As the new year dawns, I realize that there is almost nothing I really want to change. Yet, like everyone, I will probably make a list of resolutions.
Resolutions are good at "sharpening the saw" and encourage "re dedication" to positive habits that have waned. I'm all for resolutions and no one in the world has attained perfection.
This New Year, however, has me focused on attempts to understand our species. What began as an elaborate attempt to learn about human behavior for a short story has turned into an obsession. I can't stop trying to learn about the rationality employed by people. I'm now getting a second wind on writing, but my study is nowhere close to done.
I recently was exposed to behavior that shocked my conscience, and, as a result, intensified my curiosity. The thought process that followed led to a hashing-out of my concept of truth. I have settled on a "modern" view for now. Allow me to explain.
I was introduced to a situation involving a mother who gave birth to a child while high on meth - and thus imposing upon that child the most uncertain and difficult of futures. My introduction into the scene was on the periphery and I do not really know any of the people involved, but it brought back memories of a similar case I argued and set my mind aflutter.
For reasons I cannot explain, I have never needed to learn the hard way. That is not to say I always learn easily, gracefully or with any special aptitude. I just don't tend to dabble in areas clearly shown to be dangerous. It may be from over-caution; from adept parenting provided to me; or it may be out of cowardice, but I have never flirted with rock bottom. I have never tried any illegal drug, I never picked up smoking, and I do not drink regularly or to excess. Heck, I haven't even gotten a speeding ticket since college and I will do anything possible to avoid snow driving. I guess I play the odds.
I am certain that none of my choices come from any personal superiority, and that is why I have a deep fascination with those who make terrible decisions in life and how that reflects upon greater truths. I always wonder what drives those decisions.
Is it a chemical or biological urge that comes from DNA? Does upbringing overpower nature? More specifically, would someone of my own temperament submit to the pressures if placed in a specific environment? I am sure the answer would be so variable as to be no better than a shrug. All of the above? None of the above? Some of each, but all of none? Every possible answer is on the table.
The mother who gave birth to a child while high on meth can appear normal and even pleasant in casual conversation. I cannot pretend to understand her station in life. I cannot know what the world looks like through her eyes or what she learned (or didn't learn) from her parents or family. But, I do know this: what she did was just about the worst display of judgment I can imagine.
Yet, somehow, decisions like hers aren't nearly as rare as they should be. I know because I can still see the image of a dead child from the file of my first-ever case.
My case involved a mother who was crashing from a meth high. Although a malfunctioning electric blanket inflicted the fatal heat levels, it was the mother who caused a death by placing her drug addiction ahead of the needs of an 11-week-old baby.
Some might call for execution as the only remedy to such horrible judgment as a violation of a basic and indisputable truth. Others will view the mother as a victim who must be rehabilitated as a nod to the uncertainty of greater truths in light of circumstances. Still others will grudgingly advocate rehab to avoid the unhappy consequence of a child without a mother (the pragmatic approach). I have no idea how to look at it, but I will not rationalize her behavior.
I simply cannot fathom such judgment and decision making. All attempts to explain seem like rationalization, which leads me to my greater point and how that relates to a greater truth.
The variations of poor judgment run the gamut. The examples above are extreme, of course. But, I have been considering the notion that we are less a rational species than a "rationalizing" one. This notion is not unique (I read an overview in one of Malcolm Gladwell's many brilliant books), but it is a harsh one that I hope to find unfitting.
When we discuss judgment, degrees are often used to justify behavior we know to be wrong. Maybe one person will say, "well, I did meth, but not while pregnant." Another may say, "I only drink and drive, but I've never killed anyone and I always took the back roads." Degrees aside, all the above involve poor judgment and dangerous behavior no matter how explained. Taken further, this example could lead to, "well, I didn't outright lie by leaving out the obvious relevant tidbit" to justify deception. Each degree takes us closer to what could be labeled the "actual truth."
In years past, I have contemplated some of the post-modern philosophical ideas and their general notion of subjective truths. Specifically, the idea that we can never really know if an action was "wrong" in the greater sense because we can't know all that is behind a given fact pattern. But, although some of those arguments are clever, I cannot shake the older (ironically titled "modern") belief in a firm right and wrong.
There is a lot of gray area between "right" and "wrong." I am certain of that. I am also certain it is not all gray.
I have decided that much of what we all consider gray area is constructed by our own rationalization. There is gray area, but it is smaller than many are willing to accept. That gray area can become as wide as we need it to be so as to justify ourselves. Although every person's map is unique, the larger the gray area, the more we fool ourselves.
My view of the gray area includes the unknowable (such as many religion-based arguments) and moral ambiguities (the "do you kill to potentially save?" type issues). I am sure there are more, but no matter where that difficult-to-find line is, the clearly marked areas cannot be missed.
Not doing drugs is clearly right. Driving while clearly sober is clearly right. Telling the truth even when it hurts is right.
We will all land squarely in the wrong at times. It will always happen. Only when we shade that side with gray and make ourselves comfortable therein do we perpetuate poor judgment. Sometimes we have to accept that "bad things happen," feel shame and re-settle in the clearly marked areas.
Of course, I'm already thinking of rationalizations to broaden my gray area so as not to offend ... and I think maybe therein lies the problem.
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Holiday Update
... We are hosting Jen's dad for his holiday visit. In preparation for his visit, we showed Jacob some home movies of when he played trains with his grandfather during the last visit. We talked up the idea of trains and insisted that grandpa's arrival would lead to immense amounts of train play.
As a result, Jacob literally could not wait for Jen's dad to arrive and, once he did, Jacob absolutely pounced. He has referred to grandpa as "my best friend" and gets upset when he goes downstairs to take a break from the train onslaught.
... I learned not to try to explain death to a three year old. I hadn't reviewed that part of the manual. Now, whenever we mention "mommy's daddy" he turns to me and says "your dad is dead." Fun.
... Jacob caused an uproar when he and his cousins were baking with grandpa on Monday. Jacob doesn't like to miss anything with his cousins. So, he brought his training potty (which had been relegated for late-night necessity) into the kitchen and proceeded to do his business in the presence of all parties. The training potty is now hidden.
... Although I'm done with my year's allotment of books, I am still trying to get one more finished before 2010. Malcolm Gladwell literally teaches me about life. What a writer / reporter / journalist. I love his books. They just make you think.
... Gladwell touched on a topic I have taken a keen interest in lately: dancing dialogue. He discusses how people communicate through posture and movements. I always take note of how people compose their bodies, countenances, etc. while interacting. I am trying to utilize those traits for (you guessed it) my ever-in-the-works short story / book. I worked on that a little the other day, and it's moving slowly, but I feel like I know where its going.
... Health care reform is coming. I am glad it is almost here. The misleading information has been exposed, the problems with the bill as a result of compromise are apparent, and its time to start the process. If opponents of any reform at all win, nothing gets solved. It's time to provide options. And, yes, passing health care reform will be a monumental political feather in Obama's cap.
... I am off from work until January 4, 2010 and I plan on enjoying the time off.
... I want to wish everyone a happy holiday season.
As a result, Jacob literally could not wait for Jen's dad to arrive and, once he did, Jacob absolutely pounced. He has referred to grandpa as "my best friend" and gets upset when he goes downstairs to take a break from the train onslaught.
... I learned not to try to explain death to a three year old. I hadn't reviewed that part of the manual. Now, whenever we mention "mommy's daddy" he turns to me and says "your dad is dead." Fun.
... Jacob caused an uproar when he and his cousins were baking with grandpa on Monday. Jacob doesn't like to miss anything with his cousins. So, he brought his training potty (which had been relegated for late-night necessity) into the kitchen and proceeded to do his business in the presence of all parties. The training potty is now hidden.
... Although I'm done with my year's allotment of books, I am still trying to get one more finished before 2010. Malcolm Gladwell literally teaches me about life. What a writer / reporter / journalist. I love his books. They just make you think.
... Gladwell touched on a topic I have taken a keen interest in lately: dancing dialogue. He discusses how people communicate through posture and movements. I always take note of how people compose their bodies, countenances, etc. while interacting. I am trying to utilize those traits for (you guessed it) my ever-in-the-works short story / book. I worked on that a little the other day, and it's moving slowly, but I feel like I know where its going.
... Health care reform is coming. I am glad it is almost here. The misleading information has been exposed, the problems with the bill as a result of compromise are apparent, and its time to start the process. If opponents of any reform at all win, nothing gets solved. It's time to provide options. And, yes, passing health care reform will be a monumental political feather in Obama's cap.
... I am off from work until January 4, 2010 and I plan on enjoying the time off.
... I want to wish everyone a happy holiday season.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
End of the Year Book Report
This month ends year two of my "Book challenge" with, well, Book. As always, the goal is 24 per year, but this year we each received two "assignment" reads from the other. I assigned Richard Kluger's "Simple Justice" and Barrack Obama's "Faith of my Fathers" to Book.
I figured this would be a good time to give a rundown of the books I read this year and my thoughts on them. I will try to pick a top five and make notations on most memorable.
** Denotes a top 5 for the year.
THE STAT PADDERS
These books were easy reads, light reads, or whatever you want to use as a euphemism for "short." Hey, I have a job and a family, so I can't read ALL long books.
-- Ernie Davis: The Elmira Express, by Robert Gallagher. The true story of Ernie Davis and a really fun read. It was short if only because Davis' life was short. The most interesting information was from Davis' short pro career and his fight against cancer. There were also great stories about what it was like for the first African American Heisman winner to play games in the deep South. I never cease to be amazed at how relatively recently segregation gripped this nation.
-- Born Standing Up, by Steve Martin. This book included a lot of the behind-the-scenes stories of Martin's rise to fame. I had no idea how long or how diligently he worked to master the craft of comedy. The man worked hard to become funny. He also did drugs. Shocking, I know.
-- Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs, by Chuck Klosterman. An essay book that was great fun to read. Although the essays are not all winners, the vast majority are, and he even managed to reel me into topics I would otherwise never explore. He is a very clever and intelligent writer, and very funny at times. Plus, he picked the right Star Wars movie as the best ever.
-- Me of Little Faith, by Lewis Black. Comedy book. Pretty disappointing on the whole. I should have read a different one by him. Mixing religion and comedy rarely works, and never works for a whole book.
-- Winston Churchill, by John Keegan. I must confess, I really wanted to read a thorough, long and detailed biography of Sir Winston Churchill, but none were available on Kindle, and I've become a Kindle snob, so I will hold out for a Kindle-worthy title. In the meantime, this very short book from the Penguin "biography" series provided me with a working knowledge of a true hero of WWII. Interesting, but more of a long (200 page) book report than a detailed account. Interesting, and informative. It did the job.
JUST A JOY TO READ
These books all contributed to my greater good mood. Each of these were fun to read and hard to put down.
-- Have a Nice Day, a tale of blood and sweat socks, by Mick Foley. Some of the most interesting stories I have ever read. This book kicked off a mini-fascination with pro wrestling for me. It's like watching a train wreck. I got my fill and moved on, but this book was memorable.
-- The Watchmen, by Alan Moore. Loved the movie. Loved the graphic novel. Really smart story and it even satisfied my need for politics.
** -- The Book of Basketball, by Bill Simmons. I love the NBA. I love somewhat off-color humor. I loved this book. One of the top five of the year. I may even read this one again because it has already sparked a number of NBA discussions among the guys. Never hurts that we now have stories to tell from the book signing.
-- Bowls, polls and tattered souls, by Stewart Mandel. I enjoy Mandel's writing. The book was interesting and pretty entertaining. This filled the void since neither Charlottesville, VA, nor Boulder, CO fielded anything close to college football teams in 2009. Seriously, this book WAS my college football season. Well, that and watching my boss get dragged through the mud by Notre Dame.
-- Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown. Much better than Angels and Demons (which I read last year). I loved the ending and enjoyed the story. Considering I'm usually not a fan of fiction, the fact I liked this book says something.
-- Boys Will Be Boys, by Jeff Pearlman. I've never liked the Dallas Cowboys, but their 90s teams were full of some colorful characters (and that puts it lightly). Just a lot of funny stories, debauchery, and more genital waving that I expected (Seriously, Charles Haley was a Loony Toon... who liked to show everyone his junk).
