RANDOM OBSERVATIONS #1
None or few of the following are original concepts. They are lessons learned, mostly via reading, from others and simply put into my own words as part of insights I have learned over many years. Maybe in years to come my viewpoints will change yet more, or at least become revised. What is life, really, but revised understandings?
Sectarian faith is but insistence that a blind man being led by inherited dogma treads surer through life than a seeing man treading through life by the light of reason.
The world AS is, IS no longer and will never be AS IS again. Nor should it. Evolution doesn't go backwards---EVER. Or fail to change---EVER.
No religion which requires persecution and laws to sustain it's dogma is worthy of respect.
Prevention of crime is a more ethical priority than overzealous revengeful punishment of criminal behavior.
If we must hate, if hate provides some sort of meaning to our lives, then at least we should hate what should be hated----violence, falsehood, the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few at the expense of the many, irresponsible reproduction, etc.
Sarah Palin will die a political death from swallowing her own lies, ignorance, and self delusions. Maybe some polar bear, on the way to extinction, will take her with him/her.
What is sex, taken from a disinterested viewpoint, but a universal, albeit individually unique, neurosis.
At the time of Christ, Jesus was a progressive radical opposed by the conservative elements of his day. Today, to accept Christianity one must look past modern rigid purists with braces on their brains. To believe that EVERYTHING CHANGES with evolutionary time EXCEPT religious dogma is to accept an apparent absurdity. Every spread of justice and human rights to those without such rights has come over the vitriolic protests of religious dogmatists.
We should cease making God our accomplice in unethical behaviors, attitudes, and intolerance . Then maybe, at some point in human evolution, peace will reign across the planet and every species be spared human assault on their well being, including other humans.
Not much has ever been done for the good of the people without the rich and religious purists having had their monopoly of power and their rights of property/religious dogmas limited by law.
Poverty is the parent of most crime, chaos, and terrorism. Unrestricted, irresponsible population growth generates inescapable poverty, the kind of poverty which, by treating just the symptoms will never effect any cure, and indeed makes the poverty worse.
The bravest are those who conquer themselves and sacrifice to help others, not those professional soldiers who practice mass slaughter of their often illusional enemies. People are not heroes because they kill whenever a government tells them too. If this is not true then where is the holiday to celebrate World War II German soldiers?
Who are the best of us? Those of us willing to let our illusions die.
When enough is not enough, misery and discontentedness follow---and this includes material wealth, power, sex, titles, fame, etc.
When the gap between the rich and the poor becomes too great and empires too overextended, such empires implode upon themselves.
The biggest of political lies: that the Government should protect the rich with tax breaks, loopholes, exemptions, etc. and that the rich in turn, via trickle down, will care for the poor, the different, the sick.
Those on the religious right seem to fall into a pattern: They begin by loving inherited sectarian dogma better than the truth, then proceed to love their neighbors as themselves---UNLESS THE NEIGHBORS' THEOLOGIES ARE NOT STRAIGHT----and then proceed to persecute, via laws and discrimination, those of different religious beliefs, and end by LOVING THEMSELVES better than everyone else.
The moral dilemma, irrespective of political bent, is that so many of the fortunate are willing to live in excessive material comfort even if the price of this is poverty, ignorance, and disease for a majority of other global inhabitants. To maintain this extravagant lifestyle wars are waged until today terroristic wars have become universal and continuous.
Science without ethics/religion is evil. Religion without science is fraud. Fraud is evil. Good people become victims of this fraud.
The expenditures (more than the expenditures of all other major powers combined) for the many wars the U.S. has launched in the last 50 years has not only killed, displaced, or wounded millions of innocent victims, but is theft from those American citizens who are hungry and are not fed, are cold and not clothed, need good schools and have not, need good health care and have little, need jobs and have no job. EVEN AMERICA is not rich enough to wage endless wars and still provide the needs of its poorest citizens.
Death is best viewed as a NECESSARY IRRELEVANCY. While we exist there is no death, and when there is death we do not exist, therefore we do not know we are dead. Why fear something which cannot exist while we exist? We know so little about life, which we have experienced, so it is farcical to claim knowledge about death which we will never experience.
The laws of nature are laws established by God. As evolutionary time passes humans better understand the laws of nature (science). All human contrived religious dogmas are based on an imperfect understanding of the laws of nature. Thus, as understanding is elevated over time, moral precepts change too. All ancient religious dogmas have many falsehoods. Failure to correct these falsehoods in an enlightened future becomes a major impediment to increased justice for all.
Democracy is never free from it's own tyranny. Ask any minority.
TRUE religious beliefs are not wrapped in dogmas, myths, fables, and cultism via an inherited religious sect. True religious beliefs emanate from the inherent universal human concept of The Golden Rule. This universal inherent ethical concept is a PRODUCT of God's evolutionary process.
Most Christians are apparent atheists. If they weren't they wouldn't behave as they do.
Capital punishment doesn't cure crime anymore than charity cures poverty.
Religion in the worse case scenario is worshipping what one doesn't understand.
Rituals, ceremonies, anthems, adulation are not real patriotism. Precisely because you love your country you owe it reasoned deliberation, and especially criticism when government policies are morally wrong. Wars like Vietnam and the 2nd Iraq War ( which is something like the 50th country we have invaded since 1950) would never have happened but for blind patriotism. Neither would it have taken so long for more American citizens to gain the justice and freedom already granted other citizens.
The tears of the poor and over the top extravagances of the rich seem directly proportional. Not a lot of trickle down.
All human concocted religions have some truths and some falsehoods. That is a demonstrable fact. Therefore, none of these religions, all originating around the same time in history, are God's Word. God doesn't get such things half ass right.
Reckless change and blind conservatism seem tied in level of imbecility.
Nonconformists, at least those who seek change to better the lives of all, are the real engines of progress in any culture, any type of government, any religion.
Of all sexual orientations or practices, abstinence seems the most unnatural.
When those in the House of the Haves attack those in the House of the Have-Nots, no matter how sophisticated the weaponry, the House of the Have's always lose---sooner or later. This seems to be one of the most immutable laws of nature.
The American modern day vast expenditures for defense fails to produce a sense of security, but does generate a VAST NUMBER OF ENEMIES---which leads to fear of other nations, a fear seeped in suspicion and distrust and evil imagining of other cultures.
Free will may be somewhat of a misnomer. Our free will is little more than the individualized organization of our brains coupled with the influence of the environment on our individual brains.
Which is better----sleep, wakeful living, or to never have been born at all? The answer seems to depend on the particular human being to whom the question is directed.
In God's evolutionary process CHANGE is the only permanence.
In modern wars battlefield deaths mean little. We can kill ten of "THEM" for every ONE of us killed, and in the end it will be WE who will tire of the carnage and halt the invasion. We lost around 3000 people in the Trade Center bombings and went emotionally berserk---all of us, and not unnaturally so. If we went berserk it was a kind of a natural berserkiness. Millions of Vietnam and Iraqis were killed by us and we tend to view their emotional responses to our killings as their being crazed loonies, religious/political zealots willing to die as blessed martyrs. Maybe the world just has too many religious/political zealots. Maybe Americans should lead by example and not meddle so much.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
The Afghanistan Dilemma
The Afghanistan Dilemma
I write this before Obama announces his revised Afghanistan policy. Like many other major problems facing our country right now, this one is complex and fraught with risks every which way. I supported Obama because he seemed the only political leader with any prayer in Hell of achieving results on the myriad of problems facing the entire planet. I think he has the intelligence, the disposition, the personality, and the experience needed to get others to face reality and bite the bullets necessary to avoid disaster on many fronts. Having said this, another part of me feels things may well be past the ability of anyone to avoid several impending disasters. Whatever follows here is based on far less information than available to Obama. In some sense democracy is failing because the issues are so complex these days that most voters haven't a clue about solutions. Politics and special interests drive everything. The recent health reform activities reflect just how irrational things are. Here is a complex issue with a zillion nuances and yet who is for or against any package is divided exclusively between parties. In other words, every vote is based on the political perceptions that will result from your vote---and little to do with health care reform.
At any rate, given my understanding of the situation in Afghanistan I am opposed to sending American troops to fight any battles against terrorism--- which is not equally supported by other major powers. The war in Afghanistan is about fighting terrorism. Clearly logic dictates that in the absence of terrorism who would really care who controls Afghanistan? No one.
But now the whole issue gets really dicey. Every terrorist in Afghanistan could be driven from the country and terrorism would proceed unabated. Terrorists don't need to meet in buildings or control any country to be effective. With the internet, cell phones and a host of other communication devices, any group can stay in contact with others just about any place in the world. Does it really make any difference whether any terrorist group operates out of Afghanistan or Somalia or Sudan or downtown Detroit? Terrorists don't need uniformed soldiers, expensive modern weapons like 'smart bombs' to be effective. Blow up most any building, kill a lot of people in the process, and you will have terrorized those who live in that country.
The point is that we can win the War in Afghanistan and such an effect on terrorism will be minimal and temporary. Americans tend to think of terrorism in terms of Al Quaida (sp). Al Quaida started out as a group opposed to American military bases in Saudi Arabia. Chased out of Arabia they migrated to Sudan and then to Afghanistan and now I guess Pakistan. The methods Al Quaida uses have simply been adapted by all angry dissident groups across the globe. So if the Sunni blow up Shiites we tend to call them Al Quaida. Most of these active terrorist cells across the globe probably have little or no contact with Bin Laden. He may be respected by them as the Father of Terrorism, but each terrorist cell pretty much runs their own show. They have to since too much communication with known terrorist leaders can get them arrested.
Here is a simple reality: Whoever fights the terrorists across the globe becomes the target of the terrorists. If we get suckered into fighting a hugely expensive war against terrorism on our own while others spend their money on domestic needs, we fail to meet our own domestic financial needs and we allow ourselves to be the target of terrorists across the globe. Other countries are perfectly willing to let us fight terrorism on our own because it saves them from being a major target. Since terrorism is a major threat to civilized governance, my position is that all governments fight it together or we should decline to play the role of fool. The U.S. better start rethinking this idea of maintaining military bases all over the globe. For many reasons, but mainly with the increasing disparity of wealth between the rich and the poor, terrorist groups are going to grow as this disparity continues to increase. Terrorism fits those with nothing left to lose like a glove. The advantages of having military bases abroad now are outweighed by not having them there to irritate opponents of that nation's current government.
In addition to all of the above, what is the point of driving out terrorists from controlling a area inside a country when they will return as soon as your forces leave? Who can afford the manpower and cost of maintaining troops on every street so the terrorists can't return? When we talk about winning the hearts of the people the term hardly applies in places like Afghanistan. The reality for the people of Afghanistan is that they better cooperate with whatever group is in control of their community at any given time. At this point in time they have no luxury of choosing which group controls them, or whether they end up being tortured or killed by Bin Laden supporters, Dick Cheney supporters, War Lord supporters, or centrol government forces.
