Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Amen to that, brother…

Tuesday, October 6th, 2009

Source: “Notes on Prejudice,” by Isaiah Berlin. The New York Review, October 18, 2001. ©The Isiah Berlin Literary Trust 2001.

Few things have done more harm than the belief on the part of individuals or groups (or tribes or states or nations or churches) that he or she or they are in sole possession of the truth: especially about how to live, what to be & do-and those who differ from them are not merely mistaken but wicked or mad & need restraining or suppressing. It is a terrible and dangerous arrogance to believe that you alone are right, have a magical eye which sees the truth and that others cannot be right if they disagree.

This makes one certain that there is one goal & one only for one’s nation or church or the whole of humanity, & that it is worth any amount of suffering (particularly on the part of other people) if only the goal is attained … the belief that there is one & only one true answer to the central questions which have agonized mankind & that one has it oneself-or one’s leader has it-was responsible for the oceans of blood, but no Kingdom of Love sprang from it-or could. There are many ways of living, believing, behaving; mere knowledge provided by history, anthropology, literature, art, law makes clear that the differences of cultures & characters are as deep as the similarities (which make men human) & that we are none the poorer for this rich variety; knowledge of it opens the windows of the mind (and soul) and makes people wiser, nicer, & more civilized; absence of it breeds irrational prejudice, hatreds, ghastly extermination of heretics and those who are different; if the two great wars plus Hitler’s genocides haven’t taught us that, we are incurable. …

Compromising with people with whom you don’t sympathize or altogether understand is indispensable to any decent society; nothing is more destructive than a happy sense of one’s own-or one’s nation’s-infallibility, which lets you destroy others with a quiet conscience because you are doing God’s (e.g. the Spanish Inquisition or the Ayatollas) or the superior race’s (e.g. Hitler) or History’s (e.g. Lenin-Stalin) work. …

Another source of avoidable conflict is stereotypes. Tribes hate neighboring tribes by whom they feel threatened & then rationalize their fears by representing them as wicked or informer, or absurd or despicable in some way….

All these stereotypes are substitutes for real knowledge-which is never of anything so simple or permanent as a particular generalized image of foreigners-and are stimuli to national self satisfaction & disdain of other nations. …

Nationalism … is the strongest & most dangerous force at large today. It is usually the product of a wound inflicted by one nation on the pride or territory of another. …

Conquest, enslavement of peoples, imperialism etc. are not fed just by greed or desire for glory, but have to justify themselves to themselves by some central idea: … the white man’s burden; communism; and the stereotypes of others as inferior or wicked. Only knowledge, carefully acquired & not by short cuts, can dispel this, even that won’t dispel human aggressiveness or dislike for the dissimilar (in skin, culture, religion) by itself. Still, education in history, anthropology, law (especially if they are “comparative” & not just of one’s own country as they usually are) helps.

Looking for a little help from my friends

Tuesday, May 12th, 2009

(If you don’t see a Paypal donate button, please click here.)

I have a request.

We recently received an email from an acquaintance of ours. Essentially, it was a goodbye letter. The acquaintance is a widow who lives with a small dog (named Squeaky) in a small apartment here in the Dallas area. Nothing extravagant or fancy. Her job was a support role to Realtors and individually selling homes. Until a couple of months ago, there was still enough business to pay the bills, but that has gone away.

She has taken the only job available thus far working at a gas station. The job pays just over minimum wage, offers maybe 30 hours per week, and does not provide benefits. It isn’t nearly enough to cover the bare essentials of food, shelter and transportation, much less what she owes and was unable to pay when there was no income at all. In addition, she is pursuing any assistance she can get from the state and private charities, but as you may know these organizations are facing steep challenges as donation have dried up even as the number of people needing assistance has swelled.

When we visited her this past Sunday to drop off some groceries, she was trying to box up anything she valued most, preparing for the possibility of living out of her car because she knew that the current job would not even be able to cover rent. We looked at the situation with her from a number of different angles, and there are no easy answers, no quick fixes.

In order to help her avoid becoming homeless (quite literally), we made a commitment to assist with food, rent, and other bare essentials for the next two months, and to do what we can to help find a job that will sustain her. Still, I expect the shortfall to be $500/month. If by that time she has not been able to make sustainable job arrangements, we’ll need to really get creative on the housing situation, though I don’t currently know what form that might take. I hope to not find out.