ULTIMATELY FORGETTABLE
I read less forgettable books this year than last, which is a good thing. Still, they can't all be winners.
-- How to Rig an Election, by Allan Raymond. Very disappointing. There was not much depth to this "inside" story of political espionage. More like one guy who went too far one time and got smacked for it.
-- As They See 'Em, by Bruce Webber. Impulse Kindle purchase. Somewhat interesting look at how umpires are trained. There were some interesting stories from former umps, but the umpire school parts were just ok.
-- The Lost Symbol, by Dan Brown. I have referred to this as "Angels and Da Vinci Lose a Symbol." This was at times compelling, but ultimately disappointing. Dan Brown found a formula and he refuses to deviate from it. Too predictable, too much of the same thing. Not much to the end. Ultimately, it was just one step too far into the conspiracy world. Reached a Tipping Point I think.
LIFE LESSONS
-- Blink, by Malcolm Gladwell. See below.
**-- Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell. See below.
-- The Tipping Point, by Malcolm Gladwell. These three titles by Gladwell were all spectacular handbooks to life. Outliers supported my belief that you can't just pull yourself up by your bootstraps because we don't control much of what allows success. The Tipping Point can be used to illustrate how most things in life really turn the corner. Blink taught me much about perceptions and how our inherent biases work without our knowledge or control. All three were just spectacular. Outliers gets into the top five because its lessons are the most applicable to everyday life.
**-- Brothers Karamozov, by Fyodore Dostoevsky. This is considered by many to be the greatest novel ever written. It was less a novel than a psychological study of various types of people. This book was very helpful in my slow and deliberate development of characters in my own story. The depth of this book cannot be adequately described. This is truly one of the greatest works ever written.
**-- Crime and Punishment, by Fyodore Dostoevsky. Another masterpiece by Dostoevsky. I LOVED the ending and its simplicity. The main character was completely fascinating and this book explored every inch of him. It also made his crime seem almost understandable considering his circumstances. The mind games he endured while trying to avoid capture were absorbing. Only Dostoevsky could create a character so completely. You will love him, hate him, sympathize with him and condemn him. And, in the end, you will understand him.
**-- Team of Rivals, by Doris Kearns Goodwin. One of the greatest books I have ever read. This wins the award if only because of my preference for nonfiction and for my obsession with politics. Abraham Lincoln was the greatest solver of problems I have ever read about. His deeds, demeanor, methods and overall genuine kindness are shown to the reader. There is less description than illustration. By the end, you will almost find yourself in tears at his assassination. You will also literally watch him save our nation.
THE REST
-- Seabiscuit, by Laura Hillenbrand. This book was assigned by Book, and it was good. He told me I would be rooting for a horse, and, although it didn't go that far for me, it was a well-told story. I enjoyed this book much more than I expected to. The people in the story were fascinating and complemented each other well. That's probably why they were so successful.
-- The Breaks of the Game, by David Halberstam. Simmons calls this the greatest basketball book ever written. It was a fascinating account. I love the idea of a book about a team that did not win a title. Those stories interest me more and there are not many written. I would love to read more books about teams that would be forgettable without a book having been written. It makes the story feel like a snapshot of what "teams" are like. It also included a lot of background information about how the league became what it is today.
-- American Lion, by Jon Meacham. This book won a Pulitzer. I learned a lot about Andrew Jackson and his presidency. I was most surprised about just how much drama soaked his White House. I was not as impressed as I expected to be, but it was a good work based on previously un-published personal writings. At times, the drama gets very soap-opera-ish.
-- Southern Storm, by Noah Andre Trudeau. "The Devil Born to Earth," as a friend once called Gen. Sherman, basically destroyed Georgia. This is a detailed account of his March to the Sea. It was interesting and read surprisingly quickly.
HOME STRETCH
I am finishing my final book and will be reading an extra one or two before the end of the year.
-- Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman. I am almost done with this one, and it is better than "Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs." So far his very best work, and I would include it in the Joy section.
-- The Football Fan's Manifesto, by Michael Tunison. This will go into the forgettable section. I have been "close" to finishing this for quite a while. Just predictable and recycled football humor. I am only finishing it because I started it.
TOP 5
5. Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell.
4. The Book of Basketball, by Bill Simmons.
3. Brothers Karamozov, by Fyodore Dostoevsky.
2. Crime and Punishment, by Fyodore Dostoevsky.
1. Team of Rivals, by Doris Kearns Goodwin.
It's been another great year of reading. I am already getting the Kindle tuned up for 2010. As always, suggestions are welcome (and will most likely be followed if its available on Kindle).
I figured this would be a good time to give a rundown of the books I read this year and my thoughts on them. I will try to pick a top five and make notations on most memorable.
** Denotes a top 5 for the year.
THE STAT PADDERS
These books were easy reads, light reads, or whatever you want to use as a euphemism for "short." Hey, I have a job and a family, so I can't read ALL long books.
-- Ernie Davis: The Elmira Express, by Robert Gallagher. The true story of Ernie Davis and a really fun read. It was short if only because Davis' life was short. The most interesting information was from Davis' short pro career and his fight against cancer. There were also great stories about what it was like for the first African American Heisman winner to play games in the deep South. I never cease to be amazed at how relatively recently segregation gripped this nation.
-- Born Standing Up, by Steve Martin. This book included a lot of the behind-the-scenes stories of Martin's rise to fame. I had no idea how long or how diligently he worked to master the craft of comedy. The man worked hard to become funny. He also did drugs. Shocking, I know.
-- Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs, by Chuck Klosterman. An essay book that was great fun to read. Although the essays are not all winners, the vast majority are, and he even managed to reel me into topics I would otherwise never explore. He is a very clever and intelligent writer, and very funny at times. Plus, he picked the right Star Wars movie as the best ever.
-- Me of Little Faith, by Lewis Black. Comedy book. Pretty disappointing on the whole. I should have read a different one by him. Mixing religion and comedy rarely works, and never works for a whole book.
-- Winston Churchill, by John Keegan. I must confess, I really wanted to read a thorough, long and detailed biography of Sir Winston Churchill, but none were available on Kindle, and I've become a Kindle snob, so I will hold out for a Kindle-worthy title. In the meantime, this very short book from the Penguin "biography" series provided me with a working knowledge of a true hero of WWII. Interesting, but more of a long (200 page) book report than a detailed account. Interesting, and informative. It did the job.
JUST A JOY TO READ
These books all contributed to my greater good mood. Each of these were fun to read and hard to put down.
-- Have a Nice Day, a tale of blood and sweat socks, by Mick Foley. Some of the most interesting stories I have ever read. This book kicked off a mini-fascination with pro wrestling for me. It's like watching a train wreck. I got my fill and moved on, but this book was memorable.
-- The Watchmen, by Alan Moore. Loved the movie. Loved the graphic novel. Really smart story and it even satisfied my need for politics.
** -- The Book of Basketball, by Bill Simmons. I love the NBA. I love somewhat off-color humor. I loved this book. One of the top five of the year. I may even read this one again because it has already sparked a number of NBA discussions among the guys. Never hurts that we now have stories to tell from the book signing.
-- Bowls, polls and tattered souls, by Stewart Mandel. I enjoy Mandel's writing. The book was interesting and pretty entertaining. This filled the void since neither Charlottesville, VA, nor Boulder, CO fielded anything close to college football teams in 2009. Seriously, this book WAS my college football season. Well, that and watching my boss get dragged through the mud by Notre Dame.
-- Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown. Much better than Angels and Demons (which I read last year). I loved the ending and enjoyed the story. Considering I'm usually not a fan of fiction, the fact I liked this book says something.
-- Boys Will Be Boys, by Jeff Pearlman. I've never liked the Dallas Cowboys, but their 90s teams were full of some colorful characters (and that puts it lightly). Just a lot of funny stories, debauchery, and more genital waving that I expected (Seriously, Charles Haley was a Loony Toon... who liked to show everyone his junk).
ULTIMATELY FORGETTABLE
I read less forgettable books this year than last, which is a good thing. Still, they can't all be winners.
-- How to Rig an Election, by Allan Raymond. Very disappointing. There was not much depth to this "inside" story of political espionage. More like one guy who went too far one time and got smacked for it.
-- As They See 'Em, by Bruce Webber. Impulse Kindle purchase. Somewhat interesting look at how umpires are trained. There were some interesting stories from former umps, but the umpire school parts were just ok.
-- The Lost Symbol, by Dan Brown. I have referred to this as "Angels and Da Vinci Lose a Symbol." This was at times compelling, but ultimately disappointing. Dan Brown found a formula and he refuses to deviate from it. Too predictable, too much of the same thing. Not much to the end. Ultimately, it was just one step too far into the conspiracy world. Reached a Tipping Point I think.
LIFE LESSONS
-- Blink, by Malcolm Gladwell. See below.
**-- Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell. See below.
-- The Tipping Point, by Malcolm Gladwell. These three titles by Gladwell were all spectacular handbooks to life. Outliers supported my belief that you can't just pull yourself up by your bootstraps because we don't control much of what allows success. The Tipping Point can be used to illustrate how most things in life really turn the corner. Blink taught me much about perceptions and how our inherent biases work without our knowledge or control. All three were just spectacular. Outliers gets into the top five because its lessons are the most applicable to everyday life.
**-- Brothers Karamozov, by Fyodore Dostoevsky. This is considered by many to be the greatest novel ever written. It was less a novel than a psychological study of various types of people. This book was very helpful in my slow and deliberate development of characters in my own story. The depth of this book cannot be adequately described. This is truly one of the greatest works ever written.
**-- Crime and Punishment, by Fyodore Dostoevsky. Another masterpiece by Dostoevsky. I LOVED the ending and its simplicity. The main character was completely fascinating and this book explored every inch of him. It also made his crime seem almost understandable considering his circumstances. The mind games he endured while trying to avoid capture were absorbing. Only Dostoevsky could create a character so completely. You will love him, hate him, sympathize with him and condemn him. And, in the end, you will understand him.
**-- Team of Rivals, by Doris Kearns Goodwin. One of the greatest books I have ever read. This wins the award if only because of my preference for nonfiction and for my obsession with politics. Abraham Lincoln was the greatest solver of problems I have ever read about. His deeds, demeanor, methods and overall genuine kindness are shown to the reader. There is less description than illustration. By the end, you will almost find yourself in tears at his assassination. You will also literally watch him save our nation.
THE REST
-- Seabiscuit, by Laura Hillenbrand. This book was assigned by Book, and it was good. He told me I would be rooting for a horse, and, although it didn't go that far for me, it was a well-told story. I enjoyed this book much more than I expected to. The people in the story were fascinating and complemented each other well. That's probably why they were so successful.
-- The Breaks of the Game, by David Halberstam. Simmons calls this the greatest basketball book ever written. It was a fascinating account. I love the idea of a book about a team that did not win a title. Those stories interest me more and there are not many written. I would love to read more books about teams that would be forgettable without a book having been written. It makes the story feel like a snapshot of what "teams" are like. It also included a lot of background information about how the league became what it is today.
-- American Lion, by Jon Meacham. This book won a Pulitzer. I learned a lot about Andrew Jackson and his presidency. I was most surprised about just how much drama soaked his White House. I was not as impressed as I expected to be, but it was a good work based on previously un-published personal writings. At times, the drama gets very soap-opera-ish.
-- Southern Storm, by Noah Andre Trudeau. "The Devil Born to Earth," as a friend once called Gen. Sherman, basically destroyed Georgia. This is a detailed account of his March to the Sea. It was interesting and read surprisingly quickly.
HOME STRETCH
I am finishing my final book and will be reading an extra one or two before the end of the year.
-- Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman. I am almost done with this one, and it is better than "Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs." So far his very best work, and I would include it in the Joy section.
-- The Football Fan's Manifesto, by Michael Tunison. This will go into the forgettable section. I have been "close" to finishing this for quite a while. Just predictable and recycled football humor. I am only finishing it because I started it.
TOP 5
5. Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell.
