Topics: illusions, creations, heroes, counseling, health, psychology of many things

I want to create an image for you in your minds.  Imagine a close friend of yours sitting next to you, and you’re outside on a sunny day.  Now…imagine your friend has just been running, and he ends up jabbing his toe into a sharp rock on the ground.  He quickly drops to the ground, and stairs at his bloody and bleeding toe.  The nail has been half ripped off, exposing the sensitive flesh.  He screaches from the pain, and from the site, and moves quickly to take-care of the wound.  Grabbing a nearby first aid kit, he pulls out a syringe, fills it with clean water, and begins to shoot water on the open wound.  He sees that there are pebbles, dirt, and sand lodged between the nail and the flesh, and decides he needs to simply rip off the nail.  Using his thumb and forefinger of his left hand, he pinches the hanging nail on his toe, which is on his left foot, and has already been partially ripped off on the right side.  He pinches the nail, and he gives it a quick pull.  The nail yanks up a bit, his face grimaces, but the nail remains.  He uses his right hand to hold his left foot down, and proceeds to yank again, and again, his face beginning to cover itself with tears.  He yanks again and again, tugging away, till finally the nail is removed.  At this point, the entire flesh of this left toe is exposed.  The flesh is white, with drips of red blood and black grit mixed into it.  He shoots more water on it, then grabs a tube of antiboitic, spreads it onto a piece of gauze, and begins to press the pad onto the toe, and rub it around…

The point of this paragraph wasn’t merely for me to try my hand at descriptive writing…but what I was hoping to do was to create not simply an image for you, but to make you feel something psychologically.  Because what i’ve been thinking about recently, is the idea of “shared pain.”  Why is it that when we see something painful, gross, horrifying, done to someone else, such as the person above ripping off a hanging toe nail, that we oftentimes grimace in pain ourselves?  Why do we feel pain when loved ones feel pain?  Why do we feel inspired when others do inspring things (watch the movie Cinderella Man if you’re looking for inspiration).

Since these reacations are usually automatic, I believe them to be subconscious, or inborn reactions…to some extent.  You’ll notice that doctors can do all sorts of gruesome things to people, cutting them open, touching broken limbs, cleaning up blood and other gruesome injuries.  What doctors simply see is biology, and their job is to address whatever accident has occured to the human body.  It’s more likely that they’ve read case studies of things like ripped off toe-nails, and will not react squeamishly.

But…what is the psychology of squeamishness?  Why cringe when others get hurt, both physically and mentally?  Is squeamishness natural, and is it desirable?

For example, when the Giants kicker Jay Feely was lining up for the game winning field goal agains the Eagles yesturday in overtime, I felt squeemish.  There was no pressure on me, but I felt the pressure that was on the kicker.  I also assume how the kicker is feeling.  It’s likely that at that level, despite having had kicking problems in recent weeks, the kicker, being a professional, does not feel nervous or squeamish despite having a lot of people’s emotions riding on his right foot.

I’ve written about this before, as I believe squeamishness to be an emotional reaction, vs. a rational reaction, although it’s hard for me to figure out right now what the relationship between emotions and rationality are.

A new idea I want to tackle is the idea of creation and illusions.  Here’s where I’ll need some of your knowledge to help me, but it seems to me that what makes human beings different from all other species, is that we consciously create things, whether it be dwellings, communities, meals, or the ideas in which we communicate.  Other animals create, but it’s hard to say there’s any awareness of what they’re doing.

Without communication, I think it’s fair to say that what human beings uniquely create, are ideas.  Other animals may create homes, or art, but only humans have the capacity to have come up with an idea called “art.”  Also…while many animals experience emotions and psychological reactions to various things (mating rituals, fight-or-flight reactions), humans have an extensive range of emotions.  I believe many of those emotions are only the result of our ability to create ideas.

For example, if one gives food to someone on the streets, both people are likely to experience uniquely human emotions, such as gratitude and humbleness.

In addition to being able to create these unique emotions, the fact that we’ve created complex societies, has naturally bred unique psychological states.  Whereas in cave men days, men would simply club a woman over the head, and drag her home, humans now have to rely on a wide range of techniques before finding themselves in a relationship.  If you used cave man courting techniques, you’d quickly find yourself locked up behind bars.

So…I’ve gone in a bit into the idea of creating, and I now want to attempt to explore the idea of “illusions.”  Illusions usually means something that is not real, such as a mirage or a magic trick.  In these two examples, illusions can be both entertaining, as well as leading one down the wrong path.

I believe life as we know it, the idea that there is objective importance in our lives, that what we do “matters” is to some extent, an illusion.  I say this because, besides our unique differences from other animals to create ideas and meaning in our lives, we are essentially no different than any different animal.  And…the very fact that what makes us different from animals, our ability to “create ideas and meaning in our lives,” has brought me to the conclusion that there is nothing “natural” about ideas or meanings, rather, they are things that human being have built. 

Without language, would human beings have any ideas or life purpose, or would we be essentially the same as monkeys, snakes, chickens, or any other animal? 

Now…moving onto another of the topics I had listed above, the idea of heroes.  The movie Cinderella Man is about an Irish boxer during the Great Depression, who quickly became an inspiration and a hero to many.  The fighter, played by Russell Crow, was no different than any other human being…yes his status was different.  Why?  Because human beings are capable of creating heroes, of developing the illusion that a person is beyond human.

