hopelesshappiness.com

I don't care who you are, your comfort is only temporary; then you're gone. Did you make the world a better place? According to who? According to your grieving spouse? Your children? Your neighbor? According to history not yet written? According to your God? Or is your God only interested in your comfort? And what about your neighbor's God? What if his God is the one true God and your God is a sham? Belief, Faith, even confidence requires uncertainty. Right?

And comfort, satisfaction, even happiness requires ignorance.

Uncertainty and ignorance, in both the individual and the species, are necessary for functional progress and survival. Uncertainty propels and ignorance paves the way. Too much uncertainty, the going is rocky and slow. Too much ignorance, we build walls and a roof spreading up and back and we do not pave roads forward; into the unknown. And to stay here or back there when all around us is moving forward is to be left behind; to die.

We must adapt.

Battling the impact of an advanced species, depleted of some resources, the planet changes; working to survive. If we don't adapt along with the planet, we are left behind.

Humanity also changes; working to survive. The doctrine, the policies, the principles, the way for 8 billion people today must evolve and advance from the way for 3 billion people a mere older generation ago. If we don't adapt along with the species, we are left behind.

As individuals, as families, as communities, as nations, we must adapt.

A thought, a word, an action in this moment, is already outdated. I must rethink, rephrase, redo; now; and again…

I understand, there are some, perhaps many, maybe most in whom a little uncertainty creates a disproportionate amount of discomfort. And I believe this more extreme spike is the cause of more extreme reaction in thought, word and deed; a desperate grasping for a misremembered comfort that is no longer possible as illusion or reality; a reaction that encourages building walls and a roof spreading up and back, and discourages paving roads forward into the unknown.

For the sake of the species, we must find a way to bring comfort to this reactive constituency, and then we must find leadership in whom uncertainty and ignorance are proportionally efficient and productive. We must find leadership to bring comfort, then pave the way. In this moment, in this country, our leadership is extreme and desperate. In a few weeks we may have an infusion of some proportional productivity, but because there will remain considerable reactive divisiveness, comfort will be sporadic and the road will remain rocky; and the possibility for long term survival will continue to teeter.

I believe our elected leadership should be responsible for comfort and underlying layers of experts, advisers and thinkers should be responsible for planning the way forward and guiding the elected leadership toward efficient and productive decisions and policy. I believe expertise, vision, humility, eloquence and persuasiveness is a combination of characteristics rarely found in a single individual. I believe eloquence and/or persuasiveness will continue to be the yardstick for politicians, which in turn (I believe) dictates a degree of exaggerated ego; and this pretentious politician should not be allowed to operate heavy equipment. I believe we must discount persuasiveness in favor of (even some small amount of) vision and humility. I believe this combination is the politician more likely to bring comfort and allow more qualified others to operate the machinery that will pave roads forward; into the unknown.

I don't care who you are, your comfort is only temporary; then you're gone. Did you make the world a better place? According to who? According to your grieving spouse? Your children? Your neighbor? According to history not yet written? According to your God? Or is your God only interested in your comfort? And what about your neighbor's God? What if his God is the one true God and your God is a sham? Belief, Faith, even confidence requires uncertainty. Right?

And comfort, satisfaction, even happiness requires ignorance.

Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Wyoming. If this were Jeopardy, (which in a sense, it is), the question might be, what are thirteen states with high rates of incarceration? Or Death Penalty States? Or states with high rates of gun ownership? Or firearm deaths? Or executions? If you guess any of these, you are only partially correct. First, of the thirteen states listed above, all but Alaska have the death penalty, and of the twenty-eight states that do have the death penalty, eleven of the remaining twelve on this list have executed prisoners in the last six years; and ten of the remaining twelve are in the top 25 states for number of executions since 1976, with five of those ten placing in the top 10. It is a concerning parallel to the (unrevealed) topic at hand. Furthermore, with about 4% of the world’s population, the United States houses about 25% of the world’s prisoners and owns about 46% of the civilian held firearms, and (shockingly) is responsible for approximately 90% of worldwide child and teen firearm deaths. Looking deeper, of the thirteen states listed above, ten rank in the top fourteen of all fifty states in per capita imprisonment rate, ten rank in the top twenty of all fifty states in per capita gun ownership, and eleven rank in the top nineteen of all fifty states in per capita (2008-2017) firearm deaths. So, in a roundabout way, I am talking about all of these things including and most especially a death penalty. The list above shows the thirteen states that do not (as of this week) have a mask mandate. Correlations abound.

