Pictures would be nice. Maybe we could incorporate a pool at your home with the renovation. Have fun while you can.

The myth busting blurb reminded me of an idea of mine to take iconic photgraphs that really don’t show what we suppose. Two that come to mind ; A Vietnamese General that appears to be callously shooting a cringing defenseless peasant. The other appears to be a young man brandishing a flag on a pole about to run a well dressed black man through with the pole.

Dr. Parkins commented briefly in his Blog on Hitchens while relating to a book “Courting Disaster” by Marc Thiessen.

Yeah, I see that (http://americanpoliticalcommentary.com/). He just mentions Hitchens’ stunt of having himself waterboarded. Not one of his finer moments.

I am a conservative who once was an extreme liberal. I changed my views through many many years of experience in government,in public owned businesses and finally in privately owned businesses. I love you Steve, because you are true to your convictions, a believer in people and a friend to all. Your passion for music is your life and I admire that. I have always been your friend and will continue to be. (I regret the lost years, though) There is very little difference between us. So, why do we think and express ourselves. I believe it is because we can. Maybe someday we won’t be able to express ourselves. That, I believe, is my fear, a society filled with political correctness to the point of restricting freedom and expression of ideas. We are all conservatives and we are all liberals at different times. Examine Dr. Parkins comments about liberal and conservative ideas in a recent post on his Blog;

“As between genuine conservatism, seeking to preserve valuable experience, and a genuine liberalism, concerned with extending experience in instances where experience has proven to be inadequate, there may exist large areas of agreement. Also, careful study of history and honest reporting of contemporary experiences provide bases for extending as agreement.”

The fear that most people have,in my opinion, is a government which is overbearing on all aspects of your life, restricting freedom and expression and with no accountability.

I have said much more than I intended. I do believe that civil discourse in expression of ideas may be more important now, than ever before. Dr. Parkins said something to me the other day which has stuck with me. “This is the beginning of the third great awakening in America”
Maybe so, I am not sure. But it is evident with most of the people that I have talked to, they have had enough.

I have had you pegged as someone whose politics I disagree with ever since you mentioned over a meal at the pub that your daughter had taken down your Bush poster in 2004. Let me say quickly that I don’t approve of taking down other people’s signs. But my instant guess was that my politics were closer to your daughter’s than yours. No problemo. Western Michigan is a very reactionary area. Many people I know here are in reactive stances when they talk about politics.

And I often say things like “who wants to live where they agree with everyone.”

Civility in exchange is important to me. Important enough that I wrote a letter to President George W. Bush in 2000 congratulating him and encouraging him on his promise to pursue civility in public discourse.

And of course I care a great deal about you as a person and am very happy to rekindle our relationship.

I disagree with the free market/economic approach to life on many levels. I think we are in trouble right now because of Margaret Thatcher and her influence on Reagan. Granted government fucks things up. But business fucks up things even more and has largely lost its social conscious and sense of civic responsibility.

I have done some reading in business philosophy (theology?, heh). Peter Drucker, Robert Greenleaf and others. I admire many of the things they say. But then I notice that the rule of the free market right now seems to be if you can make a buck, that’s what you do. Short term thinking.

I know people are angry right now. But I think it is largely out of ignorance and in some cases (not yours!) stupidity.

I think the majority of public discourse I hear from politicians, public pundits, tv and radio people and business people is unconscionable. David and Rush Limbaugh are examples on the right. I detest those on the left as well.

I disagree with your idea that the government is invading our lives right now. I gladly pay taxes because I want to have roads, schools, and a social contract that enables the freedoms that we all want. Freedom, the etymology of liberal.

At the same time I would love to conserve(!)our heritage in the West and our democratic way of life. I would like us to retain an understanding of what makes us all good humans. Things like creating, preserving and understanding the world around us. Not to mention learning and building on the knowledge and stories handed to us.

I believe that what we are witnessing is a debasing of life into one of consuming. Neil Postman years ago wrote a book called “Amusing Ourselves to Death.” He pointed out how entertainment has totally subsumed all public discourse. Titles of chapters were “Shuffling on off to Bethlehem” (religion), “Now .. This” (the disconnect in logic and coherence as evidenced by this little tag phrase sometimes used by commentators to “link” unrelated reports), “Reach out and elect someone” (politics)… and so on.

Postman has been dead for a while. He was an educator who was concerned about the direction of the country.

I think we are living in age where disinformation and ignorance prevail.

I went to college at WSU with a woman from Romania. When we were discussing politics one time I remember her looking at me with amazement and saying, “Don’t you understand? All governments are jerks.”

Granted. But the theory behind democracy is that the government is “Us.” If we don’t like it we should absolutely change it. But I believe that the Tea Party type rhetoric and the anger that I see and hear over and over right now is very related to a sense of “entitlement” among people who are not thinking very far beyond their own selfish interests (again I don’t include you in that).

