Home » Posts tagged 'Culture' (Page 9)

Tag Archives: Culture

Let the truth set you free

“James Comey better hope that there are no “tapes” of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!”

@realDonaldTrump 12 May 2017

This was one of President Trump’s tamer tweets, although you wouldn’t know it by the ensuing chorus of condemnation from the media.

“There’s no good motive for saying this except to intimidate James Comey,” said news anchor Greta Van Susteren in an interview with Democratic Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts, who emphatically echoed her indictment.

Unpresidential?  Possibly.  But intimidating?

ALL A-TWITTER

No reasonable person can deny that Donald Trump has made a mockery of himself and his office with his litany of derisive, degrading, and delusional tweets.  There is no excuse for any public figure, much less the President of the United States, to whine that he is the victim of the “single greatest WITCH HUNT in American history,” to assert that a distinguished senator from his own party is an “embarrassment” to his home state, or to spew adolescent invectives regarding the physical appearance or psychological stability of media personalities, no matter how slanted and unprofessional their reporting might be.

There should be a code of ethics — whether implicit or explicit — governing the use of social media, which relentlessly eats away the foundations of civil society.  But the misuse of modern communication in general, and of Twitter in particular, does not make it all bad all the time.

In a world where the media has grown increasingly untrustworthy, unfair, and unbalanced, the power of social media to circumvent inaccurate or misleading reporting should be warmly welcomed.  But that power is so easily abused that it routinely invalidates its own effectiveness as an alternative information source.

Which brings us back to Mr. Trump’s tweet warning that James Comey’s own words might be subject to verification.

Was that intimidation?  Was it coercion?

FOR THE RECORD

Well, let’s see.  Mr. Trump did not say that he had any tapes.  He did not even say that he might have tapes.  He did not threaten Mr. Comey with reprisal or retribution of any kind.  He did not suggest that Mr. Comey should in any way distort or omit the truth.

What he did do was raise the specter that Mr. Comey’s statements might come back to haunt him if found to contradict anything Mr. Comey himself had previously said.

Come to think of it, this might be the most cogent message Donald Trump has tweeted since he launched his campaign to run for president.  By what twisted logic can it now be suggested that confronting public figures with the truth is a form of intimidation?

Has our moral compass spun completely off its axis?

The humorist Charles Marshall wrote, seriously, that, “Integrity is doing the right thing when you don’t have to — when no one else is looking or will ever know — when there will be no congratulations or recognition for having done so.”

That is a universal truth.  But it’s all the more relevant in an age when everyone carries a camera, when anything and everything we do could end up on YouTube or the evening news.  If there is any upside to the ubiquitous presence of recording devices lurking in every shadow, it is that we have to consider the very real possibility that someone is always watching, and that anything we say or do might be used against us.

King Solomon said, Curse not the king even in your thoughts, and curse not the rich in your bedchamber; for a bird of the air shall carry your voice, and that which has wings shall make the matter known.

More than ever, there are flies on the walls, and the walls have ears.  Rather than worrying that we might be overheard, wouldn’t we be better off making sure that nothing leaves our mouths that we wouldn’t want repeated or retweeted?

Published in Jewish World Review.

Video: What are Ethics? Part 23

Short-Term Seduction

5 Strategies for Avoiding Pain Avoidance

Adapted from an article originally published by Pick The Brain.

Are you a parent? If so, you’ve probably experienced a scenario like this one:

You run to see what your too-quiet two year old has gotten into and find him playing with the snow-globe your sister brought back from her trip to Switzerland last year. Since this is not the best toy for a toddler, you smile at your child and gently take the snow-globe out of his hands.

That’s when the screaming begins.

What do you do? Do you endure the shrieking child or give back the snow-globe?

If you’re normal, your thinking probably works its way through the following steps:

1.     He can’t really hurt himself with the snow-globe

2.     He probably won’t break the snow-globe

3.     I never really liked the snow-globe anyway

4.     If he does break it, it’s no big deal to clean it up

5.     So is it really worth making him miserable by taking it away?

But we’re not really worried about the child’s misery, are we? We’re more concerned about ourselves.

In the end, the odds are pretty good you’re going to let the toddler keep the snow-globe.

But the real issue isn’t the snow-globe; it’s the lesson you’ve just taught your child:

Click here to read the rest.

The Price of Liberty

To a Standstill

Video: What are Ethics? Part 22

You with the stars in your eyes

The Fool in the Mirror

The Green Generation has arrived!  We recycle; we favor alternative energy; we’re environmentally conscious.  Clearly, we are on our way to saving our planet.

