Chasing the Smack Dragon

In Ohio, state officials say drug overdoses from heroin increased 25 percent between 2008 and 2009, and are continuing to rise through 2012. Experts say there is no typical heroin user. They come from rich and poor neighborhoods, all levels of education, and can be young, middle-aged or old. And many of those who become addicted die. After all, today’s heroin is said to be as much as 15 times as potent as the heroin of decades past.

“The death certificates don’t tell us how long a person had been using heroin, but given the patterns of opioid use we’re seeing among people in their 40s and 50s, it’s not that surprising that the heroin overdoses are spanning the generations too,’’ said Dr. Wilson Compton, director for Epidemiology, Services and Prevention at the National Institute of Drug Abuse.

Federal risk surveys from 2011 show 2.9 percent of high school students have ever tried heroin, and that more than 350,000 Americans of all ages are addicted to the drug. A national surveillance network of hospital emergency rooms estimates that of nearly a million visits for illicit drug abuse in 2009, more than 219,000 were due to heroin.

Law enforcement and addiction experts say the current surge in heroin deaths reflects both the increased availability of the illicit drug in many U.S. communities and a large population of Americans willing to use it because it is cheaper and often more available than prescription opiates, such as OxyContin, that millions have become dependent upon.

Trying Heroin For the First Time

Reasons for trying heroin are complex and frequently dependent on circumstances relating to the individual and the social environment. There is often a complex interplay between the two. Research shows that as heroin users become more identified with the role of the heroin addict, marked by social marginalization, personal networks of heroin users, and the heroin using lifestyle, they shift to higher risk taking, injecting rather than sniffing the drug. Heroin addiction can become central to the life of people who become addicted, and it typically has a negative impact on other areas of life, such as family, school, work, or recreational activities. (Elizabeth Hartney; "Characteristics of Heroin Addiction"; About.com Guide; July 2 2012)

Heroin can be injected, smoked or sniffed. The first time it is used, the drug creates a sensation of being high. A person can feel extroverted, able to communicate easily with others and may experience a sensation of heightened sexual performance—but not for long.

Some people who are addicted to heroin are able to live a "double life," in which they are able to hold down a job, have a family, and so on. This double life is typically very stressful, and requires an enormous amount of energy and organization, as well as a constant source of money.

Will Taylor, who works as a special agent with the federal Drug Enforcement Administration out of Chicago, says, “The stigma of being a heroin addict is gone. Instead of being cooked or injected, most times it is being smoked or snorted. It could be a 40-year-old mother or the teenager next door who is using heroin.” (Ramelle Bintz; "Why Heroin? A Federal Agent Offers an Overview of the Opiate Trade"; Green Bay Press Gazette; August 3 2012)

People in their teens and early 20s are being targeted as the next big market for a drug that has long been in decline among adult populations. In some places, teens report that heroin is even more accessible than marijuana, ecstasy and alcohol. Since fewer adults are using heroin, sellers are targeting teenagers, who are less likely to have negative associations with the drug.

Taylor contends, “It’s all about money. Bang for the buck? A hit of heroin in Chicago is $10 to $20. A pill could be $15 to $30 per pill, but an addict is using many pills per day and using more to get the desired effect. Theoretically, even if they are shopping insurance and going through a doctor, they are getting high substantially less. Heroin is much stronger — it takes hold very quickly.”

A study (2005) attempts to explain why people use heroin, what leads them to try it, and paints a picture of a suburban Chicago heroin users. The findings in the “Understanding Suburban Heroin Use” study — believed to be the first of its kind in the country — were presented during a community forum in Downers Grove hosted by the Robert Crown Center for Health Education’s Reed Hruby Heroin Prevention Project. (Hamish Warburton, Paul J. Turnbull, and Mike Hough; “User Perceptions of Occasional and Controlled Heroin Use”; Joseph Roundtree Foundation; December 2005)

The 10-month study of suburban students, parents and heroin users concluded the following:

* Many people, including teenagers, no longer associate heroin with the horror stories of overdose and crippling addiction.

* Most people have little knowledge about heroin when they first use it.