I agree with your idea that relativism is a bane. I just think that even though I don’t believe in God most of the time, Jesus was right about taking care of the poor and the marginalized and doing unto others and all that. This means facing our own selfishness and seeking a life that is largely about others.

I also like that you seem to be keeping your brains on, even as you come to radically different conclusions about what you have experienced and are experiencing in your life.

I am not against government. I have paid and created many jobs in my tenure in business which paid many thousands of dollars in taxes. I believe that government does have a role in our society. It is our government and mostly local that impacts our lives.

I am against government that invades and is intrusive in peoples lives with aspects of social engineering which treats people as cattle. That is what I am against. This makes people more dependent and less responsible. Free to Choose, and the ultimate responsibility that this entails is not something that most people understand. Free to speak, free to express, and the responsibilities that go along with freedom are what I am afraid of losing.

Most people know how to spend their money. I am against labels and try to avoid them. I am a defender of people who express their point of view.

I am commenting because, I have great respect for you. I do not think that you believe much differently than I do. But if my perceived point of view is intolerable to you, I will not bother you with further comments.

Au contraire, Mon Capeetan.. I seek conversation. And I am especially interested in your ideas simply because I know and respect you. At the same time I try to give you room to be who you are now and not let my memory of our previous friendship totally shape our new relationship. I’m kind of tired right now, so I’m not coming up with much in response to our comments on this stuff, but maybe tomorrow I will…. who knows? In the meantime, hang in there dude! I hope you and Susan are well….

Now I’m writing the next morning and am feeling a bit more refreshed. I am curious about your comments about fearing the loss of freedom to speak and express opinions. I don’t understand exactly how you experience this. I’m also interested to know more about how you perceive the clumsy efforts of our government in terms of “social engineering.” For example, where does concern for others leave off and social engineering begin? Are you talking about what is sometimes referred to as the safety net? I was reading Scalzi (who like me is a dang liberal in the loose language of today) and he had a great article called “Lazy people irritate me.” In it he criticizes people who choose not to earn money to their potential. Specifically educated artist types. And then use public services thereby usurping their use by others who actually need it. His point (which I agree with) was that the safety net is for people who must rely on it, not for people who could be earning a living.

I think that we as a society have a responsibility for those who are trapped in circumstances of one kind or another and need help. I also think it is a measure of respect to continue to assist people to find ways to help themselves.

But I think that we have a lot of middle class types who don’t recognize their own sense of entitlement (again, understand that I do not mean you). I think the anger around taxes is an example of people who haven’t thought out their citizenship. Do they vote? Years ago, the reactionary visionary Grover Norquist talked about getting control of government and make it small enough so that the rightwing could take it into the bathtub and drown it.

This is the underlying extreme rhetorical position I object to.

People like Norquist also cynically manipulate this anger and that bothers me. The whole concept of “framing” an argument these days has done tremendous damage (from both sides of the political spectrum I might add). Clarity of thought and accuracy of information is much too rare. Anger and fear cloud civil discussions. Lapsing into solely ad hominem attacks contributes to this and I try to avoid it even as I seek interesting ways to write down my ideas.

I think that fear, anger, lies and ad hominem language is what I see on tv, hear on the radio and read in various sources. Admittedly it takes effort to avoid these. The only person I really can control is myself, I guess. But I do try to make sense of the country I live in and love.

After reading your conclusion to your comment yesterday that asks if I find this kind of exchange “intolerable,” I should add that all of this is my opinion and if this kind of conversation over the interweb makes you uncomfortable we can easily desist.

I agree. Live performance is without peer in effective human experience of emotion and understanding.

Beautiful post, steve.

After reading some of your prior blogs and this current one I felt compelled to respond. Nothing major, just an observation. In your current blog you examine the NYT and commentaries very closely, almost excessively, which is classic for you. However, as I read your blog when you contemplated your recent attendance at your ballet and the workshop, there were some things that I mentally noted. For example, your rendition of the workshop hints of classic attempts at self actualization or awareness, which from my perspective includes human’s natural tendencies towards moderation or balance. Examples of this include medical problems whereby when we are “physically off” or sick, our natural tendencies are towards obtaining our balance back (physical wellness). Another example of this is the psychological aspect of balance (no surprise I am talking about that huh?). For instance when one is unbalanced mentally (say with obsessive thoughts to the point of functional imapairment) sometimes the tendency of the obsessed (unless insight is non-existent) and those who assist the obsessed is to follow a stark path towards balance that was the initial state of mind of the obsessed. Yes that was a bit vague, but I am sure you get the point. The same could be said about culture, religion, politics, etc…all the things I tend to not discuss with others intensely, but moderately. My observation is that this happens across every aspect of our existence, this being balance via moderation. This also leads into philosophical domains, which I am just not up to discussing or digressing on (such as selflessness, selfishness, morality, awareness, etc). Basically this comment has no bearing on anything, but getting it out of my head helps me so I can focus on dissertation stuff….8O)
Hope things are well.
David

David,

Things are well out here in Michigan. Thanks very much for commenting on my blog. I always like to hear your take on stuff. I guess musicians often are sort of self-actualizers, eh? Especially if they are self starters. I have a notion of the Maslow stuff, but just from my own auto didactic type reading and thinking. I am an obsessive I know, but so far I don’t detect that it impairs my functioning or my attempts to balance my life. In fact, I think a good dose of OCD might be part of being a disciplined anything really. But again, I’m Mr Amateur in all this. Again, thanks for reading, dude!

