Archives for August 2021

Circle Perspectives

August 31, 2021 by

“Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform.”
– Mark Twain

I so enjoy the variety of people I know. The differences in my circle are vast on everything from political views to familial status, formal education to employment choice. I appreciate these people as they provide me great opportunities to consistently experience different views. Granted, mine may not always change, but it is an improvement still to be able to expose myself to a different perspectives.

When we talk about “varied perspectives,” we aren’t necessarily talking about debate, transformation, or convincing others. We are simply seeing how similar things in our sphere may be different. Why is this important?

  1. We can’t possibly be an expert in everything – learn from those around you.
  2. There are always two sides (typically more) to every story – always strive to have all the facts.
  3. We may be wrong – unlikely, I know, but it could happen – the correction from others can make us better.
  4. We may be doing our family, friends, or clients a disservice – your perspective is valuable and important. It is important to give when needed and guide when appropriate.

I am so thankful for my circle of perspectives. You keep me sharp, informed, and safe.

Filed Under: Turn Around Tuesday Tagged With: ,

The Benefit of Friendship

August 24, 2021 by

“Friendship make prosperity more shining and lessens adversity by dividing and sharing it.”

– Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BC – 43 BC)

Today’s quote is one of the main reasons I don’t typically write TAT‘s any earlier than the night before or the morning of. Had it not been for a conversation I had Monday evening, I may have very well picked a different quote. But after talking with Melissa Silva, owner of Alchemy, I knew the direction to take.

Funny how great friends can do that. They can put it all into perspective. They can sort through the mess you have been trying to unravel. Friends have the uncanny ability to point out the obvious in a situation we have been brooding over for weeks. Great friends are amazing.

So often, we leave our friends out of these situations. Whether the cause be pride, vulnerability, distaste of unloading on others or whatever, we can often find ourselves holding on to a lot of stuff we could let go of. In success, we are afraid of tooting out own horn. In distress, we are afraid of appearing weak. In defeat, we are afraid of of looking like a failure.

Today I want to encourage you take a minute and consider where you are misusing your friends. Have you hesitated conveying good news? Have you assumed them too busy to be a sounding board for a current obstacle? Have you considered them too successful to understand your misstep? I am guessing you are hoping your friends know you will be there for them through all of that. I am betting they would be more than happy to return the favor.

Filed Under: Turn Around Tuesday Tagged With: ,

Whiskey Women

August 23, 2021 by

Whiskey enjoys a long and storied history. With Irish beginnings sometime around the 12th century, the “water of life” has traveled continents, agriculture, and time periods. Part of that history is heavily intertwined in the history of the United States. The ability to purchase things such as beer and rum where looked at to be a sign of wealth. However, beer was hard to transport with a limited shelf life. The importation requirements and the resulting taxes made rum complicated as well. The ability to produce whiskey from domestically grown ingredients made it a ready choice in early America. Widespread availability created a time in which everyone – men, women, and children – consumed the liquor. When European sophisticates deemed the act of “drunken, uncivilized, and unmannered frontiersmen,” the Americans answered back by hoisting the liquor as a show of American independence and pride (Bellino). Unfortunately, this response did not prevent the attitude towards whiskey from shifting. The popularity decreased while the idea that whiskey was “an old drink for old men” took a strong hold (Rarick and Mich). 

Historically speaking, spirits have always been a man’s game – at least if you believe the stereotype. Unfortunately, the subjugation of women changed their role and their recognition. While women have always been instrumental in all disciplines, their influence did not keep the stereotype of a weaker sex from moving through and gaining popularity in much of the world. The marginalization of women affected the telling of the history and the recording accomplishments in the whiskey world as well. Prohibition, religious organizations, and male dominated legislation focused on keeping women boxed inside the cultural preferences of the time further exacerbated the exclusion. However, women have always been at the forefront of fermented beverages. There is quite a bit of evidence that shows women are responsible for beer, still design, and a host of other advances bring us to what we know today as “adult beverages” (Gilpin).  Now, women are beginning to reenter the industry, both as producers and consumers. No longer is the distillery process or enjoyment confined to the masculine elite. Whiskey has caught the noses and palettes of women. This reemergence of female involvement is creating exciting changes in the process, the product, and the possibilities.   

