Thursday, July 31, 2008
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
The Color Pink: Not Just a Wimpy Shade of Red
What's your favorite color? Mine used to be blue or green. Now I prefer red or something warmer and brighter than the cool colors. Often how well a color looks depends on the setting in which it is seen, or on other adjacent colors. Unlike most men, I like the color pink, but not as much as several other colors and not enough to include it in my purchases, as in clothing, tools, or cars. I'm inclined to believe that men who don't like pink are just insecure with their masculinity, but I might be wrong. Many people shy away from purple also. I wonder how pink ever became the property of females. Is there anything inherently different about pink that automatically designates it as a "female" color? I don't think so. Our association of pink as feminine is likely a learned attitude. Baby girls are identified by wearing pink and baby boys wear blue. But boys gradually disengage themselves from blue as they grow older, sharing it's former distinction with other colors, while many girls hang onto pink and make it a part of their "color"identity as women, perhaps more so than most other colors. Of course there are exceptions. Not all women like pink. I've heard some women express a keen dislike of pink.
What would it be like if people, as is the case with some mammals, could only see in black and white. Living in a colorful world enriches our lives. But what, if anything , are we missing by having the ability to see in color. Is the presence of color distracting us from some other, currently hidden, beauty that would also enrich our lives? How many times do we notice, not just black and white, but also the multitude of subtle shades in between those two opposites. If we lived in a black and white world would one shade of gray be identified as feminine and another as masculine? Would that indicate a greater skill in humans to distinguish the differences in tone, shadows, and shades of gray than we currently possess?
At my place of employment there are two brand new mountain bikes locked together on a table outside the snack room. They're prizes for a fund raising raffle. Both are the same size - 26 inches. Both have nearly alike frame designs and are build by the same company. Both have the same number of gears. There are identical small rectangular reflectors under the rear of each seat. Both have the name NEXT on the side of the frame. However the red one is designated as a boy's bike and the blue one as a girl's. Why? Perhaps the difference would be obvious to a bike connoisseur, but I don't see it. There are only three parts of a bicycle that come in frequent contact with the rider's body: the pedals, the seat, and the hand grips on the handle bar. In these two bikes the seats are identical and the pedals nearly alike. However the girl's bike has a wider hand grip, as if made for a larger hand. And why is the color red assigned to the boy's bike and blue to the girl's? Are women trying to take over another color and make it their own? Let's put a stop to it now. We'll let them keep pink. Pink's OK. It's more than just a wimpy shade of red, but not much more. It's really not THAT great. They can have it. But that's it. No more. The colors, like education, respect, wages, promotions, job opportunities, job descriptions, religious status, and other gifts, blessings, and opportunities in life should be equally available to both sexes..... and if I win the raffle, I promise to accept either bike with equal gratefulness.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Saturday, July 26, 2008
NOTICE
For those who may try to contact me, as of early this morning (7-26-08), I no longer have an e-mail account. I believe it has been stolen from me from someone who gained access to my password. If you receive an e-mail from my address keep in mind that it's NOT from me, since I no longer have access to my account. I'll let you know as soon as I either retrieve my old account, which may not be possible, or start a new one. Thank you.
Leonard Nolt
Leonard Nolt
Friday, July 25, 2008
Personality Quiz
Recently I was made aware of a personality quiz which can be found at www.blogthings.com/whatsyourpersonalitytypequiz/ I find tests or quizzes of any kind interesting, sometimes revealing, or more likely, affirming. The last few years I spent in college which wasn't very long ago despite my age (it was in the 1990s) I loved taking tests ,and because of that probably got higher grades than I deserved. However I think that many quizzes are rapidly put together with little scientific input, and no sense of responsibility or professionalism by the person or persons creating the quiz. This is definitely one of that kind. To demonstrate why I think this is a defective quiz, let's look at the questions.
I immediately see a problem with the fact that each of the forty questions has only two possible responses. Is it possible that only two responses can represent one hundred percent of the population? Not likely.
Question #1. You tend to:
- Act first - then think about what you did
- Think first and then act
The answer to that would depend on the situation. If someone needs CPR you hopefully would act first. If you're facing a tough question in an agebra final exam it might be wise to think first, before answering the question.