Perhaps this sounds absurd, but terrorism might well be Mother Nature's way of reducing human population on our planet. Mother Nature always bats last. The laws which drive God's created evolutionary process will prevent humans from destroying the planet or all life on it. If humans have not evolved enough mentally to control our own population growth, then survival of the fittest will do the weaning out. Terrorism, and the response to terrorism is already wiping out millions of humans every year. Terrorism may well continue to grow until once again there is enough land, water, and clean air to support the remaining life on the planet. There is no American destiny, no God favored tribe, no God needing our worship to have His will be done, and it is up to humans to use our mental energies to control our own population in a civilized just way OR this terroristic battle between the Have-Nots and the Haves will bring global chaos and the subsequent mass slaughter of human, plant, and animal life.
I write this before Obama announces his revised Afghanistan policy. Like many other major problems facing our country right now, this one is complex and fraught with risks every which way. I supported Obama because he seemed the only political leader with any prayer in Hell of achieving results on the myriad of problems facing the entire planet. I think he has the intelligence, the disposition, the personality, and the experience needed to get others to face reality and bite the bullets necessary to avoid disaster on many fronts. Having said this, another part of me feels things may well be past the ability of anyone to avoid several impending disasters. Whatever follows here is based on far less information than available to Obama. In some sense democracy is failing because the issues are so complex these days that most voters haven't a clue about solutions. Politics and special interests drive everything. The recent health reform activities reflect just how irrational things are. Here is a complex issue with a zillion nuances and yet who is for or against any package is divided exclusively between parties. In other words, every vote is based on the political perceptions that will result from your vote---and little to do with health care reform.
At any rate, given my understanding of the situation in Afghanistan I am opposed to sending American troops to fight any battles against terrorism--- which is not equally supported by other major powers. The war in Afghanistan is about fighting terrorism. Clearly logic dictates that in the absence of terrorism who would really care who controls Afghanistan? No one.
But now the whole issue gets really dicey. Every terrorist in Afghanistan could be driven from the country and terrorism would proceed unabated. Terrorists don't need to meet in buildings or control any country to be effective. With the internet, cell phones and a host of other communication devices, any group can stay in contact with others just about any place in the world. Does it really make any difference whether any terrorist group operates out of Afghanistan or Somalia or Sudan or downtown Detroit? Terrorists don't need uniformed soldiers, expensive modern weapons like 'smart bombs' to be effective. Blow up most any building, kill a lot of people in the process, and you will have terrorized those who live in that country.
The point is that we can win the War in Afghanistan and such an effect on terrorism will be minimal and temporary. Americans tend to think of terrorism in terms of Al Quaida (sp). Al Quaida started out as a group opposed to American military bases in Saudi Arabia. Chased out of Arabia they migrated to Sudan and then to Afghanistan and now I guess Pakistan. The methods Al Quaida uses have simply been adapted by all angry dissident groups across the globe. So if the Sunni blow up Shiites we tend to call them Al Quaida. Most of these active terrorist cells across the globe probably have little or no contact with Bin Laden. He may be respected by them as the Father of Terrorism, but each terrorist cell pretty much runs their own show. They have to since too much communication with known terrorist leaders can get them arrested.
Here is a simple reality: Whoever fights the terrorists across the globe becomes the target of the terrorists. If we get suckered into fighting a hugely expensive war against terrorism on our own while others spend their money on domestic needs, we fail to meet our own domestic financial needs and we allow ourselves to be the target of terrorists across the globe. Other countries are perfectly willing to let us fight terrorism on our own because it saves them from being a major target. Since terrorism is a major threat to civilized governance, my position is that all governments fight it together or we should decline to play the role of fool. The U.S. better start rethinking this idea of maintaining military bases all over the globe. For many reasons, but mainly with the increasing disparity of wealth between the rich and the poor, terrorist groups are going to grow as this disparity continues to increase. Terrorism fits those with nothing left to lose like a glove. The advantages of having military bases abroad now are outweighed by not having them there to irritate opponents of that nation's current government.
In addition to all of the above, what is the point of driving out terrorists from controlling a area inside a country when they will return as soon as your forces leave? Who can afford the manpower and cost of maintaining troops on every street so the terrorists can't return? When we talk about winning the hearts of the people the term hardly applies in places like Afghanistan. The reality for the people of Afghanistan is that they better cooperate with whatever group is in control of their community at any given time. At this point in time they have no luxury of choosing which group controls them, or whether they end up being tortured or killed by Bin Laden supporters, Dick Cheney supporters, War Lord supporters, or centrol government forces.
Perhaps this sounds absurd, but terrorism might well be Mother Nature's way of reducing human population on our planet. Mother Nature always bats last. The laws which drive God's created evolutionary process will prevent humans from destroying the planet or all life on it. If humans have not evolved enough mentally to control our own population growth, then survival of the fittest will do the weaning out. Terrorism, and the response to terrorism is already wiping out millions of humans every year. Terrorism may well continue to grow until once again there is enough land, water, and clean air to support the remaining life on the planet. There is no American destiny, no God favored tribe, no God needing our worship to have His will be done, and it is up to humans to use our mental energies to control our own population in a civilized just way OR this terroristic battle between the Have-Nots and the Haves will bring global chaos and the subsequent mass slaughter of human, plant, and animal life.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
The Social Life of Senectitude
The Social Life of Senectitude
This might be a total waste, to muse about the social life of old age, as there is little to generalize about regarding the social life of our productive or aging years. It is quite individualized. Then again, old age impacts considerably on most of our social lives.
Most people become less social with old age either because they are less interested in a social life or the interest is there, but others have busy lives and have little time to amuse the elderly. Often the elderly, among themselves, become a cantankerous cauldron of simmering discombobulation. Having lost power to the productive years crowd, they push each other around. Lot of mumbling, too much of a personal sort.
Oldsters with children and grandchildren often find grandchildren set the perimeters and nature of their social life. The degree of involvement varies depending on a multitude of factors---distance, compatibility, in-laws, time constraints,personalities, etc. The relationship between grandparents and their grandchildren is interesting. To some variable extent the grandparents shower attention on the grandchildren in order to force more closeness with their own grown children. Grandparents can say they are done with babysitting but they understand the risk that ensues. Grandparents may sense their grandchildren have little material needs, but understand, skimp in this area and see how interested the grandchildren are in visiting or being visited by grandma and grandpa. There are certain grandparents whose personalities are such that kids really do love being around them. But, for the most part, this is the exception. As soon as most kids are old enough to forge an identity of their own they become less and less genuinely amused by grandma and grandpa. It is more likely to be a case of parents saying: "You do too like to visit grandma and grandpa, look at all things they buy for you!" "You can't be running off to play all the time and ignoring grandma and grandpa, they took the time and effort to visit us.", etc. I liked my grandparents, but it was more a case of they existed and were present often at relative gatherings than any real relationship. When I was young, and had an elderly grandmother who lived alone, I used to sometimes walk through fields and woods to visit her, mostly for something to do and out of curiosity, even then, about someone so old. It was my first introduction to the dilemma of the old. She had like half a dozen offspring, and for the most part they were her social life. She would tell me how lonely she was and how she felt no one much cared for her, etc. I felt sorry for her but, like others in the family, my life was increasingly filled up with activities of this or that sort. To get to see her grown children she took to taking them out to restaurants. She always paid. This was to be a pattern I noticed often with grandparents---a sort of pay for the attention. I used to hate those restaurant trips. It bored me to death, they lasted forever. When I asked why Grandma always paid, Grandma dutifully offered that she enjoyed paying. When I followed up with the question as to who ever pays for her meals the outing was quickly over. Kids can be unpredictable.
But then there are grandparents who practically raise the kids themselves. If both parents work and the grandparents care for them, things can be quite different. Many grandparents feel somewhat depressed and a sense of loss as grandkids become almost totally focused on others in their lives. Grandparents are then reduced to objects to be dragged out on holidays, school performances/games, graduations, etc. with the expected congratulations and hugs. I have lost count of the times when I ask a grandparent if they see their grandchildren and get an answer like, "When they want a present I see them". The happiest grandparents are often those who manage to be standoffish and yet warm when approached. The trick is to manage to get the grandchildren to want to have the grandparents around, not feel it an obligation dutifully expected to be met.
Grandkids are often temporary pleasures but there are exceptions. My mother's life in her latter years would have been totally different without the support and attention of a grandchild. Each were best friends of the other. But that is quite rare.
Anyway, this whole topic of grandchildren is beyond my expertise. My only point is that most of the elderly better not put their whole bag of expectations for contentment on grandchildren. It seems grandparents should never get their expectations up to high. Too many variables. Some grandkids are lovable, others are not---just like kids in general. Grandparents should not even get their expectations up too high over their own grown children. Grown adults in their productive years are really busy. It can't be helped. They have jobs, kids to raise, hobbies, and the culture today is not conducive to a lot of down time, periods of time for reflection. I don't see too many people reflecting much anymore---if they have a moment free they reach for their cell phone, the TV, search the web for amusement, etc. I have no idea what this all means or where it is leading. Old people hardly ever understand where moderninity is going. I guess us old cantankerous terminationists have always been this way.
Since I retired I have made a serious effort to devise a lifestyle which brings contentment and tranquility. Excitement is great, especially for the young and productive. It is tranquility which is great for those in their terminational years---more precisely contented tranquility. I think it boils down to making it simple and rewarding. And it can't be rewarding if your contentedness depends too much on others. My observations have been that when those in their terminational years are unhappy it seems always because others they depend on let them down. This, to me, is irrational. The idea that because you are old, others have an obligation to spend their time amusing you, is kind of absurd. And it will work only in those cases where the younger person needs caring for you to give meaning and purpose to their lives. If that is not the case misery will descend on the relationship. Modern health care has substantially extended the length of our terminational years. This can be a blessing or a nightmare, and if you live long enough with your mental faculties intact, it will be a nightmare. These irrational nitwits who value life under any conditions and claim this is God's will end up imposing medical torture on many who don't wish it. If that is not wrong, nothing is wrong. It also is responsible for a high percentage of our runaway health costs---like a third of health care costs take place in the last three months of life.
Being independent of others comes natural for me. I have what might be called a socially challenged attention span. I like people, appreciate diversity---but like to keep arms length and interactions short. Chit chat for extended lengths of time are resented. There are exceptions but not that many. As I see it contentedness in one's terminational years is directly proportional to one's mental independence from others. Those elderly who sit around waiting for other's to amuse them are invariably going to have a rough time. There comes a time when the world has passed you by and you better comprehend that, then accept it. When you do that you are half way to contentment.
For the first time in life, most in their terminational years have the opportunity to CAREFULLY observe, both the simple and complex aspects of life. To observe you need to feel comfortable walking around, hither and thither, to see the world under your own microscope. Observation is best done alone. For example, if you go to a museum alone you will learn the most, be able to spend your time on exactly what interests you the most, and not be corrupted with idle chatter about whatever might be on someone else's mind who accompanies you. It is good to have time alone---after all, it has been a long life, thus plenty to mull over, to digest, to reformulate conclusions about a lot of things. Each day, through observation, reading, the internet, DVD's, etc. you find understanding about something new. Understanding, in the right atmosphere---in my case Mother Nature---brings a sense of solace, of understanding that relaxes the mind in a way which is pleasant. This is the kind of contentment a person in their terminational years ought to relish and seek. It kind of makes so much of the noise painfully present during one's formative and productive years disappear, become unimportant, and certainly irrelevant. It is good for the health and mind to walk a lot while one is still mobile. It is in nature settings which brings a sense of belonging to the evolutionary process. Once so absorbed, there is little need to pester others, to push and shove, to dominate, to control, to win any personal relationship battles. Live and let live is as applicable to the terminational years as it is to the formative and productive years.
