Human beings have the capacity to make choices...something no other species, to our knowledge, can do. And we love to do it. Choosing new friends, new clothes, a new car, new software for our new computer. Isn't that all a helluva lot of fun?
So why then the great irony? Why have we set up a society that minimizes choices, if not eliminating them completely. in so many aspects of our lives? I was driving somewhere this morning and saw lines of cars carrying people to work. And I thought: How sad! For years and years, they drive the same route each day, at about the same time, see the same signs on the road, perhaps listen to the same morning hosts on their radios, get to the same office, sit at the same desk, handle the same problems, lunch with the same coworker(s)at the same time at likely one or two of the same restaurants, return to the office at the same time, return home at the same time, to eat the same foods they ate last week, to watch the same tv shows. to go to sleep at about the same time for about the same length of time, to awaken at the same alarmed time, to wear the same clothes, to get back on the same road heading to the same office. What happened to the variety we love?
We...that is, whoever set up this anti-human idiocy...must be nuts! Totally.
Why would they have set up rigid routines and taken away our beautiful ability to choose, which no animal can do? Why would they put us on the same roads, reading the same signs, riding behind the same people, doing the same work for year after year? Don't we really like variety in our lives?
But, no. Goodbye variety, goodbye choices, get in that same car and drive the same route to work, reading those same advertising signs, to work in the same colored building, on the same floor, at the same desk, same phone calls, same food at the same diner for lunch with other workers, home at the same time, looking forward to watching the same shows on television (saw this one before, but it was good, like to see it again).
Were the people who set all this up, were they not humans who had the same unique capacity to choose as we all do, and didn't they realize that ironically they were taking away the variety we enjoy so much?
Why would they (humans?) have set up a society of repetition, duplication, regurgitation, rehashing, redundancy, parrotlike, regularity, uniformity? Why?
Isn't it a helluva lot of fun to make choices and have variety, changeability, modifiability, permutability, plasticity, instability, mercuriality, oscillation, pendulation, in your life?
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
THE BB STRAW MAN
The liberals' vitriolic disdain for Big Business, and denunciations of BB and their characterization as "the enemy", are as spurious and phony as is imaginable.
1. Tens of millions of them invest in BB, directly own shares in BB, or indirectly do so through mutual funds, participation in pension funds, etc. One in four American households receive dividend checks from BB.
2. They continue to crave/purchase/use BB products, and when they get ill, they are delighted to learn of kidney transplants, cancer cures, potent medications, virtually all of which are enabled by BB.
3. Millions of them are members of and support unions, major BB's.
4. Millions belong to, support and revere a worldwide BB: the Catholic Church, despite its known abuses.
5. 99.9% of them would be delighted to discover they have been bequeathed sole ownership of their family's BB...and would pay out a small fortune in legal fees to protect their larger income fortune.
6. They actively support enlarging the largest BB in the country: the federal government despite its known deficiencies.
So, unless you renounce at least half of the above, keep your anti-BB hypocrisy to yourself.
By the by, is that an Apple BB computer you're using? Gonna drive to work in your Toyota BB auto or you gonna take your new Harley BB bike? Still using Exxon BB fuel? Did you save a few bucks shopping at Walmart BB yesterday? How's the quality on your SONY BB stereo? Prefer watching WNBC BB or CNN BB?
SHHH!
1. Tens of millions of them invest in BB, directly own shares in BB, or indirectly do so through mutual funds, participation in pension funds, etc. One in four American households receive dividend checks from BB.
2. They continue to crave/purchase/use BB products, and when they get ill, they are delighted to learn of kidney transplants, cancer cures, potent medications, virtually all of which are enabled by BB.
3. Millions of them are members of and support unions, major BB's.
4. Millions belong to, support and revere a worldwide BB: the Catholic Church, despite its known abuses.
5. 99.9% of them would be delighted to discover they have been bequeathed sole ownership of their family's BB...and would pay out a small fortune in legal fees to protect their larger income fortune.
6. They actively support enlarging the largest BB in the country: the federal government despite its known deficiencies.
So, unless you renounce at least half of the above, keep your anti-BB hypocrisy to yourself.
