Today I present some quotations from the wisest man I never heard of until this week. I don’t know how I missed Thomas Sowell before, but I consider this post to be the first step toward correcting my indefensible oversight.
Thomas Sowell remains an astute commentator on the national scene at age 80. His website can be found at www.tsowell.com. Some quotes:
• "The most basic question is not what is best, but who shall decide what is best."
• "It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong."
• "What is ominous is the ease with which some people go from saying that they don’t like something to saying that the government should forbid it. When you go down that road, don’t expect freedom to survive very long."
• "Many bad policies are simply good policies taken too far. For example, we have taken tolerance to such an extreme that we tolerate the immigration into our country of millions of intolerant people who hate millions of Americans who are already here."
• "If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism."
• "One of the most fashionable notions of our times is that social problems like poverty and oppression breed wars. Most wars, however, are started by well-fed people with time on their hands to dream up half-baked ideologies or grandiose ambitions, and to nurse real or imagined grievances."
• "Each new generation born is in effect an invasion of civilization by little barbarians, who must be civilized before it is too late."
• "The problem isn't that Johnny can't read. The problem isn't even that Johnny can't think. The problem is that Johnny doesn't know what thinking is; he confuses it with feeling."
• "If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules and be judged by the same standards, that would have gotten you labeled a radical 60 years ago, a liberal 30 years ago and a racist today."
• "For bureaucrats procedure is everything and outcomes are nothing."
• "The march of science and technology does not imply growing intellectual complexity in the lives of most people. It often means the opposite."
• "Anyone who is serious about extending the same benefits to others must become serious about developing the same abilities in others—that is, raising them up to the same standards, not bringing the standards down to them."
• "Much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good."
It is my hope that sharing these quotes will inspire thought and conversation among people of good will about our situation, the future of our nation, and our American values.
Gryphem
Ideas. Observations. Commentary. Always Appropriate. Kind. Gryphem is a place for thinking people who believe it is more important to understand than to win arguments. It features thoughts on life, the state of the world, empathetic or irritable comments, insightful analysis, and an occasional thought-provoking or entertaining story. All persons of good will, compassion, and reason are welcome.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Saturday, March 19, 2011
I'll Be Seeing You...
This is for someone special. I hope everyone appreciates it, though.


I'll be seeing you in all the old familiar places
That this heart of mine embraces all day through
In that small café, the park across the way
The children's carousel, the chestnut trees, the wishing well
I'll be seeing you in every lovely summer's day
In everything that's light and gay
I'll always think of you that way
I'll find you in the mornin' sun
And when the night is new
I'll be looking at the moon
But I'll be seeing you
I'll find you in the mornin' sun
And when the night is new
I'll be looking at the moon
But I'll be seeing you…
(Apologies for the abrupt ending. But isn't that just like real life?)
That this heart of mine embraces all day through
In that small café, the park across the way
The children's carousel, the chestnut trees, the wishing well
I'll be seeing you in every lovely summer's day
In everything that's light and gay
I'll always think of you that way
I'll find you in the mornin' sun
And when the night is new
I'll be looking at the moon
But I'll be seeing you
I'll find you in the mornin' sun
And when the night is new
I'll be looking at the moon
But I'll be seeing you…
(Apologies for the abrupt ending. But isn't that just like real life?)
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Strange Headlines
Below I present some actual headlines and excerpts from this week’s online news. How stoopid is we?
- "Carpenters build many things like buildings."
- Do they also build things that are not like buildings?
- "I'm having difficulty beating the Bandersnatch."
- Then stop. The SPCA might have something to say about you beating your Bandersnatch anyway.
- "A plane is a two-dimensional doubly ruled surface spanned by two linearly independent vectors."
- Huh?
![]() |
Okay, this one’s not from this week. But it fits the category so perfectly otherwise. |
- "Buddhists, Dog Meat and Santa Claus"
- Name three things that have never been thought of together until now...
- "Specific ligands were found to induce erythroid-specific gene expression."
- Is this the plane dimension independence guy again? What is his problem?!
And my favorite...
- "Boneless Smoked Ham - Delicious for Hanukkah"
- Why is the advertiser writing about Hanukkah in the month of March? He should’ve said his ham would be delicious for Passover.
Gryphem
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Found Wisdom: “Motiveless”
He loves us -
not that we might love Him,
for being Love itself,
He comes by it honestly.
for being Love itself,
He comes by it honestly.
