Page 8
E S S A Y S
By The Number
Fig. 1. A rose by any other name might be a chrysanthemum.
e29
The ENRICHMENT SCHISM
Contemporary human life, especially as found in modern western societies, is not altogether different, as a metaphor, from the consumed processed foods that line supermarket shelves.
Advanced human culture is as detached and removed from the “real” world, as is a fast food hamburger or hotdog from the slaughtered cow or pig from which it was derived. Humanity, while ever more sophisticated, demonstrates by non-virtue of its multiple-standard approach to animals, the environment and even itself, a common pathological schizophrenia that if manifested by an individual, would be grounds for immediate and forcible committal to an insane asylum.
Humankind consistently exhibits a contempt for the natural world from which it was spawned. And in so doing, has alienated itself from that real world in favor of some precarious attachment to a life without substance, minus all recourse or contingency if threatened by catastrophe. A lifestyle sustained solely by the availability of fossil fuel and electricity. And if taken away, a standard of living that would quickly crash backward through time and thrust the remaining survivors into a savage arena from which far fewer, if any, should escape the ravages of disease, starvation, and predators who would eagerly devour these humans’ intelligent, educated brains.
An old saying suggests that we all should “stop and smell the roses” from time to time. That we rest from the daily hubbub of our hectic lives and take a moment to appreciate the good we enjoy, and strive to improve what is bad. Unfortunately the blush is off the bloom, for the flower is plastic and our meditative reflection centers around exclusively human concerns, joys, and circumstances. Again we tend to ignore the full and rich architecture of our existence, the contextual framework that surrounds us, envelops and engulfs us, that binds us to it, it to us.
Alas, the hamburger and hotdog are a form of Biblical, heavenly manna, the source of which is neither animal nor vegetable, but rather is somehow technologically mineral. That mechanical, artificial intelligence is always measured in terms of a smart, humanlike brain, but rarely the passionate, equally human heart.
The Hopi Indians used the word Koyaanisquatsi to describe a life “out-of-balance”. Seemingly a reference to being out-of-sync with the natural world, and much to the detriment of all concerned.
An irony exists in the sense that the term itself is now an obsolete understatement that fails to adequately describe the huge gap, a rift, which now separates humans from their origins, their roots, from reality in its most basic, organic form.
Though proffered by the most jaded of misogynists and misanthropes, by those who believe one or more great conspiracies control the destinies of all governments and countries, it is probably not the case that a few powerful families or financial empires govern all economic and political events on a global scale.
More likely the status of world economies and politics is, at any given moment, the result of one or more of only three possible causes:
01. Incompetence.
02. Financial Profit.
03. Ideological/Religious.
An unholy triad exists that, by virtue of multiple and numerous private entities, both miniature and minor empires, independent, conspiratorial and figuratively incestuous, all at odds each with the other, is arguably at the very core of both human triumph and suffering. Members of this disorganized union of egotists include, but are not limited to:
01. Media groups such as TV, radio, movies, newspapers, magazines and books.
02. Government groups that include local, state, and federal bureaucracies.
03. Education groups that include elementary, junior, high school, and college personnel.
04. Religious groups that include both organized and nondenominational, nonsectarian institutions.
All of the institutions mentioned contribute to a new type of isolationism marked by large numbers within a population who lack exposure to, and suffer from an ignorance of, the diverse cultures, peoples, and conditions that truly exist around the world. The attitudes, demeanors, and world views of persons who have not experienced on any substantial level, a sense of the human community, tend to retain abstract views and remain removed from an authentic appreciation for themselves as people, and from global affairs as a whole. Psychologically such persons live dangerous, paranoid, impoverished little lives.
Given that most of humanity lives in squalor, is hungry, sick, uneducated, unaware and uninformed, the quality of life enjoyed by a relative minority is especially remarkable. An added bit of irony is how the most unfortunate of peoples are likely more in touch with real life, the actual world, than are their privileged counterparts.
Large groups and small whose members cling to the trivial, inconsequential truths of the world, embrace them with a jealous fervor. Like fanatical zealots they covet that which is narrow, shallow, thin, weak, mediocre, mundane -- and literal.
The great wisdom of the world hints that real truths are neither great nor absolute. That they are not the private, personal domain of any single person, group, government or religious faith. That truth is always passive, visible only to the casual, uninvolved observer.
Humanity in its climb to supremacy, has succeeded best in creating a synthetic, artificial existence. A social order that is so caught up in itself, so focused on its daily routines and machinations, all of which are considered sacrosanct, that the Earth’s physical environment is perceived as more to do with human activities, and less with whatever organic systems underlie the process of existence itself.
Among all the celebratory achievements that place the human species on a pedestal of superiority, Homo sapiens can also lay claim as the only animal to willfully and willingly disconnect from every other aspect of the world in which it lives and dies. This disconnection is so complete and absolute, so inculcated and acculturated, that humankind considers as blasphemous any suggestion whatsoever which describes a kindred relationship between human beings and other animals. The very notion that Man is merely an intelligent, sentient animal surrounded by kindred (albeit less endowed) others is rejected outright by many, and without debate.
In a haughty, self-aggrandizing leap of unrivaled, egotistical arrogance, humankind declares itself of Divine Origin. The crowning achievement of some omniscient, omnipotent Being who, between conjuring whole galaxies via a bent pinky, decided one day to create hordes of adulating worshipers. Then punish those who failed to glorify Him.
Even in the modern and enlightened era of a new millennium, Creationists persist in defending Biblical literacy, continue to argue against scientific, evolutionary doctrines and discoveries. It is no coincidence that such religious dogma, based on denial, should run parallel with concepts and life practices that attempt to segregate the natural “self” from the natural world. A myopic blindness whereas humans are indigenous, but not native to the planet.
A spillover effect indoctrinates whole populations with non-religious belief systems that nonetheless also view the meaning, purpose, and reason for human existence as unrelated to organic origins or dependencies. Further evidence that technologies tend, initially, to alienate their users from that which is non-technical in nature.
The inherent and inevitable neurotic behaviors that result from intimate relationships with mechanical extensions of one’s own physiological structures, leave the bulk of humanity vulnerable, susceptible, and prone to sudden and devastating catastrophic social collapse.
If humankind is to ever extinguish the passions that give rise to contempt for its true place in the world, for itself, its obligations, roles and responsibilities, the human animal must find some way back to nature. Must somehow meld the biological and spiritual with the technical. Only then will the self-inflicted horrors spawned by untethered minds be dispelled and eradicated. Only then will people see themselves as interdependent citizens of a vast community. And only then will the true angels of the human soul fly free of their self-imposed restraints.
Advanced human culture is as detached and removed from the “real” world, as is a fast food hamburger or hotdog from the slaughtered cow or pig from which it was derived. Humanity, while ever more sophisticated, demonstrates by non-virtue of its multiple-standard approach to animals, the environment and even itself, a common pathological schizophrenia that if manifested by an individual, would be grounds for immediate and forcible committal to an insane asylum.
Humankind consistently exhibits a contempt for the natural world from which it was spawned. And in so doing, has alienated itself from that real world in favor of some precarious attachment to a life without substance, minus all recourse or contingency if threatened by catastrophe. A lifestyle sustained solely by the availability of fossil fuel and electricity. And if taken away, a standard of living that would quickly crash backward through time and thrust the remaining survivors into a savage arena from which far fewer, if any, should escape the ravages of disease, starvation, and predators who would eagerly devour these humans’ intelligent, educated brains.
An old saying suggests that we all should “stop and smell the roses” from time to time. That we rest from the daily hubbub of our hectic lives and take a moment to appreciate the good we enjoy, and strive to improve what is bad. Unfortunately the blush is off the bloom, for the flower is plastic and our meditative reflection centers around exclusively human concerns, joys, and circumstances. Again we tend to ignore the full and rich architecture of our existence, the contextual framework that surrounds us, envelops and engulfs us, that binds us to it, it to us.
Alas, the hamburger and hotdog are a form of Biblical, heavenly manna, the source of which is neither animal nor vegetable, but rather is somehow technologically mineral. That mechanical, artificial intelligence is always measured in terms of a smart, humanlike brain, but rarely the passionate, equally human heart.
The Hopi Indians used the word Koyaanisquatsi to describe a life “out-of-balance”. Seemingly a reference to being out-of-sync with the natural world, and much to the detriment of all concerned.
An irony exists in the sense that the term itself is now an obsolete understatement that fails to adequately describe the huge gap, a rift, which now separates humans from their origins, their roots, from reality in its most basic, organic form.
Though proffered by the most jaded of misogynists and misanthropes, by those who believe one or more great conspiracies control the destinies of all governments and countries, it is probably not the case that a few powerful families or financial empires govern all economic and political events on a global scale.
More likely the status of world economies and politics is, at any given moment, the result of one or more of only three possible causes:
01. Incompetence.
02. Financial Profit.
03. Ideological/Religious.
An unholy triad exists that, by virtue of multiple and numerous private entities, both miniature and minor empires, independent, conspiratorial and figuratively incestuous, all at odds each with the other, is arguably at the very core of both human triumph and suffering. Members of this disorganized union of egotists include, but are not limited to:
01. Media groups such as TV, radio, movies, newspapers, magazines and books.
02. Government groups that include local, state, and federal bureaucracies.
03. Education groups that include elementary, junior, high school, and college personnel.
04. Religious groups that include both organized and nondenominational, nonsectarian institutions.
All of the institutions mentioned contribute to a new type of isolationism marked by large numbers within a population who lack exposure to, and suffer from an ignorance of, the diverse cultures, peoples, and conditions that truly exist around the world. The attitudes, demeanors, and world views of persons who have not experienced on any substantial level, a sense of the human community, tend to retain abstract views and remain removed from an authentic appreciation for themselves as people, and from global affairs as a whole. Psychologically such persons live dangerous, paranoid, impoverished little lives.
Given that most of humanity lives in squalor, is hungry, sick, uneducated, unaware and uninformed, the quality of life enjoyed by a relative minority is especially remarkable. An added bit of irony is how the most unfortunate of peoples are likely more in touch with real life, the actual world, than are their privileged counterparts.
Large groups and small whose members cling to the trivial, inconsequential truths of the world, embrace them with a jealous fervor. Like fanatical zealots they covet that which is narrow, shallow, thin, weak, mediocre, mundane -- and literal.
The great wisdom of the world hints that real truths are neither great nor absolute. That they are not the private, personal domain of any single person, group, government or religious faith. That truth is always passive, visible only to the casual, uninvolved observer.
Humanity in its climb to supremacy, has succeeded best in creating a synthetic, artificial existence. A social order that is so caught up in itself, so focused on its daily routines and machinations, all of which are considered sacrosanct, that the Earth’s physical environment is perceived as more to do with human activities, and less with whatever organic systems underlie the process of existence itself.
Among all the celebratory achievements that place the human species on a pedestal of superiority, Homo sapiens can also lay claim as the only animal to willfully and willingly disconnect from every other aspect of the world in which it lives and dies. This disconnection is so complete and absolute, so inculcated and acculturated, that humankind considers as blasphemous any suggestion whatsoever which describes a kindred relationship between human beings and other animals. The very notion that Man is merely an intelligent, sentient animal surrounded by kindred (albeit less endowed) others is rejected outright by many, and without debate.
In a haughty, self-aggrandizing leap of unrivaled, egotistical arrogance, humankind declares itself of Divine Origin. The crowning achievement of some omniscient, omnipotent Being who, between conjuring whole galaxies via a bent pinky, decided one day to create hordes of adulating worshipers. Then punish those who failed to glorify Him.
