The 3 Why's of Empirical Logic

1 - What It Is

Like any good amateur scientist, I know that the most useful facet of any experiment, be it physical or in this case mental, is repeatability. Keeping this in mind, I have devised an introspective gate-keeping double-check that incorporates repeatability into itself.

The thing I like most about this premise is that it was inspired by the mind of a typical 5 year old. What I mean is that any five year old will ask you a question, you will give them an answer, and they will respond with the ad infinitum response of "Why?" 

I surmise that this is their basic way laying the mental mechanisms through which they will come to interpret and understand the reasoning behind another person’s thinking, a simplified precursor to the empathetic response. This applied to the opinion of an adult can have a similar effect of helping them to understand the reasoning behind their own thinking. As we grow we tend to take certain mindsets for granted, and we absorb and reflect them without ever actually considering the deeper meaning behind them. This is frequently seen with religious beliefs as well as political; this is why political and religious beliefs are as typically passion on as brown eyes and dimples.

2- How It Works

The thought experiment works like this: first, an opinion is expressed. For instance, “I think chocolate ice cream is the best there is.” Second: the question “Why?,” is posed as a response. Now, if the responses of the originator of the opinion fall outside of the following two categories: begrudging concession, or repetition; then they may have logical merit. Now, by begrudging concession I mean that they cannot give you a cop out form of an answer such as “Whatever.” And, by repetition I mean that they cannot be repeating previous information which they had used previously. If either of these responses are noted, then the originator of the opinion immediately loses the exchange and concedes to the asker.

Now, it is called the “3 Why's of Empirical Logic” because the rebutter asks the question “Why?” 3 times. So, let us follow this path together: 

Person A: I think chocolate ice cream is the best ice cream there is.

Person B: Why?

Person A: Because, I like its flavor the best.

Person B: Why?

Person A: Because, it tastes the best. 

Result: This is a tautology; this is information has been repeated, and the originator of the opinion immediately loses.

Conversely, let's look at an argument that can survive the three “Why’s?” test. 

Person A: I think sunny days are better than rainy days.

Person B: Why?

Person A: Because sunlight makes me happy.

Person B: Why?

Person A: Because I can go out and be active without getting wet.

Person B: Why?

Person A: Because getting wet makes me feel gross. 

Result: 3 “Why?” questions have been survived without either repeating information or conceding, so this argument has validity.

3 - Why It Works

Although these examples might suggest that only certain types of opinions would survive the “3 Why” challenge, it is designed specifically to help the person with the opinion delve deeper into their own understanding and determine what their motivations for having the opinion are. To this end, it is less a rejection methodology than it is an introspection methodology. Moreover, if a person wanted to give their opinion validity, they could use this methodology and find corroborative reasons that are neither redundant nor evasive; thus, the result would be that they would pose a valid argument to any given opinion.

Although, as any five year old will no doubt agree, there really is no need to limit the number of “Why” repetitions to 3. But, asking “Why” too many times will, no doubt, result in either repetition or concession. Besides, this is simply a short test either to see if the surface opinion has validity to it, or else to determine whether or not the originator of the opinion is holding onto the belief out of some sort of familial or social obligation. At its heart, the reason why the number is 3 is because this will help any arguer to root out the core motivation behind any given belief.

4 - The Reason It Is Needed

Far too often, people walk around believing things which they had not choice in incorporating into their mental and life framework. As a result, when their beliefs are challenged, they often resort to attacking the person directly instead of addressing the counter-argument. They have no rational basis for their belief, since it was inherited, so they interpret any challenge to it as a personal attack because of the inherent vulnerability in not having a strong defense for believing it. The resulting emotional response does not foster a logical reasoning pattern to their thought process. Extended further, this means that their method for interacting with their entire life is on a shaky basis, at best. This would lead them to address every choice from what coffee they order to who they should marry based on largely emotional factors rather than giving logic its fair share of the responsibility for their decisions. Don’t misunderstand me; I’m not suggesting that we live our lives like Vulcans, completely divorced from all emotional interaction. I’m simply proposing that we, as a society, try to balance our emotional reflex with our logical tendencies so that we can experience the best of both worlds. The resulting society may not save the world overnight, but it might, at the very least, prevent decisions that would lead to the frivolous lawsuits associated with Road Rage. Wouldn’t that be a nice world in which to live?