Words of Wisdom found at http://www.poncer.blogspot.com/
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Micro-Management and the Ruse of Superiority
I had a “eureka moment” today. Here’s what I realized: The more detailed our organizational objectives and task lists become, the less our members – and especially our leaders – are able to communicate intelligently and effectively.
This eureka moment was inspired by a high-level, very experienced leader in the bureaucracy of a major government organization. He talked with me for ten minutes about a topic of great concern. He tossed out names and acronyms, demonstrated in-depth understanding, even insight about the topic of the moment. His intensity was obvious. This listener did, albeit with some difficulty, follow his points.
But at the end, the boss walked away obviously expecting the listener to get to work on some aspect of the topic at hand. Although he intuitively understood something of the leader’s concerns, the listener had absolutely no idea what the leader expected him to do. Unfortunately, he knew from experience - both firsthand and secondhand - that any inquiry was most likely to unleash a string of profanity but no enlightenment. Apparently the leader was so bound up in his own mental bureaucracy, locked in by buzzwords, acronyms, mental constructs of organizational operations – that he was unable to communicate in depth with anyone beyond the bounds of his own limited sphere of concern.
What makes this more intriguing is that the topic of the angst-inspiring soliloquy was the organization “task list." The "task list" is a list of millions of essential things each organization must be able to do. To quote some experts in the field, “A task… is a specific action that enables a function to be accomplished,” and, “All must ensure that no function is forgotten.” That’s fairly comprehensive. The fact is, the task list explains every little thing in such intimate detail it is practically useless in implementation. Real people don't think about the thousands of component actions they must accomplish in order to get through every day. They just do them.
Returning to this morning's conversation... The boss wanted something that he was incapable of describing - and that something involved the list that intimately describes every single micromanaged task in the entire organization. Yet although the leader could talk all morning about issues surrounding his area of concern, he was incapable of a coherent explanation of what he wanted. He had become so intimately involved with the intimate details of the job that he was unable to communicate person-to-person with ordinary people.
Returning to this morning's conversation... The boss wanted something that he was incapable of describing - and that something involved the list that intimately describes every single micromanaged task in the entire organization. Yet although the leader could talk all morning about issues surrounding his area of concern, he was incapable of a coherent explanation of what he wanted. He had become so intimately involved with the intimate details of the job that he was unable to communicate person-to-person with ordinary people.
In all fairness, I believe the boss might agree with some of what I'm writing here. His concern this morning was, at least in part, the inadequacy of the “task list” as a guide for professional action. The trouble is, I’m not sure whether he thinks the solution is to think more like real human people, or to make a more thorough task list. I’m not about to ask him. I did hear him say recently that no one had any business being here if not "thoroughly conversant" in every aspect of the enterprise. There is irony here.
To expand the scope of the topic somewhat, I'd like to point out that the government “essential tasks” are the equivalent of the school system’s “essential learning requirements.” Same idea, different functional part of society. Both purport to improve the output of their respective organizations. Both involve extreme micromanagement. Both seem to detract from the ability of members of the respective professions actually to communicate with other people. Perhaps this diminishing ability to communicate on the part of micromanagers is due to intense pressure to perform to impossibly detailed and specific standards. Perhaps it is due to a the stress of a pervasive focus on matters that are extremely - but uneccessarily - complex. Or maybe it's that part of the brain of the organization leader is always busy complying with the organizational expectation that every discrete function be overtly stated and set forth to digital standards of specificity.
Humans just weren’t meant to work like that, to think like that. We naturally comprehend the world around us not as a series of distinct points, not only as black-or-white, on-or-off, one-or-zero. No, just as our eyes are able to see shades of color our minds perceive a gradiated universe of infinitely fine variation. We do not naturally think of the world as a group of distinct points, but as an undifferentiated spectrum of points along an endless range. Our current preoccupation with "digital" analysis is a product of training. It is an artificial demand imposed by leaders who insist that we all align our performance, our learning and teaching, all our individual actions and behaviors, with certain predetermined “expectations."
I'm sorry that sounded so complex. Even thinking about these things can get convoluted.