To summarize…human beings are unique in that we create things.  Some of the things in which we create are illusions, things which we believe to be true, but are not necessarily true.  In doing so, we affect our psychology and our emotions, by giving our lives meaning and purpose.  In essence, we live through the emotions (the pain, suffering, joy, humility) of others.

The real lessons of plagiarism

By: Dan Lilienthal

As an alumnus who has had personal experience with plagiarism and its consequences while a student at Wash. U., I would like to offer this candid essay to readers. The lesson I learned from my experience is two-fold: if you’re planning on plagiarizing, don’t get caught, and if your decision is hanging on the possible consequences of getting caught, simply consider the time, money and explanations to friends and family your actions will cost you.

Of course, the lessons I was supposed to learn were that my actions had been dishonest, lacked integrity and deserved punishment by failure. It was also argued that through my actions I was cheating other students. Of course, this is only true if a school is promoting the competition of students against one another for grades, and that there should be no sense of shared responsibility for students to help educate one another. During my academic integrity board meeting, I challenged the board’s assertions and their accompanying punishment, explaining that there was indeed a great deal of academic dishonesty that needed to be corrected, however, it was the lack of academic integrity in the everyday classrooms, South 40 dorm rooms and off-campus apartments where the problems were occurring. What I was referring to at the time was the widespread intellectual apathy that is the culture of higher education at Wash. U. and throughout this country. It is this apathy that creates a breeding ground for academic misdeeds such as plagiarism.

It was no surprise to learn in the article “Cheaters ‘fess up” in Student Life, published this past Monday, that nearly 40 percent of Wash. U. students have admitted to plagiarizing. This enormous fact leads us directly to the real lessons of plagiarism. The lesson to be learned is not that students who plagiarize are dishonest and lazy. Rather, the lesson is that the story we tell ourselves – the story that students, particularly those at top-ranked schools like Wash. U., are serious about their own learning and intellectual development – is a myth. For those of us who truly care about academic integrity, it is this myth that needs to be critically examined, for only then might we hope to see young adults who love to learn and who learn what they love.

By highlighting the misdeed of cheating, we should be shining an equal, if not brighter, spotlight on the conditions that are breeding apathy and acts of plagiarism in so many students. What we immediately find ourselves looking at is the central theme of education in society today. This theme is that school systems (not teachers) take away students’ natural desires to learn, creating in its place a game in which students will do whatever it takes, including cheating, to beat the system. Whereas a real education would involve students doing real work, engaging in deep discussions that are relevant to their lives and spending time developing relationships with other students and their professors that involve useful feedback, students find themselves in school systems where learning is mandated from the top down, where students are subjected to overcrowded classrooms, tested to death, made to believe grades are gods and where subjects are atomized and taught as independent from all other subjects.

An essay on this topic deserves to be concluded with solutions. The solutions, however, must come primarily from current students, and must involve a restructuring of school priorities. Faculty such as Dean Killen and researchers such as Professor McCabe will have to wait until students’ learning becomes as high a priority as things like applicant SAT scores, alumni donations, college rankings and professional research and publishing before they see the rates of plagiarism drop. In the meantime, individuals may use this essay as a conversation starter, or go ahead and put your name on top and take credit for it yourself.

Dan is an alumnus of the Class of 2003 and runs the Web site www.xanga.com/dansjournal. He can be contacted via e-mail at dan_lilienthal@yahoo.com.

For anyone interested in the type of school that would lead to students doing real and collaborative work, where they were learning what they wanted and had 0 incentive to cheat…please check out The Met Schools (click to follow the link).

Topic: Education…huh, what is it good for?  Absolutely everything, say it again, y’all. (sung to the tune of Edwin Starr’s anti-war song, “War”)

I had an interesting comment from pidot regarding college degrees.  And I have to agree with her, that in today’s society, college degrees are necessities for many professions.  In order to be a doctor, lawyer, professor, psychologist, social worker, teacher, etc. you need a masters degree, which you can only obtain if you have first obtained an undergraduate bachelors degree.  So…although Will Hunting was a genius janitor, without the college degree he was severely limited in what he could do professionally (although i wonder to what extent extreme knowledge and personal experiences can be considered the equivalant of a bachelors degree?)

All this makes me think a bit more about the connection between college, college degrees, and life after college.  As I wrote in my last post, I feel that most of what a person gains from college, can be gained independantly.  I will admit, however, that for most people learning is like going to the gym.  We can all do it on our own, but it becomes a lot easier to motivate ourselves and stay focussed when we are part of a larger community.

The relationship between a college degree and a person’s professional life is an interesting idea worth exploring.  Let me just ask all of you these two questions:

1) How useful was your college education in terms of obtaining your job and in terms of doing your job well?

2) How necessary was your college degree in terms of obtaining your job and in terms of doing your job well?

