Alan Turing, Transforming the System of Government

/0 Comments/in , , , , , , /by

24turing1-popupAlan Turing was perhaps one of the greatest minds the human race has ever known. He transformed the way we think of systems, and is often referred to as the father of computer science. But even now, in death, he is helping us to analyze a different kind of system, the system of human governance.

Alan Turing was convicted of the crime of being a homosexual. The punishment for that crime led to his taking his own life. Many now understand how egregious such conviction was, and have worked hard to change the laws around homosexuality. We are witness to one of the great advances in human rights as the system of democratic pluralism is leading the way in recognizing the fundamental right to the free expression of sexual orientation.

Human institutions make mistakes. Recently, the Queen of England granted Turing a Royal Pardon. I’m glad to see this action taken. There are many acts that our Government has taken, much more horrific even than this, for which we have yet to make amends.

Most important is to learn the core lessons of such mistakes, and to implement changes to the system of government to avoid similar mistakes going forward. Alan Turing is a hero; we honor his sacrifice by learning and applying the lessons.

“Nearly 60 years after his death, Alan Turing, the British mathematician regarded as one of the central figures in the development of the computer, received a formal pardon from Queen Elizabeth II on Monday for his conviction in 1952 on charges of homosexuality, at the time a criminal offense in Britain.” New York Times

New York Times: Alan Turing, Enigma Code-Breaker and Computer Pioneer, Wins Royal Pardon

 

 

The Opportunity & Danger of New Faith

/0 Comments/in , , , , , , /by

Key & keyhole with lightOne identifying mark of young faith is the idea that those who possess it have found universal truth; that their ideas are equally applicable to and required of all.

This is as predictable in the newly blessed as it is dangerous to them.

The faith of such individuals can cause them to cling so tightly to their knowledge they fail to recognize it as a key. This key, depending on which side of the door they choose to use it in, can seal them into a small box, or open them to an ever expanding world of wonder.

Human Dignity Requires Equality of Economic Opportunity

/0 Comments/in , , , , , /by

Are you a supporter of basic Human Rights? Do you bristle at racial or sexual inequality? Do you believe in the basic principles of human dignity? If so, great! But, do you also realize that human dignity and basic rights include equality of economic opportunity? Economic Equality is as fundamental to human dignity as is racial or sexual equality. Are you fully onboard to fight for this basic human right?

Read more about this here: Makers, Takers, and the Future of American Economics

The Chosen Interlocutor

/0 Comments/in , , , , /by

Choose wisely who you debate. Some of their ideas will mingle with your own, and thus change you. Therefore, debate only with those people and those ideas that merit your respect even when you may not agree with them.

The Value of Discontent

/0 Comments/in , /by

I wonder at the value of internal peace and tranquility. While I understand that many seek after such, what value is this in a  world that will always require engagement? Where children are hungry and homeless. Where wars rage. Might not a feeling of discontent be a sign of an engaged life, where one recognizes that there is work to be done, work which can break hearts? Perhaps tranquility should not be the highest goal.

Honest Disagreement…

/2 Comments/in , /by

Honest disagreement, open to real discussion, can energize a relationship, even where there are stark differences. But that can only happen in the context of arguing for an open philosophy that recognizes difference as natural, fundamental (e.g. democratic pluralism). But when you argue for and from a position of closed philosophies, a position that doesn’t recognize the validity of difference (e.g. most religious belief, platonism), then disagreement is always destructive.

Opt Out of the GOP

/in , , , /by

An organization named Generation Opportunity made a video trying to scare people away from Obamacare. I think their video is spot on, but their message needed an update. So, I updated it.

Makers, Takers, and the Future of American Economics

/5 Comments/in , , , , , , /by

President Obama signs G.I. Bill Protection Order

Note: On September 6, 2016 I published a companion article to this titled “Proposal for a Fair & Dynamic Market-based Economy”

We The People of the United States have come together with a defined set of six shared values: a more perfect union, justice, domestic tranquility, defense, welfare and liberty. (See Foundational Values: A More Perfect Union).

Our chosen economic system, Capitalism, must serve those values. Does it? Currently, no.

A common understanding of capitalism is that it will do exactly that if the “invisible hand” of the market is operating effectively. Given the assumption that people are created equal, in an effective market-based system, we should expect a natural distribution of wealth. Such as this:

 

How Are We doing?

Compare that ideal to reality. Here’s our current distribution of wealth:

Read more

How Much I Feel

/1 Comment/in , , , , /by

As an overly romantic kid, I spent a good portion of my youth wearing bulbous headphones, analyzing the lyrical content of pop music. I once passed an entire family vacation listening to “Bennie and the Jets,” trying desperately to both memorize the lyrics and comprehend their meaning. The weird and the wonderful.

