Biologist Dr. Craig Venter is known for talking and thinking big, but if he delivers on a substantial portion of his predictions as published in the Daily Mail, then we should put his mug on the one dollar bill, because he will be a hero of civilization.
According to C.V., future generations may derive energy from the living, rather than the dead. Living microorganisms will produce energy that we now get from fossil fuels. Cheaper energy is all that stands between civilization and improved living conditions for all. Energy that does not produce substantial pollution would be a godsend.
Also, science may be able to halt and even reverse global warming. However, that does raise the specter of a new means of warfare. By changing the composition of the atmosphere, a landlocked, mountainous nation could attempt to harm by proxy a nation with developed coastlines. It would be a crime comparable to the very worst in the annals of warfare, but instead of a crime against just humanity, it would be a crime against the planet itself and all living organisms.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
The Wisdom of Hesiod
That book of Hesiod's Theogony and Works and Days proved to be a spectacular investment on my part. I was curious what a writer who lived eight hundred years before the birth of Christ would have to say. There is no doubt that any man who gathers up all of Hesiod's wisdom will become an unstoppable force. Here are some of his pearls of wisdom:
"The 21st of the month is best after sunrise; it is worse toward evening. The middle 9th is a better day toward evening; but the first 9th is altogether harmless for men."
Aha! Hesiod divined the secrets of Numerology. Just as I've always suspected, there are good numbers and bad numbers!
"When your private parts are covered with semen indoors, do not let them be seen as you go near the hearth-fire, but avoid it."
I would certainly hope so.
"Never urinate in the waters of rivers that flow to the sea."
It is impolite to those that dwell downstream.
"Invite to dinner him who is friendly, and leave your enemy be."
I only wish I had known this before. All this time, I've been inviting my enemies to dinner and leaving my friends be.
Well, these are only examples of his sage instruction. Thank you, Hesiod. So much.
#
Although Hesiod presents an easy target for modern sarcasm, I am not serious, and would never consign his books to the garbage. Don't worry! I haven't had a good excuse to wax sarcastic in quite some time, and I needed to work out some of the irritation I had endured with Hesiod. Especially Theogony. Brother! It's not easy for me to read anyway, these days, with all the television shows competing for my attention, but trying to read Theogony really slowed me down. I was reading about three pages a day, if that, and sometimes less than a page.
Hesiod was an old, dear, quaint fellow, and I read him not so much for instruction, but to satisfy my curiosity about how people lived in those days. From that angle, Hesiod was a delight, especially Works and Days. Theogony I found impenetrable, just like Numbers in the Bible. Too many "begats" and not enough action. I liked Works and Days better. Hesiod is a learned man addressing simple men and therefore has no reservation against stating the obvious. What appears obvious to a modern was not always so to an ancient, particularly the rustics who composed Hesiod's audience.
Here's an interesting insight into marriage customs of the time:
In other words, be careful and know the person before you marry her. In Hesiod's time, just as today, men were marrying women based upon looks alone. I think the advice on "a seasonable age" for both the woman and the man is designed to encourage large families. The ancients always wanted large families, the better to protect against neighboring hostile tribes. Hesiod expected men to wait until thirty to marry, because prior to that, they liked to play the field, which encompassed same-sex as well as opposite-sex relationships.
Considering the history of Ancient Greece, it is probable that Hesiod gave advice concerning same-sex relationships, as well. According to the translator, many ancient manuscripts were partial scraps. The manuscripts may have been censored by prudish monks. What we possess are, in many cases, fragments of copies of copies, translated or not. The closest Hesiod comes to advice for gays concerns men who have "a dear friend that is like a brother," and there he offers little other than "repay any wrongs with vengeance that harms twice as much," which sounds foolish, and "always forgive the transgressor who tries to make amends," which sounds more reasonable. He notes that those who change their friends often should reflect upon their own disposition rather than blaming others, which seems reasonable for his time, although nowadays, we change locations so often that it may not be convenient to maintain long-distance friendships.
"The 21st of the month is best after sunrise; it is worse toward evening. The middle 9th is a better day toward evening; but the first 9th is altogether harmless for men."
Aha! Hesiod divined the secrets of Numerology. Just as I've always suspected, there are good numbers and bad numbers!
"When your private parts are covered with semen indoors, do not let them be seen as you go near the hearth-fire, but avoid it."
I would certainly hope so.
"Never urinate in the waters of rivers that flow to the sea."
It is impolite to those that dwell downstream.
"Invite to dinner him who is friendly, and leave your enemy be."
I only wish I had known this before. All this time, I've been inviting my enemies to dinner and leaving my friends be.
Well, these are only examples of his sage instruction. Thank you, Hesiod. So much.
#
Although Hesiod presents an easy target for modern sarcasm, I am not serious, and would never consign his books to the garbage. Don't worry! I haven't had a good excuse to wax sarcastic in quite some time, and I needed to work out some of the irritation I had endured with Hesiod. Especially Theogony. Brother! It's not easy for me to read anyway, these days, with all the television shows competing for my attention, but trying to read Theogony really slowed me down. I was reading about three pages a day, if that, and sometimes less than a page.
Hesiod was an old, dear, quaint fellow, and I read him not so much for instruction, but to satisfy my curiosity about how people lived in those days. From that angle, Hesiod was a delight, especially Works and Days. Theogony I found impenetrable, just like Numbers in the Bible. Too many "begats" and not enough action. I liked Works and Days better. Hesiod is a learned man addressing simple men and therefore has no reservation against stating the obvious. What appears obvious to a modern was not always so to an ancient, particularly the rustics who composed Hesiod's audience.
Here's an interesting insight into marriage customs of the time:
In due season bring a wife into your house, when you are neither many years short of thirty nor many beyond it: this is your seasonable marriage. As for the woman, she should have four years of menstruation and be married in the fifth. Marry a virgin so that you may teach her good ways; and for preference marry her who lives near you, with all circumspection in case your marriage is a joke to the neighbors. For a man acquires nothing better than the good wife, and nothing worse than the bad one, the glutton, who singes a man without a brand, strong though he may be, and consigns him to premature old age.
In other words, be careful and know the person before you marry her. In Hesiod's time, just as today, men were marrying women based upon looks alone. I think the advice on "a seasonable age" for both the woman and the man is designed to encourage large families. The ancients always wanted large families, the better to protect against neighboring hostile tribes. Hesiod expected men to wait until thirty to marry, because prior to that, they liked to play the field, which encompassed same-sex as well as opposite-sex relationships.
Considering the history of Ancient Greece, it is probable that Hesiod gave advice concerning same-sex relationships, as well. According to the translator, many ancient manuscripts were partial scraps. The manuscripts may have been censored by prudish monks. What we possess are, in many cases, fragments of copies of copies, translated or not. The closest Hesiod comes to advice for gays concerns men who have "a dear friend that is like a brother," and there he offers little other than "repay any wrongs with vengeance that harms twice as much," which sounds foolish, and "always forgive the transgressor who tries to make amends," which sounds more reasonable. He notes that those who change their friends often should reflect upon their own disposition rather than blaming others, which seems reasonable for his time, although nowadays, we change locations so often that it may not be convenient to maintain long-distance friendships.