Even in the modern and enlightened era of a new millennium, Creationists persist in defending Biblical literacy, continue to argue against scientific, evolutionary doctrines and discoveries. It is no coincidence that such religious dogma, based on denial, should run parallel with concepts and life practices that attempt to segregate the natural “self” from the natural world. A myopic blindness whereas humans are indigenous, but not native to the planet.
A spillover effect indoctrinates whole populations with non-religious belief systems that nonetheless also view the meaning, purpose, and reason for human existence as unrelated to organic origins or dependencies. Further evidence that technologies tend, initially, to alienate their users from that which is non-technical in nature.
The inherent and inevitable neurotic behaviors that result from intimate relationships with mechanical extensions of one’s own physiological structures, leave the bulk of humanity vulnerable, susceptible, and prone to sudden and devastating catastrophic social collapse.
If humankind is to ever extinguish the passions that give rise to contempt for its true place in the world, for itself, its obligations, roles and responsibilities, the human animal must find some way back to nature. Must somehow meld the biological and spiritual with the technical. Only then will the self-inflicted horrors spawned by untethered minds be dispelled and eradicated. Only then will people see themselves as interdependent citizens of a vast community. And only then will the true angels of the human soul fly free of their self-imposed restraints.
e30
The CITIZEN GUEST
Part One
GUEST Defined:
01. A person to whom hospitality is extended.
02. A person entertained in the home of another.
03. One who shares the dwelling of another.
INQUILINE Defined:
01. An animal that lives habitually in the nest or abode of some other species. In the context of this essay, the term inquiline is applied to human beings who it is argued, live in a world that is not of their making and for all intents and purposes, is the property (or residence) of an unknown landLord.
Wherever someone lives and however they subsist, each exists in one of only three possible conditions:
01. As a gracious host who welcomes, accepts, or tolerates the presence of others.
02. As the welcome, accepted, or tolerated guest of a gracious host.
03. As an involuntary attendee who, by accident of circumstance, can neither escape nor change their perceived predicament or condition.
No single human being or group bears a deed of ownership which states that the Earth or its contents is their private possession. No one possesses an endowment or entitlement whereby all other people, by virtue of the good graces of their accommodating host, are merely guests in residence upon the Baron’s personal property. It is therefore safe to assume, until proven otherwise, that everyone is a guest while the true owner of the land remains unknown.
From a purely religious standpoint, it could be argued that God is the actual landlord and that we are His tenants. Further, that attempts to delineate and define guests as either invited or uninvited are irrelevant. For the purposes set forth here, the identity of the true owner(s) is not important, nor is it relevant how we came to be here -- only that we are. And that none of the world belongs exclusively to any of us. That our physical body, as an exception, represents a sovereign possession that exists beyond the scope of the principles outlined herein.
As a third category, a legitimate discrepancy may well be demonstrated whereas one sees and considers and defines oneself as an innocent captive, as a victimized “prisoner”. A state of being in stark contrast to the proposed alternative role of guest. With respect to this tertiary condition, it is certainly in the best interest of the prisoner that others see themselves as guests. Fellow prisoners rarely honor their own, and will abuse each other with the same violence as shown to any other. Hence it is also a good idea for those bent on claiming a prisoner status to adopt, at least superficially, the more sociable attitudes expected of guests.
Though prisoners are not bound to obey the same “laws” that govern guests, they are equally vulnerable to punishments, retributions, and acts of justice brought by both the lawful and lawless. The more that people regard each other and themselves as guests, the more orderly and productive their lives. Conversely, the more chaotic and dangerous their struggle to survive.
Be it thus resolved that humans are guests upon planet Earth and as such, should conduct themselves accordingly, in a manner consistent with the behaviors and responsibilities as described forthwith.
"I am prepared to die, but there is no cause for which I am prepared to kill."
-- Gandhi
GUESTS: Rules Of Conduct:
01. A guest is respectful and considerate of that which is not their personal property.
02. A guest is respectful and considerate of all other guests, with whom all things are shared.
03. A guest understands and presumes that all aspects of the world, inclusive of all non-human entities, both animal and vegetable, every form of fauna and flora, plus all other environmental elements such as air, land, and sea, and all such things as found in each, are either sovereign unto themselves, or are the private property of an unknown owner(s).
04. A guest possesses no special rights or privileges as concerns his or her relationships with all living beings “non-human” in nature. This rule applies only to personal and private “wants and desires”. Legitimate “needs” are exempted, wherein a single proviso is allowed as described in rule 05.
05. A guest, in order to satisfy basic physical and biological needs, and/or in perpetuation of family and kind, may destroy, kill, and otherwise consume any and all non-human resources as necessary. Further, that such resources may be taken in such abundance and quantity as befits anticipated and reasonable future requirements.
06. A guest who suffers injury as a direct or indirect result of another guest’s actions, or from a non-human presence, is not entitled as a matter of arbitrary recourse, to exact justice from or inflict punishment upon, uninvolved and/or innocent others, be they human or animal.
07. A guest must never treat another guest in a manner that they would personally reject as wrongful, if done unto them.
08. A guest must always discourage or disallow another guest, or prisoner, from behaving in a disrespectful, inconsiderate manner, inconsistent with the laws delineated herein.
09. A guest must never promote or endorse forces of indiscriminate, peripheral or collateral harm which are brought against fellow guests or non-human entities. Or, by inaction, permit injury or damage to likewise occur.
10. Failure to abide by these rules of conduct may alter one’s status as guest, and change it to that of prisoner. Once identified as such, a violator is considered both an enemy and a threat to all other guests and prisoners.
01. A person to whom hospitality is extended.
02. A person entertained in the home of another.
03. One who shares the dwelling of another.
INQUILINE Defined:
01. An animal that lives habitually in the nest or abode of some other species. In the context of this essay, the term inquiline is applied to human beings who it is argued, live in a world that is not of their making and for all intents and purposes, is the property (or residence) of an unknown landLord.
Wherever someone lives and however they subsist, each exists in one of only three possible conditions:
01. As a gracious host who welcomes, accepts, or tolerates the presence of others.
02. As the welcome, accepted, or tolerated guest of a gracious host.
03. As an involuntary attendee who, by accident of circumstance, can neither escape nor change their perceived predicament or condition.
No single human being or group bears a deed of ownership which states that the Earth or its contents is their private possession. No one possesses an endowment or entitlement whereby all other people, by virtue of the good graces of their accommodating host, are merely guests in residence upon the Baron’s personal property. It is therefore safe to assume, until proven otherwise, that everyone is a guest while the true owner of the land remains unknown.
From a purely religious standpoint, it could be argued that God is the actual landlord and that we are His tenants. Further, that attempts to delineate and define guests as either invited or uninvited are irrelevant. For the purposes set forth here, the identity of the true owner(s) is not important, nor is it relevant how we came to be here -- only that we are. And that none of the world belongs exclusively to any of us. That our physical body, as an exception, represents a sovereign possession that exists beyond the scope of the principles outlined herein.
As a third category, a legitimate discrepancy may well be demonstrated whereas one sees and considers and defines oneself as an innocent captive, as a victimized “prisoner”. A state of being in stark contrast to the proposed alternative role of guest. With respect to this tertiary condition, it is certainly in the best interest of the prisoner that others see themselves as guests. Fellow prisoners rarely honor their own, and will abuse each other with the same violence as shown to any other. Hence it is also a good idea for those bent on claiming a prisoner status to adopt, at least superficially, the more sociable attitudes expected of guests.
Though prisoners are not bound to obey the same “laws” that govern guests, they are equally vulnerable to punishments, retributions, and acts of justice brought by both the lawful and lawless. The more that people regard each other and themselves as guests, the more orderly and productive their lives. Conversely, the more chaotic and dangerous their struggle to survive.
Be it thus resolved that humans are guests upon planet Earth and as such, should conduct themselves accordingly, in a manner consistent with the behaviors and responsibilities as described forthwith.
"I am prepared to die, but there is no cause for which I am prepared to kill."
-- Gandhi
GUESTS: Rules Of Conduct:
01. A guest is respectful and considerate of that which is not their personal property.
02. A guest is respectful and considerate of all other guests, with whom all things are shared.
03. A guest understands and presumes that all aspects of the world, inclusive of all non-human entities, both animal and vegetable, every form of fauna and flora, plus all other environmental elements such as air, land, and sea, and all such things as found in each, are either sovereign unto themselves, or are the private property of an unknown owner(s).
04. A guest possesses no special rights or privileges as concerns his or her relationships with all living beings “non-human” in nature. This rule applies only to personal and private “wants and desires”. Legitimate “needs” are exempted, wherein a single proviso is allowed as described in rule 05.
05. A guest, in order to satisfy basic physical and biological needs, and/or in perpetuation of family and kind, may destroy, kill, and otherwise consume any and all non-human resources as necessary. Further, that such resources may be taken in such abundance and quantity as befits anticipated and reasonable future requirements.
06. A guest who suffers injury as a direct or indirect result of another guest’s actions, or from a non-human presence, is not entitled as a matter of arbitrary recourse, to exact justice from or inflict punishment upon, uninvolved and/or innocent others, be they human or animal.
07. A guest must never treat another guest in a manner that they would personally reject as wrongful, if done unto them.
08. A guest must always discourage or disallow another guest, or prisoner, from behaving in a disrespectful, inconsiderate manner, inconsistent with the laws delineated herein.
09. A guest must never promote or endorse forces of indiscriminate, peripheral or collateral harm which are brought against fellow guests or non-human entities. Or, by inaction, permit injury or damage to likewise occur.
10. Failure to abide by these rules of conduct may alter one’s status as guest, and change it to that of prisoner. Once identified as such, a violator is considered both an enemy and a threat to all other guests and prisoners.
Fig. 2. Don't these puzzles pieces look like people? Of all races?
e31
The INVOLUNTARY GUEST
Part Two
Simple mathematical principles, axioms, and solutions sometimes require elaborate, lengthy, and complex “proofs” in order to validate or demonstrate answers to numerical problems. Elegant, step-by-step, logically sequenced confirmations that gradually combine as a cumulative presentation of why a specific formula is “true”.
In like fashion, similar methods are sometimes employed so as to prove or illustrate why a certain stream of thought, an accusation of wrongdoing, an assertion of propriety, is correct, ethical, and obligatory.
Three cases that seem, on the surface, to confound most people who attempt to argue one side or the other, one viewpoint as correct, the other wrong, concern issues of capital punishment, fetal abortion rights, and the killing of animals as both a food source and a popular sport.
By far the less challenging of the three, capital punishment of condemned criminals has long been a source of controversy and debate. Once distilled to a few simple questions, however, one might well ponder what all the shouting and hair-pulling had been about. Why all the rage, finger-pointing and name-calling had been necessary.
Capital Punishment
Which of the following (A, B, or C) best describes your position on Capital Punishment?
A. Though regrettable and tragic if an innocent person is mistakenly put-to-death, an event that has rarely if ever happened, it is an acceptable consequence in order to take the life of people who have, under special circumstances, taken the life of one or more other people.
Capital Execution produces three positive outcomes:
01. Justice for society.
02. Closure for family and friends.
03. Perpetrator can never again kill or harm anybody.
B. Though often regrettable that absolute justice cannot befall a convicted, imprisoned murderer, the fact that an innocent person may mistakenly be put-to-death remains under-evaluated; it has likely been exacted upon many innocent victims, and continues as a constant threat to all future convicts. Though rare, such an event is so egregious an act, that the death penalty itself should be forfeit in favor of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
C. That it is preferable to set a guilty person free, to perhaps even kill again, than to commit the wholly immoral act of murdering another human under any circumstances, and especially when sanctioned by society as a whole.