All whiskeys, regardless of type, follow the same process, thus placing them in the “whiskey” category of spirit. The process begins with the recipe, more commonly referred to as a mash bill. It is distilled, barrel aged, and bottled. The nuances in the different whiskeys occur from variations in addressing each step. These nuances can involve altering characteristics such as adjustments in grain ratios, blending techniques, barrel type, and aging lengths (Rarick and Mich). Most whiskey drinkers are passionate about their preferences. Some, of which I count myself, enjoy a wide variety of offerings. I am far less concerned about the label than I am the taste. And while I love a great whiskey origination story, it is not necessary it enjoy a well-crafted spirit. It is in this variety that female distillers are finding success.  

“I am far less concerned about the label than I am the taste. And while I love a great whiskey origination story, it is not necessary it enjoy a well-crafted spirit. It is in the variety that female distillers are finding success.”

April trepagnier

Even though the process for whiskey making is standard, the route used to go through the process is not. Women are bringing new perspectives into the conversation. Some of these conversations have little to do with the whiskey itself and are concerned with environmental impact. Cheri Reese and her husband, Mike Swanson, have committed to these ideas at their Far North distillery. Reese looks at the process to find ways in which they can produce a whiskey that encourages environmental awareness. They farm their own rye organically and use environmentally friendly techniques throughout the distilling and barreling portions of their process (Polonski). Reese’s commitment to these changes not only adds another flavor profile to the mix (as a process change will do), but it elevates the whiskey game to new consumers. People that may have been interested in whiskey before but put off by the capitalist male stereotype now have options to consider. 

Process innovations are not limited to those of environmental considerations. Whiskey makers of the past were a resourceful bunch. Because people can only work with what they know, trial and error created most whiskeys. Distillers passed on those failures and successes w to the next generation. Today, the whiskey industry has a little more help from science. Many distillers have advanced degrees and training in the different sciences. This training has given the whiskey industry a broader outlook. The understanding of how the chemical make up and reactions of different ingredients, influences, and conditions has allowed whiskey makers to reach into previously unchartered waters.  

Marianne Eaves is one such distiller. The first female master distiller in Kentucky since Prohibition, Eaves earned a Chemical Engineering degree from the University of Louisville. As a woman in the industry, she is using these concepts to bring fresh, innovative ideas to the whiskey making process. But she is finding this to be a challenge. Change is not always easy, and Eaves finds it difficult to convince those around her that variety can be a good thing. However, Eaves is determined to find ways to explore new ways of creating an old drink. Eaves has made the difficult decision to change distilleries, disheartened by the limits put on her. While she was excited to make great whiskey, she was not excited about her inability to innovate once one success was found. Eaves does not want to simply make one great whiskey. She wants to find out how many great whiskeys there can be. Like the drink itself, Eaves knew she could find deeper notes. Setting out to find those new flavors, Eaves is collaborating with individuals outside of the whiskey industry. Most of these collaborators are from the wine industry and, as one might suspect, women (Kimberl).  

Changes of these types do not come without resistance. Another such change happens between the distilling and bottling stages and is creating serious debates among whiskey enthusiasts – the legitimacy of blended whiskies. Understand that blends are not new. In fact, the blending of whiskey is a long-held practice. However, in the new age of whiskey growth, the idea has become hotly contested. The controversy arises from a rising group of blenders who do not (because they cannot) distill their own whiskey. Blenders of this kind purchase barrels from different distilleries, create a mix based on the flavor profiles, and bottle them under their own label. Many whiskey purists believe this type of whiskey making is akin to taking someone else’s hard work and putting your own name on it (Manley and Myrah). However, a compelling argument can be made that the ability to identify those mixes able to render a flavorful and pleasing bottle is an art in itself and worthy of the recognition. Women such as Nancy Fraley are on the forefront of making this claim. Using skills that require a complete knowledge of whiskey and its attributes, women like Fraley are elevating the abilities of the distilleries that choose to acknowledge this technique as one way to create a great bottle (Polinski). 

