When in Rome

Right or wrong?

It's a question that most of us ask ourselves from time to time. Most of us. Not all because some aren't concerned about the answer. But those who do ask are usually concerned. And they're involved in an activity which is new to them. They haven't formed an opinion and the boundaries and rules aren't clear. Often the goal is to do what's legal rather than what's right, and in such a situation you have to know the rules. If you're going to exploit the law, you have to know the law.

It's not a new problem, but the answer may be difficult. There's an old joke about a student preparing for a test and obtaining the questions asked on previous exams. Noting that the questions seem the same from year to year he inquires of student senior to him and is informed that though the questions are the same, the answers change. (And that's the case regarding right and wrong – from time to time and from place to place.)

One and one will always be two (in base 2 or above) but it's less clear that human sacrifice is legitimate. The latter issue is one that is based on societal beliefs, preferences, and judgments, and they're subject to change. Which raises a question I've mentioned on many occasions in the past: absolutes. I haven't changed my opinion, although many will consider it old-fashioned and insensitive to the current, understanding, persuasion. It's not multi-cultural. It doesn't recognize that different societies view things differently and to oppose what may be practices that may be the norm elsewhere betrays a lack of tolerance, or worse on my part. But I accept the idea that there are absolutes.

And the different societies which I mention aren't all separated simply by location, but by time as well. Does that change the principle? Was it ever, anywhere, justified to sacrifice babies to the “gods?” It was the practice in some ancient, and not so ancient, societies and cults to do so, but we would reject it immediately, irrespective of the fact that it might have been a “normal” practice somewhere at some time. There are absolutes, and, among those who care about right and wrong, I suspect there are strictures on their behavior which supersede the customs of the society in which they find themselves.

If, however, such absolutes exist, there has to be a source. For me that source is the Bible, although I know that some of the absolutes it contains are shared by societies that have never seen one. (I'll come back to that point presently.) It's a good guidebook, although the sages of Judaism have advised us to obey the laws of the state in which we live. There's an exception, however. If secular law conflicts with Torah (Biblical) law, we are to follow that in the Torah. (“Right” is defined by the Torah.) By doing so we deny the following of the aphorism about Rome and its practices. When they conflict with our laws we don't follow them, although we may comply with local customs otherwise. Indeed, when we're in a Jewish community with different customs we follow theirs rather than our own. It's our practice to try to follow the rules of the community in which we find ourselves.

That leaves one subject to be addressed: the fact that there are some absolutes which exist in societies unaware of each other. Somehow or other we all recognize certain limits to our choices. And some of them are shared, even though other practices may be at great variance. How have we achieved this common position when many of our other customs are so different from other societies?

Suggesting that some of these are obvious and serve to protect us as we protect others is begging the question. It may be true, but it doesn't explain anything. Why are certain things obvious? Why should everyone have, in regard to some aspects of our lives and beliefs, a common view of right and wrong? The only explanation that I can conceive of in this age of electronics is that we're all programmed in the same way – at least in regard to some moral as well as physical characteristics. It's in our DNA.

But sometimes cultural influences override DNA. When human sacrifice existed in some societies, they believed that what they were doing was right. At least those in charge thought that their practices were proper, even if there were some who disapproved. That doesn't mean that they were right any more than it means that we should give free rein to cultures among us that have traditions that deviate from the absolutes. Every society has rules, and the hierarchy of its restrictions includes, or at least should include, the absolutes.

But when there is disagreement about the absolutes, who decides what they are? G-d. The One who created us and assigned our DNA. There is a right and there is a wrong. Even if there are some who are unwilling to acknowledge them.

When in Rome, or anywhere else, do what the Romans do. Unless you know that they are doing wrong. Then do what your conscience – as controlled by your DNA – directs you to do. If the society in which you are chooses not to follow the absolutes, it is wrong. That's not a matter of different societal norms and sensitivity to the practices of others. Right is right and wrong is wrong.

In the words of the cliché, “do the right thing.”






March 28, 2017

Great Expectations

I have no beef. At least no legitimate beef.

When I was born in 1939, a white male (it's not a politically correct designation but I am what I am) had a life expectancy of a little less than 64 years. I'm almost 77 so I passed that a while back. Even today, in 2016, the life expectancy of a boy born now would be 76.3 – down a little from last year – so I'm ahead there too.

The progress we're making in treating disease successfully, and in increasing life span, is truly amazing. Much as we may insult the medical profession and blame doctors for the ills of society, we've all benefited. Some want more and want it faster but they, too, will live longer (and have more time to complain) than would have been the case in the past. The biblical mandate, to provide for his complete cure (Exodus 21:19, translation by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan), has been taken very seriously. (Hu)Man(ity), was made in the image of G-d, and, while many are working toward our moral improvement, medical scientists are learning more about our bodies, and how to improve the world around us, in quest of more complete cures.

There have been major improvements in the available diagnostic tools, making it easier to discover diseases earlier and to characterize them more fully and accurately. And, or course, there have been, over the years, vast improvements in all forms of therapy – medicinal, surgical, rehabilitative, and even alternative means.

The research continues. Every day there is new information learned not only about specific diseases, but also about aging in general. Perhaps some day we'll be able to increase life spans based on this kind of information, rather then piecemeal through the treatment of particular maladies. But that's for then – not now.