I’ll go straight ahead and offer an answer for myself.  Starting with number 2, I found that having a college degree was pretty necessary for getting my job, as it is for most entry level jobs.  That tends to be the minimum requirement of many.  Some will ask for specific majors, but at the end of the day, you could have a major in ancient sanskrit, but as long as you finished college and have a good head on your shoulders, you can get a decent first job.  It’s interesting to note i have a friend who went straight to work after high school, and is now in a situation where he has a great wealth of practical working experience, however they’ve opted to go to college now for no other reason than the belief that obtaining a college degree will allow them to move-up professionally and make more money, while getting more practical real world knowledge might not have.  I personally don’t hold that belief, but felt again that it’s more about the head you have on your shoulders than the degree).

The actual job I’m doing, I could have done when I was 17.  It’s a lot of common sense, and the rest is just picking things up every day.  What I bring to this job is certainly my 4 yr. experience at Wash U., but more so to social skills and the personal stories, than anything specific I learned in the classroom.  However, I have to say, that were it not for that experience, my whole chain of life events would be very different…but that’s a different idea for a different time.

Topic: The world (and education) are flat

Thomas Friedman of the New York Times has been writing extensively on the notion that the world is becoming economically and intellectually flatter.  While the economics are harder to detect by the average eye, it is clear as day that the internet and the sharing of knowledge and the building of virtual learning communities, has flattened the world such that virtually anyone with access to a computer can learn about virtually any topic they wish.

So…what does this seemless sharing of knowledge mean for the future of society?

Simply look at what it did to music.  First, with Napster, we saw people gaining access to music in an unprecedented way.  Extensive and free access to all kinds of music and other media, such as movies and tv shows.  Napster shook-up the industry, and now we have further technology with I-pods, that allow people to carry their extensive media collections in the smallest of formats.  The legal and business aspects of these new technologies are still sorting themselves out, but in the end, the costs and ease of access to media have flattened across the globe.

Now, let’s turn our attention back to knowledge.  In a world where people can access extensive amounts of information, can store and carry this information, and can engage in conversation with a wide-range of people from all corners of the globe regarding information, it’s hard to not imagine educational institutions, notably those of higher education, experiencing some of the same tensions that are being felt by other forms of media.

For example, reports have come out that less people are going to the movies today, because prices of movies are high, and because access to home entertainment is cheap and readily available.  The same goes for CD’s…unless you’re really into having a CD collection full of the manufactured CD’s, you’re going to spend just a few dollars to build a collection full of burned cd’s with your messy handwriting on them.

And finally…education.  An article in today’s student newspaper at Washington University in St. Louis, reveals how students can gain access to their lectures online.  Schools like Duke and Stanford have encouraged professors to use podcasts, whereby students can download lectures onto their I-pods, and Duke gave out 1600 20GB I-pods to incoming freshman this year. 

What does all this mean?  This means that a 13yr. old with access to the internet and an I-pod, can begin to gain an Ivy League education for free!  For those of you who have seen the movie Good Will Hunting (if you haven’t…you absolute must rent it!), the character played by Matt Damon demonstrated this very thing.  While working as a janitor at MIT, he simply read lots of the same books that are read by academics, and he worked on the same math and physics problems that were given to students.  As the famous saying goes, he paid $1.50 in late fees for the same education students paid however many thousands of dollars for! 

Topic: Short thoughts

As I’ve often skipped people’s posts because they were too long or dense, I fear I may have done that to myself w/ my last post.  So…I’ll try to make my points shorter and more energetic, instead of trying to make 1000 points on 1000 things.

I’m growing a bit more interested in the workings of the mind…something that I’ve always thought about, but after my grandmother’s stroke, it made me think further about the brain, how it works, how it creates consciousness and personality, and how it has created and explained much of the complexities of the world today.

I’m less squeamish about many things today, about the human body, about life and death, and wide-ranging social interactions.  Part of my attitudes today involve looking at things for what they are, and listening to things for what people have to say, and substituting some form of rational synthesis and analysis of ideas, rather than emotive judgements.

I would like to try to offer my initial thoughts on these various topics that I will hopefully begin to read much about in the coming months.  I’ll start basic, general, and simple.

Life is the opposite of death.  In human beings, life is demonstrated through personality, and personality is derived from the brain.  When a person dies, their personality, that which defined their life, is gone forever. 

Many animals have personalities.  The most obvious ones to people are our pets.  Dogs and cats clearly have personalities of their own, and their deaths often have affects on us akin to the loss of any other loved one.  As far as I know, what separates human beings from our pets, is that our personalities include self-awareness, or consciousness.  In some way, we have thoughts in our brains that allow us to know, “Hey…we exist.”

This brings me to an interesting question…What are the requirements for consciousness and self-awareness?  Without language, how are infants able to recognize that they exist?  To make an analogy of our brains to computers, what kind of hardware do our brains come with, and how have our brains evolved from other primates such that we are now “human,” such that we now are aware of our existence?