By the by, is that an Apple BB computer you're using? Gonna drive to work in your Toyota BB auto or you gonna take your new Harley BB bike? Still using Exxon BB fuel? Did you save a few bucks shopping at Walmart BB yesterday? How's the quality on your SONY BB stereo? Prefer watching WNBC BB or CNN BB?
SHHH!
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
THE NONJUDGMENTALITY
For centuries, we have been taught to engage in a moral cover-up, which has been promoted under the admonition to "judge not lest ye be judged." When coupled with the idea that we should only speak well of each other, that admonition could be paraphrased into "If you don't say anything bad about me, I won't say anything bad about you." At least, not publicly.
I call that the "nonjudgmentality." It is one of the most dangerous errors to commit: not to judge. Judgment, ultimately, is the assessment of whether someone or something is good for your life, or isn't. The purpose of judging is not to put someone else down, but to lift the odds that your life will be safe and successful. It is moral to judge because, properly done, it is pro-life.
Judgment presupposes two things:
First, that your life is not predetermined or preordained, but that it is determined, in substantial measure, by the choices you make. Judgment is a prerequisite to making rational choices. Were your life predetermined, pre-set, there would be no choices you need make, no choices you could make.
Second, judgment presupposes a standard against which everyone and everything can be measured. Without a standard, there could be no judgment. The only rational standard for life is your life and its happiness. If you believe life has no value or happiness is impossible, judgments are unnecessary and irrelevant.
Some of us refuse to judge, or to acknowledge our secret judgments, out of a reluctance to hurt someone else's feelings and of making them feel bad. But that is unjust. A person who has done something morally wrong, ought feel bad. If a person ought not feel bad when he does something wrong, then he ought not feel good when he does something right.
The well-being of your life demands that you treat people for what and who they are. It is a moral imperative that we judge and pronounce our judgment, and that we be prepared to be judged.
Life requires judgments...a daily host of judgments as to what actions to take in various facets of our lives. And because most actions involve other people, our judgments often rest on our judgment of their character, their integrity, their trustworthiness, their honor. The ones who think they have something to gain from not judging others are likely those who have something to lose by being judged themselves.
That's the cover-up.
I call that the "nonjudgmentality." It is one of the most dangerous errors to commit: not to judge. Judgment, ultimately, is the assessment of whether someone or something is good for your life, or isn't. The purpose of judging is not to put someone else down, but to lift the odds that your life will be safe and successful. It is moral to judge because, properly done, it is pro-life.
Judgment presupposes two things:
First, that your life is not predetermined or preordained, but that it is determined, in substantial measure, by the choices you make. Judgment is a prerequisite to making rational choices. Were your life predetermined, pre-set, there would be no choices you need make, no choices you could make.
Second, judgment presupposes a standard against which everyone and everything can be measured. Without a standard, there could be no judgment. The only rational standard for life is your life and its happiness. If you believe life has no value or happiness is impossible, judgments are unnecessary and irrelevant.
Some of us refuse to judge, or to acknowledge our secret judgments, out of a reluctance to hurt someone else's feelings and of making them feel bad. But that is unjust. A person who has done something morally wrong, ought feel bad. If a person ought not feel bad when he does something wrong, then he ought not feel good when he does something right.
The well-being of your life demands that you treat people for what and who they are. It is a moral imperative that we judge and pronounce our judgment, and that we be prepared to be judged.
Life requires judgments...a daily host of judgments as to what actions to take in various facets of our lives. And because most actions involve other people, our judgments often rest on our judgment of their character, their integrity, their trustworthiness, their honor. The ones who think they have something to gain from not judging others are likely those who have something to lose by being judged themselves.
That's the cover-up.
Monday, July 5, 2010
THE UNFUNNY JOKE
Our Constitution needs to be amended. Articles II and III dealing with the appointment of judges to the U. S. Supreme Court. Here's why:
1. The growing belief that the Constitution is a "living document", to be seen not as a statement of enduring principles but as to be interpreted by the sway of changing times, places undue and inappropriate importance on the subjective beliefs and attitudes of individual members of the Court.
