The Limits of Language and the Power of Music

For the past few days I've been omnivorously reading The Wisdom of Insecurity by Alan Watts, a 20th century  British-born philosopher and theologian.  In it, he stresses the complex duality of both mind and body, and how in many ways, according to him, it is responsible for our misconceived perceptions of life.  One of the main culprits of this misconception is our reliance on language for truly understanding reality.  He stresses that reality and life itself is that of a flowing river, continuously moving, forever changing, and by using language we are merely creating symbols, static to our times and conventions.  While language is an extremely powerful tool that helps point us in the right direction, to him, it's like trying to catch the flowing river with a bucket.  For while you may catch the water itself, it is no longer flowing, thus it cannot truly represent the real nature of the river.

Essentially he is discussing how we create constructs and models for viewing the world, and this stems from our natural state of insecurity, a symptom of the conscious, forever aware of our transient nature.  Because of this we constantly stress over the future, imagining how things will be better, trying to squeeze in as much of life's pleasures before our ego-self fades away.  He argues we need to stop relying so much on our mind's desires, and become more in touch with the body itself, streamlining a pure consciousness, so we can value the only existence that is real, the present.  For anyone who is conversant with Ancient and or Eastern philosophy, these ideas start to sound very familiar.  

While I personally enjoy his writings, for I do feel they hold great importance in terms of describing the human condition in a modern tongue, what truly excites me about his works is his focus on language and its limits.  While words have the ability to move us, make us imagine and  wonder, I'm sure many of you have at times felt that there are just certain things that words could never fully express.  I believe this comes down to the core of our being, our emotions; our body.  All of this made me think of another form of language that is without words, a language you feel just as much as you hear; the language of music.  

Music holds an infinite ability that is impossible to express with words, for words will only represent a place in time, and music is pure and flowing.  In fact, it is this rhythm, the ups and downs, the change, that music possesses, that makes it so powerful.  For it is perhaps the closest thing to expressing the nature of reality and life itself.  

Next time you find yourself at a concert, whether classical, opera, jam-band, or rock-n-roll, notice the hundreds of people memorized by the sounds and the feelings that are rushing through your body.  Sure, there are words within many of these songs, but imagine what the performance would be without the music;  merely somebody expressing a moment, for it is the music itself that brings it to life.  

The Primacy of Ends - What Thanksgiving Can Teach Us About Life

As I sat down this morning, prepping for my hour drive back home to family, friends, Turkey, and gluttonous activities, I was catching up on the most recent episode of South Park.  As always, they gave a wonderful satirical image of the various idiosyncrasies and nuances that of which the American citizen consists of.  This episode specifically targeted the mayhem of our secular, consumerist holiday; Black Friday.  The one day of the year where millions of Americans will line up outside in either the bitter cold or a more temperate climate, depending on their location, and wait for the various "temples of worship" to open their doors so the masses may pay tribute to our grand system.   Thinking to myself how awesome it would be to land a new Playstation 4 or some other hedonistic gaming device, I still tried to shift my focus onto the meaning of the holiday at hand, Thanksgiving.

We're taught that this is a day where Native Americans and Pilgrims joined together for a grand feast, celebrating the act of giving, and being thankful for all around us that helps satiate our hunger, soul, and other much needed facets of human existence.  Today is a day where we sit down and jump out of the rat race we all participate in and focus on what really matters.  Today is a day where we try to remember why we do the things we do; why we love who we love, why we have the career we have, and why we are the way we are. Today is the day where we remember all those who help complete us, who give us our identity and understanding of the world just as we give it to them.

I suppose this rant all relates back to an article I was reading the other day.  It was a rather esoteric academic work on decision-making models and how normative and affective factors influence one's decisions.  Now, to bring this to laymen terms, this essentially means how our values, emotions, and other ethical/human related concepts influence our behavior.  In it, the author, Amitai Etzioni, states these factors will always influence our behavior, but whether this is a good or bad thing depends on the situation.  Still, he also argues our values all the one thing that will consistently ensure we have what he calls, " a primacy of ends."