And…to end this post on a different topic, an antecdote from my grandfather, who was was over for dinner last night and is going to have a fibrulator put into his heart later this week (just upgrading to a newer model, we joked):

“It’s not the food that matters, although your mother makes a very good soup.  But…it’s the company joining you at meals.”  Another great comment he made, “I made a promise with my cardiologist that I’m not gonna leave this world until I see all my grandkids get married,” so I tell my grandfather, “Well…it’ll be a while till the youngest (13) gets there, but if I have to, I’ll stay single just to keep you around a little longer.”  Also, this morning I asked him, “what was your favorite period of life?”  He said, “Things were different in the ’30s, ’40s, and ’50s.  There was more respect, respect for cops, for your neighbors, and for parents.  People did more things with families, and within their communities.  The standard of living and wages has certainly gotten better since then, (like most old people…he rattled off prices “the paper was a nickle, a tuna sandwhich and a bowl of soup was 15 cents!” but, with the great diversity of products and services that we have today, we have lost a bit of a cultural identity.  We’ve gone from a time when all families would sit around the radio and listen to the same program, like The Lone Ranger, or watch the same program on tv, like Howdie Doody (think of the scene in Back to the Future when they’re all crowding around the tv in excitement), and now we have 100′s of programs, and most people just choose to not participate.  It’s not that the act of watching tv is bad, it’s that there really is so much junk on their, that the medium has made our culture toxic in some ways.

OK…enough.  Your thoughts…

Topic: A focus on today’s NYT article regarding India, status, consumption, materialism…the long post I was referring to last time.

I found an article in the Times this morning to be a good one for kickstarting some more conversation.  The issue at hand is India’s rapid-jump from a mostly state-run economy, to an “American-style” free market capitalist society, focussing specifically on the boom (for those with the right jobs and cash-at-hand), in automobile purchases. 

The article begins by stating that India has entered a new “culture of money,” one defined by a culture of both making and spending money.  Whether or not capitalism is solely responsible for this culture, as well as whether or not this is “good or bad,” are things we will get into in a moment.

The article continues, noting the growing rich, including the middle-class, although the author is quick to remind us of the World Bank’s report that India is still home to the largest population of people living in poverty.

What affect is the growth of car owners having in India, and how does this parallel life here in America?  One Indian was quoted, “This is the American 1950′s happening in India now.”  The growth of the Indian economy, has led to this boom in car owners, which has led to more car dealerships in India, expanded highway development, and increased travel by many people within the country.  It has resulted in more advertising for cars, cars serving as luxuries and toys for many, and has given some people access to their first automobiles. (Paul Krugman has an article about the relationship between economic growth and whether this really has any benefits for the avg. Joe in today’s op-ed section).

While the effects of capitalism and English colonialism are described as leading factors in India’s high-rates of poverty, the article notes that capitalism is now being embraced in parts of the country.  Not just in cars, but in their habits of using debt and credit to make purchases of an ever-growing amount of goods and services. 

“America, of course, went through a similar evolution: the making of a postwar consumerist economy; the introduction of credit cards and growing comfort with, and dependence on, debt; the rise of an advertising culture. India today offers the chance to watch it in real time, at a hyper, almost-out-of-control, pace.”

“Now the people want to spend and enjoy,” Mr. Prakky said. “Everyone wants upgradation”: the scooter owner wants a motorbike, the motorbike owner a car, the car owner a more expensive one.”

I want to stop here for a minute and discuss this quote by Mr. Prakky.  “People want to spend and enjoy.”  I’m assuming many people reading this have pre-conceived judgements about the relationships between spending and happiness, and the way these two things play out in our culture.  However, it’s something I want to continue to look deeper at. 

First of all, I think it’s healthy for people, a culture, or a nation, to not be completely hostile to the idea that buying material things makes people happy.  Owning our own books, buying toys, doing things like eating out, going to the movies, going on vacations…these are some of the very things that make life enjoyable.  The desire to upgrade from scooter to motorbike to car to fancy car, is a natural progression.  What we often think about is simply a person who lives to buy a BMW or a Mercedes or any number of fancy and expensive cars, but simply can’t afford it, and maybe goes ahead and spends beyond his means, which puts him in debt and makes him work harder to make more money so maybe he can buy a second BMW or Mercedes.  But…I think that story, which generally comes out of the “progressive camp,” isn’t really what’s going on.  I think what people are interested in is looking for ways to upgrade, and if what is happening in India is that people are finally upgrading so that they can own cars which are probably still of a much lesser quality than what the avg. American is driving, than I have no quarrel with thee…good sir knight.

The article than goes to address the issue of how free-market capitalism is affecting Indian culture. 

“This is a far bigger change for Indian society than it was for America, which in many ways was founded around the notion of the individual. Indian society has always been more about duty, or dharma, than drive, more about responsibility to others than the realization of individual desire.”

I find this particularly interesting, especially in highlighting the differences between the Indian and American situations, but also by highlighting how culture is not merely influenced by economics and politics, but comes from the general attitudes and philosophies of the individuals that make up a country.  The fact that “Indian society has always been more about duty than drive, more about responsibility to others than the realization of individual desires,” makes a case in point.  Free-market capitalism is not a one-size-fits-all program.  It’s highly dependant on the way in which a country embraces it.

But…perhaps there is something in capitalism, in its very nature of movement towards profits, innovation, progress, and growth, that creates its own culture beyond the will of the people?  Is this so?  Is it the system itself, or is it merely the people implementing the system?  Or as my friend put it, is it the people, or the chains in which we are all tied together, that is the source of our problems?

“Luxuries are now necessities…and children are focused more on earning for themselves than on caring for their parents. Indians have always been critical of what they see as American selfishness, the way children relegate parents to retirement homes so they can pursue their own lives. Now, suddenly, they are hearing such stories among themselves.

