The Relativity of Time

Now I am no Einstein.  Lord knows I can’t explain the theory of relativity, let alone give the mathematical proof for the relativity of time.  Yet, today, I will prove that time is indeed relative, but with a caveat.  My proof is outside of Einstein’s world of physics, and into the world of human experience.

We experience two worlds.  One is the world of what is -- the material world where physics and mathematics reside.  The other is the world of action -- what we do and how we choose to behave in the material world.  This is the world where values reside.  Values animate and give impetus to our actions, and underlie the choices we make.  Unlike the material world, there are no mathematical formulations to predict human behavior.  Human behavior is not mechanical or logical.  There is always an emotional component (values) that sway our choices.   We do not look to science and mathematics for our values.  Values are formulated and transmitted through language, stories, and myths. 

It is in the action world, the world of values, where the perception of time gets interesting.  There is a fascinating study by a behavioral economist, Keith Chen, on the influence of language in financial planning. 

Unlike English, there are languages, such as Mandarin Chinese, which lack verb tenses to distinguish between the present and the future.  In Chinese it is not the verb but the context of the conversation, among other markers, which distinguishes time periods

.

Chen wondered if this linguistic difference influences people’s time perception sufficiently to influence retirement savings.  He hypothesized that people speaking languages that have no verbal distinction between the present and the future will experience the future as closer to the present, thereby creating impetus to save for the future.  On the flip side, languages which verbally distinguish between the present and the future make the future harder to relate to, and, hence, plan for.

That is exactly what Chen found when he compared the savings rate between people who spoke languages with or without a future tense.  People who speak languages with a separate future tense -- English, Arabic, Greek, the Romance languages – are far worse at saving money than people whose languages don’t distinguish between the present and the future – Chinese, German, Japanese, and Norwegian.

After factoring in people’s education levels, income levels, and religious preferences, Chen found that people speaking languages with present and future verbs were 30 percent less likely to save money in any given year.  

As crazy as this sounds, Chen replicated this finding in a clever real world experiment.  New hires at a company were required to fill out a form which included providing the percentage of their salary they would devote to a retirement plan.  One form had their current picture affixed to the top corner of the form, while another had the current picture affixed to one corner and a computer aged photo of themselves affixed to the opposite corner.  Yup, having a current and older picture to view increased the percentage of retirement savings significantly.

All of this discussion is prelude to the meat of what I want to discuss – how the underpinnings of secular and religious views influence time perception, world views, and policy prescriptions.

Until next time

School Shootings -- No Longer Ho Hum

The seminal moment establishing the enduring connection between God and the children of Israel was hearing their suffering as slaves in Egypt.  The children of Israel “were groaning under the bondage and cried out; and their cry for help from the bondage rose up to God.  God heard their moaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob.  God looked upon the Israelites, and God took notice of them … and was mindful of their suffering.”

Now our children are crying out to us about their suffering, their need for help, their entrapment in unsafe schools. Having brought them into this world we must remember our sacred covenant with them to nurture, protect and make them feel safe and secure. 

For too long, as a nation, we have not acted to make our children safe and secure. With each school massacre, platitudes of blame along political fault lines trotted out.  Democrats blaming guns and advocating for increased gun control measures.  Republicans blaming the shooters and advocating for guns in the schools to stop the shooters.  Lost in the blame game, politicians’ lack of attention to what our children are saying.

Now, for the first time in the long history of school violence, our children’s cries are so loud, so forceful, and so eloquent they pierce through the platitudes and diatribes -- impossible to ignore.  A small sample of powerful remarks by students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School:

Senior student Delany Tarr

“This movement, created by students, led by students, is based on emotion. It is based on passion and it is based on pain … The only reason that we’ve gotten so far is that we are not afraid of losing money, we’re not afraid of getting reelected or not getting reelected, we have nothing to lose. The only thing we have to gain at this point is our safety.”

Senior Student Emma Gonzalez

“The students at this school have been having debates on guns for what feels like our entire lives. AP Government had about three debates this year.  Some discussions on the subject even occurred during the shooting while students were hiding in the closets.”

Junior Student Alfanso Calderon

“Everybody needs to remember, we are just children. A lot of people think that disqualifies us from even having an opinion on this sort of matter…This matters to me more than anything else in my entire life. And I want everybody to know, personally, I’m prepared to drop out of school. I’m prepared to not worry about anything besides this… so that kids don’t have to fear going back to school.”