What he states here is that our values are the things that keep our heads on straight and remind us what's important.  Of course this is obvious, but I'm not quite sure if everyone tends to look at things like this all the time.  I think it's really easy to get lost in the sea of confusion.  There's a specific story line in my head that I think we've all heard, seen, or read about at some point in time.  The man who jumps into that certain career in order to develop a stable and strong environment for which to raise a family, and then it is the demands of that career itself that help deteriorate the very thing of which he wanted in the first place.   In essence, the means themselves gained primacy as the end goal got lost at sea.

I wonder to what extent do we put these pressures on us?  The society we have created is without a doubt a highly-advanced one that has produced so many benefits to the general welfare of mankind it's almost impossible to keep track of them.  Yet I think sometimes our cause for action or our reason for continuing this social structure is slightly distorted.  Perhaps we lose sight of the values we had as a kid.  The very things that brought smiles to our young faces and warmed our hearts might have faded away. Why? Well, sometimes we lose faith just because of a few lost battles or we've spent one too many times listening to the words of another whose faith has been lost.  But to be fair, all words have their own dose of wisdom, just be sure to find what that lesson actually is rather than blindly accept all words as true.    Still, this isn't a good enough cause for throwing away everything.

I think we need to remember our values.  This has nothing to do with religion, although in reality religious structures have always been some of the biggest proponents of value systems.  This has to do with an appreciation of humanity, the thought of being thankful for what we do and do not know.  The idea that out of all of the millions and billions of particles in the world, somehow at sometime, they all collided at just the right moment, and here we are today, spending our time traveling to and fro the houses of family and friends. Experiencing the wonderfully mysterious pleasures of everything; warmth, laughter, food, and love.

Sure Thanksgiving only comes once a year, but maybe it's about time we start making the extra effort to carry its lesson throughout every day.  I know it's hard, being human is perhaps one of the most wonderfully brilliant and simultaneously miserable things we may ever know.  Yet we should appreciate it all, for without it, we wouldn't know what really matters.

The Nirvana Fallcy, Humans, and Doctor Who

When examining any complex issue or problem in general, it's important to first understand, appreciate, and calculate the human element that factors into the equation.  What does this mean?  Well, I will elucidate upon this question by using the topic of the Nirvana Fallacy, a logical fallacy first named by economist Harold Demsetz in 1969, and the example he utilized.

 As an economist, Demsetz was particularly interested in the issues of private market failure and the generally all-around accepted panacea, government intervention.  Essentially private markets are subjected to the various whims, desires, incalculable variables, and counter-competitive incentives that all actors within the market face. Moreover, since humans are thus in part self-interested beings on top of being fallible, market failure should not be a surprising occurrence.  Now the solution to this problem, which is still largely advocated today both within the realm of policy debate and within the very classrooms across the country, is that government intervention is now justifiable in order to bring a balance back to the realm of markets. The idea is that since the government now plays a large part in either facilitating or allowing the welfare of a nation state to occur (depending on your political views), employees of the public sector would have the best interest in instilling efficient policy that corrects any mistakes the private market makes.   This all seems somewhat reasonable, but as the title of this post suggests, it also appears to be somewhat idealistic.

As I mentioned at the beginning, it's important to take note of the human element of any complex problem.  Now it's easy to notice when examining the argument for why private markets fail, the human element has been factored in.  Since it applies across the board to any issue where humans have a role though, it is only logical to apply it to the public sector as well. So let's further break down the intricacies of the public sector and the various individuals who make it up in order to get a better understanding of what we're dealing with.

The public sector is comprised of politicians, people who play a direct role in creating public policy. Bureaucrats, employees of government agencies that are in charge of implementing programs that exist as a result of public policy.  There are the voters who are responsible for selecting whatever politician they feel best represents their political interests. And finally there are special interest groups; conglomerates of voting weight that are particularly concerned about one or a few more related social issues.  While this is a rather simplistic model, I feel it best represents the structure of the public sector in both a palatable and efficient manner.

First let's focus on politicians.  I'm sure we all have our own views about these individuals, but the fact is these are people who are interested in creating policy that impacts our lives, for the better (we hope).  But if we calculate the fact that politicians are humans, and humans have a self-interest in maintaining whatever position they hold, it is logical to say they will employ whatever means possible to maintain or increase their gains.  Therefore politicians are dependent upon gaining votes in order to ensure re-election. 

