Popular Posts

Sunday, August 26, 2012

WORDS OF WISDOM FROM BASEBALL STAR, CARLOS PENA


 WORDS OF WISDOM FROM BASEBALL STAR, CARLOS PENA


James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© August 26, 2012

There is a word, which we borrow from the Germans that describes the glee people feel when they are privy to the misfortunes of others.  It is called “schadenfreude.” 

Carlos Pena, first baseman for the Tampa Bay Rays in the American League, is going through a bad patch.  He is striking out a lot, leaving men on base in scoring position, and not bringing them in with hits or sacrifices.  If this weren't bad enough, he has the lowest batting average of any active player in the major leagues with 425 plate appearances.  He is hitting .190, which means eight out of ten times he is striking out, grounding or flying out, or reaching base on an error.

Baseball is a beautiful sport, but a sport that teaches us more about losing than winning.  A batting average of .300, or only hitting safely three out ten times is considered outstanding.  Moreover, the best teams in baseball are likely to lost at least sixty games in a season. 

Paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould once made a study of baseball players over the history of the sport, and found the batting average a shade less than .250.  That means that three out of every four plate appearances major league players over time, cumulatively, have failed to hit safely.

Now, you may not be a baseball fan, or have any interest in the sport much less its statistics.  I do believe you have an interest in life, and the lessons life teaches you.  Baseball is about being a winner when most of the time you are losing.

We are a society that likes winners.  We like winners, vicariously, as spectators where we don’t have to take risks, and can bask in the glory of those that do.  It is why life has become increasingly passive and dependent on those who take risks for us, who perform before our eyes, and excel or come up short to our cheers or jeers.  All we need is the price of admission.

On a more personal level, we are a society that compares and competes, often focusing on the attributes of others, and copying them rather than finding our own niche. 

It seldom occurs to us in this competitive jungle that we can never be or have or attain what someone else does because we are not that individual, nor do we have identical attributes to that person. 

The best we can do by emulating someone else is to be a poor copy of that person.  It is apparent that many if not most people choose that course.  That is unfortunate.  It means we never discover our own personal uniqueness, the difference that makes us special, whatever that is.  Everyone has that specialness.  Everyone.

*     *     *
The baseball season is a grueling business, a season that sucks the energy and spirit out of the players, who often play hurt or in pain from injuries received in the game.  This is the physical part of the game that shows, or perhaps it doesn’t.  A sore wrist or forearm, or sore calf muscle or toe does not show, and may not be sufficient to put a player on the disabled list, but it can change his stance at the plate, his bat speed, and result in plummeting statistics regarding his performance.  Baseball is a game that loves statistics, and the fate of a player rises and falls on these indices.

The other part of the game that doesn’t show but weighs decisively in the player's performance is his psychology or emotional balance.  

Baseball, like all sports, is a mind or head game, and the mind must be in sync with the physical gifts for the music of the soul to vibrate with a winning message.  Remember, that winning message may occur only three out of ten times for a hitter.  Pitching is a whole other matter with complexities too subtle and complicated to cover in this brief missive.

Every player brings his personal baggage with him to the game.  Since baseball season involves 81 of its 162 games on the road, home life is an interrupted experience with all the tensions that that may involve.  Players spend many hours in hotel rooms or on planes, trains or buses between games, and away from their families.  It is a frenetic life and spans six months or more of every year they are a professional baseball player. 

The game of baseball requires maturity and a dedication that strains the temperament of the most stable personality. 

A career can be launched right out of high school or college, with the possibility of many apprentice years in the minors before making it to the big leagues.  Then, there are no guarantees of staying longer than time for a cup of coffee.  Add to this the possibility of being traded to another team, requiring adjusting to a new management style, new players and a new baseball culture, not to mention a new complement of fans.  Put family dynamics and family tensions into the mix, and you have some appreciation of the personal and role demands on a player. 

True, major league baseball players make, on average, far more than peers their age.  Yet, it is uncommon for a baseball career to last beyond a player’s early thirties.  If a player has no sense of frugality, and accumulates a lot of hanger ons while in his glory, he can come out of baseball not only in debt but a broken man, and he has lived only a third of his life.     

*     *     *

This is preamble to Carlos Pena’s comments to the press yesterday after the Tampa Bay Rays lost their second game in a row to the Oakland Athletics, a team chasing them in the wild card race for a berth in the playoffs.  Hometown fans booed Pena when he failed to hit safely with a man on base.

It has been a disappointing month for the first basement, indeed, a disappointing season.  He said he was disappointed for the fans to boo him, but he understood.  It is their prerogative as paying customers.  That said he would not allow himself to react negatively to the boos, as he has not allowed himself to have his head turned when fans celebrate his achievements. 

“As grateful as I am for all the cheers, as grateful as I am for all the pats on the back, and all the love the area has given me, I also think I have been smart enough to make it my lifeline not to make it my identity, not to make it my source of worth.”

He went on to say, “I have been very careful over the years to not let that define me, so if you have not embraced or become addicted to the cheers then the boos shouldn’t bug you either. 

“Keeping that balance,” he said, “is easier said than done.  But that’s ideally what I want to do at all times.”

*     *     *
There is a lesson here for us all.  If we have an internal governor, an internal compass, we will be self-directed, and know where we are going.  More importantly, we will know who and what we are. 

We will not let anyone else define us, and that means with praise or criticism.  We are our own person.  That is power, with that power comes confidence, with that confidence comes the instinct to embrace our challenges and control our destiny.  We have mounted the courage and now possess the knowledge to know everything will turn out okay in the end. 

Carlos Pena must have amazing parents because he is an amazing man who happens to be, at the moment, a baseball player.

*     *     *


Monday, August 20, 2012

THE CULTURAL IMPORTANCE OF MILITARY SERVICE

THE CULTURAL IMPORTANCE OF MILITARY SERVICE

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© August 20, 2012

REFERENCE:

Dr. Donald Farr, ex-GI and former NASA scientist, creator of the Don Farr Network, along with many other activities including coaching, counseling and teaching at university, has recently had a stimulating discussion of military service.  Reading these exchanges moved me to reflect.  It is obvious I am referring to men.  Of course, women are also a vital part of the military.

DR. FISHER COMMENTS:

Dr. Don,

You may be able to relate to this.  Few in the last two generations have served in the military whereas nearly, at least in my experience, the majority of my acquaintances in high school and college were in the military.

When I taught at several universities as an adjunct professor in the 1970s and early 1980s, none were military service bound.  They didn't expect to have their lives interrupted with this commitment.

My two sons were never in the service, nor my son-in-law or my daughter Jennifer's boyfriend. 

It was part of our culture of transition into adulthood. 

My sense is that this is one reason the last two generations have failed to take hold, failed to grow up.  They have been stuck in suspended adolescence, cuddled and protected, finding a home in complacency with a penchant for complaining.

No surprise, the majority in Congress has never been in the military.  This is also true of academics at our universities, people on Wall Street, in the media, and manning the CEO chairs of our major corporations.  They bicker in bombast as if spoiled children. 

For the first time in eighty years, neither the president nor the vice president, or the two contenders for this high office have ever served in the military. 

A few years ago, I wrote a piece about our culture being "stuck in the sixth grade" (see missive of this title in www.peripateticphilosoper.com, February 7, 2008).  We see this every time we turn on our television or read a newspaper or magazine.  It is literally a sixth grade recess free for all.

Evidence is in the childish debates of Congress, which is stuck in stalemate, in the way media exploit the salacious headlines of the day, in how the two presidential campaigns spend millions as if money were confetti.  Still, these presidential campaigns cannot seem to rise above boring.  As incredible as it might seem, we look forward to the return of conventional commercials. 

Poor as I was when young, the military introduced me to dregs of society that I didn't know existed, people far worse off than I had been as a boy.  It was like finding myself in a Charles Dickens neighborhood in one of his dark novels. 

The military was good for me.  It taught me to appreciate. It was a good teacher.  To my surprise, much as I tend to be a maverick, I found I loved being in the US Navy.  I look back on that experience with pride and satisfaction.

In Switzerland, every single man has a military obligation.  The same is true of Israel, perhaps other countries as well.  The military is good for the soul, especially for the person too big for his britches.  It knocks you down and some sense into your head.  You learn to follow orders, which, incidentally, is the first step in leadership.

