My Birthday

Today I am 43 years and one day old. Yesterday was my birthday (which I share with FDR, Dick Cheney, and Christian Bale... quite an interesting mix) and it will go down as one of my best. Why? Well, for one thing, I think more people remembered than had in a long, long time. I have always had this strange fear of dying and no one outside of my immediate family caring. But, at least if I "shuffled off this mortal coil" today, I do think some people will remember me (in fact, my mother, as one of our family traditions, called me to tell me she knew exactly where I was 43 years ago). And my wonderful partner, he was so good to me (it was exactly seven years ago on my birthday that we met... you know you have found a good'n when they are willing to stand outside to watch after a total stranger as he tried to qualify for the vomit olympics). He bought opera tickets, got me some nice clothes, took me to dinner (Ohbi Sushi, the care they put into their sushi is amazing) and just doted on me the entire evening.

Ah, 43... given that the average life expectancy in the U. S. is about 78 years I am definitely into "middle age". Some days I feel it. This morning I am thinking of the words of one of my favorite poets, T. S. Elliot (a fellow Missourian):
...
But though I have wept and fasted, wept and prayed,
Though I have seen my head (grown slightly bald) brought in upon a platter,
I am no prophet—and here’s no great matter;
I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker,
And I have seen the eternal Footman hold my coat, and snicker,
And in short, I was afraid.
...
No! I am not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be;
Am an attendant lord, one that will do
To swell a progress, start a scene or two,
Advise the prince; no doubt, an easy tool,
Deferential, glad to be of use,
Politic, cautious, and meticulous;
Full of high sentence, but a bit obtuse;
At times, indeed, almost ridiculous—
Almost, at times, the Fool.

I grow old … I grow old …
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach?
I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each.
I do not think that they will sing to me...
(For you Philistines who don't know the poem you can read the whole thing here. *grin*)

And so, here in my middle age, I have not achieved greatness as the world considers greatness. But so what? I'm happy. I have friends. Yes, most of my life has been spent in a "supporting role", but where would the supposedly great be without their support? At times almost ridiculous? Yep, c'est moi, but ridiculous to whom and how? Some people say I am ridiculous because I have no desire to step on the necks of people to advance myself. Others because I "merely" seek a life of peace, joy, contentment, and love and do not chase after the material. I desire a "simple life", and as the great Hobbit philosopher Bilbo Baggins says "It is no bad thing, to celebrate a simple life". And that is what happened yesterday. My love to all of you who helped me in doing this, you will never know how much it meant to me.

I think I'm Turning Japanese

I've always enjoyed anime, there is just something about the way the stories tell themselves on the screen that is so far beyond much of what we produce here. Don't get me wrong, I generally like Disney and Pixar (and enjoyed the recent film Hoodwinked), but while technically better than much of the Japanese productions, the stories just don't even come close. In reading the book Anime Explosion I have a greater feeling why and a deeper appreciation for a culture which I once thought alien but is actually much closer to how I was brought up in rural Missouri. In a chapter titled "The Social Web and the Lone Wolf", Drazen discusses the complex web of relationships important to each and every Japanese citizen including:

• Togetherness (primarily because of geography) leading to a person's identity coming from being a part of certain groups.
• The importance of the family.
• The formula of life is summed up in the words on (obligation) and giri (honor).
• The formalization of politeness and codes of respect.
• Social propriety (imagine, a people who can insult without immediately stooping to the use of "four letter" words).

Many of these same points were reinforced in my own upbringing. My parents taught me the importance of family and what it really means to be a part of a family, to keep the promises I make, to always say please and thank you, to address my elders as Mr. and Mrs. or Miss, to say things like "Yes sir" and "No ma'am", and to "bridle my tongue" and "watch my language".