It may sound socially weird, but pets can be the best friends for those in their terminational years. While busy with your own observations, new understandings, and going gently down the evolutionary stream toward an unknown abyss, pets provide the unwavering emotional support which is unconditional, and minus the drama of human relationships.
Hovering over any person in their terminational years is the knowledge good health will not last forever. Failing health will come, as sure as night follows day, and one should not neglect to mentally prepare for it's arrival. The smart have lived healthy lives and reap the benefit in their terminational years. Good health in your terminational years is no small reward. It is huge. To fuss, fret, get depressed, and make others miserable with your own miserableness is not only pointless, but makes a bad experience worse for yourself. To ward off a bad attitude when the time hits I think it best to prepare your mind for that time. As soldiers prepare for battle, those in their terminational years need to prepare for death. Hopefully, in the not too distant future, when the religious right are defeated on this issue, each person will have control over their own dying process at the time, or via advance directives. Faith based medical torture, claiming this is God's will, is a logical absurdity. This human concocted notion that God decides when a person dies fails every test of reasonableness. It is ok to be merciful to your pet and prevent a pet from suffering at the end, but such mercy is denied humans. Ludicrous. For a human being to be forced to suffer an agonizing death when that human being has had enough and wishes to go peacefully with dignity is irrational torture. And to justify this torture by claiming God dictates it is, to me, an absurd stretch. The evolutionary laws which drive the process were created by God. Progress over time involves enough tragedy and suffering without claiming God tampers with his own created laws to favor or punish this or that individual. One of the requirements for sanity is not to pretend you understand things beyond human comprehension. Whenever I hear an elderly person, out of frustration, wail "Why has God forsaken me" I feel sorry they spent so much time deluding themselves about the nature of an evolutionary process billions of years old. One should be ever so grateful for the UNEARNED opportunity to be part of the process, if even only for living in 'a little gleam of Time between two eternities'. When anyone has had 'enough' they should be entitled to be peacefully put to rest. AND, quit the silly ass games: "we won't kill the person we will disconnect a feeding tube and let them starve to death, or we won't kill the person we will remove a breathing tube and let them suffocate to death." If this is so ethical why don't we do that to our pets? And more importantly what kind of God do so many people worship? At one time, to please God, humans made killing of certain animals or people a necessary sacrifice to make God happy. Now we still medically torture some elderly to make God happy. There is still a bit of silliness left.
So there it is, simple and there every day---a chance to learn something new, to understand better something about life, to walk around and learn to appreciate diversity, to get as close as you can to God's evolutionary process, to be thankful for all your blessings, to be kind always to those less fortunate, to share your wealth and time with the less fortunate, both before death and in your will, to support the political policies which benefit the most and demand the most from those with the most, to live and let live, to free yourself from the demands of others, to free others from your own demands on their time, to live each day as if your mind still needs to learn so many things, and as one thusly goes gently down the stream the reward will be a peaceful contentedness---the kind which will be needed when the final curtain descends, whether it be slowly or with a sudden drop. Time stays, we go.
This might be a total waste, to muse about the social life of old age, as there is little to generalize about regarding the social life of our productive or aging years. It is quite individualized. Then again, old age impacts considerably on most of our social lives.
Most people become less social with old age either because they are less interested in a social life or the interest is there, but others have busy lives and have little time to amuse the elderly. Often the elderly, among themselves, become a cantankerous cauldron of simmering discombobulation. Having lost power to the productive years crowd, they push each other around. Lot of mumbling, too much of a personal sort.
Oldsters with children and grandchildren often find grandchildren set the perimeters and nature of their social life. The degree of involvement varies depending on a multitude of factors---distance, compatibility, in-laws, time constraints,personalities, etc. The relationship between grandparents and their grandchildren is interesting. To some variable extent the grandparents shower attention on the grandchildren in order to force more closeness with their own grown children. Grandparents can say they are done with babysitting but they understand the risk that ensues. Grandparents may sense their grandchildren have little material needs, but understand, skimp in this area and see how interested the grandchildren are in visiting or being visited by grandma and grandpa. There are certain grandparents whose personalities are such that kids really do love being around them. But, for the most part, this is the exception. As soon as most kids are old enough to forge an identity of their own they become less and less genuinely amused by grandma and grandpa. It is more likely to be a case of parents saying: "You do too like to visit grandma and grandpa, look at all things they buy for you!" "You can't be running off to play all the time and ignoring grandma and grandpa, they took the time and effort to visit us.", etc. I liked my grandparents, but it was more a case of they existed and were present often at relative gatherings than any real relationship. When I was young, and had an elderly grandmother who lived alone, I used to sometimes walk through fields and woods to visit her, mostly for something to do and out of curiosity, even then, about someone so old. It was my first introduction to the dilemma of the old. She had like half a dozen offspring, and for the most part they were her social life. She would tell me how lonely she was and how she felt no one much cared for her, etc. I felt sorry for her but, like others in the family, my life was increasingly filled up with activities of this or that sort. To get to see her grown children she took to taking them out to restaurants. She always paid. This was to be a pattern I noticed often with grandparents---a sort of pay for the attention. I used to hate those restaurant trips. It bored me to death, they lasted forever. When I asked why Grandma always paid, Grandma dutifully offered that she enjoyed paying. When I followed up with the question as to who ever pays for her meals the outing was quickly over. Kids can be unpredictable.
But then there are grandparents who practically raise the kids themselves. If both parents work and the grandparents care for them, things can be quite different. Many grandparents feel somewhat depressed and a sense of loss as grandkids become almost totally focused on others in their lives. Grandparents are then reduced to objects to be dragged out on holidays, school performances/games, graduations, etc. with the expected congratulations and hugs. I have lost count of the times when I ask a grandparent if they see their grandchildren and get an answer like, "When they want a present I see them". The happiest grandparents are often those who manage to be standoffish and yet warm when approached. The trick is to manage to get the grandchildren to want to have the grandparents around, not feel it an obligation dutifully expected to be met.
Grandkids are often temporary pleasures but there are exceptions. My mother's life in her latter years would have been totally different without the support and attention of a grandchild. Each were best friends of the other. But that is quite rare.
Anyway, this whole topic of grandchildren is beyond my expertise. My only point is that most of the elderly better not put their whole bag of expectations for contentment on grandchildren. It seems grandparents should never get their expectations up to high. Too many variables. Some grandkids are lovable, others are not---just like kids in general. Grandparents should not even get their expectations up too high over their own grown children. Grown adults in their productive years are really busy. It can't be helped. They have jobs, kids to raise, hobbies, and the culture today is not conducive to a lot of down time, periods of time for reflection. I don't see too many people reflecting much anymore---if they have a moment free they reach for their cell phone, the TV, search the web for amusement, etc. I have no idea what this all means or where it is leading. Old people hardly ever understand where moderninity is going. I guess us old cantankerous terminationists have always been this way.
Since I retired I have made a serious effort to devise a lifestyle which brings contentment and tranquility. Excitement is great, especially for the young and productive. It is tranquility which is great for those in their terminational years---more precisely contented tranquility. I think it boils down to making it simple and rewarding. And it can't be rewarding if your contentedness depends too much on others. My observations have been that when those in their terminational years are unhappy it seems always because others they depend on let them down. This, to me, is irrational. The idea that because you are old, others have an obligation to spend their time amusing you, is kind of absurd. And it will work only in those cases where the younger person needs caring for you to give meaning and purpose to their lives. If that is not the case misery will descend on the relationship. Modern health care has substantially extended the length of our terminational years. This can be a blessing or a nightmare, and if you live long enough with your mental faculties intact, it will be a nightmare. These irrational nitwits who value life under any conditions and claim this is God's will end up imposing medical torture on many who don't wish it. If that is not wrong, nothing is wrong. It also is responsible for a high percentage of our runaway health costs---like a third of health care costs take place in the last three months of life.
Being independent of others comes natural for me. I have what might be called a socially challenged attention span. I like people, appreciate diversity---but like to keep arms length and interactions short. Chit chat for extended lengths of time are resented. There are exceptions but not that many. As I see it contentedness in one's terminational years is directly proportional to one's mental independence from others. Those elderly who sit around waiting for other's to amuse them are invariably going to have a rough time. There comes a time when the world has passed you by and you better comprehend that, then accept it. When you do that you are half way to contentment.
For the first time in life, most in their terminational years have the opportunity to CAREFULLY observe, both the simple and complex aspects of life. To observe you need to feel comfortable walking around, hither and thither, to see the world under your own microscope. Observation is best done alone. For example, if you go to a museum alone you will learn the most, be able to spend your time on exactly what interests you the most, and not be corrupted with idle chatter about whatever might be on someone else's mind who accompanies you. It is good to have time alone---after all, it has been a long life, thus plenty to mull over, to digest, to reformulate conclusions about a lot of things. Each day, through observation, reading, the internet, DVD's, etc. you find understanding about something new. Understanding, in the right atmosphere---in my case Mother Nature---brings a sense of solace, of understanding that relaxes the mind in a way which is pleasant. This is the kind of contentment a person in their terminational years ought to relish and seek. It kind of makes so much of the noise painfully present during one's formative and productive years disappear, become unimportant, and certainly irrelevant. It is good for the health and mind to walk a lot while one is still mobile. It is in nature settings which brings a sense of belonging to the evolutionary process. Once so absorbed, there is little need to pester others, to push and shove, to dominate, to control, to win any personal relationship battles. Live and let live is as applicable to the terminational years as it is to the formative and productive years.
It may sound socially weird, but pets can be the best friends for those in their terminational years. While busy with your own observations, new understandings, and going gently down the evolutionary stream toward an unknown abyss, pets provide the unwavering emotional support which is unconditional, and minus the drama of human relationships.
Hovering over any person in their terminational years is the knowledge good health will not last forever. Failing health will come, as sure as night follows day, and one should not neglect to mentally prepare for it's arrival. The smart have lived healthy lives and reap the benefit in their terminational years. Good health in your terminational years is no small reward. It is huge. To fuss, fret, get depressed, and make others miserable with your own miserableness is not only pointless, but makes a bad experience worse for yourself. To ward off a bad attitude when the time hits I think it best to prepare your mind for that time. As soldiers prepare for battle, those in their terminational years need to prepare for death. Hopefully, in the not too distant future, when the religious right are defeated on this issue, each person will have control over their own dying process at the time, or via advance directives. Faith based medical torture, claiming this is God's will, is a logical absurdity. This human concocted notion that God decides when a person dies fails every test of reasonableness. It is ok to be merciful to your pet and prevent a pet from suffering at the end, but such mercy is denied humans. Ludicrous. For a human being to be forced to suffer an agonizing death when that human being has had enough and wishes to go peacefully with dignity is irrational torture. And to justify this torture by claiming God dictates it is, to me, an absurd stretch. The evolutionary laws which drive the process were created by God. Progress over time involves enough tragedy and suffering without claiming God tampers with his own created laws to favor or punish this or that individual. One of the requirements for sanity is not to pretend you understand things beyond human comprehension. Whenever I hear an elderly person, out of frustration, wail "Why has God forsaken me" I feel sorry they spent so much time deluding themselves about the nature of an evolutionary process billions of years old. One should be ever so grateful for the UNEARNED opportunity to be part of the process, if even only for living in 'a little gleam of Time between two eternities'. When anyone has had 'enough' they should be entitled to be peacefully put to rest. AND, quit the silly ass games: "we won't kill the person we will disconnect a feeding tube and let them starve to death, or we won't kill the person we will remove a breathing tube and let them suffocate to death." If this is so ethical why don't we do that to our pets? And more importantly what kind of God do so many people worship? At one time, to please God, humans made killing of certain animals or people a necessary sacrifice to make God happy. Now we still medically torture some elderly to make God happy. There is still a bit of silliness left.