2. The appointment of new judges by the President and the consent of Senate members has become a politically-based, rather than a judicially-based, matter. Particularly true when, as now, the President and majority of Senators are of the same political party.
3. The appointment of judges for life was likely meant to keep them independent of political pressures by excluding them from the need to be re-appointed after a period of years. That may have made sense in 1776 when life expectancy was 35 years, but no longer true today with life expectancy is at 75(M)-80(F) years. And the pressure can be avoided by simply setting a specific period for service on the Bench (eg, 6 years, 10 years), with no re-appointments possible.
Judges appointed today can be expected to remain on the Court for decades...too great a power to give the President and Senators in a separation-of-powers government. And because of the for-life appointments, we can anticipate having some senile, doddering, dotards sitting as judges making vital decisions. Have some now and they aren't even all that old.
4. No requirements for service on the Supreme Court is required. No minimum age requirement, no educational requirements, no prior experience as a judge required. Odd. Few of us would hire someone who has never repaired one before, to fix that clogged and leaking toilet bowl in our home. But experience as a jurist for a Supreme Court nominee? Nah!
I am not 100% certain yet how to solve all of these critical problems, but solve them we must. Our future, the future of our country, depends on it. Send me your genius solutions to one or all of the problems I have outlined above and I will be happy to post them.
Listening to the Senate confirmation hearings going on today, a nominee's sense of humor seems to rank higher in importance to the Senators than top level, astute, legal wisdom. (Come to think of it, how would they possibly recognize that even if it hit them in the face?) And their priorities shouldn't surprise me. The whole confirmation thing is a public relations joke.
Problem is: the joke's on us.
1. The growing belief that the Constitution is a "living document", to be seen not as a statement of enduring principles but as to be interpreted by the sway of changing times, places undue and inappropriate importance on the subjective beliefs and attitudes of individual members of the Court.
2. The appointment of new judges by the President and the consent of Senate members has become a politically-based, rather than a judicially-based, matter. Particularly true when, as now, the President and majority of Senators are of the same political party.
3. The appointment of judges for life was likely meant to keep them independent of political pressures by excluding them from the need to be re-appointed after a period of years. That may have made sense in 1776 when life expectancy was 35 years, but no longer true today with life expectancy is at 75(M)-80(F) years. And the pressure can be avoided by simply setting a specific period for service on the Bench (eg, 6 years, 10 years), with no re-appointments possible.
Judges appointed today can be expected to remain on the Court for decades...too great a power to give the President and Senators in a separation-of-powers government. And because of the for-life appointments, we can anticipate having some senile, doddering, dotards sitting as judges making vital decisions. Have some now and they aren't even all that old.
4. No requirements for service on the Supreme Court is required. No minimum age requirement, no educational requirements, no prior experience as a judge required. Odd. Few of us would hire someone who has never repaired one before, to fix that clogged and leaking toilet bowl in our home. But experience as a jurist for a Supreme Court nominee? Nah!
I am not 100% certain yet how to solve all of these critical problems, but solve them we must. Our future, the future of our country, depends on it. Send me your genius solutions to one or all of the problems I have outlined above and I will be happy to post them.
Listening to the Senate confirmation hearings going on today, a nominee's sense of humor seems to rank higher in importance to the Senators than top level, astute, legal wisdom. (Come to think of it, how would they possibly recognize that even if it hit them in the face?) And their priorities shouldn't surprise me. The whole confirmation thing is a public relations joke.
Problem is: the joke's on us.
Sunday, July 4, 2010
OUR DAY, EVERY DAY
I looked up "unalienable" in the dictionary and it said: not transferable to another, or capable of being repudiated, inviolable, absolute, unassailable, inherent. Clear? Crystal clear? Untouchable. Unassailable. Sacred. Sacrosanct.
So, I wonder on this July 4th, if the Founding Fathers described our rights, our freedom, as unalienable, by what conceivable contorted reasoning do virtually ALL politicians and political pundits blithely say as a presumed given that "of course, we must balance (aka, give up) our individual rights when the public good, the public welfare, the public interest prevails".