The whiskey making approach employed by Heather Manley also adds credence to the blending idea. Actually, if addressing the entirety of Manley’s whiskey arena contribution, blending would be a product and not the whole of the contribution. When one looks at the influence Manley has had on the industry, it is important to note who she is as much as it is who she is not. While some may find fault in the fact that she is not a distiller, Manley’s business and technological acumen is bringing a fresh perspective to the industry. Owner of several small businesses, many in male dominated fields, Manley brings both a feminine and an entrepreneurial point of view to making whiskey. These attributes are important points of fact for two reasons. First, an entrepreneur is often finding new ways to bring success to previously untapped, overlooked, or stagnant markets. Second, females in traditionally male dominated industries understand the importance of excellence to ensure acceptance. Because she understands the need to manage overhead while bringing a quality product to the market, Manley embraces the idea of partnership. These partnerships, much like the ones nurtured by Eaves and Franley, have enabled Manley to reduce her costs by forgoing the building of a distillery and time to market by purchasing whiskey that has already aged (Manley and Myrah). While some whiskey drinkers are loyalist to certain distilleries (if Jack Daniels did not make it, my mother is not drinking it), a new rise of whiskey enthusiasts are more concerned with the quality over the label. While blenders such as Franley and Manley may not Eaves’ distiller credentials, they do have market share as the products they produce through skilled knowledge and creative artistry are as enjoyable, if not more so, than some of their grain to glass counterparts.  

Diversity in both process and product is creating a greater diversity in possibility, mostly notably in interested demographic. Reese has accomplished this with environmentally friendly production. Eaves and Manley reach out and encourage women who have not previously felt included. Fawn Weaver is attempting to broaden numbers whiskey drinkers by addressing inclusion marketing. Where women may have found themselves overlooked in the marketing strategies of whiskey makers, Weaver suggests that Black people have as well. As an African American female, Weaver belongs to both underserved demographics. Weaver is the CEO and cofounder of Nearest Green Distillery. The distillery is named for Nathan “Nearest” Green, the first African American distiller. Weaver’s brand has brought attention to the diverse voices that, while not acknowledged, have always influenced the whiskey industry. Moreover, Weaver strives for further inclusiveness by going against the idea that focusing on singular race or demographic is effective marketing. Instead, Weaver chooses to simply make great whiskey and market with an inclusion for all message (Risen). This approach utilized by Weaver and other makers, many of whom are women, is creating a comfort and interest among possible consumers who would not have otherwise considered whiskey as a drink of choice. This increased interest allows for a broadening of capital and resources that continues to whiskey the ability to innovate and explore. 

There can be no question that women have entered the whiskey arena with a fresh perspective that has changed the landscape. This completely unique perspective has had inevitable effect of broad stroke changes. Not only are they literate in the foundational process, but they have innovation and education on their side. Moreover, the need to prove themselves in a male dominated industry has created a focus on excellence in order to be taken seriously by their more established male counterparts. More than just recipes, barrels, and finish, women have brought a whole swath of ideas into an industry improving the process, product, and possibilities. While whiskey is awesome and amazing all by itself, these influences have made it more than that. The reemergence of women in the field has taken a social drink and raised both quality and social consciousness.

Works Cited 

Bellino, Grace. “Whiskey in Early America.” International Social Science Review, no. 1, 2018, p. 1. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=edsgea&AN=edsgcl.540541921. 

Gilpin, Lyndsey. “The Secret, 800-Year History of Women Making Whiskey.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 14 May 2015, www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/05/women-making-whiskey-an-800-year-history/393260/. 

Kimberl, Maggie, and Tony. “Marianne Eaves, On The Move.” American Whiskey Magazine, 21 Feb. 2020, americanwhiskeymag.com/2020/01/10/marianne-eaves-on-the-move/. 

Polonski, Adam. “6 Visionaries Who Are Changing Craft Whiskey.” Whisky Advocate, 24 July 2019, www.whiskyadvocate.com/craft-whiskey-visionaries/. 

Rarick, Charles A., and Claudia C. Mich. “The American whiskey renaissance: The rebirth of an American spirit.” Journal of the international academy for case studies 21.3 (2015): 149. 

