I don’t think spontaneity requires an element of impatience. Although the actions that result from both are nearly indistinguishable, the mechanisms behind those actions are different enough to separate them. Impatience is the lack of something–namely patience–and spontaneity is the presence of something–namely impulsiveness. What they share is the quality of immediacy or rapid motion–qualities that, as you point out, lead to quick changes without deference to the past. However, I would argue that impatience and spontaneity need not always coexist–i.e. one could be impatient without being spontaneous and vice versa. I say this because, strictly speaking, the concept “lack of patience” implies that one is, in the moment, incapable of patience, regardless of its utility. Conversely, since spontaneity is the “presence of impulsiveness,” it need not exist to the exclusion of patience. Therefore, spontaneity allows for more flexibility in decision-making ability because one can choose between the qualities of patience and the qualities of impulsiveness per the situation at hand. Impatience, in my view, is more limiting in nature in that one loses the option of patience in a situation.

I do see your point in that my previous definition was circular; here I would like to say that impatience can appear to be virtuous in moments where immediate action is the best option, but, if indeed impatience is the primary agent at play, the utility of impatience is more coincidental than it is calculated. That is, it is only through post hoc awareness that one determines impatience to be a virtue, not ad hoc. Therefore, one does not choose impatience as the solution to a situation; rather one applies impatience to situations repeatedly as if one were pulling the handle on a slot machine.

I do see the danger in using grossly oversimplified words like east/west to denote lifestyle/philosophy of life etc, but I used them for lack of a better word. My intent was to be pithy with the concept “a myopic, fast-paced, popular culture with an empirical, secular and means-end value system” in order to comment on that culture…in 700-900 words. I certainly don’t mean the distinction to literally apply to modern day China, Russia, etc, but I see how my terminology could be confusing.

Just doing my part to get this shit done.

But enough language games. My larger point was put best by Carlyle…I’ll have to paraphrase, but it’s something to the effect that the great thing about western-style secular democracies (and I believe he was here speaking especially of America and probably revolutionary france) is that they can change their minds so quickly, and without compunction. Spontaneity requires a bit of classically defined impatience, no? I was working off a different definition of impatience earlier, but one fascinating and endlessly frustrating thing about the states is how quickly it moves, changes itself, adapts and adopts without deference to the past. This can be great if moving away from bad policy, but is nerve-wracking when heading into it. Of course, as you rightly state, it’d be best to try and end this dance macabre entirely, but maybe America IS the dance (and there is nothing but the dance, as Eliot would have it).

I’ve gone way off your article here, but until you move to Chicago, this is the only way this shit will get done.

Dynamism? Hmm, that’s a new term for me. If it has a creative element woven into it then that would certainly be beneficial. I don’t mean to confuse impatience with spontaneity and the like. By impatience I mean to say that it is the lack of patience where patience would be a virtue. That is, where a desirable result would be obtained IF one were to allow natural forces to run their course, but one nevertheless takes action or passes judgment prematurely due to restlessness–a sort of working-with rather than working-over mentality is what I favor.

Impatience can also be swapped out for dynamism, which has more positive connotations. The restless energy associated with America has its uses, as well. I think balancing the consequences of impatience as you’ve listed with dynamism’s creative benefits affords serious insight into one central paradox of American culture.

Excellent drawing!