So, yes you have the right to choose the course of your life...but, no, not if society "conflicts" with what is deemed to be in the public interest. Yes, you own the money you earn, you can save it in a bank or buy and own real property with it, etc., but we can forcefully take it from you via taxes and eminent domain when we, society, wants it. In the name of the general welfare, we can limit what you can legally put into your body, we can require you to risk your life in a war you do not believe in, we can force you to stay alive when you no longer wish to do so.
EVERY SOCIETY EVER ESTABLISHED ON THE PLANET MADE THE INDIVIDUAL, TO ONE DEGREE OR ANOTHER, SUBJECT TO, SUBSERVIENT TO, THE GROUP. EVERY ONE BUT ONE, THAT IS: THIS ONE, OUR ONE, AMERICA.
Our Founding Fathers understood the destructive nature of big government, and specifically and deliberately crafted a country rooted in the unimpeachable sovereignty of the individual. The government did not rule the people; the people ruled the government. The government does not tell us what we must do, we tell it what it can do. Every balancing act of our rights with anything...ANYTHING...every diminution, qualification, of our rights is an obscene violation and denial of the precious wisdom and ideals that our country and our flag were based on and represent.
Today is Independence Day. But it is not the independence of our country that we celebrate with parades and fireworks. It is our own individual glorious independence and freedom.
So, happy 234th birthday, America...and happy Independence, my fellow Americans!
So, I wonder on this July 4th, if the Founding Fathers described our rights, our freedom, as unalienable, by what conceivable contorted reasoning do virtually ALL politicians and political pundits blithely say as a presumed given that "of course, we must balance (aka, give up) our individual rights when the public good, the public welfare, the public interest prevails".
So, yes you have the right to choose the course of your life...but, no, not if society "conflicts" with what is deemed to be in the public interest. Yes, you own the money you earn, you can save it in a bank or buy and own real property with it, etc., but we can forcefully take it from you via taxes and eminent domain when we, society, wants it. In the name of the general welfare, we can limit what you can legally put into your body, we can require you to risk your life in a war you do not believe in, we can force you to stay alive when you no longer wish to do so.
EVERY SOCIETY EVER ESTABLISHED ON THE PLANET MADE THE INDIVIDUAL, TO ONE DEGREE OR ANOTHER, SUBJECT TO, SUBSERVIENT TO, THE GROUP. EVERY ONE BUT ONE, THAT IS: THIS ONE, OUR ONE, AMERICA.
Our Founding Fathers understood the destructive nature of big government, and specifically and deliberately crafted a country rooted in the unimpeachable sovereignty of the individual. The government did not rule the people; the people ruled the government. The government does not tell us what we must do, we tell it what it can do. Every balancing act of our rights with anything...ANYTHING...every diminution, qualification, of our rights is an obscene violation and denial of the precious wisdom and ideals that our country and our flag were based on and represent.
Today is Independence Day. But it is not the independence of our country that we celebrate with parades and fireworks. It is our own individual glorious independence and freedom.
So, happy 234th birthday, America...and happy Independence, my fellow Americans!
Saturday, July 3, 2010
THE BIG ONE
There is a question most of us never seriously ask, and fewer of us ever convincingly answer, even to ourselves. It's the "What's it all about?" question and it comes in various forms:
WHAT'S THE MEANING OF LIFE?
WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF LIFE?
WHAT'S THE GOAL OF MY LIFE?
WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE?
The answers are as varied as the questions, including:
TO HAVE FUN
TO DO GOD'S WILL
TO SERVE OTHERS
TO MOVE THE WORLD
Each of those answers has a sub-question: How?
And a second sub-question: Am I certain of my answers?
Ironically, these pivotal questions are not only rarely seriously addressed, but the raising of them is disdained with a casual, blow away "Hey, Buddy, lighten up, you're too serious."
So we go through life often without knowing if we are going in the right direction, achieving less than we could if we only knew what it was we wanted to achieve. And some of us reach the conclusion that there are no answers to what glorious life is all about.