Religious leaders were scaring kids with stories of Satan-controlled rock stars and a nefarious tool called backmasking. Ironically, this made me certain the prophets of pop had access to deeper understanding. All I had to do was decode the hidden messages!

The influence of my sweet satan seemingly made me vulnerable to overwrought orchestrations of infatuation. Songs were my education in love. Imagine my joy when dad drove home in a new Chevy van! The things I imagined.

Over time, I began to develop a bullshit meter. For example, was there really a Mandy in Mr. Manilow’s life. I had my doubts.

How Much Do You Feel?

Ambrosia is the fabled food of Gods, famously used by Athena to affix beer-goggles on the suitors of Penelope. I knew nothing of Homer as a pre-teen. For me, Ambrosia was simply a band who understood true love and heartbreak, just like me. I bought all their singles.

Years later, I happened upon those 45’s, inserted the required yellow adapter (a satanic symbol for man on man on man love action) and began anew to analyze the lyrical content of their hit “How Much I Feel.” It’s widely counted as a beautiful blue-eyed soul love song. Even Casey Kasem thought so. But, is it?

Less than thirty-seconds in, the bullshit meter lurched full red. I grabbed the needle so quickly it sounded like tires screeching round Dead Man’s Curve. How Much I Feel? This guy was a lying, cheating bastard. Let’s break it down.

The Confrontation

[Note: each lyrical section of the song is presented in a short audio clip. Click on the triangle next to the title to play it.]

      How Much I Feel Pt. 1

I don’t know how this whole business started
Of you thinkin’ that I had been untrue

So, his girlfriend (wife?) suspects infidelity and confronts him. His response is classic misdirection: turn the accusation back on the accuser. The question is shifted from whether he cheated to why she doesn’t trust him. See how that works?
Read more

Mr. Romney, Where’s Your DEATH Certificate?

/1 Comment/in , , , , , , , /by

Mitt Romney Dead?While researching Mitt Romney’s family history for a future post, I happened upon this most interesting thing today. According to Mitt’s listing at the Ancestry.com, Willard Mitt Romney died about 2005!

So, consider me a “Deather!” Mitt, I demand to see your death certificate!

Now, in line with a good conspiracy, I expect this information to be scrubbed of all evidence quickly. But, I’ve got the proof! It’s right there in my screen capture. Mitt Romney is dead!

Update! @ 9:50 am

In attempting to verify this, I went to the Mormon church owned familysearch.org. There’s no record of Willard Mitt Romney there at all! It’s all been scrubbed! So, while I’m not naive enough to present the conspiracy that Mr. Romney NEVER existed, I do wonder WHAT the LDS Church is hiding!

Mr. Romney, just produce your death certificate!

Want Something More Substantial?

How To Interview Mitt Romney About Racism

How To Interview Mitt Romney About Sexism

Black Ace. Red Lady.

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

Vegas is a cold mistress. Loss expected, we sit at the table anyway. Whiskey and ice. Confident in our stack of chips, built slowly over time. We hold them close, tempting others to draw us in.

Check. Check. Fold. Fold. Check. Fold. Fold.

Bet small and lose on a weak hand. Just to show we’re willing to play. Just to be in the game.

Fold. Fold. Check. Fold. Waiting for anything worth the risk. Drinking. Playing. Tempting. Patience.

The cards come, eventually, but without guarantee.

Black Ace. Red Lady.

This. Temptation. The game begins. A big bet up front, just to see who stays, who leaves.

Cards flipped. Some help. Some hurt. Small bets. Fake confidence. Feign weakness. Push. Pull.

“All in,” she says. Question called.

You sat at the table. You ordered the free drinks. You traded sarcasm and banter. Tipped the dealer for luck. But, you didn’t sit at the table for these things.

All in? In a flash, you decide. You’re here to play. Risk.

“All in.”

Poker can be lost to greed or boredom. Sometimes we play because we’re tired of waiting. Sometimes we reach for too much too soon. Sometimes we sit at the table out of loneliness, letting our chips dwindle in small, predictable donations.

But, sometimes, knowing the odds, we choose to play.

“All in” I hear the words echo in my head. I feel myself push the chips. Time slows, cards revealed.

Win? Lose? Neither matters. Eventually, you’ll experience both and more.

What matters is that you sat at the table.

You played the game.

Ecstasy

/3 Comments/in , , /by

Bad thinking leads to bad results.

Previously, I’ve stated that my primary purpose in life is to achieve joy.

