House Repairs

The past year was one of continuous house repair. When my wife recently requested another repair, I had a momentary relapse into "old Scott" (the one who rants and raves). While our 100-year old house is charming, each repair is a custom process (and an opportunity for personal growth). The service professional's response is typically, "Wow. I haven't seen one of those in years." As they say, misery loves company. In my case, the company is the Royals of England. Here's their to-do list:

Urgent repairs: Palace costs
£18.3m Fix lead and slate roofs at Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace
£5.5m Replace heating and electrics at Buckingham Palace and remove asbestos
£4.2m Replace cast iron and lead Victorian water main at Windsor
£3m Refurbish St James's Palace
£3m Conservation work at the V&A Mausoleum

Perspectival Shift

Stephen Fry recently said, "I asked a Kenyan with whom we were working whether he was pleased that America looked to be about to have its first black president, and one of Kenyan extraction at that? ‘Very pleased,’ he replied. ‘But you must remember Mr. Obama’s mother is of European extraction. If Barack Obama had stayed here and been elected as our leader, he could have become Kenya’s first white president.’"

Increasing Complexity

In Spinoza's Ethics, he writes, "Things could not have been produced by God in any way or in any order other than that in which they have been produced." (I, P33). One implication of this statement is a necessary movement towards increasing complexity.

As God unfolds, the permutations increase in what appears a Bach-like set of fugues. These permutations unfold in a specific order, despite the seeming randomness. Further, the unfolding is constructive for the specificity that follows.

As a person who is drawn to simplicity, I am at odds with God - not my best stance. The increased complexity that I see as a characteristic of evolution is not some mistake; the increased complexity allows for that occasional quantum leap that we see in physics, biology, invention and art.

While there is nothing wrong with my desire to rely on proven formulae, there is everything wrong with my occasional desire to go back to the "white picket fences of the 50s "- as it is based in my desire to "play God."

Moses's Spiritual Experience

I am very interested in spiritual experiences, both for their power and for their poetry. One of the most well-known spiritual experiences is that of Moses. As he was tending to his father-in-law's flock of sheep, he noticed a burning bush. Initially his curiosity drove him closer. What followed changed his life.

His spiritual experience, that is, his communication with God was filled with certain critical elements. First, he was in a place of dislocation. He was a city boy living a country life. He was at loose ends without a sense of significance. Then, he came to a sense of location through a struggle. After his dialogue, or quasi-debate, with God, he moves to surrender to his mission: "I will send you to Pharaoh, and take My people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt."

What I find really fascinating about this encounter was when Moses asks God's name. God answers, "I shall be As I shall be." What a name! Some scholars debate the term, but to me it implies the No Free Will Universe. Much is made of free will, a concept I find increasingly vain and arrogant. Here, God reveals the essence: God is not only what God is, but God will be as God will be. If God is everything, then the future is laid out with our "free will" being either to enjoy it or be miserable about it.

A confirmation of this interpretation is what God tells Moses. He describes to Moses precisely what will take place. Interestingly, exact knowledge of what is going to happen does nothing to ease Moses's surrender. Instead Moses surrenders like all of us - imperfectly and unwillingly.

Where The Jobs Are

In reading todays NYT, I came across an article describing a huge labor shortage. So what's the catch? Mandatory celibacy for $1,350 per month not including tips. What's the job? Roman Catholic (RC) priesthood.

I have followed articles on the RC church since I grew up in one. Even when I was young, there was an acute shortage of priests. For a couple of days in college, I contemplated the Episcopal priesthood. But when Peter Lee, the local Episcopalian rector, said that there were too many Episcopalian priests and suggested that I consider the RC variety, I quickly discontinued the search. Celibacy ranked right behind hunger strikes in terms of personal appeal.