Is it time for questioning? The reward is energy, motivation, excitement, passion.
I have designed a set of T-shirts. On the back there is a choice: FUN, GOD'S WILL, SERVE OTHERS, MOVE THE WORLD. Or you can make one of your own.
Which one you want?
WHAT'S THE MEANING OF LIFE?
WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF LIFE?
WHAT'S THE GOAL OF MY LIFE?
WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE?
The answers are as varied as the questions, including:
TO HAVE FUN
TO DO GOD'S WILL
TO SERVE OTHERS
TO MOVE THE WORLD
Each of those answers has a sub-question: How?
And a second sub-question: Am I certain of my answers?
Ironically, these pivotal questions are not only rarely seriously addressed, but the raising of them is disdained with a casual, blow away "Hey, Buddy, lighten up, you're too serious."
So we go through life often without knowing if we are going in the right direction, achieving less than we could if we only knew what it was we wanted to achieve. And some of us reach the conclusion that there are no answers to what glorious life is all about.
Is it time for questioning? The reward is energy, motivation, excitement, passion.
I have designed a set of T-shirts. On the back there is a choice: FUN, GOD'S WILL, SERVE OTHERS, MOVE THE WORLD. Or you can make one of your own.
Which one you want?
Friday, July 2, 2010
EXTREME UGLY
Last time, I wrote about EXTREME BEAUTY. Here are some of one morning's headlines from CNN on the news of the day:
ANGER, FRUSTRATION ON GULF OIL CRISIS
JOB LOSSES RETURN
TALIBAN ATTACKS US AGENCY
50 KILLED IN PAKISTAN SHRINE ATTACK
21 DEAD IN SHOOTOUT NEAR US BORDER
HURRICANE ALEX SOAKS MEXICO, FLOOD RISK HIGH
FIRE TRAPS MAN IN BATHROOM WALL
KELSEY GRAMMER'S WIFE FILES FOR DIVORCE
TORI SPELLING'S HUSBAND IN ICU
Nary a word about the wonderful inventions patented this day, the beautiful children born, the number of safe airplane travelers, the successful kidney transplants, the just published book of poetry.
And the main blame for the torrent of depressing world-sucking, spirit and energy draining, negativity? The public, who watch it, read about it, love to talk about it, do nothing to stop it.
Tell CNN and all other purveyors of rampant hell on earth stories what you think BY NOT WATCHING ANYTHING THAT OUTLET PRODUCES. NOTHING. That drop off in audience, no matter how small, will speak louder than any complaints you send them in the mail. They do what they do for the money which is produced by advertising revenue, which is determined by size of audience.
That's us. Shut them off. Today. Now. Off.
And if you try to talk with me about negative stories in other than a positive, constructive, healing way, I shut you OUT.
ANGER, FRUSTRATION ON GULF OIL CRISIS
JOB LOSSES RETURN
TALIBAN ATTACKS US AGENCY
50 KILLED IN PAKISTAN SHRINE ATTACK
21 DEAD IN SHOOTOUT NEAR US BORDER
HURRICANE ALEX SOAKS MEXICO, FLOOD RISK HIGH
FIRE TRAPS MAN IN BATHROOM WALL
KELSEY GRAMMER'S WIFE FILES FOR DIVORCE
TORI SPELLING'S HUSBAND IN ICU
Nary a word about the wonderful inventions patented this day, the beautiful children born, the number of safe airplane travelers, the successful kidney transplants, the just published book of poetry.
And the main blame for the torrent of depressing world-sucking, spirit and energy draining, negativity? The public, who watch it, read about it, love to talk about it, do nothing to stop it.
Tell CNN and all other purveyors of rampant hell on earth stories what you think BY NOT WATCHING ANYTHING THAT OUTLET PRODUCES. NOTHING. That drop off in audience, no matter how small, will speak louder than any complaints you send them in the mail. They do what they do for the money which is produced by advertising revenue, which is determined by size of audience.
That's us. Shut them off. Today. Now. Off.
And if you try to talk with me about negative stories in other than a positive, constructive, healing way, I shut you OUT.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)