Does Your Opinion Matter?

Much of what I write about in this blog is directed toward shaping your opinion.  Not making it the same as mine, just trying to get you to base it on something other than your initial impression, which is largely simple emotion.  Your opinion should be based on facts, reasoning, objectivity.  These are "archaic" concepts that used to be thrown around by some guys (before the era of television news) named Plato, Aristotle, Socrates.  Remember them?  Their philosophy was used by the founders of this country as the basis for our constitution and bill of rights.

But why am I working so hard on this?  Does your opinion matter?  What if I suggested it might be the ONLY thing that matters?  You may not be in a position of power or influence, but notice that in actuality those people follow public opinion rather than leading it.  They live and die by polls.  No, the main source of change in society is the accumulation of public opinion.  If the public or some large segment thereof deems a behavior or a manner of speaking to be acceptable then it is.  It doesn't matter how trivial, meaningless, or even destructive it may be.  If you don't believe this, I have two words for you: reality shows.  Conversely, many people lose their jobs these days by expressing opinions - or many times facts - that the public or a vocal minority does not want to hear.  Freedom of speech be damned.

So if you believe you have the right to vote and that your one vote matters among the thousands or millions that are cast, then you have to believe that your one small opinion is contributing to the overall trends that you see in society.  Many of which you may not like.  Have you ever found yourself making excuses for someone just because you know them, like them or feel sorry for them?  Do you know any liability lawyers who have made their fortune on spurious claims or class action suits where each of a million plaintiffs gets about 5 bucks and the lawyers make two million - are you still friends with them?  How about just someone who is collecting disability even though they are working under that table at some very physical job?  Are you nice to them?

A strange assumption has been made in recent years that everyone deserves respect and that it is very, very bad to voice or show disapproval of someone's lifestyle or behavior.  Well if everyone is so pleasant to thieves, leeches and parasites, and they're making money, why on earth would they stop?  There are a lot of behaviors that are not illegal, simply immoral and destructive.  No one can possibly anticipate everything that some scoundrel will try to do and pass a law ahead of time.  And even when there are laws covering misdeeds, no one can find and prosecute them all.  The simple fact is that you cannot legislate morality.  The only thing that has ever controlled that is public opinion.

To a large extent, our society operates on an honor system.  You might recently have heard the word "honor", but it is unfashionable and poorly understood.  It means that people are expected to do what is right based on their sense of honor, of wanting to be respected and admired - or even just accepted - in society.  In societies where honor is an important concept, this works pretty well.  A densely populated country like Japan, which has survived for many centuries, can only do so when people act honorably.

So you are doing a public service and your civic duty when you openly disapprove of or reject immoral behavior that is destructive to society - especially when you express that opinion directly to the person committing that behavior.  But now you have the responsibility to react objectively and with reason, not just on your emotional reaction.  Why am I always bashing emotions?  Next time.....

Is It OK to Lie?

Faithful followers of this blog (all four of you) will note that I have not written for a while.  Partly I've been very, very busy.  Partly I was overwhelmed by a veritable tidal wave of lies and outright propaganda in the news that appeared to drown out my still, small voice of reason. On the one hand, Acorn CEO Bertha Lewis called the Tea Party a "bowel movement" and a return to segregation and McCarthyism at a meeting of the Young Democratic Socialists.  On the other Lloyd Blankfein, head of Goldman Sachs, insisted at a congressional hearing that they did nothing wrong by packaging bad mortgages as a financial derivative, rating the quality way too highly, and selling it to their investors while betting against it in their own portfolios.  It was only the wonderfully supportive thoughts and opinions of a longtime friend that convinced me to trudge onward against the tsunami and at least carry my message to those extreme few who are still interested in using their minds and not just their "hearts".

So, is lying OK?  Before you answer "no, of course not", consider whether public statements of the type mentioned above have ever touched an emotional chord in you and caused you a rush of guilty pleasure - even though you should have known they were preposterous.  (If you weren't going to answer "of course not", please stop reading and return to your television show, copy of USA Today, porn surfing, or whatever other highly inspirational activity really appeals to you).

The problem, as I mention often, is that emotions are easier and more fun than rational thought and much easier to prey upon by public figures with an agenda.  If you approve or accept the ones that appeal to you, you have no right to object to the ones from the other side.  Worse, you are helping to perpetuate a societal norm that is causing ever greater polarization in our country and making it impossible to accomplish any real good.  We can't have (and generally no longer do have) anything that qualifies as a "discussion" in our public arena because you can't discuss emotions - they only belong to the individual.  Certainly never in our political arena where winning a "victory" for your party comes before any sort of benefit to the country as a whole.  And never in the media, where facts and even whole stories are omitted if they would be damaging to the point of view of the reporters or media outlet.  And by the way, omission of significant facts that would alter the perception of a situation DOES qualify as lying because the purpose of doing so is to deceive someone into believing in something that is already known to not be entirely true.

The only way to not buy into this whole scheme is to try to get real facts and form an objective opinion on your own (rememember - my religion is objectivity).  You CANNOT do this by simply listening to the information sources that you agree with and make you feel happy.  I listen to both NPR and Fox Talk Radio pretty much every day.  Add a little uncommon sense and read between the lines and you can generally tell what is really going on and who is trying to sell you what.  Give it a try, stretch your comfort zone, keep an open mind, and see what you might learn!

By the way - does your opinion matter?  More than you can possibly know.  Stay tuned.

Who Do You Admire?