Blue-eyed comedy sketch

Reporter: Hello, I'm Matthew Walters a right-wing conservative reporter with Channel 5 Action News at 6. I'm here on the scene of the annual Nordic Track convention to answer a very compelling question that I'm sure is on the minds of all of our audience members at home that is assuming that I can find the right person with the necessary qualities to interview...(Walks up to a random person, looks closely in their eyes, and moves onto the next person. This continues for 8 more people until the 10^th person.) So, in your own words, sir, why do you have blue eyes?

Interviewee: I'm sorry, what?

R: Well it's a very simple question sir, why did you make the choice to have blue eyes?

I: Well, it's not a choice. I was born that way.

R: You really expect me to believe that you did not choose to have blue eyes?!

I: Well, yes. I mean, did you choose to have (noticeably looks at his eyes for a half-second) brown eyes.

R: Everybody knows that anybody who has morals and lives by the Christian faith set forth in the Bible should have only brown eyes. That's a fact handed down by the good book itself and is beyond any of your genetic Science.

I: What? It doesn't say anything in the Bible about brown eyes.

R: (Clearly ignoring his response while leaning into the camera more) It's brown-eyed Adam and Eve, not blue-eyed Adam and Steve!

I: But, all Caucasian babies are born with blue or slate grey eyes which often differentiate into other colors typically by their first birthday.

R: Don't confuse my beliefs with your facts! It's incontrovertible that, if the day started tomorrow and all blue-eyed people simply had disappeared without a trace, then the world would be better off without them, TRUE FACT!

I: Okay, first of all, that is clearly an opinion, and secondly, it's clearly awful! What exactly did we blue-eyed people ever do to you that makes you dislike us so much?

R: Well, you're in the minority, so immediately, I dislike you. Secondly, what has a blue-eyed person ever done for me or society at large that warrants your existence?

I: Well, Michelangelo contributed greatly to the artistic world and pioneered entirely new forms of artistic expression in the medium of sculpture. What's more, he painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel which is considered to be one of the greatest artistic achievements of the middle ages.

R: Well, if Michelangelo was so talented, then what happened to all the other fifteen chapels?

I: Well...wait, what?

R: Yeah, I mean if he was so good why did he have to ruin those 15 other chapels before getting it right?

I: Oh, well that was because you're an idiot. (Noticeably rolls eyes)

R: Hey, I'm here to talk about the issues. Let's not descend into childish name-calling...you perverted, Smurf-eyed affront to God!

I: Okay, ignoring that entirely, what issue are you feebly trying to address with your odd brand of bigotry?

R: I want to know why you as a blue-eyed person think that you deserve the same rights as we normal-eyed people even though you're in the minority.

I: What rights do you think that we should be denied based upon the color of our eyes?

R: Well, before I answer that, can you tell me why you people insist on having the therapists that you do?

I: What? You mean to say that you think that we are all seeing therapists for our eye color?

R: No, you should be, but we'll get into that later. What I want to know is why you prefer the agitated ranting of Sigmund Freud to the more calm and wise doctrine of Carl Jung.

I: What the hell are you talking about? (Noticeable, confused expression on his face)

R: I merely want to know why, when it comes to therapists, you'd prefer a crazed Freudian to a Civil Jungian.

I: I don't know how to answer that. (Becoming noticeably impatient)

R: (Realizing this line of questioning is going nowhere, so he decides to abandon it altogether) Have you ever considered going to get help for your problem of being 'inherently' (rolls eyes) blue-eyed?

I: What are you talking about now?

R: Well, why don't you go to one of those re-education camps so that you can come to realize that being blue-eyed is a choice that you should morally opt out of?

I: There aren't any camps for that!

R: Well, in this reporter's opinion, there should be!

I: So you really think that it's a choice to have blue eyes?

R: Absolutely, and the wrong one at that!

I: Well, I'll tell you what: If you change your eyes blue in front of the camera for me right now for just a minute, then I'll change mine to brown permanently.

R: You're not going to recruit me into your life of sin!

I: Well, have you ever tried to have blue eyes before?

R: Of course not! Why the very thought of it is offensive!

I: Well then, how do you know that you wouldn't like it?