4. The Book of Basketball, by Bill Simmons.
3. Brothers Karamozov, by Fyodore Dostoevsky.
2. Crime and Punishment, by Fyodore Dostoevsky.
1. Team of Rivals, by Doris Kearns Goodwin.
It's been another great year of reading. I am already getting the Kindle tuned up for 2010. As always, suggestions are welcome (and will most likely be followed if its available on Kindle).
Monday, November 23, 2009
One Full Weekend
My weekend was awesome.
It started with a book signing in Denver, included my attendance at a dominating performance by the Nuggets at Pepsi Center, and ended with a unique opportunity for me to speak about health care reform with my representative for the U.S. House.
FRIDAY: The Sports Guy Meets Chuck
On Friday, Book, Tom and I all went down to Denver for a book signing by our favorite sports columnist, Bill Simmons. His new book, The Book of Basketball, is informative and hilarious. I have already read the book and it is a great read if you are an NBA fan.
His only egregious error was not including Carmelo Anthony in his list of greatest players. Still, the book was awesome and we were excited to meet Mr. Simmons.
Book and I brought our copies of the book, but Tom brought the best item of all. Simmons ranks Alex English the 65th best basketball player of all time. Simmons references the 1980s movie Amazing Grace and Chuck, featuring Nugget great Alex English, and calls it "hauntingly bad."
Well, Tom brought a VHS video of Amazing Grace and Chuck for Simmons to sign and we were all excited about this (we're dorks, I know). Dave then coined the phrase "everything is 70% more awesome when Tom is involved." And it stuck.
We arrived two hours early - OK, this is my fault because I am extremely anal about being early to things. We browsed for awhile and then got in line. We were among the first 20 in line, but had to get through the "bouncer" who we all agreed to be a jerk.
This very large, effeminate man with an Elvis hairdo was not happy we brought books purchased from elsewhere before coming to the signing. He proceeded to tell us how much work it was to put the event together and how "next time you should really consider buying a book here for these events." We live an hour away, the book came out last month and Simmons' website said outside purchases were fine. Big dumb Elvis didn't get the memo.
We discussed the Nuggets, made fun of androgynous Elvis and waited for the event to start. Simmons started by doing a short monologue about Denver sports, set some ground rules and started signing.
He signed "Bring back the Rainbow Jerseys" in my book as I requested. Book asked him to sign "I hate the Lakers too," in a tip-of-the-hat to our Laker-loving buddy Mike. Instead Simmons wrote "Don't worry, we all hate the Lakers." Then Tom asked him to sign his copy of Amazing Grace and Chuck as "Best NBA movie ever." Simmons obliged and then asked Tom "You don't really think that, do you? You know, I killed this movie in my book." Tom replied, "yeah, I know, that's why I asked you to sign it."
Like we all agreed, 70% more awesome. Thanks Tom.
SATURDAY: Melo Goes Hunting
Book and I went to see the Denver Nuggets play the Chicago Bulls at Pepsi Center on Saturday night. The highlight was watching Carmelo Anthony destroy Luol Deng.
I remember watching John Elway play as a Denver Bronco and feeling privileged to enjoy his unique talents. I've been going to a handful of Nugget games a year since Melo came aboard in 2004. Watching his progression has been amazing.
Against Chicago on Saturday, Melo showed a Michael Jordan-like fire. Luol Deng of Chicago dunked on Melo off a rebound. It wasn't exactly a facial, but Melo took it as such.
Melo then proceeded to destroy Luol Deng.
Melo searched him out. Melo about blew a gasket trying to deny Deng the ball on defense (and nearly took Joachim Noah's arm off in response to a pick attempt). He called for isolation on offense. Deng looked terrified and seemed to implore his teammates to help. I remember Deng parked in the corner waiting for a kick-out three and Melo playing off of him, but barking incessantly in Deng's direction.
It got to the point where switching didn't work because Melo would find him. So, with the game slipping away from Chicago, but still winnable, Deng was pulled. Really, it was the right call. Melo was absolutely ravaging him and the Bulls were better off taking Melo's target from him.
The result? Melo went for 30-11-7. Almost a triple-double. More important, he put his stamp on the NBA as one of its alpha dogs.
Melo has a beautiful jumper, can drive with the best of them, rebounds, and even plays inspired D when motivated. Best of all, he can now impose his will. Deng tore the Nuggets apart early, but was a battered, beaten heap by the end of the game. Melo had destroyed his confidence.
The Nuggets won in a romp and the house was rocking.
SUNDAY: Representin'
A week or two ago, I griped to the right ears about the health care reform vote registered by my congressional representative for CD4, Betsy Markey. She voted no, which upset me in a new way because I actually knocked on doors to get her elected. Somehow, that made her vote personal even though the bill passed (by a mere 5 votes). I voted for change, not another cradle-death for health care reform.
So, by an accident of fortuitous griping, I was afforded the opportunity to go to an event last week where she attempted to explain her vote. There were too many people there with too many soapboxes to get my specific questions answered, so I lamented the missed opportunity. I was not satisfied by the answer even though the reasons given were fair. I think I am just tired of kicking the can down the street.
I know that legislation is never perfect out of the box, but I believe that it must get out of the box if any real change is to happen. Legislation can also be fixed along the way.
My inside source, who was kind enough to inform me of the meeting, seemed to care that I get a better explanation. So, he had Ms. Markey call my office personally and invite me to another event scheduled for this Sunday.
I was caught off guard by the call, but I accepted the invite. I lamented missing another opportunity to get my questions answered, but was determined to have my say on Sunday.
Ms. Markey spoke to the crowd and then mingled. I nosed my way to the front and engaged her for a few minutes on the topic. She was very gracious, engaging and attentive. I was sure to let her know that I still supported her so that she would not be alarmed and then asked two very brief and fair questions. She was straight-forward in her response and answered my questions thoughtfully.
We won't always agree with how our representatives vote, but I believe Ms. Markey gives careful deliberation and she convinced me she is looking for real solutions.
I believe we will have the framework in place for long-term healthcare reform. I appreciate that my representative has been so diligent about hearing from her constituents.
It was one heck of a weekend.
It started with a book signing in Denver, included my attendance at a dominating performance by the Nuggets at Pepsi Center, and ended with a unique opportunity for me to speak about health care reform with my representative for the U.S. House.
FRIDAY: The Sports Guy Meets Chuck
On Friday, Book, Tom and I all went down to Denver for a book signing by our favorite sports columnist, Bill Simmons. His new book, The Book of Basketball, is informative and hilarious. I have already read the book and it is a great read if you are an NBA fan.
His only egregious error was not including Carmelo Anthony in his list of greatest players. Still, the book was awesome and we were excited to meet Mr. Simmons.
Book and I brought our copies of the book, but Tom brought the best item of all. Simmons ranks Alex English the 65th best basketball player of all time. Simmons references the 1980s movie Amazing Grace and Chuck, featuring Nugget great Alex English, and calls it "hauntingly bad."
Well, Tom brought a VHS video of Amazing Grace and Chuck for Simmons to sign and we were all excited about this (we're dorks, I know). Dave then coined the phrase "everything is 70% more awesome when Tom is involved." And it stuck.
We arrived two hours early - OK, this is my fault because I am extremely anal about being early to things. We browsed for awhile and then got in line. We were among the first 20 in line, but had to get through the "bouncer" who we all agreed to be a jerk.
This very large, effeminate man with an Elvis hairdo was not happy we brought books purchased from elsewhere before coming to the signing. He proceeded to tell us how much work it was to put the event together and how "next time you should really consider buying a book here for these events." We live an hour away, the book came out last month and Simmons' website said outside purchases were fine. Big dumb Elvis didn't get the memo.
We discussed the Nuggets, made fun of androgynous Elvis and waited for the event to start. Simmons started by doing a short monologue about Denver sports, set some ground rules and started signing.
He signed "Bring back the Rainbow Jerseys" in my book as I requested. Book asked him to sign "I hate the Lakers too," in a tip-of-the-hat to our Laker-loving buddy Mike. Instead Simmons wrote "Don't worry, we all hate the Lakers." Then Tom asked him to sign his copy of Amazing Grace and Chuck as "Best NBA movie ever." Simmons obliged and then asked Tom "You don't really think that, do you? You know, I killed this movie in my book." Tom replied, "yeah, I know, that's why I asked you to sign it."
Like we all agreed, 70% more awesome. Thanks Tom.
SATURDAY: Melo Goes Hunting
Book and I went to see the Denver Nuggets play the Chicago Bulls at Pepsi Center on Saturday night. The highlight was watching Carmelo Anthony destroy Luol Deng.
I remember watching John Elway play as a Denver Bronco and feeling privileged to enjoy his unique talents. I've been going to a handful of Nugget games a year since Melo came aboard in 2004. Watching his progression has been amazing.
Against Chicago on Saturday, Melo showed a Michael Jordan-like fire. Luol Deng of Chicago dunked on Melo off a rebound. It wasn't exactly a facial, but Melo took it as such.
Melo then proceeded to destroy Luol Deng.
Melo searched him out. Melo about blew a gasket trying to deny Deng the ball on defense (and nearly took Joachim Noah's arm off in response to a pick attempt). He called for isolation on offense. Deng looked terrified and seemed to implore his teammates to help. I remember Deng parked in the corner waiting for a kick-out three and Melo playing off of him, but barking incessantly in Deng's direction.
It got to the point where switching didn't work because Melo would find him. So, with the game slipping away from Chicago, but still winnable, Deng was pulled. Really, it was the right call. Melo was absolutely ravaging him and the Bulls were better off taking Melo's target from him.
The result? Melo went for 30-11-7. Almost a triple-double. More important, he put his stamp on the NBA as one of its alpha dogs.
Melo has a beautiful jumper, can drive with the best of them, rebounds, and even plays inspired D when motivated. Best of all, he can now impose his will. Deng tore the Nuggets apart early, but was a battered, beaten heap by the end of the game. Melo had destroyed his confidence.
The Nuggets won in a romp and the house was rocking.
SUNDAY: Representin'
A week or two ago, I griped to the right ears about the health care reform vote registered by my congressional representative for CD4, Betsy Markey. She voted no, which upset me in a new way because I actually knocked on doors to get her elected. Somehow, that made her vote personal even though the bill passed (by a mere 5 votes). I voted for change, not another cradle-death for health care reform.
So, by an accident of fortuitous griping, I was afforded the opportunity to go to an event last week where she attempted to explain her vote. There were too many people there with too many soapboxes to get my specific questions answered, so I lamented the missed opportunity. I was not satisfied by the answer even though the reasons given were fair. I think I am just tired of kicking the can down the street.
I know that legislation is never perfect out of the box, but I believe that it must get out of the box if any real change is to happen. Legislation can also be fixed along the way.
My inside source, who was kind enough to inform me of the meeting, seemed to care that I get a better explanation. So, he had Ms. Markey call my office personally and invite me to another event scheduled for this Sunday.
I was caught off guard by the call, but I accepted the invite. I lamented missing another opportunity to get my questions answered, but was determined to have my say on Sunday.
Ms. Markey spoke to the crowd and then mingled. I nosed my way to the front and engaged her for a few minutes on the topic. She was very gracious, engaging and attentive. I was sure to let her know that I still supported her so that she would not be alarmed and then asked two very brief and fair questions. She was straight-forward in her response and answered my questions thoughtfully.
We won't always agree with how our representatives vote, but I believe Ms. Markey gives careful deliberation and she convinced me she is looking for real solutions.
I believe we will have the framework in place for long-term healthcare reform. I appreciate that my representative has been so diligent about hearing from her constituents.
It was one heck of a weekend.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Update
... Basketball season is here. The Nuggets are looking good early and I'm gearing up for the NBA season. I just finished reading The Book of Basketball by Bill Simmons to get me all pumped for the season. I enjoyed the book thoroughly. Book and I are going to go to Denver on November 20 to have our books signed by Simmons. It should be fun. The book was very funny and interesting to boot.