We sometimes forget that the great inventions of society -- be they in electronics or systems -- were first spun off in the military and became common fare before the public-at-large even knew they existed.  Likewise, it should be noted that the infrastructure of society is essentially a replica of what the military designed, and so it has been since the beginning of societal history. 

The military is often the sounding board to cultural issues as well.  This was the first proving station to integration, and still is the best equal opportunity employer.  I found the military an important experience in terms of the rites of passage into adulthood.  Less I forget it also financed my graduate education to a Ph.D. degree.

Don, your writers are correct.  Few have ever served in the military as a percentage of the population, even in a time of war.  Our debt to those that served and died can never be repaid.  Nor can we ever satisfy the obligation to those wounded in body or soul that limp through the rest of their lives because of what they saw and did.

It might be impossible for those who have never served to understand the sacrifice or the pride one experiences who has served.  You can always tell who has served in the military.  They are the least bellicose when it comes to military intervention.  They fail to see war as a video game.

Be always well,

Jim

*     *     *

Thursday, August 16, 2012

ANCESTORS IN THOUGHT

ANCESTORS IN THOUGHT


James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© August 16, 2012

REFERENCE

Author and friend, William L. Livingston III, wrote, Sir James: You resonated with Le Bon. Attached is a piece by Henry Adams, one of the Adams’ brothers. He is your direct ancestor in thought. He has been added to the mentors list. Regards, Bill.”

Henry Adams was the grandson of President John Quincy Adams, and the great grandson of President John Adams.  He was a prolific author, as well as a journalist, academic and historian.  He is best known for his “The Education of Henry Adams.” 

Several years ago, I read J. C. Levenson’s “The Mind and Art of Henry Adams” (1957) in which the author quotes generously from “The Education.”

“A Letter to American Teachers of History” (1910) was not published until after his death in 1918 at the age of 80.  It is a short but cerebral document of his “theory of history” based on the second law of thermodynamics and the principle of entropy.  The principle states that all energy dissipates, order becomes disorder, and everything dies when a state of equilibrium is reached. 

Scientists challenged Adams in his day, as he still is in our day, for wharfing science -- physics and mathematics -- with history and sociology.  He was an artist intrigued with science and could see connection with his work.  He was also an advocate of natural law.  His prescience is apparent in this piece, which happened to be at the dawn of the twentieth century.

QUOTATIONS FROM “A LETTER TO AMERICAN TEACHERS OF HISTORY” (1910)


As you read these excerpts, think of them in terms of today and the long road covered in the past hundred years.  Have we made great progress or are we stuck in forward inertia? 

Henry Adams was a student of science as well as of humanities.

The essential (cycle of energy) is that the second law of thermodynamics (entropy) rules biology with an authority fully as despotic as it asserts in physics.

For human purposes, whatever does work is a form of energy, and since historians exist only to recount and sum up the work that society has done, either as State, or as Church, as civil or as military, as intellectual or physical, organisms, they will, if they obey the physical law, hold that society does work by degrading its energies.

An infinite series of imperceptible steps, continuous under uniform conditions since the earliest races of organic life, and always tending upwards to higher intensities, tensions, potentials, according to the growing complexity of the organism, had already taken the place of religious dogma, and bridges the gap between two phases of thought.  With a sense of vase relief, the generation which began life in 1850, embraced the new creed, not so much because it was proved, as because it was convenient.

We recognize from this point of view as from others, that the world was once young, then adolescent; that it has even passed the age of maturity; man has come late, when a beginning of physical decadence had struck the globe, his domain.

As Newton said that he was never a Newtonian, so Darwin might perhaps have said that he was never a Darwinian.

It is perfectly exact to say that the number and extent of variations diminishes as the specialization advances.  Man has certainly advanced by leaps, and that his progress seems to be irreversible, seeks at once to know whether he shows signs of reaching its limits.

The weight of the brain is not asserted to be a gauge of its energy.  Neither instinct nor reason is supposed to have any relation to the weight of the brain; on the contrary, in a list of seventeen brains, the heaviest known, going from 1729 to 2020 grams, there are seven lunatics and only three men of science.

Increase in intellectual power often goes with a narrowing of the jaw and an early loss of the teeth, and the hair, and in women with an inability to suckle their children.

The evolution of life on earth had ceased to be progressive some millions of years ago, and had passed through its stationary period into regression before man ever appeared.

Society has been born of man, and has been built on sand, often with only materials of convention.  The individual for whom it is created is always its worst enemy; but will not bend to its necessities. 

Compared with the superficial and self-complacent optimism which seems to veneer the surface of society, the frequent and tragic outbursts of physicists, astronomers, geologists, biologists, and sociological socialists announcing the end of the world, surpass all that could be conceived as a natural product of the time.  The note of warning verges on the grotesque; it is hysterically solemn; a little more, and it would sound like that of the Salvation Army; a small natural shock might easily turn it to a panic.

When the earth becomes as barren as the moon:

Here lies the entire humanity of a world which has lived!  Here lie all the dreams of ambition, all the conquests of military glory, all the resounding affairs of finance, all the systems of an imperfect science, and also all the oaths of mortals’ love!  Here lie all the beauties of earth!  But no mortuary stone will mark the spot where the poor planet shall have rendered its last sigh!

The soul freed from the bonds of matter seems to require no education unless in the passive consciousness of pure mathematics and logic, which has hitherto been the weakest side of the American student, who is averse even to the ingenuous simplicity of logarithms and vectors.

It was a time when society was going from rural to industrial, the time of Emerson, Melville, Hawthorne, Thoreau and the James brothers, William and Henry.

Society has the air of taking for granted its indefinite progress towards perfection with more confidence, and sometimes with more dogmatism than in 1830.  

Granting that the intended effect of intellectual education is, as Bacon, Descartes and Kant began by insisting, a habit of doubt, it is only in a very secondary sense a habit of timidity or despair.  To a certain point, the more education, the more hesitation; but beyond that point, confidence should begin.  Keeping Europe still in view for illustration and assuming for the moment that America does not exist, every reader of the French or German papers knows that not a day passes without producing some uneasy discussion of supposed social decrepitude; falling off of the birth rate; decline of rural population; lowering of army standards; multiplication of suicides; increase of insanity; of cancer; of tuberculosis; signs of nervous exhaustion; enfeebled vitality; habits of alcoholism and drugs; failure of eye sight in the young, and so on, without and coupled with suggestions for correcting these evils.

The great city of today, of which Berlin is the most significant type, exhibits a constantly diminishing vitality.

The medical profession is singularly shy of pledges.  The poets are pessimists to a man and to a woman.  The legislators pass half their time, in Germany, France and England, framing social legislation, of which a large part rests on the right and duty of society to protect it from itself.

Adams suggests an American professor should begin his course:

By announcing to his class that their year’s work would be devoted to showing in American history a universal tendency to the dissipation of energy and degradation of thought, which would soon end in making America improper for the habitation of man as he is now constructed.

The dilemma is real; it may become serious; in any case it needs to be understood.  The battle of Evolution has never been wholly won; the chances at this moment favor the fear that it may yet be wholly lost.  The Darwinist no longer talks of Evolution; he uses the word Transformation.

Man is a Primate and must eternally, by his body, be subject to the second law of thermodynamics.  Escape is impossible.  Science has shut and barred every known exit. 

Man can detect no outlet except through the loophole called Mind, and even to avail himself of this, he must follow Lapparent’s advice, become a disembodied sprit and seek a confederate among such physicists or physiologists as are willing to admit that man, as an animal, has no importance; that his evolution or degradation as an organism is immaterial; that his physical force or condition has nothing to do with the subject; that the old ascetics were correct in suppressing the body; and that his consciousness is sufficient proof of his right to regard Reason as the highest potential of Vital Energy.

Reason can be only another phase of the energy earlier known as instinct or intuition, and if this be admitted as the stem history of the Mind as far back as the Eocene lemur, it must be admitted for all forms of Vital Energy back to the vegetables and perhaps even to the crystals.  In the absence of any definite break in the series, all must be treated as endowed with energy equivalent to will.

Physically the gap between the brain of man and the brain of an anthropoid ape is too insignificant to count; but their difference as beings corresponds to the distance of the earth from the nearest fixed star.

The Will shows organic evolution from first to last, and shows in this respect no differences from other bodily functions.  It is a product of organic nature, and, at least in its broadest sense, bears that stamp.