* Younger people are getting involved with heroin. Some are getting involved with heroin as a first choice drug.

* One-third of those surveyed starting using it after being addicted to or misusing prescription pain pills such as OxyContin or Vicodin.

* The study also found that more than 75 percent of respondents had a concurrent mental health condition, such as depression, ADHD or bipolar disorder, and used heroin to self-medicate.

* Two-thirds of those surveyed displayed “sensation-seeking behaviors,” which researchers translated to mean they got a thrill out of driving to the West Side of Chicago to buy heroin without getting caught.

* The study also found that the suburban heroin user is white, and the average age of first use is 18. Suburban youth from middle-class backgrounds are much more likely to have access to gateway prescription painkillers. and they also have more money to spend. Many of them have cars, which gives them a greater amount of freedom and mobility.

Add to these characteristics found by Hamish Warburton, Paul J Turnbull and Mike Hough of the Joseph Roundtree Foundation ("User Perceptions of Occasional and Controlled Heroin Use," December 16 2005)

* Few people had their first experience of drugs with heroin. Most had experience of at least one other drug, mainly cannabis, before trying heroin. Many respondents reported having moderate or extensive experience of other drugs before trying heroin.

* Nearly all respondents reported trying heroin because they chose to, not because they felt pressured or coerced into it.

* The process of “peer preference” – the gravitation towards like-minded people – provided a useful framework for understanding why people tried heroin. Most reported trying the drug out of curiosity, although the first experience for a few was prompted by instrumental as opposed to hedonistic purposes – for example, to ease the “comedown” from other drugs.

* A small number also described how trying heroin corresponded with, or was related to, a critical moment in their lives.

What did the research participants have to say?

“I was not a big risk taker as a kid. They can’t picture me using heroin. My mom was putting ribbons in my hair in fifth grade and curling my hair.”

“In junior high I always wanted to be popular. I was a cheerleader and I had friends and I always wanted to be accepted and I kinda wasn’t.”

“Heroin made me feel real mellow like I had not a care in the world. I had a lot of ‘what am I doing with my life’ and physical pain that I was covering up.”

“When I was 12, my mom had 3 bottles of pain pills left over and I took them all. I took them while I was drinking because that is what my sister’s friend told me to do.”

“I thought I was smart enough that I was not going to let myself become ‘that guy.’ I was just going to try it and then walk away. It" doesn’t matter if you are a boy or girl, short or tall, black or white. Your chances of just walking away – it’s not going to work.”

“I didn’t use heroin first – I broke my foot and I was out of pain in like 2 weeks, but he (the doctor) kept me on Vicodin for 8 months. I kept calling for refills and he kept giving them to me. I didn’t know it was addicting. I figured it was safe because it was from a doctor and he kept giving it to me.”
 

The Brain and Heroin?

(Avram Goldstein, M.D., Professor Emeritus of Pharmacology Stanford University; “Neurobiology of Heroin Addiction and of Methadone Treatment”; April 2012)

People argue that becoming addicted to heroin is a psychological, not a biological problem. But behavior, the business of psychology, is also the business of the brain. Until recently, there had been no way to map the living functioning human brain; but now imaging techniques, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) have begun to make that possible.

Thus, we are actually learning, by imaging techniques,

which brain circuits mediate which behaviors.

All of brain anatomy and chemistry is determined, at the outset, by the blueprints in our DNA. Then, through our life experiences, both anatomy (the brain circuitry) and chemistry (the neurotransmitters and their receptors) become modified.

Most behaviors are determined by both genetics and environment, one or the other predominating in a particular case.

More research is needed to find out if genetic predisposition plays a role in heroin addiction. This is an important issue because if it is true that becoming an addict is not entirely a free choice, but rather is driven by a disorder of brain chemistry, it would validate the disease concept of heroin addiction. And that, in turn, would go far toward removing stigma and legitimizing long-term treatment with an opiate like methadone or LAAM in the eyes of the policy makers, the public, and the addicts themselves.