Teachers I've Known
In the tenth grade, I transferred from a public school to a small, Christian private school. A minority of people argue that such schools are better. I would say that sometimes they are, and sometimes they aren't. It depends on the school.
As for the Christian component, it was not overbearing. We had a chaplain on campus who taught the smaller kids and acted as the vice principal, but he was out of touch with the students. He disliked me from the first, because I disliked those orders of his that I thought were harsh or unnecessary. He felt that I should go along without a murmur in every event, which was a fundamental disagreement between us. After a few incidents and the intervention of the principal, a ceasefire was arranged. Over time, the chaplain learned that I was easier to manage than the others, just as long as he did not act overbearing. It was just a question of style. He tweaked his style and learned to smile once in a while, instead of frowning all the time as he had been in the habit of doing. Before I left the school, we shook hands and wished each other well, and I think that was a satisfactory outcome.
Our principal was pretty good. I liked him. A lifelong bachelor, he was probably gay, but a conservative Christian and closeted gay, if you can wrap your mind around that. He had a photo of himself shaking hands with a Republican President. I liked him because he was kind and understanding, yet also firm enough to keep order. A softie, he wasn't. He also knew more than your average squirrel and taught me a thing or two whenever he substituted for a missing teacher, which was often in our school. His specialty was language, and he knew grammar through and through. I always viewed him as the knight in shining armor, among everyone else in the school. Without exception, all the teachers liked him, and I suspect the parents and students did, too.
Most of the ills of the school were the result of an insufficient budget. The principal did the best he could, but salaries were nowhere near what teachers could earn in public schools. This meant that we got unlicensed teachers who had not yet completed their education, as well as the dregs of the surrounding schools, those who had been fired from other schools for misconduct or a disagreement of some sort or another. The student body was composed of the same sort, including yours truly.
I had an alcoholic French teacher, for instance, who showed up to class sloshed once in a while. Her favorite expression, which punctuated any bad French translation offered by a student, was "merdez-moo!" which supposedly meant "bulls---". This was repeated enough times that I remember and sometimes use the phrase to this day, although not in my writing, because readers wouldn't understand. Her story was that her only son had put a bullet in his brain. She was over the hill, divorced and alone and figured nothing really mattered all that much anymore. She liked me and, in my senior year, would sometimes loan me the keys to her car to pick up food from Taco Bell at lunch. I don't remember ever abusing her trust, although I was tempted. It just seemed too easy to do and I felt she had had enough trouble, all things considered. The boys liked her, but instead of studying French, they preferred to study her camel-toe in class. You can say, "she should have been fired," but that is easier said than done. It is not such a simple matter to replace a French teacher. However, the other teachers disapproved of her, as you can well imagine, and gossip made the rounds, increasing in nastiness until she had to be fired. I think that women can be harsh critics of other women, even more often than of men, for some reason having to do with competition. Yes, she deserved to be fired, but then again, so did some of the male teachers. After that, I think the school went without a foreign language for a while. It didn't make all that much difference to the academic integrity of the school.
Another teacher was a grumpy old man who had issues with anger. If anyone deserved to be fired, it was him most of all. He taught social studies and history, but knew next to nothing and did little more than read from the textbook. I have no idea why he ever entered the profession of teaching, other than unemployment. He was one of the worst teachers I ever had, and I pitied the many boys who ran afoul of the old man's temper. The man knew better than to assault female students, because that would have resulted in serious complications. He was known to seize a boy by the collar, shake him, throw him to the floor, slap and claw like an animal, and scream in his face like a drill sergeant. Sometimes the boy might have said or done nothing at all to deserve this treatment, if it is ever deserved. I was a victim of his wrath once, but only once, but I don't remember the circumstances, and believe that he was lighter on me than on others, just screaming and nothing else. I learned to place myself in a strategic location in the classroom. Like most ogres, his vision was poor, so I placed myself far in the back behind a taller person. I wore dark colors, gray or black, like a ninja, and got into the habit of slouching deep in my chair to appear smaller and less conspicuous. The main thing was staying out of his sight and not saying anything at all or making any kind of noise or any kind of movement. I slept with eyes open in his class, daydreaming until it was over. It was not necessary to pay attention, because his tests were all open-book, and everyone always passed, usually with an "A". The man might have had a problem with his temper, but he was no fool. He didn't want students to make any serious complaints that might jeopardize his job.
Sometimes, a boy appealed to the principal. In such a case, the principal would visit the classroom to ask the teacher for more information, but in reality he was studying the faces of the students to determine whether the teacher had "gone off" again or whether the boy really had been provocative, as sometimes happened. This teacher was given warnings several times. His outbursts did become less frequent, although he remained grumpy and unapproachable. He had a stroke and was forced to resign due to medical issues. I think he died soon after. No one missed him, although some of us remembered his classes as being easy and even entertaining in their own way. As I thought all of the classes were equally easy, I was glad he was gone.
Another teacher I remember was a short, balding, middle-aged man who moonlighted as a gumshoe for suspicious wives and husbands. He was popular among the students, because the boys liked to work for him. He paid the boys minimum wage to sit in a car for hours and just watch people, which is a pretty easy job, but with the boys at my school, I imagine they goofed off rather than do a good job of watching anyone. I wanted to join these stakeouts, but the teacher had already had grievous experiences hiring students, and was not willing to take a chance on any new people. I believe he lost a couple of clients due to botched investigations.
At any rate, one day he became fed up and decided to quit. I think he was displeased with the students who worked for him, because I don't remember the girls or myself giving him any problems in class. The way he went about quitting was unique among teachers. He did not just give two weeks' notice and bow out in silence. Instead, he came to class one day and told all of us how rotten we were, and how he despaired of ever teaching us anything, because we were all a bunch of dunderheads, although he used a profane term. Indeed, his entire lecture was punctuated with profanity. He said we were all going to be losers in life and there was no hope at all, and he was washing his hands of us. He said we would all end up bagging groceries for a living or digging ditches. He abandoned all pretense of teaching, using the entire class period to insult the students, although he didn't insult his fellow teachers or the principal. In his view, the students were to blame for everything.
Late in his monologue, he was interrupted by the principal, who suggested in a quiet voice that he leave the premises. He wanted no dispute with our principal, who was considered a good man by all. In fact, I think the intervention of the principal was like an intervention from Heaven itself, because the man had second thoughts, and began to regret his words. Before he left, he apologized to the class and said he didn't mean any of what he had said earlier.
Although he didn't teach a formal lesson, he did teach us an important lesson, all the same. A lesson of how not to quit a job. He admitted to this with disarming candor, "I've burned my bridges here at this school, but I hope none of you do as I have done, because it's probably not the brightest thing for a man to do." I never followed his tact in later life. Wherever possible, before leaving a job, I gave two weeks' notice and tried to maintain a civil tone. There is no point in wasting breath on people that in all likelihood one will never see again. Just say good-bye and collect the last check. Work is called business for a reason. It's not drama school. Collect the money and go. Case closed.