Another difference that adds to my enjoyment of anime is the sense of "myth" they bring. Most anime have broad stories and complex characters. In Anime Explosion Drazen details how many of the anime we see have elements of ancient folktales and moral lessons that are used to provide a sense of continuity to the culture (his discussion of "cultural shorthand" is quite interesting and helped explain some things I had not understood until now). Both Lewis and Tolkien lamented the sense of passing of the idea of myth in their time (and it was one of the reasons that Tolkien created his novels of Middle Earth). My partner and I have had this discussion several times (though he prefers the word "romance" to "myth" the concepts he espouses are the same). Americans (and to some degree the set of first world countries) seem to be trading their "souls" for the more sterile world of technology and "cowboy capitalism" (as I have said before, I believe in free markets and am a bit of a libertarian Republican, but what I see today isn't quite what Smith et. al. had in mind). Our lives seem to be more sterile, more functionally oriented, career oriented, individual, and less rich and interesting than in the past. I think that is at least in part why the Lord of the Rings movie trilogy and recent Chronicles of Narnia have struck such a cord, that when presented with those concepts of myth/romance in a deep and well-written manner we sense a little of what is missing in our lives and are drawn to it. Now, if we can only make sure our children can read at least well enough to enjoy the "original" version (i.e. text), we may as a civilization still have a chance.

Today has been a good day

Ah, a nice day today. Got up early to check the status of a system that was acting up and experienced some serious changes last night to find that the group had met their SLA for the first time in three weeks. Went to the gym, had a good workout, came home with a nice little post-workout buzz. My friend Chris (and ignore his top 10 movie list, he's recently been to Amsterdam for goodness sake) had sent out several various of the film "Brokeback Mountain" ranging from the disgusting to the hilarious (like this one. Met my friend Andrew for lunch at Callahan's, spent the afternoon closing tickets and running performance reports. Got home and found my partner there and we talked about going to see the Nomadic Museum (great pix of the exhibit here) in Santa Monica. Just before he went out to a coworker's going away party he asked me about my on-call schedule and I told him it didn't start until Monday. He looked at me funny and said "So you could have gone to the opera this weekend." I looked back at him even more funny. He then said "Well, I guess I can give you your birthday present now" and produced two tickets for the upcoming Barber of Saville the week after next! Awesome seats at the opera with my sweetie. What a great way to end the day.

Random Thoughts

My favorite restaurant in San Diego is changing hands. Since we discovered it just after moving here about six years ago Thee Bungalow has been our favorite spot for special occasions. Today I received an email saying that ownership is changing hands. Of course we'll give it a try after the transition, but when you have a "special place" you always have to worry a little. We wish Ed and Marla all the best in their new endevours and will continue to drop into their other local establishment (3rd Corner) and look forward to the opening of "Nick's at the Beach" in Ocean Beach.

My friend Chris is working in Europe for the next several weeks (ditched me just as Battlestar Galactica was heating up again to go to Europe... imagine that). Found this link for you Chris just in case you have a little downtime. Get back soon, I need my BSG fix (and to spend time with a good friend).

Tonight was downtime, I was naughty and didn't study, just read two newspapers and another chapter in "The Horse and His Boy". I think I need more nights like this. No math, no science, no logic (at least in the newspapers), just a little "me" time.

My professional development plan for 2006

Geeze, I just wrote it down and it's pretty ugly:

Upgrade Oracle perfessional certification to 10g by April.
Gain my CompTIA Project+ certification by July.
Complete the financial core of my MBA program by December (Economics, Finance, Accounting, leaving just the IT courses for next year to complete the program).

Add to that my personal enrichment goals:

Complete final class in French (Spring semester).
Complete History of Philosophy sequence (Contemporary Philosophy, Fall semester).
Complete review of Symbolic Logic and Set Theory by December.

Wednesdays!

One of my favorite benefits with my current employer is my manager allowing people in our group to telecommute one day each week. My day is Wednesday, which I think is one of my most productive days. I started around 8:30am and finished my last task at around 8pm, closed several help desk requests and change requests, attended a couple of phone conferences, and performed analysis on several database systems. Only after completing the tasks did I feel the least bit fatigued, but nothing like the days when I go into work.

