Kulled

Creationism and The Simulation Argument: The Truth is Out There. Probably.

2010-12-16T12:28:00.018-05:00

Responding to this article on yet another religious nutjob who thinks evolution is "just a theory" but in this case feels he has faced nutty discrimination for a job at the University of Kentucky.

There's an intriguing theory penned a few years ago by Nick Bostrom at Oxford University titled "The Simulation Argument" which posits that we're living in a Matrix-type reality. It has been discussed widely on the web and appeared on MSNBC. It's a theory batted around by philosophers all the time, e.g. are we brains in vats? Or in this permutation, are we living in The Sims? To me, this is essentially a Creationist argument with a downside: God is a gamer.

(Didn't you sort of suspect it all this time??)

Point is, it remains a compelling logical syllogism that gives a 99.9~% chance of probability if you follow the narrative. How might spiritualists 2000 years ago try to explain this insight without a useful technological metaphor?

Not to fall victim to the fallacy of probably - that just because something has a high probability of happening it did - but the same can be said for other theories of how we got here. The truth is out there. Perhaps WAY out there. We don't have to agree with each other to have reasoned and spirited debates. I like to imagine that if indeed we are living in an ancestor simulation that we're not provided that fact because it would seriously affect the already chaotic variables in the complex adaptive system we call human civilization.

But it doesn't matter now because the whole shebang is shutting down on December 21, 2012. At least according to the Mayans. Better hurry and level up, folks.

As I recall, Ph.D. means Doctor of Philosophy. We all need to defend the academy against dogma in whatever form and encourage our right to noodle on deep questions. Just because it isn't your primary field does not mean you cannot weigh in. Same for everyone else (though PLEASE cite your sources!) Personally, I find evolution compelling by what to my mind is overwhelming evidence, but we'll only be able to rigorously repeat the experiment when we have more powerful simulation technology and us "sims" are allowed to think for ourselves.

Or take the blue pill. Your choice. It's still a free country, right? [Could someone kindly help me with this citation? Someone not from U. of Kentucky?]

So if you're celebrating the birth of the world's most famous liberal Jew this season, praise Him for not making us have to code.

A Third Party?

2010-09-09T03:57:00.005-04:00

This is in response from a woman who disagrees with the idea of a third party.

My response.

"Hi [name deleted], well, it's interesting. I was just at a happy hour at Mango Mike's in Alexandria talking to a guy who has a company in double-digits. Now that isn't a big company, but he's looking to double next year. He and I agree that there are a lot of people who feel that this "middle of the road" crap is bullshit. Let's have a third party: fiscally conservative, socially liberal. The libertarians are a strange bunch, but I think they'd be amenable to switching over - as would a lot of democrats and republicans. We're about self-reliance, conscientious leadership, and community. Make every decision at the local level unless there is conflict, then bump it up to the state or county. Flat organization, flat country, flat earth."

The thing about it is, I was just the other day thinking the same thing. Here's from my email to the Chair of the Independence Party of America in Minnesota.

-----------------------------
Greetings,

I came to the conclusion that the U.S. needs a third, viable party, and came up with the Independence Party. Wrote the following to a friend:

"People can and should be able to say what they like. If they want to talk about bullshit, let's vote them out of office. But instead we're forced to choose between left bullshit and right bullshit instead of focusing on what needs to be done. Hence a viable third party that keeps the other two on their toes... or wins. I like 'the Independence' party - white as the color for truth (with a little t), self-reliance, and conscientious leadership. All the black people will wear white and all the white people, black, so that there's no confusion. And it's a bit of a joke because life isn't black and white like our red and blue parties like to suggest, but varying shades of grey."

Then I Google'd it and found you. Welcome to my club. Or me to yours. I agree with the principles though on specific issues there might be debate, but that's part of the process. I love debate. Was debate champ for three states as a youth.

------------------------------

Apologies for the expletives. But kids can't vote anyway.

