Pazdziernik Archive

W for Wisdom

[Archive May 7, 2006]

President George W. Bush delivered the commencement speech yesterday at Oklahoma State University in Stillwater, Oklahoma. I wish that all Presidents and other public officials would write their own speeches as past Presidents such as Abraham Lincoln used to. It would certainly cut down to a considerable degree on the number of speeches given. Speechwriters are employed to help them both organize their ideas and deal with the volume of addresses that such public officials are committed to. As such, their much appreciated added value helps the audience to “enjoy” what would perhaps be an unrecognizable English of incoherect thoughts.

President Bush gave some real words of wisdom to the graduates. I sure hope that the OSU graduates take these ideas to heart:

Education does not end at commencement:

I urge you to rise to these challenges, take charge of your future. Be open to new ideas. Be willing to take risks. Treat the degree you receive today as the first step in a lifetime of learning, and your lives will be rich in purpose and reward.

Science and technology should serve mankind:

These advances in technology will transform lives -- and they will present you with profound dilemmas. Science offers the prospect of eventual cures for terrible diseases, and temptations to manipulate life and violate human dignity. With the Internet, you can communicate instantly with someone halfway across the world -- and isolate yourself from your family and your neighbors. Your generation will have to resolve these dilemmas. My advice is, harness the promise of technology without becoming slaves to technology. My advice is, ensure that science serves the cause of humanity, and not the other way around.

Liberty engenders hope:

A country that shuts itself off from competition will be a country that isolates itself from the duties and opportunities of our world. One of the greatest opportunities of this young century is the advance of human freedom. The advance of liberty is the story of our time, and we're seeing new chapters written before our eyes. Freedom is taking root in places where liberty was once unimaginable. Just 25 years ago, there were only 45 democracies on the face of the Earth. Today, there are 122 democracies, and more people now live in liberty than ever before. The advance of liberty gives us hope in the future, because free societies are peaceful societies. As freedom spreads, the threats of tyranny and terror will recede, and the rise of democracy will bring peace to the world and security to the United States America.

Character and service:

In this time of technological change and global competition, ultimately the character of America will be determined by your willingness to serve a cause larger than yourselves. The day will come when you'll be asked, what have you done to build a better America than the one you found. I'm confident that you will answer the call to service. I'm confident that your lives will be more fulfilling, and your country more hopeful. And I'm confident that you'll look back and say, job well-done.

The full text of President Bush’s speech can be found here.

Photo: President George W. Bush (June 2005)
Tags: George Bush, Oklahoma State
Related post: "War on Terror Strategy"

Kanye West’s image

[Archive January 26, 2006]

The image of Kanye West,28, on the cover of the current Rolling Stone (Issue 993, February 9,2006) is certainly generating some buzz and reactions. This image has disrupted my pause from posting. I feel like Al Pacino in Godfather III (1990) where he says, "Just when I get through, they drag me back in."

I maybe have purchased three Rolling Stone magazines in the past five years and have not yet read the full article on Kanye West but I have read some excerpts. The image itself is stunning. Kanye West appears handsome and masculine. (I can’t help thinking more of Willem Dafoe as Christ (The Last Temptation of Christ (1988)) than either of Jim Caviezel as Christ (The Passion of the Christ (2004)) or traditional art depicting Jesus of Nazareth after the painful scourging with a crown of painful thorns.)

Nevertheless, out of context , it is an image that all conscious Christians and those who truly seek the Good can relate to as an inevitable in this life.

In context, it is “controversial”, “raw”, “edgy” and marketed very well by those who care little or nothing at all about offending Christian sensibilities to sell Rolling Stone magazines and Kanye West records. It could be that it is also a campaign to promote Kanye West’s Grammy Award® bids. He has 8 nominations his second album Late Registration for the February 8th show.

Americans always seem to like the underdog. We always seem to have a special place in our heart for those who are victims or overcome actual obstacles to achieve goals. Kanye West positions himself as one. Although, in stark contrast to his being a victim or “being kept down by the mythical ‘man’”, his success, wealth and fame surely indicate otherwise.

Image is simply image. Like Malcom X and the Nation of Islam in the 1960’s the image was one of clean-cut, well-dressed and well-mannered black youths with a just cause, but on the inside the reality was one of confusion, anger, rebellion and so forth. Kanye West doesn’t present the same wholesome image. However, if he wants to compare himself (images are as powerful as words) to the Greatest Man Who Walked The Face of The Earth then the analogy with the Nation of Islam holds since the moral content of Kanye West’s music is less than edifying and is quite distant from the Beatitudes of Our Lord to say the least. In fact, it is highly corrosive.

At root, along with so many other negative things, it is a cry for love. Along these lines, West and the rest of us can really learn from Pope Benedict’s recent Encyclical Letter of December 25,2005, made public this week, "Deus Caritas Est" (God Is Love) that "eros" (desiring love) must mature into "agape" (self-giving love).

