23 September, 2011

Totally Brilliant Idea (Patent Pending)

In a flash of insight I had today the best idea of my life, and I've decided to share it with you here because I'm very excited about it.  This harkens back to the series of posts I did on capitalism (09-10), which I'm sure you are familiar with. What I will do is to get an appropriately-trained genegineer with an adequately-stocked laboratory to alter the makeup of the bacteria for the most common illness (the "common cold") and then patent that organism!  That would mean that every person who catches a cold will have to prove that it isn't mine or pay me royalties for usage of it!  Thank you, SCOTUS!

I had recently been doubting my genius, but I feel vindicated now.

02 September, 2011

Consent of the Governed

I brought up this topic in my post "Capitalism as Favoritism" of 15Mar09.  The idea here being that laws only have as much effect and last only as long as they are adhered to by those being governed.  This is not to say that laws cannot or will not be enforced by the sword or gun because it is certain that they oftentimes have been.  We have seen throughout history where an oligarchical group keeps power by terrorizing the farmers, workers, whatever majority there is.  However, even in the face of brutal repression by those using overt force there is a choice.  It is this choice, the consent, that we are concerned with. These citizens stand up, most often individually at first, and demand change.  Call it revolt, revolution, or reform-however it is characterized it signals the end of draconian rule by an elite class.  I wish that were the end of the story, but it is not so.  It is at this point that the governed consent to a law, series of laws, or entire government which become the new standard. Recognize that even now, after so many of these uprisings, there is still oppression and unfair rule by the elite.  How, if there have been so many examples of these circumstances being imposed and overcome, is this still the case?  How could it be that after overthrowing each dictatorship another springs up in its place?  My supposition is that no real change has taken place and that the reform is simply a "changing of the guard", if you will.  When the majority finally resist their government and succeed in changing the situation, they simply end up with a new elite class who hold the same interests: holding onto their power and status. My feeling is that the majority of people do not want to have the responsibility of wielding power or of adjudication.  I think most people enjoy living a simple life of work, family, and leisure and that it is actually abnormal to desire domination and strife.  I further suggest that it is this aspect which creates the systemic problem of a "ruling elite". Because it is only those few individuals who want to control and contend while others just want to get along and enjoy life.  It automatically creates a divide between those ambitious few and the rest. I think it can be addressed and changed, but in most cases up to now it is ignored so the problem persists.

Getting back to the point, I suggest simply that it is up to the majority to decide things, not the elite. When enough of the citizenry stop following a law or rule, it ceases to have any power.  Furthermore, without the majority following it means that the minority has no power.  "Leaders" are actually quite unimportant, as life and even government goes on without them; it is the masses of citizens which are vital to nations and to everyday operations.

17 August, 2011

I Would Do Anything for....

I feel a strong need to dedicate this post to Meatloaf, that is the rocking recording artist/actor.
Not the food product.

At any rate, my purpose is to discuss an interesting topic: the meaning of this claim about doing anything for some cause, person, or object. Oftentimes we hear someone claim that they would do anything for love or their family, I will call these individuals "claimants".  What is understood from this is that they would accomplish heroic feats or go to the ultimate limit to safeguard that object/ideal.  Mainly, it has been used to announce that the claimant doesn't mind death or serious injury in protecting said item.  I propose that claimants are being a bit grandiose in these statements.  Most of us are never called upon to do anything so drastic as putting our lives or bodies in harms way to protect another.  There are many documented cases of uninvolved individuals doing just that, in fact.  It doesn't really take a great attachment or forethought to act in extreme cases, just an openness to justice or relation to other humans.  These claimants can rest assured that they can, and will, still make the ultimate sacrifice if called upon.  This is still, however, worth examining because of the alternative I propose.  Rather than these improbable promises, I would support claimants instead to actually do something necessary: work on their own shortcomings.  Instead of holding out for that extreme and unlikely event (while not preparing for it in any way, I will add), I would suggest practical and meaningful personal improvement.  I propose that this active course is actually the more necessary and beneficial one.  This is because it accomplishes something immediately, it is rewarding for the claimant, and it demonstrates more concretely their intention and motivation.  It is also the more difficult choice.  It proves that the claimant means business and isn't "all talk".

12 July, 2011

How our Technology Has Outstripped our Humanity

We have ideas that are handed down to us from between 300 to 2500 years ago.  We hold on to blatantly incorrect notions that have no application to modern life. These ideas come into conflict with the discoveries that are made by science every day. We can now transplant genes from completely different species into others. This means, for example, putting genes from a jellyfish into a cat.  Where in this new world does believing in ghosts or luck have any relevance?  How does judging the worth of another person mainly by their external appearance serve?  I, for one, am suspicious and immediately mistrust anyone who is too attractive, well-dressed, or who has expensive accoutrements.  However, not every well-to-do, FUC (fine, upstanding citizen) is actually the morally bankrupt and reprehensible individual I judge them to be.  More to the point, these beliefs keep us from knowing and interacting with each other in meaningful ways. Every judgement about others is one more obstacle to really meeting them and opening up to them, which is the only way to actually relate.  It is in this relatedness that we find our humanity. When technology is simple and information easily comprehended, it poses no barrier to relating.  We can all agree that fire is hot and that being burned hurts.  It does not necessarily follow that fire is dangerous or useful, those are opinions that may differ from person to person.  If we can all find commonality and agreement on our reality then we can act in accord and in unison. If we believe different things, and especially believe incorrectly, that is an obstacle.  It is necessary to agree on facts and on how to use our knowledge in order to make the choices that lead forward.  When that happens, we will be able to actually fulfill the promise and live up to the capacity of our humanity.

22 June, 2011

Certainty is Comfort

The difficulty in life is that we do not know what to do-that we are unsure of our path, our goal, our selves.  We worry instead about how to pay bills, about raising children, pleasing our lovers, impressing our bosses, or the rut we find our selves in.  Everything in life is a challenge and there aren't easy, clear-cut answers.  Uncertainty is the most challenging thing to face in life and if we could feel sure of things, we would feel much better.  Certainty is safety to our minds, it is not being attacked, not being dumped into the street or by our lover.  Being certain of our health, our home, and our future allows us to enjoy all that life offers us.  Feeling lost and overwhelmed is commonplace and accepted, it's understood that we will be confused about all these things.  So how do we solve it?  We could recognise there is no way to actually solve uncertainty, that the future is uncontrollable.  That would be to admit that we are not the all-powerful, planning- and doing-beings we imagine ourselves to be.  Instead we create a system that we instill with the expectation that it has answers.  We convince ourselves that this process can solve all the problems, create certainty, and has a clear path to follow which will keep us safe.  The future is still just as uncertain and uncontrollable if we believe in hocus-pocus.  The problem lies in believing it and not acting in accord with reality.  If one gives up control of more areas of life and expects that everything will be fine just because of one's prayers, that does not solve the underlying problem.  It will just feel better, because there is no acknowledging of that undesirable uncertainty. 

Religion offers answers.  It does not necessarily offer real answers.