Say It Again

If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times. And I suspect that my wife secretly rues the fact that she's heard it a thousand times. Maybe more.

Speaking of facts, that's a fact of life. It's a common – perhaps universal – “malady” that increases with age. And it's not a disease, but a reflection of the fact that humans, like other forms of life, are predictable.

But first, let me take a quick digression into “habit.” We're all, as the cliché says, its “creatures.” There are many acts we perform without thought. Whether it's nail-biting, smoking, grabbing the banister when climbing or descending stairs, or sitting in a particular chair in the living room; whether it's self-imposed or taught by others – like parents, for example – habits are situational responses which aren't accompanied by conscious thought or decision making. You just do them at the appropriate time.

In this instance I'm referring to is the way we verbally interact. And in many situations we do so based on a kind of habit – an automatic response to some verbal (or other) stimulus. Social occasions follow certain highly superficial rituals. They begin with an introduction and early “ice breakers” to get the conversation started. You know they're coming, and the responses – at least to the initial inquiries – are factual and forgettable. For the most part they're thought-out, although they often don't require much thought. They're not particularly annoying to those around you, because they tend to be brief and factual. “I come from Sheboygan.” “It's in Wisconsin, on Lake Michigan.” “Chicago? About 140 miles south.”

So far so good. But then you hear yourself singing Mention my name in Sheboygan It's the greatest little town in the world. (For those who don't know, it's a song from 1947.) It's not been asked of you, and you didn't think about it, but it always seems to come out when you're discussing the place in which you grew up. Perhaps it started as an affectation, a “clever” way of hiding your anxiety. But now it's automatic – virtually Pavlovian. The circumstances of the discussion of your home town are irrelevant. Somehow or other you begin singing. And your spouse, standing next to you, has heard it so many times before.

Or someone mentions employment in a widget factory, and the work there. “That reminds me of the time ...” and a long, boring story follows. It may even be true. But the words never vary. You've told that story too many times already and you/re not going to change it now. It's easier than actually participating in the conversation, so when you realize that you're in the midst of “an oft-told tale” you simply continue. If it's a shared memory some corrections may follow, but they won't be included the next time you reprise it. You'll do it the same way.

Perhaps you see or hear something that brings back a memory and you launch into the same thing you've said so many times when facing the same stimulus. It may not be a conscious act, but the unconscious association is likely to initiate a fixed and predictable response. Much to the dismay of anyone around.

Such personal responses and stories inhabit all of us. Each of us has a stock of stock stories or comments that anyone who has heard them several times can recite for us. Even the trigger for the telling is apparent to that “anyone,” who knows, before you start, what your reply will be. (“Not again. Can't you say something different? I'm gonna' get a drink. Maybe I'll get drunk.”)

There's another variety of “normal” repetitive speech, one usually saved for your children. “Clean up your room!” “Don't pick your nose.” Turn off the TV and no texting either. It's bedtime.” “If I've told you once I've told you a thousand times (and that's not always hyperbole).” But it's different. It's more a command than a response, and so it will probably be ignored by your spouse. (Often by your child as well.)

Last week I discussed repetitive speech which was pathological and often condemned (rightly or wrongly) by society as requiring therapy. Annoying as the repetition of smart remarks and anecdotes may be, it's normal. And as we get older we'll wind up hearing them more and more often. So if you want to get older, and want your spouse to do so as well, turn down your hearing aid or just don't pay attention. (But if don't turn it down and you pay attention I hope you tell and hear such stories for many years to come.)

But the best strategy is to avoid cocktail parties and any contact with people.

That's my approach.






February 20, 2017

Various Thoughts IX

No time for essays, but thoughts that have crossed my mind.

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

Segregation is back. Voluntary. Proud. There was a commencement ceremony “for black graduate students at Harvard.” That was the declaration of an article yesterday in the New York Times. (I don't generally accept at face value what I read in the Times, but this had a picture to demonstrate the point. I don't think it was “photoshopped.”) Were caucasians excluded? And were “straight” students barred from the “lavender” ceremonies at the University of Delaware? And what about other similar events across the country? We're turning away from a common purpose and a common destiny.

There was a time when Americans were proud of their country and its people. They viewed their nation as a “melting pot.” Now the only ones proud to be Americans are those who have just gained citizenship. E Pluribus Unum no longer applies. Our protests, disdain for each other, and rejection of our government have turned us into a conglomeration of communities that identify with their members, but not with each other and not with our country. It's not what our founders had in mind.

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

I saw some robins a few mornings ago and it got me wondering about their purpose? If you're a Darwinist you see them simply as a step in the evolutionary chain and they have no particular purpose otherwise, except as the ancestors of future species. But perhaps you accept the existence of a deity and the purposeful creation of all forms of life, each with a reason. While that presupposes a use for all of them,

Rabbi Judah said in Rab's name: ... He did not create a single thing without a purpose ... " (Talmud – Shabbat 77b)

and the Bible tells us that they're for our food and our enjoyment, I know that within my religion – Judaism – there is no tradition of eating robins, which pretty much excludes it.

I suppose, then, that enjoyment is the key. I must admit that my spirits were raised when I saw them. In addition to the joy I felt as I watched, their presence told me that Spring was here. And that's good enough for me. I may not understand the secrets of the universe, but I'll enjoy what I can.

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

N. B. My mind is going. And my memory of what I wrote and when is failing as well. I tried to code my essays as I went along, but I didn't do that very well. And my time schedule lacks precision as well. I know that I have essays written and scheduled for publication as far ahead as August 2018. Of course I'm not going to read them so I'll continue in my ignorance of what I said.