Sidebar: when I was a teacher, I once had an administrator who insisted that, at the beginning of every single lesson in my eighth grade class, I state to students exactly what they would be learning. Like most of the other teachers in the school, I knew that was a silly requirement. The difference was, they didn’t want to deal with the fallout of saying so, and they pretended to go along with it. I, on the other hand, responded to his directive by telling him that it was a ridiculous requirement. Certainly it might be a good idea for some lessons - but a very bad idea for others. I told him that some of my most effective lessons involved “surprise” discoveries, and that stating the conclusions up front would short-circuit the learning process, would tend to increase boredom in a class that had become completely predictable. His response was priceless. His eyes got bigger, his jaw fell open. He laughed, truly at first, then nervously as he realized I was serious. He had never been confronted with his own absurdity before, I suspect. Apparently he was unable to comprehend that I, an experienced professional teacher, could disagree with him. In the end, he did force his point. Because he was my boss and I needed to keep my job, I complied with the letter of his law. For about two months. That was the amount of time it took me to arrange other employment. I did not leave because of that one incident or that one individual. I left because that administrator was typical of the educational leadership in that school district; I did not know of even one administrator of good sense, good will, and courage that I could go to with this problem. So, weighing all my options, I left the profession. And that was too bad, because I was a good teacher and I loved teaching. To this day I resent being forced out after 16 years by arrogant people who believed that they were smarter than they really were. I hope one day sanity will return to our educational system. If and when that happens, I would love to return to the classroom. Until then, I’ll make my way elsewhere.
Now back to the main topic…
As we learn throughout a lifetime, we retain much of the information and skills we’ve learned in our subconscious mind. The current troubles are because organization gurus have been trying for decades to short-circuit our normal thinking process, trying to make every single thought and movement and process a conscious act (at least on paper). Maybe this is due to the inordinate influence of lawyers with their emphasis on the letter-of-the-law, their us-versus-them, win-lose mentality. Maybe it is due to the influence of a computer culture in which every thought is conceptualized as a series of electronic switch positions as in an electronic “brain.” Maybe it is because we are beginning to think of our organizations as living entities and our defined processes as their brain functions. Don't laugh... there's some validity to the allegation.
In any case, the attempt to force digital thought processes and behavior onto our fuzzy-logic analog selves seems to clutter our brains so much that we can no longer think clearly. Maybe the parts of our mind that routinely manage trifling details for us atrophy when they are forcibly excluded from the thought process for long periods of time. Maybe that is why the professional educator or “mission-essential task-master” forgets how normal human beings think and communicate. Maybe the extreme “organization man” (or woman) is already halfway to becoming the digital robotic entity he (or she) seems to admires so much.
For those of you out there who haven’t been as polluted as I have by all this micromanagement of your every action and thought, I just insulted the intelligence of people who think they are better than the rest of us, and who try to control us through the tyranny of institutionalized micromanagement.
Dang, I did it again. Let me try to put this in ordinary language one more time.
People who think they are smarter than the rest of us are really stupid, because they don’t understand the basics of how to communicate with other people.
That was better.
I conclude with a reflection on a children’s story I’m sure most of you know well. It is a parable about people who think they are smarter than they are. More specifically, it is about a man who is really not that smart, and who desperately wants to prevent anyone else from discovering that fact.
Do you know the story of "The Emperor’s New Clothes," by Hans Christian Andersen? [In case you haven’t, here’s a link to a version of the story adapted by children’s author Stephen Corrin: http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/Emperors-New-Clothes.htm] Well, it’s like that. By attempting to appear smarter than everyone else, the Emperor demonstrated his undeniable ignorance for all to see. Instead of a wonderful new suit, he really had no clothes. It’s okay to be amused with him, because he brought the embarrassing situation on himself with his own arrogance.
The Emperor really has no clothes. It’s okay – go ahead and say so. Go ahead and call him on it After all, in the story it was the honest comment of an innocent child that led to the Emperor finally gaining a degree of wisdom in the end.
Likewise with the education professionals and the professional bureaucrats who demand that we comply with extraordinarily detailed “task lists” or “learning requirements.” The fact is, they are engaged in an arrogant attempt to micromanage the behavior (and sometimes even the thoughts) of the poor slobs under their control. They do so because they believe those poor slobs are not smart enough to do their jobs otherwise. They believe they alone are smart enough to get the job done, that in order for the rest of us to accomplish anything of value, we must be told what to do every step of the way. They certainly believe that they are smarter than the rest of us. That is why they try so hard to micromanage others' behavior, and to police others' thoughts.
You are allowed to laugh at their superiority complex. By means of their inflexible, intolerant, “my-way-or-the-highway” attitudes, they display their shortcomings, insecurities, lack of faith, inability to communicate, and lack of understanding of people and of how the world works. Their arrogance earns our derision.
