The Speck

There are those who wish to belittle the importance of humanity as 'a speck on a speck on a speck (on a speck)'. In short, in a vast, expanding universe, we're tiny, unimportant nothings.

I never found this a convincing argument. For starters, it actually encourages us to not take the entirety of the universe seriously. Alien worlds, alien lives? Speck on specks on specks (on specks) too. Each as tiny and unimportant as us. Take that, SETI.

Even in earthly terms, size isn't the keystone. A Giant Redwood is a magnificent tree. But it isn't human. It isn't self aware. It isn't able to consider its place in creation. It also far overshadows we mere humans. Yet it's asinine to argue that a tree is superior to a person, or a person unimportant merely because the tree is larger. 

In short, size, mass and relative geography aren't the end all be all. Moral value and moral virtue are not in them. They're just there. But individual human beings? We're aware that we're here. And we can do something about that.

Size and Value in the Cosmos

A old and graying trope, typically used to disparage organized religion but also to degrade the inherent value of humanity in general, is that we can't have much value as a race or individual seeing as we're an almost infinitesimal speck in a huge and expanding universe. And so we are, in terms of the geography of space. But what, really, has that to do with anything?

When we are thinking about the spiritual value of something, or of how good, bad, or indifferent it is in terms of morality or underlying value, size isn't a concern. Is a six foot tall man a better man than one who is 5 foot 11? Perhaps, but not because he's taller. What a man is worth, what humanity is worth, is something we must determine based on dozens of things far more critical than how far away he might be from Andromeda. That fact is ultimately unimportant. It's only incidental, with no significant bearing at all upon what types of creatures we are, and has relatively little to say about our place or role in existence.

Have a good Monday, friends.

Pride goeth

I related a tale of woe to yon reader yesterday, of an admittedly minor hassle I had to deal with. You might refresh your memory here if you like:

https://thesublimetotheridiculous.blogspot.com/2020/06/no-good-deed.html

Yet that does not tell the whole story. I rather wondered even at the time whether God was giving me a minor lesson in humility.

You see, when I decided to go ahead and assemble the customer's machines, I was quite proud of myself and my decision. 'Yeah Marty, you're the man, showing all this consideration for your customer' I was figuratively thinking to myself. 'You know what good customer care is'.

Then the hardware, the parts I needed to set up the second machine, weren't in the box so that I had to go grab them from my supplies. And I can't help think that perhaps the Almighty was sending Marty a message that maybe he shouldn't be quite so happy with himself over simply doing his job well.

I'm giggling at that thought, on no small account that I was a little too proud of me indeed.

January 22, 2017

On this, the anniversary of one of the most heinous Supreme Court decisions in our history (it's right up there with if not more awful than Dred Scott) we must take a moment and consider what our nation has become since then. Do we really support life when we give of our money and time to soup kitchens and homeless shelters yet will not protect people at their most defenseless?

We do not. What the liberals who have approached me over the abortion question always seem to fall back on is that I need to put all 'life' issues on the same plain. I need to find a balance, of which, they assert, abortion is only one issue.

It may well be only one issue, yet if it is it is the issue. It is based on the dignity of human life, which is what drives any respect for humanity in general. Why should the poor be helped? Because of their dignity as human beings. Why should people not be murdered or stolen from or raped or kidnapped? Because of their dignity as human beings. Where does this dignity begin?

It begins in the womb. Simple Reason tell us as much: human beings have human children.

If you won't support life at its beginning, when it can do nothing for itself, how can I trust that you really will support human dignity later? How can I even trust what you call human dignity? If I can't trust you on that, then, quite frankly, your opinion on education and the environment and our role is world affairs must be held suspect as well. If the dignity of the human person isn't first in your thoughts right from its very conception, then I have difficulty believing in your sincerity on lesser causes.

End abortion now. Work for and vote for the repeal of Roe v. Wade. Then we might discuss, with some promise, what to do about ancillary questions.

Fred Phelps Dies

Fred Phelps, the head of the Westboro Baptist Church, has died. What might we think about his life now? Should we think about his life now?

We should not think much today about what he did on Earth, no matter how awful we believe his actions and attitudes to be. What we need to do today is pray for him, even if that's something he would, were he still here, to scoff about. We should do that because no matter what he said or did, he was still a human being, and human dignity requires that we have regard for his soul. Even, and perhaps especially, if we believe him evil. Every single human life should mean that much.

This is an excellent opportunity for those who preach tolerance to demonstrate it. This is the chance to show that we respect him as a person even though we found his ways in life reprehensible and irresponsible. Forget how he lived and say a prayer for him. Isn't that what we really want, redemption for everyone, for every man woman and child to be made better, to become more fully and completely human? It's what we should want if we don't.

You may have noticed that the Catholics, while routinely declaring people to be in Heaven, have not once formally declared a person to be in Hell. That's at the crux of their teaching to hate the sin and love the sinner; we don't know, we cannot know, how morally culpable any given person was or is for their actions. We may rightfully condemn the act. We can never condemn the person.

Judge not lest ye be judged. Do not judge Fred Phelps; have mercy upon him even if you're certain he would afford none to you. How he acted towards you is not on you. How you act towards him, despite him, is.

The Trouble with Equality

We are in this world almost daily deluged with calls for equality. It all sounds so good, and everyone seems to want it. But there's only one problem with it.

We are not, any of us, really equal.

This is not to say that we are not political equals. Yet even that phrase leaves a bit of uncertainty: we are only equal because my vote should count as much as yours. That doesn't strike us as equality. It strikes us as justice.

In the same manner, as we have employed this tactic when talking about freedom, education, peace, and so forth, so too do we find that we must apply it to any calls for equality. We need to ask what the supporters of equality really mean. Because any absolute and final equality of circumstances must actually be something which applies only in very, very few cases. Take equal pay for equal work, for example. Notice that we are asking a question whose answer only applies to very strict and definite circumstances. A woman cancer doctor, 50 years old, with 20 years of practice, who graduated from the same schools with the same grades as a complimentary male cancer specialist in the same place of work, and with the same proficiency of work, should get the same pay. No rational mind would argue otherwise. But the case is so limited that only one answer is truly right anyway.

As to the other facet of the argument, well, calls for equality must ring hollow because, again, we are not equal. A brain surgeon isn't equal to a plumber, no matter how much more we want the latter when the faucet breaks or the basement floods, and no matter which is male or female. As a matter of decency, we should not automatically look well on the surgeon nor ill on the plumber. But yet again, that's a point about justice, not equality.

We could refine the case further, but we trust the point is made. When we are demanding equality we are often (if not in fact always) demanding justice. We are asking that we be treated rightly and properly in light of the circumstances which surround us. We are not asking for equality. We are asking for justice.

So, and we are sure many people may have grown tired of us asking yet we must, when you demand equality, do you really want that? If so, how? Why? For we need to remember that the only sure way to make folks equal is downward, to the where no one is above the lowest common denominator.

That the average person means equality in the sense of true justice we don't doubt. Still, it is when we use terms wrongly that we have the greatest troubles. It is then when the radical fringe of any given group may take the day. Yet when we clarify our thoughts, when we strive to end misunderstanding by calling things what they are, then, indeed, justice wins out. Isn't that what we really want?