Because I'm so far ahead, and some of what I've written will not age well, I've just stuck some things in with the dates they were produced. If you want, you can search for news items at about the same time, and they'll provide context for what I say, though I may have said it before.

It's all good though. I know that I'm repeating myself, and I'll likely continue to do so. Since I try not to reread what I've written I don't get the reinforcement that that might provide. But it's not my problem. It's yours. (I've probably said that already too. So be it.) Deal with my warning as you see fit. (I'll probably repeat it as well when I've forgotten this note.)

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

I can't write about all my thoughts, but some of them my be worth your consideration, even if they don't warrant fuller exposition.

June 4, 2017

A Statue Of Hitler

Slavery is an evil institution. But it is one that has always existed. In recent days it has resulted in the toppling of Civil War statues in New Orleans. Prior to that there were denaming and renaming of buildings in academia because those whom they honored owned slaves. But I want to focus on history, because history is being rewritten, much as was done in the Soviet era, and much as we read about in George Orwell's 1984.

For the moment at least, and I've illustrated this already, everyone's attention is on slavery. It was a dark period in our nation's history, a period whose effects are still with us. And we're making efforts to correct them, and to remove the stain. But, I think, we're going about it the wrong way. Let me illustrate with a bizarre example.

I found the following question on the internet and both the question and the answer are deserving of thought.

In Georgia, recently there has been a dispute, wether [sic] or not the government should keep a monument to Stalin near the house were he was born (ONLY FOR HISTORICAL PURPOSE) [Is there a] public statue of Hitler (even in Nazi Germany)?

[The “Georgia” to which the questioner referred was, obviously not the American state but the eastern European nation.] And the answer:

There are no official statues of Hitler in Germany. ... The former dictator is essentially a persona non grata in Germany, so you would not want to honour [sic] him with statues.

But I suggest the erection of statues of Hitler (and Stalin) all over the world.

I view him as a devil, The Prince of Darkness. He was a murderous, anti-semitic, psychopath and merits our abhorrence for what he did. And he convinced his followers not only of his views but, often, their views as well, and to act on them. It is not underemphasis to suggest that he was one of the most evil men in world history, and his suicide saved him from human recriminations and punishment. Still I suggest his memorialization, for reasons I shall explain presently.

Let me begin the explanation by citing a view of “The Prince of Peace.” I've already mentioned “The Prince of Darkness” so it's only right. I'll first quote all he had to say about the institution of slavery:

“”

Nothing.

Avery Robert Dulles said that "Jesus, though he repeatedly denounced sin as a kind of moral slavery, said not a word against slavery as a social institution", and believes that the writers of the New Testament did not oppose slavery either. In a paper published in Evangelical Quarterly, Kevin Giles notes that, while he often encountered it, "not one word of criticism did the Lord utter against slavery."

Knowing that he witnessed slavery all the time, it is hard not to conclude that he either approved of slavery or didn't give it a second thought. It was a feature of the time and place – normal in the context of his times.

But in recognition of his lack of concern – his tacit approval – of slavery the question arises, in view of current opinions, as to whether all statues of Jesus – indeed, all statues of Christians – should be destroyed. The owning of slaves in our history was as much the exemplification of those times in our history as Jesus's disregard of slaves in his. Whether we agree with them or not, we wouldn't want to see all his words expunged, and the history of the times suppressed because of our disagreements with its priorities. And we wouldn't want the statues of him and all his followers toppled.

But why not? What was done doesn't reflect our views. What they did was wrong, and people suffered because of it. The answer is that it happened. As did the Holocaust and American slavery. And there are many more examples. We don't have to approve of them to acknowledge that they happened, and the more we know of history, the better we can deal with the future. History is not dogma, ideology, sentiment, or political correctness, and the more we separate it from those conceptions, the more accurate will be our image of the past – and the better will be our planning for the future.

Making history conform to our outlook doesn't change the past, although it may affect our knowledge of it. Ignoring the context of the times is deceptive. Obliterating what we don't like makes us more ignorant, not more virtuous. Centuries from now people will look back at us and disagree with some of what we've done. I hope they don't hide from it. I disagree with a lot that's happening, but it's happening and denying it or altering what we know of it will cripple them, as our denial of the past cripples us.

Back to Hitler. His acts were horrendous, and it's incumbent on us to remember them and take steps to make sure they aren't repeated. We are not a world of idealists and we can't rely on others to be so. Especially if we've made them ignorant of what has come before.

Don't destroy or remove statues. Build them, as part of museums which document what happened for the education of those who follow us. There will be plenty of room in the museum to explain what happened and why it was wrong (or, sometimes, right) to those who are unaware. Hitler, Stalin, the tyrants of the Middle East and Far East, the marauders and murderers of Africa, the drug dealers of Central and South America, and our own villains must be remembered and their wickedness described.

As was said by George Santayana

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

And those who hide or falsify the past are even more responsible for our ignorance.








May 19, 2017

Uncle Jonas

It's Purim, and I've been thinking about my Uncle Jonas. Perhaps I'm the only one who ever thinks about him. He died on Purim a little over three decades ago. He was about seventy – I'm not precisely sure what his age was. And I didn't know him very well. But still I remember him.

