The Reluctant Leader.

I liked this quote so much, I wanted to put it here, and I think I’ll read the book.

We should bless men and women who have done their level best to escape leadership but who have been compelled to return and put their hand on the tiller. We should expect anyone who remains in a formal leadership context to experience repeated bouts of flight, doubt, surrender, and return. Why would this be God’s plan? Why does God love the reluctant leader? Here is one reason: the reluctant leader is not easily seduced by power, pride, or ambition.

Dan Allender in Leading With a Limp, p18.

Atlas Shrugged. Ayn Rand.

atlas_shrugged

I finished this at least a month ago, but I have been busy and, to some extent, I have putting off writing about it.  I have so many dog-eared pages, and there are so many interesting passages and concepts I could discuss.  I am not promising that I will write all that I want to, but perhaps it will be sufficient.

First, what is so coincidental for me is to have read this during the current financial crisis and subsequent government bailout, and the economic policies of our president-elect (Obama).  Atlas Shrugged portrays an America that is moving dangerously close to socialism, through more and more government regulations, subsidies from those that are successful to those that are not (“from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”), etc.; and that is frightfully close to what has recently transpired and what might transpire depending on how our policies progress.

Now, on to the book…. What an epic!  My version is a little over 1150 pages, and with the exception of a 60 page “speech” by one of the books main characters — John Galt, the stories true hero — it was very readable as a novel.  Of course, there is plenty of thought provoking philosophy mixed in, but it reads really well throughout the story.   But that speech!  Man, I had to skip ahead and come back to it over a few days… There wasn’t really much that he said that wasn’t already covered, at least at a somewhat high-level, elsewhere in the book, but this dug way way down — and seemed like it was not going to stop.  So I skipped ahead to the story, and came back to the speech as I felt like it, and I don’t think it hurt my reading in anyway.

The speech finally ends with “I swear — by my life and my love of it — that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”

The main premise of the book is first brought to light by this exchange a few hundred pages in, and is where the book got its final name:

… if you saw Atlas, the giant who holds the world on his shoulders, if you saw that he stood, blood running down his chest, his knees buckling, his arms trembling but still trying to hold the world aloft with the last of his strength, and the greater his effort the heavier the world bore down upon his shoulders — what would you tell him to do?”

“I … don’t know.  What … could he do?  What would you tell him?”

“To shrug.”

And here Atlas represents those few men who are the high achievers, the doers, the one’s that keep the world moving, progressing, living.  The book’s draft name was “The Strike,” and these top performing people all go on strike from working in the world.  The fall-out is incredibly quick as the state of the world degenerates terribly in just twelve years.

Rand puts this same thought another way when she says:

John Galt is Prometheus who changes his mind.  After centuries of being torn by vultures in payment for having brought to men the fire of the gods, he broke his chains and he withdrew is fire — until the day when men withdraw their vultures.”

The premise is excellent and is challenging to our pre-conceived notions of society.  Who are the real doers — those that have kept the world moving? And who are the leeches, the second raters, who live off the doers?  And what would our world be like without them?  How quickly would we fall — or would some in the middle tier step up and become the doers?  (This one Rand does not discuss, but it is a thought I had…)  And what happens when government steps in and tries to help the second raters at the expense of the doers?  Or when many of the primary doers go on strike, and the remainder find they are no longer competing in a capitalistic society, but instead fighting by someone else’s rules that are stacked against you?

The adversary she found herself forced to fight was not worth matching or beating; it was not superior ability which she would have found honor in challenging; it was ineptitude…”

As I have been reading through all of Rand’s books the past few months, I find many aspects which I can agree on to some extent, but others which I can not.  For example, I do believe that there are real doers and real second handers/leeches, that live off the doers.   I do believe a society built on the premise of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” would (relatively) quickly become a nightmare society to live in.   I believe in a love of life and of living it, and of living it to your highest potential.

Where I have my biggest issue is where she would place gratitude. For example, see the following quotes:

…man’s spirit gives meaning to insentient matter by modling it to serve one’s chosen goal.”

Try to obtain your food by my means of nothing but physical movement — and you’ll learn that man’s mind is the root of all the goods produced and all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.”

I thought by the time the sun was exhausted, men would find a substitute.”

..to place nothing above the verdict of my own mind…”

That which others claimed to feel at the sight of the stars — stars safely distant by millions of years and thus imposing no obligation to act, but serving as the tinsel of futility — she had felt at the sight of electric bulbs lighting the streets of town.”