In order to take care of RC Americans, the U.S. has been wooing priests away from impoverished countries, such as Nigeria, Uganda and India. Even more desirable are Spanish-speaking priests to deal with the large immigrant Spanish-speaking population, but those priests are in even greater shortage in their homelands. While there is a shortage in the U.S. with one priest per 1,500 lay people, there is an acute shortage in Mexico with one priest per 7,000 Mexican lay people.

The article recounts some funny moments in this new cultural mix. My favorite told of a priest who came from one of these hot equatorial countries and thought the frost on his car one cold Kentucky morning was the work of vandals.

What's Mine?

Recently one of my teachers told me an insightful story. Back in the old Soviet Union, party loyalty was a major testing point. The local party boss went to a farmer and asked him, "if you had 100 cows, would you consider them to be collective assets?" The farmer replied, "of course. I despise capitalism and celebrate our communist system." The party boss asked, "if you had 50 horses, would you consider them to be collective assets?" The farmer replied, "of course. I believe our founders had a great plan and a great vision and I support it." The party boss asked, "if you had 5 chickens, would you consider them to be collective assets?" There was a long silence. The party boss asked, "what's the problem? You have already considered 100 cows and 50 horses to be collective assets." The farmer replied, "well, I have 5 chickens."

Why does this story make us smile? Isn't it that we relate to the farmer? Don't we have a little place "of our own"? Don't we all have those little "guilty pleasures" that give us a feeling that something is ours? Even more, don't we all relate to the sense that the universe and government and powers are going to do what they're going to do? Isn't it amazing how easy it is to do the big things, but not the little ones?

Is Self-Serving really Self-Serving?

The "Big Book" of Alcoholics Anonymous makes a stark claim in answering the question of what is meant by turning one's will and life over to the care of God (as one understands God).

The authors state that it means "that we be convinced that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success" (pg.60). This statement is difficult. Does this mean that we should simply not do anything? Or does this mean that anything I do is not to be called a success? What are the authors driving at?

The next sentence tells the reader that living on a "self-will" basis brings us into conflict with others, regardless of our motives. Again, such a statement might imply that we are to avoid conflict at all costs or, that conflict is a sure sign of a lack of success. Is that what the authors are driving at?

The questions raised by these comments were helpfully addressed by some insights of Charlie Munger (Warren Buffett's partner). He shared that the one factor he consistently underestimates is "self-serving bias."

He states "My favorite human misjudgment is self-serving bias: how the brain subconsciously will decide that what’s good for the holder of the brain is good for everyone else. If the little me wants it, why shouldn’t the little me have it? People go through life like this. I’ve underestimated this phenomenon all my life. People go bonkers taking care of their own self-interest. It’s a sea of miscognition. People who write the laws, people who treat patients, who experiment with rats, all suffer horribly from this bias."

Given that we are living in this "sea of miscognition," what are we to do about it? Charlie Munger says "to train yourself not to do this," but provides no practical program to do so. In the "Big Book," the authors state that we will not be able to reduce this problem "by wishing or by trying on our own power." Instead, we need to "quit playing God" by making God our Director.

Essentially, the authors are stating that turning our will and our lives over to the care of God may be fraught with self-serving bias and, for this reason, requires prior thought. Without first conceding that our "self-will" is an impediment to success in life, we probably will not quit playing God, even though we may think that we are "turning it over."

The Job, The Car, The Girl

Today's article in NYT, "Seeking Employment For Ex-Cons In Newark" points out how misguided some help can be. The article states, "Some 2,300 men and women pour into the city from prison each year, and 65 percent are rearrested within five years. One in six adult residents of the city has a criminal record." Doesn't sound like Newark is such an attractive place to live - who could blame them for looking for a solution?

The misguided help is based on faulty reasoning - throughout the article is an implicit belief that unemployment causes crime, yet the article provides examples of employed individuals who end up committing crime. Duh. It's not "the job, the car, the girl." It's the result of addiction which is not the result of the addicting substance. It's the result of "stinkin' thinkin'."