Question #2. Its Friday night and your friend just cancelled on you. You:
- Spend some time along instead
- Find new friends to hang out with
Again that would depend on how you were feeling about the cancelled "date." If you were really disappointed and the cancellation was not just a postponement, you might choose to watch TV or take a hot shower and go to bed. On the other hand if you would feel just as happy with another friend, you might choose that option.
Question #3 on whether you get your motivation from within yourself or from outside sources might also be situation specific. The same can be said for questions 11, 12, 15, 16, 21, 28, and 30. In each of these questions both choices could be an option depending on the situation, the degree of urgency, and the importance of the issue. In a few including 21 and 30 both choices could be utilized simultaneously, at least in some situations.
Question #6 is particularly revealing of the defectiveness of the quiz since it's easily possible for a person to have "a ton of friends, acquaintenances and people you know" and at the same time have "a few people who are very dear to you." In fact that probably is the situation for most people I know.
In only five of the questions was I able to confidently select one answer over the other. I prefer interacting in a one-on-one situation (#4); I'm more likely to remember a face than a name(#13); (although now that I'm getting older I'm conveniently forgetting faces also). I like to vary my route when traveling, either short or long distances, although when going home from work I'm more likely to vary my route if I'm walking the 5.5 miles home from work than if I'm driving. I think conflict is a normal part of relationships (#24) although unlike some people, I think conflict needs to be addressed, and dealt with, not ignored and left to simmer. I also like a lot of time to prepare for a trip (#31).
Concerning #7, I've never had a "group job interview" so I might be more nervous with that than an one-on-one interview, but that might simply be because I'm not as familiar with the experience, not necessarily an indication of any particular personality trait. I've had major oral exams in college that included a group of questioners and that went fine.
Most of the questions in this quiz have serious problems. For example #22 asks me if I would rather be a lawyer or a teacher. In what way are those two opposites, if that's what the questioner intended? Why not a lawyer or a plumber; a teacher or an astronaut, or perhaps a farmer or a surgeon? In #24 you can believe that confict in a normal part of relationships and still find it difficult to deal with. In #34 again it depends on the situation. If you're playing basketball you probably are not going to spend a lot of time, after getting the ball, deciding whether to shoot, pass, or dribble. If you snooze, you lose... or end up sitting on the bench. However if you're choosing which college to attend you'll probably take a lot of time making the choice.
The questions in this quiz have a phony ring to them. I feel like I'm being sold a cheap set of goods for an inflated price, or like I'm being taken advantage of, that is, told to take seriously information that has no credibility. For example, what's the answer to #39 for someone who doesn't have a desk, or someone who shares a desk at work with several other employees as I do, and many other people in health care do also.
It's my impression that whoever created this quiz is trying to simplify humans to the point of trivilizing and cheapening their lives and existence. I felt as if I was being manipulated, pigeon-holed into a space that didn't fit. I'd send this quiz straight to the shredder.
Leonard Nolt
I immediately see a problem with the fact that each of the forty questions has only two possible responses. Is it possible that only two responses can represent one hundred percent of the population? Not likely.
Question #1. You tend to:
- Act first - then think about what you did
- Think first and then act
The answer to that would depend on the situation. If someone needs CPR you hopefully would act first. If you're facing a tough question in an agebra final exam it might be wise to think first, before answering the question.
Question #2. Its Friday night and your friend just cancelled on you. You:
- Spend some time along instead
- Find new friends to hang out with
Again that would depend on how you were feeling about the cancelled "date." If you were really disappointed and the cancellation was not just a postponement, you might choose to watch TV or take a hot shower and go to bed. On the other hand if you would feel just as happy with another friend, you might choose that option.
Question #3 on whether you get your motivation from within yourself or from outside sources might also be situation specific. The same can be said for questions 11, 12, 15, 16, 21, 28, and 30. In each of these questions both choices could be an option depending on the situation, the degree of urgency, and the importance of the issue. In a few including 21 and 30 both choices could be utilized simultaneously, at least in some situations.