In addition to the thirteen states above, Kansas has a statewide mask mandate, but a state law was passed by the esteemed lawmakers in that great state in June that stripped the governor of some emergency powers and allowed counties to opt out of the mask mandate; 80 out of 105 counties have done so. So that makes 14 of 50 states thumbing their nose at science and reason. And furthering the death penalty parallel above, 11 of these 14 states are in the top 25 in per capita coronavirus cases, with the other 3 coming in at #26, #28 and #29. And what about Texas? It appears to be an exception because they do have a mask mandate, yet they lead the nation in total number of death penalty executions since 1976, and total number of death penalty executions since 2014; and they are #6 in state rankings for per capita incarceration and they have more civilian held firearms and more firearm deaths than any state in the nation. Regardless of appearances, this disregard for Life is borne out in that they also lead the nation in total number of coronavirus cases, and they are second in total number of deaths attributed to Covid. Additionally, some may feel that Texas statistics should be considered in light of the fact that it is the second most populous state, but when compared to the most populous state, Texas has nearly half again as many per capita Covid cases, more than half again as many per capita Covid deaths, and (perhaps most telling) Texas has administered less than half the total number of Covid tests as has California.

I could go on…

…but I would like to focus on the numbers; specifically, the 14 of 50 states thumbing their nose at science and reason. I believe this range, (somewhere between one-quarter and one third), is an accurate approximation of how we are divided: approximately one-fourth unreasonable and incapable of reason; approximately one-fourth unreasonable but capable of reason; approximately one-fourth reasonable but incapable of reason; and approximately one-fourth reasonable and capable of reason. (Or I believe it could be as much as two-thirds unreasonable and only one-third reasonable). I am not looking at this in a strict political light. In fact, I believe that a very large majority of politicians would fall into one of the two unreasonable factions, because when I look at their results, I am hard pressed to make a case for a reasonable politician or a reasonable government. (Adding supportive depth to all this ratio conjecture, I can also note that 89.4% of all executions since 1976 have been carried out in 26% of the states).

I would like to think that reasonable is growing and unreasonable shrinking. Even if we are only moving individuals into the deferential or even apathetic reasonable-but-incapable-of-reason camp, this at least helps to de-politicize what is today a powder keg of vitriolic misinformation and divisive manipulation. Perhaps lifelong learning is not for everyone. Based on the four divisions above, I might surmise that only one-fourth are making any kind of actual, consistent effort toward lifelong learning. I believe that those (including many politicians) in the unreasonable-but-capable-of-reason crew believe they are lifelong learners, but because "one's ability to reason begins with one's ability to differentiate between a fact and a premise” those who argue a premise as a fact may show they are capable of reason but also show they are unreasonable in that they believe a premise as a fact. Any premise with which there is widespread disagreement, must be afforded the respect that comes from acknowledging the fact that it is a premise. And even a premise that is agreed upon by a majority, must be acknowledged as merely a strongly held conviction or belief. To believe requires a leap; a leap entails some risk (with no safety net), so to work to justify that leap as a stroll through the park is unreasonable; and I do not believe it is possible for one who is consistently unreasonable to be practicing lifelong learning. For lifelong learning, some uncertainty is required.

I believe the root of unreasonable is fear and/or discontent. And I believe this root of fear and discontent has spread for many reasons, flowering into a more and more active unreason. To varying degrees, fertilizers have been consistently spread on these roots to help them bloom since the founding of our nation. Today and in recent decades, some of the more heavily and frequently used growth stimulants include an increasing wealth gap, the color of law, homelessness, food insecurity, discriminatory policing, and lack of equitable or consistent health care. So perhaps the way to move more individuals into a reasonable bloc is to resolve some of these issues that are creating the fear and discontent. Yet we continue to give power to the wealthy and powerful who prefer the status quo and (more than anything) fear the loss of their wealth and power. We continue to listen to the unreasonable politicians who make unachievable promises, blame others who don’t believe as they do, claim they as we, claim expertise, and defame actual experts.

It appears we may have taken a baby step with the (yet-to-be-accomplished) ouster of our current prevaricator-in-chief. But we cannot lose sight of the fact that our incoming administration has spent a lifetime as part of the political old guard, and (I believe) still sets firmly on the side of unreason. There has simply been too much contentious separation in our political system to believe anyone can flip a switch from unreasonable to reasonable. We will continue to see significant, disruptive contempt between the two parties, that will play out between the House and the Senate and the Administration and the now-politicized Courts. And those in power, remain wealthy and powerful. They have us right where they want us.