Interestingly, the article's reporter is alert to this fact, although the local government and various help agencies seem miserably unaware of it. The reporter describes a person who has repeatedly failed in jobs, only to get one more difficult (by distance) work opportunity. He comments, “I know it’s going to be tough. But I can’t be thinking about myself anymore.” Here's someone who's closer to a solution. Thinking about ourselves, our plans and our designs does not improve outcomes when our thinking stinks.

Later on, the director of a program with a stunningly high success rate of 90% shares the key to its success. It takes at least a year, Rich Liebler, of nearby Hillside, N.J. said, to “deprogram” the felons. Most have never owned an alarm clock — months can pass before they show up for class on time — and few can name a family member with a regular job. “We treat them as if they were in a cult,” he said. “We have to reverse the thought process they’ve grown up into.”
Rich Liebler's program works on getting out of the stinkin' thinkin' and then moving to the other aspects. This is a time-consuming process, but is soundly based on true causes and the success rate reveals its power.

1:9 Becoming Objective

The decision-making process is difficult. As a friend used to say, "the quality of the decision is a function of the quality of the process." In Pirkei Avot 1:8 post, I discussed the primary challenges to objectivity: bias and cynicism. If I am not engaged in either of these , Pirkei Avot 1:9 provides additional wisdom on becoming objective.

Continuing in the language of the legal system, the author of this passage focuses on the role of the "witnesses." In 1:8, the "judge" was referenced in the sense of the decision-making faculty and "litigants" were referenced in the sense of opposing desires. The "witnesses" in 1:9 reference the data points themselves.

The author begins, "be extensive in questioning the witnesses," that is, be as thorough as possible gathering the information available. "In questioning" comes from the Hebrew phrase lachakor, which also has the sense of "for exploring." In other words, there is not a conclusion in mind. The questioning should be open-ended - an exploration in the sense of letting the data points unfold, without arranging or ordering.

Confirming this interpretation is some advice in the second part of passage: "be cautious with your words so that the witnesses do not learn to lie." In order for the "witnesses" to be truthful, they must not be led as a lawyer would lead. It is tempting to connect the data points too early thereby making those data points lie. Be patient; let the data points speak for themselves. (Another good translation for "witnesses" might be "facts." As we all know, "facts" can lie if forced.)

A Random Reading

In what may be one of the most random posts on this blog, I wanted to write about a pattern that may exist. The English letter and the Hebrew letter is written from left to right, while the Arabic letter is written from right to left. The English sentence is written from left to right; the Hebrew sentence and the Arabic sentence is written from right to left. Any cultural pattern?

In discussing this with a friend of mine, he posited that two great forces drive reality - Justice and Mercy. These forces are driven by the attributes at work in our system - Justice is essentially the way it works and Mercy is the way we want it to work. (Alot more could be said about this and perhaps a later post will address it.)

His thesis is that cultures which write letters from left to right are based on Justice, while cultures that read and write from right to left are based on Mercy. Thus, English and Hebrew language-based cultures are Justice-based, while Arabic cultures are Mercy-based. Further, the writing of the sentence either confirms or offsets this primary emphasis (primary because of the building block nature of the emphasis). Thus, English language-based cultures are Justice-based with an additional Justice emphasis. Hebrew language-based cultures are Justice-based with an additional Mercy emphasis. Arabic language-based cultures are Mercy-based with an additional Mercy emphasis.

I think that there is probably something to this novel theory. I spend much of my time reading annual reports. The format in most of these reports reads with the most recent on the left backwards to the right. In a sense, we are reading history backwards and the way management wants it to work. If, on the other hand, we were to read the reports as they historically occurred, we would be reading with Justice - which is really the thing I want to do with an annual report, but not typically what the management would want. Just a thought.

1:8 Becoming Objective

The Fourth Step of Twelve Step programs reads, "we made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves (pg.59)." This step requires a "fact-finding" and "fact-facing" process (pg.64). Clearly, when we begin by fooling others, we end by fooling ourselves. Objectivity is important, but difficult because of our inherent subjectivity.