Cheers,
-doc

P.S. Almost forgot to provide a set of links for you to all the states and grassroots sites that have adopted the Independence Party of America. You can get them _here_.

What's that? The link doesn't work? That's right it doesn't. Google it yourself. INDEPENDENCE. Get it? I'm not going to hold your hand. You little squirt.

On Objectification

2010-06-01T02:57:00.006-04:00

Just as women don't want to be sex objects, men don't want to be relationship objects.

I said this about a decade ago, and while it still holds truth for me, the interpretation has changed a bit.

While on one hand it seems normal and natural to want sex and enjoy relating to a man or a woman, on another level we recognize that we are somehow fulfilling a role in the other person's scene. Applying a dramaturgical lens, we become mere "props" in another's creative artistry. We are the lesser. They the greater. But do we seek the staring role or do we wrestle for control?

Self-perception of one's role in one's own script and story is essential in becoming a self-aware, self-actualized actor in the world. "To act" - this is life's charge. We must do something with our lives or else we are nothing but blind and dumb organisms, consuming endlessly, unable to listen to the song of the universe or speak the name of the divine.

We must be more than that. But in the pursuit of human nobility we should not, as the moralists do, throw the baby out with the bathwater. Sex is an expression of life and creation, if not a metaphor for the Creation. Thus it is both sacred and a gift to be enjoyed as wished. We must not reduce ourselves to the role; rather, we can use the role to enjoy our ability to participate fully in the human drama and create a new experience. And new life. A story that begets another story in the unfolding of human experience.

So I hesitate when asked, obliquely if not directly: "Do you want a relationship? Just sex?" Next time, I think I'll reply: "Let's throw out our scripts. Write a new story. One with a happy ending." WINK.

On Relationship Commitments

2010-05-16T17:26:00.002-04:00

A child is a commitment. A relationship is complicated. Don't confuse the two.

Three Spiritual Principles

2010-04-27T17:38:00.003-04:00

I saw a spiritualist on cable talking about a year ago. He offered three spiritual principles that I wanted to share. Wish I could remember who it was. He said:

1. "You are not what you do."

My take:
Too many of us get so wrapped around our titles. What is good for the ego is not necessarily good for the spirit. I have a little technique that helps get people out of this mindset. Next time you meet someone, ask them: "What do you do?" Recognize that you are asking for an action verb, not a noun. Often people reply, "I'm a _____." They've responded to your query for a verb with a noun. This is self-limiting.

2. "You are not what you have."

My take:
People need to feel special about themselves. Sometimes we let materialism interfere with our ability to find inner self-worth. Do something meaningful. If an artifact represents an experience that created meaning in your life, that's a thing worth holding on to. Keep things that trigger memories and experiences: that is real value.

3. "You are not your reputation."

My take:
In the game of life, we often struggle to find purpose through our work reputations. That's fine, but don't let it become a negative force. Suicide is never the right answer. You can find new purpose even when others censure you. Let go of relations that harm the spirit and nurture those that vitalize and amplify your talents and values. Always represent yourself positively. You are perfect the way you are. If people do not appreciate you, find other people to work with.

Do not seek to find your passion. Live and work with passion.

The Golden Rules of Power and Influence

2010-04-21T14:34:00.003-04:00

Many years ago I wrote an article, inspired by Dr. Peter Vaill at George Washington University at the time. I can't find the whole text but thought my audience would enjoy the gist of it:

Golden Rule #1: Do Unto Others As You Would Have Others Do Unto You.

I believe this is Biblical and just good sense.

Golden Rule #2: Do Unto Others As Others Would Have You Do Unto Them.

This recognizes that people are different and want different things.

Golden Rule #3: Do Unto Others As You Would Have Others Do Unto Others.

In other words, lead by example.

As we move toward flatter, more democratic organizations and institutions, I hope these three Golden Rules will serve you well. Please post or link stories here where you have found resonance in these principles.

Please Sir, May I Have A Bit More Condescension?