Uncle Jonas my father's younger brother. He was short and bald. He played the violin, though I can't testify as to how good he was. He never married and lived with his parents (until they died – then he lived alone in the same apartment) on Tenth Avenue in Brooklyn. As I think back, he always struck me as being a little retarded. That may have been the case, but I'm not sure it was always the case. I was told that he had been very bright as a child but was hit by a car and wasn't the same after that. I don't know the full story, but I know that he was friendly, and happy to converse with anyone who talked to him.

Obviously I can't imagine what his life was like. I don't know if he was happy and I don't know if he was contented with his lot. I don't know if he even thought about it. But he was friendly. I simultaneously liked him and, because he seemed slow, I was reluctant to interact with him. That was my problem but, I suspect, not mine alone, and he was left isolated. Now he's dead and I can only think about him. I can only remember.

Remember.

You can only remember those you knew – whether personally or by reputation. And those by reputation you really only “remember” about. Many hope to leave a heritage of accomplishments that will cause them to be remembered, not only by their families but by others as well. Perhaps others hear about them, but they don't remember them. You can't remember those you never knew, or about whom you never heard. So I don't remember the generations of my family – even the famous ones, and there were some – who died before I was born, and those who were never famous. So a few years from now, after I'm no longer in the picture, no one is likely to remember Uncle Jonas.

Does it matter? Not really. We're all forgotten. Equally. Whether accomplished, or living alone in Brooklyn, we're all equal. Whatever the cause of Uncle Jonas's mental slowness, he was human like the rest of us. Who gets remembered? To a degree, we all do. Who is forgotten? Eventually we all are.

So for a little while, I'll remember Uncle Jonas. We may have been different, but we were both made in the image of G-d. And He will remember eternally.

But Who's Counting?

I'm getting old. I know that. It happens, and there's nothing I can do about it except lie back and enjoy it. Of course I never lie.

I've been thinking about the inevitable for a while now, but also about the time that precedes it – the process of getting older. In fact that's probably the reason I write these essays: to record my thoughts while I can still remember them. Not that anyone really cares apart from me. But it gives me the chance work out my ideas as they come to me, and, fortunately, that process continues.

There's an old joke: The second thing to go is your memory. I can't remember the first.

Actually – sadly – it's not a joke. One of the (many) costs of aging is memory loss – especially short-term memory.ⁱ Fortunately for me since it doesn't seem to be associated with any form of dementia so it's little more than a minor inconvenience. I have pen and paper in my pocket at most times and can note whatever crosses my mind, though there are times when I can't remember what I wanted to say about something I jotted down, or I can't read my own handwriting. That doesn't matter all that much, however, because I have more that I can work with than I can work with. Sooner or later I'll have the same thought that stymied me before and I'll write it down a little differently, and it will make sense when I go over my bits of paper. And, of course, I won't remember that I wrote it before. But who cares?

It's your problem too though. I've probably written all this before and I'm likely to do so again. Ditto with my essays. I know I repeat myself. Since I don't go back, however, it doesn't matter all that much. To me, at least. Even the subjects of my efforts are repetitious, although there are some variations that take place from time to time. For example, politicians are politicians, but they make different stupid errors every now and then, and I'm always eager to write about (someone else's) stupidity. Mostly, though, it's the same old thing. There's nothing new under the sun. (I know I've said that before, and King Solomon said it before me.) The more things remain the same, the more they remain the same. Same with my thoughts. I'm too old to change now.

There are additional costs to aging, but I won't go into them here. TMI. And I'll try to avoid them elsewhere as well. But I do want to mention some of the benefits – though if my (failing) memory serves me right I think I've done so before. 

And there are some positives. I'm loath to reject any offers of senior citizen discounts. But I've gotten to the point of buying (low-priced) items without comparison shopping to find the best price. Nor do I hesitate to throw out what I don't need. I certainly won't need it in the future. If my kids inherit a little less that's OK. They'll understand.

From an intellectual point of view, age brings wisdom – if I remember correctly. Of course the young don't necessarily appreciate that wisdom. Nor do they understand the more realistic views of older people (views which tend to be more conservative than theirs). Like most of the young they tend to be more idealistic and liberal. I know. I used to be an optimist like them. However people have cured me of that Pollyannaish prejudice. I know better now.

But from a more personal angle, I note that people are more solicitous. They're always asking me how I feel. (I suspect that it's simply courtesy, and they don't really care. It's more reasonable to assume they're surprised that I'm still alive.) Every now and then someone offers me a seat on the subway, or a chair when we're in a crowded room. (Unfortunately it's only occasional. It used to be more common. People are less courteous and considerate than when I was young. Respect for elders was more evident then. That I remember.) And, even though it only happens occasionally, someone will offer me help, including carrying something for me. I usually decline (it's called “denial”) but I do notice. In addition, if I leave others to take a nap, it's understood. Or if I leave a party early. I hate parties, so it's a good ploy.

Another advantage is that (apart from death) I have less fear of the future. I can be cantankerous (my usual attitude) or generally disagreeable without anyone fighting back and without anticipating any negative consequences. I can pretend I don't hear when I want to ignore someone. And I can be “too weak” to do what I don't want to do. No one will hold it against me.

And I have memories. Lots of them. My long-term memory remains despite all my complaints. So there are compensations. I'd rather be young, but that's not an option. You play the hand you have.

I   For example, I thought of something this morning that I wanted to “google,” but I can't     remember now what it was. Perhaps I'll think of it later.  I do remember, however, that I promised at some time in the past, to avoid these notes, so there probably won't be any more.  In the meantime, hard cheese.

