The Power of Words

A rambling little train of thought I had this morning.

I had written a response on a friend's post in which I'd quoted a couple of things and they responded, "I love how you always have a literary reference."

Words can damage - the school yard saying about sticks and stones is rubbish as words deal significant mental and emotional damage, the effects of which reverberate through our lives long after mere physical wounds have healed.

Over the course of our lives we hear a lot of different things and a lot of different things about ourselves from a lot of different people - parents, family, friends, strangers - some of which are good, some of which are bad, and some of which are neutral. Most of the people who say these things hardly think twice about them. They say the thing and, once expressed, the thought passes out of them and they think the thoughts effect on the world has passed. But those words live on long after in our memories and merge with similar words we encounter from other sources. Long after we first heard words they echo through our lives, the moans of the ghosts of our past and swirl around us like a cloud. The effects of that cloud depend greatly on the words that make it up. For some the cloud is a healing curative restoring them, for others it is a fog of depression that they must constantly fight against.

In my life, while I was teased a lot growing up, I had great parents, family, and friends who gave me good words of encouragement, words that were echoed in the books I read, so my cloud is armor and curative cushioning blows from the outside world.

I have several friends who aren't as lucky I know. I can't see their clouds myself, for each of our clouds is ours alone, but from what they tell me, from what little I can catch a glimpse of, their clouds are like whirlwinds of tiny glass shards constantly imparting tiny little slices to their mental and emotional well being. One tiny slice is annoying, but one can heal, but dozens of constant tiny slices is a tortuous way to try to life, and I am in awe of their power, and strength and endurance surviving and thriving in such and environment day after day.

I feel it is extremely important, as a person who has been lucky enough to have an amazing, positive word cloud, to share my word cloud with others. Word by word, conversation by conversation I hope I can start transforming their word clouds from the whirlwinds of glass shards that they have been in the past to being a little more the armor and healing cozy cushion that I'm lucky enough to have.

I think it is extremely important for all of us to remember that when we speak to others whatever words we choose to give them will impact them more and longer than we think they will so it is important to make those words, so often as possible, words that are positive and uplifting and caring and avoid words that hurt. When we must criticize, we should try to criticize constructively.

I know I don't always succeed in doing this. It is easy to be carried away by emotions such as fear, anger, and hatred - the Dark Side - and fling weaponized words in an effort to defend our wounded and hurting core. But knowing how my friends struggle with their clouds day after day I know I need to keep trying even though I sometimes fail, because there are so many people like my friends who struggle invisibly with word clouds that I will never see or know and my kind words may be for them a rock in an invisible storm that I don't even know is happening.

As is my habit, and in appreciation of the kind compliment from my friend with which I started this ramble, I'll conclude with a quote from the opening paragraphs of Les Misérables by Victor Hugo, "Whether true or false, what is said about [people] often has as much influence on their lives, and particularly on their destinies, as what they do."

Just a thought as I sit here trying to solve the world's problems and dreaming of better tomorrows.

Life Lessons from my Theatre Major

      When I was an undergraduate in college my major was Theatre Arts.  Over the years as this has come up in conversation with various people and I've been asked many times, "Why?"  I didn't know what I did want to do, what I did want to major in, but I'd enjoyed doing theatre in high school, so when I had to make a choice and didn't know what to choose I thought, "Why not?"  Not too much thought was really put into it, but I'm really glad that this was the choice I made because it has prepared me so much to live my life.  The theatre is, in so many ways, a microcosm of real life - as Jaques observes in As You Like It, "All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players."  I learned public speaking, basic carpentry, and some basic sewing.  But some of the best things I learned were some of the subtlest and while I appreciated them initially on a superficial level over time I have come to appreciate them as some of the most valuable things I've learned to help me in my day to day life.

1) Public Speaking

I have been amazed over the course of my life to observe how many people there are who are terrified by the idea of speaking in public.  This is particularly interesting as public speaking, in my experience, is something that *everyone* has to do sometimes.  Thanks to my experiences in Theatre I was able to overcome that fear before it became a fear and this has been very useful to me and something I have been able to pass along to others to help them overcome their fear and help them speak aloud and share their voice with the world.