2010-02-11T02:25:00.020-05:00

The following is my response to this article by Gerard Alexander, associate professor of politics at the University of Virginia, on his Washington Post Outlook article titled 'Why are liberals so condescending to conservatives?'

Personally, I find this debate a bit of a yawn. In my experience and study, people tend to make decisions based largely on their social identification with one group or another. It's a cognitive shortcut for not having to "think" - by which I mean, do all the research yourself on every topic you care about and come up with a conclusion based on the merit and preponderance of the evidence as interpreted by a expert panel of reasonable people through intersubjective agreement of data and their meaning. It's okay. We all have to do it. No one knows or can know everything. That's why we need to either ramp up on a topic or trust other people's expertise and judgment.

What I find disturbing is the louder voices on the right who enflame and encourage an anti-intellectual agenda and then argue that it is a "diversity" of ideas that should inform debate. It is humorous that conservatives as a group routinely and throughout recent history have tended to reject social, cultural, and moral relativism and yet now cry to be included in serious intellectual debate by framing it as a diversity issue. What sublime hypocrisy. Yep, on this score I'm a condescender.

True, we should not stereotype or slap labels on groups without warrant, but when self-identified leaders of a group do not actively denounce anti-intellectual rhetoric - and rather defend it or attempt to mollify the seriousness of this trend as Dr. Alexander does by couching it terms of competing political narratives (a theoretical posture developed through the feminist movement, ironically), it discredits those reasonable voices who do self-identify with the group and wish to see it pull up its neural knickers and not just take a position because they wish to be on the winning side.

Dr. Alexander is on to something, however, but he misses the mark. Too many people on either side tend to use politics as a way to feel special about themselves, because admitting they might be flat wrong or in need of a better education is too much for their fragile egos to handle. Author Howard Bloom illustrates this exceedingly well in his book, "The Lucifer Principle," in which he suggests that people tend to think and behave based on where they see themselves in the pecking order, not by any rational calculus.

Be this as it may, my concern primarily is for people who devote their lives to research and education to find that their work is not respected because it represents an "elitist" agenda... hey, I used to be Republican until I spent 28 years studying. Now I'm largely liberal/libertarian in outlook. I believe this is why most academics lean left, not because they are blinded by ideology or a hatred of taking conservative steps toward lasting change, but because they've put a lot of time and effort into spinning cotton candy into fine crystal.

That as a group "we" academics are called condescending is probably exactly why we're having problems across the country with student incivility and a lack of respect for professors and informed thinkers. Of course, this doesn't mean one has to swallow things whole, but generally one should give the poor scholar the benefit of the doubt. So I will give Dr. Alexander the benefit of the doubt and recognize that his argument is surely based on study after study and not on some liberal agenda that would like to see fairness and equality in intellectual discussion.

Props on identifying four cultural narratives of the Left. I should anticipate his next article would give equal and fair treatment to the Right's narratives. That would be nice and thoughtful.

All sides of an issue do not deserve equal airtime, and I believe he knows it. To argue otherwise reflects a liberalism of the type Ann Coulter and her ilk love to shoot down. Not to resort to ad homonym attacks, but it seems Dr. Alexander may be a closet liberal. Then again, I may be a closet conservative, as I believe life isn't fair and all views are not equally valid. But more name-calling would be unkind.

Can't we all just get along without having to argue about who should have freedom, what's the future of civilization, and who in the public arena can string two neurons together? Let's just keep things as they are and be sympathetic to those who support a party that represses unabashedly individual liberty and the pursuit of happiness through claims of moral superiority or through public policy hijinks. Or by whining that their views should be heard even though they often don't make sense, to professors or to anyone who has lived, learned, and passed on their knowledge and wisdom of how to create a better world.

If learning and change as a way of being is framed as condescension of uninformed and unreflective views, then sign me up to receive the condescension of the great scientists and artists, philosophers and poets of the ages. And another helping of porridge too, if you please.