R: Well because....um....(His face contorts as he tries to find a good reason)

I: You've never thought about it? I can tell you as someone who was born this way and has tried all of the things that a blue-eyed person can do, that it is so much better than having brown eyes.

R: No. What advantages could come from having blue eyes? (He asks the question more to himself than I)

I: In fact sometimes, I get together with other blue-eyed people and we enjoy all of the increased knowledge and skill that comes inherent from having been born with blue-eyes. (Raises eye brows in an enticing manner)

R: (Starting to warm to the idea as evidenced by his change in tone) Like what? What things can you do that a brown-eyed person can't?

I: Well, for starters, we all can read minds.

R: You can?

I: Yeah, you see that beautiful woman over there. I'm better at understanding her thoughts with my blue eyes than you ever will with your brown ones.

R: Well, if I did want to change my eyes to blue, then how would I do it?

I: Well first, you have to focus really hard on her. Just look at her like you're trying to look through her.

R: (Focuses his eyes intensely on a beautiful woman 20 feet away standing in profile) Like this?

I: Yeah, just like that. (Reaches into his own pocket subtly while R is distracted)

R: I don't know if this is working. I'm not hearing anything.

I: Don't break focus! You're almost there.

R: Wait, I think that I'm starting to hear something. (Leans his ear more toward the woman who remains oblivious to all of this)

I: Yeah, what do you hear?

R: I think that she's thinking...“Oh god, my eyes.” (Looks confused) Why would she be thinking that? (Looks back in I's direction)

I: (Sprays him in the face with some mace taken from his pocket and then picks up the microphone that R drops while in grabbing for his eyes. Looks into the camera like a news reporter.)

R: (Said while still below the bottom edge of the camera and rolling on the ground writhing in pain) It burns!

I: And there it is proof positive folks, gullible people don't need a reason to think they way they do; they simply need the misguided belief that it will in some way benefit them. In this case, we can see that a warped idea of what is right still will not prevent you from feeling an intense burning pain. In this case however, it's only for 5 to 10 minutes instead of an eternity. Back to you in the studio.

Face Punch comedy sketch

Reporter: Hello, I'm Matthew Walters a right-wing conservative reporter with Channel 5 Action News at 6. I'm here on the scene with recent assault victim, and my own sister, Samantha Walters. So, in your own words, what happened miss?

Interviewee: Well, I was just walking out of the gym, and this random guy ran up to me punched me in the face, and ran off down the road before I could react.

R: I see, interesting. And do you think that it was your clothing that may have lead to this act of violence against you?

I: What? I don't know how that could be.

R: Well, you are wearing the same clothing now that you had on during the crime, is the correct?

I: Well, yes, but I don't see...

R: Well, given what you are wearing, it seems to me that you wanted to get punched in the face.

I: What?! No, I didn't!

R: Well you're not wearing any sort of head gear that would have stopped a potential assailant's fist, so clearly this must have been your fault. Did you lead on the man in any other way prior to the incident?

I: What?! I didn't lead him on in any way whatsoever!

R: But, everybody knows that the most natural state of any man is to punch people in the face. If you wore no sort of protective gear to prevent this then, clearly you wanted it.

I: What?! That's insane! I didn't want to get punched in the face! I didn't even know the man who did it!

R: Again, that seems to be poor judgment on your part. I mean you left the house this morning without head gear of any sort on, and you're walking around in unfamiliar places with random men looking like that (points to head and lack of gear.) How can you expect not to get punched in the face?

I: But, I walk around all the time with a helmet or anything on, and I don't get punched in the face.

R: So clearly, living this precarious lifestyle has finally caught up with you. It's a wonder that you've made it this long without being punched in the face.

I: Look, Matt, I'm really in pain here, and I don't have time to argue about whose fault this is. You see my black eye. (She points to her blackened eye.) I need to go to the hospital and get it treated.

R: Well, whose fault is that? You know, if this were really a legitimate attack that you didn't lead on in any way, then your body has a way of shutting down the blood flow to the face and you wouldn't have a blackened eye that you have to go to the doctor and take care of. Really, you're just proving my point.

I: What? Look just because you have a medical degree doesn't mean that you can make up things that the body doesn't do.

R: I don't have a medical degree.

I: I know. I just wanted you to admit it out loud.

R: Really, isn't this your own fault for being out this late anyway?

I: It's 10 in the morning.