The force that Thomson calls supernatural Will, and Flechsig calls an organic function, and Loeb calls a physico-chemical relation, is the force which I call Vital Energy.

Will is another name for the same primitive, elementary, unexplained energy which gave odor to a molecule of copper, or made the magnolia burst into flower with more than animal sensuality and perfection of form, color, scent, and line; or the caterpillar suddenly soar into the air with the amazing, inconceivable sensual properties of the butterfly; but the mere brain-mechanism you talk about is, in physics, far less extraordinary, as Will, than what went before it, creations always growing higher in tension as you go backward, like the eye, or the innumerable varieties or transformations of the shapes which vital energy has taken in every province of the vegetable and animal kingdoms, while all are still subordinate and even trivial when compared with the primary creation of energy itself, about which no one knows anything except its name, Nature.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau said: The man who thinks is a depraved animal.  As far as he is animal, the thinker is a bad animal; eating badly, digesting badly; often dying without posterity.

Thought is an organic growth which has the faculty of determining its own action within certain limits.  Thought comes as the result of helplessness.  Thought is the refraining from speech or action.  The truth is, therefore, that action comes first; the idea is an act which tends to accomplish itself, and which when stopped by some obstacle before its realization, finds a new form of reality in that stoppage.

Consciousness in many is chiefly intelligence, it might have been, it seems as thought it ought to have been, intuition too.  Another evolution might have led to a humanity either still more intelligent, or more intuitive, in reality, in the humanity of which we make part; intuition is almost completely sacrificed to intelligence.  Intuition is still there, but vague and especially discontinuous.

Not instinct but Intellect is the highest power of a supernatural Will.

Intellect should bear the same relation to instinct that the sun bears to a gaseous nebula, and hitherto in human history it has asserted this relation without a doubt of its self-evident truth.  The assertion has led to physical violence and intellectual extravagance without limit, so that history shows man as alternately insane with his own pride of intellect, and shuddering with horror at its bloody consequences.

Evolution, again, is troublesome, and has already yielded to the less compromising figure of transformation . . . In strictness, no doubt, water which falls and dynamite which expands, are equally degraded energies, but the mind is repelled by the idea of degradation, while it is pleased by the figure of expansion.  Because an energy is diffused like table salt in water, it is not rendered less useful; on the contrary, it can only by that process be made useful at all to an animal like man whose life is shut within narrow limits of intensity.

Notoriously civilization and education enfeeble personal energy; emollit mores: they aim especially at extending the forces of society at cost of the intensity of individual forces.  “Thou shalt not,’ is the beginning of law.  The individual, like the crystal of salt, is absorbed in the solution, but the solution does work which the individual could not do.

Adams is concerned with the limitations of science itself:

Science has thus far penetrated only the grosser operations of nature, and cannot deny that further knowledge may, and probably will, overthrow much of the experience of physics. 

Adams bemoans man’s waste.  Were he alive today the mourning might turn to outrage. 

Man does more to dissipate and waste nature’s economies than all the rest of the animal or vegetable life has ever done to save them. 

Already, one may hear the physicists aver, man dissipates every year all the heat stored in a thousand million tons of coal which nature herself cannot now replace, and he does this only in order to convert some ten or fifteen percent of it into mechanical energy immediately wasted on his transient and commonly purposeless objects. 

He draws great reservoirs of coal-oil and gas out of the earth, which he consumes like the coal.  He is digging out even the peat-bogs in order to consume them as heat.  He has largely deforested the planet, and hastened its desiccation.  He seizes all the zinc and whatever other minerals he can burn, or which he can convert into other forms of energy, and dissipate into space.  

What is still more curious, his chief pleasures, so far as they are his own invention, consist in gratifying the same unintelligent passion for dissipating or degrading energy, as in drinking alcohol, or burning fireworks, or firing cannon, or illuminating cities, or deafening them by senseless noises.

Adams penetrates man’s hubris:

A watch spring stores elasticity better than the mind stores thought.  Any chance bit of obsidian or crystal can set forests afire without calling itself intelligent.  A fall of one degree in temperature gives form to an icicle without claiming to be divine.

Paleontologists talk only of specialization, as though the more elaborate type were the higher intensity.  The opposite is more likely to be true.

We grant that we cannot explain why, in man or in molecule, the primitive energies of nature took directions which imply, in our limited experience, a reasoning forethought. 

Cause is a transcendental product beyond our grasp.  We no longer venture even to assert that we know the creative forces at all. We say only that in the world which we do know, we can see nothing supernatural in action. Infinite complication, we admit, but no ultimate contradiction.

The claim that Reason must be classed as an energy of the highest intensity is itself unreasonable.  On the contrary, Reason is the last in time, and therefore the lowest in tension. According to our western standards, the most intense phase of human Energy occurred in the form of religious and artistic emotion, perhaps in the Crusades and Gothic Churches; but since then, though vastly increased in apparent mass, human energy has lost intensity and continues to lose it with accelerated rapidity as the Church proves.

Organized in society, as a volume, it becomes a multiplied number of enfeebled units, on which, like the eye in insects, reason acts as an enormously multiplied lens, converging nature’s lines of will, and taking direction from them, but adding nothing of its own.

Man has, indeed, or had, in a few of his stems, some faculty for artistic expression, not nearly so strong as that of some plants, or some butterflies, or some birds, but more varied

This instinct he probably inherited from an earlier, more gifted animal; but as a creative energy he inherited next to nothing.  The coral polyp is a giant beside him.

Reason does not work, it is only a mechanism; nature’s energy, which we have agreed to call Will, that lies behind reason, does the work, and degrades the energy in doing it.

Man refuses to be degraded in self-esteem, of which he has never had enough to save him from bitter self-reproaches. He yearns for flattery, and he needs it.  The contradiction between science and instinct is so radical that, though science should prove twenty times over by every method of demonstration known to it, that man is a thermodynamic mechanism, instinct would reject the proof, and whenever it should be convinced, it would have to die.

Adams is not happy about the disposition of universities.

Universities of today hesitate to insert with confidence the old conviction of spiritual authority, showing in this respect a distinct decline in energy; while technical instruction has reached, or seems on the verge of reaching, the point where it must insist on the universal application of its thermodynamic law.

The most ardent lover of paradox, the most inveterate humorist, would hardly think it worth his while to follow a train of reasoning which would surely immolate physics and metaphysics together … Neither historians nor sociologists can afford to let themselves be driven into admitting that every gain of power, from gunpowder to steam, from the dynamo to the Daimler motor, has been made at the cost of man’s and woman’s vitality.  The mischiefs thus charged upon reason would not end there.

Metaphysics as well as mathematics would measure enfeeblement, philosophy as well as mechanics would mark degradation, the Universities as well as the technical schools would alike close their doors without waiting for the sun to grow cold.  Direct conflict, therefore, seems to be as barren as compromise.

For Adams, no discipline is one-dimensional.

If the teacher of history cares to contest the ground with the teacher of physics, he must become a physicist himself, and learn to use laboratory methods.  He needs the technical tools.

Physical science is more or less chaotic; the conclusion is only what he needs to reach before he can begin to deal with vital science which is all chaos.

We see the middle and the end series of the phylogenetic series, that we do not see the beginning is self-evident since it was built up in a period of the earth’s history which is for us transcendental.  We could not understand it if we did see it.

If the physicist cannot make mind the master, as the metaphysician would like, he can at least abstain from making it the slave.

This mental need of unity is also a weakness, which gives the degradationist an artificial and altogether unfair advantage. 

Simplicity may not be evidence of truth, and unity is perhaps the most deceptive of all the innumerable illusions of mind, but both are primary instincts in man, and have an attraction on the mind akin to that of gravitation on matter.

Perhaps the feature of the scheme that was most repulsive to instinct was most seductive to science, its fatal facility in accounting for Reason.

 After 1500, the Church very slowly lost its control of education.

Men are taught to believe with delight that society down to the present day is an unnatural abortion sustained by perverted illusions and destined to immediate suicide.

