0697 - Wisdom!

The OO is the son of a University of Chicago Professor, and indeed attended the school for 21 years (they had a kindergarten). So, it was with a great flood of delight that he read the current U of C Chronicle and discovered that the John Templeton Foundation had made a $3 million grant to the University to establish a "Research Initiative on the Nature and Benefits of Wisdom". Resounding applause. The story says that one of the Chief Investigators believes "A well-respected science of wisdom could provide great potential for informing important political, business, and personal decisions." Right on, Professor. And, er, could you please start with Washington where the supply of wisdom has been noticeably deficient for these many years. [We include all three branches of Government, not to mention both political parties.]

As you know, we have a Staff here with various specialties, having believed up until now that discussion among our specialists had a better chance of reaching the right conclusion than the current White House practice of doing things without thinking. This Staff work has allowed our column to be right on a number of significant issues, starting with Iraq. We never knew there was a science of Wisdom, or we surely would have taken the course, or at the very least subscribed to the learned journal (not yet publishing, we fear). Instead, we have been listening to the U.S. Presidential candidates debate.

These debates have ten or so candidates, of highly varied degrees of credibility. They each get half a minute to answer questions that surely would occupy a class hour at the U of C. Some of the guys (and the gal) sound rather scripted, since the current teaching is that one stupid remark can scuttle the ship of candidacy. Only our personal favorite, Barack Obama, has talked rather sensibly. Here is a man who has triumphed over his quite terrible middle name [Hussein], who has seen clearly and said clearly that the Iraq adventure would be a fiasco, and he has a talent that the others seem to lack: he is a conciliator. Since almost nothing can be done in Washington without either alarming and fake what they call "intelligence", or some sort of agreement, Obama may be the one we need.

The professionals who direct the campaigns believe it vital not to offend the true believers, like the gun nuts, or the small-government or big-government types, or the curious thinkers about stem cell personality, or gay marriage, or a flat tax, or whatever. If you say something sensible about these subjects, you offend the believers, and you – presumably – lose. Yet, on reflection, the practical way to advance is often to compromise. If you don't want to be treated by a drug made by using discarded frozen fertilized human eggs, you are certainly free to refuse the treatment, but others may need the medical advance. Don't they have rights?

And speaking of guns, the OO has come to believe that while there are far too many around, a practical compromise is to give the endangered house holder the right to own a personal Taser, for home defense only. This advice has not been greeted with any response on Anguilla, because British law is anti-Taser. You see, once again compromise would lead to the wise result, while absolutism comes to nothing.

Finally, being occupied with high matters of state, we have been remiss in bringing our Readers weird names. Here is a current favorite; treasure it: "Mullah Dadullah", always called "a feared Taliban commander." He is apparently now a late feared such, but he offers a severe future warning to parents who fool around with their children's names. Don't do it, parents, it can lead to the Taliban. Or worse.

Next time: Labels [OO #698]

| Printer-friendly page | Send this article to a friend |

Home