So there it is, simple and there every day---a chance to learn something new, to understand better something about life, to walk around and learn to appreciate diversity, to get as close as you can to God's evolutionary process, to be thankful for all your blessings, to be kind always to those less fortunate, to share your wealth and time with the less fortunate, both before death and in your will, to support the political policies which benefit the most and demand the most from those with the most, to live and let live, to free yourself from the demands of others, to free others from your own demands on their time, to live each day as if your mind still needs to learn so many things, and as one thusly goes gently down the stream the reward will be a peaceful contentedness---the kind which will be needed when the final curtain descends, whether it be slowly or with a sudden drop. Time stays, we go.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Just Wondering
Just Wondering
I support and agree that no civilized ethical country should leave millions of it's citizens without health insurance, especially children. It certainly doesn't meet the minimal religious obligations of any major religious teachings. BUT, I wonder where all the additional doctors, nurses, technicians, etc are going to come from? You just can't press a button and they exist.
I wonder if this country will ever establish enough medical schools so that we have enough of our own citizens to be our doctors?
I wonder if medical school education in this country will ever be made efficient, sane, and absent barbaric practices? Like there is no need for all doctors to go through 4 years of medical school, several years as an intern, and several years as a resident----all of which runs up hundreds of thousands of dollars debt. For example, a dermatologist hardly needs 4 years of medical school---to be an expert on the kidney, heart, etc. to the same degree as an internist.
I wonder why internists, who need to know the most about practically everything, are paid less than specialists who only need to know a lot about less?
I wonder why interns are still required to spend so many continuous hours on duty? What place has this sophomoric fraternity type hazing in the medical profession? How does that in any way contribute to good health care?
I wonder why priests and ministers always imply God is involved in marriage vows?
I think if God were involved in putting a marriage together the marriage would never go asunder.
I wonder if people who play the lottery, go to the casinos, or bet on horses can pass a math test?
I wonder why it is unethical to torture prisoners and ethical to medically torture dying patients who just want to die peacefully and painlessly?
I wonder, if energy supplies are running out and air pollution a serious problem, why people are allowed to own gas guzzlers?
I wonder, since so many people die of alcohol and nicotine related deaths at a high medical cost, why alcohol and nicotine are legal and marijuana illegal?
I wonder why people decided it was a waste of time to try and ban alcohol and gave up, but for 50 years now think marijuana can be banned successfully?
I wonder why Congress allows Professional sport teams to be owned by the wealthy? These wealthy owners not only own the team but operate outside almost all the controls imposed on other businesses. When is the last time a wealthy owner of professional sport franchise ever was bought to court on racketeering, fraud or any other major charges? How lucky we are that they are all such honest guys.
I wonder how it is that wealthy owners get to decide which wealthy owners can buy a team?
I wonder why Congress permits wealthy owners, piling up millions, to blackmail cities to build them a new stadium or else?
I wonder why Congress allows all major decisions in professional sports to be made by representatives of the owners and the Players Union? Why are fans not represented at the bargaining table?
I wonder, if professional sports is for all the people, why owners are allowed to make all the seats available at a price only the affluent can afford? In some stadiums a preferred few are allowed to go to all the games and the vast majority of fans can never have access to a ticket.
I wonder why the American people have bought into the notion that the sky is the limit for the wealthy? There seems to be no such thing as enough is enough. Even when 1-3% of the people end up owning 90% of our wealth, there is hardly a murmur. I guess we now have, in reality, a wealthocracy.
I wonder why so many people really think that God would reward individuals by 'saving' them, or helping them, or favoring them via inherited religion? Humans have a knack for making God some kind of angry idiot needing our support for HIs will to be done.
I wonder why so many people think they have a 'right' to practice irresponsible reproduction and the state has no 'right' to interfere? I thought the needs of society came ahead of individual needs?
I wonder why human sex is so outside the box of reason? We seem to be the only species which makes it a hodge podge of unfathomable behaviors.
I wonder what percentage of jokes involve sex?
I wonder where any politician for a major office finds the energy to campaign for two years to get elected?
I wonder why Viagra is so popular for the elderly? I mean fine, you can get an erection, but who the hell really wants to be in bed with you at an old age? Like when does duty end?
I wonder why, if true love is more than skin deep, that couples at the alter almost always are close on the beauty/handsomeness scale?
I wonder why our particular sex life is not a subject of detailed discourse when we are in social settings? I mean everything else we spend time at and enjoy we bore others with endless details. Just once I would love someone to elbow up to someone at a social event and say, "Hey, let me tell you what the wife and I did last night, I had a huge orgasm......" Most would probably respond, "Hey get away from me".
I wonder why our pets can get medical attention the same day we call a vet and yet when we call our doctor the first appointment may be weeks away? Huh?
I wonder why it is ethical to mercifully put a pet to sleep and it yet the law says it is unethical to do it with human beings, even if they ask for it?
I wonder why so many people exchange gifts at Christmas by giving each other a list of what they want---the size, model number, color, etc. I have a better idea, why not each exchange $10,000? That way you can brag how big a gift you got.
I wonder why two people, neither of whom is in any real need (anything reasonably priced, which they really need, they have already bought) bother to exchange gifts at all? What percentage of time is it anything you want so much?
I wonder why it is the people with the loudest and irritating voices who use the cell phone so much in public?
I wonder if it is legal to get on a cell phone in public places and make up conversations? Like, "Ma, are you and the neighbor going to have sex tonight, or is that tomorrow night?" "Look tell the bastard to sign the contract for $6.5 million or forget it." "Look, I want to end these sexual encounters. You are so young and I fear your boyfriend could find out". "Ok, I'll squeeze one more performance in if you are sure it is sold out". "Mom, you're pregnant? You are 65 years old." " I am really hungry, has the lobster been flown in from Maine yet?" etc.
I wonder why there can't be one fair graduated income tax and after that you spend your money as you wish with none of it being taxed?
I wonder why real old people can't get special license plates so you don't waste time on a tirade behind them until you finally pass and realize their age?
I wonder why Sport Commentators yell and pontificate so strongly when their predictions about games are rarely more than 60% correct? I mean, why not express your ignorance more quietly?
I wonder why an athlete, just once in a while, can't just step to the mic and say, "I had a real lucky day today--the ball came my way, it came at a crucial time, I happened to catch the ball this time, my opponent slipped, I didn't, and by chance there was no one between me and the end zone. There is no one to thank, my teammates were not really involved beyond their expected role, I doubt God was involved here, and I will ask my agent to speak to the owner about the salary implications of this catch. Good day."
I wonder why colleges insist on pretending their athletes are students? Why can't they just pay them money to play, and if any of them want to take some courses, fine, let them do it? I mean why should some bozo, with the academic ability of a near moron have to pass courses in order to perform something at which he is very good? I mean huh?
I wonder why no Constitutional Amendment can't be passed to require Federal Budgets to be balanced like in many State Constitutions? Then we couldn't engage in wars without paying for them up front, or any thing else and pass the costs off to the next generation.
I wonder why cities can't own their professional sport teams so the huge profits couldn't be used to bail cities out from their economic woes?
I wonder, now that scientific proof is beginning to pile up that concussions and other serious football injuries often cause severe medical problems in middle and old age, just what can be done to make football a defensible sport? Humans have become so fast and big and strong that injuries in a sport like football are a dime a dozen.
I wonder how many years it will take before boxing is outlawed for the physical damage it does to the brain?
I wonder how all these serious and unprecedented problems facing our planet can be solved when so few who vote have any remote understanding of these problems or their consequences? This is scary.
I wonder why bicyclists are required to ride in the direction of traffic when that means they cannot see approaching danger?
I wonder why the most DURABLE bonds are between a person and pets or nature?
Divorces are numerous, friendships come and go, and most human relationships have periods of distrust, irritation, anger, lessons being taught, etc. The bonds an individual forms between himself/herself and pets or nature are rather durable and minus all the drama. Nature and pets are calming influences, human interactions are filled in varying degrees with commotion and aggravation. Maybe we can't do without them, but there is a cost.
I wonder, why, when we are old enough to really live are we old enough to die?
I wonder why we use the phrase 'all men are created equal' when I think we really mean all men deserve a level (equal) playing field. I mean really, we all know we are not equal in anything unless we are identical twins.
I wonder, now that effective terrorism is available to all countries everywhere, and modern weaponry with it's smart bombs etc. is useless, how any society, where wealth accumulates in the hands of a few, can survive in the future?
I wonder how any political organization which has opposed every effort over the years to provide more freedom and justice to women, blks, prisoners, gays, the poor, those with differing views on politics or religion, can see themselves as suitable representatives of all the people.
I wonder why almost all of us, in one way or another, get any pleasure in denying freedom and justice to others. The pleasure just seems to be a matter of degrees.
I wonder why, when we get persecutory or greedy impulses, we use religion as the justification? This seems absurd to me. These are things we should fight against, for ethical/religious reasons, not seek to justify.
I wonder what 'respect me like a man' is suppose to mean? It is used in sports a lot. If you can't beat the shit out of someone are you lacking in manhood? Seems a bit like the caveman mentality to me. I think I would like to function a bit above the level of a caveman.
I wonder how far one needs to push the Golden Rule to be considered an ethical person? Maybe if we spend on others less fortunate, equal amounts of money that we spend on ourselves for non necessity items might be fair enough. That way others are equal to ourselves in importance. If I spend $30,000 on a car, when a $20,000 car is all I need, then I need spend $10,000 on the less fortunate. Sounds good to me. You first.
I wonder why so many of the rich and famous seem so unhappy most of the time?
I wonder if there are really any advantages living to be ancient? We all know when we visit people really up there in age that they are no where's near their old self. I think if you took a prisoner and gave them medicine which would render them hardly able to move around, hardly able to see well, hardly able to hear well, and hardly able to remember things, it would be considered extreme torture---unless you are Dick 5X Draft Deferred Cheney.
I wonder why so many of the patriotic smash mouthed right wing warmongers have never sought a military adventure or career? Well, patriotism needs limits.
I wonder why Whitey Ford's first name isn't more popular? Like Whitey Limbaugh etc. Am not sure the first name Blacky has ever been used. Like Blacky Obama which has a decent enough ring to it.