So, I’m coming to each of you for assistance to help keep one person from becoming homeless and losing the ability to pull themselves back up onto their feet. It would be painful, but not impossible, for me to do it alone – and I’m prepared to do so if necessary. Working together, though, we can distribute the load. I’ve included a button to the right where you can make Paypal donations. If 100 of us can put in only $10 over the next two months, we can see this through.

Questions I would have:

  • Why should I help this person and not someone else? I can’t answer that for you. This is the situation presented to me, and I’m presenting it to you. We have a choice to make here and now. I know what my choice is, and I hope you join me.
  • How will I know what effect my donation has? I’ll try to provide updates on this page, Facebook, etc. I’m throwing this together pretty quickly and haven’t done it before, so it may not be smooth. And there is no guarantee of success.
  • How do I know my donation is going to things that really matter? We are not just handing over cash. Whenever possible, we will pay the payee directly.
  • How do I know this is a real person? At this point, I guess you don’t. Call it an act of faith. If you know me even a little bit, you probably know that I don’t make things up and pass them off as the truth. You may learn who she is as we help try to find a job for her, but for the most part we want to respect her privacy as much as possible. For a self-sufficient person to be in this situation is already a pretty severe shock to self-esteem.
  • What if you end up with more than you need? If this happens (wouldn’t that be a great problem!), the remaining proceeds will be donated to a local food pantry, or other charity trying to assist people in need with basic necessities. I’m playing this by ear, so I don’t have one singled out.
  • What’s to keep you from running off with the cash? Well, nothing, I suppose. Except that my parents, sisters, friends, extended family, etc. are all getting a link to this request, too. And while I do have my share of vices and foibles, coveting money just isn’t one of them. If it isn’t mine, I’m fine with that.
  • Is this tax deductible? No, unless you plan to cheat on your taxes and claim it as such. Which I don’t recommend. Unless you plan to drop a large chunk of change, it would be negligible anyway.

Political “debate”

Thursday, February 12th, 2009

Blame the media. Blame the politicians. Blame whatever you want, but the state of political debate and thought in the mass media seems to be more diatribe than debate. Each side blindly trumpets its own headlines, accusing all nay-sayers of being liberal or conservative (depending on which one they think is a bad word).  Here are some examples:

The pro-choice advocates talk about a woman’s right to control her own body and reproduction. The pro-life advocates talk about the right of the developing human to live, no matter how unfortunate the timing of their existence. Which one is right?  Both. 

Regarding illegal aliens/undocumented workers, one camp says that we are a nation of laws and should punish those who break them, and deport them if they didn’t get here legally.  The other says that these workers are economic refugees with no realistic way to get here legally and are only doing what a reasonable person in their situation would do.  Which one is right?  Both.

So what do we do?  We fight and argue and kill and harass until one extreme point or the other “wins” (I use that term VERY loosely). We cover the middle ground with ignorance, arrogance, shame, blame, and blood.  We pretend that if we can shout louder and longer and make the other person be quiet, then somehow the problem will be solved and the utopia in our mind will come to pass so that everybody agrees with us and we are always right.

I’m reminded of the Monty Python argument sketch.  A man pays for an argument which descends into a “Yes it is!”/”No it isn’t!” exchange over whether or not the exchange they are having constitutes the argument that the man paid to have.

So what’s the answer? There are some simple formulas, but I’ll warn you: They aren’t always as fun because they actually require some effort and they don’t involve having a good, old-fashioned temper tantrum or shouting match.  They also require that you enter the discussion with the knowledge that you might be wrong.  This is a new concept for some people, and can be difficult if you are not able to set down your pride and realize that reality doesn’t revolve around your desires.  (And I’m not being sarcastic – this really IS hard for a lot of people!).

Once you unhinge self-esteem from a dependence on dominating other people, you can begin to listen.  When another person says something that is at odds with your experience, beliefs, or values, start asking questions.  Discover the source of your own values and beliefs (you might change them as you discover false assumptions), and offer the same for the other person.  As you explore and ask questions, you learn.  Maybe something is complicated.  Maybe it involves technical aspects that are beyond your grasp.  Do the best you can with what you have, and peg the strength of your conclusion to the strength of your understanding.  And if you don’t have the time and resources to investigate an issue well enough to obtain certainty, then don’t present your opinions with certainty.  Expand your vocabulary to include phrases like, “I suspect” or “As best I can tell”.  And if the other person is unwilling or unable to comprehend or agree with your opinion, then guess what?  It’s out of your control.  Beyond the scope of your power.  Not yours.  At best, you could coerce their external behavior into a mockery of agreement, and perhaps as they pretend you are right more and more frequently, they might even appear to believe it, but at devastating cost to their own mind, and ultimately the internal conflict is just buried beneath the surface and finds its way out in all kinds of dysfunctional and destructive behaviors.  But now matter how violent the oppression of another mind, no matter how much damage you inflict, it will never be more than a complicit fantasy of justification fabricated in your own mind for your own, self-serving pleasure.