Around 1995 or 6, I was living in a southern East Coast community that was big on golf and tennis.  I am a tennis player, but not a golfer.  One day, the folks on the tennis court were talking about someone named "Tiger Woods".  At first I thought it was a new line of drivers.  But it became apparent they were talking about a golfer and I innocently asked "Who is Tiger Woods?"  The reply from one particularly enthusiastic fellow was (this is true): "You don't know who Tiger Woods is?!?  Only the greatest human being that ever lived!"  Hmmm.  I'm long out of touch with those people now, but I find myself wondering if this is still his exact opinion on the subject.

One of my great heroes died last week.  Jaime Escalante is the teacher that took some of the poorest kids with discipline problems in an LA school and got them fired up about Mathematics.  Working with them long hours after school, on vacations, etc., he got about 20 of them to pass the Advanced Placement calculus exam in 1982, an almost unprecedented number even for an elite school.  He worked against opposition from his peers, who thought these kids were "unteachable".  He even had to fight the college board organization who thought the kids must have cheated.  They had to re-take the test under the supervision of the agency and they passed again, after which Jaime insisted the original scores be reinstated.  The story is so inspiring, the movie "Stand And Deliver", starring Edward James Olmos, was made in 1988 and you should absolutely see it if you haven't already.

I mentioned in my last blog that one of my goals is to improve the world, leave it better than I found it.  I find myself naturally gravitating toward people like Jaime who work steadily against the tide of everyday society, often with little or no pay and no expectation of fame, to truly accomplish a worthwhile goal.  He was not part of a large abstract "cause", he was doing what he knew how to do in his local environment to make a difference.

I am not terribly interested in high-profile, wealthy, self-centered individuals who may excel in one narrow area of endeavor, but often do so at the cost of tearing apart the lives of people immediately around them.  They stir up a lot of excitement, and excitement sells.  But the real business of improving the world is only accomplished at the boring, daily, personal level where it takes persistence over a period of time to make things happen.  Real progress is not exciting and does not involve large sums of money, which is why far fewer people are willing to do it.

I promised to tell you about the name of my blog.  I am an actor and have played many stage roles, but the ones I am best remembered for are Ben Franklin in the musical 1776 and Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof.  At first glance, these characters are very different.  Ben is sophisticated and intellectual while Tevye is emotional and rooted in his very small village society.  But what they had in common was a passion to see the right thing done and improve the world around them using the skills and methods they possessed.  Although you will hear me talk about how emotionalism has overrun reason in our current environment, you should not assume I am not a very emotional person.  Actually, the opposite is true.  It's just that each has its place and both can be used for broader, more selfless goals rather than just self-gratification.  The name of this blog reflects my own duality and my hope that others can recognize each aspect for how they affect their own lives.

What Are You Trying To Do?

I mean this in the larger sense. I don't mean trying to buy a house or get a job or find the remote. Your fundamental goals drive all your activities and all the choices you make every day - what are you trying to do with your life?



Let me start you off with an example. I am trying to leave the world better than I found it. I don't mean to sound grandiose or pious. I didn't even always know that I had that goal. The realization came from analyzing what choices I made and which directions I always seem to take. Money, power and fame have never been important to me, so I haven't chosen high-paying jobs or high-profile careers. And I haven't tried to save the whales either! Don't get me wrong - I really like whales and would save them if I had the opportunity. But I strongly believe the real effect you can have comes from what you do every day, how you interact with those around you and how you affect their lives. This is not as altruistic as it sounds. Making the world better for those around you makes it a lot better for you too.



I don't want to imply that this has to be your goal. Just that you should be conscious of what your aim actually is. You should be honest about your goals, first with yourself and then with the people you know (unless of course your goal includes being deceptive, in which case all bets are off!). If your goal is to make a ton of money or rise to the top of some particular field then you have to pursue it. But you should realize that some goals can only be accomplished by abandoning certain others. And the sooner you realize that, the clearer and easier your choices will become.



I started this blog because I see a lot of confusion and conflict around me. Also, a real lack of clarity. Most of this stems from people trying to do what they are supposed to do or make themselves think what they are supposed to think - being untrue to themselves and frequently ignoring reality in the process. Also, much of the confusion comes from allowing their feelings to be manipulated by the mainstream media, politicians, public relations spin doctors, commercial marketing, self-help gurus, religious organizations - all of whom are engaged in campaigns to influence you to do something for them, regardless of the cost to you. I refer to feelings here to make sure you understand that your emotions are the target and not your reason. This has become so prevalent that most people can no longer distinguish between the two. But reason is what separates humans from the rest of the animal kingdom and keeps civilizations together. I hope to convince you of that as we discourse together.



In this blog, you will get a lot of my personal philosophy, based mostly on long experience with trying to figure out why people, including me, do what they do. I'm very analytical by nature, to I've spent an absolute ton of time on this.  Try not to label me, since I don’t actually adhere to any one school of thought. I don’t have a political affiliation – since blindly following either side is the opposite of seeking the truth – and I don’t have an organized religion you can point to. What you won’t find here are extremism, blind idealism, or anything else that gets in the way of being objective about what is really happening. If any label applies at all, it should probably be "objectivism." If you can't recognize reality you can't deal with it and follow your goals.



So let’s talk. When you want to disagree with something I’ve said, do it with facts and not political or religious dogma. Not taking an extreme point of view is not always exciting (hence, media bias and sensationalism) and I’ll understand if you aren’t interested in this blog. But if you are willing to think hard and really consider what I’m saying we might both learn something. Next blog, I’ll give you the reason for the name.