... I had the unique opportunity to hear from my representative from congress about her health care vote. The experience just illustrated to me unmistakably that pulling Democrats together is like herding cats. The gathering was fairly small, but I know many people who were disillusioned by the no vote she cast in the recent House vote for health care reform. I could go deep into this topic, but I'll save it for another time. Apparently Democrats require 90% of seats in any legislative body to comfortably pass anything. To say I am frustrated would be an understatement.
... Jacob went trick-or-treating as Handy Manny. We did not like the "insta-costume" available from Disney. It was really bad. So, we just constructed our own concoction to make him into Handy Manny. Construction hat, tool belt, jeans, tools, brown shoes, green shirt, yellow gloves and he was Handy Manny. See pictures below:
... I had the unique opportunity to hear from my representative from congress about her health care vote. The experience just illustrated to me unmistakably that pulling Democrats together is like herding cats. The gathering was fairly small, but I know many people who were disillusioned by the no vote she cast in the recent House vote for health care reform. I could go deep into this topic, but I'll save it for another time. Apparently Democrats require 90% of seats in any legislative body to comfortably pass anything. To say I am frustrated would be an understatement.
... Jacob went trick-or-treating as Handy Manny. We did not like the "insta-costume" available from Disney. It was really bad. So, we just constructed our own concoction to make him into Handy Manny. Construction hat, tool belt, jeans, tools, brown shoes, green shirt, yellow gloves and he was Handy Manny. See pictures below:
Thursday, October 22, 2009
My Take on the Government Question
Break every political argument down in our nation's history and it boils down to one question: What is the proper role of government?
Rarely does one need six degrees of separation to reach this central issue.
Our citizens have argued incessantly about government's role from the beginning via the Federalist Papers, fought a Civil War over the question, and continue to spew ugly rhetoric (again with the socialism label?) over just this one basic issue.
(You care about gay marriage? Well, let me interest you in a vigorous "Defense of Marriage Act" vs. "Full Faith and Credit Clause" debate, which, you guessed it, brings us right back to GO.)
I offer one person's reasoned take on this, our nation's perpetual pebble in the shoe. My short answer is that the people as a whole (although they are loath to admit it) have about the size of government with which they are comfortable. After all, it came from representatives government.
My goals: First, to explain how I see the differences between government and private enterprise. Although they are different, neither is inherently evil, but they both have a vital role to play. Second, to give my take on "the proper role of government."
THE PLAYERS
Both sides boast Nobel winners and celebrated thinkers who advocate each side. Free Marketers point to Milton Friedman as the final voice. New Dealers sing the praises of John Maynard Keynes. Laisse faire vs. New Deal. Roosevelt vs. Reagan. O'Reilly vs. Olbermann. Private business vs. Government regulation. There are plenty of statistics to fuel each side, thus insuring that neither can ever "win" the debate in a measurable sense.
An over-simplification of the two sides can be heard when listening to campaign talk or talk-radio -- that there are those who think government solves all and those who think it solves nothing. I am not sure where the majority stands, but I meet very few who feel government is the exact size it should be. That could be from a love to complain.
Although both sides hold to fallacies that I aim to debunk, only one side (the anti-government types) have chosen to take a no-compromise stance. I consider the strategy to be a feeble attempt to take us back to a time in which we no longer live. It also solves nothing.
THE DIFFERENCE AS I SEE IT
Each part brings its own obstacles, efficiencies and strengths. The difference is in the moral imperative.
Many of the most vocal of a very agitated minority believe in the inherent incompetence of meddling government. National defense excluded, this school of thought essentially demands that government not interfere in anything (or at least a bare minimum). Although I feel safe saying none of them would advocate six-year-old workers in coal mines, their tolerance for government does not raise much further.
There is a feeling that government grew too large over the years and that only blatant attempts to destroy it as an institution will mitigate its further expansion. This assumes also that none of that expansion was necessary to accommodate the many changes inherent in technological advancements, population increase and any other change over the past two centuries.
(I would go into the Commerce Clause, its overuse and the resulting backlash against it, but I want a few people to finish reading this post).
The fallacy is that private enterprise is always preferable. Absolutist arguments really amount to casuistry, so I won't dwell on it.
My take is that the market is amoral. It is not immoral. It is also not moral. It is profit-driven, and, as a result, has allowed our economy to soar. The market is also absolutely not the hand of God - especially considering that the invisible hand likes to dunk us in the mud if left unchecked (see 1929-1938). The fact it can be mitigated at all undermines arguments of divine tampering.
But, although the drive for profit leads to some efficiency advantages and wonderful economic prosperity, the market is less capable of taking morality-driven initiatives and is prone to booms and busts.
This is why the health care debate has been labeled as a moral imperative by supporters of reform. Incentive for profit has absolutely led to higher rates of denials and searches for pre-existing conditions by insurance carriers.
As usual, when there is a hole unfilled by private business that leads to moral outrage, the government attempts to fill the gap without profit. The government acts for the betterment of customers deemed "unprofitable." We do not do this to make a profit, but because it is moral. It must be done with fiscal responsibilty, but it must be done. And, sometimes, that means a tax increase.
Allow me to reiterate that I do not believe private industry has no role to play or that it is anything less than crucial to our system. But it would be foolish to expect the market to account for morality. Government agencies foot the bill to save victims of hurricanes because no money can be made to offer that service privately. (Excuse me sir, but we just saved your family and helicopters aren't cheap... so where do I send the bill?). Still, tea-bag loving folks burn FEMA in effigy. (I am unsure how many of them live in hurricane hot-spots).
The fact that many will point to FEMA's failures as a hole in the argument simply drives home the point that agency heads must believe their departments are important and believe in the role that agency plays. Katrina was, in my view, an example of what happens when people who do not believe in the legitimacy of government or believe it to be inherently meddlesome RUN a government or agency. (Brownie, you did a hell of a job).
SIZE DOES MATTER
Perceived government inefficiency, and that of large private industry, can be attributed to size. Government is further hampered by legislative restrictions simply because moral imperatives come with strings and compromises. I get that. And, in some areas, government is less efficient. That is absolutely true.
Inefficiency is also a product of size. Ideological free marketers too often omit that very large private industries (insurance companies, for example) are every bit as inefficient as a government agency. Anyone who has had to contest a denied claim can attest to that. The idea that "government paperwork" will gum up the works is laughable in light of all the various forms currently needed. At lease government forms will be uniform.
The reason for inefficiency in government and large companies? People run both. The only way to run a big operation is by layering, bureaucracy, committees, etc. That will happen to any very large entity regardless of its status as private or public.
FINAL THOUGHTS
The debate is not helped by anyone who feels the government can never be a part of a solution. The debate is not helped by anyone who feels only complete government takeover will solve either. However, there is ample support for a public "option," which is a compromise. Democrats have pushed a rational solution to preserve private enterprise in health insurance while plugging the holes it has created. The opposition only offers an argument that nothing tainted with government stink can ever work.
So, what is the proper role of government? It's whatever needs to be done to make a profitable system honest and compassionate within the tolerance of the population. In the case of health care, government intervention is long overdue. And the argument that "government is not good at anything" is short on substance.
I know I will never convince the "ideologically certain" who may read this. However, it makes sense to me. I am inherently suspicious of "absolutist" arguments and that is what the tea-baggers bring.
In the meantime, real solutions with all options on the table are being considered. And that makes me happy.
Rarely does one need six degrees of separation to reach this central issue.
Our citizens have argued incessantly about government's role from the beginning via the Federalist Papers, fought a Civil War over the question, and continue to spew ugly rhetoric (again with the socialism label?) over just this one basic issue.
(You care about gay marriage? Well, let me interest you in a vigorous "Defense of Marriage Act" vs. "Full Faith and Credit Clause" debate, which, you guessed it, brings us right back to GO.)
I offer one person's reasoned take on this, our nation's perpetual pebble in the shoe. My short answer is that the people as a whole (although they are loath to admit it) have about the size of government with which they are comfortable. After all, it came from representatives government.
My goals: First, to explain how I see the differences between government and private enterprise. Although they are different, neither is inherently evil, but they both have a vital role to play. Second, to give my take on "the proper role of government."
THE PLAYERS
Both sides boast Nobel winners and celebrated thinkers who advocate each side. Free Marketers point to Milton Friedman as the final voice. New Dealers sing the praises of John Maynard Keynes. Laisse faire vs. New Deal. Roosevelt vs. Reagan. O'Reilly vs. Olbermann. Private business vs. Government regulation. There are plenty of statistics to fuel each side, thus insuring that neither can ever "win" the debate in a measurable sense.
An over-simplification of the two sides can be heard when listening to campaign talk or talk-radio -- that there are those who think government solves all and those who think it solves nothing. I am not sure where the majority stands, but I meet very few who feel government is the exact size it should be. That could be from a love to complain.
Although both sides hold to fallacies that I aim to debunk, only one side (the anti-government types) have chosen to take a no-compromise stance. I consider the strategy to be a feeble attempt to take us back to a time in which we no longer live. It also solves nothing.
THE DIFFERENCE AS I SEE IT
Each part brings its own obstacles, efficiencies and strengths. The difference is in the moral imperative.
Many of the most vocal of a very agitated minority believe in the inherent incompetence of meddling government. National defense excluded, this school of thought essentially demands that government not interfere in anything (or at least a bare minimum). Although I feel safe saying none of them would advocate six-year-old workers in coal mines, their tolerance for government does not raise much further.
There is a feeling that government grew too large over the years and that only blatant attempts to destroy it as an institution will mitigate its further expansion. This assumes also that none of that expansion was necessary to accommodate the many changes inherent in technological advancements, population increase and any other change over the past two centuries.
(I would go into the Commerce Clause, its overuse and the resulting backlash against it, but I want a few people to finish reading this post).
The fallacy is that private enterprise is always preferable. Absolutist arguments really amount to casuistry, so I won't dwell on it.
My take is that the market is amoral. It is not immoral. It is also not moral. It is profit-driven, and, as a result, has allowed our economy to soar. The market is also absolutely not the hand of God - especially considering that the invisible hand likes to dunk us in the mud if left unchecked (see 1929-1938). The fact it can be mitigated at all undermines arguments of divine tampering.
But, although the drive for profit leads to some efficiency advantages and wonderful economic prosperity, the market is less capable of taking morality-driven initiatives and is prone to booms and busts.
This is why the health care debate has been labeled as a moral imperative by supporters of reform. Incentive for profit has absolutely led to higher rates of denials and searches for pre-existing conditions by insurance carriers.
As usual, when there is a hole unfilled by private business that leads to moral outrage, the government attempts to fill the gap without profit. The government acts for the betterment of customers deemed "unprofitable." We do not do this to make a profit, but because it is moral. It must be done with fiscal responsibilty, but it must be done. And, sometimes, that means a tax increase.
Allow me to reiterate that I do not believe private industry has no role to play or that it is anything less than crucial to our system. But it would be foolish to expect the market to account for morality. Government agencies foot the bill to save victims of hurricanes because no money can be made to offer that service privately. (Excuse me sir, but we just saved your family and helicopters aren't cheap... so where do I send the bill?). Still, tea-bag loving folks burn FEMA in effigy. (I am unsure how many of them live in hurricane hot-spots).
The fact that many will point to FEMA's failures as a hole in the argument simply drives home the point that agency heads must believe their departments are important and believe in the role that agency plays. Katrina was, in my view, an example of what happens when people who do not believe in the legitimacy of government or believe it to be inherently meddlesome RUN a government or agency. (Brownie, you did a hell of a job).
SIZE DOES MATTER
Perceived government inefficiency, and that of large private industry, can be attributed to size. Government is further hampered by legislative restrictions simply because moral imperatives come with strings and compromises. I get that. And, in some areas, government is less efficient. That is absolutely true.
Inefficiency is also a product of size. Ideological free marketers too often omit that very large private industries (insurance companies, for example) are every bit as inefficient as a government agency. Anyone who has had to contest a denied claim can attest to that. The idea that "government paperwork" will gum up the works is laughable in light of all the various forms currently needed. At lease government forms will be uniform.
The reason for inefficiency in government and large companies? People run both. The only way to run a big operation is by layering, bureaucracy, committees, etc. That will happen to any very large entity regardless of its status as private or public.