Next we have Bureaucrats.  They on the other hand run small, medium or large government agencies that implement programs, all of which require a budget.  Therefore everywhere across the nation where budgeting occurs, bureaucrats submit what they need (or simply want) in order to finance their operations.   Again, since bureaucrats are human, they will thus act within a competitive state and advocate their needs over another, even if their needs are over-dramatized, or unessential to the overall process of efficiently running their organization or policy programs.  Sadly, something that also occurs is that bureaucrats are encouraged to spend their entire budget rather than examine ways of saving or using money prudently, because if politicians (those who okay the budget) see money was left over, they will allocate less the following year.  Therefore bureaucrats are at risk of seeing their operations experience a state of atrophy.  So in order to protect themselves and those who work with or underneath themselves, they must spend, spend, spend, even when it may not be necessary.

After this we have the voters, regular old citizens who may or may not work for either the private or public sector.  Their interests vary but they all have a reason for ensuring the welfare of themselves and those they care about.  Therefore they vote to ensure whatever political ideals they want get put into action. But the human element here is something political scientists have dubbed, "rational ignorance."  What this means is that the average citizen's daily life is already so congested with activities thanks to career and social obligations that they rationally choose to ignore the issues going on in the political world.  Let's say Joe Smith comes home after working 8 hours (8 am - 4 pm) at the office downtown.  Not only did he have to drive into the city and wait in rush hour traffic for about an hour or more depending on construction, but he also had to experience that same mundane process on his way back from work.  He's tired from the various emails, meetings, and phone calls he dealt with throughout the day, and moreover his wife Susie just called and said they were out of milk and eggs and he had to pick up their 10 year old son Johnny from soccer practice. This is his typical Tuesday, and the week doesn't get much better until the weekend itself comes.  Now what self-respecting human being wants to spend his Friday, Saturday, and Sunday researching policy issues that will help him make an educated vote for the greater good come Election Day?  If you say yourself in response to this, you either A) have a career within the public sector or within some academic institution, and you are either single or the family's out of town or B) you have an unusual hobby that while I encourage, also warn against for it is not very rewarding in the long run (it is grueling, defeating, and tedious, but keep up the good fight).  So then Johnny chooses to plug in and get his info from some talk radio source he hears on the way home from work, or tune in to his preferred news channel for a bit after dinner right before the "big game" comes on.  One thing we must take note of here is that those mediums also operate by pecuniary means, and thus by their very nature will appeal to whatever niche or mass market they are targeting.  This only pinholes and narrows down public opinion even more, but that is perhaps one of the drawbacks of living within a mass-society.  

Finally we have special interest groups.  If you answered yes in the previous paragraph to the question pertaining to wasting your weekend away studying policy history, than this might be the career path for you!  Essentially these are non-profit organizations whose main purpose is to advocate a certain social issue. Whether its gun safety, cancer, or spreading awareness of the endangered Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus, they carry both the financial and voting weight to largely impact political elections. And since they are competing for what they believe is to be of value, other important issues society face may be overlooked or underplayed.  So essentially what you have here is a competitive marketplace of people advocating ideas to thus generate some policy in order to further bring their ideas into fruition. And since the regular old voter tends to be stable in his or voting patterns, the politicians main focus tends to be the special interest groups. They have the power to ensure his job.

So, after that lengthy discussion regarding the inner-workings of the public sector, it is quite reasonable to assume that policy produced may not be done in an efficient manner.  Moreover, the policy itself could potentially be protecting one special interest over another.  So how does something such as the government, which in of itself can have just as many of the same issues as the private sector, supposed to assist in alleviating economic woes?  All individuals across the world have their interests and they will utilize whatever means and channels possible to ensure they are protected.   Now I do believe that a good majority of these people truly think that what they believe to be important is in fact important and that they are doing what they do with the best intentions.  Still, this doesn't convince me that government intervention is the best method of fixing the private sector.  Perhaps we should start reexamining the structure of our public system to ensure incentives correlate with the meta-picture rather than the various nested games competing amongst each other deep within. 