(“Research Sheds New Light on Heroin Addiction”; Howard Florey Institute; Psychology and Sociology; e! Science News; May 14 2008)

Researchers from the Howard Florey Institute in Melbourne have identified a factor that may contribute towards the development of heroin addiction by manipulating the adenosine A2A receptor, which plays a major role in the brain’s “reward pathway.” Using mice specifically bred without the adenosine A2A receptor, Professor Andrew Lawrence and his team showed that these mice had a reduced desire to self-administer morphine; heroin is converted to morphine in the body. The mice also self-administered less morphine compared to control litter mates, but did not develop tolerance to specific behavioral effects of morphine.

The researchers also found that the mice did not develop a conditioned place preference for the drug, indicating that drug-context associations are mediated in part by this receptor.

In human terms, this equates to the associative memory

of the environment where the drug is used.

Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that the adenosine A2A receptor is involved in regulating the reinforcing and motivational properties of opiates. Professor Lawrence said this was the first study to show that the adenosine A2A receptor was implicated in self-motivation to take opiates such as heroin.

“This receptor clearly plays a major role in opiate use and therefore abuse, as the mice were simply not interested in taking morphine despite it being freely available,” he said. “Although the drug-taking effects and behaviors of these mice were diminished, they still relapsed into drug-seeking after a period of withdrawal. “This indicates that the adenosine A2A receptor has a role in the ‘getting high’ aspects of addiction, but not in the adaptations that contribute to relapse after going ‘cold turkey.’”

“The results from this study reinforce that addiction is a highly complex brain disorder that will require a multi-pronged approach to treat."

Prof Lawrence said that drugs affecting the adenosine A2A receptor show preclinical promise to treat alcohol addiction. “Earlier this year we found that the adenosine A2A receptor interacts with the mGlu5 glutamate receptor found in the brain’s reward pathway to regulate drug-seeking. “Consequently, a drug developed to target both these receptors could have an even better result in treating addiction,” he added.

The Bottom Line

With the heroin of today, people must rethink their approach to this problem. Since the drug is much stronger now than decade ago, prevention strategies must include accurate, timely information about the deadly dangers of the drug. More and more young people are choosing heroin with very little knowledge of its lasting effects.

Once heroin frightened people. More recently, some people have tried to make heroin use “fashionable.” In the past decade, the “heroin addict look”—blank expression, waxy complexion, dark circles under the eyes, sunken cheeks, excessive thinness, greasy hair—was promoted in popular magazines and fashion circles as “chic.”

The effects on the body from continued use of this drug are very destructive. Frequent injections can cause collapsed veins and can lead to infections of the blood vessels and heart valves. Tuberculosis can result from the general poor condition of the body. Arthritis is another long-term result of heroin addiction.

The addict lifestyle—where heroin users often share their needles—leads to AIDS and other contagious infections. It is estimated that of the 35,000 new hepatitis C2 (liver disease) infections each year in the United States, over 70% are from drug users who use needles.

 

A highly addictive drug known as “cheese heroin” is a blend of black tar Mexican heroin (called “black tar” because of its color) and over-the-counter cold medication, such as Tylenol PM. The drug costs only a couple of dollars a hit and children as young as 9, hooked on cheese heroin, have been rushed to hospital emergency rooms for heroin withdrawal.

The combination of the two drugs can cause vital body functions such as breathing and heartbeat to slow down and result in death. Since 2004, cheese heroin is responsible for at least forty deaths in the North Texas region, according to local authorities.

 

“When you first shoot up, you will most likely puke and feel repelled, but soon you’ll try it again. It will cling to you like an obsessed lover. The rush of the hit and the way you’ll want more, as if you were being deprived of air—that’s how it will trap you.” -Sam

 

“Your whole day is spent finding or taking drugs. You get high all afternoon. At night, you put yourself to sleep with heroin. And you live only for that. You are in a prison. You beat your head against a wall, nonstop, but you don’t get anywhere. In the end, your prison becomes your tomb.” --Sabrina

 

 

“Heroin cut me off from the rest of the world. My parents kicked me out. My friends and my brothers didn’t want to see me anymore. I was all alone.” -Suzanne

Do You Possess "The American Dream"?