The other teachers were less colorful, which is to say normal and not all that noteworthy. They tried to teach their assigned classes, instead of using the classroom as a personal therapy session to deal with anger, depression or anxiety. One was a bright young attractive woman whose husband managed a grocery store, and I thought that might be of help vis-a-vis my getting a job. More than anything, I wanted to make money to pay for a car, the dream of all teenagers. Her husband's grocery store, moreover, paid a handsomer wage than the grocery store near my house. I asked her if she would recommend me to her husband. While she claimed that she did, no offer of an interview ever materialized.
Another teacher always seemed to be smiling. In retrospect, she was probably on some kind of psychiatric medication. I liked her and, because of her habit of smiling to everyone, I assumed for a long time that she also liked me. We had a misunderstanding one day that reversed my assumption. I was in the schoolyard minding my own business, but I had a cold and was taking medication for it, making no secret of the fact. She sneaked up on me from behind, seized my arm, and accused me of selling drugs. Of course, I showed her the tabs where the medicine had come from. Nevertheless, she took me to the principal's office, and either the principal or she called my parents. My parents were both at work, however. I am not sure how much time passed, possibly a day or two, but eventually it was confirmed that I was taking medication for my cold. This defused the situation, although I never received any apology. But after that incident, I realized that I was tainted by being a student at this school. With the possible exception of the fired French teacher, none of the teachers trusted any of us and they tended to think the worst of us in any event. That was an intrinsic part of the school's culture, a meme shared by all of the teachers to varying degrees. Some resisted this meme better than others, but it was pervasive and inescapable. Even the good teachers succumbed to it.
As for the Christian component, it was not overbearing. We had a chaplain on campus who taught the smaller kids and acted as the vice principal, but he was out of touch with the students. He disliked me from the first, because I disliked those orders of his that I thought were harsh or unnecessary. He felt that I should go along without a murmur in every event, which was a fundamental disagreement between us. After a few incidents and the intervention of the principal, a ceasefire was arranged. Over time, the chaplain learned that I was easier to manage than the others, just as long as he did not act overbearing. It was just a question of style. He tweaked his style and learned to smile once in a while, instead of frowning all the time as he had been in the habit of doing. Before I left the school, we shook hands and wished each other well, and I think that was a satisfactory outcome.
Our principal was pretty good. I liked him. A lifelong bachelor, he was probably gay, but a conservative Christian and closeted gay, if you can wrap your mind around that. He had a photo of himself shaking hands with a Republican President. I liked him because he was kind and understanding, yet also firm enough to keep order. A softie, he wasn't. He also knew more than your average squirrel and taught me a thing or two whenever he substituted for a missing teacher, which was often in our school. His specialty was language, and he knew grammar through and through. I always viewed him as the knight in shining armor, among everyone else in the school. Without exception, all the teachers liked him, and I suspect the parents and students did, too.
Most of the ills of the school were the result of an insufficient budget. The principal did the best he could, but salaries were nowhere near what teachers could earn in public schools. This meant that we got unlicensed teachers who had not yet completed their education, as well as the dregs of the surrounding schools, those who had been fired from other schools for misconduct or a disagreement of some sort or another. The student body was composed of the same sort, including yours truly.
I had an alcoholic French teacher, for instance, who showed up to class sloshed once in a while. Her favorite expression, which punctuated any bad French translation offered by a student, was "merdez-moo!" which supposedly meant "bulls---". This was repeated enough times that I remember and sometimes use the phrase to this day, although not in my writing, because readers wouldn't understand. Her story was that her only son had put a bullet in his brain. She was over the hill, divorced and alone and figured nothing really mattered all that much anymore. She liked me and, in my senior year, would sometimes loan me the keys to her car to pick up food from Taco Bell at lunch. I don't remember ever abusing her trust, although I was tempted. It just seemed too easy to do and I felt she had had enough trouble, all things considered. The boys liked her, but instead of studying French, they preferred to study her camel-toe in class. You can say, "she should have been fired," but that is easier said than done. It is not such a simple matter to replace a French teacher. However, the other teachers disapproved of her, as you can well imagine, and gossip made the rounds, increasing in nastiness until she had to be fired. I think that women can be harsh critics of other women, even more often than of men, for some reason having to do with competition. Yes, she deserved to be fired, but then again, so did some of the male teachers. After that, I think the school went without a foreign language for a while. It didn't make all that much difference to the academic integrity of the school.
Another teacher was a grumpy old man who had issues with anger. If anyone deserved to be fired, it was him most of all. He taught social studies and history, but knew next to nothing and did little more than read from the textbook. I have no idea why he ever entered the profession of teaching, other than unemployment. He was one of the worst teachers I ever had, and I pitied the many boys who ran afoul of the old man's temper. The man knew better than to assault female students, because that would have resulted in serious complications. He was known to seize a boy by the collar, shake him, throw him to the floor, slap and claw like an animal, and scream in his face like a drill sergeant. Sometimes the boy might have said or done nothing at all to deserve this treatment, if it is ever deserved. I was a victim of his wrath once, but only once, but I don't remember the circumstances, and believe that he was lighter on me than on others, just screaming and nothing else. I learned to place myself in a strategic location in the classroom. Like most ogres, his vision was poor, so I placed myself far in the back behind a taller person. I wore dark colors, gray or black, like a ninja, and got into the habit of slouching deep in my chair to appear smaller and less conspicuous. The main thing was staying out of his sight and not saying anything at all or making any kind of noise or any kind of movement. I slept with eyes open in his class, daydreaming until it was over. It was not necessary to pay attention, because his tests were all open-book, and everyone always passed, usually with an "A". The man might have had a problem with his temper, but he was no fool. He didn't want students to make any serious complaints that might jeopardize his job.
Sometimes, a boy appealed to the principal. In such a case, the principal would visit the classroom to ask the teacher for more information, but in reality he was studying the faces of the students to determine whether the teacher had "gone off" again or whether the boy really had been provocative, as sometimes happened. This teacher was given warnings several times. His outbursts did become less frequent, although he remained grumpy and unapproachable. He had a stroke and was forced to resign due to medical issues. I think he died soon after. No one missed him, although some of us remembered his classes as being easy and even entertaining in their own way. As I thought all of the classes were equally easy, I was glad he was gone.
Another teacher I remember was a short, balding, middle-aged man who moonlighted as a gumshoe for suspicious wives and husbands. He was popular among the students, because the boys liked to work for him. He paid the boys minimum wage to sit in a car for hours and just watch people, which is a pretty easy job, but with the boys at my school, I imagine they goofed off rather than do a good job of watching anyone. I wanted to join these stakeouts, but the teacher had already had grievous experiences hiring students, and was not willing to take a chance on any new people. I believe he lost a couple of clients due to botched investigations.
At any rate, one day he became fed up and decided to quit. I think he was displeased with the students who worked for him, because I don't remember the girls or myself giving him any problems in class. The way he went about quitting was unique among teachers. He did not just give two weeks' notice and bow out in silence. Instead, he came to class one day and told all of us how rotten we were, and how he despaired of ever teaching us anything, because we were all a bunch of dunderheads, although he used a profane term. Indeed, his entire lecture was punctuated with profanity. He said we were all going to be losers in life and there was no hope at all, and he was washing his hands of us. He said we would all end up bagging groceries for a living or digging ditches. He abandoned all pretense of teaching, using the entire class period to insult the students, although he didn't insult his fellow teachers or the principal. In his view, the students were to blame for everything.