Risen, Clay. “Yes, African-Americans Drink Bourbon. You’d Never Know It From the Marketing.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 20 May 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/05/20/dining/drinks/bourbon-african-americans.html. 

  

Filed Under: Writing Tagged With: , , ,

“Let Me Tell You Something You Already Know.”

August 17, 2021 by

“That is what learning is. You suddenly understand something you’ve understood all your life, but in a new way.” – Doris Lessing, 2007 Nobel Prize Winner

So, I didn’t know who Doris Lessing was until today. But, as soon as I read her quote, I had to look her up. Sounded very Rocky-esqe when he told his kid, “Let me tell you something you already know.”

Being told something you already know can be irritating. Ask my six year old. She’ll sigh real deep, lean her head back a bit, and say exasperatedly, “I knnnooowww.” Then she has to be reminded about her attitude and we move on.

Being told something you already know can also be energizing, comforting, and refreshing. It can increase your confidence through confirmation. It can remind you gently of important tidbits forgotten. It can renew your sense of direction with a fresh look at the map. Learning something you already know can be the highlight of your day.

Telling somebody what you already know they know can be the hardest job of all. Why? Because you already know how irritating that can be. But forgetfulness and complacency need reminding and redirecting. And it is up to us to provide it when needed and accept it when thoughtfully given. If we are friends, you would tell me if I had broccoli in my teeth. This is no different.

Don’t blow off an opportunity to learn something because you think it’s something you already know. Don’t pass up the opportunity to share because you think you have nothing new to add. Something may enter your brain in a new and exciting way. You may have an angle, an insight, a tone of voice that gives new meaning to an old topic.

One of the most special things about relationships is the sharing of information that inspires us to be better for ourselves and each other. What do you have to share today?

Filed Under: Turn Around Tuesday Tagged With: ,

Alone not Lonely (it’s me, except when it isn’t)

August 12, 2021 by

Somewhere in this blog I have discussed calling the monsters out of the shadows because they shrink in the light. I’ve probably discussed it in some capacity in quite a few places. The gist of the idea is articulated, in my opinion, most eloquently by Brené Brown. For us Gen-Xers, it is applying the “punch the bully in the mouth one time and they’ll shut up” strategy to the bitch in your brain, your other voice (voices for some us). In a different way, it is much like the final rap battle in 8 Mile when Rabbit decides while he may be a bum, he will no longer be Papa Doc’s bitch. And we all are “still standing here screaming fuck the free world.”  

I think, in a small way this is what happened last week. A tired sense of excited frustration and intention in the face of a life that is so grand and still gets so sad, a talent that is nothing short of a gift and is still so highly neglected, possibilities that are more endless now than they have ever been that are still judged as limited and impossible, left a feeling of pressure to bursting.

And I am not in the place where I am ready to split myself open.

But, I am in a place where I am ready to let it bleed forth. Not the unhinged manifesto of Jerry Maguire levels – I have burnt my whole life down before. And while I still hold it was necessary, I am not interested in doing it again. But a slower, although substantial, move into getting out of my own damn way is necessary. The alternative is causing gangrene on the inside. Sound dramatic? Then you’ve never been there and I don’t expect you to understand. And that’s okay, we can still be friends.

So, I just said all the things – rational or not, embarrassing or not, vulnerable or not. And guess what? The monster shrinks in the light still stands true. I was able to move through the next few days a bit lighter because I refused to continue to carry that load. I was able to enter into new moments, new ideas, with more headspace, more insight, more clarity. And, as is wont to happen, the path to where I really wanted to be cleared just a little.

The machete came in the form of a book recommended to me by Jordan (told you she was super smart). Process: The Writing Lives of Great Authors by Sarah Stodola takes famous authors – Toni Morrison, Edith Wharton, Joan Didion, Ernest Hemingway, and Margret Atwood are a few my favorites included – and “combines author biography with lively details about writing habits…a sort of group biography through the lens of professional technique.” You can probably see why I am enthralled. I can’t tell you much more about the the format because, as I said, I couldn’t get past the forward and introduction before I had to come here and talk with myself (and you).

