A Scientist’s Doubt Defines the Beginning

The difference between a skeptic and a scientist is that while they both doubt, a skeptic's doubt defines her end and is her ceiling while a scientist’s doubt defines her beginning and is a trampoline to greater understanding.

I was a skeptic in my youth and it limited me. I have been a scientist for many years and it has broadened my vision. I sometimes wonder where my intellect could have taken me had I made that transition in my youth.

Hold onto your virtues, but do so as a scientist, not a skeptic. Our country has too many skeptics at this time and it will limit us. Be a virtuous scientist and let it define the beginning of your journey and not the end of your vision.

Loren M. Lambert February 4, 2016 ©.

On Populism

The interesting thing is, both the entrepreneurial moguls and the angry displaced American worker are seeking access to advantages that, if gained, have the potential of guiding us into tyranny.

I tend to gravitate towards the more progressive spectrum of the political divide because what I see in my own practice is that not only are the substantive rules of law being corrupted to serve the elite and very wealthy, but the procedural rules are being changed in manners that also tip the balance of power towards the very wealthy. I see this in a case I am trying in court at this very moment in which our corporate bankruptcy and business entity laws have allowed entrepreneurs to reap all the benefits of their investments without ever having to suffer any of the consequences of their bad decisions, nor their malicious and criminally motivated ones.

This whole phenomenon is made exponentially worse when these businesses can take both their ill-gotten and legitimate gains to further corrupt the political system by bankrolling those who would further bend the rules in their favor and keep them from suffering the consequences of their decisions.

Yet, it will be in an even uglier sight if the populist movement is so successful that it degrades into battles against certain religions, certain immigrants, and certain areas of the country. Such battles and depravity are inevitable unless the ruling class and elite are wise enough to relinquish their corporate socialism and their grip upon their privileged legal status and are required to bear their proportionate share of the burden and to suffer the consequences of both their bad and malicious decisions. They, like all, should rise based on merit alone. That isn’t what is happening today.

I understand and have affinity towards many of the ideas espoused by both Mr. Sanders and Mr. Trump. But intent matters, diplomacy matters, civility matters, practicability matters, economics matter and the heart of the leader pursuing those goals matters.

Loren M. Lambert February 4, 2016 ©.

Ancestors and Modernity

The question isn’t necessarily how our ancestors centuries ago lived like our imaginations envision they lived- as beautiful, active, vigorous souls, unburdened by the excesses of modernity.

The more interesting question is: if you took a spattering of those ancient ancestors and you plunked them down into our modern existence, then how would they live and why?

I suspect that they would have the same challenges that we have now because while the individual must have liberty and freedom for self-direction, the fabric of our society must be formed and shaped to allow us to achieve our best natures.

Without both interests being fully honored, we will not reach the perfection that is possible and within reach.
Loren M Lambert © February 13, 2016

The Power of Apologies

According to most Christians, the only person who is a good candidate for never having needed to apologize, was Jesus Christ and even he asked his followers to forgive his Roman executioners. So when did it become a sign of weakness to apologize for mistakes or lapses in judgment? If it’s not a sign of weakness for individuals to do so, why is it a sign of weakness for nations to do the same? Apologizing does not equate to appeasement, nor to declining to defend self, home, family, community or nation. It is a means of reconciliation and harmonizing instead separating and antagonizing.

Only the ignorant and the disingenuous would claim that the United States of America has never made a mistake and cannot benefit from apologizing, even when there may be fault applicable to both parties. That is true in a marriage, in a partnership and among nations. It is not a sign of weakness or cowardice to apologize, it is a sign of courage, charity and strength. Only the confident and the secure are able to apologize.

Are some Americans so insecure or so ignorant about our place in history that they are threatened when leaders or individuals seek to apologize for our mistakes and misadventures?
Loren M Lambert © February 13, 2016