While working at home I love to have movies playing in the background. Today was quite rich and varied: Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan, Underworld (the sequal is out and I missed the first one), and Enron: the Smartest Guys in the Room. The first two were fun, the last one was unnerving. Having lived in California during the Enron era I thought I was well acquainted with what happened, but the documentary showed me how much deeper the dirt went. What I cannot understand is how things could have gotten that bad. I guess that is why I will never be rich (as many peole consider the term), I am just not greedy enough. My parents ran a small business and never once did they do anything that would knowingly hurt anyone and often put themselves in financial straights trying to help those could not help themselves. They are my model on how a good person will be in business (returning to my constantly recurring theme of virtue ethics, they are the people who model virtue for me). The question of legality wasn't broad enough, but the questions "Is it wrong?" and "Are we helping people?" were what guided them. Are such concepts really that foreign to corporate management? I listened to a discussion this morning about Ford and their announced "restructuring" (layoffs). One of the panelists said to the effect thaf you ask the head of a Japanese auto maker what their goal was they would say something like 'creating a better experience for our customer', but if you asked the same question to the head of an American manufacturer they would say 'increasing the value of our stock'. Totally different perspective, yet it appears that soom Toyota will be the largest manufacturer of cars and trucks in the U. S. Listen Here . Is making money and collecting things what makes a life worth living in 21st century America? Is the only goal of business to raise the price of stock doing whatever is legal (I'll give most company "leaders" the benefit of the doubt of being at least consequentialists and that fear of impoverishment and prison will keep the more egregious of violations at bay)? Aren't our businesses smart and innovative enough to deal with market valuation in ways beyond simply laying off thousands of workers? Is George Carlin right is saying that business ethics is an oxymoron? When I started my MBA I found it a little funny that business ethics was a required class at my school and an internet search showed that most graduate business schools either require it or claim to weave ethical issues into all of their classes, most of the leaders of the Enrons, WorldComs, etc, have graduate degrees in business and thus must have had this same training. Not encouraging. If you are at all interested, a good site to examine is the Ethics Toolbox (and if you take the test and want to see how you compare with me, I am a C4 /J5).

A little introspection (hope it's not too boring)

I've often feel like I have never fit in. I was brought up in a very conservative, religious part of the country but I am gay and known so for quite a long time (admitting it took a while, but it was always there). I'm gay, but I have never voted Democrat in my life, haven't seen an Oscar, Emmy, or Tony award show, love my family and don't get drag. I live in California, but I smoke (and not just smoke, but smoke cigars *shudder*). I work in the technology arena, but I am educated and not simply trained (and in fact I prefer a classical education to simple technical training as a college endeavor). Lately I have been thinking about another area in which I am not part of the mainstream and that is my ethics. For those of you who didn't sleep through freshman philosophy in college you will recall there are three principle approaches to normative ethics:consequentialism where it's the results that count, deontology where doing one's duty is the important thing, and the minority position of virtue ethics, where character is king. Of the three, I find myself squarely (and with much personal difficulty) in the virtue camp. My parents would never have known it but they were key in this part of my muddled mess and I am thankful for it. In a nutshell, virtue ethics isn't focused on what you do or why you do it, but in what kind of person you are. Since a virtuous person performs the virtues, you kind of get the other two as a side affect. My parents, by being two of the most virtuous people I know, didn't load me down with rules and regulations but modeled... no, lived, the kind of life they thought was worth living. Plato began and Aristotle refined the Western understanding of what we call virtue ethics making one "commandment" to find someone that is virtuous, who fills his or her life with good things, loves "the good", and then study them, imitate them, make what they do become a part of you (character building). My parents (and to a lesser extent my extended family) did that for me. Unfortunately I haven't always been a good student, so rather than the plot of my moral life looking like y=x^2 (or even y=x) probably looks more like a graph of the Dow. My partner is another good moral guide, plugging in some of the holes that my parents couldn't. My parents often remind me that I too have a duty to fulfill as a guide. I have two wonderful nephews. My mother tends to remind me that I need to leave "big shoes" for them to fill. I think Aristotle would like that advice, and I think I need to work a little harder.