I wonder what percent of priests and ministers actually work for a living, at least in the sense of what is usually meant by work.
I wonder what percent of their time most ministers and priests actually spend in direct individual contact with the poor and different amongst us? Or what percent of their time they spend conducting ceremonies or preparing for ceremonies?
I wonder, if somebody gets murdered before he gets 'saved' if he is eligible for Heaven? And suppose the person who murdered him gets 'saved' after he murdered him, does he go to Heaven and the person murdered, who had not yet been saved, go to hell?
I wonder what so much internet exposure to pornography before puberty does to a person's sex life after puberty?
I wonder, if one goes to Heaven what age will he/she be, which spouse will he/she be with, which pets, which friends, etc.
I wonder why, in social settings, no one ever goes into act specific detail about their sexual adventures? Every other portion of their life they go on and on about ad nausea.
I wonder why, with earth's human population now putting pressures on so many natural resources like water, arable land, energy, forests, etc. that societies across the globe make little attempt to curb excesses like huge houses, 3-4 cars per family, and in some places, especially the U.S., actually curtail expenditures on public transportation, energy conservation, etc.?
I wonder when the citizens of Afghanistan, some of the poorest on the earth, living in the toughest of climates, will ever be allowed to live in peace? For centuries now these tormented souls have had their lives threatened by ever changing forces of war lords, religious purists, drug lords, central government forces, and foreign occupiers with smart bombs. It is so bad now that maybe the only solution is to relocate everybody in the country and let them return under controlled stable conditions to start anew. Living in Afghanistan is about the closest one can come to living back in the Stone Age. To stay alive in Afghanistan is to support which ever forces control your neighborhood any given month.
I wonder, how many times before a person dies does he/she ever know anything for certain?
I wonder, clearly contentment cannot be an ever present condition, so what percent of the day does one need to feel content to be in the top10 percent?
I wonder, we all laughed when Ross Perot's Vice-Presidential candidate opened up his Vice Presidential debate with: "Why am I here? Who am I?" I don't know, can any of us answer for ourselves that question?
In my retirement each day I find new things to wonder about. For me, this is the challenge of retirement, to wonder about so many things, to gain a more informed understanding, limited as it might prove to be, about so many aspects of life. Idle chit chat about Nothing by human Nothingburgers has limited appeal to me the older I get. If I left this musing open for a year the length would be impressive. People some times ask how I find things to write about. Wrong question. It should be how do you select which topics to write about.? Just don't ask what it all proves.
I support and agree that no civilized ethical country should leave millions of it's citizens without health insurance, especially children. It certainly doesn't meet the minimal religious obligations of any major religious teachings. BUT, I wonder where all the additional doctors, nurses, technicians, etc are going to come from? You just can't press a button and they exist.
I wonder if this country will ever establish enough medical schools so that we have enough of our own citizens to be our doctors?
I wonder if medical school education in this country will ever be made efficient, sane, and absent barbaric practices? Like there is no need for all doctors to go through 4 years of medical school, several years as an intern, and several years as a resident----all of which runs up hundreds of thousands of dollars debt. For example, a dermatologist hardly needs 4 years of medical school---to be an expert on the kidney, heart, etc. to the same degree as an internist.
I wonder why internists, who need to know the most about practically everything, are paid less than specialists who only need to know a lot about less?
I wonder why interns are still required to spend so many continuous hours on duty? What place has this sophomoric fraternity type hazing in the medical profession? How does that in any way contribute to good health care?
I wonder why priests and ministers always imply God is involved in marriage vows?
I think if God were involved in putting a marriage together the marriage would never go asunder.
I wonder if people who play the lottery, go to the casinos, or bet on horses can pass a math test?
I wonder why it is unethical to torture prisoners and ethical to medically torture dying patients who just want to die peacefully and painlessly?
I wonder, if energy supplies are running out and air pollution a serious problem, why people are allowed to own gas guzzlers?
I wonder, since so many people die of alcohol and nicotine related deaths at a high medical cost, why alcohol and nicotine are legal and marijuana illegal?
I wonder why people decided it was a waste of time to try and ban alcohol and gave up, but for 50 years now think marijuana can be banned successfully?
I wonder why Congress allows Professional sport teams to be owned by the wealthy? These wealthy owners not only own the team but operate outside almost all the controls imposed on other businesses. When is the last time a wealthy owner of professional sport franchise ever was bought to court on racketeering, fraud or any other major charges? How lucky we are that they are all such honest guys.
I wonder how it is that wealthy owners get to decide which wealthy owners can buy a team?
I wonder why Congress permits wealthy owners, piling up millions, to blackmail cities to build them a new stadium or else?
I wonder why Congress allows all major decisions in professional sports to be made by representatives of the owners and the Players Union? Why are fans not represented at the bargaining table?
I wonder, if professional sports is for all the people, why owners are allowed to make all the seats available at a price only the affluent can afford? In some stadiums a preferred few are allowed to go to all the games and the vast majority of fans can never have access to a ticket.
I wonder why the American people have bought into the notion that the sky is the limit for the wealthy? There seems to be no such thing as enough is enough. Even when 1-3% of the people end up owning 90% of our wealth, there is hardly a murmur. I guess we now have, in reality, a wealthocracy.
I wonder why so many people really think that God would reward individuals by 'saving' them, or helping them, or favoring them via inherited religion? Humans have a knack for making God some kind of angry idiot needing our support for HIs will to be done.
I wonder why so many people think they have a 'right' to practice irresponsible reproduction and the state has no 'right' to interfere? I thought the needs of society came ahead of individual needs?
I wonder why human sex is so outside the box of reason? We seem to be the only species which makes it a hodge podge of unfathomable behaviors.
I wonder what percentage of jokes involve sex?
I wonder where any politician for a major office finds the energy to campaign for two years to get elected?
I wonder why Viagra is so popular for the elderly? I mean fine, you can get an erection, but who the hell really wants to be in bed with you at an old age? Like when does duty end?
I wonder why, if true love is more than skin deep, that couples at the alter almost always are close on the beauty/handsomeness scale?
I wonder why our particular sex life is not a subject of detailed discourse when we are in social settings? I mean everything else we spend time at and enjoy we bore others with endless details. Just once I would love someone to elbow up to someone at a social event and say, "Hey, let me tell you what the wife and I did last night, I had a huge orgasm......" Most would probably respond, "Hey get away from me".
I wonder why our pets can get medical attention the same day we call a vet and yet when we call our doctor the first appointment may be weeks away? Huh?
I wonder why it is ethical to mercifully put a pet to sleep and it yet the law says it is unethical to do it with human beings, even if they ask for it?
I wonder why so many people exchange gifts at Christmas by giving each other a list of what they want---the size, model number, color, etc. I have a better idea, why not each exchange $10,000? That way you can brag how big a gift you got.
I wonder why two people, neither of whom is in any real need (anything reasonably priced, which they really need, they have already bought) bother to exchange gifts at all? What percentage of time is it anything you want so much?
I wonder why it is the people with the loudest and irritating voices who use the cell phone so much in public?
I wonder if it is legal to get on a cell phone in public places and make up conversations? Like, "Ma, are you and the neighbor going to have sex tonight, or is that tomorrow night?" "Look tell the bastard to sign the contract for $6.5 million or forget it." "Look, I want to end these sexual encounters. You are so young and I fear your boyfriend could find out". "Ok, I'll squeeze one more performance in if you are sure it is sold out". "Mom, you're pregnant? You are 65 years old." " I am really hungry, has the lobster been flown in from Maine yet?" etc.
I wonder why there can't be one fair graduated income tax and after that you spend your money as you wish with none of it being taxed?
I wonder why real old people can't get special license plates so you don't waste time on a tirade behind them until you finally pass and realize their age?
I wonder why Sport Commentators yell and pontificate so strongly when their predictions about games are rarely more than 60% correct? I mean, why not express your ignorance more quietly?
I wonder why an athlete, just once in a while, can't just step to the mic and say, "I had a real lucky day today--the ball came my way, it came at a crucial time, I happened to catch the ball this time, my opponent slipped, I didn't, and by chance there was no one between me and the end zone. There is no one to thank, my teammates were not really involved beyond their expected role, I doubt God was involved here, and I will ask my agent to speak to the owner about the salary implications of this catch. Good day."
I wonder why colleges insist on pretending their athletes are students? Why can't they just pay them money to play, and if any of them want to take some courses, fine, let them do it? I mean why should some bozo, with the academic ability of a near moron have to pass courses in order to perform something at which he is very good? I mean huh?
I wonder why no Constitutional Amendment can't be passed to require Federal Budgets to be balanced like in many State Constitutions? Then we couldn't engage in wars without paying for them up front, or any thing else and pass the costs off to the next generation.
I wonder why cities can't own their professional sport teams so the huge profits couldn't be used to bail cities out from their economic woes?
I wonder, now that scientific proof is beginning to pile up that concussions and other serious football injuries often cause severe medical problems in middle and old age, just what can be done to make football a defensible sport? Humans have become so fast and big and strong that injuries in a sport like football are a dime a dozen.
I wonder how many years it will take before boxing is outlawed for the physical damage it does to the brain?
I wonder how all these serious and unprecedented problems facing our planet can be solved when so few who vote have any remote understanding of these problems or their consequences? This is scary.
I wonder why bicyclists are required to ride in the direction of traffic when that means they cannot see approaching danger?
I wonder why the most DURABLE bonds are between a person and pets or nature?
Divorces are numerous, friendships come and go, and most human relationships have periods of distrust, irritation, anger, lessons being taught, etc. The bonds an individual forms between himself/herself and pets or nature are rather durable and minus all the drama. Nature and pets are calming influences, human interactions are filled in varying degrees with commotion and aggravation. Maybe we can't do without them, but there is a cost.
I wonder, why, when we are old enough to really live are we old enough to die?
I wonder why we use the phrase 'all men are created equal' when I think we really mean all men deserve a level (equal) playing field. I mean really, we all know we are not equal in anything unless we are identical twins.
I wonder, now that effective terrorism is available to all countries everywhere, and modern weaponry with it's smart bombs etc. is useless, how any society, where wealth accumulates in the hands of a few, can survive in the future?
I wonder how any political organization which has opposed every effort over the years to provide more freedom and justice to women, blks, prisoners, gays, the poor, those with differing views on politics or religion, can see themselves as suitable representatives of all the people.
I wonder why almost all of us, in one way or another, get any pleasure in denying freedom and justice to others. The pleasure just seems to be a matter of degrees.
I wonder why, when we get persecutory or greedy impulses, we use religion as the justification? This seems absurd to me. These are things we should fight against, for ethical/religious reasons, not seek to justify.
I wonder what 'respect me like a man' is suppose to mean? It is used in sports a lot. If you can't beat the shit out of someone are you lacking in manhood? Seems a bit like the caveman mentality to me. I think I would like to function a bit above the level of a caveman.
I wonder how far one needs to push the Golden Rule to be considered an ethical person? Maybe if we spend on others less fortunate, equal amounts of money that we spend on ourselves for non necessity items might be fair enough. That way others are equal to ourselves in importance. If I spend $30,000 on a car, when a $20,000 car is all I need, then I need spend $10,000 on the less fortunate. Sounds good to me. You first.