The American Dream is commonly known as the national character of the United States -- a set of ideals in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and success, and an upward social mobility achieved through hard work.

What is the foundation of the dream that Americans have the ability, through participation in the society and the economy, to achieve a richer and fuller life?  Rooted in the New World mystique regarding frontier life, the American Dream owes much to the Founding Fathers.

The authors of the United States’ Declaration of Independence held "certain truths to be self-evident: that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness." Of course, the builders of the nation knew this liberty depended upon gaining freedom from England and establishing commerce with the European States.

The Empire of Liberty, a theme developed first by Thomas Jefferson, identified America's world responsibility to spread freedom across the globe. Jefferson saw America's mission in terms of setting an example of human rights to all nations and pursuing expansion into the west (which he accomplished during his presidency with the purchase of the Louisiana Territory from the French). He believed that America must stop the growth of the British empire and even include Canada in the American confederacy.

With independence, expansion, and freedom, colonial Americans could pursue the boundless possibilities for success and happiness afforded by the bounties of the New World. It seems the American Dream was fated to include a hunger for wealth and a mission based on the beliefs of Manifest Destiny, the idea that God had a direct influence in the foundation and further actions of the United States.

As history will attest, the pursuit of Manifest Destiny by pioneers and politicians had negative consequences for native populations during the time of Western expansion. Racism was used to promote Manifest Destiny and give reason to expel prior inhabitants. It led to the occupation and annexation of Native American Indian land, sometimes to expand slavery. It propelled America into the Oregon boundary dispute with Britain. And, Manifest Destiny played an important role in the expansion of Texas and the American relationship with Mexico. The Mexican Cession eventually added the territories of Alta California and Nuevo México to the United States.

Since early American history, the meaning of the American dream has retained its reference to the ideal of affording a good life to each inhabitant of the United States. In the 20th century, James Truslow Adams, in his book The Epic of America (1931), stated that the American dream is "that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement."

Adams continues, "It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position." (James T. Adams, The Epic of America, 1931)

The Status of the American Dream Today

Today, most people equate the American dream exclusively with material gain. -- things such as buying a big house, driving an expensive automobile, and making a lot of money. It is a hedonistic view having little or nothing to do with liberty or equality. These days many more people are concerned with the attainment of things than with the maintenance of principles.

Many believe this materialistic hedonism is a sign of moral decay that is causing a loss of freedom. They say that material gain is only a fruit of freedom, not its root. Solid spiritual and political principles, once vital aspects of the American Dream, are crumbling due to a general loss of trust and interest.

According to a survey by the National League of Cities (NLC) the following is true of today's vision of the American Dream:

Two-thirds of the American people say the American Dream is becoming harder to achieve, especially for young families, and they point to financial insecurity and poor quality public education as the most significant barriers. (Robert Longley, "Two Thirds Feel American Dream Harder to Achieve," National League of Cities, October 1 2001)

*  Financial stability (24%) is the most frequently cited characteristic of living the American Dream.

* Caucasian (27%) and Hispanic (29%) adults cite poor quality of education as the main barrier.

* African-Americans are more likely to report racial or ethnic discrimination as the main obstacle (28%).

*  Among older respondents, enjoying good health was a critical factor, with 24 percent of those over 65 believing this defines the American Dream for them.

Although Americans remain optimistic, significant numbers of older Americans, women, single parents, minorities and blue-collar workers believe the American Dream is out of their reach.

* Almost twice as many single parents (52%) as married parents (27%) report they are not living the American Dream.

Many believe their living conditions affect their ability to live the American Dream.

*  Adults living in urban cities (39%) are more likely to believe than suburbanites (19%) that where they live has affected their ability to achieve the American Dream.

* More than half of renters (52%) and 28% of home owners find they are not living the American Dream.

Large percentages of minorities believe they are not living the American Dream.

*  53% of African-Americans said they are not living the American Dream;

*  36% of Hispanics and 32% of Caucasians have the same view.

Large numbers of people believe the government should help them achieve the American Dream.