Headache

*sigh* I just finished Anscombe's Three Philosophers. I enjoyed the sections on Aristotle and Aquinas, but Frege gave me a headache. If you don't know Frege, he was a logician's logician. If are REALLY curious you can find some information about his work here (Frege's Logic). After struggling through the section (which was a small overview) I had a headache, immediately followed by sadness. It dawned on me that I had not done any formal work in mathematics in 14 years (and my only formal logic class was as a sophomore in the early '80s)! I had spend a decade taking math classes, but after the completion of my last class in the doctoral program, I was essentially done (I went into information technology as a career). So, in a mini-midlife-crisis mode I have vowed to relearn at least some of what I have forgotten. My start... formal logic and set theory... now where the heck did I put those books?

The answer, Mr. (Rodney) King, is no.

It's only 11:15am and already it's been a long day, so before I head out to bask in the southern California sun here's a brief statement for you. Gays... how funny. For all the talk of "community", "family", and the need to come together against all the supposed oppression we're still our own biggest enemy. Look at these two news articles: First we have Black clergy, gay leaders hold summit (Summit), where the gay community is once again trying to convince black clergy that the "oppression" faced by gays is equivalent to that faced by blacks. Now take a look at what happens in the gay Mecca (supposedly the place where all gays should be able to come and feel welcome) sure doesn't live up that reputation according to Gay bar racial fight settles in San Francisco (Gay bar racial fight). Why can't we just admit that we are a diverse group of people whith different values, different outlooks, different likes and dislikes? Sorry, there really is no "gay agenda"... just as (sadly) there is no open, embracing gay community that is accepting of all people.

Who will make the decisions?

After work, with the partner away at class, it was time to read the news. My trusty Yahoo ™ News brought me two seemingly unrelated stories, but together they made me think (and have a little sense of fear for the future). The titles of the stories were Study: Most College Students Lack Skills (Read) and Vatican Says “Intelligent Design” Is Not Science (Read). How do they relate and what implications do I draw from them you may ask? Ah, welcome to my world.

Let's begin with something easy. Simply put, proponents of Intelligent Design (ID) say that what they are proposing is a valid scientific theory. Opponents ("Darwinists" to use ID terminology) say that ID is simply creation science in a different tutu and is religion, not science. Now do you see how the articles tie together? Still fuzzy, huh? Here's another hint: Quick, define science. Define religion. Sounds simple doesn't it? Be careful. To those of you who may have read Plato, you know that simple questions are often the hardest to answer. That is the case here. I can't give you full classes in the philosophy of science and the philosophy of religion, but I will give you a sample of some of the complexity involved in this debate.

Let's start with science. Science comes from the Latin word for "knowledge". This doesn't help much because now we would have to define knowledge, figure out what separates knowledge from belief (the issue of warrant), etc. For an online definition you can check out Merriam-Webster (Science). From this definition we get phrases like "something that may be studied or learned" and "knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method", but neither of these discredit ID as "science" (and if you got any portion of the dictionary definition in your attempt, congratulations, you probably out performed the majority of college students). The big debate occurs because there is a whole body of study about what science is (and even that body is not conclusive). Most people who study the philosophy of science will generally agree that whatever science is, it generates theories that will have the following characteristics:

• It is guided by natural law (it is based upon the way nature works).
• It has to have expanatory powers (should tell you how nature works and has some predictive power).
• It can be tested (subject to basic empiricism).
• It's conclusions are open to possible future revision (its conclusions are tentative).
• It is falsifiable (that is, has the potential in being proven wrong, thanks Prof. Popper).

