On Law, Part 1 of 2. Rousseau, More, And Why Life’s Not So Bad (I Promise)

Posted on by

Ironically, I can be sued for using this law image

I’ve been a bad blogger for not posting since November, but it’s only because I’ve been reading a lot and everything has jumbled into 20 topics that have effectively rendered me unable to write about any of them.  Almost a creative paralysis of too many ideas, if that makes sense, anyways, no more excuses.  Let’s roll 2012.

I begin with some more reflections from Thomas More’s Utopia.  Outside of the Gold and Silver reflections, there were some interesting points raised on Law.  Utopia, which was written in 1516, was written in an age where if you robbed someone, you were hanged, and if you killed someone, you were hanged.  In other words, if you’re robbing someone, you might as well kill that person since you’re going to die anyways if you’re caught.

On the one hand, this sounds great since you would never want to rob anyone as you would die if you’re caught.

On the other hand, the punishment doesn’t exactly fit the crime.  A person who would rob someone has been proven to not have the same mental state as someone who could / would kill someone in most cases.

The book then counter-argues that the punishment basically wouldn’t make a difference in that day and age as to whether someone would rob or steal, because if you don’t have food, you will do what you have to basically to get it.  The punishment change would not necessarily be the deterrent.

The great point here is, which reflects on laws today (IMO):

1. That it is more important to not kill the wrongly accused, especially for a lesser crime.  Could you imagine the U.S. having the death penalty for robbery?  At least in the U.S., it appears that we are generally more worried about mistakenly punishing the innocent, then punishing the guilty.  While this doesn’t seem to be the direct point made in Utopia, it puts our current system in perspective into how harsh it could have been.  Basically, if our justice system wrongly punishes someone for robbery, at least we won’t kill them too.  You know what they say, time heals all wounds (unless they give you the death penalty).  Ok, maybe no one says that…but they should.

2. Not give a robber more of an incentive to kill someone.  IE: If you are robbing someone and kill them, you have higher odds of getting away with it.

This seems pretty obvious now, but everything seems more logical after thinking about it for say, 500 years.  Well, most things, except for the reason why we still use that styrofoam popcorn that gets everywhere.

We’ll dive into some reflections from Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s “The Social Contract”, for part two.

Laws have evolved quite nicely when you think about it.  As bad as things can seem now, the state of law is essentially a compendium of all the needs of a populace in a society.  By accepting the “social contract” of our society, IE not walking on your hands, shooting your neighbors, and paying taxes, you are accepting the rules and “chains” that you must live with.

This still beats moving to a foreign island and battling wildebeests, tigers, and disease laden insects for survival.  See, life’s not so bad right?

Part two this week, arrivederci!

The folly of men has enhanced the value of gold and silver, because of their scarcity…

Quote

Posted on by

“The folly of men has enhanced the value of gold and silver, because of their scarcity. Whereas, on the contrary, it is their opinion that nature, as an indulgent parent, has freely given us all the best things in great abundance, such as water and earth, but has laid up and hid from us the things that are vain and useless.” -Thomas More Utopia

On Gold And Silver – Reflections From Thomas More’s “Utopia”

Posted on by

I begin with a quote from Thomas More’s “Utopia“, published in 1516:

The folly of men has enhanced the value of gold and silver, because of their scarcity. Whereas, on the contrary, it is their opinion that nature, as an indulgent parent, has freely given us all the best things in great abundance, such as water and earth, but has laid up and hid from us the things that are vain and useless.

A one sentence summary of Utopia, is that the main character, Raphael, is approached to tell his story of a land named “Utopia” that has it’s own legal / political / societal way of working, and many ideas that are presented shaped such systems in reality going forward, even though the story is fictional.  The amount of parallels between the rationale and function of societies in the 1500′s to today amazes me, especially the human behavioral aspect.  One point that stands out is that when Raphael is describing the land of Utopia, he is urged to present his groundbreaking ideas to those who wield greater power than he.  However, Raphael states that anyone in power would not listen to him as it is too risky on their own behalf, or that if he did speak up, opposers would demolish his name for stirring the pot so to speak by breaking down long lasting ideals (this is a generalization).

On Gold And Silver

Thomas More touches on the nonsense that is the world’s valuation of Gold and Silver in the quote presented at the top of this post.  Basically, in Utopia, certain metals and materials of largest use for practical purposes such as iron and other abundant materials are given the highest regard and are the most sought after.  Metals such as Gold and Silver that have very little practical value other than to elevate perceived status, are seen as worthless.