* Since 2001, there has been an 11 percent increase in the number of Americans who say the government is more of a hindrance than a help.

*  A solid majority of all Americans (72%) believe that the government should actively work to help people achieve the American Dream. This is particularly true of young people (90% of 18 to 22-year-olds agree).

*  Almost half (45%) believe the government has done more to hinder their pursuit of the American Dream than help, up from 34% in 2001.

*  Eighty-five percent say that local, state and federal government must work together to give people a fair shot at achieving the American Dream.


My Take

From the statistics by the NLC, most people believe being financially stable would give them the American Dream. Specifically, Caucasians and Hispanics say the poor quality of education hinders them most while Afro-Americans say most of them can't achieve due to racial or ethnic discrimination.

All of these people overwhelmingly believe the local, state, and federal government should work much harder to help them achieve this stability.

Variable detriments to achieving the dream include being single and renting in an urban environment.

To me, no one is confessing to their own lack of initiative. Neither are people claiming responsibility for their financial problems or for their own limited educations. Instead, they are waiting on the government to intervene and provide them with the means to achieve their American Dreams. 

I do believe the idealistic vision of the American dream often disregards discrimination based on a person's race, religion, gender and national origin, which might inhibit his or her ability to achieve specific goals. However, does prosperity equate with happiness? To some people, the American Dream might be more about personal fulfillment than about economic success or owning property.

Yet, absolutely, people won't achieve the American Dream by dreaming. They will achieve it by doing. Successful people don't get to where they want to go by walking around with their heads in the clouds. They get there by putting one foot in front of the other and getting stuff done.

Steve Tobak of CBS Money Watch ("You Won't Achieve the American Dream by Dreaming," November 22 2011) says they achieved for one of these four reasons:

* Because it was their job and they had a strong work ethic,

* Out of necessity to put food on the table,

* To bring a product to market they thought customers would want, or

* They had a passion for what they were doing and thought it was cool.

Too many feel a sense of entitlement just because they were born in America. Early years in a little dead-end work is not a waste of time. And, of course, neither is investing in higher education. Getting actual work experience or going to college is better than spending time sitting on the couch, jobless, finding out who the welfare moms’ babies’ daddies are on “Maury.”

Tobak says, "You get there by delivering the goods, getting the job done, and satisfying the needs of your customer." Here are some notable examples he offers:

"When Mark Zuckerberg was developing Facebook, he was building something he thought would be cool. He wasn't thinking about running a big company and becoming a billionaire.

Bill Gates did not have stars in his eyes when he licensed an operating system to IBM for the first personal computer. He was just trying to satisfy a big new customer.

Fred Smith was not driven by the idea that FedEx would someday become an everyday verb for express mail. He was driven by the idea of a fully integrated air-to-ground shipping business that could operate efficiently using hubs.

In 1927, not only were Dick and Mac McDonald not trying to create the world's first and ultimately its biggest fast food empire, McDonald's, it took 21 years for them to realize they should be focusing on burgers instead of hot dogs.

Kraft Foods started with James L. Kraft selling cheese door-to-door. Toyota founder Sakichi Toyoda made looms. Sony started out as a radio repair shop in Tokyo. Nokia was a paper."

The bottom line is that the American Dream is about opportunity, not about entitlement. Even in these dismal economic times no one is going to pull you out of poverty or pull you out of misery but yourself. If you believe the American Dream is only about money and possessions, I believe you contribute to the loss of American liberty because you care more for class than for human worth. Nothing is more important to all Americans than to have the freedom and liberty to choose their own station in life and to pursue their own vision of happiness, no matter the contents of their dream.

And, the obligation for all is to keep this opportunity secure for every human, no matter his or her wealth.

When Honesty and the Golden Rule Aren't Good Enough

Integrity is a concept of consistency of actions, values, methods, measures, principles, expectations, and outcomes. In ethics, integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or accuracy of one's actions. To truly grasp the word integrity, one must understand some fine delineations between the word and a few related concepts. Integrity in an individual is rare but, perhaps, it is one of the finest human qualities.