First, did you know that Virginia Woolf preferred purple pens? Do you have any idea who else prefers purple pens? I think it’s a sign.

Ok, maybe it isn’t a sign per se, but when coupled with the next quotes, it certainly seems that the right book has found itself into the right hands at precisely the right time.

Noah Charney, PhD is an art historian and a writer. In his forward for the book, Dr. Charney says, “Inventing interesting things to write about, and new ways to convey them, is exhausting…Readers tend to overlook the intricacies involved in bringing a work to completion, and they see writers as a cult of pseudo-magicians, capable of conjuring worlds out of thought, spinning characters from thin air, and surely having a great time while doing so. In truth, a career as a writer is enjoyable, but also lonely.”

Exhausting. It is. It truly is. But it has always felt guilty to say that. It is simply writing after all. – no physical exertion, no physical discomfort, just sitting around with a pen or a keyboard, maybe some chips and a whiskey and you just type. How exhausting is that allowed to be? In true? Very. The validation washed over me. I have found nouns and verbs to be the hardest easiest thing I’ve ever done. More importantly, I am not the best version of myself when I am not doing it.

And my dear readers of which I have maybe five. I get so wrapped up in the production of it all. Will it be good enough, is it worth it, is it too much, have I overstepped, held back, gone too far, been too soft, will this be the piece that creates opportunity, will all of it just be a waste…and on and on. This can be incredibly debilitating. Concern over reception has stopped my hands more than once because honestly, who wants to be rejected, abandoned, criticized. Who wants to be lonely?

“Alone is just where you are. Lonely is a fear that you don’t have an option to be somewhere else.”

April Trepagnier

I had this thought alone on a porch in a different state away from everything familiar. It was then that I realized that, while I was alone, I was not lonely. The difference is important. While I was not in the immediate vicinity of my people, they were still my people. The work that was doing had only separated us physically – not relationally. In fact, this aloneness was supported, encouraged, and recognized as a pretty great idea. In fact, it is so unlike me that some were even proud that I decided to do it at all. I will not be coy, there is always a feeling for me at separation of “what if they don’t come back” or “what if there aren’t there when I come back.” The answer is, of course “while that is highly unlikely, you’ll deal with it when it happens.”

My self-worth is not on the table.

I can be alone when the work requires it. My family will still love me. My husband will still adore me. They don’t expect me to be a martyr to the cause. I can be alone without being lonely.

It is not lost on me that I feel no moral dilemma in skipping book forwards. I am not real sure why I decided to read this one, only that I am glad that I did. It was a pretty good one.

Stodola then takes over at the Introduction, another section of publishing I often breeze right past. And, again, I am thrilled that I didn’t.

While slightly oversimplified, I think one of the defining differences between alone and lonely is fear. Alone is just where you are. Lonely is a fear that you don’t have an option to be somewhere else. I am not worried about being alone when I write. I do, however, worry a great deal about writing making me lonely.

Writing is an intensely personal and intimate activity. I am literally taking the innermost parts of myself and my imagination and placing them in a black and white space for you to do whatever you want to with it. Add to that my preferred style of creative nonfiction, and it is naturally assumed that the writer is always me instead of a created persona that I have created to tell the story. Even in my fiction I have been wary of my words because, well, Stodola did a great job when she said, “You’re never quite sure if you’re writing about someone else, or if in writing about someone else you’re unmasking something about yourself. But maybe that’s the whole point.”

For me, that is the whole point. Whether the creative be fiction or no, I am a lover of those stories that seek to grow understanding between people who want it. In order to achieve that, it is hard (for me at least) to separate myself wholly from the narrative. And even if I could, readers will assume what they want about what’s true and what isn’t. Further, readers will assume what they want about what is about them and what isn’t. For a writer who desires low conflict, this can be a precarious place to be.

The safe idea is to just not write or to just not publish. I really don’t like any of those ideas. I do not know how to achieve connection without vulnerability and I do not know how to achieve vulnerability without just putting myself out there. And while it can be a scary place to be, myself worth is not on the table.

I haven’t even gotten to an author profile yet. If this keeps up, Stodola’s work will find a solid spot on my recommended list.