Senior David Hogg

“My message to lawmakers and Congress is, “Please, take action.  What we really need is action. We can say, ‘We’re gonna do all these things. Thoughts and prayers.’ What we need more than that is action. Please. This is the 18th [school shooting].  We're children.  You guys are the adults."

Action requires going beyond the inevitable blame that happens when looking for the causes of gun violence.  The why did this happen questions shifts the focus from ourselves onto others.  Yet when bad things happen to good people our minds ask why in order to feel in control when tragedy strikes.  The why question is so ingrained, such a reflexive response to tragedy, that the famous book about bad things happening to good people is misremembered as:  Why Bad Things Happen To Good People.  The actual title is "When Bad Things Happen To Good People".

This “when mindset” allows for a call to action.  What do I do now that this happened?  The answers to “what do I do” flows through mindfulness.  Looking into ourselves to be aware of how we see ourselves and others involved in the tragedy.    Mindful of what we and others are capable and not capable of doing, and mindful of what we might do to lessen the likelihood this tragedy recurs.

Our President made a good start to mindfulness with his listening approach.  Gathering people directly involved in school massacres to hear their stories, their needs, their pain, their anger.  To listen to what others did to lessen the likelihood of another shooting at their school.  Just as important, televising the session so the whole nation could hear the multitude of voices crying out to be seen and listened to.

Hopefully many solutions are put in place, some at the national level. Many more at the state and local level crafted to the needs and desires of the communities where the schools exist.  It is a complex and multilayered issue with no single magical solution.

 

I want to give a shout out to one solution that started locally and is gaining national traction – Rachel’s Challenge.  The program started by the father of Rachel Scott, the first victim of the Columbine shooting.  After her death, Darrell Scott heard from so many classmates how his daughter had touched them deeply with her kindness and compassion.

 

Darrell developed a program to add kindness and compassion learning as an antidote to student alienation and school bullying and violence.  His insight, schools used to, but turned away from, including character development in the school curriculum.  The heart of the program, mindfulness.  Being aware of yourself and others in your daily interactions.

 

Similarly, Russell Simmons, the hip-hop mogul, started a program for reducing youth violence through the transformative power of meditation.  Practicing meditation changes the mind from busy to quiet. Only a quiet mind is an aware mind, capable of apprehending self and others.  Violence stops when you truly see the other, not as an “other” but as someone with feelings and needs just like you.

   

God, through his actions, teaches us the importance of mindfulness.  Now let’s teach it and practice it.   

Until next time.    

    

The Ansari Aziz Rape Allegation

A few years ago my son, raised Jewish, turned atheist, married a practicing Catholic.  For my deceased father, a devout Jew who passionately believed in maintaining the unbroken chain of Judaism, the marriage would have been an existential crisis.  In contrast, I am heartened by the marriage as I know that my grandson will benefit from exposure to the wisdom of the bible and to the Judaeo-Christian values contained within.

Sadly, religious values and wisdom as a basis for behavior in civil society is gone, with no consensus on how to fill the void.  As with all voids, chaos and confusion reigns.  Consider the accusation of rape against the famous comedian, Ansari Aziz.  A first date with a woman, known under the pseudonym of Grace, ended awkwardly and painfully for her at Mr. Aziz’s apartment.  Kissing between them progressed to nude physical intimacy, heading towards intercourse.  Already uncomfortable with the level of physical intimacy, Grace said no to intercourse.  Mr. Aziz immediately stopped and arranged an Uber ride home for her.

At various stages of the date Grace felt pressured into sexual encounters beyond her comfort zone, and believed her nonverbal stop signals were ignored by Mr. Aziz.  Grace felt she was raped and made that accusation in the online publication Bee.net   Mr. Aziz dumbfounded by the accusation believed he never coerced or forced her into unwanted intimacy.  He perceived Grace as a willing partner in pleasure and perceived himself as a respectful partner, immediately stopping when she said no to anything further.

Following publication of the accusation, an online debate ensued regarding the definitions of sexual coercion and consent, and the responsible way to handle perceived sexual misconduct.  Grace’s supporters placed responsibility on men to tune into their partner’s feelings during sex.  Mr. Aziz's supporters placed responsibility on women to clearly voice there discomfort.   Many expressed concern that attaching the rape label to an ambiguous sexual encounter undermined the #MeToo movement.   

Lost in the debate is this simple truth.   When two complete strangers engage in the emotionally and psychologically intense act of physical intimacy, hovering close by are feelings of vulnerability and violation created by misunderstandings and miscommunication.  Mr. Aziz was unfamiliar with Grace’s body language or style of communicating.  Grace knew nothing of Mr. Aziz’s sensitivity level or attitudes towards women.  Neither knew the other’s views on sexual intimacy.  Neither knew the other’s expectation for the date -- a building block towards a relationship, or a one night stand.  Each was certain their perception of the evening was shared by the other.

