My Thoughts On Advice In General, As Submitted To Wikipedia

(NOTE: I wrote the following as an addition to a Wikipedia entry titled 'Advice (Opinion)' ( a stub at http://www.wikipedia.org ) and did so already expecting it to be removed at some point by the possible dark cabal(s) that love to use Wikipedia to have an inobvious but nonetheless dangerous influence on those who over-rely on the supposed objectivity of Wikipedia! So, if it is removed, do not be surprised. At least my thoughts are here for the historical record!)

Here is what I wrote at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advice_(opinion)

Additional Considerations/Thoughts. (Source: Jean-Pierre Ady Fenyo, The Original New York City Free Advice Man)

With few exceptions most post-industrial Western societies do not have the equivalent of the Guru in India or the elder village sage or Buddhist monk that exists in many Asian countries, including China, Japan and Viet Nam, and there is no doubt that there can be sociological, psychological and emotional benefits for those living in communities where there are older, more experienced and sometimes wiser individuals willing to dispense their advice, often free of charge. In Central and South America, and throughout Africa, there are Shamans and native tribal leaders to whom one can turn for advice, especially on spiritual issues and health concerns. True, there are still some communities, especially in small towns, in North America and Europe where one can find elder persons who are known to dispense advice to people from their own community.

Nowadays most people in North America and Europe get most of their advice through commercial media, such as newspaper advice columns, television talks shows and special internet subscriptions. The problem with these indirect sources of advice is that the advice is often too broad and not specific to the actual needs of the person seeking it, and then there is also the question of how ethical it is for celebrities, pundits and other profit-motivated individuals who may not really be qualified to advise people in general.

Americans and Europeans living in small rural communities and the countryside tend not to want to risk the chance that their personal problems will become the talk of the town and subject to the prejudices of idle and sometimes malicious gossipers. On the other hand those who live in big cities tend to become very skeptical about the advice strangers might provide and though their lives are often chaotic, confusing and problems can easily become overwhelming, the cost of seeking professional counseling can be prohibitive for those most in need, while those who can afford such professional counselling tend to get disappointed with their latest analyst and it is not uncommon for someone in a big city to change analysts every few months.

Today there is a new and growing anthropological phenomena; that of fellow citizens who sit out in public with signs suggesting the opportunity to receive 'Free Advice'. This kind of American Guruship is not without inherent risks, both for those offering the advice and those seeking it. It may be that the individual offering advice is actually someone in need of advice. Then again, it would seem that there is more than a grain of truth to the saying 'It is much easier to give practical, meaningful and relatively good advice to others than to one's own self.', which is what the first recorded American 'Free Advice' giver, Jean-Pierre Ady Fenyo, discovered when he began his years of 'Free Advice' giving in New York City in 1987 ( ref. to The New Yorker magazine, Talk of The Town, August 17, 1987.). Since that time hundreds of people throughout America have taken up this unusual habit. For example, The Three Free Advice Ladies who, unlike Fenyo, received major national media publicity in 1991-1994, and whose group book "Free Advice" was popular among women ( ref. to [[Amy Alkon]], Caroline Johnson, and the late Marlowe Minnick.).

"Free Advice" givers appear to be of all types and walks of life, thus one might expect that their advice would differ greatly. For example, The Original New York City Free Advice Man, as Fenyo has billed himself over the years, deals mostly with deep philosophical questions concerning life, death and the like, whereas The Three Free Advice Ladies mostly dealt with relationship advice, issues of appearance and style almost entirely geared at women. Throughout America ( you can put 'Free Advice' in the images search engines and see this for yourself ) most of those who offer 'Free Advice' appear to be males, some are experimental artists and others are clearly on a religious mission. While this sort of public advice-giving is supposedly protected under free speech rights, local authorities tend to discourage it, in part because of complaints by some citizens ( who may not want to be reminded about the fact that they really do have problems and who seem to want to enjoy public spaces, such as parks, free of any such reminders ) and because of the fact that most law enforcement officers do not have adequate training and education concerning what is and what is not protected free speech.

Growing levels of feelings of isolation and loneliness are detrimental to society and discouraging and punishing people who put themselves at some risk to help others with their advice might be worse than the risk that some might give bad or senseless advice. At the very least, free speech rights may be at stake.

It helps to keep in mind that 'you can lead a camel to the water hole but you cannot force it to drink the water'; which is true about advice, free or not, freely sought or unwelcomed.

Throughout history royalty, tribal and political leaders have tended to have one or more advisors and it is considered a sign of wisdom if a leader is not afraid to seek the advice of others. In fact, there are many classical examples of leaders who failed to heed the advice of others, to the detriment of those they lead and their own personal fortunes. In democratic societies it is not uncommon for CEOs and Presidents to openly court a number of advisors whose specific professional knowledge and experience can make even the least experienced leader a successful one. The problem is that sometimes a leader will appoint a number of people to advise them and yet be too arrogant or dictatorial, thereby inhibiting her or his group of advisors from bringing up issues, concerns and opinions that the leader involved is known to find too upsetting to handle. A really intelligent and relatively wise advisor might still be able to influence such an arrogant leader, by using clever psychological tactics, such as reverse psychology, to plant ideas (i.e. advice) into the mind of the otherwise delluded leader and thereby accomplish practically beneficial results (beneficial from the standpoint of the advisor). Perhaps the best mark of a wise leader is her or his ability to select the right people to be her or his advisor.

No matter at what level one might seek to give advice, whether as a parent to a child, a relative, a friend to another, a boss to an employee, a leader to a people, or an advisor to a leader, providing advice is never without risk to the giver, the receiver and the rest of society and the world. Which is why a relatively wise advisor might seek to provide several options (as opposed to one specific 'solution'), generally with some degree of vagueness, and leave it up to the receiver of the advice to make the final decision, thereby avoiding having to take full responsibility for any unnexpected negative consequences.

In general it can be said that advice requires judgment, and we are always making judgments, whether intentionally or not, whether consciously or not, and our judgments, thus our advice(s), is/are always going to be as imperfect and flawed as our limitations of perception, knowledge, experience and deliberate efforts at taking this very dictum into consideration! The best one can really do is to make every reasonable effort, time permitting, to take into consideration as many variables, as many possible models, ideas and potential outcomes as possible and then give and/or take the advice based on our best hunch, our intuition. Which is why some of the best forms of advice are generalizations that have a lot of room for tolerance.

Perhaps the best general advice of all is this Golden Rule: 'Do unto others as they really want to be done unto, or do nothing unto them at all' ( which is semantically and logically quite different from the more common version which states that one should 'do unto others as one would want done unto oneself'). A healthy, relatively democratic society would be one where practically everyone, especially those with the most authority and/or influence, applies this general advice or Golden Rule.

As for my own full entry at Wikinfo, click here.