Late in his monologue, he was interrupted by the principal, who suggested in a quiet voice that he leave the premises. He wanted no dispute with our principal, who was considered a good man by all. In fact, I think the intervention of the principal was like an intervention from Heaven itself, because the man had second thoughts, and began to regret his words. Before he left, he apologized to the class and said he didn't mean any of what he had said earlier.
Although he didn't teach a formal lesson, he did teach us an important lesson, all the same. A lesson of how not to quit a job. He admitted to this with disarming candor, "I've burned my bridges here at this school, but I hope none of you do as I have done, because it's probably not the brightest thing for a man to do." I never followed his tact in later life. Wherever possible, before leaving a job, I gave two weeks' notice and tried to maintain a civil tone. There is no point in wasting breath on people that in all likelihood one will never see again. Just say good-bye and collect the last check. Work is called business for a reason. It's not drama school. Collect the money and go. Case closed.
The other teachers were less colorful, which is to say normal and not all that noteworthy. They tried to teach their assigned classes, instead of using the classroom as a personal therapy session to deal with anger, depression or anxiety. One was a bright young attractive woman whose husband managed a grocery store, and I thought that might be of help vis-a-vis my getting a job. More than anything, I wanted to make money to pay for a car, the dream of all teenagers. Her husband's grocery store, moreover, paid a handsomer wage than the grocery store near my house. I asked her if she would recommend me to her husband. While she claimed that she did, no offer of an interview ever materialized.
Another teacher always seemed to be smiling. In retrospect, she was probably on some kind of psychiatric medication. I liked her and, because of her habit of smiling to everyone, I assumed for a long time that she also liked me. We had a misunderstanding one day that reversed my assumption. I was in the schoolyard minding my own business, but I had a cold and was taking medication for it, making no secret of the fact. She sneaked up on me from behind, seized my arm, and accused me of selling drugs. Of course, I showed her the tabs where the medicine had come from. Nevertheless, she took me to the principal's office, and either the principal or she called my parents. My parents were both at work, however. I am not sure how much time passed, possibly a day or two, but eventually it was confirmed that I was taking medication for my cold. This defused the situation, although I never received any apology. But after that incident, I realized that I was tainted by being a student at this school. With the possible exception of the fired French teacher, none of the teachers trusted any of us and they tended to think the worst of us in any event. That was an intrinsic part of the school's culture, a meme shared by all of the teachers to varying degrees. Some resisted this meme better than others, but it was pervasive and inescapable. Even the good teachers succumbed to it.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Meth or Math
In what may be a sign of aging, I misread this headline:
I thought it said "math ring," and I thought students were cheating on the SAT or GRE somehow. When I discovered it was meth, I lost interest. Boring. Math is the more interesting subject by far. Meth rhymes with death for a reason.
If the above article holds no interest for me, at least it jogged my thoughts on the subject of test-taking. My score on the SAT was not great. I made a 1200 on the second attempt, after months of practicing. Meanwhile, some of my friends scored in the 1300s. I even heard of a neighbor who scored pretty close to 1600, which used to be the perfect score, although the test has changed over time. On the strength of his SAT score, he went on to win a four-year scholarship to an Ivy League college, complete with a stipend to cover living expenses.
Although my score was high enough to allow entry into a state college, it precluded the Ivy League and any kind of scholarship. After a period of disappointment, I moved on. We can't choose our fate. Besides, brains aren't everything. Then, too, I thought about the majority of people who scored less than 1200. Did my score make me any better than them? If that were so, then my score also made me less than all those people who scored higher. So I put the number out of my thoughts.
When I was in middle school, I took a test in order to get into the gifted program. I squeaked by with a 89.7% score, where the cutoff was 89.5%. My best friend failed to get in, because he only scored an 89.3%. This was a huge disappointment for him, because he had ambition like I have philosophy. However, it was not as great a matter as he feared at the time. Thirty years later, he had established a successful career in law and is now a millionaire.
I thought it said "math ring," and I thought students were cheating on the SAT or GRE somehow. When I discovered it was meth, I lost interest. Boring. Math is the more interesting subject by far. Meth rhymes with death for a reason.
If the above article holds no interest for me, at least it jogged my thoughts on the subject of test-taking. My score on the SAT was not great. I made a 1200 on the second attempt, after months of practicing. Meanwhile, some of my friends scored in the 1300s. I even heard of a neighbor who scored pretty close to 1600, which used to be the perfect score, although the test has changed over time. On the strength of his SAT score, he went on to win a four-year scholarship to an Ivy League college, complete with a stipend to cover living expenses.
Although my score was high enough to allow entry into a state college, it precluded the Ivy League and any kind of scholarship. After a period of disappointment, I moved on. We can't choose our fate. Besides, brains aren't everything. Then, too, I thought about the majority of people who scored less than 1200. Did my score make me any better than them? If that were so, then my score also made me less than all those people who scored higher. So I put the number out of my thoughts.
When I was in middle school, I took a test in order to get into the gifted program. I squeaked by with a 89.7% score, where the cutoff was 89.5%. My best friend failed to get in, because he only scored an 89.3%. This was a huge disappointment for him, because he had ambition like I have philosophy. However, it was not as great a matter as he feared at the time. Thirty years later, he had established a successful career in law and is now a millionaire.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Tepid Support for Afghanistan
Is it just me, or is this a tepid endorsement of the war? I can't imagine how the writer could have made a less persuasive case. Almost every paragraph contains the seed of doubt. This may be a case of British sarcasm deceiving American credulity. If so, my bad.
Friday, August 21, 2009
The Universe as a Body
I've been reading Hesiod's "Theogony", and after a chapter on gods and the origin of things, I got to thinking about theology. I decided to write a new theology. Behold the theology of "Omni". Remember that in theology, logic is unnecessary. Theology only explains. It does not need to make sense.
What if each human being is a part of a collective body that includes all things? The Universe, instead of being an assembly of particles, may be a vast, single, living, conscious and self-aware organism. I may be unaware of the greater entity, just as a cell in my body is unaware of me. The individual cell serves the perceived interest of the greater entity even to the detriment of its own interest. "E pluribus unum."
The Universe operates in an environment larger than the one we have seen. We see only its body. As within ourselves, irrationality is in the core nature of the Universe, which explains the bizarre effects noted in quantum theory.
If the greater unit were perfect, then we, the smaller components, would also be perfect, but we are not, and the Universe, which comprises us and everything else, is not, either. The being suffers from its own peculiar species of ailments, just as we do. This leads to disturbances such as black holes. The Universe is neither omnipotent nor omniscient. As we suffer, so does the Universe suffer from problems for which it has no solutions. There is a plan, which evolves as do plans within the human mind, but this plan is not infallible.
What if each human being is a part of a collective body that includes all things? The Universe, instead of being an assembly of particles, may be a vast, single, living, conscious and self-aware organism. I may be unaware of the greater entity, just as a cell in my body is unaware of me. The individual cell serves the perceived interest of the greater entity even to the detriment of its own interest. "E pluribus unum."