2) Adaptation

There are many great life lessons for non-theatrical folk in Konstantin Stanislavski's "An Actor Prepares" and I highly recommend it to everyone.  Due to the idea, as mentioned above, of "All the world's a stage...", I think, like Sun Tzu's "Art of War", Stanislavski's "An Actor Prepares" is a work that is of great use in it's field and outside of it's field as well.  As an INTJ type personality who likes planning and having things happen predictably the chapter about Adaptation spoke very strongly to me.  Planning and predictability are important, but as Helmuth von Moltke observed, "No battle plan survives contact with the enemy."  There are always obstacles in life and learning how to adapt your plans, while continuing to drive toward your goals (and the plot points required to advance through the scene towards the end of the play) in spite of obstacles is a great skill that the Theatre helped me learn.

3) Appreciating Masks

In Theatre I learned about wearing masks, both literally and figuratively, for playing a role and presenting outward appearances to audiences.  I also learned how everyone wears figurative masks in daily life to project the image or role of themselves to the outside world that they choose to project - whether it is because it is what is expected, because it is not what's expected, or because that is the image or role they choose to project regardless of expectation.  That mask may or may not reflect facets of their true self hidden behind their mask, and both are OK.  Learning that granted a vast gift of freedom to me.  I could both be who I wanted to be outwardly and be who I wanted to be inwardly and the two could have as much or little relationship as I chose.  When I enlisted in the Air Force I could play the role of an Airman while protecting the me inside behind the shield of the mask I wore.  In Basic Military Training I observed the Military Training Instructors doing the same thing as I had been trained to see the masks, and when on one or two rare occasions they let their mask slip for a moment and I saw a flash of what lay beneath it once again brought home the lesson that all of us do this, consciously or not, and that having awareness and conscious control of it was an amazing gift and capability that helps me everyday.

4) Appreciating "Sight Lines"

In a lot of ways this goes along with the previous lesson.  When you stage a production in a theatre you always have to be aware of the audience's "sight lines" - what they can or can't see from any given seat.  Can they see backstage?  Can they see an important bit of blocking (movement)?  Can they see something that might break a bit of stage "magic" for them?  It's much the same way in real life, thinking about different people's points of view, what they can or can't see from their vantage point in the seat of their life.  Whether working to help people see everything "on stage" in their life, or trying to keep the backstage of my life backstage, the appreciation of sight lines is very important.

5) Useful Practical Skills

This is a bit of a catchall area admittedly.  There are so many useful practical skills I learned in Theatre that are tremendously useful to me.  Basic carpentry and painting from scene construction, knowledge of different fabrics and how to care for them as well as basic sewing and ironing from costuming, Neutral Breathing to help with emotional self-control from Alba Emoting...

There are loads of things I learned in the theatre that are immensely useful to me every day of my life.  I'm so glad I am a Theatre Major.

"The Road Not Taken - by Robert Frost

TWO roads diverged in a yellow wood,  

And sorry I could not travel both  

And be one traveler, long I stood  

And looked down one as far as I could  

To where it bent in the undergrowth;

  

Then took the other, as just as fair,  

And having perhaps the better claim  

Because it was grassy and wanted wear;  

Though as for that, the passing there  

Had worn them really about the same,

  

And both that morning equally lay  

In leaves no step had trodden black.  

Oh, I marked the first for another day!  

Yet knowing how way leads on to way  

I doubted if I should ever come back.

  

I shall be telling this with a sigh  

Somewhere ages and ages hence:  

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,  

I took the one less traveled by,  

And that has made all the difference."

Foundation for the Future

I was listening to The Skeptics Guide to the Universe and they were discussing the growing drought in California and the consequent pressure on the California aquifer and many other aquifers in similarly serious condition.  With the serious repercussions that a lack of water in highly populated areas would have both locally and globally as many people die, those who can afford to relocate to other regions and increase the pressure on their water and other resources, I think this is a serious problem that needs attention.  Those conditions combined with climate change and it's implications, which are equally potentially catastrophic (and intertwined with the water issue) have me wanting to join with others to do what I can to safeguard and promote the future of humanity.  I would like to join with an participate in an organization along the lines of a Foundation for the Future.

