The famous quote by Virginia Woolf nags in my mind: "...on or about December 1910, human character changed ... The change was not sudden or definite ... but a change there was, nonetheless"
Looking back on the 20th century, we have much evidence that she was correct. The 20th century followed the 19th century - that gilded age and the era of Romanticism in art, literature and music. Relative peace existed worldwide: the principal post-Napoleonic conflict was the U. S. Civil war, but it brought forth freedom for millions of human beings from slavery.
The 20th century brought forth mass murder on an industrial scale by Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Mao's China, Pol Pot's Cambodia, and militarist Japan, and in the bloodlands in Eastern Europe. Human beings ceased to be seen as individual people, but as a number, a part of a class, and a bit of a nation. The passport system imposed regulations on free travel. "Your papers, please" became the stock bureaucratic and police greeting nearly worldwide. Even supposedly free America, a government ID is now required for much previously free activity.
In a now famous literary critical essay on the Metaphysical Poets of the 17th century, T. S. Eliot wrote: "In the seventeenth century a dissociation of sensibility set in, from which we never recovered ..." [Note 1; today's word of the day is "sensibility"]. He was postulating that sometime in the mid 17th century, "life [was] no longer felt to be a moral struggle and morality itself became abstract." [Note 2]
This seems to have happened again. Beyond the historical facts of the 20th century, consider today. Commonplace dialog now examines almost every public statement as that of the rich or the poor, or the blacks or whites, or Hispanics or whatever class. People are viewed as numbers or members of a class. Jobs and school admissions are assigned by racial/ethnic groups. Public debate has degraded to sloganeering and propaganda sound bites. Realpolitik is pervasive. Simple efforts for human rights receive snickers. Efforts to bring some moral (or religious) feelings into arguments are met with screeches about "inclusiveness", when such actions are meant to exclude morality from legitimate debate.
We need to have a debate on where we want to go as a nation and a world; morality and human (meaning individual) happiness must again become part of the debate. We cannot fix our short and long term problems without knowing the end point - the eschaton - of our efforts. The path must be chosen to go to the right place. Paraphrasing Ronald Reagan said, we want to go to the Shining City on the Hill where cumulative individual happiness is optimal, not to the Dark City in the Swamp where we all are numbered parts of a cruel machine.
Note 1: Selected Prose of T. S. Eliot, The Metaphysical Poets, page 64.
Note 2: Cambridge Companion to T. S. Eliot, page 54 mid.
Word of the Day
"Sensibility" - noun [$10]
Sensibility means 1. a. openness to emotional impressions, susceptibility, sensitiveness (sensibility to kindness); 1. b. (archaic) an exceptional or excessive degree of this (sense and sensibility); 2. a. (in plural) emotional capacities or feelings (was limited in his sensibilities); 2. b. (in sing. or pl.) a person's moral, emotional, or aesthetic ideas or standards; 3. sensitivity to sensory stimuli [USAGE: Sensibility should not be used in standard English as a noun corresponding to "sense" or "sensible"; it does not mean possession of common sense. Use sensibleness for that meaning.]
Sentence: On or about December 1910, much of humanity underwent a dissociation of sensibility, as it began to lose its moral compass for seeing each person as an individual person. Can we regain our sensibility?
Showing posts with label human behavior. Show all posts
Showing posts with label human behavior. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Thursday, April 29, 2010
The Principal Source of Wealth
That is the skills, knowledge and motivation of the human beings in the community or nation, or on the planet. Human beings create wealth. Period. There is no other causal source of it. This is proven by so many examples, but it should be self-evident and obvious with minimal thought. The earth existed for billions of years, but where was the wealth in it ? That wealth did not exist. Until modern humans walked the earth, likely first about 100,000 years ago, there was almost no wealth on the planet.
Another example: The New World. For many thousands of years after the first modern human walked on the Earth, the New World was void of people. When people came, wealth was slowly created. But when human beings with more skills and knowledge arrived after 1492, the wealth of the New World increased at a much greater rate. What was the difference ? The knowledge, skills and motivation of the humans beings living there had increased by a quantum leap with the new arrivals.