The Universe operates in an environment larger than the one we have seen. We see only its body. As within ourselves, irrationality is in the core nature of the Universe, which explains the bizarre effects noted in quantum theory.
If the greater unit were perfect, then we, the smaller components, would also be perfect, but we are not, and the Universe, which comprises us and everything else, is not, either. The being suffers from its own peculiar species of ailments, just as we do. This leads to disturbances such as black holes. The Universe is neither omnipotent nor omniscient. As we suffer, so does the Universe suffer from problems for which it has no solutions. There is a plan, which evolves as do plans within the human mind, but this plan is not infallible.
A Tale of Two Stories
Two stories are making the rounds in the media. Both concern individuals who claim, with different degrees of validity, that they were attacked because they are gay. Which receives the most coverage? Guess.
The former Survivor celebrity garners the most media attention by a ratio of 50:1.
The former Survivor celebrity garners the most media attention by a ratio of 50:1.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
The Braggart
I remember the Braggart with amusement. He was taller than me and certainly stronger due to his weightlifting. He had close-cropped hair and walked with a military bearing, chest out. Much of what he said was either boastful or designed to make another person look inferior, which is why I came to think of him as the Braggart. He would only smile if another was in distress. Never was he pleased if others were doing well, unless the other was his supervisor. He paid close attention to his supervisor and tried to please him.
With me, he waged psychological warfare. To anything I said, he would have an acid remark. For instance, when I considered donating to the company blood drive, he expressed his hope that the nurse would rip up my veins with the needle. Upon suspecting I was gay, he remarked to a colleague, "homosexuality is sick--what's next, incest and bestiality?" while looking straight into my eyes. I refused to be baited.
Another time, the Braggart planted the seed of suspicion in our supervisor's mind that I had stolen from our supervisor's desk a book. I did not make a denial, because I was not accused outright. The rumor made the rounds, but nothing more came of it. To this day, I am of the opinion that the Braggart stole the book and blamed me for the theft. But no matter. Sometimes, small matters appear large due to their proximity to us.
Another time, the Braggart hid in ambush for me behind a cubicle wall, and as I walked past, he jumped out and barked like a dog, laughing at my surprise. To this, I said in a loud voice, "What are you trying to do, give me a heart attack here?" Others poked their heads above the cubicle walls to look. Embarrassed, the Braggart never tried that particular trick again.
Over time, my general policy of avoidance paid dividends. The Braggart attacked me less and less, because I was not fun sport. He could expect little or no reaction from me. His attacks seemed ineffectual and sometimes earned an admonishment from others. Therefore, he relaxed over time and no longer thought of me as his enemy. Meanwhile, my competence became clearer to others, including our supervisor, as I completed numerous and varied work assignments. As time passed, he came to ask me questions and ask for my advice, which pleased me. I must admit, I was not quite as helpful to him as I could have been, say, with a colleague that I respected. But there were other times that I did come to his rescue, just for the satisfaction of hearing him thank me within earshot of our supervisor.
I knew that, besides being an oaf, the Braggart was a lousy programmer. My competence was like a knife twisting in his side. He could not be happy in this job that we were doing. One day a senior programmer who had been around forever and knew everything about everything exploded in the Braggart's face. He yelled at the Braggart that he was stupid as hell, besides being a damned fool. After the old man had left, the Braggart complained to our supervisor over the harsh words he had been dealt.
The Braggart survived much longer than I expected, thriving upon the sympathy of higher-ups, but he did not out-survive me. My supervisors found one excuse or another to transfer him to another department. He did not perform well in the new position either. Later he left the company. I understand that his marriage fell apart as well due to his marital infidelity, leaving him with a substantial monthly alimony bill.
The moral of the story is that it is not necessary to confront every belligerent. Sometimes, if one steps aside, they will continue on their path until they careen straight over a precipice.
With me, he waged psychological warfare. To anything I said, he would have an acid remark. For instance, when I considered donating to the company blood drive, he expressed his hope that the nurse would rip up my veins with the needle. Upon suspecting I was gay, he remarked to a colleague, "homosexuality is sick--what's next, incest and bestiality?" while looking straight into my eyes. I refused to be baited.
Another time, the Braggart planted the seed of suspicion in our supervisor's mind that I had stolen from our supervisor's desk a book. I did not make a denial, because I was not accused outright. The rumor made the rounds, but nothing more came of it. To this day, I am of the opinion that the Braggart stole the book and blamed me for the theft. But no matter. Sometimes, small matters appear large due to their proximity to us.
Another time, the Braggart hid in ambush for me behind a cubicle wall, and as I walked past, he jumped out and barked like a dog, laughing at my surprise. To this, I said in a loud voice, "What are you trying to do, give me a heart attack here?" Others poked their heads above the cubicle walls to look. Embarrassed, the Braggart never tried that particular trick again.
Over time, my general policy of avoidance paid dividends. The Braggart attacked me less and less, because I was not fun sport. He could expect little or no reaction from me. His attacks seemed ineffectual and sometimes earned an admonishment from others. Therefore, he relaxed over time and no longer thought of me as his enemy. Meanwhile, my competence became clearer to others, including our supervisor, as I completed numerous and varied work assignments. As time passed, he came to ask me questions and ask for my advice, which pleased me. I must admit, I was not quite as helpful to him as I could have been, say, with a colleague that I respected. But there were other times that I did come to his rescue, just for the satisfaction of hearing him thank me within earshot of our supervisor.
I knew that, besides being an oaf, the Braggart was a lousy programmer. My competence was like a knife twisting in his side. He could not be happy in this job that we were doing. One day a senior programmer who had been around forever and knew everything about everything exploded in the Braggart's face. He yelled at the Braggart that he was stupid as hell, besides being a damned fool. After the old man had left, the Braggart complained to our supervisor over the harsh words he had been dealt.
The Braggart survived much longer than I expected, thriving upon the sympathy of higher-ups, but he did not out-survive me. My supervisors found one excuse or another to transfer him to another department. He did not perform well in the new position either. Later he left the company. I understand that his marriage fell apart as well due to his marital infidelity, leaving him with a substantial monthly alimony bill.
The moral of the story is that it is not necessary to confront every belligerent. Sometimes, if one steps aside, they will continue on their path until they careen straight over a precipice.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
James Buchanan, First Gay President?
After watching the History Channel's "Presidents" miniseries of shows, I'm persuaded that James Buchanan, our 15th U.S. President, was gay.
A lifelong bachelor, he lived with a man for many years, and the two of them were referred to as "Aunt Nancies." They hobnobbed with a group of other dandies. No conclusive evidence, I grant, but one is unlikely to find conclusive evidence; had there been any, he would have been denied the Presidency.
It is possible that Buchanan went along with slavery in part due to blackmail by those Washington insiders who knew incriminating details about his personal life. This leads me to the following observation.
In societies where homosexuality is not tolerated, gays are subject to blackmail. This offers another argument in favor of toleration. Gays will always be with us. If they can be open about their sexuality, then they are just as safe from blackmail as their heterosexual counterparts. To bring this issue home, gays serving in the U.S. military are subject to blackmail at this time due to the so-called "Don't Ask / Don't Tell" policy. It would be wise to eliminate that policy along with all of the other policies that seek to meddle in the sex lives of our troops. Otherwise, blackmail remains a potent risk.