Spreading affluence also has brought new competitive anxiety. Where once everyone in a neighborhood had an Ambassador or a Fiat, the hierarchy of livelihoods, of success, now can be parsed easily through cars.”

There are several things you might want to think about.  First is the difference in culture between India and what Indians have described as “American selfishness” particularly the practice of “children relegat[ing] parents to retiremment homes so they can pursue their own lives.”  Is this a fair assessment?

Second, the question is, leaving the broad attack of American selfishness alone, is the assessment of embracing capitalism leads to the practice of children abandoning their parents so they can pursue their own lives.

I personally don’t believe capitalism is the cause, rather it is likely a generational issue affected by a wide blend of influences.  There is simply more opportunity now for young people than ever before.  For example, a generation ago most parents didn’t go away to school, and it wasn’t very common to take off and travel the world.  Now, companies are popping up left and right to help people leave home (at least for a short while).  That change is merely one of culture, and in many ways is a very beneficial thing.  Sure, more people might be living farther from home and not spending as much direct time w/ their parents, but we also have developments in technology that allow us to maintain contact w/ our families in new ways and one might argue in richer ways since we are able to tell and show our parents all the wonderful things we are discovering away from home!

“The car fever here is in part a triumph of marketing to people who did not grow up being marketed to. Advertising in India has succeeded in making, as Mr. Khanduri said, luxuries into necessities, in portraying persuasion as knowledge.”

I asked this question the other day…what is the relationship between marketing and people’s views of material goods and consumption?  It’s a chicken and the egg question…

1) Has marketing and advertising triumphed in convincing people that luxuries are now necessities (buy this fancy car and girls will think you’ll make a wonderful mate)?

OR

2) Did people decide that certain luxuries were necessities (this new car is friggin’ sweet, it handles better, is more comfortable and fun to drive in, it looks good, has better safety features, I can use an online navigation system so I don’t get lost, and entertain my kids in the backseat w/ a DVD during a long drive), and then advertisers have used ads to help buyers and sellers come togheter?

So…what, if any, are the real concerns for both India’s embracing capitalism and cars?  Obviously, higher car wrecks is one down side.  There is also an increased demand on foreign oil for auto fuel, and traffic problems to deal with. 

Then there are also the non-vehical related concerns coming out of India, since most people (1 billion people minus approximately 8 million car users) don’t have cars.

“The rise of the auto, and the investment in highways, dovetails with a larger trend of privatization in Indian life, in which the “haves” are those who can afford to pay for services the government does not provide: efficient transport, clean water, good schools, decent health care.”

What is life like for the “have-nots?”   I think that’s the important question in India, in the United States, and across the entire globe.  In a privatized soceity, or more specifically a capitalist society that holds a philosophy where taxes should be low, and gov’t spending should be near invisable (for things like public transport, public schools, and public health care), there will be those “haves” with money who can always count on their individual financial fortune for transportation, schooling, and medical care.  Yet there are certailny almost always a majority of “have-nots” who do not have the same fortunes, both financial fortunes as well as the good fortune of being able to have access to healthy food, water, good schools, and adequate medical care, and these people are the ones that we must not forget when having a political and economic discussion.

The article ends with a final downside to economic development, being the increase in personal debt.  I believe personal debt can be tied to two things, people being marketed to spend, and people being marketed to use credit cards to afford their purchases.  But…as I stated earlier, I’m not quite sold on the idea that marketing necessarily is the primary cause of individual’s spending habits.  People enter debt because of various reasons, including high educational costs, medical costs, and spending for basic needs.  Sometimes, people simply don’t have the knowledge or experience at the time to realize fully the consequences of debt. 

For some, entering into debt is caused not necessarily by the pressure created by ads, but by the pressures created by seeing what’s around you.  For example, I don’t necessarily believe that people went scrambling for I-pods because of advertising.  I believe this is a perfect example simply of buyers being in favor of spending for a new technology, and sellers using advertising to make buyers aware that there was something new to be bought.  Compare this to the argument that sellers use advertising to make buyers buy. 

I think there is another interesting discussion to be had about people’s intelligence and naiivity.  Some may argue that in many cases advertising makes people buy, such as arguments against cigarette ads that make pry on the psychology of kids to want to be cool and fit in, while others may argue that advertising to informed buyers, such as for expensive purchases like technology, merely involve helping to make the public aware of the new technology.

One last point on this topic…is going back to the idea that the pressure to buy, spend, consume, etc., comes not necessarily from the marketing done by corporations, but by the values and pressures of individuals and individual communities.  A perfect example of this is the pressure to buy an expensive college education.  While the US News & World reports is largely responsiblie for marketing which schools are “the best,” it is largely the values of parents, and their attitudes towards one another, that allows those rankings to create such high anxiety and pressure to go to the “best school,” which oftentime involves spending an amount ($120,000 – $1.50 in late fees) way beyond the true cost of getting an education.

As usual, feel free to tacklet as little, or as much, or none at all.

And…to return this blog to the personal world of Dan for a moment.

-Giants won 17-10…move to 1st place on top of the NFC East…will now watch the rest of the season from the comforts of my warm couch!

-had a very pleasant experience meeting another friend through this very blog…and discovered some hidden NYC treasures as a result!