In the foundational post on this blog, I state:

 I choose joy as the primary purpose of my life. I specifically choose the word joy instead of other similar words such as happiness. In my usage of joy, I mean something more enduring than simple pleasure.

My Definition of Joy: An enduring sense of contentment, measured not in each moment, but as a dynamic summation of experience. The constituent parts of joy include instances of happiness, sorrow, pleasure and pain, boredom, excitement, leisure and work. Joy is the result of life well-lived, adjusted by experience to achieve a net-positive sentiment. It is an expression of my desire.

Scratch that. It has not produced desirable results.

The Poverty of Joy

Recent events have caused me to stop and measure how well I am achieving that goal. In the process of asking this question, I’ve spent time analyzing the target itself. Is joy the right focus?

My experience over the past several years leads me to conclude that aiming for joy has left me unfulfilled, protective of small success, and fearful of loss.

As I’ve defined it and subsequently lived it, I’ve come to understand that a pursuit of joy is really a pursuit of safety. It is cautious and conservative. It seeks merely to sustain a net positive result. It is a guard against failure rather than a celebration of success. It is small.

100%

My lived experience of 51% joy and 49% pain does not feel prosperous. Why should it? 51% to 49% is within any reasonable margin of error, and so, half my life is lived in pain. I’ve been looking for a 2% margin of victory. Fail.

Inherent in my view has been a fight against scarcity, the feeling that I am guarding against lack and loss. Fighting off death. Building barricades. At war with sadness. I’ve created space for lack and sorrow, built it right into my view of my life and made it a partner in my pursuit. I’ve given platform to that which I claim not to want.

Creation

Sustainability is inherently conservative, and thus, inherently regressive. An attempt to conserve will always breed loss. Conservation seeks to maintain the status quo, an attempt to hold on to that which we have is protective, not creative.

We cannot be creative with that which already exists. Creation must involve the new, that which we dream of but don’t yet experience. The Universe is expanding, and therefore, conservation will always fall short of a changing reality.

And, what is the emotion of creation?

Ecstasy

I will now replace my pursuit of joy with a pursuit of ecstasy.

How To Interview Mitt Romney About Sexism

/5 Comments/in , , , , , , , /by

Ask: Could a woman ever be appointed to lead your religion? Should they?

Mitt Romney is sexist. He adheres to a philosophy, Mormonism, which denies women equal rights. Mormon women are not allowed to hold leadership positions within the church and forbidden ordination into the priesthood.

Similarly, before 1978, the Mormon church did not allow black men to hold the priesthood. Had they not changed that position, Mitt Romney would have no chance to run for President; he’d rightly be branded as racist; that he’s not being asked to reconcile his sexism in a similar fashion reveals a troubling double standard.

Sexism isn’t sexy, it appears. Racism? That’s hot. Homophobia? Get a room. However, when it comes to the most dominant form of inequality, many seem complacent.

The foundational Mormon treatise “The Family, A Proclamation To The World” holds:

By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.

Mitt Romney’s vision of a healthy society puts men in the boardroom and women in the bedroom

Here’s how the Mormon Church practices this: Women are not allowed to hold the priesthood. Women are not allowed to hold any position of leadership over men. Even within the Mormon organization for women, they are not allowed to set their own budgets or to structure their own teaching materials. Women are not allowed to bless their babies, or even to hold their babies while they are being blessed.

Read more

Post-Atheist: Moving Beyond Belief

/9 Comments/in , , , , , , /by

Moses was asking the wrong questions

Summary

Asking whether one believes in God is a nonsensical, and ultimately, meaningless question. One would not ask “Do you believe in King?” God, like King, is a title, a political office. What matters is not belief in the existence of a being who claims the title, but rather, agreement with the political philosophy of any being who would assert power over us.

What is Post-Atheism?

I’ve coined the term Post-Atheist to convey moving beyond our current understanding of the title of god and our relationship to it. The common questions about god are nonsensical (do you believe) and impossible for finite beings to rationally consider (e.g. debating the attributes of god). Further, belief in a being is a simplistic calculation; more important is agreement with that being on fundamental governing principles.

Would the existence of an all-powerful creator automatically bestow a right to authoritarian rule? Of course not, just as my power to create a child does not bestow upon me a moral right to authoritarian rule.

Rather than our being defined by a best-guess at the existence of a powerful being (atheist, agnostic, believer), it is more important to define what is and is not acceptable behavior from any being who would seek our participation in their community.

Do you believe in God?

This question is nonsensical.

“God” is a title. Titles are descriptive appellations which convey rank, office, or status. For example, “king” is the title of a person holding a political office. A king may also have a personal name; e.g, King George.

