude, or cheat your way into profit. You cannot claim that reality is what it is not and generate meaningful results. It is no one else’s responsibility. Your room is yours, it is only your responsibility. And you have the power to change it. Here’s an example of what it looks like by someone who took this advice:

This person has a small space. Can you imagine functioning in the room on the left? Imagine the difficulty of even going to sleep in the room on the left. Imagine the challenge of living a life where going to sleep is a difficult chore. Now empathize the relief of this person entering the room on the right.

According to Admiral McRaven, “If you make your bed every morning, you will have accomplished the first task of the day. It will give you a small sense of pride and will encourage you to do another task and another.”

(At this time, I’d like to acknowledge my mother. She has made her bed every day of my life. It is one of the many ways that she has served as an exceptional model for success.)

There is a certain sense of signaling here. I want the world to be better. If necessary, I want to change the world to be better. But how do I know what is “better”? How can I know that the way I want the world changed would actually be better? If I were competent, then that would be the case. But how can I know that I am competent? One answer, a very simple answer, is that I make my bed. It is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for competence. It is merely a reminder that I can do something right. If I can’t even make my bed, if I can’t even accomplish this simple task that I have complete control over, there is no reason to think that I am capable of altering the world in a beneficial way.

Similarly, I have opinions that I would like to be respected. I first require that my opinions be respectable. How can I know if my opinions are respectable? I try to steel man the opposing argument:

I attempt to beat my ideas up with reality when I can. If I have an idea, I implement it (or some small version of it) and see how it performs. I use the resources within my power to make the change and determine its effectiveness. I then continue testing as much as I can. I communicate my opinion to those who are opposed to it and actively listen to their responses. (This is much easier if the communication is written where one person cannot speak on top of another.) I try my best to make logical arguments and evaluate opposing arguments with critical thinking. (For example, if someone resorts to ad hominem attacks, that is a good indication that they have run out of logical ammunition.) I present my ideas publicly. (This is always scary.) I solicit feedback from interested and intelligent personnel when I can, and I actively listen. I am not perfect in my efforts to accomplish the above. As best I can, I try to forgive myself for these imperfections and keep trying.

This has worked very well for me. It starts with the room. A clean room is a signal to myself that I am at least competent enough to have a clean room. By publishing my ideas and generating results, I am demonstrating a higher level of competence. During my last interview, the interviewer downloaded my software for one of my inventions and ran it on data I had never seen before. Many of the works I see would never generate good results in this situation; they are barely able to generate good results on the data used in their papers. But I was as confident as I could be; I had tested my work as thoroughly as possible. My code worked well; I got the job and have been working there for over a year.

I see several examples in the world where I think we could all benefit from these sorts of self-scrutinizing and competence demonstrating behaviors.

I worked as a military contractor for approximately 8 years. In that time, I saw several advanced projects in development. I saw the military attempt to develop a smart suit that would inform the soldier of the location and status of any allies and enemies (powered by the Palm Pilot), the development of a fighter jet with vertical liftoff (what would become the Joint Strike Fighter or the F35) leveraging the larger market of three military branches to bring the cost of the jet down, and the development of extremely advanced communications equipment for use by the military. And I saw the terror that is war.

War is a theater where the military developments are tested for effectiveness. It’s an environment where all rhetoric is put aside and reality imposes itself. And here I saw extreme failures.

The extremely advanced communications equipment the US developed often failed. They leave soldiers without an ability to communicate. In one case I know about, a helicopter pilot, during battle, landed his helicopter and ran under fire to the person he needed to communicate with. When the conversation was finished, he ran back to his helicopter under fire to complete his mission.

Similarly, our firearms should be discussed. The M16 and the Russian AK47 are competitors. It is well known that the M16 is lighter but that the AK47 is more resilient. What is meant by more resilient? It jams less. I learned from a member of the special forces during the Vietnam war that, while on patrol, they would often walk upon dead soldiers whose guns jammed during battle. They found their corpses next to a disassembled gun and a cleaning kit. In response, the members of the Special Forces began carrying AK47s and the associated ammunition when they could find or steal it along with their Army issued M16s. Of course, having to carry two guns eliminated any benefit of the lack of weight of the M16.

Unfortunately, this situation was not fixed even thirty years later. In one story of the Gulf war, two Navy Seals and a medic were tasked with transporting an Afghan official across the desert (walking). It was assumed to be easy travel without resistance. The Seals were carrying (improved) M16s and the medic was carrying a commercially available Smith and Wesson slide action shotgun. Unfortunately, they were surprised with significant resistance; they ran into over 100 enemy personnel, each carrying an AK47. Both M16s jammed and the seals were shot. Only the commercially available shotgun remained functional. The medic was able to hold off the enemy with this gun until reinforcements arrived.