Filed Under: Writing Tagged With:

Exceptional is the Goal

August 10, 2021 by

Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain but it takes character and self control to be understanding and forgiving.

~Dale Carnegie

Let me start out today with this disclaimer. Yes, I am aware that some things, situations, places, people completely stink. I agree that there are times when the redeeming quality that you can find isn’t worth the effort it took to find it.

However, contrary to recent (or maybe just more noticeable) behavior, a good many people are starting to think my disclaimer is the norm. It is not. If we were real honest with ourselves, we would instinctively know that it is the very rare exception.

I can’t tell you how many times I have heard the phrases, “that’s the dumbest thing I have ever heard of”, “why in the world would they do it that way”, “this makes me sick”, or other moans that sound like that. I have heard them so often, I have noticed them coming from my mouth as well, even as I am disgusted by the same behaviors in others – now ain’t that crazy.

I have had to spend a good bit of time reminding myself that the way I see things isn’t always the way things are. My perception is only one of a variety of perceptions – all of which have different histories and influences. Should I assume the worse of the available perceptions is accurate, my attitude and influence in the situation becomes yet another negative influence. The situation escalates and I have achieved my prophecy – completely self fulfilled and avoidable with a better attitude.

Today, I encourage you to mind your company and mind your behavior. Think of those folks that you really enjoy spending time with – they are uplifting, supportive, positive, encouraging. Appreciate that in them and commit to treating others that way. Our behaviors, if not carefully watched, are apt to follow in line with those around us. I am not placing blame, as we are all responsible for our own reactions and choices. I am acknowledging a choice to remember that good is nice, great is better and exceptional is the goal. And we can get there – with character, self control, and just a little help from a few friends.

Filed Under: Turn Around Tuesday Tagged With: ,

A Journey to Self

August 9, 2021 by

Many of my own philosophical questions revolve around the idea of self. Who am I? Why am I here? How can I know myself? Is my self real? We find examples of philosophers discussing these questions throughout history. Attempting to identify the self as something one can know while encountering all the ancillary ideas that each position leads to has been a subject of much discussion. Rene Descartes found himself in an uncomfortable situation trying to satisfy the inclinations of both his religious and scientific mind. He found his answer in an ontological dualism that put res cogitans, the thinking, unextended substance under the authority of God (and thus, the Church), and res extensa, the unthinking, extended substance under the authority of science. In this way, Descartes reasoned, both empirical and rational truths can coexist. However, this idea quickly came under scrutiny as it seemed to make a causal connection between the mind or soul, and the body or physical nature impossible (Mitchell on Descartes’ Epistemology, 236). 

While Descartes tried to produce solutions, as he was certain the mind and the body were linked, he was unable to do so convincingly; his best effort was the pineal gland (Mitchell on Descartes’ Epistemology, 237). Both Physicalists, who identify self as the body only, and Idealists, who argue the self is only an idea, use the mind body problem to refute the dualism defended by Descartes. In fact, David Hume uses the argument as part of his discussion to conclude that there is no actual “self” at all. While I think it is safe to say that the pineal gland is not the linchpin of the mind and body, I also think that, barring a reality I cannot conceive of, denying any idea of self is also inadequate. I am in good company in that idea as Immanuel Kant also disagreed with Hume’s evaluation of self. Instead Kant imagined that there are two separate realities – the noumena that we cannot know, and the phenomena that we can. Kant uses the concept of transcendental ideas to explain how the information passes or shifts from the noumena to the phenomena (Soccio on Kant, 318). It is in these shifts that we develop constructs for our reality. As these transcendental ideas are ignited by experience, forming structures for the experiencer through which the noumena become organized into the phenomena, it is a likely candidate for the mind body connection and satisfactory criteria for personal identity. This idea of construct of self through a perception of experience gained momentum through my encounter with William James’ discussion on consciousness (although I do not pretend to understand the fullness of that piece of work), and solidified with V.F. Cordova’s assertion that self is a constant creation. 