 In closing, the only thing this convinces me of is that humans are extremely complex, stubborn, confusing, creatures that sometimes make problems worse off than how they were in the beginning. Even with all of this though I will still borrow a quote from the good ole Doctor Who and say that the best part of this world and our existence is, "People. Ordinary, stupid, brilliant people."

Summer Update and Why Cloud Atlas Rocks

So far this summer hasn't been much different from the Fall and Spring semesters most college kids usually gruelingly go through. I still have class, albeit only one at time, but since it is delivered in a much more succinct time span, it has been somewhat demanding.  I still work, ten hours more than I did during the Fall and Spring, yet this current job is pretty much over when I leave the office.  Being a Graduate Assistant for Residence Life services, I found out rather quickly, is a 24/7 job.  I love it, but I suppose since I have a tiny bit more free time and less on the mind, I should use it wisely and update my blog. It's been a while.  

I go into work around 8 am and leave around 2 or 3 pm. I come home, make lunch, relax for a bit, maybe read, then start my summer class work load.  If it's nice out I end outside on an evening cruise snapping pictures of the now vacant and much more quaint Clarion University campus.  It's really peaceful, but somewhat eery after a while if you're used to the chaotic nature of the full-swing sessions. Either way, I've been trying to make the best of my summer by indulging in some long-lost hobbies and catching up on some of my favorite topics; political economics, philosophy, public policy, and political science.  I know I know, I live an exhilarating life. Sometimes I don't know how I handle all of the excitement. 

Yet as I type these tiny 12 inch Times New Roman words onto this pastel white script page, I think of something a friend, I guess someone I consider to be a good friend, recently told me.  That I tend to act as if the world is my diary.  What this person meant was that I am somewhat open with my life, what's happening in it, where I'm from, where I'm going, or at least planning on going, and who I am, with anyone that asks.  I guess this is a unique characteristic and maybe that's why I've always been interested in people, their stories, and the various nuances, complexities, and visceral moments that define who we are.  To me nothing is more fascinating than the human experience and all it entails because it is the foundation of all facets of existence.  Everything we are and what we have done has led to every tit bit of knowledge we now have or at least claim to have.  

The older I get (I'll be turning the ripe old age of 24 come July) the more I realize I need to find what I truly value.  For I know I'm not someone who could ever drudge through some tedious career even if it provided substantial pay unless I really loved it.  Well, lately I've been starting to focus on some potential paths that may lead to such a career.  I've always thought if I valued humans and the infinite intangibles we experience, what better a role is there to play than someone who helps maintain and encourage such things to prosper?  

To me that means dealing with the fundamental structures that make society work. The macro issues, the big picture; I look at it all and I see relevance.  I see how the words of a 13th century Middle Eastern mystic such as Rumi paint a perfectly pan-optic work of existence, how that has influenced various cultures and historical events in the region, and how those occurrences have gone to influence such things as the Western Renaissance, Classical Western Philosophy and Religion, and thus our Liberal Democratic institutional ideals, through interactions over time. 

Maybe that's why I think, "Cloud Atlas," by David Mitchell, is perhaps one of the most important works in the modern Western library.   

"Our lives are not our own.  We are bound to others, past and present, and by each crime and every kindness, we birth our future."  

That comes straight from the pages of Mitchells's, in my opinion, Magnus Opus, and I have never read a line that has truly grasped such a concept better than that quote right there; because it's true.  I'm sure we all know people who have impacted our lives.  Some of them may no longer be with us, but we feel or we justify via whatever parameters of logic and understanding that best work for us, that in some way shape or form they are still with us.  Whether you believe it's through a perhaps ethereal concept such as the spirit, or whether it's the actions, ideals, and emotional impressions that person bestowed upon you, we value that individual and thus they still live on through our own cognition.  And no matter if you have children of your own, friends, or family, those impressions will shape and guide your actions toward them; thus continuing the chain. 