Pirkei Avos 1:8 has some helpful advice for assisting our objectivity. The first section of the verse tells us that we are not to place ourselves as a lawyer.

The first section reads al taas atsmecha which can be translated as "do not make yourself" corchei hadayanin "an arranger of judges" or "an advocate who arranges pleas before a judge" or, in our parlance, "a lawyer." The awkwardness of this phrase indicates either a shortage of or embarrassment about the biased role of organizing information so as to persuade judges.

We are warned against being an advocate. I see several reasons. First, I am more likely to become biased. Second, I am likely to get emotionally attached to my viewpoint and dislike those who disagree. Third, and even more importantly, I am likely to begin "playing God" as I lodge with certainty that Reality ought to be other than as it is.

The second section reads "when the litigants are standing before you, let them all be in your eyes as guilty." This section would seem to contradict the advice given earlier in 1:6 "judge every person favorably." Is there a resolution to it? I think so. Just as in the first section, we are urged to not be biased because it will distort Reality, so in the second section we are assured that Reality is as it ought to be, i.e, God's in control. It is important to realize that the litigants are standing there for good reason, not because it is an unjust or random universe.

The third and final section reads "but when they are dismissed from before you, let them all be in your eyes as innocent, provided they have accepted upon themselves the judgment." Here the implied warning is to not obsess about the process. By letting go of it, by understanding that the process has been completed, we are relieved of our entanglement.

But what of the final contingency? Why would we be involved, in any way, to see that they have accepted upon themselves the judgment? Here, I believe, the warning is for us, not for them. If we see them "as innocent," we may be inclined to reach to avert their consequences with such a new view in mind. This final part warns of attempts against the benefits of the process of consequences.

1:7 Know When To Run

The last section of Pirkei Avos 1:6 finishes with "judge every person favorably." The first section of the next verse - Pirkei Avos 1:7 - reads, "distance yourself from a bad neighbor." What a striking contrast of seemingly opposite approaches!

However, more consistency is yielded by interpreting "bad neighbor" as an ongoing person, institution or principle of "badness," or ra. This section is placed here because someone may justify approaching such ra by saying, "I'm only here because I am open-minded and judging every person favorably." There are clearly times that our motives are suspect.

The next section of verse 1:7 reads "do not join with a bad person." Here a more fruitful interpretation involves focusing on the activity rather than the person. Unlike the prior section which describes a place of ongoing activity, this section describes joining an activity in the planning stage.

The final section of 1:7 reads, "do not abandon bad happenings" with the key word poranut, literally meaning "bad happenings." This section gives clarification to the earlier two sections. In the earlier sections, we are to avoid a place of bad activity and planning a bad activity, but now we are told not to abandon a "bad happening" by simply labeling it a bad activity. Growth in life requires embracing not abandoning challenges.

The focus of this verse, then, seems to be to help us determine what the classic country song advises when it plays, "know when to run."

"Right-sizing"

In the Pirkei Avos, verse 1:6 reads "make yourself a teacher, acquire yourself a friend and judge every person favorably." This verse has three components yet each component could stand on its own. Why were they put together? Is this simply a Reader's Digest verse?

Before looking at them together, let's look at each component. The first - "make yourself a teacher" has peculiarity in the verb "make" (asai, in Hebrew). Of course a teacher is important, so why not "find" one?

To me, the implication is clear. We are apt to be cafeteria-like in our approach. So "make" seems to have force here, as in, "see if you can make me.." We are to force ourselves to follow what our teachers say - even when we disagree. They have perspective on our situation which we lack.

"Acquire yourself a friend" also has peculiarity in the verb "acquire" (k'nai, in Hebrew). This verb has a financial sense, as in "buy" yourself a friend. Isn't that exactly the wrong way to get a friend?

To me, the implication is again clear. The long term qualities of a friend are similar to the long term qualities of a good investment. Just as finding a good investment requires patience and attention, so too does finding a good friend.