See For Yourself

Look! Off in the distance. I don't believe it. It's Elvis. He's coming towards me. I'm sure of it. But they say he died years ago. I think it was 1977. I didn't believe it then and I don't believe it now. Certainly not since that time several years ago when I saw him from the train I was on. It was going fairly quickly but I'm sure I saw him through a restaurant window. He was eating with Amelia Earhart and Judge Crater. There was no doubt about it, however the next stop was in a city many miles from where I had seen him, so there was no going back. This time, though, he's coming toward me so I'll meet him and have a chance to speak to him. What an opportunity.

He's coming closer. I still can't make out the details. He's carrying something. Must be his guitar. This is great. And today's his birthday. I knew the King didn't die.

He's closer now. And a little clearer. That thing in his hand is probably a shopping bag rather than a guitar case, but there's no question in my mind that it's Elvis.

It's not Elvis. He's much closer now and I can see his build and his face. And his bald head. It's Harry Perkanovich from down the block. Must have been sent out shopping by his wife. From up close he doesn't look at all like Elvis. And I can tell you from the time my wife and I visited his house that he's not musical. He tried playing a song for us when we were there, but the comb and the tissue paper sounded awful. Almost as bad as his voice. His only talent is for making us suffer. (Of course we complimented him.) But from a distance I could have sworn he was my favorite singer. I was certain it was Elvis. I used to be a big fan of his.

You see what you want to see. And if some information is lacking, you fill it in. Most of us deal better with certainty than doubt. And seeing someone or something from a distance provides the opportunity. I suspect that the phenomenon is common. We see what we want to see and what we're prepared to see. Or, often, what we expect to see or what we're told we'll see. Any lawyer knows that an “eye witness” is only reliable if his testimony supports the case. Otherwise there are numerous explanations for his obvious error.

And the same is true of hearing. Hear a snippet of a conversation and you can recreate the whole thing. Whether that's what was said or not. Even if you mis-hear something, what you think you heard becomes fact. Have you ever played “Telephone?”

We can't trust our memories either – consider déjà vu for example. The problem becomes obvious when we compare recollections with those of someone else who shared an experience but remembers it very differently from the way that we do. One of us is wrong. (Or maybe both of us.) Yet when we're not comparing notes there won't be any doubt in either of our minds that we remember exactly what happened. For some, the precision and the detail of the memory become more clear with each retelling of the event.

And for some, any later documentation – a photograph, or the report of someone else – is likely to be added to the memory and reported subsequently as something that is remembered clearly as a first-hand observation. It's not a lie, but a trick of the mind. And it's another potential source of misinformation that may bedevil a legal proceeding. Even if witnesses and jury members are cautioned against the consideration of any information they may have heard or seen about the events at issue, the possibility exists that material of just that sort will be incorporated into the witness's memory or into the juror's knowledge base and affect the outcome of the trial.

Another example of implanted memory is the result of hypnosis, especially “past life regression” and “recovered-memory therapy,” where what is brought up as an unshakable memory may result from suggestion or from incidental unrelated knowledge the subject may have.

What it all boils down to is that our senses, minds, and our memories are less than perfect. Yet we don't doubt them. We often rely on them to the exclusion of “reality.” That's usually a mistake, but not always. Fortunately there are times when we're right and “reality” is nothing more than what the majority incorrectly remember. Perhaps this time it was Perkanovich rather than Presley, but I know that Elvis is still alive.

Happy Birthday.

Thanks For The Memory (footnote i)

As I recall, I've spoken on the subject of memory in the past, although I can't remember very much about what I said.ⁱⁱ As far as I remember, however, I mentioned the idea mostly in passing, and this time I'd like to focus on some aspects that I find interesting and intriguing.

We live in an age when the need for memory is becoming less and less important. (More critical very often is the inability to forget – or the inability to have others forget.ⁱⁱⁱ) With internet searches, we can find out much more than we were ever able to remember when it was necessary to either know it ourselves or to go to the library to learn it, and we can access the information far more quickly than before. And it's no longer necessary to remember the multiplication tables or more complex mathematical formulas. As long as your computer is working, you can find out almost anything you need to know. You can even see pictures of it.^iv

And notwithstanding Santayana and the others who have voiced similar concerns, there isn't even any need to know history. It's all on line. You don't have to remember the Maine, the Alamo, Pearl Harbor, or even 9/11. A few clicks of your mouse and you'll have more information about those events than you could possibly remember. That kind of ability is no longer of importance. Don't waste your neurons and synapses on them. Memory and history are things of the past.

Yet we are fixated on memory. We used to be happy when we could teach some mice to run through a maze, and we offered them rewards for doing so. But we've gone well beyond that now, and beyond Pavlovian responses as well. We can now pick memory apart – we can identify its pieces. Long-term and short-term memory used to be the main categories that we considered, but now we deal with working memory, episodic memory, semantic memory, instrumental learning, motor memory, and other types.^v

Memory has become an industry. Not just the chips in your computer. Study of memory is an important academic pursuit – whether animals or plants^vi are the subject. How memory works is a significant issue for education and, recognizing that numerous nations are outpacing us in this area, we have to be concerned with all the issues that relate to learning in any way. It would be wonderful if our kids could remember history or science as well as they remember hip-hop lyrics.^vii Mnemonics and test results rely on memory, but more important is the knowledge which we can acquire, and the ability to relate that knowledge to facts previously learned. If we are going to create something new, we need to know (and remember) what's old. We have to stand on the shoulders of those who came before.