Singapore has little land or natural resources, yet its people are relatively wealthy. That's because of their own skills, knowledge and motivations. Ditto Hong Kong.
Culture is part of the skills, knowledge and motivation that produces wealth. A nation with a culture that oppresses and effectively enslaves its women and /or certain castes automatically, ipso facto, loses that same proportion of its potential for wealth. Cultural institutions like slavery and serfdom impeded the growth of national wealth, as do special privileges for aristocratic classes.
Greece has problems. What is the solution ? Re-examine the sources and uses of human capital in Greece. All Greece possesses to increase its wealth - to solve its debt problems - are its people and its sole source of wealth is its people. What is debt ? Debt is simply a transfer in time for the rights to use goods or services: debt neither creates nor destroys wealth. Too much debt means simply that the nation (or community) is consuming too much wealth now versus what it can produce in the future.
Early retirements at high pay DOES reduce national wealth. The nation or community loses the productive capacity of the retiree for those years when he/she would other wise be able to work productively. That's a lot. Many, many other state activities reduce wealth of a community. If one focuses on the human source of wealth, these become apparent very, very quickly.
To solve a nation's debt problems, look to its people. To restore a community, look to its people. That's where all its wealth inherently comes from - the skills, knowledge and motivation of its people.
Word of the Day
"Canaille" - noun [$10] pronounced kuh 'ni with a long 'i' - loan word from French
Canaille means the rabble, the populace.
Sentence: Around 100 B. C., Gaius Marius saved Rome by recognizing the potential for, and using Rome's canaille in the legions. And in doing so, he likely preserved the future path of the modern world to that which we now have.
Another example: The New World. For many thousands of years after the first modern human walked on the Earth, the New World was void of people. When people came, wealth was slowly created. But when human beings with more skills and knowledge arrived after 1492, the wealth of the New World increased at a much greater rate. What was the difference ? The knowledge, skills and motivation of the humans beings living there had increased by a quantum leap with the new arrivals.
Singapore has little land or natural resources, yet its people are relatively wealthy. That's because of their own skills, knowledge and motivations. Ditto Hong Kong.
Culture is part of the skills, knowledge and motivation that produces wealth. A nation with a culture that oppresses and effectively enslaves its women and /or certain castes automatically, ipso facto, loses that same proportion of its potential for wealth. Cultural institutions like slavery and serfdom impeded the growth of national wealth, as do special privileges for aristocratic classes.
Greece has problems. What is the solution ? Re-examine the sources and uses of human capital in Greece. All Greece possesses to increase its wealth - to solve its debt problems - are its people and its sole source of wealth is its people. What is debt ? Debt is simply a transfer in time for the rights to use goods or services: debt neither creates nor destroys wealth. Too much debt means simply that the nation (or community) is consuming too much wealth now versus what it can produce in the future.
Early retirements at high pay DOES reduce national wealth. The nation or community loses the productive capacity of the retiree for those years when he/she would other wise be able to work productively. That's a lot. Many, many other state activities reduce wealth of a community. If one focuses on the human source of wealth, these become apparent very, very quickly.
To solve a nation's debt problems, look to its people. To restore a community, look to its people. That's where all its wealth inherently comes from - the skills, knowledge and motivation of its people.
Word of the Day
"Canaille" - noun [$10] pronounced kuh 'ni with a long 'i' - loan word from French
Canaille means the rabble, the populace.
Sentence: Around 100 B. C., Gaius Marius saved Rome by recognizing the potential for, and using Rome's canaille in the legions. And in doing so, he likely preserved the future path of the modern world to that which we now have.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Rome
Understanding the nature and beliefs of the civilization of ancient Rome is a crucial building block for understanding the modern world. This is not only because so many modern institutions trace elements of their structure to Roman institutions, but also cultural and behavioral dimensions of modern human beings do (or should) draw on the early Roman models. For the former, I'm talking about law, courts a Senate and assembly of the People, a Republic versus kings, an army drawn from the middle class (in the Republic); for the later I'm referring to honor, duty, integrity, rhetoric, family.
