Aging Thoughts

As I grow older (I am a crotchety 74 but who’s counting?), I find myself returning to thoughts of my youth. I recall my father, Rabbi Spector, talking about Job and found myself as a teenager immersed with the meaning of the words allegedly spoken to Job from the whirlwind in response to Job’s complaint that he was being treated unfairly and cruelly. Rather than respond to Job’s complaint, according to the account, God only asks Job where Job was when the mountains were created and the stars set in motion. My understanding of the Book of Job is that human knowledge is necessarily limited and incomplete. That understanding has stayed with me into old age. As a college student at the Air Force Academy I came across Martin Buber’s I and Thou thanks to my philosophy teachers. My early understanding of the limits of human knowledge and reasoning was extended to the implication that one should treat others with dignity and respect regardless of any other details about them such as race, religion, nationality, age, gender, and so on. While I have found it much easier to live with the notion of skepticism and limits to human knowledge and understanding that I found in the Book of Job, I have found it more challenging to live up to Buber’s implication that one should focus on I-Thou relationships rather than I-It relationships.

I recently experienced a near-death experience and fortunately escaped uninjured – I cannot say the same for my vehicle which was totaled. This is the second near-death experience I have survived and I am again wondering how fortunate I have been … and asking myself why? I am thinking I have been given a little more time to learn to live in the I-Thou world that Buber advocated for us all. So, “if not now, then when” as Hillel reminded us.

Quid Pro Quo

The notion of compromise occurs in many contexts. The general sense of a quid pro quo is something like this: “If you do this for me, then I will do that for you.” Compromise is essential for progress in many cases. As a child, I had a football, but I was the smallest child wanting to play sandlot football. I remember telling my friends that I would let them use my football if they would let me play. I got to play as did my friends. In college, I played lacrosse and also taught an undergraduate logic course. Some of the younger lacrosse players asked if they could take my logic course and get a guaranteed passing grade. They really wanted an automatic A but only said a passing grade. One of them came to class regularly and earned an A. I gave the other two a C and they were very upset with me. I felt pressured to pass them as teammates and only gave them a C in return for them not isolating me on the team – that was never a direct threat but I thought it was a real possibility. I saw the Cs as a compromise – unfortunately, those two did not see it the same way. As an intelligence officer in the Air Force, I was told I needed to inflate the North Vietnamese casualties when reporting weekly statistics to the general if I wanted to be promoted. I refused and was sent to a remote assignment as punishment. There was no compromise and a punishment ensued. Fortunately, with some help, I recovered and came to realize that some compromises are okay but others are not okay.

In the area of educational technology, one has to make many compromises in order to see any progress occur. Some of those compromises are worth making but some may infringe on one’s sense of right and wrong or threaten one’s personal dignity. One may want to do a study in a school but the superintendent or principal or teacher may ask for a special favor in return for allowing the study to proceed. Some favors may be innocuous but some may be unethical or illegal. My advice is to take nothing in return and make no promises and offer no favors in return for your research other than improved learning and understanding.

Bouwsma described Socrates as someone who spoke highly and lived in accordance with what he said; others only talk high and live low, and a few speak low and live in accordance with their words, which are often aimed at others rather than at themselves. I suppose one could also speak low and live high, but I do not know anyone like that. Bouwsma also said you become more like one kind of person rather than another kind of person based on what you do and say. My father said something similar. I suppose Bouwsma and my father were promoting a deep sense of self-awareness and metacognitive understanding. One example of living in accordance with Socrates and Bouwsma is the life of Franz Jägerstätter (see Gordon Zahn’s In Solitary Witness). Another way to make a more clear distinction is to view compromise vs. extortion. Bouwsma also said “surely your life will show what you think of yourself.”