But there are other needs which memory fulfills. For example, it's critical to our commerce. Our advertising depends on it. It's important that consumers remember our brand names and all that we've taught them about the quality of our products. It doesn't matter if the claims are true, as long as we get enough people to remember them and to buy the things we make or market.

And we need memory in order to play games. How else can we expect to get to the 36^th level of whatever it is that has our attention. And the chess masters, as well as those who play games like Concentration, won't do very well if their focus on the game at hand is not supplemented by additional information that they learned and remember.

More important though, we're concerned about Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia. And not only because we might forget how to utilize our computers. We hear almost daily of people who have wandered off and who lack any concept of where they are going or of how to return home – if they remember that they have homes. As the population ages, memory loss is becoming a more and more serious problem. It's a problem for the patients, their caregivers, and the American economy in general. For example, according to the Alzheimer's Foundation of America, the medical cost of the disease is one hundred billion dollars annually.^viii And that doesn't include other dementias, nor the fact that the cost is certain to go up. (Of course all that money has to go somewhere, and that's to nursing homes, home healthcare workers, scam artists, and anyone else with an idea about how to benefit from the situation. It's all “zero sum.” The money doesn't disappear. Someone gets it.)

But, from my perspective, the greatest merit of memory is that it allows me to have memories. They're not the kinds of things that Google can fetch for me. They're personal. No one remembers my childhood, or that of my children, as I do; no one can call back my college days or my courtship^ix of my wife as I experienced it. And no one wants to. Everyone has memories of his own. Nostalgia. Déjà vu. Sometimes the memories are real and sometimes they're idealized. And sometimes they're created from the “whole cloth.” In any event, they'll be forgotten when we forget them. But that's OK. Those memories will disappear as we will – as those who came before us did.^x We all want to be remembered, but we know that our stories will soon be forgotten. How long does a legacy last? In fact, how long does your own memory last?

So if you're thinking about remembering something for a long time, or being remembered for a long time, fuggedaboudit.

Next episode: “The Only Thing” – Henry Russell Sanders's philosophy and ours.

I        It was Bob Hope's theme song, from “The Big Broadcast of 1938,” in which he starred. He sang the song with Shirley Ross.

ii       The older I get, the more I forget. I try to deal with that problem by making lists. Whenever I think of something interesting, I write it down. Unfortunately, however, there are times when I can't make notes. Like when I'm in the shower. I think of things that I want to remember and try very hard to keep them “on line,” but I know I'm going to forget a lot of my ideas. And that's one of my most accurate insights, since I frequently forget the unwritten thoughts.

iii     Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age, Viktor Mayer-Schönberger

iv      You can even see pictures of memory. Here's Salvatore Dali's “Persistence of Memory.”

         I don't understand it either.  (If the picture does not appear on your computer, you can see it by going to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Persistence_of_Memory)

v        I can't remember them all and doing so is too complicated anyway.

vi      http://www.news.uwa.edu.au/201401156399/research/move-over-elephants-mimosas-have-memories-too. (Don't say things you don't want them to know. They may remember. And they may tell them to someone else.)

vii      In my day it was batting averages and car models – at least among the boys. I don't know what the girls' obsessions were.

viii     http://www.alzfdn.org/AboutAlzheimers/cost.html

ix       Does the whole idea of courtship exist as it did more than half a century ago?

x        Do you remember your great grandparents? Or those who came before them? Or even after them. Each generation makes way for the next, and too many memories would occupy too much space and keep us from making our own. And it's our own that will sustain us as we get older.

A Solemn Day

“Four score and seven years ago ...”

The words, known to most school children and their parents, are the opening words of the Gettysburg Address, probably the best know speech by any American. The world will long remember them.

Fewer of the children and adults know that they were uttered by President Abraham Lincoln
on the afternoon of Thursday, November 19, 1863, at the dedication of the Soldiers' National Cemetery in Pennsylvania. The battlefield was filled with the graves of “who here gave their lives that that nation might live.” A year later, on July 4^th, 1864, those graves were decorated with flowers by local women, and that practice was later adopted in the form of a national holiday, Decoration Day – which we now observe as “Memorial Day,” although the character of the holiday has changed completely.

The decoration of graves by family members is an ancient custom, although the practice originated to memorialize single individuals. There is dispute about the origin of its observance as a recollection of the deaths of the numerous soldiers lost during the Civil War, but the practice certainly began in several locations before the Commander-in Chief of the Grand Army of the Republic (the GAR, an organization of Union Army veterans), General John Logan, called for the establishment of a national holiday – Decoration Day – to commemorate the sacrifices made by so many. In that form it was first held on May 30^th in 1868.ⁱ Although the practice was not at that time an official holiday, it was taken up by localities and states and, soon, the Federal Government.

The observances varied from time to time. Decoration of the graves was an important feature, as were the speeches that recalled the sacrifices of the dead and the atrocities of those who had opposed whichever side was favored by the speaker. The flag was lowered to half-staff and memorials were held for the fallen. In some locations parades were held.

Subsequently, as national military cemeteries were established, and as more died in other wars, military observances became more formalized and more ritualized and, in 1967, the name of the holiday was changed to Memorial Day. Although the name had been adopted in some locations earlier, it was changed under Federal law at that time. As both the old and the new names testify, it was as solemn day – one of remembrance and appreciation.