Like king, god is a title. Defined generally as “the one supreme being, the creator and ruler of the universe,”1 the title of god conveys rank, office and status.

Read more

The Violence of Lines

/0 Comments/in , , , , , , /by

“When people began living in settled agricultural communities, social reality shifted deeply and irrevocably. Suddenly it became crucially important to know where your field ended and your neighbor’s began. — Christopher Ryan, Ph.D. and Cacilda Jethá, M.D. in Sex At Dawn”

Whosoever Looketh On A Woman

As we closed our eyes for the congregational prayer, I could feel the closeness of her skin, electricity arcing as from one lead to another. Right hand folded tightly under left arm, index finger extended slightly. A hoped for inadvertent touch.

That act, however innocent it may seem, had the potential to cost me everything.

Three weeks previous, my mission companion and I were shopping at Sears in Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. I needed another white short-sleeved shirt, having lost one to bicycle grease.

As I turned to the counter, a moment cliches are made of: Eyes locked, time slowed. She smiled, I blushed.

It was easy to imagine that I had never seen a more beautiful woman.

In the history of pick up lines, this had to be among the worst: “Have you ever heard of the Book of Mormon?” I haltingly stammered, words fighting others I’d have preferred.

Read more

Science As A Human Right: Data-driven Governance

/6 Comments/in , , , , , , , /by

Summary

To match the ideals outlined in the U.S. Constitution, we must define and measure our values.

We have already defined our values. We do not yet measure outcomes.

Science is the only tool capable of abstracting human experience over populations, allowing us to know whether we are achieving our goals.

By choosing not to measure, we violate basic human rights and empower the strong over the weak, the majority over the minority. This threatens to make meaningless our chosen values.

Therefore, Science should be a human right.

Government and The Moral Landscape

Sam Harris recently published a controversial book titled The Moral Landscape, wherein he argues that science can answer moral questions:

Questions about value—about meaning, morality, and life’s larger purpose—are really questions about the well-being of conscious creatures. Values, therefore, translate into facts that can be scientifically understood.

Stephen Gould provides a common dissent:

Morality is a subject for philosophers, theologians, students of the humanities, indeed for all thinking people…The factual state of the world does not teach us how we, with our powers for good and evil, should alter or preserve it in the most ethical manner.

I side with Harris.

Most criticism of his position rests in a critique of Utilitarianism; an ethical position that holds the right course of action is the one that creates “the greatest good for the greatest number.”

Harris, by presenting his theory abstractly (“some science somewhere could do this”) and by responding to the abstract criticisms of his opponents, actually misses the strength of his argument when applied to practical use.

What else are we doing than safeguarding the well being of individuals when we form governments?

Harris’ theory can be grounded in Governance. U.S. Democracy, for example, is functionally utilitarian.

What else are we doing than safeguarding the well being of individuals when we form governments? In this light, arguments about whether we can define and measure moral positions are nonsense; we’ve been attempting to do so since the beginning of recorded history. We’ve just been doing it poorly.

If, as Harris’ opponents argue, this endeavor is impossible, then we should immediately dispense attempts to define communal values and form governments.

Read more

My Life With Sade

/4 Comments/in , , , , /by

Dedicated, with Appreciation, to Paul Denman, Helen Folasade Adu, Andrew Hale & Stuart Mattheman

Diamond Life: Heaven Help Him, When He Falls

click arrow to play…listen to each song as you read each section

      Smooth Operator

October 1984 | 2:30 am | Provo, Utah

Lying across a sturdy sofa, empty lobby of a dormitory, Brigham Young University.

Eyes smudged with eyeliner, highlighted hair tousled, bleached white 501s.

I’d been at The Star Palace, a refuge from the adjustment of moving out of Seattle and into Pleasantville. “Don’t drink, don’t smoke, what do you do?” I danced. Hard.

My best friend back home was black. We frequented black clubs, listened to black music. There’s no “black” in Provo. I adapted; rather than rock steady to the Whispers, I swayed to Swing Out Sister.

In a malaise of misfit and dried sweat, I was watching Night Tracks, a late night music video show.

He’s laughing with another girl,
playing with another heart.
Placing high stakes making hearts ache.
He’s loved in seven languages.
Jewel Box life, diamond nights and ruby lights,
high in the sky.

Sight: red lips, black hair, freckled brown skin.

Sound: delicate piano, driving bass, salvific sax; creating structure to protect, wings to carry a voice soft and soaring, mysterious and familiar.

Heaven help him, when he falls.

And fall I did. No help from Heaven.
Read more