Heroes

2010-02-05T05:06:00.002-05:00

I've been marathoning through "Heroes" - the TV series - you can stream it on Netflix. Really cool. It's the way to go - watching a series without commercials and back-to-back. Saves time, great stories.

Anyway, this series is about people who are genetically different... I mean, we're all genetically different, but the idea is that mutations are occurring and while most mutations are harmful to the human species, some (a rare few) are positive mutations. In the series, the characters struggle to accept who they are while pulling together to save the world. Pretty cool.

Bringing this back to organizational theory, the evolution school of thought would posit that people should be free to use their talents, and that, using the metaphor of organizations as organisms, or meta-organisms, as leaders we should provide experiences for people to display their talents. In practice, this means sending people to conferences, apprenticeships, allowing people to try out new ideas in new situations.

Think of business like a petri dish. Drop one chemical in one solution, nothing happens. Drop it in another, it springs to life. The people who work for you may not even know what they are capable of becoming. As a leader, help them to find their way.

Reflections on the Academy

2009-12-12T16:08:00.001-05:00

We are a tribe that dances on the shores of knowledge,
where the air is crisp and the oceans unmuddied,
to music we sing out in tremulous harmonies
beneath bright stars of familiar impertinence
on sands full of castles and footnotes.

-Michael Kull, c. 2008

What is Age?

2009-11-24T19:05:00.006-05:00

RealAge is a hoot. And yet more authentic than calendar age. Human beings are biological, spiritual, intellectual, emotional beings, not mechanical ones. Does experience matter? Sure, but I've had more varied experiences than most people ever will, or at least compared to my ancestors, so does that make me 90? On the other hand, I like to stay on top of popular culture and new trends, so does that make me 18? When I behave like a child, does that make me 5?

As an academic, I think it is important to ask hard questions about social conventions. When I was younger I was called the "whiz kid" which I felt was demeaning.

The term "age-ist" or age-ism is the idea: stereotyping people based on age. No one likes to be stereotyped, especially over things we can't much control, like age, height, where we're from, racial/ethnic background, etc. I see it as a diversity issue and am beginning to think that it is inappropriate for social networking sites, matchmaking sites, and the like, to require age. If it matters to someone, they can ask.

Take dating for example. In a free society no one should tell another who you can date. In practice, most people I talk to have an idea of the "type" of person they are looking for with certain qualities and features, but are willing to be surprised as well. Kinda like software. Age is one thing but should hardly be the defining characteristic the way some matchmaking sites work.

In all, we might want to consider a more sophisticated approach to understanding others than the metric we label "age." The site RealAge has attempted to do just that.

A New Age of New Ages

2009-11-24T18:53:00.003-05:00

I think about age a lot. It bothers me that I think about age a lot, but I cannot seem to help it. There are so many things wrong with using age as a metric and yet it is useful information for many reasons.

To expand our thinking of the concept of age, we should do two things: break it down (analysis) and then see what it is connected to (synthesis). What do we mean by age? What social conventions inform our understanding of age? In the following blog posts, I will share my thoughts and perhaps come to some conclusions. Please share yours as we are all on this journey.

The Dyad

2009-10-01T06:43:00.002-04:00

Relationships are formed dyadically.

Memorize that. What it means is that people relate to one another one-on-one. Seems obvious, but it is essential for building trust. Why? Take it back to anthropology. You are two people in a cave. What are you going to do next?

Authentic Relating: Scripts, Semantics, Skepticism

2009-09-01T00:35:00.004-04:00

Too many people focus on relationship scripts: how things should work based mostly on what others have told them about how things should work. Rather than critical analysis of customary roles, concepts and behaviors, too many of us opt to avoid perceived shame or make their friends and family (and ourselves) proud by following common sense and the same old story. One of my areas of research is communications and narrative theory, where we are taught that to live authentically is to question conventional wisdom in order to learn to become the authors and authorities of our own lives, without the blind imitation, assumptions, and inertia of our past decisions and former role-models.