-helped out my old high school wrestling coach on Sat. morning.  Was my first time wrestling in almost 7 years.  Had a quick reminder of how physically exhausting the sport is, and also remembered why the sport is stuck in my blood.  Physical strength and athletic ability aside, the sport is largely a phsycial chess match between two people.  There’s hundreds of situations you can be in, and you need to have such good understanding of body positioning.  This sport should hopefully provide me with winter entertainment until I can get outdoors again, and maybe I’ll relive my dreams and enter a competition sometime if I can get my conditioning up and catch-up on the 7yr. layoff.

Things are good…and future posts about the mind, consciousness, biochemisty, jazz, building rocking chairs, and a letter I’m drafting to be published in my school paper are to come.

Topic: NY Giants vs. Dallas Cowboys (Short post now…long post later)

  VS.  

I just scored a ticket to this Sunday’s Giants – Cowboys game from my uncle.  Both teams are tied for first place in the NFL East, at 7-4.  The Cowboys bring in head coach Bill Parcells, who once led the Giants to Super Bowl titles in ’86 (vs. the Broncos) and ’90 (the infamous “wide left” game vs. the Bills)  My uncle had 2 tickets, and as Jewish tradition has it, he is in 1yr. of mourning for the loss of his mother (my grandmother), so he can’t attend any major forms of entertainment, including what might be the biggest football game of the season for the Giants.  So…I’ll be going with my cousin to only my second Giatns game ever…and what at a game it shall be.

As usual…my mind is racing w/ various things that I write about, including thoughts on the inner workings of the mind, but for now, realizing that I expect to live at least into my hundreds, I’m gonna relax and take my time a bit…bye for now.

Topic: the nature of the beast

Just a heads up…the following link is quite hysterical…the following post, I can’t vouch for it…but feel free to give it a shot anyways.

http://www.dumpalink.com/media/1131440198/Family_Guy_Osama_bin_Laden

I want to frame this post by saying first of all, I’ve been busy booking and changing people’s flights in my office all day, so I haven’t really had time to put togheter a solid theme or idea for this post, and especially haven’t put much thought into making it interactive for all of you…so i’ll just say this is an impromptu, stream of conscious post, regarding work, society, culture, people, and organization, or something like that…feel free to respond to anything or nothing that i write, or to add your own impromptu stream of conscious thoughts about whatever you’d like to write about…

Now that I’ve been working for a few months, and out of college a couple of years, I am ever more conscious of what it is people do.  Virtually everyone works, even if they don’t talk about their jobs, even if you’re not really aware that they’re working.  For example, when I call Staples to order things for my office, I’ll have a chat with the guy on the phone about sports, or the weather, usual bs, and for a moment I forget that I’m working, and I forget that this person is at his job.  Same thing with a friend of mine who owns a PostNet mailing center near my office, I go there everyday, and I don’t even pay attention to the fact that my friend is working there.  Or the other day…when I was volunteering, the people that work security, and they just for the most part sit and stare at the ceiling.  Yes…even those people, seemingly doing nothing, are actually working.

But when you get home, at 6pm, 7pm, whenever you get home, you’re home.  Work is over.  How was your day?  Your day was whatever you happened to do for those 8-10 hours you were at work.  What do you think doctors do on a given day, or lawyers, or teachers…they all do their jobs, and when they get home, they’re regular people.  As I prefaced this post…I’m not quite finding the point I want to make, but I think the idea that was scratching in my mind was the idea of defining ourselves by our work, by our jobs, our companies, and our titles.

I’ve begun to see through the surface of people.  Begun to get past the initial impressions and descriptions.  Beginning to define people by what they say, how they act, the experiences of their life.  What difference does it make if someone is a doctor/lawyer vs. a secretary/garbage man?  We all know their are differences, notably in the required knowledge, skills, and training that go into their jobs.  But beyond that…beyond that what are the differences? 

Along this same issue, I’ve been thinking a bit about the concept of celebrity.  What makes celebrities different from everyone else?  Like doctors/lawyers, celebrities possess a unique combination of knowledge, skills, training, and most likely good luck/breaks/connections.  But beyond that, how is John Stewart different than someone equally as intelligent and witty?

Along this issue, I had a conversation w/ a friend last night about intelligence.  We both basically agreed that intelligence, while to some extent genetic/biological, is mostly a result of reading.  Why does John Stewart come off as so intelligent, and where does most of his wit come from?  It comes from the fact, that as I once read, “he’s read every book on the Brown curriculum.” 

Along this issue, I’ve been thinking about the relationship between people of different levels of knowledge.  When you’re in grade school, sometimes being smart is looked down on, and as you get closer to college, oftentimes “how smart you are,” is looked at in a competitive ego boosting light.  However…when it’s all said in done, there is no room for the proud or the (opposite of proud?).  Knowledge comes from the accumulated learning experiences of a lifetime.  In that manner, when I speak with my father, I realize that he’s gonna amaze me everytime with the knowledge he has, but in a situation like this, I should neither feel daunted by the knowledge gap, nor in awe.  What a person needs to realize is that virtually every moment of every day, there is an opportunity for knowledge to be passed on from person-to-person. 

Along this issue…reading the newspaper.  Reading the newspaper is merely the passing on of knowledge from those who have observed and analyzed something, to the reader.  Newspapers are to some extent bias, and fail to tell the full story, but reporters are the most important link that people have to gaining knowledge that they cannot easily gain themselves. 

