Pros and Cons Between Generations

I hear generations fight with each other about which had it easier.  And I think back and realize how I struggled finding a job after getting a college degree, and my dad didn't struggle with that quite as much. And I probably won't have as good of a retirement as he had either.  But ALSO he had a MUCH rougher childhood.  He didn't spend most of his time playing video games like I did.  Nor did he have anywhere near the level of toys I had.  He worked at his dad's gas station without pay.  And even when he had free time the entertainment he partook in wasn't near as sophisticated because video games weren't even invented back then.  My childhood was MUCH better than his even if his adulthood might have been a bit smoother economically than mine.  Also he studied engineering and I studied math, so that might have made a difference as well.

But of course, that's only the economic prosperity part of the equation.  Some people who have less still enjoy what they have more than those with a greater number of possessions.  And as much as I enjoyed my childhood, I actually enjoy my adulthood more.  It's not as economically prosperous, but life is about much more than how many toys you have to play with.  Sometimes it's about your mission, even if that mission is mostly unglamorous minor responsibilities that won't change the world or anything.  They're important to me and a few other people, and I think they're important to God as well.  God cares about small things, even if it doesn't always seem like he does.

Wasted Potential is Worse than Wasted Effort

Ecclesiastes chapter 11 says that whoever watches the wind will not plant.  

A man like this finds weather conditions for planting to be unideal every time he contemplates the endeavor.  So he never does it.  This is an example of a man saving effort by wasting potential.  

Compare this to the main that waits for tolerable conditions to plant instead of ideal conditions.  Or even one that plants in conditions that may be extremely far from unideal because he has no choice.  He may be wasting his effort, because the seeds may not grow.  But if they don't, he's ultimately not much worse off than the man that didn't plant at all, and may actually be substantially better off if luck is on his side.

The man that never planted at all only has one thing as the result of his effort-saving.  An excuse.  "Well, the weather wasn't good," he might say.  And he might be correct.  But that will be of little comfort if his neighbor DID plant in weather that wasn't good and actually got something as a result of it.  Are excuses really so comforting that they're worth wasting potential on?

I see this in young men online who get discouraged by the admittedly bad job market.  Entering the job market wasn't easy for me in my 20's either, and I remember the job search not being a fun experience.  I don't want to go through it again if I can avoid it.  I can sympathize.  But it never entered my mind at that time to totally give up on working for a living, because I knew that wouldn't end up going well.  I wanted to at least TRY to ultimately end up with more than just an excuse in my life if I could.  I'd rather fail making the continuous attempt and wasting the effort than not even make the attempt and waste the potential.  And in my case I did fail for a while, but not forever.  What at that time seemed like an eternity of wasteful effort is now in the long-distant past.  The effort ultimately paid off, and I believe more often than not, effort tends to do just that, if someone can just hold out and exercise consistency and patience.

So anyone in a tough position where effort doesn't feel like it's going anywhere, remember the trade off, and keep taking the chance.  Because wasted potential is even worse.

My Mom's Garfield Collection

My mom passed away many years ago, but she used to buy stuffed Garfields all the time as a hobby, and put little outfits on them that she got from other stuffed animals at places like Goodwill.  Later on my dad made some awesome display cases for them in reverence to all of her work.  I am unsure what I will do with them after my dad passes, but it would be nice to have the collection on display somewhere.  I don't want to just throw it out, but I have no room for it myself.

 

Anti-Villain Example In the Anti-Hero Age

One of my favorite YouTube channels now is citytutoringmath.  I like it because it's an interesting combination of mathematics and Biblical doctrine - two things I've always enjoyed and don't often see put together in one place.

Now many years ago, intellectual pursuit and Christian devotion were seen as positive things.  This was before the current age of the anti-hero who rejects tradition and many honorable things that go along with it.  I guess it makes sense that when destructive activity is heralded that constructive activity would be shunned.  That's how it was in the movie Danger Diabolik.  But the guy behind citytutoringmath does seem to fit a villainous persona as well, in that he speaks fairly aggressively and could care less about the feelings of his listeners and how sensitive they are to the less-pleasant aspects of his message.

So citytutoringmath gets my vote for one of the best anti-villains in the world today, and I kind of want to see more of his kind.

Problems With The Term "Woke" And A Potentially False Mathematical Implication

Possibly the biggest problem I have with the woke movement is the choice of the term it uses to represent itself.  It's not called "social justice woke" or "sexual orientation woke."  It's simply called "woke."  While this might simply be born out of convenience because one word is a much quicker and easier abbreviation for a concept than three words, I still think this possibly inadvertent simplification seems to imply a level of awareness that stretches far beyond its reach.  

While social injustice awareness is certainly not a bad thing, I believe it becomes a bad thing when you imply that's the ONLY skill anyone is required to possess in this world in order to be classified as fully aware and enlightened to the point that no other knowledge or skills are required.  Even if you can't count or read, and you've never expended any effort beyond sitting around and doing drugs all day, you're still fully aware of everything that matters simply because you recognize bigotry exists?  I would disagree, because I would argue that bigotry recognition is a NECESSARY but INSUFFICENT condition for cultural awareness and enlightenment.