FINAL THOUGHTS
The debate is not helped by anyone who feels the government can never be a part of a solution. The debate is not helped by anyone who feels only complete government takeover will solve either. However, there is ample support for a public "option," which is a compromise. Democrats have pushed a rational solution to preserve private enterprise in health insurance while plugging the holes it has created. The opposition only offers an argument that nothing tainted with government stink can ever work.
So, what is the proper role of government? It's whatever needs to be done to make a profitable system honest and compassionate within the tolerance of the population. In the case of health care, government intervention is long overdue. And the argument that "government is not good at anything" is short on substance.
I know I will never convince the "ideologically certain" who may read this. However, it makes sense to me. I am inherently suspicious of "absolutist" arguments and that is what the tea-baggers bring.
In the meantime, real solutions with all options on the table are being considered. And that makes me happy.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Cognitive Biases
INTRO
A few posts ago I referenced cognitive biases. I have been very interested in this area of study lately, and I can't get enough of it. Specifically, I am interested in how cognitive biases influence how we all see the world.
One of the most important life lesson I ever had was from Benjamin Franklin's autobiography. That book showed me that we have control of our enlightenment and the elasticity of our growth depends upon our willingness to confront our biases and be willing to change.
I understand paradigms to be the maps with which we view the world. That map changes all the time as our experiences within the world change. Our biases function as limitations to that map of the world. A bias against a particular idea creates resistance against any lesson or experience that may lead to a new or adjusted "life map" that would tolerate that idea. Thus, the map retains that limitation and remains narrow.
Every single person has biases of various forms. My goal for diving into this subject is twofold: 1) I want to learn about bias in an effort to overcome as many biases as possible to create as open and diverse a "life paradigm" as I can; and 2) I want to use natural biases within characters to create a story (eventually book?) that makes the reader truly and deeply understand the paradigm of each character.
BASIC IDEA
Cognitive biases are deviations of judgment that lead to rationalization, and may or may not be illogical. Cognitive dissonance is the uncomfortable feeling of holding two contradictory ideas, and it leads to rationalization. In short, we are confronted with an inconsistency, which makes us uncomfortable, and we rationalize to create harmony. Our biases can sometimes blind us to the irrationality of a justification. At least that's my understanding.
The pattern I notice in my daily life has left me with the impression that cognitive biases drive much of our interactions with each other. The story I hear usually proceeds as follows: Person X is evil, manipulative, a liar, and is attempting to get away with unspeakable wrongs.
My experience is that, although no intentional lies are being told, those harsh judgments are almost never correct. Why? One bias or another creates a block to perception (the life map isn't moving as to that topic). The classic case is in the area of inheritance. Siblings are quick to accuse each other of robbing parents blind or not caring for that parent's well-being. Almost always, the answer is that both parties misjudged the intentions of the other. Why? Cognitive biases seem to explain most scenarios.
Most cognitive biases are more subtle and simply guide our perception of everyday interactions. And, not all biases are things to necessarily eliminate.
SPECIFIC BIASES
The specific cognitive biases that jumped out at me most are the following:
Anchoring: Disproportionate weight given to the first piece of information received. ("Bob missed one opportunity to help mom, and no amount of generosity or kindness can make up for it.")
Outcome Bias: The tendency to judge a decision by its eventual outcome instead of by the soundness of the decision at the time it was made.
Semmelweis Reflex: The tendency to reject new evidence that contradicts an established paradigm. (Politics, anyone?)
Irrational escalation: The tendency to make irrational decision based upon rational decisions of the past (even if inapplicable) or to justify actions already taken.
Confirmation bias: Tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms preconceptions. (Again... politics).
Bandwagon Effect: The tendency to allow group consensus to influence personal decisions.
I am sure every single one of these sounds familiar to anyone reading this. That's because we all have biases.
FRANKLIN
The difference (and this I take from Franklin) is how we deal with biases. Some cement those biases into place and never move them, question them or second-guess. For anyone willing to take hold of those biases, however, those biases can be mitigated. (Mitigated, not eliminated).
Franklin distinguished between biases and pillars of morality, and I want to be clear that attempts to mitigate biases does not mean anyone should alter morals necessarily. Morality questions should always be examined, but pillars such as honesty and integrity are parts of our life map that remain unmoved during "paradigm updates."
Often, biases are most visible from outside when a person is faced with defending a possible mistake. All of that person's cognitive function will focus on justification for the sake of defense. It's natural and inevitable. We will leave out the bad and emphasize the good. It happens. It just does.
In my story, I plan to create a character who who used a specific logic to success many times in the past. That same decision-process will then be utilized to failure at a crucial moment. The subsequent rationalization will ignore the inapplicability of the logic that led to past success.
NOBEL-WORTHY EXAMPLE
Perhaps the most blatant surrender to bias comes in politics. Take, for example, the recent Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Barack Obama. Tell me if any of these arguments sound familiar:
1) This award is bogus because he hasn't done anything to deserve it! Euros are liberal and they prop up other liberals like Al Gore.
2) This is just sour-grapes by the far-right and a baseless slap at the President. It was well deserved and to argue otherwise is just politics.
3) He just got it for not being George W. Bush. (not as partisan, but seems to me to be equally biased... possibly toward scepticism. This option is also just funny.)
Number one shows an inability to give credit and seems to freely and loosely embrace a convenient world-wide conspiracy when much more rational and believable arguments can be made. It also shows no willingness to ever be happy for any success of the Obama administration. Number two dismisses the legitimate questions NOT raised by number one. Number two conveniently leaves out the genuine confusion many people felt at the outcome... especially since Mr. Obama is currently making a decision regarding troop levels. Number three, as explained earlier, makes me laugh because I have a deep-seeded bias against W and take pleasure in occasionally indulging in it. I have a bias, sue me.
In all seriousness, politics provide such stark examples because it is an exercise in outrage and exaggeration. My bias would be to defend President Obama, but when I force myself to even it out (as best I can), I came up with this mitigated version of my bias:
This award did seem out of the blue. I think it is a very good thing that the world considers our leader to be a force for peace, whether earned or not. I think this could prove to be a booster to the "cult of Obama" argument. I do think President Obama has changed our tone to the world in favor of cooperation. I also do not think he has accomplished anything specific that led to an actual cessation of violence or a measurable increase in peace.
I was tempted to say that both sides failed to consider that the other side's beliefs are genuinely felt. However, upon consideration of biases, they may just be stubbornly held.
IN THE END
As I stated in my 2007 post, "Examined Life," efforts to improve matter. But, I now think equal effort should be made to understand each other. That's what I've been trying to do lately. That, and to write a good story.
A few posts ago I referenced cognitive biases. I have been very interested in this area of study lately, and I can't get enough of it. Specifically, I am interested in how cognitive biases influence how we all see the world.
One of the most important life lesson I ever had was from Benjamin Franklin's autobiography. That book showed me that we have control of our enlightenment and the elasticity of our growth depends upon our willingness to confront our biases and be willing to change.
I understand paradigms to be the maps with which we view the world. That map changes all the time as our experiences within the world change. Our biases function as limitations to that map of the world. A bias against a particular idea creates resistance against any lesson or experience that may lead to a new or adjusted "life map" that would tolerate that idea. Thus, the map retains that limitation and remains narrow.
Every single person has biases of various forms. My goal for diving into this subject is twofold: 1) I want to learn about bias in an effort to overcome as many biases as possible to create as open and diverse a "life paradigm" as I can; and 2) I want to use natural biases within characters to create a story (eventually book?) that makes the reader truly and deeply understand the paradigm of each character.
BASIC IDEA
Cognitive biases are deviations of judgment that lead to rationalization, and may or may not be illogical. Cognitive dissonance is the uncomfortable feeling of holding two contradictory ideas, and it leads to rationalization. In short, we are confronted with an inconsistency, which makes us uncomfortable, and we rationalize to create harmony. Our biases can sometimes blind us to the irrationality of a justification. At least that's my understanding.
The pattern I notice in my daily life has left me with the impression that cognitive biases drive much of our interactions with each other. The story I hear usually proceeds as follows: Person X is evil, manipulative, a liar, and is attempting to get away with unspeakable wrongs.
My experience is that, although no intentional lies are being told, those harsh judgments are almost never correct. Why? One bias or another creates a block to perception (the life map isn't moving as to that topic). The classic case is in the area of inheritance. Siblings are quick to accuse each other of robbing parents blind or not caring for that parent's well-being. Almost always, the answer is that both parties misjudged the intentions of the other. Why? Cognitive biases seem to explain most scenarios.
Most cognitive biases are more subtle and simply guide our perception of everyday interactions. And, not all biases are things to necessarily eliminate.
SPECIFIC BIASES
The specific cognitive biases that jumped out at me most are the following:
Anchoring: Disproportionate weight given to the first piece of information received. ("Bob missed one opportunity to help mom, and no amount of generosity or kindness can make up for it.")
Outcome Bias: The tendency to judge a decision by its eventual outcome instead of by the soundness of the decision at the time it was made.
Semmelweis Reflex: The tendency to reject new evidence that contradicts an established paradigm. (Politics, anyone?)
Irrational escalation: The tendency to make irrational decision based upon rational decisions of the past (even if inapplicable) or to justify actions already taken.
Confirmation bias: Tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms preconceptions. (Again... politics).
Bandwagon Effect: The tendency to allow group consensus to influence personal decisions.
I am sure every single one of these sounds familiar to anyone reading this. That's because we all have biases.
FRANKLIN
The difference (and this I take from Franklin) is how we deal with biases. Some cement those biases into place and never move them, question them or second-guess. For anyone willing to take hold of those biases, however, those biases can be mitigated. (Mitigated, not eliminated).
Franklin distinguished between biases and pillars of morality, and I want to be clear that attempts to mitigate biases does not mean anyone should alter morals necessarily. Morality questions should always be examined, but pillars such as honesty and integrity are parts of our life map that remain unmoved during "paradigm updates."
Often, biases are most visible from outside when a person is faced with defending a possible mistake. All of that person's cognitive function will focus on justification for the sake of defense. It's natural and inevitable. We will leave out the bad and emphasize the good. It happens. It just does.
In my story, I plan to create a character who who used a specific logic to success many times in the past. That same decision-process will then be utilized to failure at a crucial moment. The subsequent rationalization will ignore the inapplicability of the logic that led to past success.
NOBEL-WORTHY EXAMPLE
Perhaps the most blatant surrender to bias comes in politics. Take, for example, the recent Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Barack Obama. Tell me if any of these arguments sound familiar:
1) This award is bogus because he hasn't done anything to deserve it! Euros are liberal and they prop up other liberals like Al Gore.
2) This is just sour-grapes by the far-right and a baseless slap at the President. It was well deserved and to argue otherwise is just politics.
3) He just got it for not being George W. Bush. (not as partisan, but seems to me to be equally biased... possibly toward scepticism. This option is also just funny.)
Number one shows an inability to give credit and seems to freely and loosely embrace a convenient world-wide conspiracy when much more rational and believable arguments can be made. It also shows no willingness to ever be happy for any success of the Obama administration. Number two dismisses the legitimate questions NOT raised by number one. Number two conveniently leaves out the genuine confusion many people felt at the outcome... especially since Mr. Obama is currently making a decision regarding troop levels. Number three, as explained earlier, makes me laugh because I have a deep-seeded bias against W and take pleasure in occasionally indulging in it. I have a bias, sue me.
In all seriousness, politics provide such stark examples because it is an exercise in outrage and exaggeration. My bias would be to defend President Obama, but when I force myself to even it out (as best I can), I came up with this mitigated version of my bias:
This award did seem out of the blue. I think it is a very good thing that the world considers our leader to be a force for peace, whether earned or not. I think this could prove to be a booster to the "cult of Obama" argument. I do think President Obama has changed our tone to the world in favor of cooperation. I also do not think he has accomplished anything specific that led to an actual cessation of violence or a measurable increase in peace.
I was tempted to say that both sides failed to consider that the other side's beliefs are genuinely felt. However, upon consideration of biases, they may just be stubbornly held.