Of course, after we have laughed at the arrogance, we must be kind and extend a hand of friendship. The misbehavior of the micromanager is no excuse for us to be mean. Once the controlling leaders realize how foolishly they have behaved, they are going to feel kind of bad about themselves. It will be up to us to build them up, just as we wish they had done for us. So expose the arrogance, but then reach out in compassion.
Of course, after we have laughed at the arrogance, we must be kind and extend a hand of friendship. The misbehavior of the micromanager is no excuse for us to be mean. Once the controlling leaders realize how foolishly they have behaved, they are going to feel kind of bad about themselves. It will be up to us to build them up, just as we wish they had done for us. So expose the arrogance, but then reach out in compassion.
Bottom lines:
- People are more important than checklists.
- No one is smarter than everyone.
- Treat other people with respect and kindness.
That's what I think. Of course, your opinion may differ. I respect your intelligence so please draw your own conclusions, and feel free to share them here. Thanks for reading.
Gryphem
Sunday, March 6, 2011
What Happened to the Space Program? And Us?
Within the lifetime of nearly half of all Americans, within the scope of memory of nearly every current political leader of this nation, we once accomplished something beyond all human dreams. It was awesome, remarkable, and audacious. It was arguably the greatest scientific feat of all time. It was the most amazing achievement, representing an unprecedented triumph of the human spirit.
Nothing in all of history can match it. Our astounding accomplishment rises above the great adventures of the ages. Only four decades ago the American people put one of their own on the surface of the Moon.
Nothing in all of history can match it. Our astounding accomplishment rises above the great adventures of the ages. Only four decades ago the American people put one of their own on the surface of the Moon. Since time immemorial, human beings dreamed of flying through the sky, of speeding like lightning high above the face of the Earth, of traveling to other worlds. Our American nation, collectively, finally made that dream real.
We launched our first satellite in 1958, put our first astronaut in orbit in 1962, and landed a spacecraft on the moon in 1969. Eleven years from Explorer, a shot-put in orbit, to Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin dancing across the face of the Man in the Moon.
The last person on the Moon was Apollo astronaut Eugene Cernan in 1972. There was talk of a space station, talk of a colony on the Moon, talk of a mission to Mars. Given time and effort, we knew we could do anything.
Having proven ourselves in conquering the distance to the Moon, we stepped back. The next steps, we said, would require the ability to go easily between the surface of the Earth and Earth orbit. Although it lacked the excitement of flying to another world, we set about developing the Space Shuttle.
We were right in creating the Space Shuttle program. We were on task. The rationale for development of the Space Shuttle program was valid. We needed to develop the capability to go to and from orbit quickly and reliably. That capability was a necessary prerequisite to building the Space Station, or the Moon colony, or the trip to Mars. Everything beyond required it.
The trouble was, we lost our sense of urgency. In the absence of a challenging mission, of a “Space Race,” it seemed that there was no popular mandate to keep up the prolonged effort of space exploration. Instead of the near-omnipotent agent of universal exploration, we began to think of NASA as a glorified taxi service. Somewhere along the way we lost sight of the real objective.
The colony on the Moon retreated to the realm of science fiction as the people of America, and Earth, silently gave up on actually being able to build such an ambitious project. It would require too much coordination, and cost too much.
![]() |
| Surface of Mars from Viking |
The Space Station did get developed to a point, and continues to exist. But it has become a small scientific outpost, a sort of orbital bus station for the Space Shuttle rather than the city-in-Earth-orbit we imagined a decade or two earlier. The Space Station became a support facility for the Shuttle, instead of the other way around.
![]() |
| International Space Station |
Some people blame the profiteers of Wall Street for the failure of the American Space Program. The business community was supposed to take up the cause of space exploration, and they have not. Businesses exist to create profit and, let’s face it - with the broad range of problems attendant to space flight, the tremendous expense, the risks and the uncertain returns, for now at least, space flight is a poor business venture. Space exploration, while it has created profits here and there, was and still is an unreliable source of financial return. The rewards of space flight are real, but they are not primarily monetary.
Space flight may be motivated by nationalistic effort, by pride-in-accomplishment, by the curiosity that spurs major scientific investigation, by the indefinable impulse of the human spirit to explore. But, to date at least, we should not reasonably expect that space flight will be motivated by capitalism.
To tell the truth, I’m glad that space flight was undertaken by government rather than business. As an American citizen who was watched the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo missions of the 1960s and early 1970s, I feel like a very real participant in the Space Program. It would not have been the same if the whole thing had been underwritten by IBM or Exxon or Coca-Cola.