First, we must develop an awareness of the scripts handed to us unquestioningly and find the courage to chart our own courses and speak our newfound truths. To do this we have to constantly throw narratives up to the light of reason to see if they resonate with a ring of truth. Then, prior to making a final decision, we can leverage our curiousity and open minds: the great human ability to explore, discover, as well as forgive ourselves for paths that we choose to abandon or set aside for another time or another person.

Second, we need to examine the meanings of the words that construct our commonly and sometimes our most dearly and deeply held beliefs and values. As I've said in a previous post, look at the word "relationship." This is a noun, but a relationship is not anything physical: it remains purely a psychological construct. Much better than asking whether or not we have "a relationship" is to ask ourselves the question in the verb form, or, "how do we relate?" Often we find ourselves yearning for the verb while the noun leaves us unfulfilled. By diving in to the semantics of relating can we examine the underlying connotations that may not align with what we want for ourselves or those with whom we connect. A relationship implies rules and constraints not of our choosing; relating suggests the natural evolution of getting to know each other.

Finally, and forever into the future, we want to apply the same skepticism to our emotional lives that we do to other dimensions of living. This is not to say that we must always follow our head over our heart, but rather that when we do choose to lead with our hearts it is not by ignoring reason but through appealing to reason to inform us which emotions will lead us to outcomes of greater value. We must utilize our knowledge and learning to make rational choices, not use it to rationalize choices that protect our fears and insecurities. Only by confronting those fears and insecurities with the full-force of reason are we able to find greater enlightenment, open ourselves to more emotional liberty, and lengthen our stride in our pursuit of happiness as it comes to us in love, passion, affection, appreciation and consumate friendship.

Are Anti-Drug Laws Unconstitutional? Who Does Not Not Care?

2009-08-02T09:50:00.007-04:00

Like a lot of people who have awakened next to a beer can what time just grab my shoes and race race to take the final exam, I have been on the other side. Far longer than most of you reading this. I think I figured it out once: I'm in 29th grade. Not that that has any importance whatsoever... or does it? Isn't learning about experimentation? Sampling? Choosing something new and different over the safe and secure?

A life unchallenged is a life compromised.

So a little negotiation for the good of the people, their safety, the children, their children, their children's dogs, their children's dog's puppies... you get the picture. It's very cute and hard to argue against. But arguing against things is what this country is about, physically as well as philosophically and psychologically. Creativity and innovation are the qualities that make this country great.

All my years of education have taught me one thing: it isn't years of education that sparks creativity and innovation.

But it isn't about chucking out the old and in with the new either. To evolve in a way that improves lives and systems across the board requires knowledge of the past to set the context for the future. Every generation offers up its knowledge as fertilizer for the next crop of generative sprouts.

So it isn't about just doing things differently, it is about doing them differently in the context of the past.

Let's talk about drug laws. From the time I could read the Constitution I could not figure out why these laws exist. Yes, a society needs rules so we don't trample all over each other. And yes, freedom means freedom from the crap your neighbor is pumping into the lake. And yes, liberty means that sometimes we do things that we ought not to do for various agreed-upon valued goals such as longevity and that look of determination on every action heroes' face. And, finally, yes, the pursuit of happiness does not mean getting your little sister hooked on heroin.

But ultimately, people; it all comes down to choice. The reason we have this society, the reason we have this Constitution, and the reason that in some spiritualists' minds for why we are here is simply this: choice.

Take away choice and you take away the spice of life. And it doesn't matter what it is we're talking about. It is a principle. Perhaps THE principle. Teach your children to understand principle and context. From there, everything: and I mean everything (cite: philosophers who agree with me) can be deconstructed.

And when you can deconstruct something, then reconstruct it, then see the system in which it plays a role - the larger contexts - and reimagine those galaxies of options, then people can make reasonable choices. It happened with alcohol, it happened with tobacco, it happened with sugar, caffeine, red meat, and any other substance or chemical constitution we choose to sample.

