up2in2

Let me begin with a few miscellaneous observations and semi-truths.

I am a highly practiced in the arts of logic, obsfucation, and obliteration, but I will endeavor to leave these credentials untapped for the duration of this article. ;-)

The second point to be made in advance is that I believe there are two types of people in the world: the type that believes there are only two types of people in the world and the type that believes otherwise. For those of you who may prefer a bit of mathematical framework, let's say that the set P = Types of People in the World (you get to decide what we mean by world); furthermore this set is not actually infinite, but in can be treated as such for sake of argument (and if you chose the World = the Universe then it is obvious or at least axiomatic that the number of elements in our set P is infinite). Therefore the set has a cardinality of the Natural Numbers {1,2,3, ...} For the type of person who believes there are possibly NO types of people in the world, which is a special case we use {0,1,2, ...). Or if you believe there may be net negative types of People in the World we use the whole numbers {... -3,-2,-1,0,1,2,3, ...} from which to describe the 'size' of our set P. The most important point here is that the set P is countable which is a mathmeticans way of saying that regardless of being infinite or finite the elements of the set can be organized so as to count them. (Yes there is such a thing as an uncountable set: e.g. the set of Real Numbers).

To review:

1. The number of types of people can be counted

2. There are either two types of people or some other number of types

Yesterday I received an email from a friend (thanks JA!) with a link to an article circulating the net about a passage from the book The Reagan Diaries. The article claims that Ronald Reagan said,

**********

"A moment I've been dreading. George brought his n'er-do-well son around this morning and asked me to find the kid a job. Not the political one who lives in Florida; the one who hangs around here all the time looking shiftless. This so-called kid is already almost 40 and has never had a real job. Maybe I'll call Kinsley over at The New Republic and see if they'll hire him as a contributing editor or something. That looks like easy work."

From the REAGAN DIARIES------entry dated May 17, 1986.

***********

Upon reading this article, I was amused. Furthermore, being a member of the local ThumbsDownOnBushAndTheRestOfTheRightWing coalition (yes, even in Nevada), I let my emotion run a bit further to the area of smug satisfaction and correctness (aka I'm better than, my Daddy can kick your Daddy's ass, etc, etc). After all, I don't really think Reagan was all that; but if HE is saying GW is a "ne'er-do-well" then it must be true!

After being done with my BetterThan Orgy I reminded myself that what Reagan may or may not have said isn't relevant. The point is that there is a lot of information out there about what's going on in the world we live in. I believe we have some serious issues to address as a species and a nation. And if we depend on our reductionist dinosaur mid-brains to guide us through our daily lives, I believe we may well find ourselves going the way of the dinosaur (beat out of of the evolutionary gangbang by a little fire from outerspace and some wiley little furry guys scurrying among the giant ferns).

I said to myself, "Self, trust but verify!" I went to snopes.com and I checked their offical statement on this Reaganism.

Check for yourself at http://www.snopes.com/politics/satire/kinsley.asp

Then ask yourself:

1. Are you predisposed to oversimplification and reductionist thinking?

2. To what degree do you indulge these coping mechanisms?

3. How many types of people do you think there are?

4. Which type (or types) are you?

5. Are you willing to step out of your comfort zone and do ask some questions you might not want to know the true answers to?

6. Do you believe that all generalizations are false?

I maintain that my mid-brain is healthy and alive, but perhaps somewhat on my forebrain's leash. My skin, on the otherhand, is thick like aligator

Finally, I believe someone else (besides me) said:

The ability to disagree without being disagreeable is the essence of the civilized (person).

As always,

U5M