As you can see, all gratitude is in Man, and Man’s ability to reason and to act.  In both this book, and in The Fountainhead, the heroes never see beauty in the natural world outside of their ability to change it via their very humanism.  For Rand, as a professed atheist, I guess that is all there is.   But I see beauty in the world and am grateful to a creator.  And even if our world and universe were the result of random events, I would still be grateful to something other than man.  And I certainly see beauty in man’s creations when we have used material from the natural world, but I am still grateful to the gifts of that natural world that clearly have not come from man.  I never see gratitude in Rand’s heroes for the materials themselves, or where they came from.

Just as in The Fountainhead, she is strongly against altruism, self-sacrafice, and humility:

If you wish to achieve full virtue, you must seek no gratitude in return for your sacrifice, no praise, no love, no admiration, no self-esteem, not even the pride of being virtuous; the faintest trace of any gain dilutes your virtue.”

Discard the protective rags of that vice which you call a virtue:  humility — learn to value yourself, which means: to fight for your happiness — and when you learn that pride is the sum of all virtues, you will learn to live like a man.”

On virtue, I agree that a perfect sacrifice would seek no praise, love, etc.  But I also know that as humans, that is hard (impossible!) to achieve, no matter how hard we try.  But I still think that it is a desirable goal and an approachable one.  On humility, I think it goes back to where we place our gratitude for our skills.  If we have no one (or no One) to thank for our skills (gifts), than all we have is pride in ourselves, and that can become dangerous.  But if we are grateful to someone or something other than ourselves, for our skills, but still use them as they should be used, then we can approach humility properly.

On Man’s fall as portrayed in the Judea-Christian world view, and other religious topics, she has some excellent points (this is mostly in the 60 page speech by Galt), though, in my opinion, they often lack the proper perspective.  I have chosen not to go into all of those here, at least at this time,  as this post is getting long enough as it is.  🙂  But the book is well worth the read just for this!  I will give just a hint with the following quotes:

…a free will saddled with a tendency [towards evil] is like a game with loaded dice…”

“Faith in the supernatural begins as faith in the superiority of others”

Other miscellaneous quotes that I wanted to record, but don’t want to write more about at this time…

There is no escape from justice, nothing can be unearned and unpaid for in the universe, niether in matter or in spirit — if the guilty do not pay, then the innocent have to pay it.”

Bill Brent knew nothing about epistemology; but he knew that man must live by his own rational perception of reality, that he cannot act against it or escape it or find a substitute for it — and that there is no other way for him to live.”

This was Mulligan’s concept of wealth, she thought — the wealth of selection, not of accumulation.”

  • here she is referring to a person who had a few very fine items — classics or masterpieces so-to-say — but just not many of them

What I’ve learned is that a lie is an act of self-abdication, because one surrenders one’s reality to the person to whom one lies, making that person one’s master, condemning oneself from then on to faking the sort of reality that person’s views requires to be faked.  And if one gains the immediate purpose of the lie — the price one pays is the destruction of that which the gain was intended to serve.  The man who lies to the world, is the world’s slave from then on.

There’s nothing of importance in life — except how well you do you work.  Nothing.  Only that.  Whatever else you are, will come from that.  It’s the only measure of human value…”

  • Ok, on this one, I have to write something…   While I agree that we are called to work to the best of our ability, I in no way agree that our work, at least in terms of a career, is the only measure of human value.  Now if you expand work to include more than just your job, and include your family, your friends, your community, and perhaps beyond, then you may be able to measure value by that “work”

What is morality?…  Judgement to distinguish right and wrong, vision to see the truth, courage to act upon it, dedication to that which is good, integrity to stand by the good at any price.  But where does one find it?”

… people don’t think… And the deeper they get into trouble, the less they want to think.  But by some sort of instinct, they feel that they ought to and it makes them feel guilty.  So they’ll bless and follow anyone who gives them a justification for not thinking. “

..the hallmark of a second rater… It’s resentment of another man’s achievement.  Those touchy mediocrities who sit trembling lest someone’s work prove greater than their own — they have no inkling of the loneliness that comes when you reach the top.  The loneliness for an equal — for a mind to respect and an achievement to admire.”

The hours head, like all her nights with him, would be added, she thought, to that savings account of one’s life were moments of time are stored in the pride of having lived.”

One thing that I really want to explore is the concept of “my brother’s keeper.”  “I am not my brother’s keeper” came up here and in The Fountainhead, and we just happened to be studying Genesis when Cane says this as answer to God when God asked if he knew where Abel was (just after Cane had murdered him).  And it came up in the recent campaign.  So, when I have time, I want to explore the context of the answer in the New Testament to see how it relates to Rand’s views, altruism, Obama, and my own views.  Maybe I’ll even post on it someday.

Taco Soup.

This is a quick, easy, and yummy recipe.