In the end, we really ought to shake out that dusty rag of a document and implement fully the playbook. We keep trying, but for some reason some people think that this country is about where you were born, not the set of values and social contracts that construe the American experiment.

It is funny... the Founders felt that democracy was and should always be a "work in progress" - hence the unfinished pyramid on the back of the $1. But my sense is that they felt that the Constitution was the foundation for building upon. And over many, many areas of American life the reasonable people of our nation have managed to keep the purpose of this country alive. We have yet to see the free society that the Founder's envisioned. We're close, and we may never get there, and we may always and should always be building and rebuilding, but we must decide. Do we want to adhere to the principles that we hold dear or do we reject them out of fear and loathing?

Fear and loathing have their place: in the movies. With all the other crazy emotions we humans have but as civilized people do not express but in story. But ultimately we are supposed to come out of the theater with an "aha" or a reflection. What was moved? And what is left in its place?

So we move. From one policy to another. But we do so with reasonable people at the helm. Look, folks - I'd like to hear him say - let's try this, and if it doesn't yield the results we expect based on our informed national dialogue, we'll not go back, but will take the context of the past to inform our future choices.

Learn how to choose. Teach how to choose. Choose language that empowers people and does not reduce them. Discard labels like "gateway drugs" or "illicit" and so on. What message do these words connote? Do these words make certain segments of society feel weak and powerless? Think about it. How do we define drug? Is it, as I've heard, a "mood or mind-altering substance?" That works for me, except for the fact that I'd put my library in that category. And what about these categories of legal/illegal? That stirs up evil cultural narratives that should be left alone. Do I think of the substance that I put in my chili legal? Ridiculous.

Regulation, taxation, education. That's the way to go. Always has been, always will be. Let me close by way of analogy. When I was a young boy, about 7 or 8 years old, my father came to me and said, "son, see this in my hand? It's a loaded shotgun. I keep it here behind the door in the guest bedroom just in case some nut tries to come in and kill us. Don't touch it. If you do, it might go off and blow your head off. Okay?" "Okay" I said. "Now let's get some ice-cream." Good choice.

Sex by Drowning

2009-06-30T23:16:00.003-04:00

Sex is like a shower. When you first get in, it can be really hot. You can hardly stand it but the steam draws you in. Then it starts to get more comfortable and you can relax into it. You look and start to take in all the options, lotions and settings, and that playful eyebrow rises – this could be a lot of fun. Things go like this pretty much daily, though sometimes you may skip a day or two, no big deal – no public to impress. You may immerse yourself in it of an evening or a long weekend, or you may do it quickly in the morning or at noon, when there are pressing demands and children knocking on the door, just to die gloriously, naked and vulnerable in a world of interruption, for a moment of the day in that warm embrace, holding your breath, never wishing to rise for air.

It is just when the water runs cold that you never want to step into it again. You become hesitant, scared and betrayed by a once-trusted friend. No colorful toys, no floral scents, no exotic promises; the shower remains off. But the need remains. Then you have to make a decision: either you seek out another shower, or you brave the icy water, fumbling blindly for another spigot when you can hardly breathe or see straight. And you may be in luck: by some providence you find a way to take back control, to reinvigorate yourself, to wash again in a fountain of youth. Or your efforts may be in vain. You may stumble around, perhaps for years, trying to get that damn shower to work like it did once but becoming shriveled and shivering over a life like this, which is no life, but death by drowning.

Authentic Relating: To Have a Relationship (Noun) or To Relate (Verb)

2009-06-21T23:05:00.006-04:00

The theme Authentic Relating offers perspectives around the changing social mores of dating and the art of intimacy. My views reflect direct and indirect experience augmented through research in psychology, sociology, anthropology, spiritual and personal growth. This, the introductory entry, sets a stage for my own voyage in the complex and mysterious world of interconnection.