Update January 28,2006: I read the full RS article on Kanye West, "West World" by Lola Ogunnaike, and as I suspected before I wasted $3.95, it had nothing to do with Kanye West's suffering or faith. The image was used to get attention.

Photo: David LaChapelle Rolling Stone 2006
Tags: Rolling Stone, Kanye West

God of Desire

[Archive January 6, 2006]

Men and women seem to welcome some advice over no advice when a difficult or even not-so-difficult decision needs to be made or a path taken. In short, they seek spiritual direction, although it is not always identified or named as such. Unfortunately, most people do not receive regular spiritual direction. Sure Oprah, Dr. Phil and others regularly dispense “spiritual direction” of varying usefulness.

Authentic spiritual direction should be personal. It should address our attitudes and decisions rather than our feelings. It should help us to know and follow God’s Will for our happiness and well-being. Many times it is easy to know God’s Will: Is it in conformity with his commandments? (This includes just civil laws and so forth.) For a Catholic, is it in conformity with the laws of the Church? Is it going to benefit our family? Is it going to benefit our self personally, individually, and uniquely?

Feelings and desires are just that: feelings and desires. Sometimes God’s Will is “objectified” to the point of dismissing our feelings and desires as if they were not real. More common is the phenomena in which God’s Laws are dismissed in favor of “feelings and desires” as if God’s Laws are of no practical use. Anyway, I found some really good advice for the area of dating and courtship. Singles can all use some solid advice, no? Here is a sampling of advice from David Sloan’s God of Desire web site.

How do we recognize Godly desire? By these three things--that we are drawn to the person's mind, body, and spirit.

I am drawn to her mind. I am enamored of the way she thinks about things and expresses her thoughts. Her way of understanding the world around her energizes and excites me. I want to know more about what she thinks. This is an essential and irreplaceable aspect of attraction.

Next, I long to be with her because I am drawn to her physical beauty. It doesn't mean simply that she has a particular body shape or facial structure. It means that I smile when I see her walking toward me. I want her close to me. I want to look at her. I want to touch and hold her. This is another essential and irreplaceable type of attraction.

Lastly, but certainly not leastly, I am drawn to her spirit. When I think about her, and when I am with her, I sense the presence of God. I am actually conscious of God in her, moving in her, loving her and desiring her for himself. As I come closer to her heart, I sense the power of God drawing me closer to his heart. This too, is an essential and irreplaceable type of attraction.

God of Desire’s “Twelve Principles of Dating and Courtship” are really worth more than a look. I recommend some study of this great advice for singles. Or at least it is something to think about.

Photo: A couple watch a sunset at Town Lake in Austin, Texas. ©Tom Wald

Kinreizdzap

[Archive November 22, 2005]

A palindrome is a word, phrase or sequence that reads the same backward as forward, such as "madam." "Kinreizdzap" doesn't make for a good palindrome, since spelled backwards it is "Pazdziernik." But "abba" does. Life is not fair?

"A man a plan a canal Panama" is the longest one that I'm familiar with. "Warsaw was raw" is a palindrome that at least makes some sense. Thanks to the internet (and the inventor of the internet Al Gore), I found very likely the world's longest known palindrome in the English language. I'm not sure what use palindromes are. Certainly satanists would have little or no use for them. Think about it.

The world's longest known palindrome in the English language (?) can be found here.

Can the characters of the Chinese language also produce palindromes?

The H Word

[Archive November 5, 2005]

The “H word”: hypocrisy seems to be thrown around with the greatest of ease these days. A reaction of guilt, real or imagined, can accompany the one who receives such an accusation. On the other hand, the one who either writes about or verbally hurls such an accusation, just or unjust, may either be acting in good faith or not. Sometimes people accuse others (persons or institutions) as a cover for personal failings without regard for the truth of a matter. At other times it can be used with true charity and the good of others (persons or institutions) in view.

“Hypocrisy" as an accusation or idea is inescapable. It, along with other “accusations”, ideas, and words can be misunderstood and is often misunderstood. Its correct understanding is really necessary for serenity of conscience.

“Saying one thing and doing another” is perhaps a childhood definition, although not a childish one. It has merit. It is in line with standard dictionary definitions.

The practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behaviour does not conform. (Oxford American Dictionary)

“Pretending to be something that one is not" is a deeper definition and more in accord with standard Catholic and moral definitions. This is the one that I have been working with for the past several years. It has paid dividens for peace of mind.

Hypocrisy is the pretension to qualities which one does not possess, or … the putting forward of a false appearance of virtue or religion. (The 1917 Catholic Encyclopiedia)

In a recent article John Mallon wrote about this topic and went deeper into this area. He described it as a “weasel word” which immediately piqued my interest! In short, he writes that its essence is "not believing what one preaches". This is quite different than the common “external behaviour” definition.