Things changed, however, the following year with the passage of the Uniform Monday Holiday Act which changed Memorial Day, along with Washington's Birthday, Columbus Day, and Veterans Day,ⁱⁱ into Monday holidays near their original dates. This created three-day weekends for Federal workers, and soon for others as well. And those holidays, memorials of our history, became joyous celebrations, accompanied by paid leave and barbecues. In the case of Decoration/Memorial Day, what had been a solemn day, a day to remember those who died preserving our freedom, became a time of celebration, picnics, automobile races, and the unofficial beginning of summer. The politicians, primarily for PR purposes, continued to pay lip-service to the original intent, but it was clear that the day had as little meaning for them as it did for most Americans. The only ones who cared about the meaning of the holiday were those who had lost friends or family members. Most of the rest of us viewed it as a day off with pay.

But whenever we observe the day we must remember that it originated as a day to decorate the graves of those who fought and died for us, and became a day of memorial for them. They may not have fought willingly, they may have opposed the wars in which they were called upon to take part, but because of them are free and we are alive. Perhaps we, too, questioned some of the choices our government made, and would have preferred another form of conflict resolution, but we chose the government and authorized it to make decisions for us. We are responsible, and we owe our heroes our respect.

We can't go back. We are alive and they are dead. We can argue about whether those deaths were necessary, but we cannot change the facts. We cannot bring them back. We may take a day off from work and celebrate, we may have a barbecue or go on a picnic. But if we forget that they didn't get a day off, and their action was no picnic, then we deny our own history. We deny our national goals, converting patriotism to frivolity, and the sacrifice of others to a day off for us.

We have an obligation: we must continue to be dedicated to the great task remaining before us. We must remember. For if we do not, our entire raison d'être perishes from the earth.

 

 

 

 

I        May 30^th was chosen, according to government sources, because that corresponds to a time when many flowers are in bloom and can be used for the purpose. The date does not commemorate any specific event.

ii       By 1975, in response to veterans' pressure groups, Veterans Day observance was returned to November 11^th, the day of the armistice that ended the First World War. Even so, some communities observe it on other dates and irrespective of the day of the week that November 11^th falls, a day off from work is arranged for Federal employees, and some others. For many of them the meaning of the holiday is less significant than the time off.

Forget It

There's an old joke that you've heard, whether or not you can recall it:

            A: Your memory is the second thing to go.

            B: Oh? What's the first?

            A: I don't remember.

It's funny. The younger you are, the funnier it is. Unfortunately it reflects the reality that your memory deteriorates as you age. I'm not talking about dementia,ⁱ but about normal aging and its consequences.

My wife and I have it worked out. Fortunately we tend to forget different things (mostly) so we can usually help out each other with missing facts, words, events, and fill in the other lacunae left in our memories. It's kind of a joke between us. Sometimes what is missing will reappear on its own if we focus on something else, but sometimes we need help. Rarely the problem is solved with the aid of a family member and for some things a search engine is the magic bullet. And once you've accepted the inevitable, that's funny too.ⁱⁱ Of course it's less funny when you're driving along and have a thought and can't record it. The sign says that you can wait five minutes until the next “text stop,” but you know you can't. You know you'll have forgotten it by then. That's better than having an accident, though. I guess.

We all know that “the golden years” aren't as golden when you experience them as they might have been when you anticipated them, or when you saw them as someone else's problem, which people are likely to do when they're still young. One of the greatest difficulties you're likely to face is the need to make too many hospital visits and attend too many funerals. Of course you're glad they're not yours, but the loss of a friend or family member, and the need to comfort someone bereaved by that loss are difficult to manage. As is the knowledge that the time until your own funeral is decreasing.

However it's not all bad. At least if your health is reasonably good – apart from the various aches and pains that increase through the years and to which none of us is immune. They go with the territory.

In some ways getting older also has fiscal ramifications. The kids are out of the houseⁱⁱⁱ and the food bills now have human proportions. No more concerns about getting them to school on time or about tuition bills. And the various expenses they incurred are gone.^iv In addition, Medicare and Social Security are quite helpful for keeping the checkbook balanced, although you'll probably have to pay for some supplementation – medical or medicational.

On the other hand, there are some increased costs as well. One is the cost of insurance which rises with the years unless you have an already overpriced lifetime policy. And the cost of heating^v and lighting. I seem to need more of both as I get older, but I'm always debating with myself over the wisdom of spending more when I don't know how long I'll need whatever it is that I'm getting.^vi Should I save as much as possible to pass on to my children and grandchildren? Or will I simply be padding Uncle Sam's coffers by leaving them more money on which they'll have to pay taxes?

But, besides some savings in expenses, there are other features of an “up” side that result. At least there's an up side if those around you understand the problem – which they're likely to do since they see the aging as someone else's problem. Yours.

For example, seeing the arrival of grandchildren, and watching them grow up, is a pleasure and privilege without peer. As everyone knows, it's a grandparent's permitted pleasure to spoil them, and his privilege to go home when problems arise.

And since I'm retired, I have more time to go out – though I tend not to do so. But when I do, I often take the subway. It's so much easier to do so than to drive at night, and then to look for, and pay for, parking. I don't need to sit down for my trips on the subway. In fact I like to stand. But it's nice when someone offers me a seat. It doesn't happen very often, but it's nice when it does – whether or not I accept.^vii I'm more likely, however, to accommodate the magnanimity of those who would help me with something they consider too heavy or too difficult for me. I'd be a fool not to. I'm often amused when someone does for me what I'm quite capable of doing for myself, but if I have to get older^viii I shouldn't abjure the “perks.”