1 lb ground beef (browned)  — we omit this.  🙂
1 can diced tomato
1 can white corn
1 can pinto beans
1 can light red kidney beans
1 can Busch chili beans
1 pack HiddenValley Ranch mix
1 pack mild taco seasoning

  • Empty all cans (do not drain them) into a large pot
  • Empty the ranch mix and taco seasoning into the pot
  • stir and add the browned ground meat
  • Bring to a slight boil and turn on simmer for about 20 minutes
  • Serve ith Tosito chips or bread

The Ghosts of Christmas Eve. 1999.

I am a huge Trans-Siberian Orchestra fan.  They are 4th on my most played artist list according to ilike, which is pretty amazing since three of their four albums are Christmas albums, and I tend to not listen to them except in December!  (I do love their one non-Christmas album “Beethoven’s Last Night,” and I have been planning on a blog entry for it at some point.)

October is definitely early to watch a Christmas movie, but TSO is coming here in November, and I wanted to have Riley watch the movie to see if she would be interested in going to the concert.  Turns out she loved the movie part, but said she thought she might be bored at the concert if it was just music and not a movie!  😦

If you are a TSO fan, you will probably like this short movie (45 min.), and if you are not a TSO fan, you may like it.  I still can’t decide, after just one viewing, if it really captured TSO’s music and the emotion it can pull.  The story in the movie is much different from the three Christmas albums, and while the music was tied in pretty well, most of the music is from the stories of the albums and not the story of the movie.  I also can’t compare to a live show since I have yet to see them, but I still want to!

Anthem. Ayn Rand.

I actually finished Atlas Shrugged a few weeks ago but have not written anything yet — it was 1200 pages and I have a lot to say – If I can find the time!

Anyway, I ran out of reading material on a recent trip and grabbed this book at Borders.  (It is so hard to pay list price for a book these days, after years of discounts at on-line retailers with free shipping but sometimes in a pinch when I don’t have anything to read, I have to.  😦  )

This was a very fast read (I read it in a day) and not nearly as deep or complex as Rand’s other books that I have finished, but it was still quite good.  Almost sci-fi like.  The basic premise is that of mankind in the future, where all sense of individualism is lost.  Even when the characters are talking of themselves, they use “we,” or “us,” or “our,” but never “I” or “me” or “mine.  Any work towards all mankind is good, and any work, thought, desire for an individual is evil.  The triumph of the main character (whose name is Equality 7-2521) is when he finally, truly discovers his “ego,” his self, and uses the word I.”

Just one quote, and it goes along with past discussions of freedom:

But what is freedom?  Freedom from what?  There is nothing to take a man’s freedom away from him, save other men.  To be free, a man must be free of his brothers.  That is freedom.  This and nothing else.

Note that in The Fountainhead, Rand defines freedom as “want nothing, expect nothing, depend on nothing.”

Failure to Launch. 2006.

Kelly and I were both recovering from a rough stomach bug and needed something light hearted and relatively short, and this was just the ticket.  If I had to summarize with just one word, that would be “predictable.”  But it still made me laugh here and there.

Old newspaper cut-out found…

I found this old news paper clipping in my Bible the other day and thought I’d put it here rather than continue to carry it around there.  I don’t know how old this is but I am guessing 8+ years.

I believe there is an important distinction between two senses of the word “religion” that many decent people don’t understand, and I’m not being sarcastic about this.  Religion can be understood and practiced in two very different ways:  as a routine act and as a reflective act.

As a routine act, religion is an object of worship in its own right, an excuse not to think and a justification for violence against those who are not of the same religion.  In this routine sense prayer is a weapon to be used against “pagans,” “heathens,” and “infidels.”  Rent Schindler’s List and watch what happens when any religion becomes an object of worship by its practitioners, a routine to be enforced against unbelievers at any cost including war.

On the other hand, religion as a thoughtful, reflective practice, which is what I hope most people have in mind, is a process of standing back from all of the everyday routines of our lives (including our religious routines) and inquiring whether the results of those routines are likely to be acceptable in the eyes of a being of infinite knowledge, power, and goodness.  In this sense prayer is a means of achieving the highest level of personal responsibility.

— Jim Perry

Tracking Goals and Workouts, part II

This is part II…  Find part I here.