My conceptualization of such an organization draws on the inspiration of fictional organizations such as Asimov's Foundation and Roddenberry's United Federation of Planets.  The other side of the survivalist coin, such an organization would also be aimed at survival and obtaining the best possible outcomes, but for all rather than merely for self and tribe.  I see the mission of such an organization including such elements as:

1. Endeavoring to predict "Failure Modes" for humanity or significant sections of it.  (i.e. avoiding Great Filters if we can)
2. Once predicted act in two manners simultaneously:
1. Gather resources (technological, interpersonal, financial, political, etc.) to direct at minimizing the probability and/or severity of such a "Failure Mode"
2. Gather resources (technological, interpersonal, financial, political, etc.) to direct at assisting humanity adapt to and survive the occurrence of such a "Failure Mode"
3. Work to promote habits in the general populace generally aimed at minimizing the probability and/or severity of "Failure Modes" both foreseen and unforeseen:
1. Promotion of Critical Thinking and Rationality
2. Promotion of Tact, Respect, and Diplomacy
3. Promotion of Education - STEM and Humanities both
4. Other "Habits of Highly Effective Humans"

Does anyone know of such an organization I can participate in?  If not, what can we do to create one?

Just a thought as I sit here trying to solve the world's problems and dreaming of better tomorrows.

A Proposal for the Improvement of American Democracy

Before going into my proposal for alterations to the electoral system of the United States Federal Government, I will first state upfront what I consider the the design goals to be.


1) The first words of the Constitution are "We the People of the United States..." indicating that in the view of the framers, and myself, that the government should, ideally arise from the people. Through the 19th and 20th centuries we have improved our achievement of that premise be allowing an increasing percentage of our population the rights and responsibilities of voting. In view of this the primary design goal should be the the striving for maximal voter participation, or at the very least minimizing the difficulties for anyone to participate.  That said - Corporations are *not* people - they are entities created for the purpose of commerce and have no business in the realm of politics.  Their interests are amply and sufficiently represented by the actual people that they are composed of.

2) It is my belief that is is through discussion, debate, and civil discord that we are strengthened, hence my moniker's nod to the fictional Vulcan philosophy of Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. As such, a strong American Democratic system should allow for as many different perspectives as possible to have a seat at the table for discussions on our national will.  At present the pressures of the "first past the post" system force the politics of the United States into a two party system that loses much of the nuance of different voices and opinions in the condensation of many perspectives along a full spectrum into two polar parties each of which averages opinions and endeavors to represent a large portion of the population, and in doing so, naturally, does not represent it well.


In order to accomplish these things and eliminate gerrymandering and other election shenanigans, I think we should modify our existing federal electoral system in the following ways:

1) Fix the Citizens United error and minimize the influence of money in politics - political discussions should be about ideas, not money. There are many good efforts underway at present to attempt to rectify this issue, such as WolfPAC, Move to Amend, Reclaim Democracy and others. In returning to the fundamentals of democracy this alteration supports the first design goal.

2) Eliminate representative districts. Senators can still represent states, but Representatives are re-designated to represent the portion of the population that elected them. People vote for parties rather than people, seats are allotted to the parties to fill based on the percentage of the votes they received. If a Representative does not adequately represent the interests of the party that they represent, the party has the authority to replace them with another representative. It is the ideas not the people that are being voted on. If Republicans get 25% of the vote, they get 25% of the seats. If the Tea party gets 30% of the vote, they get 30% of the seats, and so on for Democrats, Greens, Progressives, Socialists, Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, etc. It is to the benefit of people of every political stripe to make sure that their view and that of others like them is represented as accurately as possible. This should break up the two party system and allow more voices at the table, thus supporting design goal number two.

3) Eliminate the Electoral College, the presidency is decided by popular vote. Perhaps with an instant run-off system in the case of a tie. This supports design goal number one.

4) Follow Oregon's lead and automatically register all eligible voters. Voting isn't mandatory, but it is made as easy as possible for anyone who wants to to participate and make their voice heard to do so. This supports design goal number one.

5) Election Day is a mandatory national holiday. Potentially move it from November to the 4th of July to minimize disruption to business and harness the historic and emotional zeitgeist to maximize voter turn out to make sure that the government of the people by the people for the people most accurately reflects the voice of *all* the people.  This supports both design goals.

Just a thought as I sit here trying to solve the world's problems and dreaming of better tomorrows.