Hey don’t misconstrue the comment crazy. Don’t be that guy who personalized the NYT article…my blanket opinion is only Driven by my goal to freely get my thoughts out of my head. Your blog is up for critical analysis, seeing as how it is public domain. I would never insinuate that you are functionally impaired in any manner, for this is not my place. My examples are simple and again only pertain to my internal dialogue and limited persona expertise. I only noted an observation and provided examples. I would however argue that musicians are not necessarily self actualizers by nature, but more self induldged with what they see as in thier interpersonal interests. I would pose that musicians like you are a rarity in that they are induldging in such profound introspection. Plus many are not as savy in the literary term. My impressions of many musicians is that they are self induldged to the point of exclusion, which is both constructive and destructive. I have a lot of respect for you and musicians like you, but I also recognize and encourage continuEd growth both intellectually and physically in the interest of the pursuit of self actualization and idealistic perfectionism.
David

Interesting that you see musicians as self indulgent. Does this include classical musicians? I was thinking of people who spend their lives honing and continually improving their skills. Maybe I misunderstand self actualization…. I think of it as people who seek meaning in life and are willing to do what it takes to get there and are largely motivated on their own. Is that not it?

Sorry my stupid iphone crashed and I am restoring it as I write this post. my understanding of self actualization or the pursuit there of is solely based on the Maslow’s HON. it is the state of mind that people rarely achieve, but if they do it can be a very fulfilling experience and drives the actualizer to produce in a higher state of mind…..so to speak. my experience with people has lead me to believe that most people do not reach this state of mind, but rather draw from “epiphanies” that come to them for some reason or another. This includes musicians of any sorts. Your statement about people who seek meaning in life sounds like a more philosophical inquiry to me, for meaning in life to you may be different to meaning in life for me. I don’t know. I’m just a regular dude in California trying to survive much less trying to achieve a higher state of being.

David

Self actualization seems to me to be a more mundane and common thing than a state of mind that people rarely achieve. See my blog post today. I think you and I are both classic examples of self-actualizers, that is we have our basic needs met and seek to fulfill our potential. Where does the “higher state of being” idea come from? That actually sounds more religious to me, like nirvana or enlightenment.

The problem with understanding the concepts by people like Maslow is that their theories are always subject to interpretation. My understanding of Maslow is that he was concerned more with people’s potential, which he based his research on (specifically those who are not necessarily psychologically unbalanced, but rather balanced in a higher sense of being). Most of the traits or concepts within the “self actualization” category are hardly achievable for most people, but that does not mean that humans innately do not have the potential. Example: “without prejudice” – this is a very hard concept to achieve as we as people have our prejudices both consciously and unconsciously. If one truly wants to be “without-prejudice”, one would need to tap into the unconscious part of our brains to address and correct or process this (that is if you believe in all that kooky Freudian/Jungian stuff, again open to interpretation). So following this logic, people rarely are able to achieve this sense of being “self-actualized” mostly do the preoccupation with the lower levels or needs. This is my understanding of Maslow and I base this not only on readings, but discussion with psychologists and academics for Maslow’s theories span across psychology, business, etc.. and is similar to other theories within psychology. I would argue that this is not “common sense”, but rather a philosophically interpretive point of view as many people (common) have most likely not heard or could care less about Maslow’s HON. Also, I would not be so quick to dismiss the value of the theory’s underpinnings. There is a lot we can continue to learn from theories such as this, regardless of the conventional wisdom that states otherwise. Your engineer friend may tend to want to be self-actualizing or strives for that ideal state of what he conceives as self-actualization, but just from what you describe it is obvious to me that he is not without-prejudice (attending religious gathering/promoting the idea that engineers are more “self-actualizers”, etc). Of course this is open to yours as well as mine interpretations of how you worded the story….. (is that killer circular stuff or what?)
I actually get a lot of pop psychology stuff thrown at me when people hear the word “psychology” and associate it with me. I try to remind those I discuss this stuff with that psychology continues to strive to be recognized as a legitimate field of study even though it is soooooooo open to interpretation. When we get a sound theory that can be tested and disproved, it is one step closer to legitimizing psychology in the mainstream. Of course this is another reason why I am sooooo done with it. As I try and tackle another illegitimate field (public administration), I will keep in mind those lessons learned, which may be more than you are interested in right now. I digress…..

in terms of the other comments and views on your blog today….im not even gonna go there….
David

I also started reading “Biography of London” by Ackroyd but did not finish it-if I see any books by Ackroyd at used book sales I buy them-a wonderful writer-peace

Looks like u retracted ur comment?