Adams quotes one of my favorites, Gustave Le Bon, and his book “Physiologic des Foules” (1895), or “Anatomy of the Crowd”:

That which formed a people, a unity, a block, ends by becoming an agglomeration of individuals without cohesion, still held together for a time by its traditions and institutions.  This is the phase when men, divided by their interests and aspirations, but no longer knowing how to govern themselves, ask to be directed in their smallest acts, and when the State exercises its absorbing influence.  With the definitive loss of the old ideal, the race ends by entirely losing its soul; it becomes nothing more than a dust of isolated individuals, and returns to what it was at the start, a crowd.

Adams continues:

Under the thinnest veil of analogy the physicist-historian, with scientific calmness, condemns our actual society as he condemns the sun, for the crowd which  Gustave Le Bon declares to be the end of social evolutionists is not at all the same crowd that made its beginning, and is wholly incapable of doing useful work.

The preceding remarks give the key to the apparent juxtaposition which exists between the doctrine of Evolution and the principle of Degradation of energy.  Physical science presents to us a world which is increasingly wearing itself out.

The words of Adams resonate one hundred years after his reflections.  Yet, irony of ironies, we still believe progress is our most important product because:

The degradationist can so far ameliorate the immediate rigor of his law as to admit that degradation of energy may create, or convey an impression of progress and gain; but if the evolutionist presses the inquiry further, and asks where the proposed compromise will lead him as a teacher of young men, what future really lies behind the impression of progress, what amount of illusion is to be reckoned as an independent variable in the formula of gain, the degradationist replies, quite candidly, and honestly, that this impression of gain is derived from an impression of Order due to the leveling of energies, but that the impression of Order is an illusion consequent on the dissolution of the higher Order which had supplied by lowering its inequalities, all the useful energies that caused progress.

*     *     *

FINAL THOUGHT

My sense is that modern man is not open to such in-your-face discourse.  It was why I brought Kierkegaard to these pages.  Nobody thinks much less writes so passionately or candidly.  Where is the profit, the celebrity?  They weren’t interested in selling books but in changing lives.  They are missed.



Monday, July 16, 2012

PERSPECTIVE, EDUCATION OF A SUNDAY MORNING

PERSPECTIVE, EDUCATION OF A SUNDAY MORNING

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© July 15, 2012

Reading the Sunday newspaper in one’s golden years, and having had an interesting and sometimes exciting life, it is something to read a section of a newspaper and realize education is a constant in one’s life. 

In a section designated PERSPECTIVE, one is introduced to the latest findings in science, scandal in finance, and social psychological persuasions in politics. 

For one who first pursued the hard then the soft sciences, then did research and development in both fields, along with a spate of adjunct professorship at several universities, it is a credit to a newspaper not to “talk down” to the reader in tracking science achievements, apprising financial malfeasance, while having a little fun with happiness and political orientation.

What follows is my take on these subjects of a Sunday morning as I walk through the neighborhood reflecting on this newspaper’s PERSPECTIVE.

FROM H2O TO THE HIGGS BOSON


The nature of man seems to be an insatiable curiosity for what is not known but can be found out.  Think of man evolving from the earth on this lonely planet, taking root but uncertain of the matter of mass, until he discovered the “God particle.”  . 

My science education was during this primitive period, when water was described as simply two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen.  Hydrogen charged with one electron and oxygen charged with two.  Smaller than these atoms, then, were electrons and protons. 

Particle physicists dreamed up the idea of an energy field that would have permeated the early universe, but research kept coming up with particles with zero mass, which could not explain matter. 

Dr. Peter Higgs, and others realized that when the universe cooled enough after “the Big Bang,” this energy field would have had to emerge, but proving this was the challenge.

Known as the “Higgs Field,” its existence required a new particle, the “Higgs boson” (Bosons are a class of fundamental particles defined by quantum mechanics.).  Finding the Higgs was the major goal of the Hadron Collider at CERN laboratories near Geneva, Switzerland.  On July 4, 2012 physicists announced the discovery.

This is complicated physics.  To the newspaper’s credit, it provides simple illustrations and the words of a credentialed physicist that will change our view of our place in the universe and view of ourselves. 

The Higgs confirms the “standard model,” which is the physicist’s framework for understanding the particles that make up the universe and the forces that govern them. 

The “standard model” was sixteen fundamental particles, which still failed to explain mass.  It required the 17th particle, the Higgs, to do so.  Like a puddle of molasses, physicists explain, the “energy field” resists the motion of particles moving through it.  Such resistance to motion, or inertia, is the defining quality of mass or substance.  Subatomic particles acquire differing amounts of mass, and depend on how strongly they interact with the energy field.  This is illustrated in this article. 

The reader is also introduced to new terms beyond protons, electrons and neutrons, as the “standard model” has two kinds of particles, Fermions, which give form, and bosons, which transmit forces such as electromagnetism and radioactivity.  Still with me?

“The standard model” has up and down “quarks” held together in the proton by “gluons,” which act like glue.  There is still an electron in orbit by electromagnetic forces transmitted by photons.  So, the hydrogen atom looks quite different than it did when I studied it sixty years ago.  Neither the gluon nor the photon has any mass.

For the past fifty years, Geneva has been struggling to put the pieces of this jigsaw puzzle together that might explain our existence to form from nothing.  That is how long ago Peter Higgs proposed the “Higgs particle.”  Now, it is confirmed.  Physicists have shown with this discovery why we exist and why we have a Genesis.

CALL THIS SCANDAL LIBOR


In everyone’s life without exception, there will be many times when what is ethical will compete in the mind with what is legal, and this in terms will compete with what is moral, and often, it is sad to say, ethics and morality suffer for expediency in the belief that departure from the straight and narrow “this one time” won’t be so bad. 

If nature abhors a vacuum, certainly nature also abhors expediency. 

As bad as the punishment may be to admit and deal with a failure, a stupid error, or a departure from good sense, rationalizing the situation in an attempt to dodge the consequences of one’s action is surely to come to no good.  Remember, we all have to live with the coldest most unforgiving critic of all, ourselves.

This newspaper article reports on the LIBOR (London interbank offered rates) saying, “sometimes the most earth changing events are the most banal,” as this surely appears to be.  LIBOR is the everyday rate bank traders set in manipulating financial transactions. 

The rigging of this obscure number is beginning to assume global significance.  These traders at the Barclay Bank of London were toying with the prices people and corporations around the world pay for loans or receive for their savings.

LIBOR is the number used by traders to set payments on about $800 trillion worth of financial instruments from complex interest rate derivatives to simple mortgages.

The charge is that Barclays and regulators in Great Britain and the United States tried to rig the number time and time again over the past five years.  One observer quipped, “This is the banking industry’s tobacco moment,” referring to the $ billions tobacco companies’ settlements in the tobacco scandal of 1998.

Like all good ideas gone to seed, LIBOR is supposed to be a pretty honest number.  Once the rate was set, it was assumed banks would play by the rules and give truthful estimates.  In reality, the system proved rotten from the start with banks manipulating the rate away from its benchmark with the incentive to minimize or bury losses, or provide marginal profits when clearly that was a betrayal of trust. 

Groups of derivative traders at Barclays and other banks fixed the final LIBOR rate by only one or two hundredths of a percentage point (one to two basis points), but sometimes LIBOR panels submitted rates as high as 30 to 40 basis points too low on average.  These manipulations could result in $ millions to the manipulators.

Barclays chief executive, Bob Diamond, who resigned on July 3, 2012, as a result of the scandal, claimed, “on the majority of days no requests were made at all” to manipulate the rates.  The article risibly adds, “This is rather like an adulterer saying that he was faithful on most days.”

Obviously, there will be hearings, trials, with possible civil and criminal prosecution, along with reforms.  They will only be stopgap measures as the culture of society is acquisitive, and trust is often considered a luxury that cannot be afforded. 

A graph shows trust and confidence in banking has plummeted from 60 percent in 1980 to 21 percent in 2010.  The more things change the more they remain the same.

WHY CONSERVATIVES ARE HAPPIER THAN LIBERALS


Academics and studies are quoted on political persuasion and happiness.  You decide whether this makes sense to you or not.

While conservatives are shown to be naturally authoritative, dogmatic, intolerant of ambiguity, fearful of the loss of self-esteem, and uncomfortable with complex modes of thinking, the article claims they are much happier than liberals. 

The Pew Research Center in 2006 found conservatives 68 percent more likely to say they were happy than liberal Democrats.  Conservatives, it shows, favor marriage and faith 53 percent to 33 percent for liberals. 