The word integrity stems from the Latin adjective integer (whole, complete). In this context, integrity is the inner sense of "wholeness" deriving from qualities such as honesty and consistency of character.

One who possesses integrity cannot be hypocritical. Internal consistency is required. For example, if a person who has integrity confronts a conflicting value, that person must either account for his particular views with a credible defense or alter his beliefs. To refuse to do so would be deceitful. So, one may judge that others "have integrity" to the extent that they act according to the values, beliefs and principles they claim to hold.

According to law professor Stephen L. Carter, integrity in ethics involves not only a refusal to engage in behaviors that evade responsibility but also an understanding of different modes or styles in which written and spoken communication attempt to uncover a particular truth. He regards integrity as being distinct from honesty. (Stephen L. Carter, Integrity, 1996)

David L. Miller, senior editor of The Lutheran, speaks of Carter's belief concerning the distinction of integrity from honesty: "Consider, for example, a dying man who confesses to his wife an adulterous affair that occurred 35 years before. He dies, conscience clear. He was honest. But is this riskless confession an example of integrity or just another self-serving violation of his marriage vows? Or how about the man who says he will support his live-in partner, unless she gets pregnant. Honest? Sure. But integrity? No." (David L. Miller, "Integrity: Why We Need a Transfusion," The Lutheran, 1996)


Carter writes that integrity requires three steps:

(1) Discerning what is right and what is wrong,

(2) Acting on what you have discerned, even at personal cost, and

(3) Saying openly that you are acting on your understanding of right from wrong.


Discerning right from wrong takes time, considerable thought, and support. People must realize that a broad range of issues allow those with integrity to take different sides. For instance, a person with integrity may oppose the death penalty while another with integrity may support capital punishment.

Their belief doesn't make them evil, stupid, or worse than the other. They have merely discerned a different view with support.

However, some issues cannot be supported from different sides with integrity. Consider this: racial hatred and mass slaughter are wrong. People know this from history. They don't need to agree on a philosophical system to come to an agreement on these issues. Why? Universally, these heinous acts are morally wrong.

Many humans, however, tend to view one side (their own belief) of many arguments as universally accepted. People without integrity refuse to consider the oppositional view. In fact, many times these people do not even thoroughly investigate another viewpoint. They prefer to jump on the "moral" bandwagon without thinking. These "flaming" issues are subsequently fanned by the media and become "hotter" topics.

 

David L. Miller says, "There is a lot of moral agreement in America. The amount of moral disagreement is exaggerated because the media focuses on a handful of issues on which people have sharply different views--abortion, gay rights, affirmative action. But beyond this there is a large core on which we can reach agreement. These teachings are common to various religious traditions. They also show up in public opinion surveys and in the Constitution. For example: respecting others, believing in family, not lying or stealing, being courageous." (David L. Miller, "Integrity: Why We Need a Transfusion," The Lutheran, 1996)

 

Miller believes Americans react to moral disagreement and often swallow "the expedient lie, the one that greases the wheels and avoids problems." And then, one lie leads to another until people become entangled in a web of lies. Then, they live enormously skeptical lives. Miller says, "It's unreasonable for us to demand of ourselves and others the kind of perfect integrity that no mortal has. But I do suggest we pay close attention to it. Otherwise it's pointless for us to demand integrity of the media or politicians when we don't demand it of ourselves."

What do people demand of themselves these days? Years ago (1991), James Patterson and Peter Kim wrote a book titled, The Day America Told the Truth. The goal of the book was to get at the moral views and ethical disposition of Americans. The results of their research concluded that the majority of Americans lack moral integrity. According to the authors...
 
* 74% of those surveyed said they would steal without regret.
* 64% said they would lie if it was to their advantage
* 87% said the 10 commandments have no moral validity
* 86% of those who participated in the survey admitted to lying regularly to their parents and 75% say they lie to their friends.
* When asked, "What are you willing to do the $10 million?" 25% would abandon their families; 23% would become a prostitute for a week; 7% would murder a stranger.

Those things that do demand integrity must not be left to sway. With its consistent framework, integrity demands avoidance of any unwarranted exceptions for a particular person or group -- especially the person or group that holds the framework.