There’s an old saying that hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue. In a world where so many moral standards have broken down, still nobody wants to be a hypocrite…

I will say this and repeat it: Hypocrisy consists not in failing to practice what we preach, but in not believing what we preach.

I might fail to live up to my beliefs all day long, but still hold on to them as I strive to live up to them. That is not hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is a cynical pretense of being a “good person” while disregarding the morality we claim to follow. The difference is being sorry, repenting, and striving forward. The hypocrite doesn’t care.

His article is well worth a read.

Photo: “Truth” ©P. Wei
Tags: hypocrisy, John Mallon

"Where you at?"

[Archive September 18, 2005]

The phrase “Where you at?” is heard in several popular songs including Destiny’s Child’s “Soldier”. It is sure to be heard more often now that is part of Boost Mobile’s new advertising campaign. This phrase may well go the way of “Where’s the beef?” from Clara Peller of Wendy’s Hamburger T.V. commercial fame in the ‘80s and find its way into the English language.

The English language is a living language unlike Latin. As such it evolves. Modern-day English sounds little like Old English (like Shakespeare and before.) The phrase “Where you at?” is certainly not standard English. “Where are you?” is the proper interrogative. It is little known that “Where you be?” is also acceptable English, although it is not common nowadays because it is in the subjunctive mood. "Where shoud you be?" is preferred. The subjunctive mood is the focus of this posting.

I am neither an English language teacher nor an expert in the English language in an academic sense, nor a linguist. However, I am a native English speaker and have a good grasp of the language. Most native English speakers can easily identify past, present, future and perfect (past, present, and future) tenses of verbs and their proper use with a subject (first, second, third; singular and plural.) Auxiliary verbs like “may” and “should” are also easily understood. The voice (active or passive) of a verb is also easily identifiable.

The mood of a verb like indicative, imperative, and conditional are commonly used and with some study are easily understood. I’ll skip the aspect of a verb at this time because I don’t have a full grasp of its distinction with the mood. There is a debate among linguists themselves on this point from what I’ve read on this topic. So, we’ll leave the distinction aside.

Aside: Languages other than English have additional tenses, voices, aspects and moods. Along with nouns and personal names, and so forth, they do not always have a one-to-one corresponding verb in the English language.

One mood in the English language that has fell out of use but is slowly making a comeback is the subjunctive mood. It expresses what is imagined, wished or possible. This mood is not too common in modern English because the auxiliary verbs “might”, “could” and “should” cover the same function. Today it is a more “formal tone” than the indicative mood. The subjunctive tense of “to be” has a present tense (be) for all persons (e.g. “I be”, “you be”, “she be”) and well as a past tense (were). The subjunctive mood is common in different accents like the West Country accent : “Where you be going to?”

If one purposefully uses the subjunctive mood nowadays, one can be met with a perplexing contempt that he or she does not know the English language. However, this mood is still used although it is not always easily identifiable as such.

Here’s a quick comparison of the subjunctive and indicative moods:
Subjunctive/ Indicative
“He face” / “He faces”
“I were” / “I was”
“They be” / They are”
“The Lord be with you” / The Lord is with you”

Here are some common expressions in the subjunctive mood:
“be that as it may”
“far be it from me”
“as it were”
“lest we forget”
“God help you”
“perish the thought”
“come what may”

For more examples of the subjunctive mood please visit British Council LearnEnglish.

Give the subjunctive mood a go with your family, friends and colleagues and see what happens!

Bibliography:
1. New Oxford American Dictionary
2. Jimmy Akin
3. Wikipedia

Photo: “Moody Sea” © Andreas Vitting

Editorial Cartoons

[Archive September 5, 2005]

Editorial cartoons are powerful form of journalism expressing an opinion or viewpoint as a picture or series of panel pictures. They do not have accompanying commentary other than what is expressed in the artist’s panel. They make their point with few words. Often people read and understand them better than a long or short opinion, editorial or story item. It is form of art that requires artistic skills, a quick wit, keen perception and the ability to synthesize concisely. It’s is a form of journalism that I have always personally admired. As a child I read them in the papers and though that they were “funny” and well done. (Although not funny in the sense of “ha ha”.)

You don’t always have to agree with them to enjoy them because the drawing is usually great and the topic is often “fair game” although sometimes they can be simplistic, unfair or shortsighted. I suppose that in this regard it is no different than much worded (and often overly worded) opinion articles. However, they can be “on the mark.” They certainly can strike a chord with the reader. I’m not sure if they drive a disproportionate number of letters to news editors. I suspect that they may. Regardless, the editors must love them because it means that people are reading and buying their papers.