![]() |
| Lunar Module in orbit above Moon, with Earth in the background. |
Some people blame the decline of the Space Program on naysayers who ranted every time a rocket lifted off about the waste of money, about how we should feed more poor people instead of spending money to fly into space. According to these, we have no business building a space program until poverty is eradicated and all of Earth’s problems are solved. To follow their misplaced idealism to a logical conclusion would mean that we never undertake any new venture until the world has been made perfect. In other words, never.
Although we cannot lay the blame for the initial failure of the Space Program on the priority-Earth people, they do bear some responsibility. Their rhetoric led to a decrease in enthusiasm, a loss of motivation. Their larger impact has been effectively eradicating space exploration from public consciousness. By continuing to emphasize scarcity of resources for everything other than their own priorities, they demonize space enthusiasts as elitists who don’t care about poor people. They have stifled or marginalized the voices of those who would’ve had us out in the Cosmos once more.
[Sidebar: I support feeding hungry people. There is no reason we cannot do both.]
Risking the danger of a comment on real-time politics, I will say this. Perhaps the apex (an ironic term) of the priority-Earth movement was reached as late as 2010. That was when President Obama redirected NASA, the greatest organization dedicated to exploration in the history of the human race, to become an instrument of political outreach to Islamic cultures. I cannot even think about this without being stunned and amazed at the utter lack of comprehension and long-term vision this demonstrates.
In the end, we cannot completely blame either the business community, or the priority-Earth people, or even the current administration. No, the real responsibility for the decline of the American Space program lies with the people themselves. We got to the Moon, then we got self-satisfied. We accomplished what we had set out to do, then relaxed and smugly forgot why we had done it in the first place.
About the time the Apollo landings were coming to a close, a series of unfortunate events pulled our collective attention away from the heavens. Watergate shook faith in our American government. The energy crisis of 1973 damaged our self-confidence. The Vietnam War turned even uglier and we came to grips with the fact that for the first time the United States was losing a war. We got depressed. Extreme inflation made it worse. The Iranian hostage crisis made it worse. Somewhere along the way we lost our sense of direction, even of purpose. By the early 1980s we were a mess.
Under the optimistic, can-do environment engendered by President Reagan, we began to believe in ourselves again. But instead of exploring space we thought of it as a place to counter the missile threat posed by our enemies. Instead of exploring, we turned our efforts to defeating Communism and making profits.
![]() |
| Astronaut John Glenn |
Space exploration began to be thought of, in the common mentality, as a piece of proud American history. Important, but past; irrelevant. Even when we had a rare interlude of widespread peace from 1989 to 1999 (with a brief interruption for the Gulf War in 1991), we did not make a greater effort to expand the space program. Instead of using the financial savings that came with the end of the “Cold War” (the “peace dividend”) to reinvigorate our exploration of space, we squandered it on this and that until it was no more.
Whether subsequent events cause you to love or hate President George W. Bush, he did come closest of any recent President to reinvigorating NASA and manned flight beyond Earth orbit. During his campaign in 2000 and in the first months of his presidency, President Bush hinted about a new space program like that of the 1960s, hinted of a challenge to send astronauts to Mars. But before the initiative was fully developed or formally announced, the attacks of September 11, 2001 changed everything. In a sense, our return to space was derailed by terrorist attacks and the two wars that followed. Instead of sending people to Mars, we had to send military forces to Southwest Asia.
Although President Bush’s Mission to Mars might have brought new life to the American Space Program, we cannot blame terrorism for its demise. We had already allowed space exploration to atrophy. The terrorist attacks just distracted a leader who was thinking about reinvigorating a program that was already on life-support. Long before 2001 we had reordered our societal priorities. As early as the late 1970s we had decided that instead of sending people to live on the Moon, we should apply our collective efforts in technology to improving communication and entertainment. So today, some three decades later, we have cell phones that can tell you the temperature in Kansas City or Klamath Falls, the phone number of your sister’s ex-boyfriend in Winnipeg, or the scores of this morning’s cricket matches in South Africa. We can communicate electronically - and incessantly - to people far far away, or a block away. We can send and receive pictures and music as well as our voices.
But we can no longer build a rocket that will reach the Moon.
We have fantastic special effects in our movies and video games. But we can no longer fly between worlds.
No matter… even though we cannot “really” do that anymore, our special effects make us feel like we can. And that’s what matters most, right? We build great simulators, for training and also for playing. Gotta love that X-Box. No one can top the way we pretend.
We have fantastic special effects in our movies and video games. But we can no longer fly between worlds.