Question #6 is particularly revealing of the defectiveness of the quiz since it's easily possible for a person to have "a ton of friends, acquaintenances and people you know" and at the same time have "a few people who are very dear to you." In fact that probably is the situation for most people I know.
In only five of the questions was I able to confidently select one answer over the other. I prefer interacting in a one-on-one situation (#4); I'm more likely to remember a face than a name(#13); (although now that I'm getting older I'm conveniently forgetting faces also). I like to vary my route when traveling, either short or long distances, although when going home from work I'm more likely to vary my route if I'm walking the 5.5 miles home from work than if I'm driving. I think conflict is a normal part of relationships (#24) although unlike some people, I think conflict needs to be addressed, and dealt with, not ignored and left to simmer. I also like a lot of time to prepare for a trip (#31).
Concerning #7, I've never had a "group job interview" so I might be more nervous with that than an one-on-one interview, but that might simply be because I'm not as familiar with the experience, not necessarily an indication of any particular personality trait. I've had major oral exams in college that included a group of questioners and that went fine.
Most of the questions in this quiz have serious problems. For example #22 asks me if I would rather be a lawyer or a teacher. In what way are those two opposites, if that's what the questioner intended? Why not a lawyer or a plumber; a teacher or an astronaut, or perhaps a farmer or a surgeon? In #24 you can believe that confict in a normal part of relationships and still find it difficult to deal with. In #34 again it depends on the situation. If you're playing basketball you probably are not going to spend a lot of time, after getting the ball, deciding whether to shoot, pass, or dribble. If you snooze, you lose... or end up sitting on the bench. However if you're choosing which college to attend you'll probably take a lot of time making the choice.
The questions in this quiz have a phony ring to them. I feel like I'm being sold a cheap set of goods for an inflated price, or like I'm being taken advantage of, that is, told to take seriously information that has no credibility. For example, what's the answer to #39 for someone who doesn't have a desk, or someone who shares a desk at work with several other employees as I do, and many other people in health care do also.
It's my impression that whoever created this quiz is trying to simplify humans to the point of trivilizing and cheapening their lives and existence. I felt as if I was being manipulated, pigeon-holed into a space that didn't fit. I'd send this quiz straight to the shredder.
Leonard Nolt
Thursday, July 24, 2008
"But to write a story is to inch backward and forward along a series of planks you are canterlevering out into the darkness, plank by plank, inch by inch, and the best you can hope is that each day you find yourself a little farther out over the abyss."
Anthony Doerr in "Four Seasons in Rome," Page 98
Although "Four Seasons in Rome" is non-fiction, Doerr, in this quote, is talking
about the art of writing fiction. However I think this quote also applies to
those who may be writing "risky" non-fiction, as in telling the story or stories
of difficult or troubling experiences in their lives.
Anthony Doerr in "Four Seasons in Rome," Page 98
Although "Four Seasons in Rome" is non-fiction, Doerr, in this quote, is talking
about the art of writing fiction. However I think this quote also applies to
those who may be writing "risky" non-fiction, as in telling the story or stories
of difficult or troubling experiences in their lives.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Saturday, July 19, 2008
A Letter from the Past (that, unfortunately, applies to the present)
January 5, 2002
Reader's View
The Idaho Statesman
Box 40
Boise, ID 83707
Editor;
The US attack of Afghanistan is an act of terrorism. The events of the past four months have proven that Osama bin Laden and George W. Bush are alike, in that both are willing to threaten and kill thousands of innocent civilians for a political cause, which you will find, if you check a dictionary, is one of the definitions of a terrorist.
What does it mean when the United States, a country with 278 million people, with an average life expectancy of 77 years and per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of $36,200, launches a military attack on Afghanistan, a country of 27 million people with an average life expectancy of 46 years and per capita GDP of $800? The answer is obvious, It's just the latest in a long history of rich and militarily powerful countries beating up on poor, weak countries.
Forty-two pecent of the people of Afghanistan are under the age of fifteen, so any bombing campaign against Afghanistan is primarily an attack on teenagers and children. The Afghan civilian death toll from the US attack, which includes many children, now exceeds the number of Americans killed by terrorists on September 11.