Dependent on your choice of A, B, or C, how and why one stands on a particular side of this issue is quickly clarified and unambiguous. Immediately eliminated is an endless tedium of forever squabbling over vagaries and misunderstandings. All discussion has cut directly to what might be called, core-qualities.
Once presented, stated and defined as one’s position, further argument is futile, unnecessary and unproductive. Core-qualities, known also as “value judgments” cannot and, perhaps, should not be debated. Such qualities lie at the very heart of what a person values most, what is sacred and inviolate. Other examples of core-values include:
01. Religion, belief in God.
02. War and patriotism.
03. Morality and ethics.
04. Home and family.
When someone values more the death of a convicted murderer, than the wrongful execution of an innocent victim, no additional repartee is required. Conversely, when one values more the sparing of an innocent victim, than the justice and satisfaction derived by slaying the guilty, further debate is pointless.
At this level, minds are rarely changed. In a democratic republic, it is the votes that count, and simple tallies should, for a time, continue to dictate majority opinions. Note: Such voting should, however, be determined by a clearer appreciation for the circumstances as outlined by the three choices (A,B,C) provided above.
Abortion | Partial Birth Infanticide
More difficult to explain, even more emotional at its heart, is the topic of fetal abortion rights, and a woman’s right or denial to choose.
Analogies and metaphors can often assist and clarify how we perceive and interpret otherwise complex and confusing dilemmas, especially those which involve issues of morality and religious faith. The following argument imagines (envisions) the conflict of fetal rights, versus those of the mother, as a form of warfare. The proposal is designed to illuminate a discourse that is free of the usual impasses which prevent meaningful resolutions to the problem. It is assumed that all sides are in basic agreement on issues of patriotism, the need for self-defense, both personal and national, and that someone must do the fighting, and some the dying.
So-called pro-life advocates cannot demand justice for the “unborn” and have things both ways in their favor. Either killing (or murdering) innocent kids is wrong all the time, or only some of the time, depending on whose child it is -- their race, perhaps, and what uniform is worn. Once made subjective, then democratic rule must, as always, be enforced.
Thus, if one accepts the need for sacrificial death on the battlefield, so that others may live in a peaceful, free society, one hardly demonstrates consistent thinking if, on the other hand, he or she argues against a woman’s right to choose whether or not to end her pregnancy. Rational consistency demands that the mother’s right to free self-determination should take precedence, and thus prevail.
A reasonable, logical, and intelligent viewpoint perceives the unborn infant as similar, if not identical to a young soldier who we otherwise allow to be slaughtered in the name of patriotism -- in the preservation of our way of life. That no irrational exceptions are put forth with respect to issues of sovereignty, in this case, as if a woman’s body somehow existed as separate from her personhood.
It is more a matter of when, at what age, a person is “abortable”. Society readily sanctions the death of youngsters in uniform, the killing of others, then somehow condemns the loss of yet other children who also must pay the ultimate price for freedom. A war no less real, in terms of a woman claiming ownership of her own body, than a country of peoples loudly proclaiming its autonomy among the world’s community of nations.
Those who oppose a woman’s “right to choose”, who would make it illegal and punishable, must also condemn the nature and exercise of warfare itself, under any circumstances. Most of whom do not. Such thinking is entirely emotional, inconsistent and illogical, and is prone to nonsensical and petty arguments.
The only true, authentic abortion abolitionist is, by nature and practice, a staunch and unwavering, conscientious objector.
Hunting
Third among the original three issues under consideration is the topic of hunting, both for survival and for sport. The subject again brings to bear an earlier main essay that deals with people as either guests or prisoners on planet Earth. An argument that indeed promotes humans as guests, defines them as such, and argues against adoption of a prisoner mentality. Also provided is a precise list of principles and rules of conduct which all guests are obliged to follow.
Those who are against the practice of hunting, for almost any reason, will find themselves in total and happy accord with a portrayal of human beings as guests. They will embrace the concepts put forth, and wholly endorse the conditions stated. The “guest” principle will be seen as an accurate depiction of one’s opposition to sport hunting, and serve as a basis for all subsequent discussion.
Only upon mutual agreement by all sides, of all persuasions, to the general validity of the Involuntary Guest commentary, can the debate in question be resolved. In the event that no agreement is reached, with little or no acceptance of the guest principle, additional dialogue can serve no beneficial purpose.
In like fashion, similar methods are sometimes employed so as to prove or illustrate why a certain stream of thought, an accusation of wrongdoing, an assertion of propriety, is correct, ethical, and obligatory.
Three cases that seem, on the surface, to confound most people who attempt to argue one side or the other, one viewpoint as correct, the other wrong, concern issues of capital punishment, fetal abortion rights, and the killing of animals as both a food source and a popular sport.
By far the less challenging of the three, capital punishment of condemned criminals has long been a source of controversy and debate. Once distilled to a few simple questions, however, one might well ponder what all the shouting and hair-pulling had been about. Why all the rage, finger-pointing and name-calling had been necessary.
Capital Punishment
Which of the following (A, B, or C) best describes your position on Capital Punishment?
A. Though regrettable and tragic if an innocent person is mistakenly put-to-death, an event that has rarely if ever happened, it is an acceptable consequence in order to take the life of people who have, under special circumstances, taken the life of one or more other people.
Capital Execution produces three positive outcomes:
01. Justice for society.
02. Closure for family and friends.
03. Perpetrator can never again kill or harm anybody.
B. Though often regrettable that absolute justice cannot befall a convicted, imprisoned murderer, the fact that an innocent person may mistakenly be put-to-death remains under-evaluated; it has likely been exacted upon many innocent victims, and continues as a constant threat to all future convicts. Though rare, such an event is so egregious an act, that the death penalty itself should be forfeit in favor of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
C. That it is preferable to set a guilty person free, to perhaps even kill again, than to commit the wholly immoral act of murdering another human under any circumstances, and especially when sanctioned by society as a whole.
Dependent on your choice of A, B, or C, how and why one stands on a particular side of this issue is quickly clarified and unambiguous. Immediately eliminated is an endless tedium of forever squabbling over vagaries and misunderstandings. All discussion has cut directly to what might be called, core-qualities.
Once presented, stated and defined as one’s position, further argument is futile, unnecessary and unproductive. Core-qualities, known also as “value judgments” cannot and, perhaps, should not be debated. Such qualities lie at the very heart of what a person values most, what is sacred and inviolate. Other examples of core-values include:
01. Religion, belief in God.
02. War and patriotism.
03. Morality and ethics.
04. Home and family.
When someone values more the death of a convicted murderer, than the wrongful execution of an innocent victim, no additional repartee is required. Conversely, when one values more the sparing of an innocent victim, than the justice and satisfaction derived by slaying the guilty, further debate is pointless.
At this level, minds are rarely changed. In a democratic republic, it is the votes that count, and simple tallies should, for a time, continue to dictate majority opinions. Note: Such voting should, however, be determined by a clearer appreciation for the circumstances as outlined by the three choices (A,B,C) provided above.
Abortion | Partial Birth Infanticide
More difficult to explain, even more emotional at its heart, is the topic of fetal abortion rights, and a woman’s right or denial to choose.
Analogies and metaphors can often assist and clarify how we perceive and interpret otherwise complex and confusing dilemmas, especially those which involve issues of morality and religious faith. The following argument imagines (envisions) the conflict of fetal rights, versus those of the mother, as a form of warfare. The proposal is designed to illuminate a discourse that is free of the usual impasses which prevent meaningful resolutions to the problem. It is assumed that all sides are in basic agreement on issues of patriotism, the need for self-defense, both personal and national, and that someone must do the fighting, and some the dying.
So-called pro-life advocates cannot demand justice for the “unborn” and have things both ways in their favor. Either killing (or murdering) innocent kids is wrong all the time, or only some of the time, depending on whose child it is -- their race, perhaps, and what uniform is worn. Once made subjective, then democratic rule must, as always, be enforced.
Thus, if one accepts the need for sacrificial death on the battlefield, so that others may live in a peaceful, free society, one hardly demonstrates consistent thinking if, on the other hand, he or she argues against a woman’s right to choose whether or not to end her pregnancy. Rational consistency demands that the mother’s right to free self-determination should take precedence, and thus prevail.
A reasonable, logical, and intelligent viewpoint perceives the unborn infant as similar, if not identical to a young soldier who we otherwise allow to be slaughtered in the name of patriotism -- in the preservation of our way of life. That no irrational exceptions are put forth with respect to issues of sovereignty, in this case, as if a woman’s body somehow existed as separate from her personhood.
It is more a matter of when, at what age, a person is “abortable”. Society readily sanctions the death of youngsters in uniform, the killing of others, then somehow condemns the loss of yet other children who also must pay the ultimate price for freedom. A war no less real, in terms of a woman claiming ownership of her own body, than a country of peoples loudly proclaiming its autonomy among the world’s community of nations.
Those who oppose a woman’s “right to choose”, who would make it illegal and punishable, must also condemn the nature and exercise of warfare itself, under any circumstances. Most of whom do not. Such thinking is entirely emotional, inconsistent and illogical, and is prone to nonsensical and petty arguments.
The only true, authentic abortion abolitionist is, by nature and practice, a staunch and unwavering, conscientious objector.
Hunting
Third among the original three issues under consideration is the topic of hunting, both for survival and for sport. The subject again brings to bear an earlier main essay that deals with people as either guests or prisoners on planet Earth. An argument that indeed promotes humans as guests, defines them as such, and argues against adoption of a prisoner mentality. Also provided is a precise list of principles and rules of conduct which all guests are obliged to follow.
Those who are against the practice of hunting, for almost any reason, will find themselves in total and happy accord with a portrayal of human beings as guests. They will embrace the concepts put forth, and wholly endorse the conditions stated. The “guest” principle will be seen as an accurate depiction of one’s opposition to sport hunting, and serve as a basis for all subsequent discussion.
Only upon mutual agreement by all sides, of all persuasions, to the general validity of the Involuntary Guest commentary, can the debate in question be resolved. In the event that no agreement is reached, with little or no acceptance of the guest principle, additional dialogue can serve no beneficial purpose.
Fig. 3. "PLANET Of The HUMANS."
e32
ON the PROS and CONS of SPORT HUNTING
Animal Rights In An Enlightened Age.
Faunacide includes most forms of fishing, taking of wild game, and trophy kills.
Just as a police force substitutes for the unruly mob, the judicial system for vigilantes, whole industries are devoted to the procurement of food for the masses, thus sparing most average citizens the need to hunt animals and grow crops. Those not engaged in related businesses are free to pursue a wide variety of other endeavors of his or her choice.
Because of our highly developed senses, satisfying hunger is as much entertainment as it is the fulfillment of a basic survival requirement. As much a pleasure industry, and equal to any other. Need has become want, our wants now seen as needs.
Humans are divided in their eating habits between vegetarianism and omnivorism. Vegetarians are further subdivided into groups whose choices are based either on moral rationales, health concerns, or both. For obvious and more subtle reasons, vegetable matter is immune to debates over moral and ethical apprehensions related to the eating of meat. As mammals, we can neither imagine nor truly accept the notion that lowly plants possess emotions, feel pain or are intelligibly affected by direct abuse, neglect, or harmful deprivations.
Rightly or unfairly, the consumption of animal flesh is reserved exclusively for the purpose of this debate. Even then, the topic is clouded by fuzzy, arbitrary demarcations that separate higher forms of animal life from lower forms. By example, a mammalian porpoise is considered a superior, more sophisticated entity than a lower, less intelligent species of fish, such as a trout or salmon. Or sardine.