Take law, for example. In law, this principle of universal application requires that even those in positions of official power be subject to the same laws as pertain to their fellow citizens. In personal ethics, this principle requires that one should not act according to any rule that one would not wish to see universally followed.

Philosopher Immanuel Kant described this universal application as the categorical imperative. It is categorical in virtue of applying to all unconditionally, or simply because all possesses rational wills, without reference to any ends that they might or might not have. It does not, in other words, apply to anyone on the condition that he has adopted beforehand some goal for himself.

Kant saw the importance of the human will in integrity. Acts that are morally praiseworthy are done out of a sense of duty rather than for the consequences that are expected, particularly the consequences to self. The only thing "good" about the act is the will, the "good will."

Then, the duty of all is clear. That duty stipulates a person must act in such a manner towards all others that he would want them to act in similar circumstances. Very simply, Kant believed people
must act according to the maxim that you would wish all other rational people to follow, as if it were a universal law.

This integrity is not the Golden Rule. The Golden Rule states, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." The Categorical Imperative exceeds the Golden Rule with his demand to create a general law (maxim) out of one's actions (on the basis of moral thinking).

Think about it -- the Golden Rule involves reciprocation. The categorical imperative states that what makes an action moral is whether the action can be universalized in every circumstance towards every agent. If it cannot, then a person will contradict himself by willing the action in the first place. The Golden Rule has good will as its foundation, whereas to infringe the categorical imperative, according to Kant, is an infringement of reason itself. Persons are always ends in themselves, not to be used or exploited by anyone for whatever purpose.

To illustrate the difference between the Golden Rule and the categorical imperative, here is the "horny Martin" example:

"Suppose that Martin is a 20 year-old college student. Suppose further that Martin has never been out on a date. The woman of his dreams finally agrees to go out with him. So, Martin gets dressed up and takes her out to a nice dinner, after which he drives up to Lookout Point. And.... Martin 'does unto others as he would have done unto himself' with disastrous consequences."

My Take

Integrity can't simply be passed on. It must grow inside of you. And, it continues to develop as you consistently practice it. Yet, you cannot just desire the characteristic of integrity and will it upon yourself. Integrity is steadfast adherence to a strict moral or ethical code. It is proven through thoughtful judgment, action, and complete understanding. In brief, integrity can be summed up simply as doing the right thing for the right reason even when no one is watching.

I believe in order to possess integrity, people must question their beliefs and move beyond their personal frames of reference. They must explore their sources for developing beliefs (through parental advice, direct personal experience, teachings at school, church or through organizational involvement, reading, research, etc.). They must find evidence that both supports and contradicts their beliefs. In addition, they must digest all the information and arrive at good conclusions.

People need to be receptive to acquire integrity. They must be flexible enough to change their beliefs when the truth stares them in the face. Having integrity means they will sometimes be humbled by others, and it also means being significantly compassionate.
Integrity involves the three R’s:

* Respect for self,
* Respect for others,
* Responsibility for all your actions.

 

"No one can be happy who has been thrust outside the pale (boundary) of truth.

And there are two ways that one can be removed from this realm:

by lying, or by being lied to."

-Seneca, Roman philosopher and writer

 

Leave Afghanistan: Why Wait Until 2014?

President Obama is espousing 

“The Afghan war as we understand it (being) over”

after the U.S. combat role ends in 2014,

and Afghanistan will enter a “transformational decade

 of peace and stability and development.”

Yet, General John Allen, commander of NATO’s ISAF mission in Afghanistan and Obama's commander on the ground, told a media briefing on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Chicago on May 20 2012, ”I don’t want to, again, understate the challenge that we have ahead of us. The Taliban is still a resilient and capable opponent in the battle space. There’s no end of combat before the end of 2014. And, in fact, the Taliban will oppose the ANSF (Afghan National Security Forces) after 2014.”

In other words, the war won’t end with NATO withdrawal.

So, Obama is pressing President Hamid Karzai to engage in reconciliation talks with the Taliban and to implement electoral reforms to diminish corruption and make elections transparent.