At the end of that article, I said I would jump into the pros and cons of my little spreadsheet, so here goes:

pros:

  • It is nice to set goals and work towards them.  Goals make it more likely that I won’t skip workouts.
  • The tracking I have set up lets me know exactly where I am in my progress towards the goal, and lets me know how far behind I am (if when I do get behind).
  • I made a “static” goal and an “adjustable” goal, in case I was too aggressive (or not aggressive enough!) in my targets.  For example, just a couple weeks in, and I can tell that the push up goal will be fairly easy to reach, while the running goal may not be.  That will depend on if my knee and hip can handle that amount of running…

cons:

  • I am combining push ups, pull ups, and dips into my bodywork/strength column.  So while I have specific strength goals for those three exercises, and an overall time goal for general strength work, I am not tracking a lot of other exercises I do such as squats, or curls, or whatever.   So I will have to be careful not to let the 3 specific exercises dominate my strength training time just to meet those goals.  If I continue this approach over time, I will try to rotate different exercises into to the spreadsheet, or perhaps just add a couple more to get a more rounded list of exercises in there.
  • I can already see that I am going to have to be careful to not let the spreadsheet dictate to me what I should be doing, but let my body dictate — especially in terms of pushing my knee/hip too hard.  The running goal is probably a bit aggressive, so I will have to be careful not to run just because I am behind in my tracking, if my knee does not feel up to it.
  • I typically have one or two big events a quarter — something like a 2 or 3 day back pack trip on the Appalachian trail.  Those are going to be a little hard to fit into this model, but I will figure something out.

No matter what, I am still having fun with this method, and that is a good thing.  As long as I am having fun, I am more likely to keep at it.

The Fountainhead. 1949.

After reading The Fountainhead (see post here), and then finding out there was a movie, I had to see it.  I was sckeptical that a movie, especially at just 2 hours, would be any good since the book was so epic and philosophical.  I just couldn’t figure out how the screen writer(s), director, and producer could pull it off.  I was happy to see right in the beginning that Rand did the screen play herself.

The movie started out moving incredibly fast.  The book takes time to develop the plot, the characters, and the philosophy.  The movie did not.  And there were also several items that were out of order, and one very notable item that was much better placed in the book, in my opinion.  (I don’t want to say what it is here, as it is a bit of a spoiler…)

Overall, the movie was just the tip of the iceberg of the book.  While fairly well thought out, it certainly does not match the book’s depth (nor do many movies that try to capture this kind of book).  While I can recommend the movie, I would say that you must read the book if you really want to dig into Rand’s ideas.

One thing that was a pleasant surprise was to see some of the buildings of Roark.  In the book, it was extremely hard to visualize, but the movie did a good job with them.  It was quite impressive considering the movie was done in 1949 how the skyscrapers seemed so real.  Of course, I’ve had the opposite experience of seeing things in a movie that I had visualized in a book.  For the Lord of the Ring movies, it was quite a different experience for me.  I had been picturing hobbits, orks, etc. for 20-25 years, and when I saw someone else’s representations that were so drastically different than my own, I was not pleased.  I got over it.  🙂

Some quotes that I may have missed in the book, or maybe they were just different in the movie.  These may be more paraphrases than exact quotes.  🙂

  • Defining freedom as “want nothing, expect nothing, depend on nothing.”   (Compare that to the discussion in this post.)
  • “The things that we want and admire enslave us.”
  • “See through your own eyes, think with your own brain.”
  • …spectacular talent, but made subservient to the masses
  • “Does man have a right to exist if he refuses to serve society.”
  • “The world is perishing from an orgy of self sacrifice.”

That last one is huge for Rand… She is not into altruism at all.  I am just about done with Atlas Shrugged, and that book is even stronger on this point.  So I likely will say more about this when I write on that book.

Finally, in the speech to the court near the end, Roark talks of the brain as man’s only weapon, and that the mind is an attribute of the individual.  He goes on to say that there is such thing as a collective mind.  I wonder how Rand would see today what is often called a hive mind, or universal mind, or even the collective mind.  I think I first read of it in Neal Stehpenson’s “The Diamond Age,” though I often think of it today as I am searching for answers online– data, information, knowledge, how-to’s, solutions to problems I am having that others have already had.  Today, we really do rely on each other’s minds moreso than at any other time in history.

Alvin and the Chipmunks. 2007.

I gave the kids a choice of 4 or 5 movies by watching previews on iTunes, and this is what they chose.  Riley seemed very interested in “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang,” but it was an hour longer than this at almost 2.5 hours, and I said no to that!  🙂

Overall I was pretty happy with this for the kids.   They really enjoyed it, and there were only a couple of things that I thought were a bit over the top… I don’t know why, but it seems like every “kid” movie has to have aspects of crude humor and allusions to intimacy these days!  But beyond that, there were some really good life lessons.  The chipmumks are let loose and totally indulged by “Uncle Ian,” who does not have their best interest in mind at all.  Instead, he is only interested in exploiting them for the money they can bring him.  Whereas “Dave,” who is more of a surrogate father, in no way wants to exploit them but instead wants to set rules and limits to protect them.  I actually think Riley got this when we talked about it, which is good to see.