R: So, you've been out all night?!

I: No. I left my house at 8 am this morning.

R: Well there's the problem leaving the house at all. And, how many drinks did you have before this assault?

I: None. It's 10 in the morning.

R: Fine. But you were surely leading on your attacker, right?

I: I'd never seen him before. It was a hit and run.

R: Right. But, you were exiting the gym. How do we know that you didn't punch yourself in the face and claim that it was this man just to get him into trouble?

I: Because, I don't know who it was. So, I'm not blaming anyone specifically.

R: So, you admit that you are on a crusade to tarnish the reputation of men in general. How long have you had the goal of defaming the good name of an entire gender?

I: I'm...not...what?! (Looks confused)

R: Are you following this man-hating agenda because you never learned how just to lie back and enjoy being punched in the face like all women should?

I: No women learn that.

R: And that's the problem with America! If you had just taken that class they offered in high school about wearing a riot helmet at all times and frequently ducking out of the way, then this would never have happened in the first place!

I: They never offered any class like that! (Becomes noticeably agitated)

R: And you agree with me that they should as evidenced by your anger. And, are you also angry that our parents didn't take the time to educate you on what kinds of face-punch proof clothing is appropriate to wear when you are outside?

(At this point, a Random Male Onlooker from the crowd walks up. I immediately becomes noticeably agitated for some reason.)

RMO: Excuse me, I saw what happened.

R: (pushes I out of the way to make room in front of the camera for RMO): Yes, sir. Can you tell us in what way this woman was leading on her attacker to bring about this tragic happenstance?

RMO: Well, from what I saw, it really all boils down to this roll of quarters that the attacker dropped before he ran off. (Holds a roll of quarters aloft in his hand for both R and the camera.)

R: (Studies roll of quarters intently trying to unlock the mystery) And what do you think that this has to do with the attack?
RMO: Well, you have to get your eyes really close before you can see the reason clearly.

R: (Draws slowly but surely closer to RMO's hand.) What is it that I'm supposed to see?
RMO: You need to be a little closer still.

R: (As if mesmerized by what's in RMO's hand, he draws his face to within 2-3 inches from his hand.) What is it?

RMO: This! (Curls fingers around the roll of quarters, punches R in the face, and runs off away from the camera.)

R: (Falls to the ground screaming.) OW! (various whimpers and yells of pain)

I: (Bends over to pick up the microphone and places it to her mouth) Hmm...I think that that was the original assailant. Well, I guess that this reporter (points to the man crying on the ground) didn't remember his station-issued head gear. (winks at camera) This has been Samantha Walters with Channel 5 Action News at 6. Back to you, George. (I drops microphone and bends down to wrap her shoulders around R) Well, I guess that's what you get for leading him on like that, dear. (I and R walk away from the camera while R is still crying)

The Engine that Runs on...Hope.

Have you ever loved something that didn't love you back? Have you ever been told a lie so passionately and from so many different sources that you forgot it was a lie? Have you ever given 110% worth of effort to something only to find that you have ultimately harvested a fields-worth of a crop as inedible as the dirt which was supposed to nourish it?

I have worked in the field of education for several years and in various capacities all orbiting the theme of “English Teacher.” Teaching has always been a passion of mine, and the vast majority of my students have greatly appreciated my natural ability to instruct them in the intricacies of its practice. And, I have enjoyed it a great deal. I recall one of my former students, when I was a mere English tutor, asked me “When am I going to be able to take an English class from you?” Her respect for my abilities flattered me greatly. Conversely, there were other examples of when the educational field in general did not respect my abilities. The field being governed greatly by seasonal demand has left me without viable work on more than one occasion. I have tried to take this in stride as best as I can, but there is a specific example which sticks in my brain and serves to rile my anger every now and then. Recently, I came off a stint with a seasonal education company in San Francisco. When I was hired, they informed me that the position was strictly temporary, and while I was hoping that I could be one of those who made it passed the end of the season, I was not too surprised when I was called into my boss's office the week that my schedule didn't extend passed Monday. Despite my expressed interest to continue with this company, the season ended, and I was let go. That, in and of itself, would have been bad enough, but to add insult to injury, when I inquired about a letter of recommendation for all the exemplary work I had done previously with said company, I was told that they were not legally allowed to give me one. I had spent the last 2 months going above and beyond for this company, getting up at 5 am to be there often before my 8 am start time, I had spent hundreds of dollars on BART tickets for which I had not been reimbursed, and I had had students whose mood greatly elevated just by working with me, and I was tossed away like a used facial tissue without so much as a letter reflecting my hard work for this company! This, in no uncertain terms, demonstrated to me that while I love being an educator, and I love the feeling of fulfillment which I received from teaching students, it is the field of education which just doesn't love me!

