Nota Bene

Reality has raised its ugly head. I've been doing this now for over four years and my list of potential subjects keeps getting long faster than I can publish. I admit that some of the subjects are really repetitious – but I've said that before. Anyway, it's become obvious to me that I'll never be able to write about all the things that interest or bother me. So I thought I'd offer some of them to the few readers of these essays. (And I'll do so about once a month from now on – at least until I stop doing so.) If you'd like to use one, for fiction or non-fictional setting, let me know using the comment option below and I'll make sure that others don't use it as well.ⁱ Some are story ideas and others are subjects for essaysⁱⁱ – but don't let my preconceived notions govern the use that you have in mind. And I'd love to read your discussions of the subjects. Since I'm unlikely to ever get to them anyway I may, in this way, get the clarification of the issues that I seek. I'll try to mix up the subject matter in each offering. To wit:

1. Scientists tell us that the “Big Bang” was a random event – a “singularity” – and before it happened, time didn't exist.ⁱⁱⁱ If that's the case, however unlikely the event, it could happen again, at least theoretically, perhaps next Tuesday.

Suppose it did happen a second time, some distance away from earth.^iv What physical impact would that have? And when? What would be the implications of a new start of time? Would that apply to us or only to the new universe? How would our belief systems be affected?

2. What goes through the mind of someone involved in the manufacture of an item whose “proper” use will certainly injure or kill a percentage of the users? Tobacco products are certainly convenient examples, but they are hardly unique in this respect. Alcohol and pharmaceuticals are other commodities from which a certain number of deaths are predictable. Drug manufacturers warn us all the time of the side effects^v as they encourage us to discuss our using their potions with our doctors.

Justification may take the form of cost/benefit balance^vi or by the citation of other products or industries that also exist despite the certain knowledge of the casualties they will cause. Automobiles and airplanes are two such products, and construction (of bridges, tunnels, and skyscrapers, etc.) is a dangerous industry. How does the executive, or even the low-level worker in the industry, justify his actions?

3. How would you react, after having to rebuild portions of your house twice because it is in a flood plain, if the government offered to buy you out, tear down the building, and turn the area into wetlands? The house is where you were born, and the area is the only home you have ever known. Your parents lived here and they left it to you. It is their heritage, one that you intended to leave to your own children. All of your friends are from around here, although some of them may sell and leave. Do you owe it to your heirs to stay or to go?

4. Suppose a society that practices cannibalism subjects a citizen of a “retentionist” (of capital punishment) country to its practice. Suppose, then, that a member of that society visits, as a tourist, the country of origin of the victim, and his own citizenship is noted. Should the culture of the society that produced cannibals be respected as a valid choice? Should the cannibal be tried and executed? Are there absolutes or is everything relative? Is cannibalism permissible? What about capital punishment? Would the “appropriate” remedy be any different if the cannibalism were performed in the “enlightened” country or does the cultural background of the individual justify his acts wherever he is?

I suspect that some readers may have considered some of these issues, however I don't know to what degree. I know that I don't have immediate answers to the questions they pose, although they trouble me and I wonder about them. Perhaps someone else can resolve the issues in a satisfactory manner. That will surely cut down on the backlog of subjects I have compiled for discussion.

Next episode: “In Praise Of Homosexuality” – There are two sides to every question.

I        We can also discuss any mutually beneficial arrangements relating to the use of my ideas.

ii       Some may be single sentences or short questions. You'll see.

iii      I must admit that I have difficulty with the entire concept – at least its details if not its occurrence – but that's neither here nor there. I'll deal with that separately however, and in a manner that doesn't affect the issues raised here.

iv      The distance could be one mile, fifteen billion light years, or somewhere in-between. I don't know if the effects on our planet would be different depending on the distance, or if the event itself would cancel out any previous beginnings (I hesitate to say “Creations,” however this might be a consideration in the mind of the writer).

v       Including death.

vi      Cigarettes, for example, might be defended because of the “pleasure” they give to their (addicted) users or because of the beneficial economic impact of he industry.