I wonder why so many of the rich and famous seem so unhappy most of the time?
I wonder if there are really any advantages living to be ancient? We all know when we visit people really up there in age that they are no where's near their old self. I think if you took a prisoner and gave them medicine which would render them hardly able to move around, hardly able to see well, hardly able to hear well, and hardly able to remember things, it would be considered extreme torture---unless you are Dick 5X Draft Deferred Cheney.
I wonder why so many of the patriotic smash mouthed right wing warmongers have never sought a military adventure or career? Well, patriotism needs limits.
I wonder why Whitey Ford's first name isn't more popular? Like Whitey Limbaugh etc. Am not sure the first name Blacky has ever been used. Like Blacky Obama which has a decent enough ring to it.
I wonder what percent of priests and ministers actually work for a living, at least in the sense of what is usually meant by work.
I wonder what percent of their time most ministers and priests actually spend in direct individual contact with the poor and different amongst us? Or what percent of their time they spend conducting ceremonies or preparing for ceremonies?
I wonder, if somebody gets murdered before he gets 'saved' if he is eligible for Heaven? And suppose the person who murdered him gets 'saved' after he murdered him, does he go to Heaven and the person murdered, who had not yet been saved, go to hell?
I wonder what so much internet exposure to pornography before puberty does to a person's sex life after puberty?
I wonder, if one goes to Heaven what age will he/she be, which spouse will he/she be with, which pets, which friends, etc.
I wonder why, in social settings, no one ever goes into act specific detail about their sexual adventures? Every other portion of their life they go on and on about ad nausea.
I wonder why, with earth's human population now putting pressures on so many natural resources like water, arable land, energy, forests, etc. that societies across the globe make little attempt to curb excesses like huge houses, 3-4 cars per family, and in some places, especially the U.S., actually curtail expenditures on public transportation, energy conservation, etc.?
I wonder when the citizens of Afghanistan, some of the poorest on the earth, living in the toughest of climates, will ever be allowed to live in peace? For centuries now these tormented souls have had their lives threatened by ever changing forces of war lords, religious purists, drug lords, central government forces, and foreign occupiers with smart bombs. It is so bad now that maybe the only solution is to relocate everybody in the country and let them return under controlled stable conditions to start anew. Living in Afghanistan is about the closest one can come to living back in the Stone Age. To stay alive in Afghanistan is to support which ever forces control your neighborhood any given month.
I wonder, how many times before a person dies does he/she ever know anything for certain?
I wonder, clearly contentment cannot be an ever present condition, so what percent of the day does one need to feel content to be in the top10 percent?
I wonder, we all laughed when Ross Perot's Vice-Presidential candidate opened up his Vice Presidential debate with: "Why am I here? Who am I?" I don't know, can any of us answer for ourselves that question?
In my retirement each day I find new things to wonder about. For me, this is the challenge of retirement, to wonder about so many things, to gain a more informed understanding, limited as it might prove to be, about so many aspects of life. Idle chit chat about Nothing by human Nothingburgers has limited appeal to me the older I get. If I left this musing open for a year the length would be impressive. People some times ask how I find things to write about. Wrong question. It should be how do you select which topics to write about.? Just don't ask what it all proves.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Elusive Dreams and T.O.
Elusive Dreams and T.O.
The evolutionary process is brilliant---billions of years can attest to that. Yet it is never a level playing field. Diversity is the driving force for change, and while the individual life forms kind of do their thing---each in their own way---evolutionary laws sort it all out, and progress results---with more complex species evolving over time. Where is it all heading? Beats me. Does evolution have a terminal point? Actually,I haven't yet figured out how it could have a starting point.
For me, I see the inequalities and suffering which abound across our planet and it leaves me saddened. Of course all this 'survival of the fittest' gets the job done in the long run, but the individual tragedies are impossible for any of us to not perceive. Nothing has any permanence. Ok, some things last longer than others, but that is about it. Recently, a friend got on my case for constantly defending Terrell Owens, commenting that "I can understand (although disagree) why you admire him. Although, there certainly are many other individuals who have come out of similar type situations and don't act in such a way that there behavior has to be constantly explained and defended."
I disagree. One of the Universities at which I taught was located in the heart of a Drug War ravaged black ghetto. The majority of students were blk and some came from the worst of these Drug War ravaged neighborhoods. Their neighborhoods were dangerous, their schools often the worst in the whole city. The University itself was poorly run and trapped into the politics and racial tensions of the 60's. I have been retired for over 12 years so maybe some things have changed a bit. When I first taught there in the early 70's the school was a physical dump mired in grime accumulated over years of neglect. Shortly after I arrived on the scene a new campus was built. This was the reason I accepted the position. When completed it didn't look anything like a campus that a state would have built in a more affluent neighborhood. If one was blindfolded and the blindfold removed when standing in the center of the campus you would have thought it was a large prison complex with the various buildings being prison cell blocks. I was there for around 25 years and little changed. The classrooms I taught in were the same when I left as when I first started. If you were really lucky you might get an old fashioned overhead projector which worked most of the time. Broken seats in a lecture hall were to be expected. There were no modern classroom visual-aid gadgets to enhance illustrations.
For someone like a young me, naive about ethnic struggles and the economically disadvantaged, it took some time to get my bearings and understand this picture from life's other side. I grew up in a town with maybe 20% blk but for all practical purposes they didn't exist. I don't recall any animosity by myself or my neighborhood friends toward blks except the occasional racial jokes. The blacks all lived in the seedier part of town and there were no confrontations with them by myself or anyone else in my neighborhood. We were all Republicans through and through. We kind of all assumed everyone should get ahead the old fashioned way----earn it. I went through the first half of the sixties pretty much oblivious to all the social issues that were out in the streets. If these people marching and protesting in the streets didn't like it here they could leave. I didn't have any ingrained prejudices for two reasons: no one or group was bothering me, and my parents never said negative things about hardly anyone or any group. Participating in sports in the latter years of high school and in college brought me, for the first time, into contact with human and ethnic diversity.
Ending up with my first university teaching job at a predominantly blk university in the middle of an urban ghetto was essentially an accident. I was heading to a major University on the West Coast when the state budget there was frozen with a hiring freeze put in place. So at the last minute I took this other job. It didn't take long for me to understand just how different life was for this population. The public racial and economic anger was there and pervasive, but the truth was, if anyone would listen and be supportive of their individual efforts and situations, they embraced such individuals regardless of ethnicity. Still, the atmosphere was seeped in racism. Almost all the faculty were white, most of the students were blk. For the first time the University had a blk President but that was deceptive. The Board which selected the President was mostly white and any blks on the Board were appointed to the Board by whites. There were two blk University Presidents in the State. One at this blk university and the other at a predominantly white University. The one at the white University had applied to be President at the Black University but his name was summarily rejected at the onset and his application never permitted to go forward. He was perfectly qualified to be a University President, a strong creative person. The blk University got instead a Clown, an Uncle Tom who went around making ridiculous statements, harmless enough, but just ridiculous. At that point in history, whites were not about to appoint a blk to a position of authority who whites could not firmly control. So the black University got the clown. The conventional wisdom was that a predominantly black University needed more blk Professors---role models for blk students. BUT, there were few blk PH.D. candidates for positions and those few available would naturally take positions at prestigious universities via affirmative action. Of course there are lousy blk candidates as well as lousy white candidates for teaching positions. The only blk candidates available to an urban blk university were the poor blk candidates. Solomon himself could not have solved this problem to everyone's satisfaction. At any rate poor blk candidates would be accepted over good white candidates and this just compounded the problem of good education.
One of the first things I learned was that affirmative action was primarily a great deal for those blks who needed no affirmative action. Affirmative action was a bad idea as long as it had race attached to it. Why middle class blks attending good public schools and living in decent neighborhoods need special assistance or consideration is beyond me. And it was this middle class population which primarily benefitted from affirmative action.
Be all this as it may, a person like myself, thrown into that situation, saw it as an opportunity to help those with real needs. Over time, the realities of the problem, the depth of the problem, became more and more evident. Essentially, most of these young people had little of what more affluent young from better neighborhoods think they have earned. No one earns their looks, their place of birth, their parents, the grammar and high schools they go to, their physical or mental capabilities, etc. We all, as young people, are given our genetics and our environment. A good portion of these young people were eager to succeed. Most were the first generation to even go to college. If the eagerness was there, the obstacles were huge. Little had prepared them for legitimate college work---not the neighborhood, not the culture, not the schools they attended, and often not the family environment. On the other hand some of the students had amazingly dedicated parents or more likely A parent who did all they could to raise them right. I can't document this, but the ethics of most of these students exceeded those from more affluent backgrounds. Religion often played a bigger role for these students than those from more affluent neighborhoods. It was a rigid faith based religion. In some sense religion is the opiate of the poor. Because of their neighborhood culture and poor schools from which they graduated their academic skills were poor. It is hard to take someone in their late teens and make any swift improvement in basic academic skills. The window of opportunity was rapidly closing. When I say poor schools I am talking about the quality of the teachers. Good teachers naturally gravitate to the better schools in better neighborhoods with better pay. A lot of losers teach in urban or rural ghetto schools.
Added to all these other disadvantages was their economic plight. Most of these students worked full-time, had kids to raise (theirs or siblings), and had little time to study. They couldn't go slower, take fewer courses because they would lose their Pell Grant and yng people are always in a hurry. A good student from the best of environments and high schools would have a hard time performing well under such time constraints. With all the pressures and what not they often miss a deadline, or an important class, or made poor choices of the moment. Many rules exist for good reason and with good intentions, but rules should never be used to destroy good people trying their best under the most trying of circumstances. But most authority figures are of a bent that a "rule is a rule is a rule' and that is that. Fortunately, there will be those Professors who will intercede on their behalf, get them through one crisis or another, and enable their innate talent and determination succeed FOR THE MOMENT. When you do this, you feel good, like you have kept someone afloat and they will recover and swim away to success. Yet often, you see students, who had so much potential, years later working at the most bland of jobs, like the Post Office etc. It makes their efforts and efforts of others seem wasted. You wonder, what happened, why did they not have greater success in life? My guess now is that when your youth is filled with little or no unearned advantages, and your struggles are never ending and seemingly futile, at some point you just accept something, which is better than the nothing with which you grew up. It irritates me to see affluent people who had all these unearned advantages in their youth, act as adults like they earned everything they achieved. And this attitude is expressed in their politics: "I got's mine and if others want the same let them do like I did---earn it." It sounds so neat and obvious, but it is bullshit.
As I have learned to see it over the years, success is based on 3 variables. First are all the unearned blessings we are given which others may not be given---particular parents, a country of birth, a neighborhood in which we spend our formative years, schools which may be good or bad, our physical characteristics and physical talents, our mental quirks (personality), mental capabilities, our health, etc. Second are fortuitous opportunities which may come our way through no design of our own. And third are our conscious choices for which we can claim we earned. There are a lot of variables and most of them are not ones which we can remotely claim to have earned.