IN THE END
As I stated in my 2007 post, "Examined Life," efforts to improve matter. But, I now think equal effort should be made to understand each other. That's what I've been trying to do lately. That, and to write a good story.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Random thoughts
... I recently finished Fyodore Dostoevsky's classic novel Crime and Punishment. It's a great read and I recommend it to anyone. Unlike most authors today, Dostoevsky really dives deep into the psyche of his characters. It has been a real education for my current short story project.
Although I enjoyed reading the book, older styles (and translated works especially) can make for some difficult reads. I probably spent five times as long reading this book as any others this year.
Still, the story was brilliant, the ending simple but meaningful and the characters were deeply thought-out.
I will be reading Brothers Karamosov before the end of the year. Some have called that book the greatest novel ever written. It's sub chapter titled "The Great Inquisitor" is famous, although I only know that it involves the Spanish Inquisition and Jesus.
I am most interested in how the book deals with the different paradigms of five characters who experience the same event. Dostoevsky's writing can be an acquired taste, but his characters are brilliant for their depth. I plan on taking some time to learn from the master while preparing my own story.
... I am currently reading The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown, or as I've come to call it "Angels and Da Vinci Lose a Symbol." I enjoy the book because it's like watching a movie, it's fast-paced and it is interesting, but it's really the same formula without much change from his previous books. I guess the ending will tell for sure, but right now, I've seen this movie before. Most important, this book was a must-read after slogging through Crime and Punishment.
... The Denver Broncos are 4-0 and, God help me, I don't know if they are any good or not. The offense is horrible, but the D is really good. They are trying to reel me in, but I remain sceptical until I'm sure they aren't just setting me up for a stomach punch.
... It's too bad college football was cancelled this year. It would have been nice to watch CU and UVA try to make runs at the Big 12 and ACC. (THE WHOLE SEASON WAS CANCELLED!!!! I'M ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE!!! WHY ARE YOU LOOKING AT ME LIKE THAT?)
... I've been listening to a lot of the Beatles lately. I can't say why... I just do this from time to time. I've been watching a lot of youtube clips. Fun stuff. I think it started when I read a Rolling Stone article of why they broke up and that spiraled into fascination with the older days when they were on top of the pop world.
In fact, here's a great old clip from their last live performance as a group.
Although I enjoyed reading the book, older styles (and translated works especially) can make for some difficult reads. I probably spent five times as long reading this book as any others this year.
Still, the story was brilliant, the ending simple but meaningful and the characters were deeply thought-out.
I will be reading Brothers Karamosov before the end of the year. Some have called that book the greatest novel ever written. It's sub chapter titled "The Great Inquisitor" is famous, although I only know that it involves the Spanish Inquisition and Jesus.
I am most interested in how the book deals with the different paradigms of five characters who experience the same event. Dostoevsky's writing can be an acquired taste, but his characters are brilliant for their depth. I plan on taking some time to learn from the master while preparing my own story.
... I am currently reading The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown, or as I've come to call it "Angels and Da Vinci Lose a Symbol." I enjoy the book because it's like watching a movie, it's fast-paced and it is interesting, but it's really the same formula without much change from his previous books. I guess the ending will tell for sure, but right now, I've seen this movie before. Most important, this book was a must-read after slogging through Crime and Punishment.
... The Denver Broncos are 4-0 and, God help me, I don't know if they are any good or not. The offense is horrible, but the D is really good. They are trying to reel me in, but I remain sceptical until I'm sure they aren't just setting me up for a stomach punch.
... It's too bad college football was cancelled this year. It would have been nice to watch CU and UVA try to make runs at the Big 12 and ACC. (THE WHOLE SEASON WAS CANCELLED!!!! I'M ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE!!! WHY ARE YOU LOOKING AT ME LIKE THAT?)
... I've been listening to a lot of the Beatles lately. I can't say why... I just do this from time to time. I've been watching a lot of youtube clips. Fun stuff. I think it started when I read a Rolling Stone article of why they broke up and that spiraled into fascination with the older days when they were on top of the pop world.
In fact, here's a great old clip from their last live performance as a group.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Clutter
My line of work allows me to see how much crap the average person accumulates in a lifetime. In many cases, even just accumulation over a shorter time can be staggering. It is often my job to dispose of that accumulation and that duty has hardened me as to such "items."
Needless to say, I now look at my basement and my garage differently. This past weekend I attacked the garage and, as a result, it's much more spacious now. That same weekend Jen and I donated 87 books to the library. 87! How many were I going to read again? Probably none.
I am now on a mission to get rid of everything I can spare. We should all remember that things are just things. Memories matter. Absent memories, things become trash. Take it from someone who facilitates the disposal of things that inspired memories for people who are now gone. Ultimately, it's all just trash. It's merely a function of time.
Although I realize much of the personal property accumulated by people has some special meaning, a simple test should determine whether or not something merits preservation. The test I am attempting to apply is this:
1) Have I searched for it during the past year?
2) If I keep it, do I imagine I will search for it again in the next year?
3) Does it have "special" sentimental value? (merely sentimental is insufficient).
I have had to struggle with some belongings just as anyone would. Items that belonged to my father, items that bring back memories and or were gifts from the departed have been difficult to toss. I am even trying to justify holding on to my father's car. It is a hockey puck on the ice, old, temperamental and expensive to maintain. If it wouldn't cause a riot in the family, I would probably sell it. (I may do just that anyway).
The short of it is that, even though it was my father's car, it is just a car. I remember riding in it to UVA games as a kid. I remember being taken to middle school in the morning and enduring the cold air in lieu of a working defrost. I remember riding in the hatchback all the way to DC.
But, do I need to keep the car to keep those memories? There is only one answer, and it is simply "No."
My biggest weakness has been an unwillingness to throw away anything related to school. In 20 years of school, I have accumulated a small mountain of notes. I have finally taken the step to get rid of it all. I had schoolwork from elementary school, high school, college, law school and the bar exam preparation. Some of those papers remain in my mother's home. Well, it's all going away. Why? Simple: I will never reference those again. I even finally recycled all the cases I printed to research my law review comment.
Much like memories from "things," the notes became a part of me and preservation of the physical manifestation of my education is ultimately meaningless. In fact it could become some vain attempt to preserve or display the work that was done. Trust me, this was not an easy decision for me. Those boxes might as well be filled with a lifetime of blood, sweat and tears.
I do not think I will finish my project for many, many months, but I am determined to keep working at it, room by room and box by box.
In a world where too much plastic seeps into the population by the minute; where not a month goes by without some form of holiday or celebration; and where we are all prone to pack-ratish behavior, I am ready to push back against the tide.
I have not yet missed one thing donated or thrown away and I do not imagine it will happen. It is actually a liberating feeling.
So, ultimately, preservation of a shirt simply because it was purchased for me by my father years ago does little to further his legacy of generosity when it could just as easily clothe someone who truly needs it.
I guess it's time to donate that Tony Gwynn shirt he bought me that I never wore.
Needless to say, I now look at my basement and my garage differently. This past weekend I attacked the garage and, as a result, it's much more spacious now. That same weekend Jen and I donated 87 books to the library. 87! How many were I going to read again? Probably none.
I am now on a mission to get rid of everything I can spare. We should all remember that things are just things. Memories matter. Absent memories, things become trash. Take it from someone who facilitates the disposal of things that inspired memories for people who are now gone. Ultimately, it's all just trash. It's merely a function of time.
Although I realize much of the personal property accumulated by people has some special meaning, a simple test should determine whether or not something merits preservation. The test I am attempting to apply is this:
1) Have I searched for it during the past year?
2) If I keep it, do I imagine I will search for it again in the next year?
3) Does it have "special" sentimental value? (merely sentimental is insufficient).
I have had to struggle with some belongings just as anyone would. Items that belonged to my father, items that bring back memories and or were gifts from the departed have been difficult to toss. I am even trying to justify holding on to my father's car. It is a hockey puck on the ice, old, temperamental and expensive to maintain. If it wouldn't cause a riot in the family, I would probably sell it. (I may do just that anyway).
The short of it is that, even though it was my father's car, it is just a car. I remember riding in it to UVA games as a kid. I remember being taken to middle school in the morning and enduring the cold air in lieu of a working defrost. I remember riding in the hatchback all the way to DC.
But, do I need to keep the car to keep those memories? There is only one answer, and it is simply "No."
My biggest weakness has been an unwillingness to throw away anything related to school. In 20 years of school, I have accumulated a small mountain of notes. I have finally taken the step to get rid of it all. I had schoolwork from elementary school, high school, college, law school and the bar exam preparation. Some of those papers remain in my mother's home. Well, it's all going away. Why? Simple: I will never reference those again. I even finally recycled all the cases I printed to research my law review comment.
Much like memories from "things," the notes became a part of me and preservation of the physical manifestation of my education is ultimately meaningless. In fact it could become some vain attempt to preserve or display the work that was done. Trust me, this was not an easy decision for me. Those boxes might as well be filled with a lifetime of blood, sweat and tears.
I do not think I will finish my project for many, many months, but I am determined to keep working at it, room by room and box by box.
In a world where too much plastic seeps into the population by the minute; where not a month goes by without some form of holiday or celebration; and where we are all prone to pack-ratish behavior, I am ready to push back against the tide.
I have not yet missed one thing donated or thrown away and I do not imagine it will happen. It is actually a liberating feeling.
So, ultimately, preservation of a shirt simply because it was purchased for me by my father years ago does little to further his legacy of generosity when it could just as easily clothe someone who truly needs it.
I guess it's time to donate that Tony Gwynn shirt he bought me that I never wore.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Update
... Jacob Year 3 video is being burned to DVDs as I type. I'd like to give a special thanks to Tom for his excellent editing. It really looks professional and came out as a very high quality product. For all who view the videos, this version will have much better cuts, shorter clips, great music and a lot of clever montages. We owe Tommy a big thanks.
... Jacob is doing really well in school and the class is getting back up to full capacity. Many of his friends are back in school from the summer break. He's been very cheerful lately and a joy around the house.
... I have been really thinking through the short story I have developed. I have really been researching effective character development as well as useful tools for making that character resonate with a reader. For one, I am reading Fyodore Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, which places the reader into the mind of a person brilliantly. But, my most inspirational enlightenment came from an otherwise mundane class.
I was at a CLE program when I learned the name for my conceptual goal. That is "cognitive bias." I always discuss paradigms and a large part of my story is perception and perspective. So, I have researched cognitive biases and have picked some to apply to my characters.
A judge actually told a story that illustrated cognitive bias. She discussed how two people can perceive the same events very differently without lying. The axiom that "someone must be lying," therefore, is rarely correct. Instead, the lenses through which we see events are tainted by these biases (whether conscious or unconscious).
I try not to have a "post-modern" or "morality is in the eye of the beholder" perspective, but cognitive bias is very real and it colors everything. I see it in my line of work all the time. I will be exploring this in depth in my story and will probably concentrate most of my writing on that in the coming weeks.
... The Broncos will have a terrible season and every college team I usually follow (CU and UVA) both look to have rough seasons. Therefore, for a one-year trial, the guys and I have decided to adopt a team to save the football season. We will be rooting for the Cal Bears this year. I'm all in! George Carlin once put sports into perspective by saying "you don't leave an opera angry, and the same should apply to sports." I'll still follow my teams, but I'm in on Cal so I can taste a good season. It'll make the otherwise crappy taste of multiple bad seasons go down a little more smoothly.
... Jacob is doing really well in school and the class is getting back up to full capacity. Many of his friends are back in school from the summer break. He's been very cheerful lately and a joy around the house.
... I have been really thinking through the short story I have developed. I have really been researching effective character development as well as useful tools for making that character resonate with a reader. For one, I am reading Fyodore Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, which places the reader into the mind of a person brilliantly. But, my most inspirational enlightenment came from an otherwise mundane class.
I was at a CLE program when I learned the name for my conceptual goal. That is "cognitive bias." I always discuss paradigms and a large part of my story is perception and perspective. So, I have researched cognitive biases and have picked some to apply to my characters.