Recently I heard someone calling US soldiers fighting in Afghanistan, heroes. What's so heroic about leaving your home and traveling thousands of miles to another country to shed someone else's blood? What's so heroic about dropping bombs on people from 20,000 feet with no regard for individual guilt or innonence, and no due process of law? It's a shame that so many Americans have so little respect for the homes, neighborhoods, and homelands of other people that they are willing to drop bombs on them. The US attack on Afghanistan fits as easily into the definition of terrorism, as the Sept. 11 attack on the US.
Lopsided reports coming from our right-wing news media sound like they originate in the Pentagon. Defense Sec. Rumsfeld expresses regret about the death of a US soldier, but says nothing about the five-year-old daughter of Ramsir, a Tajik mother, who is psychologically damaged after seeing three of her playmates killed by US bombs at a park in Kabul. He expresses regret for Marines killed in a plane crash, but says nothing about the forty fresh civilian graves in Kama Ado, a village destroyed by the bombing campaign. "We mourn each civilian death, " Rumsfeld lied at a Pentagon briefing in December, but the bombing continues. Those who truly regret some misbehavior, change their behavior. Incomplete and dishonest Pentagon and White House reports are a far greater threat to our freedoms than that posed by any terrorist orgainzation.
In Iraq thousands of children have been dying each month for over ten years as a result of the terrorism of US sanctions. In Gaza, Israeli soldiers, funded by US taxpayers, are murdering Palestinian children for sport. Unfortunately our incompetent president has yet to take the first and most important step necessary to prevent future attacks on Americans. If we want to avoid being the target of terrorists in the future, the first thing we much do is quit terrorizing other countries.
"War on Terror!" The phony caption glares at us from TV screens and printed news media so frequently that we might miss the contradiction. Not all terrorism is war, but every war terrorizes one group of people or another. War has been the chief source of terrorism throughout human history. Trying to stop terrorism by going to war is like trying to extinguish a fire by dousing it with gasoline. War promotes terrorism,. War is terrorism.
Sincerely,
Leonard Nolt
Reader's View
The Idaho Statesman
Box 40
Boise, ID 83707
Editor;
The US attack of Afghanistan is an act of terrorism. The events of the past four months have proven that Osama bin Laden and George W. Bush are alike, in that both are willing to threaten and kill thousands of innocent civilians for a political cause, which you will find, if you check a dictionary, is one of the definitions of a terrorist.
What does it mean when the United States, a country with 278 million people, with an average life expectancy of 77 years and per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of $36,200, launches a military attack on Afghanistan, a country of 27 million people with an average life expectancy of 46 years and per capita GDP of $800? The answer is obvious, It's just the latest in a long history of rich and militarily powerful countries beating up on poor, weak countries.
Forty-two pecent of the people of Afghanistan are under the age of fifteen, so any bombing campaign against Afghanistan is primarily an attack on teenagers and children. The Afghan civilian death toll from the US attack, which includes many children, now exceeds the number of Americans killed by terrorists on September 11.
Recently I heard someone calling US soldiers fighting in Afghanistan, heroes. What's so heroic about leaving your home and traveling thousands of miles to another country to shed someone else's blood? What's so heroic about dropping bombs on people from 20,000 feet with no regard for individual guilt or innonence, and no due process of law? It's a shame that so many Americans have so little respect for the homes, neighborhoods, and homelands of other people that they are willing to drop bombs on them. The US attack on Afghanistan fits as easily into the definition of terrorism, as the Sept. 11 attack on the US.
Lopsided reports coming from our right-wing news media sound like they originate in the Pentagon. Defense Sec. Rumsfeld expresses regret about the death of a US soldier, but says nothing about the five-year-old daughter of Ramsir, a Tajik mother, who is psychologically damaged after seeing three of her playmates killed by US bombs at a park in Kabul. He expresses regret for Marines killed in a plane crash, but says nothing about the forty fresh civilian graves in Kama Ado, a village destroyed by the bombing campaign. "We mourn each civilian death, " Rumsfeld lied at a Pentagon briefing in December, but the bombing continues. Those who truly regret some misbehavior, change their behavior. Incomplete and dishonest Pentagon and White House reports are a far greater threat to our freedoms than that posed by any terrorist orgainzation.