Slaves and prisoners are chained by thick gold and silver necklaces and braces to enforce this notion.  Children are given these shiny pieces to play with as children, but grow up to learn that gold and silver is only for the slaves, prisoners, and for babies essentially.  Diplomats from a foreign land visit Utopia with their gold and silver fashions, only to feel out of place as the people of Utopia look at them as if they are slaves or prisoners.  The Diplomats eventually take off their gold and silver as they are embarrassed to see prisoners with greater than twice as much gold as they, or common houses filled with gold chamber pots.  The Utopians happily trade away this resource as well when needed for trade with other lands (if I remember correctly), as it has no value in their society, but greater value elsewhere.

I know what you are thinking, this sounds kind of communist.  It’s not though, all Utopians need to work, but the key factor is that quality of life and life necessity is placed above class warfare and nonsensical valuations of pretty objects.  Remember when thinking about gold or silver going forward, perception is everything, and recognize the true value of what you seek, not just everyone else’s perception thrust upon you.

But after the ambassadors had stayed a day among them, and saw so vast a quantity of gold in their houses, which was as much despised by them as it was esteemed in other nations, and beheld more gold and silver in the chains and fetters of one slave than all their ornaments amounted to, their plumes fell, and they were ashamed of all that glory for which they had formerly valued themselves, and accordingly laid it aside; a resolution that they immediately took, when on their engaging in some free discourse with the Utopians, they discovered their sense of such things and their other customs. The Utopians wonder how any man should be so much taken with the glaring doubtful lustre of a jewel or a stone, that can look up to a star or to the sun himself; or how any should value himself because his cloth is made of a finer thread: for how fine soever that thread may be, it was once no better than the fleece of a sheep, and that sheep was a sheep still for all its wearing it. They wonder much to hear that gold which in itself is so useless a thing, should be everywhere so much esteemed, that even men for whom it was made, and by whom it has its value, should yet be thought of less value than this metal.

…they are most wasteful of the one thing in which it is right to be so stingy.

Quote

Posted on by

“You will find no one willing to share out his money; but to how many does each of us divide up his life!  People are frugal in guarding their personal property; but as soon as it comes to squandering time they are most wasteful of the one thing in which it is right to be so stingy.” - Seneca  On the Shortness of Life

Why Watching American Idol Is The Same As Watching Gladiators Die

Posted on by

Why Watching American Idol Is The Same As Watching Gladiators Die

I open by first saying that I do not mean to judge how anyone spends their time, for life is short and they should engage in it as they wish.  However, I would like to point out amazing parallels that I have come to concerning American Idol and the gladiatorial games of Ancient Rome.  Both are basically giant distractions of an abused citizenry.  Both bring in relatively huge numbers of regular viewers, who would prefer to watch things such as this every single night then say, reflect or improve upon the current state of their own life.  Or perhaps, even learn a thing or two.

Both spectacles draw massive audiences in order to watch the rise and fall of their participants.  Instead of trying to achieve one’s own goals, one gains significant pleasure in watching the rise and fall of others.  In Ancient Rome there were many a reason for a participant to enter the games, some reasons just, some unjust.  I do not pretend to be an expert on the games, but even some light reading or movie watching can give you the gist of what’s going on.

Watching contestants on American Idol is essentially the same thing.  While the participants do not die at the end, you are watching them risk their veritable lives on every performance.  They have worked their entire lives for this moment, and if they are dropped in the earlier rounds or even towards the end, I see this as equivalent to a gladiatorial death.  A stab into the heart, perhaps the last chance for that person to ever succeed at their one and only passion.  I’m sure more than one contestant would admit that they would rather die then learn that they would never receive a chance like that again.

On Television In General

Some people complain that networks only put “dumb” programming on television, but that’s what the masses want, so they are just delivering.  I can trust you that if PBS or the History Channel brought in 15 million viewers a night, we would be seeing a lot more Ken Burns documentaries on network television.  I stopped my cable subscription about 4 years ago and it was one of the greatest things I ever did for myself.  I’m not saying I don’t have Netflix and don’t enjoy watching Curb Your Enthusiasm or the Super Bowl, but I’ve successfully eliminated a giant time-waster in my life.  Sit back for a minute and think about how much time you may waste watching news which has little to no impact on your life.  You could be using this time to do something you actually enjoy instead of getting freaked out and watching 20 minutes of advertising.  People have “no time” these days, but I think the issue is that people don’t prioritize effectively enough.

I leave you with a quote from Seneca:

“You will find no one willing to share out his money; but to how many does each of us divide up his life!  People are frugal in guarding their personal property; but as soon as it comes to squandering time they are most wasteful of the one thing in which it is right to be so stingy.” – Seneca  On the Shortness of Life (Penguin Great Ideas)

Your Cell Phone on the Dinner Table. PS: I hate you.

Posted on by

Today's reality

Your Cell Phone on the Dinner Table. PS: I hate you.

I’m really not that negative, but I have a feeling that I’m going to have some trouble not ranting about things I see everyday that really annoy me.  For one, if you leave your cell phone on the table at dinner, I automatically hate you. No offense, but I do.