Finally, "judging every person favorably" requires an extraordinary shift in perspective. By viewing each person favorably, we are giving everyone the benefit of the doubt. Although such a viewpoint is difficult to maintain, the rewards are significant and numerous. Along these lines, Schopenhauer said, "a man can do as he wills, but not will as he wills."

Each component of this verse is critical to "right-sizing" our egos. A teacher will make us take actions which are beneficial to us, but in our blind spot. A valuable friend will also challenge us to expand our perspectives. Finally, judging others favorably will remove logs from our eyes.

The 1:5 Problem of Balance

When a verse in Pirkei Avos pushes together several apparently disparate ideas, I struggle to connect them. I merely labelled the resulting idea "The 1:5 Problem of Balance." Here it is.

The verse begins by stating "let your house be wide open." As I wrote in an earlier post, a contemporary translation of our "house" is our mind or our internet connection. So here, the verse encourages an open mind.

But the verse continues with "let the needy be members of your household," moving beyond open-mindedness to generosity. By giving the needy our attention, we are less likely to be self-centered.

So far, so good. But the weird part follows: "and do not over-indulge in light talk with your wife." Wow. How does encouragement to open-mindedness move to admonishing frivolity with one's wife? Realizing that any explanation may look like justification, I would still like to venture my idea.

Sometimes, when one feels "open-minded" and generous, there is an expansiveness - kind of like being "high on life." At such periods, we may be susceptible to new connections, new ideas or even new commitments. With all of that good stuff going on, life may lose its seriousness. As every silver lining has its cloud, the cloud here seems to be frivolity.

This last part of the verse seems to warn that while keeping our heads in the clouds of open-minded generosity, we should be balanced in keeping our feet seriously grounded.

"Emotional Stability"

One of my favorite reads of the year is Berkshire Hathaway's annual report. A few hours ago it was published and, as usual, it was filled with insight and humor. But one of the most interesting discussions this year dealt with the challenge of finding an investor to succeed Mr. Buffett. In looking for such a person, he listed as vital qualities for investment success to be "independent thinking, emotional stability and a keen understanding of both human and institutional behavior." While the thinking and understanding components are clearly vital, I found it significant that "emotional stability" got equal billing.

In reading about Twelve Step programs, the eleventh step deals with prayer and meditation. The step's discussion on emotions relates as well to investing as addictive behaviors. In the primary text (Big Book p.88), he writes "as we go through the day, we pause..we are then in much less danger of excitement, fear, anger, worry, self-pity or foolish decisions." Note the progression. It is similar to watching a stock bubble with "excitement" and pop and finally get sold at "foolish" levels. I think Mr. Buffett has once again hit it; like recovery itself, investing is "simple, but not easy" (Big Book p.14).

Role Models

Pirkei Avos (1:4) advises "let your home be a meeting place for the wise, become dirty by sitting at the dust of their feet, and drink their words thirstily." Such patterns are difficult in today's world. Coffee shops are the more likely meeting places. So how can this advice be best applied?

I have always had a critical place in my heart for those who were avid readers of People magazine. I didn't consider those celebrities worthy of such attention, but in my condemnation I missed something important. Essentially, these people were following the advice given here. They brought their "wise" into their minds and souls (their "homes"). They attended closely to where their "wise" went and remembered their every word. If I will only give my "wise" the same level as they give their "wise" and spend less time criticizing others' choices, I'll be able to apply this advice.

Three Dimensions of Human Affairs, Part II

In an earlier post, I contrasted the three dimensions of the Jewish Pirkei Avos with those of the Aristotle's Greek text On Rhetoric. On further reflection, I have come across another three dimensional framework - Steps 10, 11 and 12 of the Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous. Step 10 says "continued to take personal inventory and when wrong, promptly admitted it." Step 11 says "sought to increase our conscious contact with God.." Step 12 says "..practice these principles in all our affairs." These final three steps are the growth and living steps of the program. Remarkably, they correlate closely with the three dimensions I discussed in an earlier post. Step 10 is a study step, correlating with Torah study and logos. Step 11 is an inner person step, correlating with avodah and ethos. Step 12 is an other person step, correlating with gemulit chassidum and pathos.