It used to be that a college education was a sure-fire road to economic and personal success. But, over time, the water has re-leveled to a higher echelon of expectation, and jobs that once were guaranteed upon the graduation of the minority ratio of society who finished college are now divvied up among the overwhelming throng of graduates flooding every corner of the job market. While it is good that the expectation of society has grown more ambitious and that more people are educating themselves, in this scramble for higher graduation rates, it has become the individual who has been left out in the cold to fend for himself against the oncoming storm of as-yet unfulfilled, personal ambition.

I was granted admission into a very prominent and famous college about 2 and a half years ago. This particular University's reputation has been touted, the world over, as a prestigious institution of higher learning where completion of a degree is a graduate's "golden ticket" to economic prosperity and a happier life. Despite having been told that several times by faculty, fellow students, and prospective students of this college both preceding and all throughout my 2-year tenure there, I have found this “truth” to be the “fisherman's tale” which I had always suspected it to be. My bachelors degree hangs on my wall a symbol of the sum of about $13,000 worth of debt that I have accrued by attaining that overrated piece of parchment emblazoned with my name, which arrived in the mail a full 6 months after graduating by the way! Having spent the better part of a year, steadfastly looking in every corner of the internet, making any and every networking contact which I can hope to find, and pursuing dozens of job leads only to have them fizzle into the ephemera, I have concluded, first-hand, that there is no "golden ticket" for me. Like anything in life, success is the product of “1% inspiration and 99% perspiration,” which I have known since the age of 10.

Honestly, after all the effort which I have put into this endeavor, I'm tired. I'm tired of noncommittal recruiters, I'm tired of reading rejection e-mails that all have that “Form Letter” feel, and most of all, I'm tired of having to wait for a perfect stranger to see that I possess all the value which I KNOW that I have even if they can't see it due to their tired eyes. Upon graduating from college, I watched a college commencement speech given by the famous writer John Green. In it, he said “Your perfect job might not even exist yet.” For some reason, my mind keeps going back to that. Nothing in the way that this job market works has ever made that much sense to me for having been a member of it for nearly 16 years. I've read all of the articles on “How to get a recruiter to notice you,” and “How to polish your resume perfectly,” and “How to answer questions during an interview,” but all to no avail since I still find myself without gainful and fulfilling employment. Maybe all my competitors read all of those articles too. But still, I keep “doing the same thing and expecting different results,” ah insanity, my old friend. I wonder what the rent on the nearest padded room goes for nowadays. On second thought, I'd probably be forced to have a roommate, and they're always pretty crazy!

So, what's a man to do when he is staring mediocrity in the face with which his friend poverty has set him up on a blind date? I suppose that I could quit and give up all of my ambitions ever to improve myself, settle into the pedestrian job which I currently have, and somehow convince myself that I am happy about it. But wait, they never have the XL-sized straight jackets in a the coat room at the local mental hospital, so that's out! No, my ambition would never allow that. I'm cursed to be that arrogant bastard you know with plans to make something of himself one day. After all, in regard to myself “I have promises to keep and miles to go before I sleep.”

Let's all look at that Green-Eyed Monster through Rose-Colored Glasses...

Why is jealousy such a vilified emotional response? There's a strong stigma surrounding it that forces us immediately to pigeon-hole it as a “bad thing” without any analysis as to why it is one. It is even considered to be one of the Seven Deadly Sins for crying out loud! But despite all of the bad press that jealousy has gotten over the centuries (religious texts notwithstanding,) I propose that properly controlled jealously is useful, and in some cases, it is even beneficial.