Getting back to the issue of James Buchanan, I do not believe that he was our first gay President, as the show suggested. He was our second.
A lifelong bachelor, he lived with a man for many years, and the two of them were referred to as "Aunt Nancies." They hobnobbed with a group of other dandies. No conclusive evidence, I grant, but one is unlikely to find conclusive evidence; had there been any, he would have been denied the Presidency.
It is possible that Buchanan went along with slavery in part due to blackmail by those Washington insiders who knew incriminating details about his personal life. This leads me to the following observation.
In societies where homosexuality is not tolerated, gays are subject to blackmail. This offers another argument in favor of toleration. Gays will always be with us. If they can be open about their sexuality, then they are just as safe from blackmail as their heterosexual counterparts. To bring this issue home, gays serving in the U.S. military are subject to blackmail at this time due to the so-called "Don't Ask / Don't Tell" policy. It would be wise to eliminate that policy along with all of the other policies that seek to meddle in the sex lives of our troops. Otherwise, blackmail remains a potent risk.
Getting back to the issue of James Buchanan, I do not believe that he was our first gay President, as the show suggested. He was our second.
Profitability
Profitability has long been a dominant force in the world. Men do what makes money, not necessarily what is good for all.
If a means could be found to harness the power of fusion energy, and energy became so abundant as to be almost free of cost, then the system of commerce might become obsolete. Imagine a world that is fully automated, with all tasks being performed by robots that manufacture and repair themselves. What need would humans then have to sell their labor? Instead, we could each do the work that we love to do, or not as the case may be, without ever a thought of profit. This flies in the face of the assumption made by many, that greed is a necessary component of human nature. Is it?
If a means could be found to harness the power of fusion energy, and energy became so abundant as to be almost free of cost, then the system of commerce might become obsolete. Imagine a world that is fully automated, with all tasks being performed by robots that manufacture and repair themselves. What need would humans then have to sell their labor? Instead, we could each do the work that we love to do, or not as the case may be, without ever a thought of profit. This flies in the face of the assumption made by many, that greed is a necessary component of human nature. Is it?
Computer Problems Can Be Life or Death
This article on CNN demonstrates that computer problems can make the difference between life and death.
What was the precise nature of the "computer problems" in this legal case? It would be interesting to know. Other professionals could then take measures to prevent a similar scenario from arising in the future. Too often the mainstream media makes the assumption that nobody cares about the technical details. Details matter a great deal in this technological world of ours.
I'm reminded of the media's handling of scientific research papers. Often they provide just the conclusions of the researchers. Such conclusions may go too far. In order to evaluate scientific research, readers require additional information about the experiments performed. Not all research is created equal, and just because a new scientific finding issues forth from a prestigious institution does not make it golden.
The New York Times has superior writing than any television-oriented company like CNN, where I found the article above. This is why I prefer to click on articles that are from newspapers, rather than television. I'm not sure why newspapers make their content available free of charge on the web, but I'm glad that they do. I hope that a system can be developed whereby quality newspapers like the NYT can survive and be profitable.
What was the precise nature of the "computer problems" in this legal case? It would be interesting to know. Other professionals could then take measures to prevent a similar scenario from arising in the future. Too often the mainstream media makes the assumption that nobody cares about the technical details. Details matter a great deal in this technological world of ours.
I'm reminded of the media's handling of scientific research papers. Often they provide just the conclusions of the researchers. Such conclusions may go too far. In order to evaluate scientific research, readers require additional information about the experiments performed. Not all research is created equal, and just because a new scientific finding issues forth from a prestigious institution does not make it golden.
The New York Times has superior writing than any television-oriented company like CNN, where I found the article above. This is why I prefer to click on articles that are from newspapers, rather than television. I'm not sure why newspapers make their content available free of charge on the web, but I'm glad that they do. I hope that a system can be developed whereby quality newspapers like the NYT can survive and be profitable.
Monday, August 17, 2009
The History Channel's "Evolve" Series
I've been watching the History Channel's 11-part "Evolve" series, each of which covers a different aspect of evolution--size, flight, skin, sex, and so on. I liked the concept of the show and had high hopes for it.
The show plays more like a music video than a science documentary. On the hypothesis that their audience suffers from ADD, "Evolve" does not allow any one human being to speak for more than thirty seconds. The show zips from clip to clip, possibly because the producers are terrified that their audience will get bored with the science. Well, the science is not boring, but their writing is. They are forever stating the obvious. For instance, in the "Flight" episode, they define what it means to fly. Ever seen a bird before? All right then. Also, there is distracting muzak playing in the background. I found myself listening to the muzak rather than the narrative and soon became lost. Finally, the producers employ a number of fancy tricks using digital technology, which better suits music videos. It seems to me that their graphic technicians are showing off just for the sake of showing off. Technology has its place, but should be used in moderation.
Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer a documentary with a learned host, like David Attenborough. Gray hair is a plus. A host functions like a teacher, which is how most of us got our education in the first place. A teacher is a good thing. Don't discard the teacher! Nothing is better than a good teacher!
"Evolve" is by no means alone. Many of the latest science documentaries have this tawdry music video flavor about them. If this keeps up, it could prove a boon for the book market.
The show plays more like a music video than a science documentary. On the hypothesis that their audience suffers from ADD, "Evolve" does not allow any one human being to speak for more than thirty seconds. The show zips from clip to clip, possibly because the producers are terrified that their audience will get bored with the science. Well, the science is not boring, but their writing is. They are forever stating the obvious. For instance, in the "Flight" episode, they define what it means to fly. Ever seen a bird before? All right then. Also, there is distracting muzak playing in the background. I found myself listening to the muzak rather than the narrative and soon became lost. Finally, the producers employ a number of fancy tricks using digital technology, which better suits music videos. It seems to me that their graphic technicians are showing off just for the sake of showing off. Technology has its place, but should be used in moderation.
Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer a documentary with a learned host, like David Attenborough. Gray hair is a plus. A host functions like a teacher, which is how most of us got our education in the first place. A teacher is a good thing. Don't discard the teacher! Nothing is better than a good teacher!
"Evolve" is by no means alone. Many of the latest science documentaries have this tawdry music video flavor about them. If this keeps up, it could prove a boon for the book market.
The Gay Travel Agency
Once upon a time, I was browsing through a gay newspaper when I saw a big, splashy ad for a sweepstakes for a free one-week vacation for two to the Carribean. I entered and won. As the official winner, my name was printed in the paper in another advertisement.
The terms of the sweepstakes were that I could choose to take the vacation anytime. All I had to do was call them up and book the trip. So I did. The travel agent asked me when I wanted to take my vacation. I said, "Whenever. Anytime at all that is available, how about that?"
"Fred handles the sweepstakes, but I'm afraid he's not in the office right at the moment. He'll call you back as soon as he gets in." Thus began a game of phone tag that persisted for weeks.