Marriage and happiness go together as the married person is 18 percentage points more likely to say he is happy than an unmarried person.  Conservatives go to church and appear twice as happy as people who claim to be separatists (43 percent to 23 percent).  These differences seem to be unrelated to education, race, sex or age.

Fifty-two percent of married, religious politically conservative people with children are very happy to only fourteen percent of single, secular, liberal people without children.

Liberals are more idealistic to conservatives who are inclined to rationalize or explain away inequalities in society.  This is called “system justification.” 

Conservatives see free enterprise as a beacon on the hill with every American with a chance to get ahead; liberals see it as a gated community with most people victims of circumstances needing the government as liberator. 

Even liberals who have achieved status are one third less likely to see the free enterprise system as a good thing.

Liberals, the article continues, have this pie in the sky vision of fairness and social justice that will lift people who refuse to get up and do something, anything, on their own. 

Liberals will forgive people of everything, people who don’t file their federal income taxes, don’t vote in state and federal elections, people who fail as students in school (it is the teacher’s fault), who become drug addicts or alcoholics (it is because they don’t have jobs), who become obese or suffer some other behavioral induced condition (it is society’s fault), who drift into crime (again, it is society’s fault).  The individual is off the hook. 

Conservatives see the individual with this mindset as lost, wanting to be saved from himself when that self never thinks of being a factor in process.

Ironically, people at the extreme of liberal and conservative persuasion are the most happy (48 percent) because they have the whole world figured out, and have no doubt in their minds they are right.  It is the “Occupy Wall Street” crowd and the “Tea Party.” 

The least happy people are those labeled “independent,” people who want to be on the winning side and can’t make up their minds which side that is, people who are ambivalent and undecided, not only about politics, but about most things in life, people who like to be accepted, not make waves, not cause controversy, not get into trouble, people who are safe hires, and mind their own business.  You might think such people would be the happiest, but this article claims the contrary.  Regards to this liberal newspaper for printing this piece.

WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?


It means a stimulating session with writers going to the trouble to explain the difficult (Higgs particle), commenting on the embarrassing (LIBOR scandal), and reflecting on the attitudinal (happiness or its lack). 

There is a photograph of Dr. Peter Higgs, white haired, with the grimace of a man deep in internal contemplation unaware of the camera.  He and others like him, unknown to 99.9 percent of us, are revealing the physical world hidden, and in the process, changing civilization without fanfare.

As to the LIBOR scandal, thinkers since Socrates have pondered why men choose deception and fraud to honesty.  Honesty is the best policy.  We should never tire of reminding ourselves of that fact.

“Happiness,” philosopher Alan W. Watts has said, “once you define it you lose it.”  I agree.  It is a state of mind, a disposition to action, not contemplation.  Yet, academics and research organizations will continue to devote their efforts to the subject.  My sense is that the reader, whether conservative or liberal will come away from this piece pretty much undamaged.

*     *     *

Saturday, July 14, 2012

"YOU JUST NEVER KNOW!"

"YOU JUST NEVER KNOW!"

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© July 14, 2012

As those that read my blog, and are someone addicted to my missives, you know that I operate mainly below the radar, that I am an outsider, and comfortable in that role, and that I write whatever my peripatetic wanderings come to mind as I walk. 

Even so, I have published ten books, and am trying, some might say desperately, to get my novel A GREEN ISLAND IN A BLACK SEA published. 

A reader writes, and asked me what one of my autograph books is selling for as a collectible.  I had no idea.  Check out http://www.alibris.com/, he said, and see what an autograph copy of SIX SILENT KILLERS: MANAGEMENT’S GREATEST CHALLENGE (1998) is listed for.

So, I did.  I asked BB to come and look at the screen.  She just smiled.  “It doesn’t even get five stars,” she offered, as I moved down to its rating.  Sure enough, it only gets three stars. 

“Maybe it’s because it is different,” I suggested. 

“You’re different that’s for sure.”

We both found it incredulous if not meaningless, but there it was in bold type. Six Silent Killers (collectible): $16,452.88.

I autographed only about fifty copies when it came out.  Perhaps this is one of them.  I don’t even think I autographed the local copy at the public library.  Oh well, so much for ”you just never know.”

*     *     *

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

"A GREEN ISLAND IN A BLACK SEA" HAS HIT A SNAG

“A GREEN ISLAND IN A BLACK SEA” HAS HIT A SNAG

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© July 10, 2012

MY LOYAL READERS


Repeatedly, you have been told that this novel would be ready for publication, that it was going through yet another rewrite or reediting, or reconfiguration as if it were an old engineering project, or a psychological treatise.  It has, of course, risen out of both disciplines, as that has been my conditioning. 

Recently, I read a biography of Albert Camus, winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature (1957), dying tragically in an automobile accident in 1960 at the age of 47.  It surprised me to learn that he had been working on “The First Man,” published thirty-five years after has death, since he was in his twenties. 

Hopefully, this will not be the same trajectory of “Green Island.”

As indicated earlier, we had chosen a publisher after much hesitation, as we wanted total control of the novel, feeling our only possible obstacle might be the censors.  That is now academic.  We have withdrawn from this publisher as the expense of publishing was well beyond our expectations. 

“The First Man” was published as the “final work” of Albert Camus when it was his first work.  I can relate to that.

In a manner of speaking, I left South Africa as a young man in 1969, and created notebooks then, as did Camus from the start.  CONFIDENT SELLING (1971) was my first published book with many nonfiction books to follow, with the exception of IN THE SHADOW OF THE COURTHOUSE (2003), a memoir written as a novel. . 

Camus kept coming back to “The First Man,” as he believed his only real truth was registered on his soul.  He claimed his other works gave him fame and acclaim, but were periphery to this work. 

Obviously, I am no Camus.  That said many of my readers are writers or in the process of becoming writers, philosophers or in the process of becoming philosophers, or readers who, like Camus, desire to get in touch with that beguiling soul that reveals all. 

It is a mind dance in every age, and each age has its own challenges and interpretations of that dance, individually and collectively.  Mine has been “Green Island.”

“Green Island” is about the conflicting war between a good people, the Afrikaners, and another good people, the Bantu during apartheid.  It is also about the conflicting sides of paradise, which South Africa clearly is, and, in turn, the conflicting sides of innocence and darkness in the characters in the story in a time of remarkable change. 

Paradoxically, South African Brits, drifting as colonial empire expires, are central and peripheral to the story at once. 

It would be comforting to believe that what the story illustrates is behind us when it seems we are irrevocably fixated on the same obsessions.  Stay tuned.  I’ll update you as to where we are in this publishing saga.

Be always well,

Jim

Wednesday, July 04, 2012

"CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR PUBLISHED NOVEL!" RESPONSE: "CONGRATULATIONS ARE A BIT PREMATURE."


 “CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR PUBLISHED NOVEL!”

RESPONSE: “CONGRATULATIONS ARE A BIT PREMATURE.”

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© July 4, 2012

REFERENCE:

The person offering the congratulations is an author with a series of successful mystery novels. We also share the same hometown of Clinton, Iowa, although she, too, lives elsewhere.

EARLY MORNING RESPONSE:

Dixie,

The novel is not yet published.  I often speak at the Kiwanis when I come into town giving me a chance to see Ron McGauvran and Hank Dihlmann among others.  BB is still reading my behemoth. 

1968 was a pivotal year, and from a South African perspective and vis-à-vis the United States of the time, manages to make the present a bit deja vu.

As a writer, and I think I've always been such a strange bird, there is a yearning to belong to your place of origin, yet simultaneously a feeling of being threatened and diminished by it. 

A friend of BB's and mine, a Clinton County judge, at one of these Kiwanis meetings said in the Q&A period after the talk, "Not any chance you'll soon be moving back to Clinton (Iowa) is there?" 

The question threw me, and often when that happens, I answer directly. "Actually," I said, "I feel more comfortable in Europe."  Now, why would I say that?  It is true but arrogant and misplaced as well.

It goes back, I suspect, to my sense of diminishing and threatening that I've already alluded to, that is, part of me feels more close to those back home where my roots lie, feeling a sense of still being one of them, while being able to see them and myself more clearly from afar. 

I could never have become the person I am, or have had the experiences that I have had were I to have remained "back home."  It would have been a zone of suffocation and limitation, possibly spiritual death even, a place where my sensitive intellect could not have been abandoned, as it needed to be abandoned to create. 