So what does this all mean?  Why I am I ranting at 1:45 am when I could probably be catching up on some worry-free weekend sleep, even though it's been proven one cannot truly "catch up" on sleep? Casual verbal social lubrication aside, I guess I just wanted to open up the pages of my diary and share what's on my mind.  Maybe someone will read this and take value to what I say, or maybe no one will.  Who cares, it's just nice to get it out there I suppose.

A Question Without an Answer

A few weeks ago in my Economics course, my professor proposed a simple question, " Is America the greatest country in the world?"  This encouraged a few of the usually quiet, but apparently overly-patriotic students in the back to create a bit of a hoop-la. Roars of American exceptionalism  were mixed together with the normal tone of red, white, and blue dissidents. On the former side of the argument you will hear that due to our cultural, political, and socio-economic histories, our nation has been somewhat of a "city upon hill," if you will.  I use that metaphor for I feel it is a proper homage to one of our Puritan founders, John Winthrop's, original hopes for his future home of Massachusetts.  Essentially this new land would be a beacon, a model for the rest of the world. And I profoundly believe that those philosophical roots have woven their way throughout the fabric of our American identity.  Perhaps such an ideal in itself is necessary to drive a sovereign nation within our somewhat modern nationalistic organization of civilization, but either way, we as Americans have a sense of pride.  Which we should.  But I do think it is fair to state like all things, too much of something may not be good.

On the dissident side you tend to hear the common imperialistic argument.  That is via warfare, economic influence, and other means our culture and beliefs have created a hegemonic like net over the rest of the Western world. Moreover, the issues we now face in areas such as the middle east are fundamentally based off of these cultural struggles.   Some will point to our exceptionally large military, which is stationed all across the world, as evidence.  Others will state that the tangible moralistic depravity has not only corrupted our society, breeding a hedonic, materialistic generation of wantons, but it has also spread throughout the very foundations of our society, as evident within political and private sector corruption.  This is all a tad bit extreme.  But like the other side's argument, there are some points to be made here as well.  Americans do tend to place heavy value on consumption, which to be fair is something rooted within our very biological nature.  As animals we need to consume in order to survive.  There is no getting around it. Still, perhaps rather than focusing on the items that we value for conspicuous or ostentatious purposes, we should more or less value the vessels throughout which the consumption is experienced; ourselves.  

Do I believe America is the greatest country in the world?  I don't think that is a fair question.  Not because I value some other country out there or I am "anti-American."  That is far from the truth, for I love everything about my basic identity, including the nation where I was born and currently reside in.  But I don't find it to be a fair question because I don't think a question such as that is one with a straight answer.  Sure, there are many historical instances or cases we could easily point at and say, "that is definitely not a time and place I would want to live in."  Perhaps it was the Assyrian empire, or maybe for modern purposes it is North Korea.  So yes we can easily falsify this statement, to speak in a scientific tongue, but it is not something we can state as empirically true.  To do that we would need to create a list of criteria which based off the basic flaws of logic and reasoning, would be subjective and bias to our conditioned preferences of Western values. 

Do I think America is the most powerful country in the world? Surely, without a doubt, when it comes in terms of military capabilities.  But I don't think that is the purpose of a nation.  To me you could have many great nations, but neither one would truly be above the other as long as they serve the basic purpose of those who reside within their geographic and political boundaries.   As long as  a nation seeks to assist and offer security of a social group, so that said social group can pursue economic and sociological ventures in order to achieve biological, psychological and internal forms of happiness and peace, while simultaneously offering a breeding ground to support and nourish said groups socio-economic cultural identity and history, then that nation is one that is moralistically sound and legitimate.

Now obviously things such as education, healthcare, economic opportunity, and general infrastructure of a sovereign nation are all factors that will contribute to the greater goal.  And yes these are aspects that we as Americans do in fact have.  Yet if you look at some of our rankings, such as our overall performance in terms of education, there are obviously rooms for improvement.  So I suppose the purpose of this little piece is merely to encourage a tad bit of humbleness. Perhaps you could say I am merely arguing the virtue of humility, American humility.  For while we have obviously had a great wealth  of resources and opportunities in the past, this is not all due to our will and ability alone.  A lot of this merely comes down to the winds of fortune, and sometimes the winds change directions.  Let's make sure we have our sails in the right position.