From Roman examples we learn about greatness and honor in real people: Julius and Augustus Caesar for the former; and Cato and Cicero for the latter.
From Rome we also learn about tyranny and depravity: Sulla and Caligula.
Stories one reads learning Latin are very uplifting. The language brings this out with its simple, inflected forms and sparsity of fluff and adjectives. A Latin epigram or proverb is beautifully precise. Of course, few people learn Latin nowadays. I'm re-learning Latin and am enjoying it immensely, but if you didn't have it in high school, I can't recommend that path to learn from Rome.
Instead, I recommend the combination of books and CD courses.
From antiquity: Plutarch, Lives, and Suetonius, Twelve Caesars, Julius Caesar, Gallic Wars (aka Commentaries).
The Teaching Company courses on Rome: Famous Romans, History of Ancient Rome.
And now I can recommend a historical novel as a Book of the Week: The First Man in Rome, by Colleen McCullough. This is a fine book, very well researched. The author builds from a foundations of facts about Rome and its culture, then adds the human side in dialog and thoughts very, very plausibly. I started reading it on Saturday and am enjoying it immensely. Nothing yet contradicts my own understanding of Roman culture and history. The book through its characters is an excellent learning tool for one to better understand Rome and the Romans.
NOTE: The First Man in Rome is a first of a series of seven books which were well received by the public and critics. I plan to read the first two, then perhaps over time more.
MORE: The book is pleasantly written in a fine style and includes a few $10 words; it's definitely not dumbed down. I've found four good $10 words already - three new ones and one old one in the file I had forgotten.
Word of the Day
"Ken" - noun and verb [$10] from The First Man in Rome. Not Barbie's boyfriend !
Ken means (noun) a range of sight or knowledge (it's beyond my ken); (verb) 1. recognize at sight; 2. know [past & participle: kenning; kenned or kent]
Sentence: One's ken expands greatly with more understanding of Rome and the Romans.
From Roman examples we learn about greatness and honor in real people: Julius and Augustus Caesar for the former; and Cato and Cicero for the latter.
From Rome we also learn about tyranny and depravity: Sulla and Caligula.
Stories one reads learning Latin are very uplifting. The language brings this out with its simple, inflected forms and sparsity of fluff and adjectives. A Latin epigram or proverb is beautifully precise. Of course, few people learn Latin nowadays. I'm re-learning Latin and am enjoying it immensely, but if you didn't have it in high school, I can't recommend that path to learn from Rome.
Instead, I recommend the combination of books and CD courses.
From antiquity: Plutarch, Lives, and Suetonius, Twelve Caesars, Julius Caesar, Gallic Wars (aka Commentaries).
The Teaching Company courses on Rome: Famous Romans, History of Ancient Rome.
And now I can recommend a historical novel as a Book of the Week: The First Man in Rome, by Colleen McCullough. This is a fine book, very well researched. The author builds from a foundations of facts about Rome and its culture, then adds the human side in dialog and thoughts very, very plausibly. I started reading it on Saturday and am enjoying it immensely. Nothing yet contradicts my own understanding of Roman culture and history. The book through its characters is an excellent learning tool for one to better understand Rome and the Romans.
NOTE: The First Man in Rome is a first of a series of seven books which were well received by the public and critics. I plan to read the first two, then perhaps over time more.
MORE: The book is pleasantly written in a fine style and includes a few $10 words; it's definitely not dumbed down. I've found four good $10 words already - three new ones and one old one in the file I had forgotten.
Word of the Day
"Ken" - noun and verb [$10] from The First Man in Rome. Not Barbie's boyfriend !
Ken means (noun) a range of sight or knowledge (it's beyond my ken); (verb) 1. recognize at sight; 2. know [past & participle: kenning; kenned or kent]
Sentence: One's ken expands greatly with more understanding of Rome and the Romans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