The words necessary and sufficient form an important pair of terms in mathematics.  When a two related conditions in a statement fit both of these criteria, the statement carries a special kind of relationship between conditions known as a biconditional.  Biconditionality implies equivalence.  True in both directions.  Necessary implies truth in one direction and sufficient implies truth in the other direction.  What I claim regarding bigotry awareness and true enlightenment is that the two conditions are NOT connected by a biconditional.  Instead I claim these two things:

1) If one is fully enlightened, then indeed one automatically possesses an awareness of social justice problems

2) However, if one possesses an awareness of social justice problems, that person is still NOT automatically fully enlightened, because true enlightenment and awareness has other unrelated requirements as well

Notice with these two conditions, the flow is automatic in one direction but not the other.  It is a conditional statement but not a biconditional statement.  For two conditions to be equal, the biconditional must be satisfied, so that if either one of the conditions is satisfied, the other will automatically be satisfied as well.  That's not happening here.  So the two conditions are not equal.  Being truly enlightened is not equal to being aware of social justice issues.  Why?  Because being truly enlightened requires more than just that alone.  When one condition or set is strictly bigger than another, like true enlightenment encompassing more than just social justice awareness, they can't be completely equal.  Even if social justice awareness is the BIGGEST part of being truly enlightened, it's still not fitting all the requirements for full enlightenment and awareness.  

Now it might seem petty on my part to make a claim that the woke term implies far more than it does, and honestly it might be some kind of a stretch.  I believe the formal phrase for that type of petty stretch action now is called "seeking a microaggression."  Is that something that's permitted in two political directions or only one?

Misconceptions About Relativity

There's a big misconception about the theory of relativity in physics.  It does NOT imply that absolutes don't exist.  It just implies that space isn't an absolute and time isn't an absolute.  Also, very importantly, it implies that the speed of light measured by an inertial observer in a vacuum IS an absolute.  There are other absolutes also, but I don't know them all that well and don't feel like going into them here.  Ask AI if you want to know them.  The point is NOT EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE even in this theory.  There's at least one thing that isn't.

But some people don't want to look into things that deeply.  Instead they hastily develop a class of thought based on the faulty premise that because certain things we previously believed to be absolute turned out otherwise, then nothing is absolute.  This is false.

Whether morality has no absolutes is technically still up for debate I guess, but moral relativists can't really use the scientific theory of relativity to back their claim, because that theory DOES claim absolutes, even if it sounds like it doesn't.

Quote From A Tree Grows In Brooklyn

"It would be considered beautiful except that there are too many of it."

I believe this quote is in an isolated spot on one of the pages before the actual start of the novel, if I recall correctly.  I love this quote because it sums up reality pretty well.  There are so many amazing things out there that our brains can't process it all or even detect it all.  A lot of beautiful stuff gets no attention as a result.  Kind of a shame, but there's not really anything we can do about it.

The Elephant in the Room - At Least With Modern-Day Christianity

Fornication.  Very prevalent.  Hardly ever mentioned.  How much is homosexuality mentioned in the Bible?  Maybe about five times?  Adultery and fornication are mentioned more.  Much, much more.  Probably a reason for that disparity in emphasis somewhere.  

Let's face it.  Fornication prior to marriage, or even as a substitute for marriage, is something most of us in this day and age have been guilty of at some point - even myself for a short time.  It has become extremely tolerated in the western world, and as a result I believe the church has softened its approach with it.  Especially because it's a fairly easy sin to keep hidden, despite how prevalent it is.  

Too bad other things are easier for churches to attack because they are much less prevalent and aren't quite so easy to hide.  I don't know of too many churches that openly say fornication is okay, but they sure don't go out of their way to condemn it either when other stuff is available to condemn.  Is it because too many church members would be offended that a sin they're much more likely to be committing is being called out?  Is it easier to simply pick on sins that they have no possibility of engaging in?  If that's the case, I can't imagine God being pleased with that.

I doubt that God is okay with rampant and uncommitted sleeping around, regardless of one's orientation.  As far as I know he has never been okay with it, and has always favored lifetime commitment in intimate relationships.  

Charles Steinmetz - A Guy You Probably Don't Know

I found out about a guy named Charles Steinmetz asking AI a question once.  I believe I asked who it was that first applied imaginary numbers to electrical engineering.  Very interesting.  It sounds like he's just one of the long list of many guys who profoundly influenced society in ways that most of us will never know.  It's a byproduct of specialization and industrialization I guess.  We can't all know the intimate details of every contribution in every field.