IN THE SHADOW OF THE COURTHOUSE (2003) was obviously biographical.  A GREEN ISLAND IN A BLACK SEA, I fear, will be seen in that same context.

"Green Island," I must admit, could neither have been written had I not experienced South Africa, nor have had its gravitas without the earlier ambience and ambivalence of my hometown. 

I would not have had the capacity, indeed, the passion or attention to detail to transform the squalid into the lyrical and the lyrical into the concomitant squalid. 

Paradoxically, my sense is that my novel, which calls Clinton, "Crescent City," and creates an atmosphere of intense attachment and nostalgia for those roots, which originate in Ireland, could not have been written without this perpetual sense of belonging in absence.  

It is no doubt why I have always felt a James Joyce connection.  He could not have written without Dublin, and had he stayed, could not have written at all.  He needed it but only in his soul while his body and mind was in a constant peripatetic sojourn.

You are far more the creative artist than I am, as my writing allows me -- even in my nonfiction -- to become the center of a small community in my mind suitable for the role I play and the art, as I do believe I create art, that is allowed to develop in that community. 

In my "Shadow" book, I am eight years old.  In my "Green Island," which is a symbolism for paradise and hell combined, thus the reference to "Black Sea," meaning hell and the huge subjugated black population, I am nearly thirty.  The tether to both South Africa and Ireland remains the focus to where I grew up. 

Only a single couple has read my novel in its entirety, and it has been revised repeatedly since.  The woman of the couple was not offended by the earthiness of the novel, but the man was.  He liked the inventive and imaginative and even bold posture of the young executive, but not "the smut" as he put it, which, incidentally, without it would be an empty vessel without meaning, direction, theme or denouement. 

These thoughts occur to me early this day.

Be always well,

Jim



Sunday, July 01, 2012

THE CHALLENGE OF LOVING PERSONS IN A CULTURE OF SELF-HATRED

THE CHALLENGE OF LOVING PERSONS IN A CULTURE OF SELF-HATRED

James R. Fisher, Jr., Ph.D.
© July 1, 2012


“No one ever gets tired of loving, they just get tired of waiting, assuming, hearing he’s saying he’s sorry and hurting.”

The lament of a loving person in pain.

*     *     *

PREAMBLE


America is a self-hating culture.  From the earliest moments of our existence we are programmed to be self-critical, to worry more about how we look and others see us than how we see ourselves. 

We are compulsively other-directed rather than self-directed.  We are never clever enough, tall, fast or agile enough, never pretty or handsome enough compared to others. 

We compare and compete at home, in school, on the playground and with friends.  This delays or prevents us from self-discovery.  Too often we settle for a mere imitation of ourselves.  If we do, psychiatrist Willard Beecher claims we are humanly dead, zombies, devoid of initiative, imagination, originality or spontaneity.1

Self-doubters are inclined to trust the opinions of others more than their own, to retreat in terror from any intimacy with self, and therefore an impossibility to have intimacy with anyone else except on a physical level. 

Self-haters lack a moral center, a governor to guide the person to prudent interaction.  For example, it is not prudent to please others at the expense of pleasing self when the action depletes rather than completes the person, and is therefore counterproductive. 

Self-haters are often generous to others to impress, but much less generous to family, which they feel no such need.  They charm and show good cheer to people at work and strangers, while treating family members horridly at home.  The false face they wear at work finds them bankrupt emotionally at home where they are likely to explode.  Imagine what it would be like if pleasing self and pleasing others had discretionary balance.

By the time we are of an age to grow up and take responsibility we are likely to be a hodgepodge of other people but pretty much a stranger to ourselves.  This is a gift of contrary cultural inculcation.

We hide the truth of ourselves from ourselves as long as we can, sometimes forever, often stumbling into some type of disorder from eating, drinking, drugs, gambling, fornicating, video games, or delusions of grandeur, anything to escape a reminder we are all pretty much ordinary.

Corporate society has latched on to and exploited our cornucopia of hang-ups for profit.  It has discovered it is easier to manipulate our fake self than to appeal to our authentic self.  Biographical novelists have dissembled self-hatred into an art form.  F. Scott Fitzgerald was a want-to-be plutocrat who questioned his libido (The Great Gatsby), and became an insufferable drunk; Ernest Hemingway (The Sun Also Rises) masked his false bravado in bizarre machismo exploits, committing suicide when this no longer worked; William Faulkner (The Sound and the Fury) pretended to be a wounded Canadian Air Force veteran when he never left the shores of the American continent in WWII. 

Into the midst of this quagmire, rise loving persons.  They quietly and privately become authentic, developing their centers with a capacity to love.  Often weary, they still believe love conquers all, even self-hatred.  This is written with them in mind.

*     *     *

If you have had a life without being in the midst of a self-hating person, you have been blessed.  I would suggest in a normal American family it would be near impossible not to have a mother or father, brother or sister, uncle or aunt, friend or classmate, or an acquaintance at work that was not suffering from this malady. 

THE LOVING PERSON


The loving person often falls in love or in friendship with a person in which self-hatred is well disguised.  Self-haters are chameleons and have an ability to appear mirror images of the loving person’s nature.

The self-hating person is often attractive, magnetic, engaging with an endless repertoire of stories and facile humor to establish intrigue and act as a magnet to the loving person.

Once the freshness fades and remarks are made seemingly out of character, the loving person is put on guard, but is apt to retreat into denial.  Blind acceptance follows denial, which foreshadows trouble on the horizon.  The loving partner has missed an opportunity to expose and foil the deceiver. 

Self-hatred stretches over a lifetime.  The self-hating student thinks school sucks and is bored with the process, and it is collective teachers’ fault.  When a worker, the employer doesn’t pay enough, the job doesn’t give enough recognition or reward, the company doesn’t promote fast enough.  No thought is given to squelching the problem by moving on. 

That would be out of character.  More than likely, the self-hating person gets fired, as resentment and complaint are cumulative properties of self-hatred that become self-prophecy.  We engineer our fate.   

With self-hatred, blame is the game, first with parents, then the school, then the workplace and finally with the long-suffering loving person. 

THE WELFARE STATE AND CHRONIC SELF-HATRED


Over the past hundred years, there has been a shift from self-responsibility to societal responsibility to irresponsibility.  Now, no one is responsible, and everything can be explained away as to why it happens.  Explanatory models have come to assuage guilt and shame and seed self-hatred.

Western culture has become a “cry baby culture.”  The rigors of life, and the inevitable false steps that people take have resulted in little learning and even less consequences, and are now unraveling.  A safety net culture of apology has no place for reality. 

The European economic model is crashing into chaos.  Whose fault?  The United States is claimed by the EEC to be the blame for the 2008 banking meltdown and real estate collapse.  The socialistic policies of Europe over the past sixty years are given a pass even though such policies have bankrupted Europe.  Self-hatred seems to flourish on both banks of the Atlantic Ocean.   

The US is not yet Europe.  Europe would rather vacation and play than work and produce and manage its fate.  It can no longer afford the 35-hour-work week with a month or more of vacation, and retirement in the worker’s fifties at 75 percent of the worker’s net earnings.  In Greece, public employees make more than private sector employees, and the public sector are not profit centers. 

With the exception of Germany, the European community is in economic turmoil.  The United States cannot bail Europe out of its mess for America is heading in the same direction.  Americans are still hard working, but many lack the skills required, while community and state governments can no longer maintain European like welfare programs.  The chronic source of self-hatred is the failure of the mature adult to appear on the scene and to deal with these problems.  Instead, something else is happening.

THE SURREAL WORLD OF VIRTUAL REALITY


Corporate society over the last several decades has unwittingly emptied the individual of a self-monitoring conscience and discerning center.  Self-responsibility has been the major casualty.  It has done this by protecting the individual from pain and struggle, failure and defeat, and therefore growth and maturity. 

Collective passivity has become the norm, complaining and explaining a substitute for action.  Waiting has dissolved into stalemate. 

Hard on the heels of this collective gridlock has been the distracting influence of virtual reality.  Here there is no need for conscience, no need for discernment, no fear of personal conflict and confrontation.  Life has been reduced to doppelganger video games.

Industrial society promised the individual cradle to grave security for the sacrifice of ownership of what he did.  Control was given freely for pay and benefits, but this has proven an unsustainable contract. 