So, if our only choices for leaders are the unreasonable, perhaps by giving power to those in the unreasonable-but-capable-of-reason clique we will be choosing policymakers who might figure out that by resolving some of the issues creating discontent, they are more likely to lull the masses and maintain power. That is, after all, what they want: to stay wealthy and to maintain power. And until we are able to fully plumb the depths of the reasonable-and-capable-of-reason network to find efficiency in progress, I am afraid it will continue to be baby steps. I am actively hopeful though that since 2016 and into the next administration, we will at least continue to learn that creating discontent does not resolve discontent. And I am actively hopeful that as a discontented constituency, we will continue to pressure our current cabal of unreasonable-but-capable-of-reason leaders to narrow and ultimately close gaps that for far too long have perpetuated an unreasonable disregard for Life.

And I am actively hopeful that it does not become too late.

One moment I think, “I am broken.” The next moment I ask, “am I broken?” “Or is reality broken?” Which leads me to ask, “is my reality broken?” “Or is our reality broken?” And then, “shouldn't they be the same?” If reality is something that exists independent of consideration, this implies there can be no interpretation; something either is or it isn't. Guided by facts, my reality should not differ from our reality. But, interpretation (of a fact as premise or a premise as fact) produces disagreement, and disagreement leads to multiple realities, which by definition is simply not possible. Yet in a contortionistic perversion of reason, multiple realities is our reality; and I suppose it has been for our entire history.

So perhaps it should not be a question of who or what is broken, nor even a question of reality or fact, but rather a question of one's ability to reason. If to reason is “to form conclusions, judgements or inferences from facts or premises” then it feels to me like one's ability to reason begins with one's ability to differentiate between a fact and a premise. To argue a fact as a premise is reasonable and may lead to some productive truth. But to argue a premise as a fact is dangerous in that (if done reasonably) it may lead to an ignorance and denial of actual fact. A fact is provable. To be reasonable, a fact that is provable but not easily provable, must be argued as a premise. A premise, by virtue of an assumption or a leap, is not provable. If we disagree on what is fact, we should argue everything as premise. This requires an objective patience, a patient empathy, and empathic respect.

An unreasonable individual will dispute facts not consistent with their agenda and put forth personally beneficial premise as indisputable fact, and in so doing may argue reasonably and appear reasonable. A reasonable individual then must argue everything as premise and risk that their objective, patient, empathic, respectful voice will be lost in the noise and distraction of indisputable disputation. The reasonable individual can continue in this vein, or the reasonable individual can more loudly dispute premise held as fact thus appearing to the unreasonable individual (and to many reasonable individuals) to be unreasonable.

And this is where we are at. But again, isn’t this where we have always been? Unreasonable individuals in power? Unheard individuals on the sidelines, arguing reasonably? And purportedly reasonable individuals on the playing field appearing unreasonable.

So perhaps my very first statement above is the most correct. I am broken. Broken by the unreasonable power of individuals. And broken by the insentient machinations of bureaucracy. And broken by unreasonable reason. And (perhaps worst of all) broken by my own (objective, patient, empathic, respectful) inclination to reason.

I believe we are changing, evolving, progressing, but I am afraid we are not doing so as quickly as what may be necessary for our survival. To move past 1) unreasonable power and 2) insentient machinations and 3) unreasonable reason requires first, (on the part of all three) an ability to differentiate fact from premise, thus finding agreement; a common ground. Yet unreasonable power likes the status quo. And insentient machinations are, well, insentient; heedless, uncaring, unfeeling, and in the service of unreasonable power. And unreasonable reason, though willing and capable, resist objective, patient, empathic, respectful reason that may remove it from the playing field.

And this is where we are at.

A couple of years ago, I believed it might take some sort of national or worldwide emergency, crisis or catastrophe to shake us up enough to move us away from divisive arguments of premise as fact and toward some agreement differentiating fact from premise. I was wrong. Nearly one year into a worldwide pandemic and we are still incapable of even beginning the process of necessary, interdependent reason. We are still incapable, as a community, as a culture, as a nation, as a species, of productively and efficiently moving forward. We are still incapable, as individuals, of acknowledging our mortality; the inevitability of my individual mortality and/or the possibility of our mortality as a species. This acknowledgement sorta kinda feels important.

Evidence of our mortality is all around us. Today could be my last day. Tomorrow, (a foreseeable tomorrow), could be our last day. These are facts. Facts that cannot be changed by denial and ignorance. Facts that one day, (How About Today?!!), we will no longer be able to ignore. Facts that are leading us and will follow us to our graves.