First of all, in a world where we are inundated with 30 possible ways to order coffee, it becomes very easy to lose sight of what it is you actually want. After looking over all of the possible choices, the brain goes into this scenario-spinning mode; whereby, it tries to predict the most favorable outcome. But, because there are so many possibilities in so many possible combinations, the brain, from an outside perspective, appears stuck in an eternal feedback loop of indecision. This “analysis paralysis” results in no decision being made whatsoever. As a result, there is absolutely no benefit that is gained because the more evolved part of the brain is deadlocked in its analysis. However, when we see another coffee shop patron enjoying their beverage of choice, the more primitive part of the brain is activated, and we actually commit to making a decision because that more primitive brain bypassed the traffic jam by taking the disused, back road to the ultimate goal. In a nutshell, jealousy actually leads to a decision when logic lead to indecision.

To complicate this beyond the trivial, say that you have been dating two different people each for several months, and for ease's sake, let us also say that they are fully aware of each other and each of their respective links to you (more on this in a moment.) You have an equal amount of fun with both of them, they are each equally well off, and you can foresee a solid future with either of them. As a result, you cannot decide who you should pursue for a more formally permanent relationship, so you decide to leave it to the ever-trusty toss of the coin. Heads, it's Person A; tails, it's Person B. You flip the coin into the air, it lands in your right hand, and you flip it over onto your left. Now, let's hit the pause button for a moment. This coin is taking something away from you here. It has stolen your right to make an informed decision based upon the available data. This coin knows nothing of your motivations, desires, or those of your two, potential mates. So, you become angry. Why should this coin get to make such a huge decision for you?! Who does this disc-shaped hunk of metal think it is? It is in this moment, if you can look passed the impetus of the trivial, that you can clearly see your own desire through the lens of how you are hoping the coin flip will turn out. You have again just bypassed analysis paralysis by tricking yourself to get into touch with that more primal part of your brain. This is the part that experiences emotion unadvised by the eons of logic that have evolved around it. In effect, this served to wrap its logical hands around the throat of the decision-making process and choke out the air getting to the desire behind the logic.

Moreover, jealousy (in small and controlled doses) can serve to heighten emotional intimacy. Let me be clear, I am not advocating the unbridled application of hitting on other people in the presence of your significant other whenever you get the chance to do so. This is cruel and unusual punishment. But, in my own experience, I have been in relationships where my partner never got jealous...at all...ever. On first pass, this seems like an ideal situation, but in practice, it is far from it. A small modicum of jealous response from your partner (as in the 2-5% range) can reassure you that your partner does indeed value your relationship because they will take steps not to lose it. This reassurance can serve to fan the fires of your passion for this person and keep the torch you carry for them burning brightly for years to come. Sadly, for most people, there is no internal buffer to jealousy, and they can become swept away in the emotional deluge that an unmitigated flood of passion can induce in the unprepared. The bottom line is, we all have jealousy; it is as universally human as any other attribute which you can name. To be so thoroughly ashamed of something that is an intrinsic part of you is akin to feet because they touch the floor. Instead, I think that we as humans should learn to embrace our jealousy and use it as a tool in the aforementioned capacities. I mean, it's not going to go anywhere, so we might as well put it to work for us rather than against us.

To this end, I will leave you with an excerpt from Mark Twain's story Letters from the Earth pertaining to that green-eyed monster which follows: “...among human beings jealousy ranks distinctly as a weakness; a trademark of small minds; a property of all small minds, yet a property which even the smallest is ashamed of; and when accused of its possession will lyingly deny it and resent the accusation as an insult.”

What Women SAY THEY Want

Recently, I find myself thinking of the movie “What Women Want” starring the (now revealed as an anti-Semite) Mel Gibson opposite Helen Hunt. In this movie, a man is struck by lightning, and so he gets the ability to read the mind of all the women around him. This leads him to understand the best ways in which to manipulate them for the motives of obtaining sex, outperforming them at work, and eventually falling in love. While all of these motives are varying degrees of selfish, I found myself thinking how useful it would be to be able to read the mind of women for the purposes of enhancing my love life and not for the conclusions that you all might be jumping to right now.

We live in an ever-evolving world of complication. The modern incarnation of the human animal took 6.5 million years to reach its current level of complication. There was a time-tested vetting process by which traits inefficient to the perpetuation of our species were weeded out of the both the geno- and phenotypes. If one of our ancestors possessed a trait that somehow impeded the passing on of genetic material, then he/she was summarily eaten by a saber-toothed tiger or what-have-you. So, it could be argued that the current embodiment of our species has become the most efficient vehicle to date by which to spread our varying spectrum of genetically encoded traits to the succeeding generation. If we accept this premise, then the question becomes “Why are we still playing mind-games with each other when it comes to the simple act of meeting for a date?!” If this question seems particularly pointed, it is.