The individual in self-retreat has abdicated self-responsibility to such surrogates as personal trainers, guidance and advice counselors, technical experts, religious gurus, spellbinding wordsmiths, charismatic leaders, fawning academics, intrusive polltakers, and an assortment of ergonomists, economists, psychologists, sociologists, psychiatrists, anthropologists, sociobiologists, and pundits.  Small wonder he has looked for escape.

Virtual reality has made “corporate sin,” as I’ve described it elsewhere, venial in comparison.2  Students at universities believe multitasking with iPads and smartphones are signs of brilliance when this has been shown to be a dumbing down process with efficiency hovering around 50 percent.3 

It doesn’t help that only 50 percent of the student’s attention in class is on the lecture.  Students are texting, checking emails, surfing the net, or playing virtual reality games, few sensing problems are on the horizon.4

Roughly only 2 billion souls out of 7 billion on the planet have such access.  A virtual universe of 5 billion souls experiences a separate reality.

PBS’s Frontline had a recent segment on US Air Force drone pilots to show how bizarre this disconnect has become.5

Pilots are required to dress in combat fatigues as they assume their stations in air-conditioned facilities in the United States to direct drones on combat missions.  In such safe and mundane quarters, they launch missiles from drones flying 7 to 9 miles above their targets some 7,500 miles away in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

These pilots sit in front of screens that survey the landscape of enemy territory checking movement of people and vehicles on the ground.  Military intelligence identifies these targets as “good and bad guys” not unlike in video games. 

A button is pressed, which activates the drone to launch a missile to wreak death and destruction visible on the screen.  The controlling pilot lacks the psychic insulation from the mayhem bomber pilots had in WWII.  He can see the havoc he has wrought.

*     *     *

We blunder into new technological warfare as we blunder into all technologies that come to consume our interests never considering the unintended consequences, or what has been lost for what has been gained. 

President George W. Bush was fascinated with the possibilities of drones, which he made known to President Barak Obama as he left office.  Drones have clearly captivated Obama, so much so that they are now being mass-produced as a primary war strategy of the Obama Administration.   

I shudder at the thought of what this means for the future.  We have the drones today; tomorrow every advance society on earth will have them. 

War may soon be fought like “Star Wars” with drones carrying nuclear devices.  Star Wars was a film; it was fiction.  Recently, a film “The Book of Eli” (2010) revolved around a nomad (Denzel Washington) in a post-apocalyptic world, thirty years after a nuclear holocaust left the United States desolate with rogues and highway bandits seemingly the only survivors.  The story revolves around a book that represents the essence of what was lost, and which the nomad hopes to get to the West coast to have it published for the future of man.  I could not sleep after viewing the film.

Imagine the world reduced to video games and virtual reality where politicians offer eye candy campaign promises on television and smartphones, promises that are never kept. Self-hatred has never had a more effective accomplice 

Could reality reduced to virtual reality be a prescription for disaster?  We have in the past always found a way to escape the crush of our missteps. 

At the end of the nineteenth century, as society entered the confusion of post modernity, Sigmund Freud provided his psychosexual psychoanalytical explanation for societal uptightedness.  Elton Mayo followed in the early twentieth century with the performance spike to paying attention to menial workers.  Social engineers took over, but in three quarters of a century have had little positive to show for the attention.6 

The unintended consequences of Elton Mayo were to treat workers as if spoiled children.  This resulted in arrested development with workers drifting from contribution to comfort to complacency to ceaseless complaining.  The misreading of Freud resulted in free love unintentionally leading to the decline of the family and the sharp rise in illegitimate births, which continues to this day.    

Close on the heels of these misinterpretations were a plethora of management paradigms that implied that management and managers were the key to the future, but paradoxically as management, per se, was becoming increasingly redundant.7    

The decline in management, and rise of knowledge workers in decision-making has produced tension and dissention.  This has surfaced in self-hating passivity (re. the six silent killers),8 as management brought out its big guns in resistance with the power of pay and promotion.  Obviously, it is illogical for disgruntled workers to punish the company by dragging their feet, but they do so because they fail to see how it places their survival in jeopardy.  There is little sense to anger and self-hatred.

THE CULTURE OF SELF-HATRED


When an Olympic champion was mercilessly abused for his sexual orientation, New York Times columnist Murray Kempton was moved to write, “Why, America, did you, in your arrogance, teach so many of your children to hate themselves?”9

From our earliest days, we are shoe fitted into a size designed to fit all.  It starts with school and play, continues in our dreams and fantasies, our expectations and pursuits. 

The few who escape this are schooled into the belief they were meant to lead, to administer to the needs of the majority, and to provide meaning to otherwise meaningless lives.  After all, what do most people need but a roof over their heads, food on the table, a job, and a surfeit of entertainment to distract them from wanting more? 

The majority has been relegated to spectators to life, spending their hard earned money to finance the elaborate lifestyles of the rich and famous in sport, film, the arts and public life, while they sit back in passive adulating compliance.

The majority imitates in dress and manner, nesting and lifestyles a modest version of those idolized, becoming a shadow of what they could become.   They embrace laudatory expressions such as “the greatest generation” and “the best and the brightest” without hesitation, while having little clue as to their own nature other than to find it wanting. 

Educators promote cultural biases that program the majority to admire and support, trust and emulate the few, which distance them from self-discovery. 

The few have driven society to the brink while being relatively unscathed for the effort.  The majority, on the other hand, has seen their modest wealth plummet by as much as 40 percent.  The majority always pays for the foolhardiness of the few. 

This brings us to the crux of the problem of self-hatred. 

Self-haters despise what they are and desire what they could never be.  The nouveau rich envy inherited wealth failing to appreciate that inherited wealth a few generations ago was right where they are now.  It would be comical if it weren’t so tragic for it is the loving person who suffers this pointless self-pity.

My sense is self-hatred stays entrenched because Americans have never left the nostalgia of World War Two, when everything seemed to work and everyone seemed to get along.  It was never as perfect as perceived, but that is not important.  Then the shoehorn culture worked.  Stubbornly and foolishly, Americans still hold adamantly to that apparition despite obsolescent skills, inappropriate college curriculums, outmoded industrial and governmental policies, and capricious leadership/management practices.10

When what you know and can do no longer has tangible value, self-worth plummets and self-hatred flourishes.  Prudence would suggest learning more appropriate skills, demanding more relevant college curriculums, and a workplace culture that energizes.  This is unlikely to happen in an other-directed passive environment.  The tendency instead is to beat up on ourselves and wallow in self-contemptuous gridlock.11 

Those closest to the self-hater suffer the collateral damage, although innocent, while the architects of this obsolete design continue to practice business as usual.  Top down leadership has been a bust for decades, but few have had the courage to suggest, much less organize, bottom up initiatives.

NOT EVERYONE IS ASLEEP AT THE SWITCH

Among the few who have had such courage is Elinor Ostrom, the only woman to win the Nobel Prize in economics (2009).  Ostrom didn’t believe in the 2008-2009 TARP bailout of banks or the rationale some corporations were “too big to fail.”  She has demonstrated quietly over the past fifty years the wisdom of bottom up decision-making.12   

Ostrom emphasizes how people interact with ecosystems to maintain long term sustainable resource yields.  She conducted bottom up studies in the pastures and villages of Africa and Nepal, creating community managed systems.  Her institutional arrangements provided ways to maintain forests, fisheries, oil fields, grazing lands and irrigation systems to avoid ecosystem collapse. 

Her human-ecosystem interaction template argues against grand scale interventions and panacea approaches to individual social/ecological system perturbations.  Her emphasis on a self-organized governance system includes effective communication, internal trust and reciprocity, and human-ecosystem maintenance consistent with natural law.

Ostrom has much in common with William L. Livingston’s Design for Prevention (2010) mathematical/social engineering template.  Livingston’s primer on prevention was published shortly before the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico.  Had it been in place the disaster could have been avoided.  D4P is an operational approach to problem solving.

Ostrom’s human-ecosystem principles read like a Livingston echo: (1) clearly defined boundaries, (2) rules and provisions adaptable to conditions and contingencies, (3) collective-choice arrangements for decision-making, (4) effective monitoring for accountable results, (5) a scale of prevention practices and penalties for violations, (6) mechanisms for conflict resolution, (7) steps to establish self-directed authority, (8) common pool of resources (CPRs) for multiple layers of nested enterprises. 