Finally, with all this lead-up, I am ready to tackle my friend's statement: "I can understand (although disagree) why you admire him (Terrell Owens). Although, there certainly are many other individuals who have come out of similar type situations and don't act in such a way that there behavior has to be constantly explained and defended."
There are two factors which separate Owens from the young people I have just written about. First, he was kept separated from other young people in his early ghetto environment by his grandmother. He was not allowed to leave the yard except to go to school or sport practice once in high school. His protestations were met with the explanation that she did not want him to become like the other kids---going no where in life.
Second, Terrell had little natural athletic ability. The other individuals my friend refers to in his quote, by far, are identified early on as having athletic talent and as a consequence are spoiled, pampered, and given all kinds of mentoring, support, attention etc. more so than other kids. Their athletic talent was a given, and it was a natural athletic talent which enabled them to stand out from the rest.I met many of these 'students' in my teaching career also. None of their good fortune was earned. They were going to be excellent athletes unless they messed up. Of course, as many spoiled but good natured young people often do---some do mess up. They are not independent, self focused, or, for the most part, self made in any way regarding their career. What they have is unearned natural athletic ability which, in certain sports attracts an army of people to help them develop their obvious talents. If these fortunate pampered athletes are in your class you will get phone calls and visits from tutors, advisors, and concerned coaches. These naturally gifted athletes are often fun to have in class; they can be funny, good natured, and personable in a polished way. Many of them are P.E. majors and P.E. Departments like to require a course in physiology for them to graduate. Of course that is a joke. They are in with pre-meds, pre-dents, physical therapists, nurses, occupational therapists and other assorted medical programs. Like most any other instructor I am not going to have the star basketball player made academically ineligible because I gave him an F in a physiology course. Like who cares how much a P.E. major knows about physiology? At best you give them a separate course for P.E. majors titled the Physiology of Exercise. Of course administrators don't like that, they prefer it look like they are taking high powered classes. It is certainly true that guys like Allen Iverson, Michael Vick, etc. did, as my friend states, come from similar urban or rural ghettoes, but had an army of people to guide and support their development. They by no means are self made. Spoiled yes, self made, no.
Terrell is unique. People who were on the same team with him in high school or his early college years hardly remember him. He was not a first stringer or envisioned to have all that much athletic talent. He was skinny and not exceptionally coordinated. He was shy, socially inert. All he had was assurance from his grandmother that he was 'special' and that he could be successful BUT, and this his grandma repeated over and over---others will try to stop you and can never be trusted to help you. From his grandmother's window he vowed he was going to be someone and not the nobody he was. He would, he promised himself, run through any hurdles anyone put in front of him. He then developed his own training program, trained by himself, listened to everything coaches told their star athletes, and made being a wide receiver the sole focus of his life. Terrell was drafted 89th in the third round of the draft by the San Francisco 49ers. By now he had bulked up, listened to what coaches told others, and had the good fortune to be teamed up with Jerry Rice. He studied Jerry Rice and amongst other things he learned that he was going to have to be vocal to make things go his way. The rest is history, and he is among the top five wide receivers in football history stats. His history intrigued me because what he did, by himself, almost exclusively, is rare. Granted, if everyone had the same self focus and strength to persist against anyone or anything that gets in the way, this would be a more difficult world. But then again, if you don't get the kind of unearned blessings that many of us have gotten, and the fortuitous opportunities many of us get, you are not likely to power yourself to the top. Terrell did, is an excellent citizen, has a strong sense of right and wrong, and is content to be walled off from the social circuit of others.The dislike of Terrell Owens seems to be his self focus (selfishness) and his love of attention. The first got him to the top of his profession and the second is personal, can be annoying, but is no sin. The attention, in his mind, is his reward for his extraordinary effort. Other athletes from the same background---pampered from junior high on with a small army of support----get their reward from a wide circle of friends and people who have been mentors of some sort for years. Terrell, a one man band, the ultimate little engine who could, walled off from others, celebrates as a one man band and HUGS HIMSELF. Isolated from others in any intimate way Terrell can be honest about his success. While others can stand before a mic and thank all those others who made their personal success possible over the years Terrell thanks himself and his grandmother. To do otherwise would be disingenuous and Terrell is bluntly honest. It is difficult to find other successful athletes, raised in a similar environment, who did it on their own the Terrell Owens way. For young people trapped in similar formative years environments, who are not natural born athletes, the Owens way may be the most likely way to succeed. I think if I were teaching such students over again I would tend to instill more of the kind of advice Terrell's grandmother gave him: don't wait for others or the government or anyone to help you. Help yourself, set clear focused goals, and whenever necessary run through any hurdles in your way. There are many 'nice' guys/gals growing up in difficult environments with few unearned blessings, and precious few unearned fortuitous opportunities likely to come their way. In these situations it really is true that nice guys/gals often finish back in the pack. If these students can find something they can be good at and focus on it with an 'Owens' intensity that exceeds the intensity of others, and then have the strength to force their way ahead, they have a better chance of succeeding. Young people with little, generally are extremely appreciative of those who help them along the way, but the reality is that this kind of help often comes their way too little too seldom to carry them to success, and they will end up settling for little. Terrell was smart like a fox: 'get out of the way, here I come---in your face--- ready or not.' Hey, it worked. And it is my opinion he is entitled to thank himself, to be a one man band. If one admires those individuals who manage to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, then Terrell is the pent-ultimate guru of this art.
Of course, for Terrell, like any of the rest of us, success at anything never lasts. At 37 he has pushed it further than most. The next hurdle for Owens will be one of a totally different nature. He is not going to win any battle against age and time. This is one hurdle he can't run through via sheer effort, determination or self focus. Can Owens accept the race is over, the battle won, and go gently down the stream? Which Owens can accept a hurdle insurmoutable? Owens the Fox? No way. Owens the emotional volcano? No way. Owens the Philosopher? If the latter doesn't win out age will not be kind to him.
We understand a lot about the evolutionary process in it's progression from simple to more complex physical forms. But we pay not enough attention to the evolution of the mind. With the passage of time humans have grown more civilized and ethics has grown. Humans are not as universally barbaric as in early ages. Oh, we still torture and disrespect but, for the most part, it is of a lesser degree. It is this evolvement which holds the hope for future youth who have little of the unearned gifts others have, who find few fortuitous opportunities to escape rough formative years. There is no justification, in any truly just society, for any young people not to have decent schools, good health care, and adequate adult support---whether it be genetic in nature or just support from non genetic contributors. There is no excuse for irresponsible reproduction and there should never be a situation where a child needs to be locked up to protect that child from going nowhere in his/her life. There is no reason why any child should have to have the innate qualities to be the 'little engine who could' or fail. I have more trouble visualizing future physical changes as a result of evolution than I do advancement in mental function, including ethics. Human survival in the evolutionary process requires responsible family planning. If this evolves, one way or another---and it will---then all the rest follows. For evolution to advance a lot of individuals within every species suffer badly, but at least not in vain. This egocentric notion that any of us are able to use God to manipulate good fortunes for ourselves I have trouble accepting. It is the wonder of God's created evolutionary process, controlled by the laws of evolution, which creates a more advanced world. Chance and luck are not bit players in life and those of us who benefit from both have an ethical duty to be on the side of those with less unearned blessings and few unearned fortuitous opportunities. To do otherwise can never bring real contentment and or any real justice.
The evolutionary process is brilliant---billions of years can attest to that. Yet it is never a level playing field. Diversity is the driving force for change, and while the individual life forms kind of do their thing---each in their own way---evolutionary laws sort it all out, and progress results---with more complex species evolving over time. Where is it all heading? Beats me. Does evolution have a terminal point? Actually,I haven't yet figured out how it could have a starting point.
For me, I see the inequalities and suffering which abound across our planet and it leaves me saddened. Of course all this 'survival of the fittest' gets the job done in the long run, but the individual tragedies are impossible for any of us to not perceive. Nothing has any permanence. Ok, some things last longer than others, but that is about it. Recently, a friend got on my case for constantly defending Terrell Owens, commenting that "I can understand (although disagree) why you admire him. Although, there certainly are many other individuals who have come out of similar type situations and don't act in such a way that there behavior has to be constantly explained and defended."
I disagree. One of the Universities at which I taught was located in the heart of a Drug War ravaged black ghetto. The majority of students were blk and some came from the worst of these Drug War ravaged neighborhoods. Their neighborhoods were dangerous, their schools often the worst in the whole city. The University itself was poorly run and trapped into the politics and racial tensions of the 60's. I have been retired for over 12 years so maybe some things have changed a bit. When I first taught there in the early 70's the school was a physical dump mired in grime accumulated over years of neglect. Shortly after I arrived on the scene a new campus was built. This was the reason I accepted the position. When completed it didn't look anything like a campus that a state would have built in a more affluent neighborhood. If one was blindfolded and the blindfold removed when standing in the center of the campus you would have thought it was a large prison complex with the various buildings being prison cell blocks. I was there for around 25 years and little changed. The classrooms I taught in were the same when I left as when I first started. If you were really lucky you might get an old fashioned overhead projector which worked most of the time. Broken seats in a lecture hall were to be expected. There were no modern classroom visual-aid gadgets to enhance illustrations.
For someone like a young me, naive about ethnic struggles and the economically disadvantaged, it took some time to get my bearings and understand this picture from life's other side. I grew up in a town with maybe 20% blk but for all practical purposes they didn't exist. I don't recall any animosity by myself or my neighborhood friends toward blks except the occasional racial jokes. The blacks all lived in the seedier part of town and there were no confrontations with them by myself or anyone else in my neighborhood. We were all Republicans through and through. We kind of all assumed everyone should get ahead the old fashioned way----earn it. I went through the first half of the sixties pretty much oblivious to all the social issues that were out in the streets. If these people marching and protesting in the streets didn't like it here they could leave. I didn't have any ingrained prejudices for two reasons: no one or group was bothering me, and my parents never said negative things about hardly anyone or any group. Participating in sports in the latter years of high school and in college brought me, for the first time, into contact with human and ethnic diversity.
Ending up with my first university teaching job at a predominantly blk university in the middle of an urban ghetto was essentially an accident. I was heading to a major University on the West Coast when the state budget there was frozen with a hiring freeze put in place. So at the last minute I took this other job. It didn't take long for me to understand just how different life was for this population. The public racial and economic anger was there and pervasive, but the truth was, if anyone would listen and be supportive of their individual efforts and situations, they embraced such individuals regardless of ethnicity. Still, the atmosphere was seeped in racism. Almost all the faculty were white, most of the students were blk. For the first time the University had a blk President but that was deceptive. The Board which selected the President was mostly white and any blks on the Board were appointed to the Board by whites. There were two blk University Presidents in the State. One at this blk university and the other at a predominantly white University. The one at the white University had applied to be President at the Black University but his name was summarily rejected at the onset and his application never permitted to go forward. He was perfectly qualified to be a University President, a strong creative person. The blk University got instead a Clown, an Uncle Tom who went around making ridiculous statements, harmless enough, but just ridiculous. At that point in history, whites were not about to appoint a blk to a position of authority who whites could not firmly control. So the black University got the clown. The conventional wisdom was that a predominantly black University needed more blk Professors---role models for blk students. BUT, there were few blk PH.D. candidates for positions and those few available would naturally take positions at prestigious universities via affirmative action. Of course there are lousy blk candidates as well as lousy white candidates for teaching positions. The only blk candidates available to an urban blk university were the poor blk candidates. Solomon himself could not have solved this problem to everyone's satisfaction. At any rate poor blk candidates would be accepted over good white candidates and this just compounded the problem of good education.
