Monthly Archives: February 2022

Old Jules Asks: questions for a Saturday

Could the human species be replaced by a large flock of free-ranging chickens?

Aside from a relatively compact population of farmers to grow the food, carpenters to build chicken-houses, and soldiers to keep the predators away?

I’ve been watching free-ranging chickens for several years and become increasingly convinced they’re an almost perfect simulation of human-society and human society minus the wars, genocides and the occasional demonstration of intelligence.

Considering chickens do the same thing humans do, but do it a lot more efficiently, could the great majority of humanity be replaced without anyone noticing?

Is the exercise of taking responsibility for what we didn’t do a self-aggrandizing or delusional hoax?

During the past half-century US presidents have apologized to:

Native Americans for the European migration into the Americas

The ‘Trail of Tears’ [moving the tribes east of the Mississippi River out of their traditional lands to areas west of the Mississippi River]

Americans of Japanese descent for the internment of Japanese descended citizens during WWII

Japanese for the nuclear detonations over Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Mexico and Mexicans for the US confiscation of Mexican territory [the entire US southwest] from Mexico after the Mexican War

US citizens of African descent for the slavery and hardships their ancestors experienced

The presidents who apologized had nothing to do with the events apologized for. In many cases nobody who participated was alive when the apology was rendered.

On the History section a frequent complaint of members of Native American descent is expressed over the fact that everyone of European descent hasn’t apologized for the behavior of their ancestors.

Occasionally, in the spirit of good will, I’ve apologized for what my European ancestors did to my Native American ancestors and what my Native American ancestors did to my European ancestors. Unfortunately my apologies weren’t well received.

Is it possible, rational, meaningful, even positive to apologize or otherwise take responsibility for actions of people we never knew?

Wouldn’t it make more sense for the religious right to encourage abortion?

Wouldn’t it make more sense for the religious right to encourage abortion among blacks, Hispanics and other minorities instead of trying to starve them out or put them in prison?

Has the wisdom of Eastern philosophy assisted Asians in a pursuit of a peaceful existence?

A not-entirely-tongue-in-cheek question.

Did we learn anything?

Several generations ask and answer questions on the forum for Philosophy. The burning issues for the youngest of them are generically the same questions all the older phases asked when they were that age. True also of the next age-group upward and so on.

The 20ish age group attempts to share their knowledge and wisdom with others their own age as well as the younger group. Those in their 30s and older appear to be fewer in numbers, but when they post they often follow the same pattern.

But when we were in those age groups we weren’t about to concede the next group upward in age had any understanding of what we were going through and the burning issues in our lives.

1] As a member of the 20ish age group do you believe the askers in their teens attempt to learn from your greater breadth of experience?

2] As a member of the 30s and 40s age group do you believe anyone younger sees you as a source of a more solid grasp of their own issues?

I’m in the late-60s age group and I don’t believe I’d have answered yes to any of this when I was living that age. I have a vivid recollection of the ‘don’t trust anyone over 30’ mindset, and recall something approaching depression as the 30th birthday drew near.

I ask because I find, despite what appears to be a consistent lesson I could have learned, I don’t look to an age group in their 70s and 80s as a source of learning or wisdom.

Do you older folks in your 70s look to people in their 80s and 90s to mine their wisdom and greater experience?

Is “Can I have all your stuff when you die?” in the minds of those around you a form of karma?

The nearest town to me is full of retirees. Every time I go to town I hit the thrift stores looking for what the most recent dead men hung on the people they left behind to dispose of. Got a 10X John B Stetson felt hat hanging on the peg for $10, several pairs of good boots for little or nothing, lots of good socks at 10 pairs for a dollar. Almost everything I wear used to belong to dead men.

I figure it’s karma if I don’t outlive the cats and chickens I have a contract with, but I’m not sure about that Stetson and all those socks. I don’t worry about the underwear because it’s all original equipment. Never could get excited about digging through boxes of somebody else’s skid marks.

So, unless the cabin burns down and destroys whatever I didn’t wear out while I was alive am I going to be dragging around karma for what’s left? What about a bag with 7 pounds of pinto beans in it? An a bunch of open bags of flour I use to vary the kinds of bread I make?

The joys of already KNOWING

Jack wrote this in November, 2005:

Morning blogsters:

Around 1969, I was in a freshman Geology course at the University of Texas, first week of classes. The instructor was a grad student teaching assistant who began the course with an overlay of how geologists determine the age of a particular layer of deposition.

Along about the third day a kid who’d been sitting next to me raised his hand. I’d noticed him squirming from the first day, and now he just had to get whatever was bothering him off his chest.

“I’ve been trying to understand what you’re saying, but it’s confusing. How can all this be true, all those depositions being so old when the world’s only (some specified low-range number of thousands) years old. It’s all been calculated when God created the earth.”

After the chaotic eruption of laughter from forty sophisticated freshmen who knew better subsided the instructor directed his response to the now-cringing questioner.

“You can’t have it both ways. This is a Geology course. Everything you hear in this room is based on the premise that the earth is ancient beyond imagination. That the world we see around us is the product of eons of tectonic activity. Of faulting, lifting, erosion, weathering followed by more of the same.

“I’m not going to try to convince you that what you’ve said is wrong. But I’ll tell you that if you can’t accept, for the sake of discussion, the possibility that the book in front of you describes reality, you’ll never get through this course.”

The kid joined me at a table in the Union coffee shop later. He was still upset and confused by the incident, the laughter. Turned out the kid truly couldn’t wrap his mind around the concepts being discussed. He KNEW it to be otherwise at such a fundamental level that he’d have had to relax all manner of other things he KNEW and held sacred to even consider it.

So he dropped the course and never let his mind out of the cage he’d built around it.

The experience that kid had in a geology classroom isn’t too different from what all of us encounter in life. It’s all a matter of where we place the boundaries of the cage.

Within a decade of the incident the geology world was turned upside down with emergence of tectonic plate theory, and much of what he’d have learned if he’d finished the course would have been out of date.

But Tectonic Plate Theory found similar boundaries among geologists’ minds during the difficult battle for acceptance. Old department heads wrestled against it in a war as bloody as a fundamentalist preacher would have fought against the concept of an earth more than a couple of thousand years old. They’d just placed the boundaries a bit further out than the kid and whatever school teacher told him the world was young. Those old geology profs KNEW there was no such animal as continental drift. No point in discussing evidence supporting it.

Similarly, we all KNOW the numbers are random.

Jack