Yesterday evening, I showed up to the coffee shop where I had agreed to meet a girl for an informal coffee date. We found each other on OkayCupid.com, and we had arranged this date the previous Saturday. Just after we had confirmed that we would meet there at that time, I entered it into my calendar on my phone because I didn't want to forget it. All week I looked forward to meeting her in person. Yesterday morning, I took a little extra time than normal on my daily, morning, grooming ritual because I was eager to make a good, first impression. After work and all of my other daily plans, I wound up arriving at the coffee shop around 3:00 pm for a date who would not arrive until sometime after 5 because unlike me she did not have a half day at work. Being the boy-scout that I am, I brought a few electronic devices to occupy myself until (what I assumed was) her eminent arrival. I had made the decision to give her until 6:30 since our agreed time was non-specific. 7 o'clock rolls around, and there is still no sign of her, so I go back to OkayCupid and very diplomatically ask her if we can re-schedule for Monday after work which is the next time that I'll be in the city. Her verbatim reply was “Hey! Sorry about that. I wasn't super sure you still wanted to meet up since I hadn't heard from you.”

Now I have been branded as a feminist from outside sources because I believe that there should be no difference in the rights between men and women in pretty much every facet of our lives. As a side effect, I have come to understand that the one thing that women don't want men to do is to underestimate them or their motivations, i.e. none of this “Needing a man to save me and my ineffectual abilities from the dangerous dragon” mentality. I have learned not only to accept but also to embrace the notion that women are strong, capable human beings who deserve all the respect that I would give any man. Over the centuries women have come to claim their equal share of the rights and responsibilities of any man; although, until they are paid equally for the same work, there is still more distance that needs to be covered. So, my new question becomes “Why is it that I should assume that a potential mate's attention-span needs re-stoking every other day or so?” Wouldn't this be a step backwards in all of the respect and consideration women have so hardly fought for over the eras?

Perhaps, I am being too close-minded. Maybe this is not a trait of the entire gender but just this one woman in particular. The only thing that gives me a glimpse of the validity of this idea is that I interpret the world through my own eyes as we all do. Personally, when I make plans (even a week in advance) I show up. Can I say that this is true of all men? No. But, isn't needing a man to entice you constantly just the new form of being a “Damsel in Distress?” As a logical and evolved species, haven't we all evolved beyond these more basic impulses yet? I don't claim to have the answers to any of these questions; in fact, I have always made the joke that if I were ever to understand the opposite sex completely, then that would be the precise instant when a bolt of lightning would strike me dead. And since I don't possess the capacity to read a women's mind, I suppose that I will have to keep studying this somewhat foreign species in an attempt at least to understand them a little better.

“I am neither a feminist nor a masculinist, I am an equalist. The determining factor for who gets what amount of respect, goods, and opportunities should never be decided on the basis of something as trivial as which bathroom door you walk through.”

-The Oft Forgotten Prophet

Rest in Peace Maya Angelou

I have recently learned that Maya Angelou, a woman of amazing poetic talent and inspiring presence, has passed on from this world. I'm ashamed to say that I'm not as familiar with her work as a person of my interests should be, but in this moment I am thinking that that is likely true of most of us.

This is a woman who saw the America that we live in today take shape from a backward nation of racial segregation to a more enlightened age of greater racial balance. Moreover, she overcame many other hardships that are terrible even to think about let alone experience. But, what I find to be most inspirational about this woman is that despite all of that and in an age when both African-Americans and women in general were widely discriminated against, she found an inner strength not only merely to endure, but also to thrive and achieve a level of fame commensurate with her amazing talent.

It is my firm belief that if we all could tap into a fraction of the overwhelming spiritual strength that she possessed in our own lives, then this world would not have any choice but to become better through the community of spiritual consensus. So, I implore all of the people who read this to go to Youtube and really listen to her works so that we can all commune with her message collectively and just maybe find the inspiration to make this world even better than it was when we first came to it. She certainly made it so. 

http://youtu.be/Xs1Cjoq6U_Q