In the religious world fences are built around interactions between men and women precisely because such interactions are fraught with misunderstandings and unwanted behavior.  Hence Vice President Mike Pence’s rule to always include his wife when attending a private social event with another woman, or the practice of Orthodox Jews to refrain from touching anyone of the opposite sex who is not close family. 

In the secular world these behaviors are dismissed as remnants of a patriarchal society not suitable for the modern understanding of gender equality.  Overlooked is the wisdom of creating fences to avoid emotionally painful interactions.  Instead of antiquated ideas, create fences with modern sensibilities.  Create them because, even in this modern world, communication between people is imperfect, and because, contrary to modern beliefs, fundamental human nature and basic emotional reactions are unchanged

 

Until next time 

Trump and the Politics of Branding

I recently returned from a trip to Hong Kong and Singapore.  While there, the eyes of the prawns were upon me -- cooked alive and served with eyes intact as a sign of freshness for restaurant patrons.  Those bug eyes disturbed the sensibilities of my kosher upbringing, so I ate mostly rabbit food as a palliative to my churning stomach.  The good news, I returned home without the dreaded vacation belly.

The bad news, I returned home to deja vu all over again -- the country in an uproar over Trump stepping on his tongue.  The pattern oh so familiar, Democratic leaders expressing outrage, Republican leaders voicing lipstick on a pig rationales, and the legislative agenda drowned out by the political noise.

Lost in the hub hub a disturbing trend, the increasing commercialization of politics.  Parties no longer defined by their philosophy or principals but by their branding.  Democrats brand Republicans as deplorable and Republicans brand Democrats as out of touch elites.  Opportunities to brand the other trumps legislative agendas, even bi-partisan ones.

Senator Dick Durbin’s actions a case in point.   After hearing the shithole comments in a private, contentious meeting with the President, the Senator could not resist the gift that Trump’s mouth keeps on giving.  He immediately disclosed the remarks to the press, creating the predictable shockwave across the country.   A reflexive action for political advantage, absent any reflection on what is best for the country or the Dreamers.

There is an important distinction between a President’s private and public comments.  Unlike private comments, a President’s public pronouncement are official views guiding policy.  Take LBJ as an example, with large disconnects between his private and public speech and policy.  LBJ’s potty mouth, positively Trumpian in private, regularly used the "n" word during cabinet meetings.   Publicly he advocated for sweeping civil rights legislation and at the signing ceremony spoke these stirring words, “Let us close the close the springs of racial poison.  Let us pray for wise and understanding hearts.  Let us set aside irrelevant differences and make our Nation whole.”

Senator Durbin, as a public servant, never considered the public good before talking to the press.  Lost, because of his act of political advantage, was movement towards a permanent bi-partisan solution for the sword of deportation hanging over the Dreamers, and impetus towards an overhaul of our outdated immigration policy.

Republicans are equally eager to play the political advantage game, with Nancy Pelosi as one favorite target.  Recently jumping on her comments after corporations announced bonuses to employees following passage of the tax reform bill.  Characterizing the $1,000 bonuses as mere crumbs, Pelosi was excoriated as a liberal elite, out of touch with employees living pay check to pay check for whom $1,000 is highly meaningful.  

The politics of advantage is a corrosive outgrowth of the extreme polarization of our two parties and the radical elements that form the base of each.  Each party is loath to support any legislation emanating from the other side lest it anger their base and provide their opponents with an advantage at the polling booths.  This was the Republican strategy when Democrats were in power, and now the Democrats are returning the favor. 

Nothing gets done in a bi-partisan way which severely restricts what either party does while in power.  Legislation addresses issues catering to the base’s views, while most Americans are middle of the road in their views.  This sets the stage for ping-ponging of governance, particularly at the Presidential level, as the party in favor loses favor with independents, where elections are won or lost.  A trend I fear is our future.

Such a downer to think about, I’ll end on a positive note.  Headed up north to visit with my mini me, now 17 months.  Last I saw him he was Mr. Destructo, taking repeated, and I do mean repeated, delight in lifting his large plastic fire engine on its head and then pushing it see which way it fell and how loud it crashed.   Clapping each time he performed the trick did not suffice for long.  Soon he began clapping prior to the performance and required all of us to join in.  My mini me definitely inherited my “look at me” gene.

Until next time.