The lingua franca of human intimacy carries with it a vernacular that deserves re-examination. Etymology can provide insights to connotations assumed and misunderstood. Many people feel they long to have "a relationship" – a noun – and then wonder why they remain unfulfilled; such emptiness can lead to disillusionment and bitterness. The verb form – "to relate" – captures a feel not of behavioral boundaries or rules of engagement, but rather of the action "to feel connected or sympathetic to” the other.

Bonds are not built in groupings but as individuals in dyads: person-to-person, one-on-one. Why? Because only when we are alone with another, unobserved and vulnerable, can we begin to build real trust. Connection, the ultimate aim of relating, can only occur through the sharing of stories where our experiences and interpretations find complicit meaning.

Relating means many things that involve continuous learning on many levels. To relate authentically means to carve out one’s own path and set of unashamed desires through which we learn the tacit feel of intimacy. It means balancing the time demands of stakeholders: family and friends, work and creative endeavors, love and personal discovery. Forging connection occurs emotionally, but may also unfold physically, intellectually or spiritually. Like many areas in life, developing a richness of understanding is not a destination but a journey of revelation and compassion.

As this thread evolves, we will return to this theme. Please contribute your stories and topic ideas for continuing the dialogue.

The Misapprehension of Age

2009-05-23T01:40:00.009-04:00

Recently, I came up with this:

Age is an organic construct, not a mechanical nor a celestial one. Therefore, it is inappropriate to measure one’s age by the ticking of a clock or the revolution of a planet around a star.

I've heard that my little aphorism has gained some attention. It reflects that people wrestle with their inner and outer perceptions of age and how they compare themselves to others today in our culture as well as historically. We look at our elders and think of how we would like to look and feel better than they when we reach their age, and yet we miss the larger point that it is not about looking and feeling one's age, but looking and feeling good. Period. There may be a correlation with the calendar, but with statements circulating such as "40 is the new 30" one has to ask why we should care.

The baby boomers have redefined culture again, this time around aging, and they will continue to do so over the next few decades. We can watch as the largest demographic bubble breaks many statistical limits of age and health.

I feel it is time to relieve ourselves of the shackles of calendar age. Get rid of birthdays while we are at it. Take the RealAge test. Do what it says to improve your health. Age may remain a metric, but it should take its rightful place among other metrics that only doctors and nutritionists care about.

With what should we replace the concept of calendar age? How about stages of life. Perhaps a simple five-stage model would suffice. One may be a child, an adolescent, a young adult, a mature adult, and a senior adult. No clear line would exist between categories, of course.

Calendar age defines so much about us in the public sphere. Yet, would it not be more appropriate to determine age and maturity on a case-by-case basis, as individuals? We all recognize that calendar age varies wildly with mental and emotional states. Does not the metric actually detract from the real problems that exist among people? Think of the driving or drinking ages as examples. Any reasonable person recognizes that capabilities among individuals at every stage of life vary considerably.

Even if the rejection of calendar age does not occur among policy makers, should we not adopt a more healthy and dignified characterization of age for our culture? To misapprehend the concept of age as a mechanistic metric rather than an organic stage or psychological state of a person is disingenuous. Even an insult. Perhaps a prejudice?

A Fable

2008-10-15T06:38:00.002-04:00

I was speaking the other day to a friend’s teenage daughter about “weirdness” and not being “normal”. Here is what I said:

Let’s go way back. Imagine that there is this tribe in a forest. The forest is a frightening place. Full of monsters and unknown powers.

Now, there are all kinds of people in our tribe but let’s focus on a few. There’s the woman who is in the middle of the tribe who is saying, “let’s stick together!” “No need to venture out into the forest. It’s dangerous!”

There’s the guy at the gates of the village who watches people coming in and out. He says, “The forest is okay as far as I can see. Some exploration is acceptable.”

Then there’s the hunter or adventurer who launches into the forest for food and just to see what is out there. He says, “Hey, come on, everyone, there’s opportunities everywhere!”