*Whew* This means that whatever the standard formal statement of ID theory is, it must meet at least these five criteria to be called science. The question is, does it? Proponents say yes (or at least they say it meets the criteria at least as well as Darwinism does), while opponents say it doesn't (though I have yet to read a committed evolutionist's comparison of how well evolutionary theory as commonly taught stands up to such a definition of "science").

Now let's take the other side. Evolutionists say that ID is simply an attempt to get religion into the public schools by fundamentalists (and honestly, I have seen more fallacies commited by proponents of evolution: ad hominem attacks, appeal to ridicule, genetic fallacy, slippery slope, and guilt by association, than I care to think about) while ID advocates say that evolution itself acts more like a religion than ID. So, who is right? Well, we need a definiton of religion. Again, Merriam-Webster comes to the rescue as a start (Religion) and we see phrases such as "service and worship of a God or the supernatural" and "a commitment or devotion to religious faith". Now neither of these sound like ID or evolution so are both sides wrong? Again, alot depends on the definitions of things like "God" and "faith". But since there are philosophers who specialize in the study of religion, how would they define religion? *Ahem* If you thought "science" was complicated, try religion. Most definitions contain at least one deficiency and requires you to know alot about the different belief systems often classified as a religion. Philosopher Ninian Smart in The World's Religions brings no less than seven dimensions in trying to create an operational definition of religion (including a ritualistic dimension, an experiential dimension, a narrative or mythic dimension, a doctrinal or philosophic dimension, etc). Then, just as he has convinced you that it looks pretty good, Professor Smart shows how some secular worldviews can STILL meet the criteria. So it looks like on this side of the argument it is possible that both ID and evolution may meet Professor Smart's description of religion!

Okay, figured out how the articles tie together? Then let me tell you. What we have seen is that to make decisions (from personal to those of national importance) it takes knowledge and skill. If you don't know something you at least need the skills necessary to find out the details. You need to know how to ask questions and then how to set about answering those questions. Is ID (or, for the other side, evolution) science or religion? Is abortion the taking of a human life? Is the death penalty "wrong" (and for those who are Christian does the Bible say "Thou shalt not kill" or "Thou shalt not murder")? The article about the skills of college students found them, our "best and brightest", having difficulty with "analyzing news stories and other prose, understanding documents and having math skills needed for checkbooks or restaurant tips". At least they appeared to be okay at "intermediate tasks"... like finding a location on a map (is it just me, or has our bar been lowered a bit since I was an undergraduate in the early '80s?). Our next generation of leaders, our judges, our thinkers, our defenders of freedom... *sigh* Let's hope things change.

I'm not a protectionist, but...

Ever have one of those days where there seems to be a recurring theme? I experienced it today with regards to today's topic. Last night I finished reading Outsourcing America by Ron and Anil Hira. This morning I took the newly arrived U. S. News and World Report (23-Jan-2006) with me to the gym and while on the elliptical machine read Coming and Going, an article by Richard Newman on the current state of “offshoring” (outsourcing has become more complex in meaning with “offshoring” for the U. S. being the outsourcing of jobs to countries that are not in the northern hemisphere). Over breakfast I read Ephraim Schwartz’s article in InfoWorld (16-Jan-2006 so yeah, I am a little slow getting through the dozen or so magazines that arrive weekly) titled Outsourcing the Network on how the future will probably be individual companies giving up control over their networks and moving towards a service model. While the last article isn’t quite on the same topic as the first two works it does follow the theme of changes in how American’s work in the new century. Before I get too far, let me be up front with my politics; I am a registered Republican and would classify myself as being center-right (though I think I am more of a classical liberal – Adams, Locke, Hayek, Friedman are my economic and political thought-parents, but calling myself a classical liberal confuses people and God forbid anyone confusing my convictions with those of Teddy Kennedy!). But I am afraid I find myself parting company with my fellow political pachyderms on the issue of outsourcing with respect to the flow of jobs overseas (henceforth called “offshoring”).