So I'm grateful for my “Senior Citizen”^ix card when I go into the subway and I never refuse the discounts that are given to those of a certain age.^x But, given the chance, I'd be willing – I'd be delighted – to forgo them for a few more years.

Next episode: “Snowden, Aspirin, and Unintended Consequences” – If it can go wrong ...

i        Who's to say, though. At some time in the future, someone will publish a paper listing the forgetfulness that we experience as we get older along with diseases, and everyone will jump on the bandwagon and turn it into a new form of dementia.

ii       My assumption is that a failing memory is your only affliction.

iii      Despite all our grousing, theirs and ours, it was fun at the time. And one of the costs of aging is the emptying of the house. However much I love my wife, when the children leave to go their own ways there is both a sense of loss and increasing knowledge of your mortality.

iv      Costs still exist. Assistance when it's needed and gifts when you feel like it. Presents for the grandchildren so that they won't forget you. But the costs are more a matter of choice than obligation.

v       That, of course, includes more sweaters and gloves, even to wear indoors. Something seems to happen to the circulation.

vi      And that applies to everything – not just clothing.

vii     Though I usually do. It would be a shame if my pigheadedness led to the belief by some young, healthy, individual that (s)he was a fool to make that offer and should avoid it in the future. I don't want to ruin it for others.

viii    And, as the saying goes, it's (usually) better than the alternative.

ix      My Metro Card is safe in my wallet so I won't forget it.

x       One of my favorites is the discount I get on Wednesdays at the used day-old cake store.

Cogito Ergo Sum – Pars II

                                                                                                           

It goes without sayingⁱthat even before science learns how to insert thoughts – and they willⁱⁱ– there will be ways found to read thoughts from the outside. It's already possible to identify the areas of the brain that are active in relation to a variety of stimuli, so it can be determined what“turns you on.”ⁱⁱⁱ Thoughts used to be considered sacred and beyond legal consequence. A couple of examples of that philosophy are the German song, Die Gedanken sind frei(thoughts are free) and a line from Frank Loesser's Standing on the Corner which says “Brother, you can't go to jail for what you're thinkin'.” The time will come, however, when you can. Right now all they can do in some jurisdictions is charge you with loitering.

The insertion of ideas, however, is not new. And it needn't be surgical. For better or worse it's always been with us. We call it education, but we try to limit the particular concepts our children learn to those with which we, ourselves, are comfortable. And we look for the“best” schools and teachers to implement the program we have prescribed. We want to choose the school district or, in some cases, a particular school – secular or parochial – to instill both the desired facts in our children and the techniques for working with them, and the “proper” outlook, which is sometimes more important than the facts. And, during this period of information acquisition, youth, we want to shield our children from ideas that we view as detrimental – whether because they are wrong or because we consider them contrary to our own ideas and, thus, confusing and misleading.

When it comes to “proper outlook,” most people usually accept the one that is available at no cost, the one usually described as public education, although some families will opt for a parochial^ivor a private school – even at what may be a significant cost – in order to promote a particular set of values or to improve the chances of a particular outcome that is likely to result from, the attendance at a desirable (type of) institution.

The“promotion” of thoughts, values, and philosophies in a parochial school is often viewed as restrictive and coercive by “liberal”citizens who don't use them, but the techniques they use are no different – and perhaps less harmful – than those used by the state in general.^v Under the usual circumstances the education our children receive –public education – is whatever is believed by the majority,^viand minority viewpoints are either ignored or belittled. It's usually some form of default to generally accepted ideas without much attention to details. In some instances, however, there may be a specific intent to indoctrinate the students into “correct”beliefs and “knowledge.” George Orwell, in 1984,^viishowed what can be done with the recasting of history, the“correction” of existing texts, careful crafting of the message, and the creative use of language. If there are no time constraints, if it can be done over generations, and no one will notice or care. Soon enough the information people are taught to believe becomes common knowledge. First “knowledge,” and then memory. Mythology and old wives' tales are well accepted in our society already. Who is not aware the George Washington chopped down a cherry tree and admitted his transgression, and that vitamin C will prevent or cure the common cold? In the next generation these will be the truths that everyone knows.

The education, provided by those who will seek community through uniformity of knowledge will be greatly assisted by technological advances, as well as by the popular desire for test score improvements and a common curriculum for all – however inappropriate it is for many of the students. Disingenuous innovators will, with feigned diffidence claim they are “standing on the shoulders of giants.” What is actually the case is that they've had an education and are working with more information than previous generations – the real giants – had. The idea, as they express it, sounds modest but noble, yet it is too often camouflage for calculated misrepresentation. And with the internet and all the social media outlets, false “truths” and spins, that “calculated misrepresentation” can be disseminated instantaneously. If it doesn't stick the first time, it can be presented again and again. After all, one of the basic techniques of education is repetition.

So the public may be horrified by scientific advances,^viiiwithout realizing that the advances research will bring some day by techniques now viewed as science fiction, have been present in less dramatic form since the dawn of civilization. And so, as with so many other things, before we take issue with what's to come, the perils of the future, it's vital that we evaluate what we have and what we've been taught is right. That, itself, may hold some dangers that need reconsideration. If I am what I think, I may not be what I think I am.

Anyway, that's what I think. At least I think it is.