René Descartes

If I may be permitted a caveat: I have been somewhat hesitant to tackle this subject, partly because it covers multiple philosophers. Mostly because, as I have intimated, I am honest about my lack of full understanding of the philosophic positions offered. However, I have decided to take the journey approach to explain my position. As such, I will begin with my first encounter with the idea of self and move through to the most comfortable idea I believe I have ever heard concerning the subject. The errors in understanding are all mine. However, the knowledge gained is valuable to me even in its imperfection. 

My idea of self moved from a casual and obvious fact to a philosophical quest with Descartes’ Cogito. While familiar with “I think therefore I am,” this condensed version had not inspired a contemplation of self. However, the expanded idea, in particular “…he can never make me be nothing as long as I think that I am something,” resonated in such a way that, while I could not be sure exactly how I would get there, I was certain that I agreed philosophically with the existence of a self (Mitchell on Descartes’ Epistemology, 232).   

Because I am unfamiliar with all the rules of philosophy, I am only partly sure that my certainty of destination breaks one of them. That concern only lasted for a moment as Descartes’ offering of the pineal glad and Cartesian circle offering to solve the mind body problem was immediately met by an eyeroll at the absurdity. Hence, I was certain I had my intellectual honesty intact even if I had violated a predestination in research rule (again if there is such a rule). This intellectual honesty had me at a serious disadvantage when I engaged with David Hume who argued against the existence of a self at all. Because of our current inability to scientifically show where the self is, or to define the material of which it is made, there is no way to prove its physicality or permanence. Therefore, it does not exist; there is no self (Pojman on Personal Identity in Locke and Hume, 384). While his argument was compelling, it was not insurmountable. First, Hume’s asserted that every real thing must correspond to one real idea (Pojman on Personal Identity in Locke and Hume, 384). The self does not have any singular impression and is therefore not real. I refute this point with one simple question, “Why must it?” While I am sure Hume has a compelling answer for that, I will continue to go back to “…he can never make me be nothing as long as I think that I am something.” In this particular instance, Hume, not Descartes’ evil deity, is the “he.” 

Immanuel Kant

While I would have resigned myself to this idea to preserve my belief of a self, Immanuel Kant did not let me fight this good fight alone for very long. His Copernican revolution changed the way in which experiential knowledge and personal ideas of such knowledge could be deemed as true. Kant suggested that the mind did not conform to experience, but that experience conformed to the mind. Kant suggested that there were two types of reality – noumenal reality and phenomenal reality. Our experience is facilitated by transcendental ideas. These ideas, Kant suggests, are the way in which experience, the noumena that we cannot know is conformed into the phenomena that we can know (Soccio on Kant, 318). In this singular reversal, Kant provided me with a counterpoint to Hume’s suggestion that self was nothing more than a bundle of perceptions. My self, my cogito, is the is the creator of the perceptions. Without my self, there are no perceptions. As Hume has acknowledged the existence of perceptions, in fact bundles of them, I would insist that he therefore acknowledge my self as the facilitator of those perceptions. is Coperiam Hois 

William James furthers my journey, although in a cursory way. While I understand many of his thoughts, I am having a much tougher time determining his point. His tone suggests that he is directly contradicting Kant’s thoughts on transcendental ideas and sides with Hume on the denial of the existence of self, positioning the self as a “function” versus something real (James – Does Consciousness Exist, 3 – 4). However, I will share how his ideas of experience and his metaphor of both the paint and the room set me up for the apex encounter with Cordova and my final argument that my self does exist and it is real in so far as I identify and understand real. James’ proposal that “things,” e.g., the paint and the room, are real both of themselves and within the context of the being experiencing them situates itself, in my mind, in line with Kant’s description of noumena and phenomena. The paint, the room (noumena) cannot be known by my self outside of the transcendental ideas that shape it into the phenomena. Once I have experienced the paint, the room, there is both the paint, the room as they are and my perception of them in my self. The differences between the actuality of the paint, the room and my perceptions of them may be nonexistent or innumerable; they still exist both in themselves and in my self. James describes this ability to exist in multiplicity as the way a point can exist on two separate lines provided that the lines intersect. To this point, I would suggest that one line being the paint’s, the room’s existence, and the other being my self. Without my self, there is no intersection. Regardless of whether one positions the experience within or without, or considers it by addition or subtraction, and regardless of how many instances of the paint, the room exist based on encounters, if they are able exist outside of themselves at all relies on the existence of my self to interact with it.  