In Iraq thousands of children have been dying each month for over ten years as a result of the terrorism of US sanctions. In Gaza, Israeli soldiers, funded by US taxpayers, are murdering Palestinian children for sport. Unfortunately our incompetent president has yet to take the first and most important step necessary to prevent future attacks on Americans. If we want to avoid being the target of terrorists in the future, the first thing we much do is quit terrorizing other countries.
"War on Terror!" The phony caption glares at us from TV screens and printed news media so frequently that we might miss the contradiction. Not all terrorism is war, but every war terrorizes one group of people or another. War has been the chief source of terrorism throughout human history. Trying to stop terrorism by going to war is like trying to extinguish a fire by dousing it with gasoline. War promotes terrorism,. War is terrorism.
Sincerely,
Leonard Nolt
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
For a Good Laugh - Take a Hike
I took the five pictures below on my approximately six mile walk home from work this morning through several Boise neighborhoods, strolling from the east part of the North End to the northwest part of Boise where I live. I'm always amazed at the interesting and often funny things I notice when I'm walking, things I would miss if I drove.
I've been a regular runner since I was a junior in high school and I recall several years ago, after running the same route regularly for many years, walking the course one day and being surprised at the things I noticed which I never saw before, all because I was running instead of walking, and it wasn't because I was such a fast runner. It's just that slowing down is a rewarding and an eye-opening experience.
Don't worry about the passengers in the plane with its tail sticking out of the roof of the house just west of 36th St. It's been there for decades so I'm sure they've been extricated! The "attack frog" warning sign and the poster of the smiling frog were NOT at the same house.
One of the most frequently over-looked sources of humor in our lives are the signs or messages we see posted along roads, trails, on mailboxes, in yards, on fences, t-shirts, and even "bumper" stickers on cars, bicycles, and scooters. It's an inexpensive, but very vibrant, source of humor that challenges anything on comedy tv or stage. But sometimes we have to slow down to notice them.
Traveling by foot instead of using a motorized vehicle makes its possible for people to observe, appreciate, and perhaps even better understand their hometown and its neighborhoods. These five photos are just a small sample of what I saw during the 90 minute walk home. Not illustrated were the seven or eight cats lounging on porches in doorways or yards cautiously scrutinzing me as I walked by; the unusual and fascinating irrigation system in one yard in the North End; and dangling from a couple trees along 6th street on small pieces of simple but attractively designed cardboard, somewhat like broadsides, several of the articles of impeachment addressing the decisions made by Pres. George W. Bush!
I've been a regular runner since I was a junior in high school and I recall several years ago, after running the same route regularly for many years, walking the course one day and being surprised at the things I noticed which I never saw before, all because I was running instead of walking, and it wasn't because I was such a fast runner. It's just that slowing down is a rewarding and an eye-opening experience.
Don't worry about the passengers in the plane with its tail sticking out of the roof of the house just west of 36th St. It's been there for decades so I'm sure they've been extricated! The "attack frog" warning sign and the poster of the smiling frog were NOT at the same house.
One of the most frequently over-looked sources of humor in our lives are the signs or messages we see posted along roads, trails, on mailboxes, in yards, on fences, t-shirts, and even "bumper" stickers on cars, bicycles, and scooters. It's an inexpensive, but very vibrant, source of humor that challenges anything on comedy tv or stage. But sometimes we have to slow down to notice them.
Traveling by foot instead of using a motorized vehicle makes its possible for people to observe, appreciate, and perhaps even better understand their hometown and its neighborhoods. These five photos are just a small sample of what I saw during the 90 minute walk home. Not illustrated were the seven or eight cats lounging on porches in doorways or yards cautiously scrutinzing me as I walked by; the unusual and fascinating irrigation system in one yard in the North End; and dangling from a couple trees along 6th street on small pieces of simple but attractively designed cardboard, somewhat like broadsides, several of the articles of impeachment addressing the decisions made by Pres. George W. Bush!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