The travel agency was located a good fifty miles away, but I drove out there to speak to the gentlemen in person. Once again, Fred wasn't in the office, as luck would have it, but I had taken the day off from work and wasn't leaving until some sort of arrangement was worked out. When I made my position clear, that's when the story changed. "Oh, you waited too long to redeem your vacation prize. Sorry, but the offer has expired."
This is one reason that I no longer make a point of patronizing gay-owned businesses. All it takes is getting ripped off once to realize that all the talk about keeping dollars within the community is just self-serving propaganda for the gay business owner. Good for them, but not necessarily good for the gay customer.
At any rate, in what might have been a case of poetic justice, the travel agency went bust about three years later. I imagine their philosophy about how to treat people came back to haunt them later.
The terms of the sweepstakes were that I could choose to take the vacation anytime. All I had to do was call them up and book the trip. So I did. The travel agent asked me when I wanted to take my vacation. I said, "Whenever. Anytime at all that is available, how about that?"
"Fred handles the sweepstakes, but I'm afraid he's not in the office right at the moment. He'll call you back as soon as he gets in." Thus began a game of phone tag that persisted for weeks.
The travel agency was located a good fifty miles away, but I drove out there to speak to the gentlemen in person. Once again, Fred wasn't in the office, as luck would have it, but I had taken the day off from work and wasn't leaving until some sort of arrangement was worked out. When I made my position clear, that's when the story changed. "Oh, you waited too long to redeem your vacation prize. Sorry, but the offer has expired."
This is one reason that I no longer make a point of patronizing gay-owned businesses. All it takes is getting ripped off once to realize that all the talk about keeping dollars within the community is just self-serving propaganda for the gay business owner. Good for them, but not necessarily good for the gay customer.
At any rate, in what might have been a case of poetic justice, the travel agency went bust about three years later. I imagine their philosophy about how to treat people came back to haunt them later.
Save Money on Air Conditioning Costs
In a July 21st, 2009 interview on The Daily Show, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu offered a practical suggestion that people can use today in order to reduce energy costs. Choose white tiles for a roof, instead of black. The cost is nil, while the energy savings amount to at least five per cent, because the white tiles reflect solar energy back into space, saving on air conditioning costs.
Is Government Too Incompetent?
If government is too incompetent to run health care, as Republicans claim, then surely it cannot wage war, which is a vastly more complicated business. To be consistent, Republicans must oppose all foreign engagements and demand the instant withdrawal of U.S. troops. Because government is just too wasteful, isn't it? Besides, the military is a socialist institution, and socialism is bad. What we need is a private army funded by Republican donors--the same armchair generals that get excited over the prospect of killing foreigners.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Kodak Easyshare and Backups
Kodak Easyshare has a backup option, but it will not allow you to backup to any other than a local drive. However, not every PC contains multiple drives. In fact, most don't. I prefer to backup to a networked drive, but Kodak won't let me:
When creating a backup, it is essential to store data on a separate and distinct PC. This is because a computer can be destroyed or stolen. A virus or other computer glitch can eradicate the entire file system. If you are backing up files to the same PC, it is not without value; but it carries greater risk than backing up to a different PC.
To preserve my photo album from destruction, I developed a method for backing up a photo album myself, which is a simple batch file that supports networked drives. This works on Windows XP, but I cannot vouch for any other version. If you wish to use this batch, you will have to customize it for your system.
cls
c:
@For /F "tokens=2,3,4 delims=/ " %%A in ('Date /t') do @(
Set Month=%%A
Set Day=%%B
Set Year=%%C
)
@echo DAY = %Day%
@echo Month = %Month%
@echo Year = %Year%
@echo This utility will backup the contents of c:\art\%Year%
pause
if not exist c:\art\%Year% goto err_msg
if not exist \\GLORIOUSIGOR\kodak\%Year% md \\GLORIOUSIGOR\kodak\%Year%
Set source=c:\art\%Year%\*.*
set dest=\\GLORIOUSIGOR\kodak\%Year%
xcopy %source% %dest% /D /S /Y
pause
exit
err_msg:
echo Year has not been created on source computer yet!
pause
exit
Notes:
When creating a backup, it is essential to store data on a separate and distinct PC. This is because a computer can be destroyed or stolen. A virus or other computer glitch can eradicate the entire file system. If you are backing up files to the same PC, it is not without value; but it carries greater risk than backing up to a different PC.
To preserve my photo album from destruction, I developed a method for backing up a photo album myself, which is a simple batch file that supports networked drives. This works on Windows XP, but I cannot vouch for any other version. If you wish to use this batch, you will have to customize it for your system.
cls
c:
@For /F "tokens=2,3,4 delims=/ " %%A in ('Date /t') do @(
Set Month=%%A
Set Day=%%B
Set Year=%%C
)
@echo DAY = %Day%
@echo Month = %Month%
@echo Year = %Year%
@echo This utility will backup the contents of c:\art\%Year%
pause
if not exist c:\art\%Year% goto err_msg
if not exist \\GLORIOUSIGOR\kodak\%Year% md \\GLORIOUSIGOR\kodak\%Year%
Set source=c:\art\%Year%\*.*
set dest=\\GLORIOUSIGOR\kodak\%Year%
xcopy %source% %dest% /D /S /Y
pause
exit
err_msg:
echo Year has not been created on source computer yet!
pause
exit
Notes:
- Day and Month are unused, but I left them in there, because you may find useful this method of extracting the current system day, month, and year, if you like to write your own batches. I forget where I nicked this snippet of code.
- The Xcopy command is instructed through the optional switches to not copy files which have already been copied, to copy subdirectories, and to go ahead and overwrite already existing files.
- This batch expects that each year has its own directory, such that all photos from 2009 are stored in a directory named "2009". Otherwise, it can be a chore to locate specific dates, because Kodak defaults to storing photos in directories with a MM-DD-YYYY naming convention, dropping the leading zeroes. In past versions of Easyshare, there was an option for changing the naming convention, but I have not found it in the new version. The optimal naming convention is YYYY-MM-DD, without dropping leading zeroes. When sorted alphabetically, such a directory begins with the earliest and ends with the latest, which makes finding specific dates a breeze.
- This batch can be adapted for multiple uses.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Sen. Webb's Humanitarian Mission
Sen. Webb (D) has secured the release of an American imprisoned by the Burmese military dictatorship.
A certain amount of dialogue with totalitarian governments can be beneficial, even at the risk of appearing to condone them. In the absence of communication, there are few other viable options available.
The American prisoner, a man who went to Burma uninvited and visited Suu Kyi, implicating her in a so-called crime, was guilty of naivety and foolishness. What he did was a very American thing to do. Since the World Wars, Americans have had a crusader mentality which sometimes exceeds the bounds of reason. Probably he was in love with Suu Kyi, because she is an attractive and eloquent woman, besides being the leader of the democratic opposition. Unfortunately, the Burmese government has used this debacle as an excuse to extend Suu Kyi's confinement, which is a terrible outcome. The desire to help foreigners must be counter-balanced by an appreciation for the consequences.