This was not an isolated incident, but a common occurrence [9,10]. The M16 seems to have been replaced with the M16A2 (or its shorter version, the M4 carbine which is the Army’s standard issue weapon). It is a much more reliable weapon. However, even in 2018, none of the manufacturers of M4 carbines were able to meet Army reliability requirements [10].

Is it any wonder that the F35, which has now cost over $1 trillion, cannot outperform the aged F16 in a dog fight and struggles during battles near the North Pole (due to its reliance on GPS and the lack of foresight of its programmers)? If our military cannot make a well functioning gun, why would anyone think that they could achieve much more complicated goals?

Our soldiers are resilient. During the second Gulf war, they were having a large problem with booby traps placed in rooms they needed to clear. Their solution was to start carrying cans of silly string. They would launch an expelling can into the room and it did a decent job of clearing traps before putting themselves at risk. And how did they work around the problem associated with communications? They began carrying the short distance hand walkie-talkies that snowboarders use. It’s not encrypted, but they don’t have to land under fire to have a conversation.

It is a disservice to our soldiers to send them into battle with a rifle that does not function well and a radio that does not work. And while this problem remains unaddressed, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (which has an abysmal success rate of investment) claims to be building smart bullets and exoskeletons [11.1]. Our enemies continue to use the AK47, which continues to function reliably.

Switching topics:

I was recently contacted by a former student to ask: “How can we transition the economy to be carbon neutral?” With the massive discussion of our environment, the reduction of regulations of pollution control [12], the warming of the earth [13], and the drive for a Green New Deal (GND), it is no wonder that this student is (rightly) concerned. Let us focus on the GND for a moment.

The GND is a massive federal overhaul to our existing economy (the most productive in the world) in an attempt to clean our environment. The proponents of this legislation, though, have not demonstrated environmental competence. And, they regularly demonstrate hypocrisy. Presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren claims to want to tackle the climate crisis head on on her website as she asks for your support [14]. And yet, she flies on a private jet (a terribly destructive way to travel per capita) during her campaigning [15]. Similarly with presidential candidate Bernie Sanders [16]. These actions make it too easy to dismiss their opinions (as Fox News loves to do).

Moreover, the Federal government is one of the worst offenders of the environment. The postal service uses a vehicle that gets approximately 9 miles per gallon [17], and has since the mid 1980s. For comparison, the Ford F150 gets approximately 22 miles per gallon [18]. It would actually be more environmentally friendly for the postal service to deliver mail with Ford F150s! The postal vehicle is a worst offender on the road, and there are between 140,000 – 180,000 of these vehicles functioning. This has nothing to do with the economic system of the US, and it has little to do with federal regulations on production. This is the Federal government using a vehicle that goes completely against the statements of the politicians when there are a multitude of better options available. And though there are efforts to replace these vehicles, the start of the replacement continues to see delays [19]. Here’s an example where members of the Federal government are willing to impose themselves on us when they can’t even clean their own room. (See how silly that is?) They’re willing to overhaul the entire US economy and reduce our income, while they are the worst offender on the road and in the sky.

It can become overwhelming to consider these aspects of the world. When I get overwhelmed, I remember that I have power over my own room. While writing this, I made my bed for the first time in too long. I leveraged that success into submitting one of my inventions to arxiv.org for public review. (I think that I can now make quality MR images with less data.) It is, of course, scary to make my idea available to the public for scrutiny. I will eagerly await any response to see how well it stands up.

“God, give me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.” -Reinhold Niebuhr

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sK3wJAxGfs

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxBQLFLei70

[3] https://smile.amazon.com/Make-Your-Bed-Little-Things-ebook/dp/B01KFJGT50?sa-no-redirect=1

[4] https://smile.amazon.com/12-Rules-Life-Antidote-Chaos/dp/0345816021?sa-no-redirect=1

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_Rules_for_Life

[5.1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/08/why-the-left-is-so-afraid-of-jordan-peterson/567110/

[6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTk-69f64KU

[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_l85129u6g

[8] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBR5v89L6gk

[9] https://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/02/how-reliable-is-the-m-16-rifle/

[10] https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/firefight-fail-how-us-armys-m-4-rifle-overheated-and-jammed-bloody-battle-47262

[11] https://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/06/14/army-gun-makers-didnt-meet-reliability-standard.html?ESRC=sm_todayinmil.nl

[11.1] https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/coolest-darpa-projects/

[12] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51225604

[13] https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

[14] https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/climate-change

[15] https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/25/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-private-jet-flights-1182793

[16] https://www.foxnews.com/politics/class-warrior-warren-on-video-stepping-off-private-plane-in-des-moines

[17] https://phys.org/news/2015-03-postal-miles-gallon-mail-trucks.html

[18] https://www.edmunds.com/ford/f-150/2019/mpg/

[19] https://www.trucks.com/2019/09/03/postal-service-delays-new-mail-truck-contract/