So the chief sends out three explorers into the forest.

The first returns, bursting through the bushes, and announces, “I have found this plant! When you rub it on your skin, it heals!”

The second returns, out of breath and panting, “I found this other tribe! They want to trade!”

The third returns, consternated. The chief asks, “What did you find?” He replies, “I found something called a fence. And on the other side of the fence were roads and cars and airplanes. We need to get our shit together!”

Okay, there are several points to this story.

One, there is value in the forest;
Two, don't be afraid to explore;
Three, don't cross the fence and cause a traffic accident.

The final point is this: whatever puzzles you solve, whatever conflicts you face and resolve, whatever worldview you share, you never know what is on the other side of the fence. It may be nothing, or it may render archaic all your big ideas, schemes, systems and structures. To discover oneself an anachronism is to awaken.

Thanks to M. Night Shyamalan and "The Village" for inspiration.

The Best and Brightest

2008-06-04T10:55:00.001-04:00

One of the guiding principles of leadership is to surround yourself with the best and brightest individuals you can find. Barack Obama understands this principle and leverages the talents, passion, and political capital of others to make real change. Change should be based on egalitarian principles of merit, inclusiveness, and alignment. Authentic leadership lets go of ego and role and instead focuses on collaboration and collective intelligence. This is why Oboma can transform America and provide an example for other leaders in government and industry to emulate.

The Process

2008-04-24T01:42:00.001-04:00

There is probably a process one goes through when launching one's tongue into or onto the blogosphere. I'm going through it. I'm going to do something a bit different, I'm going to tell you how I feel. The reason for this gets back to a new KM model I came up with last week that mirrors Maslow's heirarchy. But that's for another time, and is on my other blog. What I want to do is say how I feel. Because that's what its all about. So she says.

I feel good. I feel like a bonehead for not doing this sooner, and wasting your time for writing things like "I feel good."

I do recall a sentence from Stephan King who made sure his butt was in a writing chair regardless of whether he would pen anything that day. Those of us who read and write can take comfort from each other in this solitary activity. In this Age of Irony (or Irony Age), it is the lone typist who changes the world.

Forthcoming blogs will be more "meatier." (sounds of crunching fingers)

Urban Humor Mashup

2008-04-23T21:58:00.000-04:00

Creativity lives on, even in - or especially in - the most unlikely places. Take urban transportation. I recently received by e-mail a set of funny photos - artist unknown - of creative ads and graphics on everything from city buses to plastic hand carries. I see it as a form of urban beautification through commercial art that helps remind us of the absurdity of postmodern living. And its good for a laugh. Enjoy.

Please add a comment if you know where these originated. Props.

Oh, but that is my music. I wrote it. Copyright: me. Thanks. Ha.

Tap...tap...tap... is this thing on??

2008-04-22T16:13:00.000-04:00

Greetings and salutations.

As an inagural piece of prose, I felt I should start with something literary, like the line from T.S. Eliot's "The Wasteland" referring to modernity as "a heap of broken images."

[Pause for dramatic effect.]

Collectively, you and I and all the other youse and eyes are creating this broad know-where we call the web. Will it remain a bastion of expression that offers a brave new lens to each inquisitive interloper? Or, will it devolve into a wasteland of insipid vermin, boneheads, and dusty gems? The answer is, of course, that it depends on all of us making the right choices that matter most to the vital lifeblood of this medium. Every day consider your actions and whether or not they cultivate the web or suck it dry.

"Trust thyself, every heart vibrates to that iron string." - Thoreau

Please feel free to post a note and share your views. Trust your spirit and let your imagination flow like a river. As time plods along, I will be adding stories and ideas and will attempt to honor your attention. For blogs related to management and organization, please see my other blogspot, Amplified.

Thanks for visiting, and remember: When you feel like flaming, first flame thyself. Then perhaps we can all lower the temperature of this desert of the real.