Three Dimensions of World

The world I experience is three-dimensional, despite mathematical assertions to the contrary. As I study more, however, I see that this three-dimensionality occurs in wisdom writings. In Aristotle's work titled On Rhetoric, he divides the world of communications into three dimensions: ethos (speaker), logos (idea) and pathos (listener). In Pirkei Avos, the famous Jewish text of wisdom, verse 1:2, states that the world is sustained by three dimensions: Torah study, avodah (service of the heart) and gemilut chassidum (bestowing kindnesses).

I see a relationship. In the construction of our "world," there is one axis of us relating with ourselves. This is a spiritual axis, as in ethos, or avodah. Then, there is a second axis of us relating with our fellow man. This is a physical axis of action, like pathos, or gemilut chassidum. Finally, there is a mental axis of ideas, like logos, or Torah study. For our world, individually or collectively, to sustain itself, study, external relations and interior health are all critical.

This does raise another issue. Where does "emotional" fit in? Some individuals, such as Bill W. of AA fame, seem to put the emotional on the mental axis. Aristotle seems to imply that the emotional is on the pathos axis, while the Pirkei Avos seems to imply that the emotional is a on the spiritual axis. My sense is that the emotional is the dot connecting to the intersection of the other three vectors, possibly explaining its volatility.

Tochacha

The Hebrew word tochacha is important to understand. Variously translated as rebuke, reproof or chastisement, tochacha seems harsh and undesirable. None of us like to be told that we have been or are wrong. Our egos are perfectionists, preferring to be right rather than happy.

Our goal, then, shouldn't be perfection, but growth. The reality is that we all make mistakes and are frequently wrong. In order to make a stepping stone out of these stumbling blocks, a different translation for tochacha may be more helpful to this growth process. For me, a better translation would be "illumination," as that indicates its core kindness.

There are two sides to tochacha - the receiving and the giving. Receiving "illumination" is not easy. Our egos often interfere. Sometimes we're just not ready. After forty long years in the desert, Moses told the Jews, "but God did not give you a heart to know, or eyes to see, or ears to hear until this day." If it took the Jews forty years to get it, we should be patient with ourselves.

In turn, such patience can help us when we give tochacha. Just as with money, giving tochacha is much harder than receiving. As a friend of mine says, "no good deed goes unpunished." By recognizing that "illumination" occurs beyond our control, we can patiently wait for it to be requested. We are not responsible for another's outcome - only for our availability. Further, by understanding tochacha as "illumination," our requested help may be less forced.

Will "Alternative" Foods Go Mainstream?

Since Whole Foods built a new store in Highland Park in 2001, I have been a regular at the store. Despite higher prices, I was attracted to a much higher level of cleanliness, a thorough description of food content and the option of no and low fat foods. In the meantime, I watched Tom Thumb close down a recently remodeled store and asked myself, "why don't they sell some of those Whole Food products?"

The recent purchase of 84% of Tom's of Maine by Colgate-Palmolive (stock symbol:CL and founded in 1806) for $100 million points to movement in that direction. Tom's of Maine was started in 1970 by Tom Chappell as a "natural" product category company with deodorants and toothpastes. Last year sales were about $50 million. In light of Tom's high profit margins, it doesn't appear that CL overpaid. Rather, Tom's will get heavyweight distribution and CL will begin to get that product line that Tom Thumb lacked. Winners all around?

Not likely. It looks like Whole Foods may be the ultimate loser through franchise erosion. As production and distribution gets more efficient for Tom's through CL's efforts, other food chains will have the ability to carry such products. While Whole Foods may argue that Tom's should not diminish its brand by selling through inorganic, animal-haters, CL will logically argue that if Tom's is good for the world, why limit its distribution?