To argue requires a fact or premise. To argue reasonably requires some agreement on what is fact and what is premise. To argue productively requires reason. To reason requires an objective patience, a patient empathy, and empathic respect. Objectivity, patience, empathy and respect are difficult in the face of denial and ignorance. How about we begin by agreeing that on this planet, individual and species mortality is a fact. From there, those who do not believe the survival of Humanity into future generations is of consequence, should opt out. Because we, as a species, are on this planet, occupying this plane of existence, and because future generations are already here, perhaps our focus, our consideration, our concern, our efforts, should also be here. And perhaps from there we can argue productively?

Or we can continue to misinterpret fact and premise, continue to argue premise as fact, and continue toward an early grave, because reason is on the sidelines playing with itself.

Mortality is the First Fact!

Our president has always struggled some with spelling, but this week it is worse; his translation skills have been turned inside out. Here we are in the middle of a pandemic, an issue that should be first in our thoughts and efforts, a circumstance currently worsening by the hour, with a government full of non-responders, and predictably and consistently Trump has taken this crisis, misinterpreted it, and put it in the back seat – no, he has booted it out of the car – to make room for his full-blown dem panic. Not only is our president panicked by the inevitability of a democrat in the White House, on a deeper level, (for him, likely subconscious), he is panicked by the possibility of an actual democracy working for justice and progress. I could point out the continued complexities our new administration will face in the form of a hostile, politicized justice system (the Supreme Court, federal courts and many state courts), and the ongoing unavoidable divisiveness in our legislative branch, thus making our election efforts likely and barely only a baby step toward any real justice or progress; but even if he could understand this, he is too busy crying to actually allow it to soothe his hurt feelings. Regardless, think of the progress we might see if we could take this effort being wasted on this presidential dem panic and expend it instead on the pandemic.

As a buyer I define myself. As a consumer I undermine myself. As a seller I refine myself. To buy is also to dream. To consume is also to waste. To sell is also to polish, purify, purge; a sleight of hand, some misdirection to distract the potential buyer, (i.e. future consumer), from the sludge that inevitably follows consumption.

Nutrition is an important part of consumption. The less nutrition, the more sludge. To efficiently sustain, strengthen and grow one’s body, one’s heart, one’s mind, one’s soul or spirit, requires more nourishment, less sludge. Today, in this country, I am being force fed at a trough filled with future sludge. It may look tasty, it may smell tasty, it may taste tasty, but in the end it results in very little nourishment and the excretion of a great deal of sludge.

Even when I have a choice, I find it difficult to stop feeding.

On my morning walks I write about nourishment and necessary nutrients, and on the weekends I visit grocers and book sellers to define myself and I think and I study on how to make the world a better place, and in these times I work at my dream and I believe in my dream. But each day I still turn to news feeds and angry pundits and divisive rhetoric and Netflix, and each day I am force fed injustice and bureaucracy, and I slop it all up. Then when given the opportunity, I talk to others about the food I am cooking and the books I am reading and the big picture and saving the world, and I pretend I am above the fray. Buyer. Consumer. Seller.

I buy rice and fish. I consume beer and potato chips. I sell glitter and pretense.

As a consumer, whether for my body, my heart, my mind, my soul, there will always be waste. When I feed on rice and fish, I will enhance health and well-being and I will produce less sludge. When I feed on beer and potato chips, I will create a potential to be undernourished and unhealthy and I will produce copious amounts of sludge. When I feed on glitter and pretense, I excrete ragged, sharp, shiny sludge.

So why do I buy glitter and pretense? Why do I sell glitter and pretense? Am I better off with beer and potato chips? Why is it so difficult to maintain a steady diet of rice and fish? Is it because those in power force feed me glitter and pretense and encourage the sluggish under-nourishment of beer and potato chips? Is it because I am human? Weak and frail? Is it because my personal identity has been consumed by my social identity? And perhaps my social identity has been commandeered by an even larger, more powerful political identity?

I can't help but to dream and hope and believe and buy and sell. At times my consumption is more efficient, consistent with my dream. But because to consume is also to waste and because (for whatever reasons) I buy and enjoy beer and potato chips and glitter and pretense, I am also inefficient and disappointed. Some days I consider giving up rice and fish and glitter and pretense to simply wallow in the glory of beer and potato chips believing it would be more honest and more consistent with results. But (for whatever reasons) I can't help but to dream and hope and believe and buy and sell.

As a buyer I define myself. As a consumer I undermine myself. As a seller I refine myself.