Despite being animals in their own right, bugs and insects are categorized at a level little different from that of plant life. Even worse, little more than inanimate matter itself. A chimpanzee is regarded as resting atop the highest rungs of an evolutionary ladder, while snakes and other reptiles, though ancient and successful, equally evolved species, are placed among the lowest rungs, and only slightly higher than beetles and bushes.
Cultural considerations come into play and dictate what animals, indeed which parts of animals, are deemed suitable for human sustenance, and which creatures are adopted for adoration as household pets. A situation exists whereby one’s pet may represent another’s highly prized culinary delicacy. The entire affair is chaotic, without rhyme or reason and, were it not for the unfortunate toll taken of animal life in the process, would be insanely comedic by nature.
It is precisely the mentioned toll that deserves our closer attention and keener evaluation. Inconsistencies may arise in our thoughts with reference to ideas that beg to know at what point should we, do we, concern ourselves with how animals are raised, treated, and slaughtered for the common good. Should those persons with particularly compassionate hearts be allowed to disrupt the “processing” of dumb beasts and interfere accordingly?
Plant and insect populations exist in such comparatively huge numbers, they seem like individual cells that, collectively, compose some larger organism. Few tears are shed over the demise of weeds or creatures whose nervous systems more resemble miniature computers, with instinctual responses to a limited array of stimuli, than they do living, sympathetic beings.
A distinct form of chauvinism is evident in humankind’s assessment of those animals regarded as “too advanced” or “too cute” or too something that prevents or inhibits their being killed and eaten. Aside from endangered species, other critters are equally protected and spared by virtue of any number of criteria, usually based on emotional responses to an acculturated aesthetic bias. Favoritism at its most lethal level.
A bit of information not widely known by lay people concerns the advantages that carnivores wield over their herbivore neighbors. Vegetable matter when eaten, is a relatively poor source of energy. Large vegetarians must therefore eat often and in quantity so as to sustain their daily, routine activities. Little time is available for anything other than the constant search for, and consumption of food.
Carnivores on the other paw, whose fatty, protein-rich diet offers extended and extensive levels of energy, can afford long, leisurely periods between feedings. One of the great contributions in the advancement of human social evolution, was the inclusion of meat, whenever possible, as a dietary supplement, if not a frequent staple. With the advent of farming both crops and animals, large numbers of people could then devote the new luxury of leisure time to the further development of technology, religion, and philosophy.
As an outpouring of philosophical thought, many people looked at animals, empathized and anthropomorphosized, and saw kindred, soul-bearing spirits. They visualized entities who, for one reason or another, initiated a reversal, of sorts. A situation whereby a conscious decision was made to intentionally turn from meat and ingest only vegetable products which, by comparison, were viewed as both insignificant and inconsequential.
Other persons, though not vegetarians, but with equal conviction, chose to adopt a lifestyle that, while enjoying the benefits of meat, would inflict the least harm possible on the fewest number and variety of animals. And thus was born the dichotomy in question. The disagreement between those who devour meat conditionally, reservedly, and those who hunt, kill, wound and maim animals for sport. Who may or may not actually eat the animals destroyed.
Sport hunters accuse their meat-eating opponents of hypocrisy and cowardice. Anti-hunting advocates condemn the sport as cruel, barbaric and, above all else, unnecessary. Hunters claim a right similar to “eminent domain” by which the superior, God-fearing human being is lord and master over all other life forms; he or she is thus free, is somehow entitled to cull from whatever herd the law permits. Indeed it is almost an obligation to do so, a thinning-out that benefits both animals and people alike.
It is acknowledged that circumstances do exist where natural predators have been reduced in number, usually by human intervention, such that prey animals experience overpopulation problems. The opposite situation is, at times, also a complication. Dilemmas of these kinds should not, however, be left for amateur hunters to solve, but rather by organized, humane professionals.
Two thoughtful arguments are possible which, hopefully, might convince one who possesses a “hunter mentality” that their recreational pursuits are fraught with philosophical/ethical problems. For many if not most hunters, they will choose simply not to care, or not allow themselves to be emotionally moved by sentimental debates, regardless the weakness of their position.
The first commentary points directly to the “Involuntary Guest” argument and attempts to demonstrate how the act of hunting, when the primary intent is for the purposes of sport and entertainment, violates several, if not all of the parameters outlined.
Secondly, suggestion is made that sport hunting promulgates and reinforces the lesser, more debase aspects of being human. That it is not so much what the activity does to its animal victims, but more how the act victimizes the doer. How, by rationalizing the brutality of “the hunt”, sport enthusiasts perpetuate humankind as warlike killers. Instead of macho frontiersmen, many if not most hunters are generally viewed as short-tempered, hot-blooded fanatics who at times, may see little difference between their fellow humans and those animals seen as prey.
An important clarification bears repeating. That an important distinction exists between hunting for food and hunting for sport (hunting for the adrenaline “rush” derived). This is despite the fact that afterwards an animal may indeed be eaten, its fur used, the creature’s sacrifice lauded, respected and appreciated.
Animal products found in the retail marketplace are there not because fun-loving, thrill-seeking weekend warriors gallivant about supplying us with fresh meat, but rather due to the hard labor of those for whom the killing of animals is a livelihood, no more enjoyable, or less, than the more routine jobs performed by the vast majority of ordinary workers.
It is the sport hunter who shuns the food already prepared and available, who willfully and for pleasure alone, succumbs to the darker angels of their soul and snuffs the life from creatures who bear malice to no one, and who belong to none but themselves. Entities who, by the very nature of their vulnerability and innocence, should never be slain or abused simply because they can be. Because no obvious negative consequences result, because their suffering is deemed unimportant, unfelt, and irrelevant.
Woe unto the souls of those,
Be they mistaken,
Who steal what is not theirs to take,
Who oppress the weak,
Who murder what would struggle to live,
And who, in their blind arrogance,
Presume to know the will of God.
Be they mistaken,
Who steal what is not theirs to take,
Who oppress the weak,
Who murder what would struggle to live,
And who, in their blind arrogance,
Presume to know the will of God.
Ultimately matters of ego gratification are ones of conscience and minds open to epiphanies. Many people indulge in certain activities solely because opposing viewpoints have not been presented or made clear to them. And once understood, those same behaviors, though not necessarily positive or negative, are never repeated.
As with almost all conflicts of conscience, where one must choose between two different courses of action, a helpful guideline exists that attempts to ascertain the potential benefits of one choice, compared and weighed against the degree of possible loss via an opposite selection.
Whenever the loss suffered is greater than any amount of good gained, a proper response seems axiomatic, accompanied respectively by decisive action which withdraws, ceases and desists from all further contention.
Learned and taught from otherwise decent people, passed from father to son, mother to daughter, sport hunting in the modern age -- at a time when matters of life and death are not at stake -- is motivated at its core by attitudes based on myth, tradition, and arrogant self-gratification.
If seriously contemplated, one cannot help but ponder whose loss is greater, whose life is more changed for the worse, whose personal domain was invaded, imposed upon by unwelcome guests, and for whom the luxury of choice was never an option.
As a simple update that risks over-sentimentalizing a relative non-issue, I once came across the largest fish I'd ever seen caught at the lake where I used to live. Probably two feet long or so, it’s body was thick with colorful, iridescent scales. The part that caught me was seeing the animal, intact, draped over a trash bin, smothered by flies. Someone, probably kids, obviously had no interest in the creature except for the brief joy they derived from catching it. I don't pretend to know what real value is placed upon these less-than-human creatures with whom we share existence, but it must surely exceed the miniscule consideration paid in this instance. No suggestion is made, however, that my observation proves anything one way or the other, simply that it was noteworthy.
As with almost all conflicts of conscience, where one must choose between two different courses of action, a helpful guideline exists that attempts to ascertain the potential benefits of one choice, compared and weighed against the degree of possible loss via an opposite selection.
Whenever the loss suffered is greater than any amount of good gained, a proper response seems axiomatic, accompanied respectively by decisive action which withdraws, ceases and desists from all further contention.
Learned and taught from otherwise decent people, passed from father to son, mother to daughter, sport hunting in the modern age -- at a time when matters of life and death are not at stake -- is motivated at its core by attitudes based on myth, tradition, and arrogant self-gratification.
If seriously contemplated, one cannot help but ponder whose loss is greater, whose life is more changed for the worse, whose personal domain was invaded, imposed upon by unwelcome guests, and for whom the luxury of choice was never an option.
As a simple update that risks over-sentimentalizing a relative non-issue, I once came across the largest fish I'd ever seen caught at the lake where I used to live. Probably two feet long or so, it’s body was thick with colorful, iridescent scales. The part that caught me was seeing the animal, intact, draped over a trash bin, smothered by flies. Someone, probably kids, obviously had no interest in the creature except for the brief joy they derived from catching it. I don't pretend to know what real value is placed upon these less-than-human creatures with whom we share existence, but it must surely exceed the miniscule consideration paid in this instance. No suggestion is made, however, that my observation proves anything one way or the other, simply that it was noteworthy.
Fig. 4. The high price of technology.
e33
DEATH of a SOLE SURVIVOR
In the famous story, “Zorba The Greek”, the main characters illustrate, by dancing, a method of coping with the tragedies and frustrations of life. In so doing, they submit and humble themselves to the forces of trial and circumstance that can never be cheated, fooled, or defeated.
An old saying tells us “the good die young”. Unspoken is the reverse which might suggest “the bad die old”. The question has often been raised as to why bad things happen to good people. Why long, healthy lives are sometimes enjoyed by evil, dastardly people.
In the dark little ditty that follows, Spaceship Earth, a metaphor used to describe everyone and everything as passengers aboard a craft hurtling through the cosmos, is also a place where, though the music is loud and lovely, some people can never dance. Can never reconcile the jovial ballroom inside, and the hostile wasteland of the dead and dying, just outside.
Similar to the doomed rows of innocent victims who once stood outside of European railcars, some selected to work, others to die, a finger of mindless fate points some to waltz, others to starve. Directs some to know only happiness, while others suffer only misery and pain.
Planet Earth is crash landing in slow motion. As a result of the catastrophe, innumerable fatalities of all manner of living things abound. With specific regard to humans, most suffer from either minor or serious wounds. Many more will eventually die from their injuries. Amid the carnage, precious few have escaped unscathed and these will, for the most part, live long and healthy lives.
Under identical conditions that transpire in real life, as opposed to the preceding parable, survivors of actual airplane crashes, train wrecks, or other such disasters, often suffer psychological distress due to their inability to explain or justify the good fortune or supernatural force that permitted them to live. Referred to as “sole survivor syndrome” or “post-traumatic stress disorder”, these common infirmities prevail as an unexpected response to what would otherwise be considered a lucky turn in one’s favor.
Few question the winning of large sums of money in the same manner we fret over someone’s cheating of death by equal accident. To some extent, no amount of counseling can quell the nagging, irksome fear that one was not worthy or deserving of their unearned survival. Certainly much less so than the many better people who perished instead.
In similar fashion, we hearken to the original analogy submitted prior, whereas the Earth itself is compared to an airplane, or space vehicle, its complement of passengers representing the whole of humanity. Even as this essay is read, the Earthship continues to crash and skid across the ground, taking a terrible toll as it goes. The edge of a cliff is in sight and one can only pray the craft stops in time, before it reaches the furthermost point, then plunges over the precipice into an abyss below. A final disaster which could spell the end of the human race once and forever.