This journey explains why my mind was ready with full preparation to encounter V. F. Cordova. Allow me to venture into the illustrative for a moment and I will conclude with reasoned logic, thus covering, I hope, both the relative and absolute belief I have in my self, and the self of others. I found Cordova’s writing to be beautiful and profound. Her respect of nature and our place in it was complete, whether we as individuals respected it or not. Her ability to confront the human condition as a whole, in parts, relative, and separate had the ability to convey both empathy and straight forward judgements. In her explanation of our relationship to nature, our egg in the womb reliance to that which is around us, I found the final piece, for now, that I needed to put my belief that my existence is real, my self is my existence, therefore my self is real.  

Filed Under: Writing Tagged With: , , ,

The Cold Dish (Walt Longmire #1) – Craig Johnson

August 5, 2021 by

“Sometimes I feel like I’ve been here a very long time.”

Lonnie Little Bird

Walt Longmire has been the sheriff of Absaroka County Wyoming for a long time and the best friend of Henry Standing Bear even longer. He is looking forward to his retirement and trying to figure out how to make his outspoken deputy Victoria Moretti, his successor. There may even be a romance on his horizon. Unfortunately, a dead body requires his attention.

When Cody Pritchard is found dead, the town is curious, but not sad. In fact the suspect list is pretty long. It doesn’t take long for Walt to realize that the murder is related to the rape case two years ago where Cody and three other boys were convicted of assaulting Melissa Real Bird.

When this series was recommended to me some years ago. I didn’t intend to stick with it. The description read like a western crime novel — not really my genre. However, it came highly recommended from a reader I trusted and the husband of one of my dearest friends.

I couldn’t be more thankful that I did. The characters are rich and full. The plot while not overly complex, gives just enough of a ride to be enjoyable. The story is well told and Henry Standing Bear is one of my favorite fictional characters to date.

But the real treat is the writing. Craig Johnson’s ability to be both rugged and poetic is a thrill to the senses. The tiptoe into philosophical without indulgence is beautiful. The off shoots of different actions around the central plot create a real feeling while adding depth to characters I have grown to love.

More than mystery. More than crime. More than a western. Longmire is a solid series for anyone looking to make some new fictional friends.

Filed Under: Paraphernalia Tagged With: ,

Joy and Responsibility of Self Awareness

August 3, 2021 by

If we shirk the responsibility of self-awareness, we empower other people and circumstances to shape our lives for us. We live reactively to their scripts and not our own maps.

~ Stephen Covey

Most folks know the following things about me:

  • I am a big thinker who enjoys new ideas and have issues in the area of details
  • I am a professional salesman
  • I am in the real estate industry
  • I have a large family
  • I am easily distracted and passionate
  • I can be loud
  • I have to concentrate to achieve follow through
  • I am working on getting comfortable in my own skin
  • I have no problem telling you any of this

As I look up at the above list, I realize that some of those traits can both be seen as real good stuff and amazing bad habits depending on who is doing the seeing. The wonderful thing is, I see them all as positive. I appreciate the fact that I can look into my own makeup and celebrate those things that are fantastic and forgive and improve those things that need work.

In the lives of each of us, there are traits and people who are less than supportive. They may not be intentional or unkind – they just are. It is important to realize that we need to neither understand nor alter these outside forces. We just need to recognize that there are there. Then the objective becomes to remember that we cannot change the forces outside of us, only those within us.

Today I encourage you to revel in your own self-awareness. Take time to really enjoy the you who makes your piece of the world a better place. Write down those talents and positive traits. Call someone and tell them what your list says and allow them to be excited with you. Include those things that haven’t been brought to a polish yet, but your fortitude is moving you towards improvement. That in itself is a win! Allow others to have their input (that sort of thing can be valuable). But do not allow them to speak contradicting routes into your plans. You are wonderful because you are who you are. Our maps are good. We understand adjustment. We appreciate a co-pilot, but have little need for a backseat driver.

Filed Under: Turn Around Tuesday Tagged With: , ,