I guess the point is that most of life is simply the free-flow of knowledge and ideas between people.

I guess the point is that sometimes, in order to get to what you really want to write, you just need to start writing.  I honestly have no idea what the f#@# i was just writing, but I just haven’t had the time today to think, so I just needed to jog-loose what it is I really wanted to write about…

Which was Outward Bound.  Specifically, Expeditionary Learning Outward Bound.  I got around to re-reading some of the booklets I’d been given about these schools, and what immediately struck me was the obvious.  The fact that these schools actually have a philsophy, and that the philosophy is deep, and that the philosophy is passoinate.

To give some background again, Outward Bound was founded by a German Jew (although I believe he converted) named Kurt Hahn.  He originally founded a progressive school in Scotland called the Gordonstoun School around 1933, a school that was dedicated to developing the whole child.  Hahn was full of great quotes, including the one that used to be the headline for this site, “your disability is your opportunity.”  Another idea of Hahn’s was the importance of impelling the young into value forming experiences.

“I regret that I cannot bring about a world war in every generation in order to rescue the young from the depression of peace.”

That last quote was a jump-off from another famous quote, that as a society we must find, “the moral equivalant in war.”  For in wartime what we so often see is an awakening, a passion and zeal for life, adventure.  Hahn wanted to take that zeal and apply it compassionately to education.

When I first read about Kurt Hahn, he carried a kind of celebrity about him, was kind of a mythical figure.  But…like John Stewart, he was just your avg. person, who was reasonably educated and passionate (like many celebs…Kurt Hahn had many political connections which helped him to put his ideas into practice).

Josh Miner, the first American to visit Hahn’s school, remarked, “Hahn was putting into practice what I’d thought about for years.”  Along that line…my friend and I were discussing how there are very few ideas at all that haven’t already been thought of.  All of us, alive today in 2005, especially us idealists and those w/ a bit of spark to create something, or do something, need to remember that things have been tried before. 

Which brings me to another idea…what matters in life.  Most people have a basic idea of what matters, but as Morrie talks about in Tuesday’s With Morrie, we so rarely take the time to stop, think, write, or talk about what matters.  I’ve concluded, that what matters most in life, are communal meals.

You see, what I most remember and loved about college were communal meals.  What I loved about summer camp…communal meals.  Travelling and staying in hostels…communal meals.  At work…communal meals.  There’s simply something about getting together with people to share in food, drink, and conversation, that simply represents what I believe to be the highest for of life.  And…while we should engage in conversation about how to better society, and how to do more for our children and those struggling in developing countries, I think we need to not forget the importance of communal meals in all of this.

For what good is it if we help South Africa townships grow up into “McMansions?”  Have we really bettered the world by isolating these impovershed communities?  And…what harm is done if we live in sprawled out suburbs, if we still use our weekday and weekend meals as communal gatherings?  Now that’s a platform worth running on…in the long run, how does political issue A-Z effect the quality of my communal meals…

I’m afraid to re-read this rambled on post, but…do w/ it what you will. 

Topic: The relationship between money, counsumption, economics, and materialism

“Materialism should not supplant compassion towards those less fortunate.”

This quote was a comment made by Bethany regarding the various issues currently being discussed on this site, notably money and happiness (both as individual entities and the real or non-real relationship between the two).

I think that quote ties in with something I was thinking this morning, and something I’ve thought about for years.  The idea that economics is based predominantly on consumption (please expand on that since that’s probably not 100% the case).  Also, the idea that economics reveals something about the “health” of our society.

The last part I think most people will be able to pick apart.  Clearly, the “health” of a society is a subjective term, and economics alone does not determine whatever it is we want to define as a “healthy nation.”  However, to some extent, a strong economy tells us something about our society.  The following list I know will be incomplete and likely inaccurate, but, my understanding is that the economy does tell us things like how many people are buying homes, how far people’s incomes are going in terms of their power to purchase things, how many people are working or unemployed, how our currency compares to the currencies of other countries, how well people who own securities like stocks and bonds are doing…

So…to try to get to the point, I see economics as two things.  The second thing I just described, and that is that economics can tell us certain things about what I guess I’ll call the “financial health” of the country.  The first thing I see in economics, is what I’ll call the forces that drive the economy.  What causes fluctuations in the number of people buying homes, what causes flucuations in incomes and buying power, what causes unemployment to go up and down, what causes currencies to fluctuate, what causes the moves in the stock and bond markets.

Obviously…economics is a deeply complex topic, both understanding what drives the economy, and in interpreting economic data.

1. However…to tie this back to Bethany’s comment, what role does materialism and compassion have in economics? 


2. To what extent are the financial health of a country like the US tied to materialism?


3. Is it fair to say that the US, being a capitalist economy (and the overarching question being…what is the importance of a healthy economy?) is dependant on the growth of businesses?


4. To what extent should the gov’t intervene, through tax policy, subsidies, regulation, and in other means, in order to support the financial health of a country?


5. In what ways are the health of major corporations such as General Motors, IBM, and the oil companies, tied to the health of low-income and middle-income America?  Is the answer different for different companies or industries?