They are really at their best when they present a caricature of public officials, e,g. George W. Bush as a little boy with big ears, George H. W. Bush as a thin man with large glasses or Bill Clinton as pudgy man with a big nose.

Editorial cartoons are not always political in nature but they are most always timely. Chuck Asay’s editorial cartoons are described as “critical and keen.” His are among my favorites. Check out some of his work HERE.

Chuck Asay writes for the Colorado Springs Gazette.

Image: Editorial Cartoon by Chuck Asay ©Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph

"Not Even Wrong"

[Archive August 29, 2005]

Today I was considering how best to respond to an opinion that seemed reasonable but didn’t quite add up to reality. I did not want to alienate the person who proposed it because that person, I sensed “didn’t quite get it.” I am not going to layout the specifics of the “case” here. However, it did not seem to fall into the normal categories of “true” and “false”; “good, better, best” or “bad, worse, worst”; “prudence” or “principle.” I found my answer in, of all places, The Old Farmer’s 2005 Almanac. At root (radical) the opinion was best categorized as “not even wrong.” Upon further reflection, the “not even wrong” category is worth sharing here.

“Not even wrong,” is a term scientists use to heap scorn on bad theory. A hypothesis or proposed account of reality that is dismissed as being not even wrong is not, perhaps false, as to fact or reasoning, but somehow radically, irremediably irrelevant. The criticism works on the profoundest level and goes beyond the truth and logic of an idea to cast doubt on its fundamental perception, its standpoint, almost its sanity.

The understanding that a position can be subject to flaws deeper than falsehood or fallacy provides the climax to one of the world’s greatest philosophical dramas, the story of Job. In the Bible, job is the prosperous herdsman whom the Lord tests so cruelly. For no reason, because of no offence of Job’s, the Lord strips him of his property, his family, and his health. Prostrate with suffering and grief, Job demands to know why an innocent and upright man like himself should be put in such pain by a just God. Various counselors attempt to answer this question, none satisfactorily. At last, in one of the most astonishing passages of the Bible, the Lord speaks to Job and tells him, in effect, that he doesn’t get it. “Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?” the Lord asks Job. “Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? Doth the eagle mount up at thy command?” He goes on to invite job to consider the majesty, intricacy, and perfection of God’s creation and to reflect that, by comparison, Job’s remonstrances on the injustice of his condition are as nothing. They are not false, but unimportant. They are not even wrong.

Photo: "One Eyed Jack with a Gun" ©Michael C. Newell

“The Dating Dearth”

[Archive August 16, 2005]

Tomorrow is the one year anniversary of John Mallon’s on-line article from his “Reality Check” series, The Dating Dearth: A Man’s Perspective. Ladies, if you’ve ever wondered, "Why don't the men ask us out?" study this article and take it to heart. Guys, know that you’ve found a friend in John Mallon.

Here are some excerpts:

One man commented to me on a climate nowadays of a prevailing hostility among women towards men. It is easy for a man to feel that some women are actually looking to find fault, ready to pounce on him at the slightest ill-chosen word or misspoken comment. In Christian women this can manifest in self-righteousness, or a kind of assumed moral superiority over men often unconscious on their part. Men complain that they often feel around women that they cannot win, or say or do anything right. Such women drive men away.

A man needs to feel that he is a hero in the eyes of the woman he loves. It may sound corny, and most men may not admit it, but real life is corny, and it is true. It is from such admiration that a man derives his strength. The quest for this admiration, either in the eyes of a specific woman, or hoping to catch the eye of a woman, supplies him with inspiration and motivation to serve and accomplish in his world.

I can hear even some Christian women saying, "Well, he should get his strength from God!" This attitude, apart from being rather ungenerous, overlooks the facts of creation: that God did not say to Adam, "I'm all you need!" but rather, "It is not good for man to be alone, I will make him a helper like himself." In other words, one of the main ways ordained and willed by God to give a man strength is through a woman's love. There is no shame in this mediation.

Men are far more vulnerable to women than women can even imagine. Men are sensitive to things in women that women are not even aware of. The slightest bit of sarcasm from a women in whom he's interested can cause him to call off the whole pursuit. A woman who thinks this weak on the man's part simply doesn't know how men are built and what men are feeling these days. We live in a culture that sinfully exploits women, but many women have retaliated by vengefully diminishing men with their tongues and attitudes. There is much healing needed on both sides.

Here is the full article: The Dating Dearth

Photo: Mysterious Green ©Amanda Rohde

Marshall McLuhan

[Archive: February 2, 2005]

Have you ever read works from Marshall McLuhan, Canadian philosopher (1911-1980) ? He was received into the Catholic Church later in his life. He is very good on commenting on the mass media and its influence. He is a great source of quotes.

"Many a good argument is ruined by some fool who knows what he is talking about."

"The modern media are engaged in a Luciferian conspiracy against the truth."

"The medium is the message."

Certain statements you never forget...