People count in these front-end approaches to prevention.  Ostrom and Livingston see a need for a radical change in institutional culture.  Ironically, Ostrom is a trained political scientist, not an economist, and Livingston a trained engineer, but both use multiple disciplines to establish their modalities and practices.

Were these front-end efforts institutional norms, my sense is that there would be little reason for this discussion.   Livingston, in particular, examines all aspects of institutional society, and offers a rigorous proof how prevention and reconfiguration could solve many of our ills.  It would not eliminate self-hatred, but it would put a serious dent in its rationale.

As matters stand, students are not being prepared for the demands of contemporary life, jobs and job training are not consistent with these demands, and crisis management rather than prevention remains the order of the day. 

Self-hatred flourishes in a climate of eternal frustration and debilitating fatigue.  I would suggest cultural depression precedes economic depression.  This is the case when the problems we solve are not the problems we face.  To wit, we have witnessed over the past sixty years, given the practices of management, unions and governments, a progressive increase in worker dependence in the public and private sector.  Workers appear to be stuck in arrested development in terminal adolescence waiting for someone to rescue them.  Safety nets shielded them from economic reality.  Now, these salary and benefit packages, this system where 80 percent of productivity is accomplished by 20 percent of the workforce, are no longer sustainable or a luxury that post-industrial society can afford. 

Companies are going bankrupt, and now communities are joining the bankruptcy lines.  The city of Stockton, California, a community of some 300,000 citizens, has recently declared bankruptcy.  Its commitment to public employees in terms of pay, benefits and retirement income is far beyond its ability to pay. Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and several other cities may follow.  To be sure private employers are facing the same pressures, but the majority of the Fortune 500 companies do not have entrenched unions, or have found a way to keep them in check.  Often, this is not the case in the public sector.

When people are management dependent and/or counterdependent on the place of employment for total well being, and that support is withdrawn, we have mob theatre in the streets.  It is happening in Greece and recently happened in Wisconsin’s state capitol. Santa Claus has left the building.

  A BROADER PROBLEM THAN THE INDIVIDUAL


We pride ourselves with our intelligence despite the fact that we forever go blindly into the future, inventing and innovating seemingly never stopping to ask ourselves, “What will be the consequences of this change?  What impact will it have on the planet and us?  What will be sacrificed for this new gain?  Will what is lost ever be recovered?  What judicious steps might we have taken to minimize the damage?”

Rather than pausing, assessing and judiciously evaluating, we simply blunder blindly forward in perpetuity celebrating the new breakthroughs disregarding the wake left behind. 

The seeds of self-hate are native to the romantic who never has time to bear in mind possible consequences.  Since this seems so pervasive, my sense is self-hatred is common to us all.  We dare the future to break our stride.  We laugh in the face of fate and turn contempt into comedy.  Take comedienne Joan River’s new book, “I Hate Everyone Starting with Me!” (2012).  She has made a career of self-contempt constantly reconfiguring her appearance with plastic surgery.  She is not alone.

Men’s Health (June 2012) rates American cities on a vanity index that includes consumer use of Botox, teeth whitener, at-home hair dyes, shapewear, plastic surgery, cosmetic dentistry and tanning salon sessions.  The top ten in the order of obsessive vanity were Tampa, Plano, Texas, Atlanta, Las Vegas, Dallas, Pittsburgh, Houston, Miami, San Francisco, and Providence, Rhode Island.  Des Moines, Iowa won the distinction of being the least vain of the 100 cities ranked.

Tampa, which incidentally is my residence, is also rated one of the smuttiest cities in the country based on online pornographic film views, number of adult bookstores and the nature of Internet searches.  Moreover, CNBC did a survey and concluded that the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metro area, as calculated by divorce rates, commute times, unemployment, violent crime, property crime, suicides, alcohol consumption, percentage of households using antidepressants, having mental health problems from feeling depressed or sad all the time to having sleep problems, and the annual number of cloudy days, contributes to being one of the highest stressful places in the United States.  

As you can see, self-hatred is tied to self-estrangement and an obsessive projection of external angst on everything imaginable except oneself.  With self-examination and self-acceptance, the individual would be more inclined to embrace his fears, acclimate to his circumstances, or retreat to more favorable circumstances.  He would then be less likely to be so consumed with fear and loathing. 

*     *     *.
The loving person suffers the brunt of this sickness, choosing to believe this too will pass.  It will not.  It will fester and show itself in a number of dehumanizing ways, no doubt more bland than the surveys above, but nevertheless unsettling.  The loving person will be:  

(1)   Kept out of the loop as to the economic status,
(2)   Presumed to be available for whatever folly catches the whim of the partner without forewarning,
(3)   Expected to be understanding when offended, shamed or embarrassed,
(4)   Expected to forgive and forget when truth catches up with a litany of lies, 
(5)   Presumed to be satisfied as simply an appendage to the partnership.

Failure of the loving person to be taken into confidence is evidence of being undervalued, considered clueless, weak and inferior, which justifies the treatment.  In contrast, self-hatred displays an inexhaustible need to dominate as proof it is in control. 

*     *     *    

The greatest foil to male dominance in the past half century has been the attaining of professional credentials by women.  The ultimate badge of independence and freedom for women has been the college degree.  They can take relationships on their terms and in their time, delaying marriage, having or not having children, doing, going and being whatever they choose to be without taking orders from someone bent on conquest.  I single out women in this context because it is women more than men who, at the moment, suffer self-hating relationships, but that, too, is changing as education is rebalancing the gender equation.    

What should the loving person do given the scenario I have created here?  As Socrates said, he did not have answers; but could only frame the question. That is what I have attempted to do. 

Dostoyevsky tackled the problem of self-hatred in “Notes from the Underground” (1864).  To him the “underground” dealt with the depths of degradation and humiliation to which the acutely conscious person suffered because of perverse self-hatred.  He saw the disappearance of the individual dedicating his writing against this rising tide.  He could see modern social forces were molding man into an uncomfortable sameness with everyone else that would make man easier to dominate.  Dostoyevsky’s opening lines underscore this point:

“I am a sick man.  I am a spiteful man.  I am an unattractive man.  I believe my liver is diseased.  However, I know nothing at all about my disease, and do not know for certain what ails me.  I don’t consult a doctor for it, and never have, though I have a respect for medicine and doctors.  Besides, I am extremely superstitious, sufficiently so to respect medicine, anyway (I am well-educated enough not to be superstitious, but I am superstitious).  No, I refuse to consult a doctor from spite.  That you will probably not understand.  Well, I understand it, though.“

You get the picture.  The Underground Man is totally self-absorbed.  You learn in reading the book that this wreaks havoc on his love interests, as it does on loving persons to this day. 

*     *     *






1 Willard and Marguerite Beecher, Beyond Success and Failure: Ways to Self-reliance and Maturity (1971);

2 Corporate Sin: Dissonant Workers and Leaderless Leaders (2000).  Corporate sin was defined as schizophrenic management (pp 113-116).

3 “Digital Nation,” Frontline PBS (October 16, 2009).

4 Ibid.

5 “War by Remote,” Frontline PBS (June 19, 2012).

6 Work Without Managers (1991) deals with iatrogenic interventions, a medical expression that means the cure is worse than the disease.
  
7 Ibid. pp 185 –212.

8 Six silent killers: passive aggressive, passive defensive, passive responsive, approach avoidance, malicious obedience, and obsessive-compulsive behaviors.

9 Murray Kempton, “Home of the Brave,” New York Review, April 20, 1995

10 See A Look Back to See Ahead (2007)

11 If anything, it is even more complicated.  Drew Greenblatt, president of Marlin Steel Wire Products in Baltimore, a metal fabrication machine business, cannot find qualified employees to operate his equipment.  Tens of thousands of jobs across the nation are sitting idle because of the lack of qualified workers.  This is especially true of small or medium sized companies.  Mega corporations siphon off what is available, and still have skill worker job openings.  One company claims it has 18,000 orders it cannot fill because of a lack of skilled workers (Tampa Bay Times, June 29, 2012, pp 4-5B).

12 Dr. Ostrom’s work confirms the bottom up capacity of people to harness their collective power in productive engagement.  I have had the same experience documenting it in a series of books and articles, as well as seen it demonstrated by William L. Livingston III in his work.