I'm the beneficiary of some of these medical advances. MRI, CT, and a variety of blood tests, including genetic screens, have contributed to the ability of my doctors to understand my illness. Modern surgical techniques and recent medical therapies have also been employed in my treatment. Will they help? Only G-d knows, but what is possible for mortals to do is being done. I'm lucky – but I think I've said that before.

Noting my good fortune, however, doesn't solve all of my problems. I'm slower, more tired, and less steady than I used to be. And while my gustatorial preferences haven't changed, I find that I fill up much faster than was the case before.

Several years ago I volunteered for a study at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. The stated intent was to investigate both cognitive and physical abilities in people as they aged. From the perspective of cognitive skills, I recognize diminishment only in the ability to remember some words. The ideas are clear but sometimes I can't recall the word that goes with it. (It's interesting that the mind can visualize concepts without requiring the words that go with them. Cognitive content and the words that identify and describe it seem to be separate functions, and we don't require words to have ideas. It's hard not to wonder, though, the extent to which it was necessary to have vocabulary in order to formulate and imprint the ideas in the first place.) That, apparently, is a common problem associated with aging, and my wife and I have dealt with it by helping each other with words.

In any event, the study has focused my attention on aging as one of the contributors to my current physical difficulties, but I cannot ignore the disease itself and the psychological baggage that accompanies it. And, to a degree, I can't dismiss the thought that the placing of chairs, beds, tables, and other devices to make life easy for me isn't in fact making things harder by being in the way. Oh well, I'll probably never work it out.

But I've already outlived most of my cohort. That's what the numbers tell me. So I guess that I win. And I'm not tossing in the towel just yet. I still have goals. Mostly they're sort of deadlines. They're primarily family events that I want to attend, and I'm hopeful that I'll be fortunate enough to do so. My (and my wife's) sixtieth anniversary is June 26, 2020. I'd like to be able to celebrate it, although I won't hold my breath (or maybe I will). Bargaining won't help. The Judge of all the earth will do justly

There's another kind of goal, though, that I've long pursued. We – human souls – are children of G-d and made in His image. We are called upon to love and care for each other as He loves and cares for us. Helping each other and having responsibility for them – that seems to be one of the absolutes that cultural relativists say don't exist. But they do.

If I can have helped or guided one other, my life will have been worthwhile – at least to me.

December 31, 2016

Decibel, It Was You

I found a fascinating Wikipedia article recently. It reads, in part,

The National Radio Quiet Zone (NRQZ) is a large area of land in the United States in which radio transmissions are strictly restricted by law to facilitate scientific research and military intelligence. It is located in the states of West Virginia, Virginia, and a tiny part of Maryland. ...

Most broadcast transmitters in the Quiet Zone are forced to operate at reduced power and use highly directional antennas. This makes cable and satellite all but essential for acceptable television in much of the region. Restrictions on transmissions are tightest within ten miles of the NRAO and Sugar Grove facilities, where most omnidirectional and high-power transmissions are prohibited.

There was more, of course, but this was enough to convince me that it must be a great place to live. I value peace and quiet and it sounded like the place for me. And I'm old-fashioned. A quiet area with a minimum of noise and electronic devices sounded great. So I sent a link to my children, and got back the following from my older son who noted that his Rabbi had mentioned it in a sermon. It's from an article in The Smithsonian Magazine.

Earth’s Quietest Place Will Drive You Crazy in 45 Minutes

… Inside the room it's silent. So silent that the background noise measured is actually negative decibels, -9.4 dBA. Steven Orfield, the lab's founder, told Hearing Aid Know [an on-line site]: “We challenge people to sit in the chamber in the dark – one person stayed in there for 45 minutes. When it’s quiet, ears will adapt. The quieter the room, the more things you hear. You’ll hear your heart beating, sometimes you can hear your lungs, hear your stomach gurgling loudly. In the anechoic chamber, you become the sound. ...

I admit to being an amateur when it comes to physics, so I was amazed. At least until I thought about it. (I never read the article, however, hence I'm not corrupted by facts.) The whole idea of negative sound is one that I find confusing. If, for example, there is a -9.4 dBA reading, there must be a -4.7 and a -14.3 dBA. The possibility that there are degrees of soundlessness – and, therefore, that one “non-sound” is greater than another – is totally beyond me. (Are there degrees of perfection, uniqueness, and infinity?) And how would you measure it anyway?

I tried to use negative pressure and the vacuum cleaner as analogies, but that didn't really work. The “negative pressure” involved is simply a pressure relative to those around it, rather than an absolute.

Indeed, we know of no temperature below absolute zero, nor a humidity below 0%. At least not yet (unless it just hasn't made it to the media yet). And what tools would provide us with the information? Being a scientist is a great profession. You don't have to explain anything to anyone – only to amaze them. They wouldn't understand the explanation anyway. I know I wouldn't.

I'm a hermit. And I like it quiet. But there are limits. At least I thought there were.

November 13, 2016

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Subsequent to writing this I was informed (by the same son who gave me the initial information) that 0 dBA reflects not soundlessness, but the lowest level of sound that the human ear can hear and that “it seems that the dB scale is more like Celsius or Fahrenheit, not Kelvin.” Facts are nasty things. That's why I try to avoid them and not let myself be corrupted.



November 14, 2016