Next episode: “Don't Put A Cold In Your Pocket”- Common sense but not Thomas Paine.

i           But I'll say it anyway.

ii            Surgery has already been employed to govern thought. Lobotomy was designed to sever pathways of emotional thoughts, allowing the victims to be more manageable. We now use mind-altering drugs to achieve the same results, but what we're learning may also teach us how to surgically change thought patterns. And we're experimenting with the transfer of genetic material to prevent, treat, and possibly cure diseases, so why not use the injection of facts as a cure for ignorance? It will be especially useful in those likely to have low IQs. Obviously that kind of procedure will be more difficult, but when scientists set their minds to solving a problem, it eventually gets solved, though it may take a long time and may be a problem better left unsolved.

iii         How long will it take before the techniques are refined and more specific information, perhaps individual thoughts, ideas, and memories, can be determined? Who knows? But it's only a matter of time.

iv          While a parochial school is usually chosen in order to have a particular religion inculcated in its students, the “public” schools similarly inculcate religion – the secular religion of the society in which the students live. (Although uncommon, there are occasions when a parochial school of another religion is chosen because of the quality of the education.)

v         Actually, it is not only the schools that do this, but the media. In their editorials, which are often repetitive messages emphasizing a particular viewpoint, they hammer home to susceptible readers the virtuous way to understand a particular situation or idea. Their way.

vi        Depending on sophistication and intent, that may be old wives' tales and mythology, or brainwashing and “reeducation.”

vii       Following the lead of the USSR and other totalitarian governments.

viii      As will many scientists.

Cogito Ergo Sum

 

                                                                                                          

That's what I thought; That's what I thought; That's what I thought; That's what I thought.

But I was wrong on all counts. And everyone makes the same mistake.

“I thought services started at 9 o'clock.”ⁱ That's what my friend said. “Thought.” One of mankind's greatest sources of error.ⁱⁱ Thought is too often a substitute for actual knowledge, and too often thought is confused with knowledge. For what you “know” may not be true. Certainly, as you get older your memories and your “knowledge” have a way of losing their clarity. The transmission of information from one neuron to the next isn't a sure thing. Sooner or later the memory – which is presumably some kind of chemical formulation which is passed along the neurons or resides in one of them – become corrupted, and words, ideas, and memories drop out. So grants will be sought and written to determine how to solve this problem. What, specifically, is the nature of an idea and where, specifically, is it located?

And this is where science fictionⁱⁱⁱ enters the picture. Once scientists discover how specific thoughts are encoded and recovered, and the location at which they are located, it won't be long before they figure out how to implant false ideas at those locations. Efforts to restore information will be superseded by those to implant it. Déjà vu will become reality.

The first step is anatomical. Where are thoughts located? That's not the only challenge, but it's an important one. It will probably be a while before we get the kind of answer we need, but the work has been going on for a while and we now know a little about thoughts and memories and their locations in various places in the cerebral cortex, in the frontal lobes and the basal ganglia, and in some other spots, but it will take more research before we can refine that knowledge to what we need. If the whole thing is going to work – if we're going to be able to implant thoughts the way we are learning to do with genes^iv – we'll need to know about which neurons to choose and how to get the new “fact” to stick. And of course we'll have to know what to insert to achieve the desired result.

So, needing a subject for experimentation, we recall that animals can be taught, if they have the physical apparatus both for the placement of the ideas and the performance of the acts that the encoded idea contains. They'll be the test subjects.^v After the chemical components, or the nucleic acid sequences of specific ideas are determined, and once the particular sites in the brain are identified, someone will come up with a way to insert the idea where it needs to be.

And then we'll start doing it on people. There will be numerous legal and ethical questions but they always lag behind the scientific accomplishments so it's unlikely that they will slow down the “critical” research.^vi First there will be the prisoners. Many of those destined for death will certainly be willing to offer their brains for experimentation in exchange for their lives, or for some “consideration” for family members. And once the techniques are perfected, there are likely to be some, among the elderly, who may find hope in the idea of restoration of memories. And the idea of a treatment for dementia will be extraordinarily appealing. Think of the savings for any health care program.

It will soon be noted that learning is nothing more than the acquisition of facts, so why not speed up education on the operating table? (Or “re-education,” as brainwashing is often labeled.) It is not hard to imagine a time when some amoral accountant will point out that it's cheaper to inject education – perhaps in newborns – than to pay for years of education. Of course the universities and other paid educational institutions will object, but what's wrong in having a child of Pre-K age who has the knowledge of a Ph.D? And, since the original advances in this field are likely to come from our country, perhaps we'll be able to catch up in all those surveys of education that show us behind so many countries in the free world.

Next episode: “Cogito Ergo Sum, Part Two” – The more I think about it,^vii the more I realize there's a lot more to be said.

i       It had been announced a week earlier that it would be 8:45.

ii      “Think” and “assume” are two ideas that can only get us into trouble. Both should be used with great caution and the knowledge of the risks inherent in their use – both in terms of the words themselves, and the process they reflect. If it ain't “know,” it ain't reliable. But sometimes that's not true either. Please continue with the text.

iii       Fiction at least for now. But science usually has a way of catching up with both the imaginable and the unimaginable.

iv      We're experimenting now with the transfer of genetic material to prevent, treat, and possibly cure diseases so, it will be argued, why not use the injection of facts as a cure for ignorance. It will be especially useful in those likely to have low IQs.

v      The guinea pigs, whatever their species.

vi      In fact, those doing the research will be happy if the lag is long, or even unending, so that they have the time to get whatever information, fame, or patents they seek.

vii     Yes, “think.” No one has injected me with anything yet. The fantasies are all mine.