N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors, gives us the modern take on offshoring in the 2004 Economic Report of the President (Read) in which it states that outsourcing gains "that take place over the Internet or telephone lines are no different than the gains from trade in physical goods transported by ship or plane… When a good or service is produced at lower cost in another country, it makes sense to import it rather than to produce it domestically." The idea is that if we utilize the “global supply chain” (the favorite phrase of an associate working on his MBA) we can shift low-level work overseas where it can be done cheaper, freeing up Americans to do higher-level work or shift to new demands in the economy. In many ways the theory sounds good (but then again most do while still on paper). Labor intensive, redundant, lower-skill jobs are done by someone else while we, being freed from mundane tasks, move up the intellectual / innovative / entrepreneurial chain. These statements sound good… as long as you don’t allow people to ask too many questions, and questions do need to be asked. While I am not an expert on international trade or macroeconomics (why these topics are just touched upon in my own MBA classes), I do think that people who really believe chasing the lowest price always in the best interest of the country should answer, openly and honestly, at least the following questions:

• If we are to shift a huge number of workers, to what are they supposed to shift? The answer used to be information technology, but guess which sector is currently being hit the hardest with offshoring! It’s one thing to say there is something out there, it’s another thing to say what it is.


• Okay, suppose we think it is biotechnology or nanotechnology or even yet some facet of IT. How long does it take to retrain from any other field into one of these? We have many different ways to get into IT (you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a college or institute that doesn’t offer some type of training in some sector of IT but remember that you have to try to find one that is not moving offshore soon). Biotechnology is a bit more specialized and not many colleges have actual biotechnology programs (biology and chemistry are close, but there are some skills beyond traditional bio and chem. programs that are need for a biotech career). Nanotechnology is still in its infancy but too will require special skills that are not commonly available in your typical college offering. So if you are lucky, perhaps a year of training (an IT-to-IT shift will support this timeframe), but suppose it is a field rather far off from your current specialization (say call center support for insurance to biotechnology), then what?


• Alright, let’s take even the relatively short one year timeframe as our model. How do you live for a year without pay? Most companies no longer provide realistic severance packages or real support once you have been turned out. If you have savings or some equity in a home you may be okay, but you will significantly deplete your resources. And suppose you have a family to support, how will you do this as well as afford to attend college or a training program? Let’s face it, in most circumstances unemployment doesn’t cover rent much less what it takes to at least survive a year or more. Now, you should be planning for retirement, putting money away for the time when you will no longer work, but having that time happen when you are 40 rather than 70 provides quite a shock.


• Okay, so I get retrained. I had 10 years of experience in position X, so where do I start in position Y? Let’s say I was a Java programmer that was let go after eight years of experience. Seeing the reports and keeping track of what happens on sites such as Offshoring I decide that I need to go into nursing (not a bad move actually). I don’t being my new career as a nurse with eight years experience, so I start at the bottom of the pay scale! I go from $80K per year to about $45K. Think of the effects both at the personal level as well as the macroeconomic level (less income means less income tax paid to the government, less disposable income to drive the private economic engine, etc).

I could go on, but you get the gist. Now I am all for the free market, but I disagree with Milton Friedman’s statement "there is one and only one social responsibility of business–to use it resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud." (Sometime I will write on my disagreement, one free market man to another). What upsets me most in this is that politicians (I can’t even use the term political leaders anymore, they don’t deserve to be called that) have bought into the theory without thinking of the consequences. These actions involve people, not just theories to be debated or statistics moved around on a spreadsheet. Democrats like to speak this way, but they are mired in their own bog of protectionism (both economic and social). The brand of Republicanism I was brought of with understood this, but it seems our current crop has confused being pro-big business with being pro-free market. I’ve got news for you: it isn’t, and you should know better.