We hear little about Burma, also called Myanmar, in the news, other than reports of repression and brutality directed toward the poor and toward Buddhist monks. China supports the military government in Burma, which is unethical. It is true that in the past, the U.S. has supported military dictatorships, such as the one that existed in Iran prior to the revolution. However, just because the U.S. has erred in the past does not mean it is all right for everyone to do the same. Follow what is good, not what is bad. Our support of the Shah in Iran proved to be counter-productive in the long run. China may one day discover that their support for Burma's military dictatorship is counter-productive, as well, because people have a long memory.
A certain amount of dialogue with totalitarian governments can be beneficial, even at the risk of appearing to condone them. In the absence of communication, there are few other viable options available.
The American prisoner, a man who went to Burma uninvited and visited Suu Kyi, implicating her in a so-called crime, was guilty of naivety and foolishness. What he did was a very American thing to do. Since the World Wars, Americans have had a crusader mentality which sometimes exceeds the bounds of reason. Probably he was in love with Suu Kyi, because she is an attractive and eloquent woman, besides being the leader of the democratic opposition. Unfortunately, the Burmese government has used this debacle as an excuse to extend Suu Kyi's confinement, which is a terrible outcome. The desire to help foreigners must be counter-balanced by an appreciation for the consequences.
We hear little about Burma, also called Myanmar, in the news, other than reports of repression and brutality directed toward the poor and toward Buddhist monks. China supports the military government in Burma, which is unethical. It is true that in the past, the U.S. has supported military dictatorships, such as the one that existed in Iran prior to the revolution. However, just because the U.S. has erred in the past does not mean it is all right for everyone to do the same. Follow what is good, not what is bad. Our support of the Shah in Iran proved to be counter-productive in the long run. China may one day discover that their support for Burma's military dictatorship is counter-productive, as well, because people have a long memory.
The Gay Christian Network
I found an interesting online article in the Washington Post's web site about the Gay Christian Network. Some of the comments are as good as the article itself. I am pleased to read articles like this. They were rare in my day. I grew up thinking that I was the "the only gay in the village," like Daffyd in the comedy show, "Little Britain."
When Jesus spoke of helping others and avoiding harming others, that was the message, alpha and omega. Dilution occurred when men placed their personal prejudices into religious theory and practice. This is why there is conflict today in certain religious communities over the issue of homosexuality. Sexual orientation is not a moral issue and never was. Men want to put themselves above others and think that they are better than others. This has always been the case, whether the matter is religion or something else, like ideology.
Religion does not have a monopoly on intolerance. Ideology can prove just as homophobic if not more so. In Communist Russia, homosexuality was considered a capitalist decadence and was grounds for imprisonment. Hitler murdered his close associate, Roehm, officially on the grounds of homosexuality. The Nazis placed homosexuals in concentration camps along with other minorities. Ayn Rand, the atheist behind the Objectivist movement, thought that gays should be treated psychologically just for being gay. So I do not believe that religion is the enemy of homosexuality. The cause of homophobia goes deeper within the human psyche than any belief system.
A common assumption is that those who are different are therefore bad, sick, or wrong. But this is not true. They are different, yes. Not bad. A simple concept, but even intelligent minds have difficulty with this simple concept. Intelligence is insufficient when uninformed by empathy for others. The same mistake that leads to racism also leads to homophobia.
Religion need not be the enemy of homosexuality. Neither must homosexuality be the enemy of religion. Gays can be as religious as any other group, have been in the past, and are today. This is an important point to consider for those religious communities that take issue with homosexuality. By being intolerant, a religious community bleeds numbers and influence and discredits their cause. It is counter-productive and begins a pointless battle that cannot be won.
If you believe in God, then that is all right. If you say, do not harm others, then that is something people will support. You may even make the world a better place! But if you say, I don't approve of your sexuality, then you have created an artificial conflict that must persist into perpetuity, because gays will continue to be born, even within the families of the faithful.
When Jesus spoke of helping others and avoiding harming others, that was the message, alpha and omega. Dilution occurred when men placed their personal prejudices into religious theory and practice. This is why there is conflict today in certain religious communities over the issue of homosexuality. Sexual orientation is not a moral issue and never was. Men want to put themselves above others and think that they are better than others. This has always been the case, whether the matter is religion or something else, like ideology.
Religion does not have a monopoly on intolerance. Ideology can prove just as homophobic if not more so. In Communist Russia, homosexuality was considered a capitalist decadence and was grounds for imprisonment. Hitler murdered his close associate, Roehm, officially on the grounds of homosexuality. The Nazis placed homosexuals in concentration camps along with other minorities. Ayn Rand, the atheist behind the Objectivist movement, thought that gays should be treated psychologically just for being gay. So I do not believe that religion is the enemy of homosexuality. The cause of homophobia goes deeper within the human psyche than any belief system.
A common assumption is that those who are different are therefore bad, sick, or wrong. But this is not true. They are different, yes. Not bad. A simple concept, but even intelligent minds have difficulty with this simple concept. Intelligence is insufficient when uninformed by empathy for others. The same mistake that leads to racism also leads to homophobia.
Religion need not be the enemy of homosexuality. Neither must homosexuality be the enemy of religion. Gays can be as religious as any other group, have been in the past, and are today. This is an important point to consider for those religious communities that take issue with homosexuality. By being intolerant, a religious community bleeds numbers and influence and discredits their cause. It is counter-productive and begins a pointless battle that cannot be won.
If you believe in God, then that is all right. If you say, do not harm others, then that is something people will support. You may even make the world a better place! But if you say, I don't approve of your sexuality, then you have created an artificial conflict that must persist into perpetuity, because gays will continue to be born, even within the families of the faithful.
Avoid Stating the Obvious
A good rule of thumb for writers is to avoid stating the obvious. This is sometimes easier said than done, because what is obvious to one person may not be quite so obvious to another.
Yesterday, I wrote an article extolling the virtues of Wikipedia. I thought it was pretty good, explaining the advantages that Wikipedia has over Google and other search engines. Satisfied, I saved the piece, and then went to watch the July 14th, 2009 episode of "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart."
In his monologue, Jon dropped a reference to Wikipedia. That's when it hit me like a cast-iron safe dropped from a fifth-floor window. Wikipedia is old news. Might as well gush over how great motorized transportation is. Duh! Everybody already knows. So, I ruthlessly deleted the piece, which had taken about an hour to write. Oh well. Good writing practice, if nothing else.
Here's a little something that people might not know about Wikipedia, though. If you're interested in exploring new career options, you can input a job title in Wikipedia, and it usually provides a detailed description along with external links that provide further information.
Yesterday, I wrote an article extolling the virtues of Wikipedia. I thought it was pretty good, explaining the advantages that Wikipedia has over Google and other search engines. Satisfied, I saved the piece, and then went to watch the July 14th, 2009 episode of "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart."
In his monologue, Jon dropped a reference to Wikipedia. That's when it hit me like a cast-iron safe dropped from a fifth-floor window. Wikipedia is old news. Might as well gush over how great motorized transportation is. Duh! Everybody already knows. So, I ruthlessly deleted the piece, which had taken about an hour to write. Oh well. Good writing practice, if nothing else.
Here's a little something that people might not know about Wikipedia, though. If you're interested in exploring new career options, you can input a job title in Wikipedia, and it usually provides a detailed description along with external links that provide further information.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)