A judge actually told a story that illustrated cognitive bias. She discussed how two people can perceive the same events very differently without lying. The axiom that "someone must be lying," therefore, is rarely correct. Instead, the lenses through which we see events are tainted by these biases (whether conscious or unconscious).
I try not to have a "post-modern" or "morality is in the eye of the beholder" perspective, but cognitive bias is very real and it colors everything. I see it in my line of work all the time. I will be exploring this in depth in my story and will probably concentrate most of my writing on that in the coming weeks.
... The Broncos will have a terrible season and every college team I usually follow (CU and UVA) both look to have rough seasons. Therefore, for a one-year trial, the guys and I have decided to adopt a team to save the football season. We will be rooting for the Cal Bears this year. I'm all in! George Carlin once put sports into perspective by saying "you don't leave an opera angry, and the same should apply to sports." I'll still follow my teams, but I'm in on Cal so I can taste a good season. It'll make the otherwise crappy taste of multiple bad seasons go down a little more smoothly.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Health Care Debate
What about this campaign sign says "Status Quo" to you? Health care reform. It's coming. It's needed. It's time.
Unfortunately the rhetoric and anger has managed to steal the spotlight, as usual. We must be discussing an issue of importance because the usual words are flying around. "Socialist" has made its triumphant return. *Sigh*.
Somehow, in a stroke of unspeakable ignorance, some have managed to convince themselves that the reform will lead to "death panels." Again, *sigh*.
The torches and pitchforks are ready for deployment.
Distraction and ignorance aside, I think this is a crucial issue. I also think that the people of this county have already decided to change our current system. My reading of the extreme opposition is that there is an attempt to restart the debate about whether or not reform should happen at all.
That debate has been decided. To paraphrase the White House spokesman when addressing criticism by Dick Cheney, "the American people debated the issue... it happened in November... we even kept score. We won."
Therefore, the legitimate question is how health care should be reformed. It's a legitimate debate. There is room for discussion, and the details should be hashed out. It's a big decision.
Shouting does not accomplish that.
However, the shouting has reached such a pitch that the hand has officially been overplayed. The party of "the silent majority" and "love it or leave it" has not taken well to being the vocal minority.
I support the proposed plan for a variety of reasons. First, it is very consistent with the message given on the campaign trail. I feel like President Obama is trying to fulfill one of the promises that led to his election. I'm getting what I voted for. Woot!
Second, it makes sense and addresses key specifics. It's not perfect, but its an improvement. After all, politics is the art of the possible. Single-payer won't pass and the status quo is not an option. Despite the charges of socialism, this is another middle-ground proposal by Obama. Again, this is what I voted for.
I like the idea of ridding the world of pre-existing conditions. I like having an affordable option so we won't have 47 million uninsured people (which makes everything more expensive). I like the streamlining of paperwork and the introduction of efficient technology to help cut costs. Standardizing forms should mean less manpower needed to deal with the vast array of forms and procedures that come from each different company.
In spite of the overwhelming news coverage, I have heard some well-reasoned arguments in favor of a different structure for reform. What I have not heard is a legitimate argument to change nothing. Those arguments are being made (you can see them on the news, complete with bulging neck veins).
I have had some discussions with some people about this issue. I am always open to political discussion so long as its reasonable and courteous. I've actually had a few good experiences.
Sometimes the discussion is a one-sentence statement refuting the notion that everyone will be required to have government health care. The most rewarding involved a young person who promised to look into the issue for himself after initially springing the "socialism" cop-out.
I don't care if people disagree with the proposed plan. I just ask that everyone research the specifics so we can strain out the nonsense (seriously, there will not be death panels). I am amazed at how dearly held some of the most outrageous rumors can be (no, we will not be condemning everyone over 74 to death... just not going to happen).
Thank you Internet for transferring crazy further and deeper than any printing press could.
Also, bring a proposal to the discussion. It's easy to be against something, so I will be looking for proposed solutions that work. How will the private market create coverage for 47 million uninsured? How will those with diseases get coverage? There isn't one way to do it, but the proposal must address those issues.
I am happy to have the discussion. I love it. I'm excited that this is (probably) going to happen this year. It's just that I refuse to discuss whether or not change should happen at all. That's not what 60 million Americans voted for.
Monday, August 3, 2009
More Music
I've decided to explore some music performances to supplement my music post from before.
Lately I've enjoyed searching Youtube for interesting music performances that I either remember or had heard about.
First up is this Michael Jackson clip. I remain fascinated by how popular Michael Jackson was during life and how that popularity has inexplicably increased after death. No one in the public eye has ever remained an icon despite charges of sexual abuse of children. No politician, no celebrity, no athlete. No one except Michael Jackson has survived even an allegation of that particular offense. Without comment toward his guilt or innocence, it's just amazing that the accusation didn't ruin his popularity.
I actually remember when MJ was on top of the world. I remember when Beat It was released on video and how that sent shockwaves through the schoolyard. I remember dad showing us his recording of the video for Billie Jean. So, I actually remember when he ruled pop culture above everyone else. Just look at the people in the audience during this clip and you will see it.
No amount of plastic surgery, no allegation and no weird behavior could stand up to the love fans seemed to feel for him (which is just intesting to me). And, he could sure dance.
(As a side note, check out old interviews on Youtube with Michael Jackson and you will see that even in his Thriller days he was "eccentric" and showed the beginnings of a life as a strange recluse. For some reason his story fascinates me).
I remember hearing Fleetwood Mac a lot growing up. I even remember working for a newspaper and noticing how often I typed Rhiannon when entering the accomplishments of local children. The band made its mark on a generation.
... All I have to say is Jimi.
KISS, shown in a trippy live performance on some Halloween special back in the day.
DMB doing Cortez the Killer with Warren Hayes. I love the guitar work in this song. It's long, but I loved every minute.
Good beat with this one from across the pond. Great to dance to even if its a bit dark.
I just love this mix. It's Jay-Z, Eminem, 50-cent, Linkin Park and Dr. Dre all mixed together. I've been really getting into mixed music lately.
I think that covers just about every genre that would be on youtube. Everything but Country, but I hate Country music and its my list.
Lately I've enjoyed searching Youtube for interesting music performances that I either remember or had heard about.
First up is this Michael Jackson clip. I remain fascinated by how popular Michael Jackson was during life and how that popularity has inexplicably increased after death. No one in the public eye has ever remained an icon despite charges of sexual abuse of children. No politician, no celebrity, no athlete. No one except Michael Jackson has survived even an allegation of that particular offense. Without comment toward his guilt or innocence, it's just amazing that the accusation didn't ruin his popularity.
I actually remember when MJ was on top of the world. I remember when Beat It was released on video and how that sent shockwaves through the schoolyard. I remember dad showing us his recording of the video for Billie Jean. So, I actually remember when he ruled pop culture above everyone else. Just look at the people in the audience during this clip and you will see it.
No amount of plastic surgery, no allegation and no weird behavior could stand up to the love fans seemed to feel for him (which is just intesting to me). And, he could sure dance.
(As a side note, check out old interviews on Youtube with Michael Jackson and you will see that even in his Thriller days he was "eccentric" and showed the beginnings of a life as a strange recluse. For some reason his story fascinates me).
I remember hearing Fleetwood Mac a lot growing up. I even remember working for a newspaper and noticing how often I typed Rhiannon when entering the accomplishments of local children. The band made its mark on a generation.
... All I have to say is Jimi.
KISS, shown in a trippy live performance on some Halloween special back in the day.
DMB doing Cortez the Killer with Warren Hayes. I love the guitar work in this song. It's long, but I loved every minute.
Good beat with this one from across the pond. Great to dance to even if its a bit dark.
I just love this mix. It's Jay-Z, Eminem, 50-cent, Linkin Park and Dr. Dre all mixed together. I've been really getting into mixed music lately.
I think that covers just about every genre that would be on youtube. Everything but Country, but I hate Country music and its my list.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Text Madness
I don't get texting, I just don't. I especially don't get texting while driving, but that's another story altogether. I get cell phones. I just don't get texting.
Maybe I'm just shaking my cane right now, but I don't see the use. I get the purported benefits; short, quick instant messages. "I'm on my way." "Movie starts at 7." "Just drove by your house and it's on fire." (more accurately: "drv by u house, it n fr"). Such things can be more easily just said. Or, and I know this is old fashioned, one could just show up at a predetermined time.
I use instant-message online all the time, but it feels like talking and I'm at the computer reading while doing so, so it seems to fit. Much like taking a cell phone call, I am locked in with IM. Also, I don't have to use abbreviations to communicate.
I also use my cell phone a lot. It's great. It provides all the convenience a person could need. I call, and receive calls, from anywhere. Huzzah!
Do people text because of the ease alone? Do people text because they can't handle just being alone and quiet? Or do we do it because its just there? For all the benefits of speed and instant, short communication, those legitimate functions seem to have become secondary.
For example, I heard of a teenager who texted more than 1,000 times in a month. I've even heard that such a number has even become common for many people. Of the more-than 30 messages per day it would take to reach 1,000 in a month, most of those would have to be conversational, right?
So, if you text to converse, why not just talk? Judging by how many people will text at the dinner table, text in line or interrupt a conversation to answer a text, either the text or the incoming texter would seem to be preferred. Either way, it pushes us further away from face-to-face interactions.
It was even suggested that Jay Cutler was able to hide behind texting to avoid looking his coach in the eye without his agent there to run a screen. Whether texting actually encourages people to avoid eye contact is to be determined, but it definitely encourages more bold communication and, I believe, a much higher incidence of miscommunication.
Texting also can be maddeningly inefficient.
I received an inquiry about our car for sale via text asking if the car was for sale. I answered "yes." I then received a text asking if he could see it sometime this week. So... I ended the pointless charade and called him and set up a time in about 10 seconds. The texting back and forth took much longer. At that point, texting is not quicker, or more efficient. In fact, I got so tired of the text game I just called and got the matter settled in a snap. How's that for advanced technology?
Finally (and this is where my cane gets out of control), I have read that text language (like "ur" and "plz" etc.) has found its way into school assignments produced by students. I realize that languages are literally alive and that they never stop changing. I also realize that grammar sometimes changes over generations. But, I also don't want someone to find this blog from a cyber-archeology dig and consider it a relic of a language now lost. Imagine that: "These words, they are so inefficiently long! And what are all those symbols? Could they serve any purpose?" (more likely: ths wrds r so crzy lng! symbls? y?).
I spent a lot of time (and money) learning how to make a sentence sound like a voice in your head with those crazy symbols, so, for selfish reasons, I don't want our language to change. At least not until I'm dead. Which has a much higher chance of happening since I keep seeing drivers staring at their laps on the road.
Maybe I'm just shaking my cane right now, but I don't see the use. I get the purported benefits; short, quick instant messages. "I'm on my way." "Movie starts at 7." "Just drove by your house and it's on fire." (more accurately: "drv by u house, it n fr"). Such things can be more easily just said. Or, and I know this is old fashioned, one could just show up at a predetermined time.
I use instant-message online all the time, but it feels like talking and I'm at the computer reading while doing so, so it seems to fit. Much like taking a cell phone call, I am locked in with IM. Also, I don't have to use abbreviations to communicate.
I also use my cell phone a lot. It's great. It provides all the convenience a person could need. I call, and receive calls, from anywhere. Huzzah!
Do people text because of the ease alone? Do people text because they can't handle just being alone and quiet? Or do we do it because its just there? For all the benefits of speed and instant, short communication, those legitimate functions seem to have become secondary.
For example, I heard of a teenager who texted more than 1,000 times in a month. I've even heard that such a number has even become common for many people. Of the more-than 30 messages per day it would take to reach 1,000 in a month, most of those would have to be conversational, right?
So, if you text to converse, why not just talk? Judging by how many people will text at the dinner table, text in line or interrupt a conversation to answer a text, either the text or the incoming texter would seem to be preferred. Either way, it pushes us further away from face-to-face interactions.
It was even suggested that Jay Cutler was able to hide behind texting to avoid looking his coach in the eye without his agent there to run a screen. Whether texting actually encourages people to avoid eye contact is to be determined, but it definitely encourages more bold communication and, I believe, a much higher incidence of miscommunication.