No matter… even though we cannot “really” do that anymore, our special effects make us feel like we can. And that’s what matters most, right? We build great simulators, for training and also for playing. Gotta love that X-Box. No one can top the way we pretend.We went from being masters of the Earth and Sky to being pitiful pretenders. We care more about the latest “app” for our “cell,” we care more about the newest version of “Tomb Raider” or “Mortal Kombat” than we care about accomplishing great things in the REAL world. The real world requires too much effort. The real world takes too long. The real world is tiring for a populace trained to avoid exertion and boring for a populace addicted to the instant gratification of electronic stimulation.
How did we let this happened to US?
The sad little person of 2011 believes that the ability to accomplish is tied to technological resources. The heroic person of the 1960s knew that achievement is more about the ascendancy of the triumphant human spirit, coupled with dogged determination.
Today's consumer sits alone in the dark, linked electronically to others just like him, and plays. With his playmates, he ridicules the shortcomings of a past he judges by the feeble standards of his own limited experience. He dismisses the potential of a vast nation of capable, courageous and determined pioneers in pursuit of a common goal.
Perhaps the ultimate insult is the growth of conspiracy theories. Greater numbers of people than ever before believe the moon landings of 1969 to 1972 were faked. They just can’t believe that people with less technology than we have today could have performed a feat so far beyond our own ability.
Too many people today judge the past using the yardstick of their own limited ability, motivation, and accomplishment. We have fallen so far that many among us not only dismiss the possibility of returning to the Moon… Many are incapable of comprehending that we ever really went there in the first place.
Too many people today judge the past using the yardstick of their own limited ability, motivation, and accomplishment. We have fallen so far that many among us not only dismiss the possibility of returning to the Moon… Many are incapable of comprehending that we ever really went there in the first place.
As the Space Shuttle winds down to its final few flights in the coming months, we stand at a crossroads. We could allow the last vestige of the glory of manned space flight to disappear from our nation (and at this point, from the planet). We could let NASA become a fancy high-tech surrogate for the Peace Corps. Or we could take this opportunity to reestablish the American Space Program as it was, and as it can be again.
There might be hope. We were great once, and we can be again. But it won't happen if we keep playing games. If we are to approach the heroic stature of our parents and grandparents, we're going to have to put down the electronics, turn off the television, take the earpiece out, turn off the cell phone, and get to work.
There might be hope. We were great once, and we can be again. But it won't happen if we keep playing games. If we are to approach the heroic stature of our parents and grandparents, we're going to have to put down the electronics, turn off the television, take the earpiece out, turn off the cell phone, and get to work.
We can start by answering some hard questions. Who are we and what is our role in the world, and in this universe? What’s the world of our future going to look like? What are we going to do about it? Can we exist apart from our home planet? Can we explore space and still protect Earth? Can we remain earthbound and still protect Earth? Are we tough enough to do this? Are we mentally and emotionally up to the challenge? Can we match the courage, drive and determination of the first spacefarers of 40 or 50 years ago?
It might be possible. An advantage we have over the space pioneers of a half-century ago is the benefit of their impressive example. Do we have enough life and strength and valor to undertake the quest again? We have a long way to go, even if we do find the courage to try. It has been 39 years since any human being traveled beyond Earth orbit.
Do we have it within us to be worthy heirs?
If we are going to return to space, we have to begin finding some answers to those hard questions. We will begin finding answers by looking within ourselves. If we look within and find valor and curiosity and a sense of boldness and determination and the seeds of greatness... Then perhaps we will be able to go forth to find many more answers out there somewhere, blowing in the solar wind.
Do we have it within us to be worthy heirs?
If we are going to return to space, we have to begin finding some answers to those hard questions. We will begin finding answers by looking within ourselves. If we look within and find valor and curiosity and a sense of boldness and determination and the seeds of greatness... Then perhaps we will be able to go forth to find many more answers out there somewhere, blowing in the solar wind.
Gryphem
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Discoveries About Life #6: WISDOM BITS
There is no more beautiful sound than the laughter of a child.
A smile must start on the inside.
Drive faster, arrive sooner. Drive slower, arrive more surely.
Reason helps us understand and explain our world, but it is only one aspect of the experience of life. The whole experience is characterized by sights and sounds, feelings, thoughts reasonable and thoughts random, emotions great and small, compulsion, instinct, desire, compassion, and a sense of something greater within which we all have our being.
Visit a castle, experience the power of the ages. Own a castle, experience humility.
Gryphem
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)