Favorite Wisdoms from Great books

"My father, a wise and grave man, gave me serious and excellent counsel against what he foresaw was my design. He called me one morning into his chamber, where he was confined by the gout, and expostulated very warmly with me upon this subject. He asked me what reasons, more than a mere wandering inclination, I had for leaving father's house and my native country, where I might be well introduced, and had a prospect of raising my fortune by application and industry, with a life of ease and pleasure. He told me it was men of desperate fortunes on one hand, or of aspiring, superior fortunes on the other, who went abroad upon adventures, to rise by enterprise, and make themselves famous in undertakings of a nature out of the common road; that these things were all either too far above me or too far below me; that mine was the middle state, or what might be called the upper station of low life, which he had found, by long experience, was the best state in the world, the most suited to human happiness, not exposed to the miseries and hardships, the labour and sufferings of the mechanic part of mankind, and not embarrassed with the pride, luxury, ambition, and envy of the upper part of mankind. He told me I might judge of the happiness of this state by this one thing-viz. that this was the state of life which all other people envied; that kings have frequently lamented the miserable consequence of being born to great things, and wished they had been placed in the middle of the two extremes, between the mean and the great; that the wise man gave his testimony to this, as the standard of felicity, when he prayed to have neither poverty nor riches.

He bade me observe it, and I should always find that the calamities of life were shared among the upper and lower part of mankind, but that the middle station had the fewest disasters, and was not exposed to so many vicissitudes as the higher or lower part of mankind; nay, they were not subjected to so many distempers and uneasinesses, either of body or mind, as those were who, by vicious living, luxury, and extravagances on the one hand, or by hard labour, want of necessaries, and mean or insufficient diet on the other hand, bring distemper upon themselves by the natural consequences of their way of living; that the middle station of life was calculated for all kind of virtue and all kind of enjoyments; that peace and plenty were the handmaids of a middle fortune; that temperance, moderation, quietness, health, society, all agreeable diversions, and all desirable pleasures, were the blessings attending the middle station of life; that this way men went silently and smoothly through the world, and comfortably out of it, not embarrassed with the labours of the hands or of the head, not sold to a life of slavery for daily bread, nor harassed with perplexed circumstances, which rob the soul of peace and the body of rest, nor enraged with the passion of envy, or the secret burning lust of ambition for great things; but, in easy circumstances, sliding gently through the world, and sensibly tasting the sweets of living, without the bitter; feeling that they are happy, and learning by every day's experience to know it more sensibly,"

- Robinson Crusoe, Daniel Defoe (Chapter 1, paragraphs 4&5 - sometimes you don't have to dig deep to find great pearls of wisdom)

"True or false, that which is said of men often occupies as important a place in their lives, and above all in their destinies, as that which they do."

- Les Miserables, Victor Hugo (Book 1, Chapter 1, last line of Paragraph 2 - again sometimes you don't have to dig deep to find great pearls of wisdom)

"On emerging from that black and deformed thing which is called the galleys, the Bishop had hurt his soul, as too vivid a light would have hurt his eyes on emerging from the dark. The future life, the possible life which offered itself to him henceforth, all pure and radiant, filled him with tremors and anxiety. He no longer knew where he really was. Like an owl, who should suddenly see the sun rise, the convict had been dazzled and blinded, as it were, by virtue."

- Les Miserables, Victor Hugo (Book 2, Chapter 13 - sometimes you *do* have to dig deep to find great pearls of wisdom)

"Long ago I yearned to be a hero without knowing, in truth, what a hero was. Now, perhaps, I understand it a little better. A grower of turnips or a shaper of clay, a Commot farmer or a king--every man is a hero if he strives more for others than for himself alone.
Once you told me that the seeking counts more than the finding. So, too, must the striving count more than the gain."

- The High King, Lloyd Alexander

Creationism, oops, Intelligent Design in the classroom

I find the classroom of a school to be no place for the discussion of creationism or intelligent design or what have you. How lazy are parents these days when they try to force schools to not only teach their children, but in addition babysit, discipline, and - most germaine to this discussion - convey to their children their values and beliefs. Religion or other beliefr systems are not the purview of the schools, they are the purview of the parents. I don't mind whatever parents wish to teach their children about their values and beliefs... but if they abdicate that responsibility to someone else, they also, in my view, abdicate the right to choose the values and beliefs taught.

The fact that remains however that in some places groups of parents either have such an enhanced view of their own importance that they feel they can dictate what beliefs others can and should hold in addition to teaching them to their children, or, in spite of abdicating their duty and responsibility to convey their beliefs and values to their children still insist on having others teach their children their beliefs and values and still think they should get to choose which beliefs and values those are. Still others find their beliefs and values in conflict with scientific viewpoints and try to force others to see a conflicting dichotomy. In any case these persons sometimes try to force their beliefs, whether in the guise of creationism or intelligent design, or whatever else they might call it, into the school system. And not only into the school system but into the science classroom rather than a class on society, culture or religion.