I was just out to dinner at a somewhat fancy restaurant in SoHo, and I’ve learned one thing.  No matter where you are, manners are blind to one’s background and income level. People are rude and into themselves wherever they go.

Am I innocent in this whole process?  Of course not, I’m on Twitter, so I can’t say I haven’t hopped aboard the ego train every now and again.

However, I never, I repeat never, put my cell phone on the table at dinner.  Especially when out with friends, colleagues, contacts, whoever.  This is why:

1. It’s rude as hell.  It’s like saying “I’m enjoying time with you for dinner, but if I get a message on facebook, or a text, I need to be ready. Ohhh yes, I need to be ready to reply IMMEDIATELY.  God forbid I miss a status update, I SWORE TO MYSELF TWO YEARS AGO THAT I WOULD NEVER MISS A STATUS UPDATE OF A PERSON I HAVEN’T SPOKEN TO IN FOUR YEARS.”

2. Live in the moment for crying out loud.  When you’re dead, will it matter that you just got an email about a new sale at J.Crew?  I didn’t think so. Will it matter that you were out for dinner with your grandparents, who you then didn’t see again before they passed away?  Well, I’d hope that would matter to you, but you were texting, so you missed their sage old wisdom.  Feel the guilt, feel it!

3. Get over yourself. Unless you are a doctor and are awaiting an urgent life threatening call, put the phone down and give yourself a break for once.  You’re job will be there, trust me.  If it isn’t, then you have a problem that won’t be solved by a 30 minute break.

Not to promote gender bias here, but I’ve seen women as the worst offenders.  I thought to write this article because I saw four girls sitting together at a table across from me, all staring at their cellphones.  What is this about!? I see it in bars, clubs, the dancefloor.  For god sakes, WHO ARE YOU TEXTING?! Have we all just abandoned life as we know it and are obsessed with these little light up boxes?! Can no one have actual communication anymore?!

PS: To the guy who was trying to view a freaking cell phone MS Excel application and hold it up during the entire last Interpol show I went to. I hate you the most. For god sakes who ATTEMPTS to use MS Excel on a damn smartphone!  The thing could only show 4 cells at a time!  And why couldn’t you just hold it at your waist? Why up at the performers? You sure as hell weren’t watching them!

Sometimes I really feel that technology has just become too accessible and has given people a chance to annoy you in new and unforgettable ways.

Related Links:

Texting at the Dinner Table (emilypost.com)

http://www.emilypost.com/communication-and-technology/telephone-and-cell-phone-manners/259-texting-at-thedinner-table

Play with your food, just don’t text! (nytimes.com)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/dining/27text.html?scp=1&sq=Cindy%20Post%20Senning&st=cse

Spread the word (just not at dinner)

Tweet

And we begin anew.

Posted on by
Reply

NYC 1954 - Arthur Leipzig

It’s nice to be back.  After much hustle and bustle with travel for work, and well, life, I’m glad to have a new venue to reflect and think a bit.  I’ve been reading a lot of Montaigne as of late and he has inspired me to pick up the pen again.

I read a lot, but I usually only make it halfway through most books.  Then I end up buying another book that interests me more at the moment.  Does anyone else have that problem?  I’ll assume yes.  Maybe I should just avoid bookstores like the plague when I’m reading a book.  Impossible.  I just feel like I have so many things I want to learn about and so little time.  Knock on wood, I’ll have plenty of time ahead of me.

The book I can’t get enough of currently is:

How To Live -Or- A Life Of Montaigne

I’ll be honest, I had never heard of the guy.  He’s a 1500′s French writer / philosopher who is now coined as the world’s first blogger.  The man wrote the Essays, a compendium of analyses on all things in life, experienced from his viewpoint.  Everything from meeting royals to going to the bathroom, it’s all there, and brutally honest.  It’s amazing to see someone write and accept open hypocrisy as well, which I find to be a trait that is so unacceptable now, which is unfortunate. People change viewpoints over time, that’s how they grow.

Example, on the one hand Montaigne cannot possibly accept any limitation to his freedom, such as marriage, but on the other hand he writes of loving the simple pleasures of how much he enjoys sitting by the fire with his wife and children.  I think people should be allowed to change views based on mood or current perspective.  Why can’t we give people a little breathing room these days?

Another interesting note, is that human behavior does not appear to have changed much from the 1500′s to the present.

The most critical lesson I have taken away from the book however, is that no one is going to tap you on the shoulder and remind you that your life is slipping away every moment.  Montaigne thought about death…a lot. I had a recent medical scare myself, but it turns out I’m fine.  I don’t think about death much at all, but I’ve become more aware of my time, and how precious every moment can be.

In closing, it’s nice to be back.

Tweet