The historical record of a human presence on Earth is, to a large and jumbled extent, a dismal chronicle rife with cruelty, tragedy, ironic and glorious achievement. It is a story of the need for a new redemption, of a saving grace that will balance or offset the inhumane atrocities spawned from advanced brains absent an equal level of wisdom. Beings whose savage, brutal nature is amplified, enhanced, accelerated by a raw intelligence with both the ability to speak and express complex, abstract ideas.
Akin to a young Jewish boy's bar mitzvah, at what time, during which era or epoch, did humans reach an age of accountability? A point when people could willingly, knowingly, decisively choose between malice and compassion, helpfulness and apathy. Certainly one of humankind’s greatest evils was slavery, and its abolition the most notable of triumphs. Some persuasive truth found its way into an uncivilized human psyche and, once there, forever eliminated the scourge of people owning people. A realization that changed forever, and for the better, the way people could behave.
Even today, however, dark pockets of slavery persist, kept alive by entrepreneurs who know better, are aware of the evils they promote, but remain unmoved, unswayed, interested only in personal enrichment at any price.
It is long since irrelevant as to just when humanity became of age. Far more that the time has come and gone. A benevolent treasure chest, a more positive version of Pandora’s box, long opened, has already freed the great and kindly angels of the human spirit. Beneficent insights have burned enlightenment into the deepest, darkest recesses of the bestial mind, given hope to the hopeless, and tradition to hapless, nomadic wanderers.
Unfortunately humankind has proven to be a slow learner, a slow teacher as well. Isolated cloisters of the wealthy, the educated and well fed have been, and continue to be, somehow content that the bulk of their brethren languish in squalor. Unable or unwilling to rescue those who, decade upon decade, during an ever more enlightened age, perish by the countless millions.
The modern world wars of the twentieth century alone, shed enough blood, wrought horrors in sufficient quantity that perhaps no amount of subsequent good can undo the wrongs done. Perhaps no deliverance, no emancipation will ever be possible, no self-forgiveness in the offing, no contrition great enough, whereby humanity remains forever soiled, irrevocably spoiled, and beyond all redemption.
It is a sad tale of one who murders a neighbor the day after their bat mitzvah, then goes undiscovered and unpunished. Who despite a lifetime of subsequent good deeds, can never restore the stolen life of their single victim. A notion that suggests, indeed asserts, the one truly murdered was the killer herself.
Spaceship Earth is crashing, its passengers dying at unprecedented rates. Those in first-class do not, cannot, and mostly choose not to hear the pleas and cries of their fellows in coach, who perish within earshot, within reach. The plentiful bounties enjoyed by those who, only by fluke of fate, travel unscathed, are piled high to every side and obscure all views of those who are already dead. Or soon will be. For lack of some trifle vomited up by an anorexic brat with Bulimia.
I am among the sole survivors who must somehow account for my good fortune, my undeserved blessing bestowed by an anonymous God. But I am not free, not off-the-hook entirely. Because I know. I have seen the suffering. I am aware of the pain and hopelessness that surrounds me. The terrible knowledge is a part of me for which no pill, no bauble, no amount of charitable donations, can offer relief of my personal anguish, albeit petty by comparison.
I am not a survivor due to my own hard work. Rather I am a consumer, some of whose appetites are satisfied by labors of both necessity and love.
I am lucky, which is a simplistic yet probably accurate estimate of my privileged condition. But others are less than unlucky. Many are less than unfortunate. Most of the world’s children die of starvation and disease, while overweight diabetics ponder the pros and cons of abortion. While elitist, wannabe aristocrats purge whole meals for the sake of a fashion statement.
I am one of the inheritors of a licentious legacy. Of an abundance for the few, denied to the many. As a sole survivor, a neurotic sense of guilt disturbs my sleep. Some foreboding sense of a premature death yet to come, unsettles my life. Some forbidding judgment that yet awaits, condemns me for not caring enough, not seeing or listening or doing enough.
If I am to continue to live, to thrive, I must get my mind right, my head straight. I must stay well, enjoy and appreciate the great gifts available to me.
I must no longer allow myself to care, to see, to listen. Nor allow the nagging troubles of the world to bum me out, to burn me out. Before insanity robs me of all joy. Before I lose myself in the delusion that all people are my brothers and sisters.
Or that God will someday cease to weep.
An old saying tells us “the good die young”. Unspoken is the reverse which might suggest “the bad die old”. The question has often been raised as to why bad things happen to good people. Why long, healthy lives are sometimes enjoyed by evil, dastardly people.
In the dark little ditty that follows, Spaceship Earth, a metaphor used to describe everyone and everything as passengers aboard a craft hurtling through the cosmos, is also a place where, though the music is loud and lovely, some people can never dance. Can never reconcile the jovial ballroom inside, and the hostile wasteland of the dead and dying, just outside.
Similar to the doomed rows of innocent victims who once stood outside of European railcars, some selected to work, others to die, a finger of mindless fate points some to waltz, others to starve. Directs some to know only happiness, while others suffer only misery and pain.
Planet Earth is crash landing in slow motion. As a result of the catastrophe, innumerable fatalities of all manner of living things abound. With specific regard to humans, most suffer from either minor or serious wounds. Many more will eventually die from their injuries. Amid the carnage, precious few have escaped unscathed and these will, for the most part, live long and healthy lives.
Under identical conditions that transpire in real life, as opposed to the preceding parable, survivors of actual airplane crashes, train wrecks, or other such disasters, often suffer psychological distress due to their inability to explain or justify the good fortune or supernatural force that permitted them to live. Referred to as “sole survivor syndrome” or “post-traumatic stress disorder”, these common infirmities prevail as an unexpected response to what would otherwise be considered a lucky turn in one’s favor.
Few question the winning of large sums of money in the same manner we fret over someone’s cheating of death by equal accident. To some extent, no amount of counseling can quell the nagging, irksome fear that one was not worthy or deserving of their unearned survival. Certainly much less so than the many better people who perished instead.
In similar fashion, we hearken to the original analogy submitted prior, whereas the Earth itself is compared to an airplane, or space vehicle, its complement of passengers representing the whole of humanity. Even as this essay is read, the Earthship continues to crash and skid across the ground, taking a terrible toll as it goes. The edge of a cliff is in sight and one can only pray the craft stops in time, before it reaches the furthermost point, then plunges over the precipice into an abyss below. A final disaster which could spell the end of the human race once and forever.
The historical record of a human presence on Earth is, to a large and jumbled extent, a dismal chronicle rife with cruelty, tragedy, ironic and glorious achievement. It is a story of the need for a new redemption, of a saving grace that will balance or offset the inhumane atrocities spawned from advanced brains absent an equal level of wisdom. Beings whose savage, brutal nature is amplified, enhanced, accelerated by a raw intelligence with both the ability to speak and express complex, abstract ideas.
Akin to a young Jewish boy's bar mitzvah, at what time, during which era or epoch, did humans reach an age of accountability? A point when people could willingly, knowingly, decisively choose between malice and compassion, helpfulness and apathy. Certainly one of humankind’s greatest evils was slavery, and its abolition the most notable of triumphs. Some persuasive truth found its way into an uncivilized human psyche and, once there, forever eliminated the scourge of people owning people. A realization that changed forever, and for the better, the way people could behave.
Even today, however, dark pockets of slavery persist, kept alive by entrepreneurs who know better, are aware of the evils they promote, but remain unmoved, unswayed, interested only in personal enrichment at any price.
It is long since irrelevant as to just when humanity became of age. Far more that the time has come and gone. A benevolent treasure chest, a more positive version of Pandora’s box, long opened, has already freed the great and kindly angels of the human spirit. Beneficent insights have burned enlightenment into the deepest, darkest recesses of the bestial mind, given hope to the hopeless, and tradition to hapless, nomadic wanderers.
Unfortunately humankind has proven to be a slow learner, a slow teacher as well. Isolated cloisters of the wealthy, the educated and well fed have been, and continue to be, somehow content that the bulk of their brethren languish in squalor. Unable or unwilling to rescue those who, decade upon decade, during an ever more enlightened age, perish by the countless millions.
The modern world wars of the twentieth century alone, shed enough blood, wrought horrors in sufficient quantity that perhaps no amount of subsequent good can undo the wrongs done. Perhaps no deliverance, no emancipation will ever be possible, no self-forgiveness in the offing, no contrition great enough, whereby humanity remains forever soiled, irrevocably spoiled, and beyond all redemption.
It is a sad tale of one who murders a neighbor the day after their bat mitzvah, then goes undiscovered and unpunished. Who despite a lifetime of subsequent good deeds, can never restore the stolen life of their single victim. A notion that suggests, indeed asserts, the one truly murdered was the killer herself.
Spaceship Earth is crashing, its passengers dying at unprecedented rates. Those in first-class do not, cannot, and mostly choose not to hear the pleas and cries of their fellows in coach, who perish within earshot, within reach. The plentiful bounties enjoyed by those who, only by fluke of fate, travel unscathed, are piled high to every side and obscure all views of those who are already dead. Or soon will be. For lack of some trifle vomited up by an anorexic brat with Bulimia.
I am among the sole survivors who must somehow account for my good fortune, my undeserved blessing bestowed by an anonymous God. But I am not free, not off-the-hook entirely. Because I know. I have seen the suffering. I am aware of the pain and hopelessness that surrounds me. The terrible knowledge is a part of me for which no pill, no bauble, no amount of charitable donations, can offer relief of my personal anguish, albeit petty by comparison.
I am not a survivor due to my own hard work. Rather I am a consumer, some of whose appetites are satisfied by labors of both necessity and love.
I am lucky, which is a simplistic yet probably accurate estimate of my privileged condition. But others are less than unlucky. Many are less than unfortunate. Most of the world’s children die of starvation and disease, while overweight diabetics ponder the pros and cons of abortion. While elitist, wannabe aristocrats purge whole meals for the sake of a fashion statement.
I am one of the inheritors of a licentious legacy. Of an abundance for the few, denied to the many. As a sole survivor, a neurotic sense of guilt disturbs my sleep. Some foreboding sense of a premature death yet to come, unsettles my life. Some forbidding judgment that yet awaits, condemns me for not caring enough, not seeing or listening or doing enough.
If I am to continue to live, to thrive, I must get my mind right, my head straight. I must stay well, enjoy and appreciate the great gifts available to me.
I must no longer allow myself to care, to see, to listen. Nor allow the nagging troubles of the world to bum me out, to burn me out. Before insanity robs me of all joy. Before I lose myself in the delusion that all people are my brothers and sisters.
Or that God will someday cease to weep.
Fig. 5. Can you say, "Ahhh ahquals ahm-sah-squard."
e34
LAST CHANCE at the BRAIN-TRUST HOTEL
Simple Solutions for a Modern Age
Times have changed. Things have changed. Albert Einstein, a long time ago, told us everything has changed. Everything except our way of thinking. But time for us is running out. The human biological clock is ticking down. The extinction clock of all life on Earth is nearing some unknown alarm setting. And the precious period that remains is being squandered needlessly.
If humankind is to one day explore the far reaches of an endless cosmos, its most valuable resource must be treasured, nurtured, fostered, kept free of harm’s way and, above all else, conscripted to form a cumulative alliance. The resource in question is the small population of intellectual geniuses, young and old, who could be found worldwide in every country and enlisted from every culture. Individuals whose mental prowess exhibits a propensity for special and unique achievements. Whose aptitude for excellence yearns to realize its true potential.
Such persons, though relatively few in number, exist as a vast pool of untapped talent, who are currently allowed to live in obscurity and fend for themselves. Who, for the most part, are likely to live under impoverished conditions in poor countries. Where they will live and die amongst those who could profit most from the boundless gifts spawned of the great but anonymous minds in their midst.