Taking a cue from my conversation with the stubborn person related in my previous post, perhaps, once again, arguing is the wrong way to go about seeking a solution. Perhaps we could let them be right.

They often demand that time be given in science class for equal discussion of all theories of of the origins of the universe and existence - specifically creationism/intelligent design in addition to evolution. Let's do so. Of course when presenting creationism/intelligent design we, for fairness sake, must present all component subtheories it comprises - i.e. creationism/intelligent design as seen by Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Native Americans, the Aborigines of Australia, and so on until all competing theories have been given equal presentation. This would be a wonderful opportunity for an essays by the students comparing and contrasting different theories, discussing evidence supporting each theory, discussing which theories are in conflict with other theories and which are not... in other words a stellar opportunity for exercising the most vital skill in the modern world and the one which it is most vital for schools to teach above all others including reading, writing and arithmetic - Critical Thinking.

Just a thought as I sit here trying to solve the world's problems and dreaming of better tomorrows.

Conflicts over Marriage

I had a conversation with someone the other day and it got me thinking.

I mentioned in passing that in Germany, where I had lived many years and married my wife, there are two weddings - a state wedding, which must come first, and then, if you opt for it, a church ceremony. I mentioned that I thought this was marvellous - separation of church and state!

It seems so reasonable to me, and it seemed to me to, in one stroke solve all people's difficulties with the "immorality" of gay marriage - the state can marry who it wants to, the church can marry who it wants to, and neither are required to recognize the other's marriages!

The person I was speaking with was not of the same opinion. His contention was that if you were going to do that then the state should get out of the marriage business entirely anyway because, "it's was God's idea first." Then he left.

In retrospect as I continued to think on it, at first this seemed a ludicrous assertion - trying to show evidence that the state essentially copied "God's idea" is problematic to say the least - look at copyright infringement lawsuits, they're so complex and hairy and you're just trying to show which person had an idea first. Bring a supernatural all powerful all knowing being into it and there are just problems. At the very least, I thought, I could have argued that the idea was arrived at independantly by others - Ancient China, the Druids of western europe, and the marriages of other societies existing together with the ancient Isrealites - Pharonic Egypt, Canaanites and others had marriage and/or marriage like concepts. The state has a vested interest in the continuation of the state and in the interworkings of the individuals that make it up. Like Liebnitz inventing Calculus independantly from other people, besides God, could create a similar institution independantly.

Then I realized that this was exactly the wrong approach. We were speaking different philosophical languages and it didn't matter what I said, he would not have understood it. It would be like trying to program a computer in English - unless there's a English to Machine code compiler I don't know about, no matter how cool your "program" is, it isn't going to work because the computer doesn't understand.

So then I stopped and thought about it again. Now I think I have a better idea. I think I'll let him be right.

He's right, marriage is God's idea and, to further the idea of separation of church and state, the state should not deal with marriage at all. It will not be asked for or cared about in census reports or tax forms any more than a person having had First Communion or a Bar Mitzvah or Bat Mitzvah is asked. Nor will it have any legal standing in any other sense. Husband-Wife communication will no longer be priviledged communication, marriage has no effect on the distribution of personal effects should a person die without a will. Currently marriage is discriminatory. It provides special rights and priviledges to some people, and denys them to others. You could even go so far as to say it makes "all people equal, but somepeople are more equal than others" to paraphrase George Orwell. I think that for a political institution discrimination of this sort is wrong. If people are opposed to removing discrimination from the political aspect of marriage in spite of allowing individual religious institutions to keep discriminating as they think they must then the only other ethical solution, politically speaking, is to completely remove marriage as a political/governmental institution and let it remain in existance as a purely religious ceremony.

This has the additional benefits. Religious people claim that marriage is being destroyed, not only because of gay marriage, but because of the ease with with divorces seem to be able to be obtained. Eliminating marriage as a consideration in the political sphere means to get a divorce you'd have to go back to the church, and they could deal with that as they choose.

It might also reduce some of the complexity of government as tax and other governmental forms would no longer require any consideration of marriage. Of course this would make getting a green card for a foreign spouse, like mine, much harder... but it would also mean the INS wouldn't have to wonder if it was a green card marriage.

Just a thought as I sit here trying to solve the world's problems and dreaming of better tomorrows.