An Example from previous

So let's get into this example, with out dialog and we begin
with two anonymous.

Now we are supposing in advance that one is more liberal
and the other more conservative but it is not necessary to
know which is which.   Now both individuals are in the
same position both had motor vehicles that they have had
for sometime and both are unhappy because these vehicles
are not what they had been ( not so great anymore ) and
both are short of money to get these new vehicles.

Well, one decides that he will get a part time job to
afford this new car.  The second individual thinks, well
I really don't need a new car, I just want to drive a new
car and so he looks for a job with a taxi company that
uses new cars.  Now we don't have to decide who is
conservative and who is liberal, because as it turns out,
these two individuals are the previously introduced
Josh and Jocelyn and they are married.

Well, now we have an issue as to how this will be solved
and we can assume one of 6 possible solutions,

1)  they both get part time jobs
2)  they both go to work for cab companies,
      maybe the same, or maybe different.
3)  one gets part time job
4)  one goes to work for cab company
5)  one could do one and the other do different one
6)  no solution

Okay,  it doesn't matter what decision is actually
made, it only matters how Josh and Jocelyn get
along " after " the decision.

So to sum this up, moral compass, very helpful,
also necessary for sovereignty for various reasons.


   

Moral Compass and Soveriegnty

Well, this may be just an aside, but I was fascinated by this video,
of Paul Simon, in New York:   9 / 11 Sounds of Silence

as well as listening to these descriptions of a new film about
Martin Luther King, Jr.   :   King in the Wilderness

note: the link above is just a conversation about the film,
on Democracy Now and not the film itself.

But to the point,

it seems as some commenting on our current situation would
say, it seems we have ourselves in a real " pickle ". 

Difficult times.  The issue of moral compass seems to
have moved to the forefront, and that I would suggest
is similar to the arc of the Universe referred to by
Dr. King.

As I have mentioned before I believe we have a defacto
moral compass based on the notion that a correct moral
position is generated by the notion of being somewhere
between the opposition of liberal to conservative.

Unfortunately, I can't buy into that because that disturbs
my notion that a person is capable of being conversative
and / or liberal in the course of  a single day.  Now the
key notion here is that your perspective might change
but that does not affect the compass itself.  The compass
should always point in the right direction, but we
are capable of viewing the compass from different
directions for different reasons.  Second issue is of
course that within an individual the compass is always
evolving, ideally always pointing more toward justice.

The issue is how we resolve our various views and
our varying reading of our own moral compass.

So I wish to give some examples of this notion,
but I believe I will continue with examples in a later post.

Some items related to sovereignty

  I could not fail to be aware of the government closure
which has developed recently, kind of like a Ford Fiesta
crashing into a concrete barrier it's never a pretty sight.

I am always reminded at times like these of two special
quotes:

that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—
that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and 
that government of the people, by the people, for the people, 
shall not perish from the earth.


more context here:  Gettysburg Address

also this one:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a 
more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic 
Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the 
general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to 
ourselves and our Posterity,  ....

more here:  preamble

Sometimes these crashes motivate us to point fingers at
others.  I guess it is a normal reaction.  But honestly,
by the people,  I think, means all of the people, so who do
you point the finger at ?

Now, I belong to that group which is somewhat uncertain
about putting our shiny, or maybe not so shiny Ford Fiesta
back together and getting it on the road again,  but
I am pretty sure we need to do it together or even if it
does get back together, it will probably not be long
before we find ourselves back in the same situation.

Sovereignty, Democracy, Justice, and Chance

I should of started out with this post and used the above for the name of
the blog.  Well, you know. live and learn.

So Democracy or democracy, right away you can see there is a problem.
Big D or little d.

But I'd like to go immediately to Bob and Alice, but since they are
pretty much used by the physics community and they would
immediately be suspect for having one or more black hole devices or
at least parts, so we'll go with Jocelyn and Josh because they need
to go to a voting place.

Now they enter and they cast there ballots.   There are all kinds of
possibilities for what could happen when they exit, and if they
meet or perhaps knew each other somehow and they converse.

Well, I think one extremely fundamental notion of democracy how
ever you spell it is that no matter what they did in that voting
place, they can still get along and agree with each other on
a vast variety of subjects.

What does that mean?

In terms of sovereignty it mean you can have it.  In terms
of justice it means we can achieve it, and in terms of
chance, well we don't know what was on those ballots
from Jocelyn and Josh, and by my thinking we will
never know.

To sum up, it's about relationships.