Bottom line: Until you can get your head around the perspective of the other person and understand from what angle their words and actions “make sense”, you do not possess enough data and are therefore not qualified to determine that they are stupid, lazy, sinful, crazy, cowardly, wrong, or any other adjective you may find more convenient than actually discovering the truth.  Sure, this may involve accepting the risk that your initial opinions were incorrect, and require that you make some changes to your own thinking.  Maybe it is time to grow up.

Ultimately, the question is whether you prefer to actually be correct, or just pretend that you are and hope everybody else is willing to do the same.

Observations vs. Evaluations

Thursday, September 4th, 2008

This is part of a series of posts on what I am learning about Non-Violent Communication (NVC). You can find an introduction to NVC in a previous post.

The first step in the NVC process is to Observe. When I saw this, I thought, “Great! As a software engineer, I’m already a trained observer! No problem.” As usual, there is more to it than first impressions.

In his book, Marshall introduced me to the concept of observation without evaluation. In other words, “Just the facts, ma’am.” Here are some examples of observations that have evaluations mixed in:

  • I didn’t get enough. (“enough” is an evaluation of how much you got, rather than an observation of what you got.)
  • She just blew up at me! (This is my interpretation of what she did, not an actual observation of what she did. It also implies that her action, or reaction, was not justified, which is also an evaluation on my part.)
  • He won’t stay focussed on his work. (Here I’m implying that I know his intentions and choices, which I don’t based on the information given here.)
  • They are constantly complaining. (There are actually two issues here. My use of “constantly” is probably an exaggeration. I need to be more specific if possible. Also, my claim that they are complaining is an evaluation. I need to step back and report what actions they are taking that I interpret as complaining.)
  • He got mad and started yelling. (I’ve observed that he started yelling, although truthfully this is just my interpretation of his tone and body language. Rather, he raised his voice and maybe started waving his arms around. Saying that he got mad is just my interpretation.)

Now, you may be thinking, “Well, what if it was obvious that he was angry, or that i didn’t get enough??” Some of these statements may be factually correct if all the factors could be known, but I’m surprised at how often we are wrong. It took a long time for my wife and I to understand that there was a range of things she might observe in me that would lead her to conclude that I was angry. Often, I wasn’t. It just looked that way to her. Think about the last time that you were misunderstood, either your intentions or your actions. Those are cases where another person made an observation, mixed in their evaluation, and they were wrong.

We all tend to look at what other people do at least partially from our own perspective, given what we have experienced, what we believe, and what we value. Learning to observe without evaluation is a valuable step in the process of understanding another person from THEIR perspective rather than from our own.

Another reason to separate observation from evaluation is that all the things that go into our evaluation are more effectively addressed by the rest of the NVC process. We aren’t simply ignoring them, but we do find another way to express them that is more likely to result in the kind of change that we want.

Introducing Non-Violent Communication

Thursday, September 4th, 2008

Something I’ve been studying recently is a communication technique called Non-Violent Communication (NVC), pioneered by a man named Marshall B. Rosenberg. I’ve also heard it referred to as Compassionate Communication, though. It is a way of communicating what you want or need from other people in a way that is not coercive or manipulative (considered “violent”), but is instead inviting and accepting of others (considered “compassionate”).

My understanding is that NVC is built around the premise that humans, by nature, want to interact with one another in ways that enhance one another’s life experience. It presumes that all of the selfish, dysfunctional ways that we treat one another are learned behavior patterns. Now, whether you agree with this premise, or believe as I do that humans are naturally selfish and must learn to be compassionate, the principles and techniques of NVC are equally valid. Either way, the goal is to learn a communication style that enhances life and helps us meet one another’s wants and needs. This could be with co-workers, family members, or even people who are hostile to you. By developing the skills within yourself, you are better able to communicate positively with others even when they have no exposure to NVC.