Or maybe we’re not.

But at least we feel really good about ourselves.

That’s what Remi Trudel discovered.  The Boston University marketing professor ran a study in which subjects were asked to sample four different beverages.  With a recycling bin placed nearby, people more often took a new cup for each beverage; when there was no bin, more people reused the same cup.

Paradoxically, the opportunity to recycle increased the production of waste.  In other words, environmental consciousness increases environmental carelessness.

It should come as no surprise, therefore, to learn that people who buy hybrid cars typically increase their driving miles.  From the perspective of human psychology, it seems that conservation is a zero sum game:  if I save here, I’m permitted to indulge there.

Professor Trudel suggests that, for most of us, recycling is more about making ourselves feel good than about being responsible custodians of the environment. If I save a plastic bottle or aluminum can from the county landfill, I can go on consuming with less guilt.  The result is that we become like the dieter who justifies an extra helping of dessert because he used Sweet’N Low in his coffee.

HOW GREEN IS YOUR VALLEY?

Mike Adams of Natural News takes it a step further.  If you sift through a recycling bin, you’re likely to find all kinds of containers for chemical products that potentially do more harm to the environment than the boxes and bottles in which they are sold.  We don’t mind releasing pollutants into the ecosystem in the form of scented laundry detergent, antibacterial soap, and perfume.  Why?  Because we assuage our collective conscience with the knowledge that those plastic and cardboard containers will be turned into packaging for more toxic products.

For decades we’ve been warned about the evils of polystyrene cups.  But many paper cups are not biodegradable; they may cost more to produce, while requiring more raw materials, use more energy, and produce more greenhouse gases.  But, hey, paper feels more eco-friendly.

All this is the natural, if maddeningly irrational, consequence of our national obsessions with feelings.  Motives are important.  Fairness is important.  Perception is important.  Results are largely irrelevant.

That may explain why Al Gore, at the time he accepted his Nobel Peace Prize for chiding the American people for their environmental irresponsibility, was simultaneously living in a mansion that guzzled 12 times as much energy as an average American home.  Presumably, he reasoned that the benefit to the world from his advocacy far outweighed his own environmental rapaciousness.

This kind of inconsistency is not limited to environmentalism.  Repeatedly during his campaign and presidency, Barack Obama promoted increasing capital gains taxes in the name of fairness, even though empirical evidence showed that such increases actually decrease tax revenue rather than raise it.  For decades, California lawmakers relentlessly raised corporate taxes on the most successful businesses, eventually driving many of them out of the state and plunging the economy into chaos.

But at least they can sleep at night.

IF WISHES WERE FORCES

The worldview that values feelings and good intentions over results inevitably fosters a terrifying ideology of utopianism.  On October 11, 2002, former President Jimmy Carter received his own Nobel Peace Prize, in large part for his role negotiating a treaty in which North Korea agreed to suspend its nuclear weapons program.  On October 16, just five days later, the United States announced that North Korea admitted to having a clandestine program to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons.

Many observers continue to wonder how anyone could have believed that the North Korean leaders could be trusted to honor their commitments.  But the idea of peace was just too good to let go.

Social conscience, environmental awareness, world peace — these are all noble ideals.  But the mere desire to make our planet a better place will not make it so.  Indeed, lofty dreams untethered from reality typically produce much more harm than good.

And yet the dreamers continue to dream, unperturbed by either logic or history.

King Solomon ponders:  What use is wealth in the hands of a fool when his heart has no desire to purchase wisdom?

The real challenge is to get the fool to recognize the self-destructive consequences of his folly.  In literature, the Knight of Mirrors forces Don Quixote to see his own madness, but the tragic hero quickly returns to the comfort of his delusions once the looking glass is taken away.

So how do we speak truth to power, when power shows such persistent disdain for truth?

Published in Jewish World Review.

How Ants Survive Rush Hour

Adapted from an article originally published by Pick The Brain.

Who doesn’t hate rush hour? Either we’re stuck motionless in a sea of cars or taking our lives in our hands as if on an amusement park bumper ride.

Maybe we should take a lesson from the ants.

Yes, ants.

Ants are better drivers than we are. And the lessons of their highway habits offer some valuable lessons that extend far beyond the way we drive.

Click here to read the rest.

Ripples

2 Minute Video: What are Ethics? Part 21

Winning through Civility