The towering intellectuals of the physical and social sciences, if sought, found, funded and supported, educated and encouraged by nations united against the many sufferings of the world, and for the sole purpose of finding and implementing solutions of universal import, could appreciably accelerate and expedite the necessary exodus of humans into outer space. The colonization of other worlds offers a solitary opportunity, in all probability, of saving ourselves from certain and inevitable, less grandiose and far more dire events.
No amount of philosophizing, round-table discussions, treaties, intimidation or threats will resolve the political and religious quagmires within which all human cultures presently wallow. The time to leave is upon us. To let those who would venture forth and settle new worlds, ready themselves for the journey ahead.
The responsibilities of those who stay behind is to gather up the keenest of human minds, coddle, coerce, and tempt them, tease their appetites for knowledge with fulfillments of dreams yet undreamt.
For the common good of all, of generations yet unborn, the overt obstacles of distrust, hatred and revenge must be set aside, just this once, solely for this cause, strictly and exclusively for those most involved and for the benefit of those least so. No nation or person need give ground or “lose face”. Everything remains the same including all feuds, disputes, and regional conflicts. Everything except our treatment of the smartest among us, and in all respects except our way of thinking about them.
Too much time is wasted haggling over the territories and natural resources of planet Earth. Sooner or later the technological equivalence of what were once known as "wagon trains" will, once again carry pioneers and their families into uncharted areas. Better for humankind that this migration -- emigration -- be sooner, for it is later than we think.
Great cataclysms, both external and internal, from beyond our atmosphere and within Earth’s molten core, threaten to delay -- perhaps forever -- the ultimate departure and subsequent survival of the human species as a viable life form. The tree upon whose branch our species was spawned will one day topple and fall amid the countless other timbers that presently lay rotting at its roots. Our failure to leave the nest soon enough will spell our doom the same as were we just another twig no different from any other. That lay moldering at the roots of some other tree.
Political upheavals, famine, disputes over religion, plus a multitude of other dilemmas hover just below the horizon of a precarious status-quo. All ready to rise like a black sun and extinguish the light from the brightness of humanity’s future.
A sense of urgency should bring together, if only temporarily, the wealthiest entrepreneurs, the keenest minds, and establish one or more programs akin to:
01. The hurried pace of atomic research during the Manhattan Project of WWII.
02. The joint efforts of individuals and industry portrayed in the movie, When Worlds Collide.
03. The organized social and military structures as described in Plato’s Republic.
04. The advent of new technologies as seen in NASA’s race for the Moon during the 1960’s.
Ironically, it is our current preoccupation with terrestrial affairs and problems that hinders our reach for the heavens. The old fictional stories of hideous alien invaders, if suddenly true, would quickly be cause enough for some form of unbridled unified action, where lesser squabbles were put aside at least for a while.
To the endless chagrin of those who understand the single, central dilemma that faces human civilization as a whole, namely the inability to coexist peaceably, no means seem possible by which an emergency siren might be sounded. A blaring warning that would alert, not the apathetic, argumentative masses, but the small numbers of movers and shakers who, by themselves, could begin a process that might avert the inevitable carnage to come. But one which, moment by moment, becomes ever more imperative as we continue to push our run of good luck. Amid a whirling roulette wheel of Earth-crossing asteroids, meteoroids and comets.
In the past, Prophets of Doom have been properly ridiculed. They have consistently overestimated the dangers involved and underestimated human ingenuity, including our social and technological developments. The undetected space rock on a collision course with Earth will make no such errors in judgment. The earthquakes and volcanoes set to devastate large population centers are not interested in statistical probabilities. Nuclear terrorism, the collapse of world order, will not be halted by the scorn heaped upon latter-day doomsayers.
In all likelihood very few positive steps will be taken in the foreseeable future, certainly too few, too late, to stave off the one or more events which will halt, perhaps indefinitely, humanity's continued progress. A very real possibility exists that, via natural disaster, social chaos -- or both -- human beings will lose their supremacy over Earth, and forfeit their current ability to enjoy a destiny of choice.
In full possession of the technical skills required, but lacking the will and wisdom necessary, people may awaken one day and view a new Star Of Bethlehem in the nighttime sky. A point of light that, without further warning, will blast humanity from the face of the Earth -- forever. A dispassionate executioner which even now, is surely on its way.
EPILOGUE
Sometime in Earth’s distant future, a great puzzle mystifies a visiting team of alien archaeologists as they dig through the remains of strange, once mighty civilizations. Their quandaries will undoubtedly focus on why such relatively advanced beings, with a great deal of technical know-how at their disposal, failed to avoid and eliminate the celestial impact event responsible for their extinction.
Much curiosity will be aroused as to what forces had prevented these commensal entities from colonizing other planets. Especially while the time remained, over an extended period, for them to do so. Time before a wayward asteroid had obliterated most species, erasing them forever from the roster and roll-call of survivors. All but oceanic worms and microbes still found in isolated niches.
Others from the expedition suggest that the asteroid came sometime after the reigning species had already died out. They point to evidence which indicates multiple cultures had undergone a rapid decline, had plunged into anarchy long before their ultimate annihilation by a wayward space rock.
On a small, tentacle-held measuring device, one member registers a high level of radioactivity not associated with the main impact crater. Nuclear weapons, the team muses, used against one another? What a waste, the group agrees, as they continue their evaluations. To have ascended so far from their savage origins, only to fall prey in the end to those same untamed instincts.
In their travels the team has seen such losses before, on other planets, where rising beings had succumbed to the idiosyncrasies of their lesser natures. Where each had failed to act in time. The travelers know all-too-well how their own species had itself barely escaped the tragic fates that curtailed the potential destinies of so many others.
The small band of explorers will finally abandon the dig site, only one of several such places on this forsaken, burned-out planet. As they leave the atmosphere and return to the blackness of space, each looks back at the blue orb shrinking in the distance.
A final report states how the species of this world showed more promise than many. That their minds were fertile, full of imagination and creativity. What might have become of them, the foreign scientists ponder, had these beings been allowed to mature, progress, leave the womb of their own planet and journey elsewhere.
What glory indeed might they have achieved, had these unfortunate beings, endowed with so much promise, permitted themselves to survive and prosper?
If humankind is to one day explore the far reaches of an endless cosmos, its most valuable resource must be treasured, nurtured, fostered, kept free of harm’s way and, above all else, conscripted to form a cumulative alliance. The resource in question is the small population of intellectual geniuses, young and old, who could be found worldwide in every country and enlisted from every culture. Individuals whose mental prowess exhibits a propensity for special and unique achievements. Whose aptitude for excellence yearns to realize its true potential.
Such persons, though relatively few in number, exist as a vast pool of untapped talent, who are currently allowed to live in obscurity and fend for themselves. Who, for the most part, are likely to live under impoverished conditions in poor countries. Where they will live and die amongst those who could profit most from the boundless gifts spawned of the great but anonymous minds in their midst.
The towering intellectuals of the physical and social sciences, if sought, found, funded and supported, educated and encouraged by nations united against the many sufferings of the world, and for the sole purpose of finding and implementing solutions of universal import, could appreciably accelerate and expedite the necessary exodus of humans into outer space. The colonization of other worlds offers a solitary opportunity, in all probability, of saving ourselves from certain and inevitable, less grandiose and far more dire events.
No amount of philosophizing, round-table discussions, treaties, intimidation or threats will resolve the political and religious quagmires within which all human cultures presently wallow. The time to leave is upon us. To let those who would venture forth and settle new worlds, ready themselves for the journey ahead.
The responsibilities of those who stay behind is to gather up the keenest of human minds, coddle, coerce, and tempt them, tease their appetites for knowledge with fulfillments of dreams yet undreamt.
For the common good of all, of generations yet unborn, the overt obstacles of distrust, hatred and revenge must be set aside, just this once, solely for this cause, strictly and exclusively for those most involved and for the benefit of those least so. No nation or person need give ground or “lose face”. Everything remains the same including all feuds, disputes, and regional conflicts. Everything except our treatment of the smartest among us, and in all respects except our way of thinking about them.
Too much time is wasted haggling over the territories and natural resources of planet Earth. Sooner or later the technological equivalence of what were once known as "wagon trains" will, once again carry pioneers and their families into uncharted areas. Better for humankind that this migration -- emigration -- be sooner, for it is later than we think.
Great cataclysms, both external and internal, from beyond our atmosphere and within Earth’s molten core, threaten to delay -- perhaps forever -- the ultimate departure and subsequent survival of the human species as a viable life form. The tree upon whose branch our species was spawned will one day topple and fall amid the countless other timbers that presently lay rotting at its roots. Our failure to leave the nest soon enough will spell our doom the same as were we just another twig no different from any other. That lay moldering at the roots of some other tree.
Political upheavals, famine, disputes over religion, plus a multitude of other dilemmas hover just below the horizon of a precarious status-quo. All ready to rise like a black sun and extinguish the light from the brightness of humanity’s future.
A sense of urgency should bring together, if only temporarily, the wealthiest entrepreneurs, the keenest minds, and establish one or more programs akin to:
01. The hurried pace of atomic research during the Manhattan Project of WWII.
02. The joint efforts of individuals and industry portrayed in the movie, When Worlds Collide.
03. The organized social and military structures as described in Plato’s Republic.
04. The advent of new technologies as seen in NASA’s race for the Moon during the 1960’s.
Ironically, it is our current preoccupation with terrestrial affairs and problems that hinders our reach for the heavens. The old fictional stories of hideous alien invaders, if suddenly true, would quickly be cause enough for some form of unbridled unified action, where lesser squabbles were put aside at least for a while.
To the endless chagrin of those who understand the single, central dilemma that faces human civilization as a whole, namely the inability to coexist peaceably, no means seem possible by which an emergency siren might be sounded. A blaring warning that would alert, not the apathetic, argumentative masses, but the small numbers of movers and shakers who, by themselves, could begin a process that might avert the inevitable carnage to come. But one which, moment by moment, becomes ever more imperative as we continue to push our run of good luck. Amid a whirling roulette wheel of Earth-crossing asteroids, meteoroids and comets.
In the past, Prophets of Doom have been properly ridiculed. They have consistently overestimated the dangers involved and underestimated human ingenuity, including our social and technological developments. The undetected space rock on a collision course with Earth will make no such errors in judgment. The earthquakes and volcanoes set to devastate large population centers are not interested in statistical probabilities. Nuclear terrorism, the collapse of world order, will not be halted by the scorn heaped upon latter-day doomsayers.
In all likelihood very few positive steps will be taken in the foreseeable future, certainly too few, too late, to stave off the one or more events which will halt, perhaps indefinitely, humanity's continued progress. A very real possibility exists that, via natural disaster, social chaos -- or both -- human beings will lose their supremacy over Earth, and forfeit their current ability to enjoy a destiny of choice.
In full possession of the technical skills required, but lacking the will and wisdom necessary, people may awaken one day and view a new Star Of Bethlehem in the nighttime sky. A point of light that, without further warning, will blast humanity from the face of the Earth -- forever. A dispassionate executioner which even now, is surely on its way.
EPILOGUE
Sometime in Earth’s distant future, a great puzzle mystifies a visiting team of alien archaeologists as they dig through the remains of strange, once mighty civilizations. Their quandaries will undoubtedly focus on why such relatively advanced beings, with a great deal of technical know-how at their disposal, failed to avoid and eliminate the celestial impact event responsible for their extinction.