Texting also can be maddeningly inefficient.
I received an inquiry about our car for sale via text asking if the car was for sale. I answered "yes." I then received a text asking if he could see it sometime this week. So... I ended the pointless charade and called him and set up a time in about 10 seconds. The texting back and forth took much longer. At that point, texting is not quicker, or more efficient. In fact, I got so tired of the text game I just called and got the matter settled in a snap. How's that for advanced technology?
Finally (and this is where my cane gets out of control), I have read that text language (like "ur" and "plz" etc.) has found its way into school assignments produced by students. I realize that languages are literally alive and that they never stop changing. I also realize that grammar sometimes changes over generations. But, I also don't want someone to find this blog from a cyber-archeology dig and consider it a relic of a language now lost. Imagine that: "These words, they are so inefficiently long! And what are all those symbols? Could they serve any purpose?" (more likely: ths wrds r so crzy lng! symbls? y?).
I spent a lot of time (and money) learning how to make a sentence sound like a voice in your head with those crazy symbols, so, for selfish reasons, I don't want our language to change. At least not until I'm dead. Which has a much higher chance of happening since I keep seeing drivers staring at their laps on the road.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Update and Pictures
Update:
... I have finally developed the skeleton structure of a short story idea. I am cultivating it and working through the story, but I have a ways to go before its finished. At least now I know exactly where it's going. I will enjoy doing this. I have wanted to get kick started on developing some sort of a book, and this is a start. I am really psyched about the story I have developed and look forward to developing it. I may post it here in pieces (it will be long). I have even started looking into how to publish and have found a lot of useful ideas. If you know me at all, you probably guessed that it will focus on paradigm shifts. I may even try a rough draft or two on the blog for any comments. You know, for all you crickets out there to read and comment upon.
... Anyone interested in a 1996 Mustang, give us a call. We have one for sale.
... I've been screaming through books on the Kindle. Just finished number 18 on the year. At least I'm on the final Malcolm Gladwell book. Those books are phenomenal and if I discover another, then my pace will only quicken. Anyone who reads his three books (Tipping Point, Blink and Outliers) will have quite a study in human nature. I actually feel like he has taught me something useful about how we all function. This is the kind of information that can lead to actual change in life for the better and deep understanding of people and how to intensify and deepen interaction. I cannot recommend them any higher.
... Jen and I took vacation last week. We took Jacob to the Aquarium on Monday, to BOUNCE! on Tuesday and then kept him in school the rest of the week. We relaxed, but did not do any traveling beyond Denver. The break was needed, but we are both feeling refreshed.
PICTURES:
Jacob after eating rasberries from Jen's garden.
My Jen:
Jacob stained with rasberry juice:
Caught in the act:
... I have finally developed the skeleton structure of a short story idea. I am cultivating it and working through the story, but I have a ways to go before its finished. At least now I know exactly where it's going. I will enjoy doing this. I have wanted to get kick started on developing some sort of a book, and this is a start. I am really psyched about the story I have developed and look forward to developing it. I may post it here in pieces (it will be long). I have even started looking into how to publish and have found a lot of useful ideas. If you know me at all, you probably guessed that it will focus on paradigm shifts. I may even try a rough draft or two on the blog for any comments. You know, for all you crickets out there to read and comment upon.
... Anyone interested in a 1996 Mustang, give us a call. We have one for sale.
... I've been screaming through books on the Kindle. Just finished number 18 on the year. At least I'm on the final Malcolm Gladwell book. Those books are phenomenal and if I discover another, then my pace will only quicken. Anyone who reads his three books (Tipping Point, Blink and Outliers) will have quite a study in human nature. I actually feel like he has taught me something useful about how we all function. This is the kind of information that can lead to actual change in life for the better and deep understanding of people and how to intensify and deepen interaction. I cannot recommend them any higher.
... Jen and I took vacation last week. We took Jacob to the Aquarium on Monday, to BOUNCE! on Tuesday and then kept him in school the rest of the week. We relaxed, but did not do any traveling beyond Denver. The break was needed, but we are both feeling refreshed.
PICTURES:
Jacob after eating rasberries from Jen's garden.
My Jen:
Jacob stained with rasberry juice:
Caught in the act:
Monday, July 13, 2009
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Weekend Pictures
This weekend we took Jacob to a local water park and celebrated our 10th Anniversary. It was a wonderful weekend filled with wonderful weather. Here are some pics.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
A good Father's Day
"I love you daddy."
- Jacob L. Findley
"I had fun at the water park. And I got clean!"
- Also from Jacob.
I woke up this morning to the wonderful aroma of pancakes. Jen took care of me well on Father's Day.
I then awoke Jacob by giving him a back rub. The day started off with a bang. Specifically, it started with buckwheat pancakes with blueberries in them. Although I had planned a quiet Father's Day reading and relaxing, the day was simply too beautiful to stay home.
So, we went to a new park in town that features new and uniquely-designed playground equipment and a little water park play area. We had a blast watching Jacob play. We had to roll his pant legs up so he could run through the water, but that didn't stop him from pulling his pants up as he ran.
Jacob ate his lunch at the park and kept going back in for more water fun. We walked on a path around the park together talking.
Our pancake breakfast made lunch a late affair, so we decided to just have a very early dinner. Out of the blue I decided to take Jen to Nordy's for some amazing BBQ. Nordy's is famous for its great BBQ buffet, but I understood that to only be on weekdays. Apparently, a Father's Day special meant we were in business. It was 2:15 when we arrived. Buffet ended at 3. Score!
After a great dinner, we took another walk at Centera and Jacob again found a water spray. A quick stop to run errands later, we were back home for the relaxation we all needed.
On the way home, we passed a fire engine, and Jacob was captivated as we drove along side it. He waved vigorously to the driver and received a wave back. You forget sometimes just how thrilling a fire truck can be until you have a three-year-old smiling from ear to ear at the sight of one.
At home, Jacob wound down with some Blue's Clues (a show he is now completely crazy for) and I got my relaxation by sitting with him and reading.
The only downside was when I decided to go for a jog, which inspired my knee to fall off the wagon and start swelling again.
We put a very happy Jacob to bed and now I'm finishing up some laundry.
It was a great time. I wasn't sure how this Father's Day would go so soon after the five-year anniversary of my father's passing, but I can say happily that Jacob has once again rescued Father's Day for me. He had a lot of help from Jen, and the two of them treated me to a wonderful Father's Day.
A special thank you goes out to both of them.
Monday, June 15, 2009
5 long years
I woke up this morning and remembered something.
It's hard to believe, but I almost forgot that tomorrow, June 16, marks the 5th anniversary of my father's passing. Father's Day must be around the corner. That'll mess up a day.
The fact that years 2-4 were pretty inconsequential and fairly easy to handle apparently lulled me to sleep. Being a father myself, the last three seemed to free me from the Father's Day doldrums. I'm not sure what it is about denominations of 5 and 10 that make our brains overcompensate, but it hit me like a ton of bricks today.
For some reason our brains process permanence on scales of five. Anyone knows that the march of time can be cruel and that it's always relentless, but we seem to only recognize that every five years. Who knows, maybe it's because that's how many fingers we have on each hand.
Today is as good a day as any to meander through my thoughts five years later. For one thing, so much has happened, so much has changed. I'm not even sure he would know me all that well anymore. So I thought it might be interesting to touch on the highlights of the last five years.
I was 28 when dad died. That's not a denomination of 5. But it is approximately the age of my dad when this picture was taken.
------------------------------------>
(That's me in his arms)
First and foremost is that dad missed out on Jacob. Dad never pushed me to have children even though he knew exactly how little time he had left. He neither shared that knowledge nor pressed me to hurry up with the grand kids to selfish ends. Indeed, he was the one who counseled patience.
I'm sure he'd be happy that Jen and I waited and would tip his hat to his only grandson.
He missed my most recent graduation in 2005. I think he would have really liked to have attended that one. It was a fun time and I think he would have considered it noteworthy. It really is too bad that he missed it considering how much he emphasized school to me. I know it was important to him. He would have wanted to help me write my law review comment more than anything. He would have probably driven me nuts trying to tinker with wordings and concepts. And, he would have understood the topic better than I could by the time it was finished. In the end, his roving expertise would have helped make it better.
I know he would be happy that we found our way back home after graduation. He might even try to spoil Jacob.
It's impossible to predict how he would feel about things as they are today. After all, I can't even be sure everything would be the same. For example, I was inspired to work in my specific field because of the experience I had trying to tie up my the loose ends after his death. Without that change in my life, who knows what I'd be doing.
Still, as the combination of Father's Day and the big fifth anniversary collide, it gives comfort to think about how he would react to the world as it is. I don't get caught up in the notion of loved ones peering down from above. I neither believe nor disbelieve such notions. I just like to think about having him stop by for a visit. We would have so much to talk about.
It isn't just the updating of information, but the recognition and joy I imagine he would display as I told him story after story. We would talk about great albums of the past five years, movies he would have loved, jokes told and everything in between.
I know every single person dies. I know I am no victim. But, it's been five years, so apparently it is acceptable for me to grieve.
Monday, June 8, 2009
33 and content
I turned 33 on Saturday.
June's a big month for me every year, but this year is bigger than most. Birthday, Father's Day, and my 10th Anniversary all happen this month. Throw in our annual trip to the zoo with Jacob, the fifth anniversary of my father's passing, the annual family picnic and the beginning of Jen's new status as a commuter to work and it's going to be one heck of a month.
As if any of us need yet another reason for introspection in a year, birthdays have a way of giving a boost to New Year's resolutions. Well, at least mine does. It happens right in the middle of the year.
Aging doesn't bother me. At least, not yet. But, my semi-annual sharpening of the saw sometimes reveals certain gaps and changes. These gaps are not bad things, but curious nonetheless. We are all our own study subject in life.
I am not on top of the music scene at all anymore. I carry a dinosaur of a cell phone and have no desire to carry one that allows Internet connection. I like the convenience, but fear the leash. I no longer know anything about pop culture outside of the very select few programs I watch - usually at the behest of others, and often to satisfaction. Our household is behind most others mainly because of our choice to forgo cable television or any other regular programing.
I do miss all the movies I would otherwise be sure to see, but I read a lot more books, so I can live with it. Besides, I make sure to see all the movies I really want to see. No harm, no foul, I guess. Heck, looks like a win.
Increasingly, our world seems more and more connected through such media. Although I consider that to be neither positive nor negative, it is simply interesting to me. I do not necessarily mourn my loss of connection to the most commonly-shared media of our culture. But it does provide a unique paradigm.
Still, it is important to keep a toe in the pool so as to avoid becoming too out of touch or, God forbid, boring. I am trying to walk the line between connected (I now read my books electronically via my Kindle) and oblivious (I don't text... and I wish no one would while driving).
If I could pinpoint some positives of aging, the list would include the ability to slowly and deliberately disconnect from old patterns and explore new ones. And old patters are usually the inspiration for change. I just don't think "new" always involves "advancements" (such as with technology). Backward movement, in life as in cell phone usage, can create a "new" peace. As long as it's new to me, I guess. "New" in that sense would mean less connectivity. I can live with that if balanced.
Thus, my proposed changes came to mind, and now will be memorialized for accountability's sake.
I'm hoping to accomplish as much of the following as possible:
-- Read to Jacob at least once per day.
-- Get back to taking vitamins every day.
-- Exercise more (what would a list be without it?).
-- Eat better (ditto here).
-- Intensify focus.
-- Drop the casual cursing (amazing how easy it is to slip in front of the little guy).
-- Walk with my family every evening after work (weather permitting).
-- Do not begin evening media routines until after the walk or reading session.
-- Get back to regular family visits (easier after the worst flu season we've had here).
-- Listen to and enjoy music more.
Honestly, there isn't much I really want to change right now. I'm still going to try, however, because it's a good habit. Sometimes you need to inspect just to discover that you are indeed happy. There are no guarantees in life, so I guess I'll add "appreciate the good times" to my list.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)