One of the first things I learned was that affirmative action was primarily a great deal for those blks who needed no affirmative action. Affirmative action was a bad idea as long as it had race attached to it. Why middle class blks attending good public schools and living in decent neighborhoods need special assistance or consideration is beyond me. And it was this middle class population which primarily benefitted from affirmative action.
Be all this as it may, a person like myself, thrown into that situation, saw it as an opportunity to help those with real needs. Over time, the realities of the problem, the depth of the problem, became more and more evident. Essentially, most of these young people had little of what more affluent young from better neighborhoods think they have earned. No one earns their looks, their place of birth, their parents, the grammar and high schools they go to, their physical or mental capabilities, etc. We all, as young people, are given our genetics and our environment. A good portion of these young people were eager to succeed. Most were the first generation to even go to college. If the eagerness was there, the obstacles were huge. Little had prepared them for legitimate college work---not the neighborhood, not the culture, not the schools they attended, and often not the family environment. On the other hand some of the students had amazingly dedicated parents or more likely A parent who did all they could to raise them right. I can't document this, but the ethics of most of these students exceeded those from more affluent backgrounds. Religion often played a bigger role for these students than those from more affluent neighborhoods. It was a rigid faith based religion. In some sense religion is the opiate of the poor. Because of their neighborhood culture and poor schools from which they graduated their academic skills were poor. It is hard to take someone in their late teens and make any swift improvement in basic academic skills. The window of opportunity was rapidly closing. When I say poor schools I am talking about the quality of the teachers. Good teachers naturally gravitate to the better schools in better neighborhoods with better pay. A lot of losers teach in urban or rural ghetto schools.
Added to all these other disadvantages was their economic plight. Most of these students worked full-time, had kids to raise (theirs or siblings), and had little time to study. They couldn't go slower, take fewer courses because they would lose their Pell Grant and yng people are always in a hurry. A good student from the best of environments and high schools would have a hard time performing well under such time constraints. With all the pressures and what not they often miss a deadline, or an important class, or made poor choices of the moment. Many rules exist for good reason and with good intentions, but rules should never be used to destroy good people trying their best under the most trying of circumstances. But most authority figures are of a bent that a "rule is a rule is a rule' and that is that. Fortunately, there will be those Professors who will intercede on their behalf, get them through one crisis or another, and enable their innate talent and determination succeed FOR THE MOMENT. When you do this, you feel good, like you have kept someone afloat and they will recover and swim away to success. Yet often, you see students, who had so much potential, years later working at the most bland of jobs, like the Post Office etc. It makes their efforts and efforts of others seem wasted. You wonder, what happened, why did they not have greater success in life? My guess now is that when your youth is filled with little or no unearned advantages, and your struggles are never ending and seemingly futile, at some point you just accept something, which is better than the nothing with which you grew up. It irritates me to see affluent people who had all these unearned advantages in their youth, act as adults like they earned everything they achieved. And this attitude is expressed in their politics: "I got's mine and if others want the same let them do like I did---earn it." It sounds so neat and obvious, but it is bullshit.
As I have learned to see it over the years, success is based on 3 variables. First are all the unearned blessings we are given which others may not be given---particular parents, a country of birth, a neighborhood in which we spend our formative years, schools which may be good or bad, our physical characteristics and physical talents, our mental quirks (personality), mental capabilities, our health, etc. Second are fortuitous opportunities which may come our way through no design of our own. And third are our conscious choices for which we can claim we earned. There are a lot of variables and most of them are not ones which we can remotely claim to have earned.
Finally, with all this lead-up, I am ready to tackle my friend's statement: "I can understand (although disagree) why you admire him (Terrell Owens). Although, there certainly are many other individuals who have come out of similar type situations and don't act in such a way that there behavior has to be constantly explained and defended."
There are two factors which separate Owens from the young people I have just written about. First, he was kept separated from other young people in his early ghetto environment by his grandmother. He was not allowed to leave the yard except to go to school or sport practice once in high school. His protestations were met with the explanation that she did not want him to become like the other kids---going no where in life.
Second, Terrell had little natural athletic ability. The other individuals my friend refers to in his quote, by far, are identified early on as having athletic talent and as a consequence are spoiled, pampered, and given all kinds of mentoring, support, attention etc. more so than other kids. Their athletic talent was a given, and it was a natural athletic talent which enabled them to stand out from the rest.I met many of these 'students' in my teaching career also. None of their good fortune was earned. They were going to be excellent athletes unless they messed up. Of course, as many spoiled but good natured young people often do---some do mess up. They are not independent, self focused, or, for the most part, self made in any way regarding their career. What they have is unearned natural athletic ability which, in certain sports attracts an army of people to help them develop their obvious talents. If these fortunate pampered athletes are in your class you will get phone calls and visits from tutors, advisors, and concerned coaches. These naturally gifted athletes are often fun to have in class; they can be funny, good natured, and personable in a polished way. Many of them are P.E. majors and P.E. Departments like to require a course in physiology for them to graduate. Of course that is a joke. They are in with pre-meds, pre-dents, physical therapists, nurses, occupational therapists and other assorted medical programs. Like most any other instructor I am not going to have the star basketball player made academically ineligible because I gave him an F in a physiology course. Like who cares how much a P.E. major knows about physiology? At best you give them a separate course for P.E. majors titled the Physiology of Exercise. Of course administrators don't like that, they prefer it look like they are taking high powered classes. It is certainly true that guys like Allen Iverson, Michael Vick, etc. did, as my friend states, come from similar urban or rural ghettoes, but had an army of people to guide and support their development. They by no means are self made. Spoiled yes, self made, no.
Terrell is unique. People who were on the same team with him in high school or his early college years hardly remember him. He was not a first stringer or envisioned to have all that much athletic talent. He was skinny and not exceptionally coordinated. He was shy, socially inert. All he had was assurance from his grandmother that he was 'special' and that he could be successful BUT, and this his grandma repeated over and over---others will try to stop you and can never be trusted to help you. From his grandmother's window he vowed he was going to be someone and not the nobody he was. He would, he promised himself, run through any hurdles anyone put in front of him. He then developed his own training program, trained by himself, listened to everything coaches told their star athletes, and made being a wide receiver the sole focus of his life. Terrell was drafted 89th in the third round of the draft by the San Francisco 49ers. By now he had bulked up, listened to what coaches told others, and had the good fortune to be teamed up with Jerry Rice. He studied Jerry Rice and amongst other things he learned that he was going to have to be vocal to make things go his way. The rest is history, and he is among the top five wide receivers in football history stats. His history intrigued me because what he did, by himself, almost exclusively, is rare. Granted, if everyone had the same self focus and strength to persist against anyone or anything that gets in the way, this would be a more difficult world. But then again, if you don't get the kind of unearned blessings that many of us have gotten, and the fortuitous opportunities many of us get, you are not likely to power yourself to the top. Terrell did, is an excellent citizen, has a strong sense of right and wrong, and is content to be walled off from the social circuit of others.The dislike of Terrell Owens seems to be his self focus (selfishness) and his love of attention. The first got him to the top of his profession and the second is personal, can be annoying, but is no sin. The attention, in his mind, is his reward for his extraordinary effort. Other athletes from the same background---pampered from junior high on with a small army of support----get their reward from a wide circle of friends and people who have been mentors of some sort for years. Terrell, a one man band, the ultimate little engine who could, walled off from others, celebrates as a one man band and HUGS HIMSELF. Isolated from others in any intimate way Terrell can be honest about his success. While others can stand before a mic and thank all those others who made their personal success possible over the years Terrell thanks himself and his grandmother. To do otherwise would be disingenuous and Terrell is bluntly honest. It is difficult to find other successful athletes, raised in a similar environment, who did it on their own the Terrell Owens way. For young people trapped in similar formative years environments, who are not natural born athletes, the Owens way may be the most likely way to succeed. I think if I were teaching such students over again I would tend to instill more of the kind of advice Terrell's grandmother gave him: don't wait for others or the government or anyone to help you. Help yourself, set clear focused goals, and whenever necessary run through any hurdles in your way. There are many 'nice' guys/gals growing up in difficult environments with few unearned blessings, and precious few unearned fortuitous opportunities likely to come their way. In these situations it really is true that nice guys/gals often finish back in the pack. If these students can find something they can be good at and focus on it with an 'Owens' intensity that exceeds the intensity of others, and then have the strength to force their way ahead, they have a better chance of succeeding. Young people with little, generally are extremely appreciative of those who help them along the way, but the reality is that this kind of help often comes their way too little too seldom to carry them to success, and they will end up settling for little. Terrell was smart like a fox: 'get out of the way, here I come---in your face--- ready or not.' Hey, it worked. And it is my opinion he is entitled to thank himself, to be a one man band. If one admires those individuals who manage to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, then Terrell is the pent-ultimate guru of this art.
Of course, for Terrell, like any of the rest of us, success at anything never lasts. At 37 he has pushed it further than most. The next hurdle for Owens will be one of a totally different nature. He is not going to win any battle against age and time. This is one hurdle he can't run through via sheer effort, determination or self focus. Can Owens accept the race is over, the battle won, and go gently down the stream? Which Owens can accept a hurdle insurmoutable? Owens the Fox? No way. Owens the emotional volcano? No way. Owens the Philosopher? If the latter doesn't win out age will not be kind to him.
We understand a lot about the evolutionary process in it's progression from simple to more complex physical forms. But we pay not enough attention to the evolution of the mind. With the passage of time humans have grown more civilized and ethics has grown. Humans are not as universally barbaric as in early ages. Oh, we still torture and disrespect but, for the most part, it is of a lesser degree. It is this evolvement which holds the hope for future youth who have little of the unearned gifts others have, who find few fortuitous opportunities to escape rough formative years. There is no justification, in any truly just society, for any young people not to have decent schools, good health care, and adequate adult support---whether it be genetic in nature or just support from non genetic contributors. There is no excuse for irresponsible reproduction and there should never be a situation where a child needs to be locked up to protect that child from going nowhere in his/her life. There is no reason why any child should have to have the innate qualities to be the 'little engine who could' or fail. I have more trouble visualizing future physical changes as a result of evolution than I do advancement in mental function, including ethics. Human survival in the evolutionary process requires responsible family planning. If this evolves, one way or another---and it will---then all the rest follows. For evolution to advance a lot of individuals within every species suffer badly, but at least not in vain. This egocentric notion that any of us are able to use God to manipulate good fortunes for ourselves I have trouble accepting. It is the wonder of God's created evolutionary process, controlled by the laws of evolution, which creates a more advanced world. Chance and luck are not bit players in life and those of us who benefit from both have an ethical duty to be on the side of those with less unearned blessings and few unearned fortuitous opportunities. To do otherwise can never bring real contentment and or any real justice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)