Much curiosity will be aroused as to what forces had prevented these commensal entities from colonizing other planets. Especially while the time remained, over an extended period, for them to do so. Time before a wayward asteroid had obliterated most species, erasing them forever from the roster and roll-call of survivors. All but oceanic worms and microbes still found in isolated niches.
Others from the expedition suggest that the asteroid came sometime after the reigning species had already died out. They point to evidence which indicates multiple cultures had undergone a rapid decline, had plunged into anarchy long before their ultimate annihilation by a wayward space rock.
On a small, tentacle-held measuring device, one member registers a high level of radioactivity not associated with the main impact crater. Nuclear weapons, the team muses, used against one another? What a waste, the group agrees, as they continue their evaluations. To have ascended so far from their savage origins, only to fall prey in the end to those same untamed instincts.
In their travels the team has seen such losses before, on other planets, where rising beings had succumbed to the idiosyncrasies of their lesser natures. Where each had failed to act in time. The travelers know all-too-well how their own species had itself barely escaped the tragic fates that curtailed the potential destinies of so many others.
The small band of explorers will finally abandon the dig site, only one of several such places on this forsaken, burned-out planet. As they leave the atmosphere and return to the blackness of space, each looks back at the blue orb shrinking in the distance.
A final report states how the species of this world showed more promise than many. That their minds were fertile, full of imagination and creativity. What might have become of them, the foreign scientists ponder, had these beings been allowed to mature, progress, leave the womb of their own planet and journey elsewhere.
What glory indeed might they have achieved, had these unfortunate beings, endowed with so much promise, permitted themselves to survive and prosper?
e35
QUESTIONING the ANSWERS
The following “logic problem” serves as a parable for why the right questions are definitely the equal of any answers we obtain. If not superior altogether. Most answers create and force a grappling with new questions which themselves may be incomprehensible. It seems better that one formulate an appropriate question for which a reply, regardless of its nature or our lack of understanding, was at least anticipated.
A woman once found herself lost in the wilderness home of two separate and very different tribes. She knew that the members of one village were friendly and always told the truth. She was also aware how those from the other village were cannibals and always lied when they spoke.
While the woman wandered along a trail, weak from hunger and thirst, she happened upon a fork in the path, occupied by a lone native whose tribal affiliation was unknown to her. In desperate need of food and rest, the woman realized that taking the wrong route would deliver her into the deadly clutches of the cannibals. Choosing the other, she would soon be welcomed by the generous people of the friendly village.
If she asked the right question of the solitary stranger, the woman realized, he should invariably direct her to safety. After a moment of deliberation, she asked her question, went about her way, and lived happily ever after.
What question did the woman ask?
“?egalliv ruoy ot liart eht si hcihW”
Analysis:
A. Were the villager a member of the truthsayers, he would obviously point the woman in the right direction, and to safety.
B. Were the villager a member of the cannibalistic tribe of liars, he also would, by virtue of his lie, direct the woman to follow the path to the truthsayers tribe.
Only the best questions yield the most valuable answers.
A woman once found herself lost in the wilderness home of two separate and very different tribes. She knew that the members of one village were friendly and always told the truth. She was also aware how those from the other village were cannibals and always lied when they spoke.
While the woman wandered along a trail, weak from hunger and thirst, she happened upon a fork in the path, occupied by a lone native whose tribal affiliation was unknown to her. In desperate need of food and rest, the woman realized that taking the wrong route would deliver her into the deadly clutches of the cannibals. Choosing the other, she would soon be welcomed by the generous people of the friendly village.
If she asked the right question of the solitary stranger, the woman realized, he should invariably direct her to safety. After a moment of deliberation, she asked her question, went about her way, and lived happily ever after.
What question did the woman ask?
“?egalliv ruoy ot liart eht si hcihW”
Analysis:
A. Were the villager a member of the truthsayers, he would obviously point the woman in the right direction, and to safety.
B. Were the villager a member of the cannibalistic tribe of liars, he also would, by virtue of his lie, direct the woman to follow the path to the truthsayers tribe.
Only the best questions yield the most valuable answers.
Fig. 6. Exactly how I'd like my headstone to look.
e36
DEATH is MORE TAXING than POLITICS or RELIGION
Can you look ahead,
To when you’re dead?
Do you see clear skies,
Yet have no eyes?
Can you hear that music,
Without your ears?
Is your passing mourned,
By your own shed tears?
Though the party just got started,
It’s time for you to go.
And if you feel heavy hearted,
It’s for the oats you never sewed.
To when you’re dead?
Do you see clear skies,
Yet have no eyes?
Can you hear that music,
Without your ears?
Is your passing mourned,
By your own shed tears?
Though the party just got started,
It’s time for you to go.
And if you feel heavy hearted,
It’s for the oats you never sewed.
e37
Say What?
Hey, wait a second, this is some kind of joke, isn’t it? You’re kiddin’ me, right? Whadaya mean, it’s all gonna end someday, even soon, maybe? I’ve spent all this time, hard work, money, and a bunch else, only to wind up with nothin’? Or according to you, even less than that! And probably comin’ to an end that’s painful to boot? Yeah, I know I don’t feel as good as I used to. Hair comin’ out some places, growin’ in longer, other spots. Eyes’re only half what they used to be. Hearing’s a little better than that, but not great. I got more’n’nuff energy to keep doin’ my work, though. Got some to spare, too. Well, maybe not so’s to go bowlin’ every night, if that’s what you mean. But I still get around; don’t you worry about it. Get around real good. Yeah, I see a doctor, now and then. Okay, so I see’im regular like. What’s your point? More of this "death" crap? A buncha nonsense, I say. Don’t be tellin’me I spent all these years fightin’ to grow up, to figure things out -- even got pretty smart about some things -- only to wind up just a lump of dead meat. Some kinda corpse thing that some stranger’s gonna bury or burn up. You got a sick sense of humor, buddy. You should get some kinda help before you really hurt someone. Now, if you don’t mind, I’ve got things to do, people to see, places to go. And just to show you how worried I’m not, I can’t wait to see how good TV’s gonna be in twenty years or so. Let alone the flicks. Lotta other stuff besides. Maybe by then, some of this work I’ve been tryin’ to finish’ll finally be done. Wonder what stuff I’ll be doin’ after that? And by the way, just to prove how stupid your whole idea is -- about this dyin’ business -- you’re talkin’ to somebody who follows current events, international affairs, especially. You think I’m gonna fall down and miss how things turn out for them folks who’ve been havin’ all that trouble with . . . or wait, what about that terrorism stuff? Everybody want’s to hear what happens with that, right? And what about sendin’ people into space, goin’ to Mars, the space station and all them other things? No way I’m not gonna sit tight for that stuff. Been lookin’ forward to seein’ that happen, all my life. A life, you say, that's almost over. Well, you got a lotta nerve, buddy. Yeah, you’re a real clown; I’ll give you that much. A regular comedian. Well, 'n case you hadn’t noticed, I ain’t laughin’. Or buyin’ what you’re sellin’. Go peddle your bummer blues somewhere else. Go find some other chump who’ll listen to the baloney you’re dishin’ out. More I think about it, more mad I’m gettin’, too. Kinda fed up with your negative attitude and all, about what you’re sayin’ and stuff. People mindin’ their own business, not botherin’ another livin’ soul and here you come, all high and mighty and such, tellin’ folks how they’re gonna get sick -- maybe slow, maybe fast -- but dead all the same. Everything all for nothin’? Well, best you turn your ass around and get the hell outta here. I’ve ’bout had it with you, your stupid jokes, and the rest of your bull. All of it nuthin’ but a pack of stinkin’ lies, anyway. I swear, don’t lemme see you hangin’ around here again or, by God, I’ll kill you myself.
Fig. 7. Not a Catholic school. The teacher just dresses like a nun.
e38
HALF a GLASS of WATER
A Brief Commentary On Contemporary American Culture
Back when I was a youngster, way back in the day and attending first, elementary, then junior high school, I can still recall how part of the social studies or history curriculum involved our reporting on various "current events" taken from newspapers, television, or magazines. With items picked randomly as personal choices, these school projects were then presented to the teacher or class, along with written or verbal explanations as to the pertinent, relevant details of the events, and why they were important in both our daily lives and as world affairs.
Social scientists of today are very curious about the new generations of young people growing up in a very different world from the one that describes my own childhood -- from the one in which I and others of my generation grew up. The outcome remains unknown as to what impact, if any, a "graphically adult environment" will yet have on youngsters whose earliest and most recent experiences and memories include everything from hardcore pornography to the most horrendous violence imaginable. Children whose minds and vulnerable, formative brains have witnessed and continue to do so, intensely graphic images, portrayals, writings, and other machinations of a harsh world rife with minimal heroes and maximum viscera.
The following ditty portends to describe a modern, hypothetical classroom session where the children involved have brought in their chosen assignments. A typical day where each is ready to present his or her selection of a so-called current-event deserving of everyone's attention.
The topics, picked from any newspaper or internet news site on no particular day, represent the disconcerting theme of this particular essay.
Johnny brought us his report on the latest scandal surrounding another Catholic priest accused of molesting children.
On a related note, Alice discussed the recent kidnapping, rape, and murder of another little girl found near the side of a dirt road.
Not to be outdone, Tommy described a terrorist bombing that killed more than a hundred men, women and children.
Betty, who has two mothers and no dad, gave the class some interesting statistics about the latest death toll, worldwide, from AIDS.
Speaking of wholesale deaths, David related the staggering loss of life from a recent major earthquake somewhere in South America.
Julie's report suggested that more people died or were made homeless by hurricanes and floods than from earthquakes.
Ann bested everyone with her clippings on global starvation, especially the hundred-thousand children or so who die each and every day for lack of food or medical care.
Bobby, a real serious type, tried to steal the show by telling the class that an asteroid is heading for Earth, and will soon destroy all life on the planet.
Anthony, a true sci-fi enthusiast, insisted that the proliferation of nuclear weapons will kill everyone sooner than any space rock. Or at the very least, millions will suffer lingering deaths from radiation poisoning.
As a change of pace, Megan delivered a provocative piece on abortion and women's rights issues. She even included graphic, full color pictures of dismembered fetuses, which caused most of the kids to scrunch their faces and giggle.
Michael, in a short snippet, described the newest headlines about a sniper on the loose who has claimed another victim.
Emily, holding back tears, discussed her report of other child kidnappings, mostly between one parent and the other. She explained her personal experience with her own parents who are still fighting things out in a bitter court battle.
The whole class sat up when Melvin called their attention to the latest suicide bombing in the Middle East. As bombings go, his was considered one of the more entertaining, even exciting. A whole school, it was said, with lots of blown-up kids. He promised to keep everyone posted on whatever retaliation might be in store. Neither he -- nor the teacher -- expected that it would be a long wait.
Susan talked about how many more people die from various diseases every day, mostly children, than are lost to wars or bombs or terrorists. Too similar to Ann's report on starvation, the class seemed somewhat bored by Susan's report.
Dillon stirred things back to life with his explicit news about sex, and whether to abstain or go all the way, but especially the blurb on what turns people into Gays and Lesbians.
James stayed on topic and gave a riveting talk on hate crimes against homosexuals and other minorities. The class agreed that hate criminals should be given harsher penalties than other murderers, rapists, and muggers.
Brian, a child of color, used this opportunity to quote a group of Black leaders who insisted that racism is alive and well in America. He was surprised, however, to discover that many of his friends did not know he was a member of a minority group. They thought he was just Brian. His attempt to convince them otherwise met with mixed results.
Maria, a girl of Mexican descent, cited a series of articles that showed how people of color are treated unfairly when prosecuted for using drugs. The teacher had to cut her short when Mary claimed, without hard evidence, that she was often treated unfairly because of her race.