I've seen early group pictures of electrical engineers and Mr. Steinmetz stands out the most.  Even more than Albert Einstein in those pictures in terms of appearance.  It's because he had dwarfism.  It's nice to know that he was still able to receive recognition for his contributions even in those early days where prejudices against a perceived norm were a lot more rampant.  It seems he got in trouble more for his political beliefs than his physical stature.  From the miniscule bit I've read about him, I probably would have disagreed with him on some of those beliefs too.

Lawrence of Arabia, The Land of Oz, and the Insufficiency of Ideals

One of the really fun Rifftrax episodes is The Wonderful Land of Oz directed by Barry Mahon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EgY_Tzfn8g.  It's an awful film based on a book that was the first of many sequels written by the original Wizard of Oz author to the original Wizard of Oz book.  

A major plot point in the both the book and film is a young girl named General Jinjur leads a bunch of other young girls in overthrowing the Emerald City because they're tired of tedious chores like homework and babysitting.  But after their success, they run into problems they didn't expect.  None of the girls ever learned how to cook, so they have no food to eat.

Now we go from a very badly produced film to its exact opposite in Lawrence of Arabia, which is probably the longest movie I ever watched.  It was so long it took me two nights to watch it.  And I will probably never watch it again.  But I remember one thing from it quite vividly.  I remember the faction Lawrence fought so hard for struggling to build and maintain its infrastructure on its own, and British officials coming in and being outraged at how badly things like hospitals were being run.

So we see a commonality here.  You can be mad at how things are and fight against them and win, but what about the aftermath?  Can you do a better job overall than the group you're overthrowing?  If you can't, then what's the point?  Having decent ideals is good and all, but that alone isn't sufficient to run a government.  Just like being angry isn't enough to win a fight or pick up a heavy deadlift.  You have to have some sort of knowledge or experience and be willing to develop skills in more than just what you want to fight against.  It really is a tall order.  Not for the faint of heart.

Fraud Triangle Comparison to Sin Triangle

In one of my accounting classes, we learned about something called the fraud triangle, which I thought was a great theory.  It said for someone to execute fraud, they had to have all three of the following:

1) Incentive

2) Opportunity

3) Rationalization

So if someone wanted to steal, but never had the chance to, it wouldn't happen.  Or if they had a chance to, but couldn't make their conscience accept it as a viable option, it also wouldn't happen.  And of course, if they didn't want to, they wouldn't even pursue it to begin with.

Perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to put this triangle idea in Bible classes as a constructive theory behind the concept of sin.  I've always felt that Biblical doctrine was a great way to provide the rationalization necessary to protect against the act of committing a sin, even when there was both the opportunity and a desire to engage in it.

A sin triangle also works because sin looks like a trigonometric function to begin with.

New National Anthem?

If we ever get a chance to select a new national anthem, I'd vote for Hulk Hogan's Real American entrance music when he was in the WWF that was performed by Rick Derringer.  I listened to it countless times over the years watching old wrestling tapes and YouTube videos, and to this day I still feel a sense of pride in the country when I hear it, and visualize the great land that America was always intended to be, where righteousness for all is consistently pursued.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lZDgGr1PO0&list=RD9lZDgGr1PO0&start_radio=1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPO5lbFnulE&list=OLAK5uy_keN9V6A6Txc98L-QGKWnCohmOTHLHkycU&index=11

Desire Idea

I had a thought this morning:

Perhaps the people that desire capitalism the most are the ones that deserve it the least, and perhaps the people that desire socialism the most are the ones that deserve it the least.

And I wouldn't be surprised if this desire idea could be generalized to other things as well.

Personally, I'd like to believe that I could accomplish whatever goals I have under either political system.

Serving in Heaven vs. Ruling in Hell

Paradise Lost brings up this debate.  Some would rather rule over chaos than serve under order, and others the opposite.  And for a while I wondered which I preferred.  Then I thought of a scenario that puts this into perspective.  

When I used to compete in lifting meets, I definitely preferred others to be weaker than me.  I'd rather be 1st place with a low combined weight total than 6th place with a much higher total.  Didn't matter if I squatted 315 pounds in the 181 pound weight class, as long as no one else exceeded me. Squatting 700 pounds and being 3rd place just wasn't as good of a prize in my eyes.

And I thought the same initially with regards to intellect.  If I was the smartest in the room, it didn't matter if everyone else WAY below me or just slightly below me.  As long as I was at the top and recognized as the best.

But years later my perspective has changed a bit.  I realized if I was the smartest person ever on earth, the quality of our daily appliances we take for granted would probably be dramatically lower.  Is it worth a lower quality of life for everyone else just to satisfy my own ego?  Can I handle having a lower ranking on the totem pole of recognition if it means a better life for everybody in general?

And it made me realize that it probably is better for me to accept a lower status of governance than to possess total authority over things of inferior quality.  Letting go of a little bit of control can make things go a long way.  And ruling over a bunch of idiots doesn't sound like such a good prize anymore.  Better for us to try to build up those underneath us and accept the benefits of them overtaking us.  

But of course, if those underneath don't want to build themselves up, they are probably better off learning to accept their place.