6. It seems that most major financial decisions, such as those relating to taxes and interest rates set by the Fed (which sounds like a small and obscure thing, but essentially the Fed rate has an affect on interest rates for all banks, which affects credit card rates, which affects spending, which affects people buying new homes…a huge ripple effect) have a profound affect on how people consume.  To what extent is consumption tied to these gov’t and financial institutions?

And finally…since I didn’t talk much about the compassion side of Bethany’s comment, and to address something less technical and more on a human side, in what way are companies, government, non-profits, political leaders, working towards making compassion as relevant as materialism to the “health of a country.”

Feel free to comment as little or as much as you like.

Topic: Dansjournal evolves!!!

Welcome all!  So, on the train this morning, while my eyes fell shut, this alliteration popped into my head, “Love what you learn, learn what you’d like.”  It was inspired by several recent events and ideas that have been rolling around in my head.  The first part, “love what you learn,” should be universal to everyone, teachers, parents, administrators, and yes, even politicians.  The second part, while more controversial, is the philosophy I now feel strongest about. 

“Learn what you’d like.”  This idea became a bit more clear to me last night, as I was participating in a 1hr. book club, reading and having books read to me by 5-8yr. olds in a subsidized apartment in New York City.  This one child wasn’t the least interested in the books that were lying around, but he had this deep curiosity about why the book had two prices listed on the back cover, one for US currency, and one for Canadian.  It immediately dawned on me that this 7 3/4 yr. old was ready for a lesson in economics.  Not that I was ready to give that lesson (although I do carry currencies from several countries in my wallet that I’ve collected, which ammused the kid although he was disappointed when I told him, “no, you cannot keep it,”) but the more important point was that if I had been this child’s full-time teacher, or parent, I would be in a position to help that child look into the question of why Americans pay $5 for a book that Canadians pay $7 for.  The potential for this 7 3/4 yr. old to know more about economics than many college grads was possible, if only he were supported in “learning what he liked.”

What I hope to begin to use this blog for, is to develop a way for me to learn what I like.  Not much will be different than in the past, but I will be more deliberate and focussed in using this blog as a method for gaining information, and resources to information, from other human beings who happen to have found their way to this site.  In this respect, you all will be contributing to my learning through the comments you leave. 

This is not any type of experiment or research.  This is simply harnessing the technology available to me through something that is now used by millions, a simple blog.  There is no deeper motive of revolution, of convincing people of what is right or wrong, of creating argument and tension except where it involves us as a community loving what we’re learning, and learning whatever we like. 

I should also note, I hope to use this site not simply for my benefit, but for the interest of all who contribute.  While I am essentially the moderator (this is my site…and I will still use it to write about things personal and unrelated to learning), I hope to address broad topics that I believe will have relevance and interest to all, and that all can contribute.  From you comments, I will then draw out quotes, ideas, and themes, and use them in my posts to create further questions and ideas for us to tackle.

So…let me go right ahead and introduce the first two topics I wish to address:

1) Money

2) Happiness

Although I bring up two topics that you’re used to seeing together, my original intention is to introduce them as two separate topics.  The issue of money, I want to cast as wide a net as possible on.  When I say the word money, I want to move beyond our initial impressions of the word (although that’s also worth discussing), and allow the conversation to cover wages and labor, economics and politics, buying, selling, trading, consuming, and advertising…

Let me narrow this down and ask this question:

“Does advertising drive consumption, or does consumption drive advertising?”
“To what extent is our society affected by our consumption?”
“To what extent is our society affected by our advertising?”
“To what extent does our answer to the first question, the chicken and egg question between consumption and advertising, affect our answers to how these two entities affect our society?”

The topic of happiness dawned on me because I’ve recently been feeling quite happy, but I’m quick to temper that happiness because oftentimes consciousness of my happiness makes me sad.  Why is that?  What does that mean?  What is the relationship between happiness and sadness?  What is the relationship between being conscious of our emotional states, and simply being in those states?  Can one be in an emotional state w/out being also conscious of it? (ie. Can you be relaxed without “feeling” or “having awareness” of being relaxed?)  This topics is heavy in psychology, philosophy, and science, topics that I know others reading this should have much to contribute.

Let me narrow this down and ask this question:

What is the relationship between our logical thinking and emotions, vs. our biochemistry and our emotions (ie. The NY football Giants kicker missed 3 game winning field goals, therefore hurting their chances of winning, therefore having an affect on their standings, and affecting their odds of winning the Super Bowl…(all things that require consciousness and knowledge which have an end result in me FEELing a bit of anger, sadness, and angst) vs. certain chemicals in my brain are now releasing as a result of my thinking which are making me FEEL something, anger, sadness, angst, etc)?

If our emotions are controlled by our biochemistry, are we in a sense prisoners of science and genetics?
If our emotions are controlled by our knowledge, are we in a sense prisoners of to what we know?  Is it better to be ignorant if it means not knowing things that will produce sadness? 
If our emotions are controlled by some arrangement of ideas and knowledge in our minds, are we in a sense in complete control of our emotions?  Does a high quantity of knowledge of both the world and the workings of the mind also allow for a person to in a sense, manage their emotions?

To what extent can we / should we be altering our circumstances, our perceptions of our circumstances, or our biochemistry (through drugs, alcohol, or genetic modifcation) in order to live “pleasant” lives?

Your turn…