Jenny found an opening to introduce her topic on religion, and how everyone’s idea of God is different. And even others think God died a long time ago. Jenny’s report ended abruptly when someone from the back of the room shouted out that there never was a God.
Timmy changed direction when he delivered his dissertation on how Marijuana is not a dangerous drug and, according to some experts, all drugs should be legalized. Some of the other kids, members of the D.A.R.E. program, threatened to beat Timmy up if he didn't shut up.
Jesus talked about how the term, "illegal alien", is inappropriate and really refers to undocumented workers who are illegally prevented from crossing our southern borders. Especially since the gringos stole the land from the Mexicans in the first place.
Fists-Like-Rocks, an indigenous Amerindian, took Jesus to task by complaining that his so-called Indian ancestors had their lands stolen by the Mexicans.
Veronica used the argument to document the many similar kinds of wars still raging around the globe. Lots of fighting over whose land is whose.
Samuel then told how modern civil wars prevented needed medicines from reaching remote areas. How various “warlords” made lots of money by stealing from charitable donations.
Grant stood up and explained that most antibiotics in use today are losing their effectiveness and pretty soon, most people would start dying from bacterial diseases for which no penicillin was available. A few of the kids who had the sniffles didn't like Grant's additional report on the growing menace of "super viruses".
Marty chimed in with his debate over the world's contaminated food and water supplies, most of which is now fouled by numerous forms of toxic waste.
Ellen found the discussion perfect for her to introduce a stack of news reports which described how the oceans of the world are dying, with many important species of plants and fishes already nearing extinction.
Harriet broke in with a similar fact sheet on the rain forests which continue to wither away, although her particular article seemed like old news to those who listened.
Freddy got in a good dose of the most recent, up-to-date stats on global warming, despite the fact that most of the kids had to wear their jackets to school.
Barbara wanted to give her talk on local gang killings, especially drive-by shootings, but time ran short and the class still wanted to hear Billy's account of the latest celebrity murder case.
Social scientists of today are very curious about the new generations of young people growing up in a very different world from the one that describes my own childhood -- from the one in which I and others of my generation grew up. The outcome remains unknown as to what impact, if any, a "graphically adult environment" will yet have on youngsters whose earliest and most recent experiences and memories include everything from hardcore pornography to the most horrendous violence imaginable. Children whose minds and vulnerable, formative brains have witnessed and continue to do so, intensely graphic images, portrayals, writings, and other machinations of a harsh world rife with minimal heroes and maximum viscera.
The following ditty portends to describe a modern, hypothetical classroom session where the children involved have brought in their chosen assignments. A typical day where each is ready to present his or her selection of a so-called current-event deserving of everyone's attention.
The topics, picked from any newspaper or internet news site on no particular day, represent the disconcerting theme of this particular essay.
Johnny brought us his report on the latest scandal surrounding another Catholic priest accused of molesting children.
On a related note, Alice discussed the recent kidnapping, rape, and murder of another little girl found near the side of a dirt road.
Not to be outdone, Tommy described a terrorist bombing that killed more than a hundred men, women and children.
Betty, who has two mothers and no dad, gave the class some interesting statistics about the latest death toll, worldwide, from AIDS.
Speaking of wholesale deaths, David related the staggering loss of life from a recent major earthquake somewhere in South America.
Julie's report suggested that more people died or were made homeless by hurricanes and floods than from earthquakes.
Ann bested everyone with her clippings on global starvation, especially the hundred-thousand children or so who die each and every day for lack of food or medical care.
Bobby, a real serious type, tried to steal the show by telling the class that an asteroid is heading for Earth, and will soon destroy all life on the planet.
Anthony, a true sci-fi enthusiast, insisted that the proliferation of nuclear weapons will kill everyone sooner than any space rock. Or at the very least, millions will suffer lingering deaths from radiation poisoning.
As a change of pace, Megan delivered a provocative piece on abortion and women's rights issues. She even included graphic, full color pictures of dismembered fetuses, which caused most of the kids to scrunch their faces and giggle.
Michael, in a short snippet, described the newest headlines about a sniper on the loose who has claimed another victim.
Emily, holding back tears, discussed her report of other child kidnappings, mostly between one parent and the other. She explained her personal experience with her own parents who are still fighting things out in a bitter court battle.
The whole class sat up when Melvin called their attention to the latest suicide bombing in the Middle East. As bombings go, his was considered one of the more entertaining, even exciting. A whole school, it was said, with lots of blown-up kids. He promised to keep everyone posted on whatever retaliation might be in store. Neither he -- nor the teacher -- expected that it would be a long wait.
Susan talked about how many more people die from various diseases every day, mostly children, than are lost to wars or bombs or terrorists. Too similar to Ann's report on starvation, the class seemed somewhat bored by Susan's report.
Dillon stirred things back to life with his explicit news about sex, and whether to abstain or go all the way, but especially the blurb on what turns people into Gays and Lesbians.
James stayed on topic and gave a riveting talk on hate crimes against homosexuals and other minorities. The class agreed that hate criminals should be given harsher penalties than other murderers, rapists, and muggers.
Brian, a child of color, used this opportunity to quote a group of Black leaders who insisted that racism is alive and well in America. He was surprised, however, to discover that many of his friends did not know he was a member of a minority group. They thought he was just Brian. His attempt to convince them otherwise met with mixed results.
Maria, a girl of Mexican descent, cited a series of articles that showed how people of color are treated unfairly when prosecuted for using drugs. The teacher had to cut her short when Mary claimed, without hard evidence, that she was often treated unfairly because of her race.
Jenny found an opening to introduce her topic on religion, and how everyone’s idea of God is different. And even others think God died a long time ago. Jenny’s report ended abruptly when someone from the back of the room shouted out that there never was a God.
Timmy changed direction when he delivered his dissertation on how Marijuana is not a dangerous drug and, according to some experts, all drugs should be legalized. Some of the other kids, members of the D.A.R.E. program, threatened to beat Timmy up if he didn't shut up.
Jesus talked about how the term, "illegal alien", is inappropriate and really refers to undocumented workers who are illegally prevented from crossing our southern borders. Especially since the gringos stole the land from the Mexicans in the first place.
Fists-Like-Rocks, an indigenous Amerindian, took Jesus to task by complaining that his so-called Indian ancestors had their lands stolen by the Mexicans.
Veronica used the argument to document the many similar kinds of wars still raging around the globe. Lots of fighting over whose land is whose.
Samuel then told how modern civil wars prevented needed medicines from reaching remote areas. How various “warlords” made lots of money by stealing from charitable donations.
Grant stood up and explained that most antibiotics in use today are losing their effectiveness and pretty soon, most people would start dying from bacterial diseases for which no penicillin was available. A few of the kids who had the sniffles didn't like Grant's additional report on the growing menace of "super viruses".
Marty chimed in with his debate over the world's contaminated food and water supplies, most of which is now fouled by numerous forms of toxic waste.
Ellen found the discussion perfect for her to introduce a stack of news reports which described how the oceans of the world are dying, with many important species of plants and fishes already nearing extinction.
Harriet broke in with a similar fact sheet on the rain forests which continue to wither away, although her particular article seemed like old news to those who listened.
Freddy got in a good dose of the most recent, up-to-date stats on global warming, despite the fact that most of the kids had to wear their jackets to school.
Barbara wanted to give her talk on local gang killings, especially drive-by shootings, but time ran short and the class still wanted to hear Billy's account of the latest celebrity murder case.
e39
LAMENTATIONS of an AGNOSTIC
Part One
The bad news is that Heaven may not exist.
The good news is that if Heaven does exist,
Both humans and animals probably go there.
The really bad news is that if there is a Heaven,
It's probably only for the animals.
The really good news is that if you’re kind to animals,
You might go to Heaven.
Part Two
My greatest regret in life
is being trapped amid circumstances where I am forced,
absent all intent to do so, to kill many living beings.
Especially the smallest and most innocent
with whom I share this thing called existence.
Thus far I have seen no indication
that I am either worthy or deserving of such power.
A Rebuttal by Paul D.:
My greatest joy in life
is being free amid circumstances where I am able
to love many living beings.
Especially the smallest and most innocent
with whom I share this thing called existence.
Thus far I have seen no indication
that I am either worthy or deserving of such power.
My response to Paul's rebuttal:
Yes, of course, and thank you. Thus the Yin and Yang of all things. A natural alternative to which I wholly subscribe. Unfortunately your upbeat, positive version is the weaker of the two, in my never-humble opinion. The reason is that choosing to love or cherish or worship, even to the benefit of another, is always a matter of degree, the effect of which is not necessarily of significance or consequence to the recipient, but is surely meaningful to the person who bequeaths such affection; it is obviously important to the bestower of compassion and caring.
By comparison, when one chooses to kill, out of desire or necessity, it represents a finality from which the victim can never recover, escape, or reciprocate. One needs, I would agree, to exercise some restraint in espousing such a philosophy, however. The core notion that feeds such thinking, that every life form is a unique product of evolution -- an entity that will exist only this once in the entirety of the universe -- can rapidly digress to levels of absurdity. Where do we draw our demarcations of hierarchies, that separate puppies from microbes?
The general principle prevails, I believe, that love and gentility come naturally, and always via self-interest. But the decision not to kill, not to destroy, requires a higher calling of the human spirit not so easily tapped. In matters of priorities, simply where "what not to do" may be of a superior order than "things to do". Certainly in medicine, "at least do no harm" is considered the all-important prime directive.
The bad news is that Heaven may not exist.
The good news is that if Heaven does exist,
Both humans and animals probably go there.
The really bad news is that if there is a Heaven,
It's probably only for the animals.
The really good news is that if you’re kind to animals,
You might go to Heaven.
Part Two
My greatest regret in life
is being trapped amid circumstances where I am forced,
absent all intent to do so, to kill many living beings.
Especially the smallest and most innocent
with whom I share this thing called existence.
Thus far I have seen no indication
that I am either worthy or deserving of such power.
A Rebuttal by Paul D.:
My greatest joy in life
is being free amid circumstances where I am able
to love many living beings.
Especially the smallest and most innocent
with whom I share this thing called existence.
Thus far I have seen no indication
that I am either worthy or deserving of such power.
My response to Paul's rebuttal:
Yes, of course, and thank you. Thus the Yin and Yang of all things. A natural alternative to which I wholly subscribe. Unfortunately your upbeat, positive version is the weaker of the two, in my never-humble opinion. The reason is that choosing to love or cherish or worship, even to the benefit of another, is always a matter of degree, the effect of which is not necessarily of significance or consequence to the recipient, but is surely meaningful to the person who bequeaths such affection; it is obviously important to the bestower of compassion and caring.
By comparison, when one chooses to kill, out of desire or necessity, it represents a finality from which the victim can never recover, escape, or reciprocate. One needs, I would agree, to exercise some restraint in espousing such a philosophy, however. The core notion that feeds such thinking, that every life form is a unique product of evolution -- an entity that will exist only this once in the entirety of the universe -- can rapidly digress to levels of absurdity. Where do we draw our demarcations of hierarchies, that separate puppies from microbes?
The general principle prevails, I believe, that love and gentility come naturally, and always via self-interest. But the decision not to kill, not to destroy, requires a higher calling of the human spirit not so easily tapped. In matters of priorities, simply where "what not to do" may be of a superior order than "things to do". Certainly in medicine, "at least do no harm" is considered the all-important prime directive.
* * * *
You're currently on page NOU8
listed under NOUMENOMICON.
listed under NOUMENOMICON.