The basic process involves four steps:

  1. Observe the facts
  2. Identify the feelings
  3. Identify the needs
  4. Make specific requests

Of course, each individual step has it’s own landscape once you start to look at it in detail. As I go through the process of looking at each one, I’ll add my thoughts, feelings and insights here. The book that I’m currently reading on the topic is called “Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life” by Marshall B. Rosenberg.

Dog Diary vs. Cat Diary – Author Unknown

Friday, March 14th, 2008

DOG DIARY

8:00 am – Dog food! My favorite thing!
9:30 am – A car ride! My favorite thing!
9:40 am – A walk in the park! My favorite thing!
10:30 am – Got rubbed and petted! My favorite thing!
12:00 pm – Lunch! My favorite thing!
1:00 pm – Played in the yard! My favorite thing!
3:00 pm – Wagged my tail! My favorite thing!
5:00 pm – Milk bones! My favorite thing!
7:00 pm – Got to play ball! My favorite thing!
8:00 pm – Wow! Watched TV with the people! My favorite thing!
11:00 pm – Sleeping on the bed! My favorite thing!

CAT DIARY

Day 983 of my captivity. My captors continue to taunt me with bizarre little dangling objects. They dine lavishly on fresh meat, while the other inmates and I are fed hash or some sort of dry nuggets.

Although I make my contempt for the rations perfectly clear, I nevertheless must eat something in order to keep up my strength. The only thing that keeps me going is my dream of escape. In an attempt to disgust them, I once again vomit on the carpet. Today I decapitated a mouse and dropped its headless body at their feet. I had hoped this would strike fear into their hearts, since it clearly demonstrates what I am capable of. However, they merely made condescending comments about what a ‘good little hunter’ I am. Bastards!

There was some sort of assembly of their accomplices tonight. I was placed in solitary confinement for the duration of the event. However, I could hear the noises and smell the food. I overheard that my confinement was due to the power of ‘allergies.’ I must learn what this means, and how to use it to my advantage.

This morning I was almost successful in an attempt to assassinate one of my tormentors by weaving around his feet as he was walking. I must try this again tomorrow– but at the top of the stairs.

I am convinced that the other prisoners here are flunkies and snitches. The dog receives special privileges. He is regularly released – and seems to be more than willing to return. He is obviously retarded. The bird has got to be an informant. I observe him communicate with the guards regularly. I am certain that he reports my every move. My captors have arranged protective custody for him in an elevated cell, so he is safe. For now…

Office 2.0 database

Friday, April 6th, 2007

I ran across a really cool site today: http://o20db.com/.

It’s basically a site that aggregates all kinds of web-based productivity applications.  An excellent resource for finding new online tools that can actually help you accomplish things.  (Amazing concept, no?)

I resolve…

Friday, April 6th, 2007

… to blog more often.  :-)

Humans can be so stupid…

Wednesday, October 18th, 2006

I had a disappointing experienced the other day. I suppose it shouldn’t surprise me since I generally surround myself with non-bigots, so my life tends to be a bit insulated, but still.

I was at the Texas state fair with my family, and my daughter and I were in line to get on one of the rides. A Hispanic gentleman and his wife/GF explained in somewhat broken English that their two sons were already in line, and they were asking if they could pass so that all four could ride together. I had no problem with that, so I motioned him on. I could see the two kids, hear them talking, etc. Clearly, they were together.

As soon as the couple passed out of earshot, the guy in front of me turns back and asked if I had actually seen the kids they were going to join. He said that the man was looking down at the ground and smiling like he was getting away with something. I assured him that I had seen the kids further in the line, and that I speak Spanish and understood the conversation. The guy proceeds to explain the rationale behind his skepticism by telling me, “First they jump across the border illegally, and then they want to jump to the front of the line.”

I said, “Uhhhhh. Wellll.” I know. Rather and eloquent response, eh? First, I couldn’t think where to begin. Then, I realized that there wasn’t really any point in beginning. What I wanted to ask was:

  • “If you were living in another country, and you knew that life for you and your family would be significantly better if you came here, even illegally. Wouldn’t you?”
  • “How do you know he’s not here legally?”
  • “Can you really correlate illegal border crossing with line jumping at state fairs?”

Is a little bit of thought too much to ask for?

Christmas Letters now online

Friday, June 16th, 2006

Every now and then I get family members asking if I still have holiday letters that I’ve written. I finally got around to digging them up and posting them (to the right). It was cool reading back through them and remembering how different things were even a few years ago.

Well, enjoy!