Do people believe talks with the Taliban or electoral reform with enhance Karzai's political survival? Does Karzai even believe these efforts will help? After all, Karzai has a minimal political base, and the U.S.-led invasion force pushed him into power.

Tony Karon, a senior editor at Time says, "The only thing keeping him (President Karzai) in power over the past decade has been the presence of tens of thousands of Western troops. Even if the Afghan security forces NATO is frantically training to take over — and suffering almost weekly 'green on blue' fatalities as Afghan security men turn their guns on their Western mentors — were up to par, it requires a vast leap of faith to imagine they’ll be loyal to Karzai." (Tony Karon, "Obama’s Afghanistan Problem: Neither Karzai Nor the Taliban Like the ‘Reconciliation’ Script," Time, May 21 2012)

Karon goes on to explain Karzai is the "least-worst" option for his position in a place where corruption and and cronyism has a long tradition. Karon says, "After all, when the CIA had first sent its operatives into Afghanistan to initiate the toppling of the Taliban, they were armed not with stirring calls to freedom and democracy, but with suitcases containing millions of dollars in hard cash. Karzai knows the limits of the loyalty of those presently aligned with the status quo, and the traditional fluidity of Afghan warlord politics. He holds his present position only because there’s no obvious alternative to play the role he’s been playing." (Tony Karon, "Obama’s Afghanistan Problem: Neither Karzai Nor the Taliban Like the ‘Reconciliation’ Script," Time, May 21 2012)

Of course, the Taliban brands Karzai as a “puppet” of the West. Obama’s Afghan “surge” that began in the summer of 2009 doubled down the U.S. military commitment in order to pummel the Taliban into suing for peace and being ready to accept U.S. terms that included the extension of authority and legitimacy for President Karzai. That hasn't happened.

The more militant Taliban elements retain ties with al-Qaeda, as well as some of the movement’s younger, more embittered mid-level commanders. None of them see any good coming out of negotiating a compromise when their primary enemies, the U.S. and its NATO partners, have made clear they intend to withdraw by the end of 2014. Surely they view that time is on their side.

           The latest New York Times/CBS News poll found

that more than two-thirds of those polled — 69 percent — thought that the United States should not

be at war in Afghanistan.

 

 

Just four months ago, 53 percent said that Americans should no longer be fighting in the conflict, more than a decade old.

(Elisabeth Bumiller, "Support in U.S. for Afghan War Drops Sharply, Poll Finds,"  

The New York Times, March 26 2012)

The same poll found that 68 percent thought

the fighting was going “somewhat badly” or “very badly,” compared with 42 percent who had those impressions

 in November.

In a Washington Post/ABC News poll, 60 percent

of respondents said the war in Afghanistan

had not been worth the fighting,

while 57 percent in a Pew Research Center poll

said that the United States should bring home

American troops as soon as possible.

 

 

In a Gallup/USA Today poll, 50 percent of respondents

 said the United States should speed up

the withdrawal from Afghanistan.

 

My Take

President George W. Bush faced broad discontent over the war in Iraq. His overall approval rating eventually dipped below 25 percent. How long can President Obama's dismal withdrawal strategy hold greater criticism at bay?

If the American people, by a margin of greater than two to one disapprove of the war, the U.S. should end it. Does it seem that the present U.S. government has a clear rationale for pursuing their policy through 2014? The answer is evidently "no." Now, after more than a decade of war, and despite some significant accomplishments, most notably the killing of Osama Bin Laden, victory in Afghanistan remains elusive.

Don't the American people need to be more active in calling for an immediate end to the war in Afghanistan? Does public opinion count for anything these days? It seems few care to do more than mouth their disapproval. For most, politics and bureaucracy seem too strong to be influenced by protest. Besides, since media coverage has diminished, people really seem to have lost interest.

The U.S. has not been gaining any clear advantage in Afghanistan. But, the cost in life and the monetary investment keep piling up. Does anyone hold hope that the U.S. will bring lasting peace, democracy and stability to Afghanistan? I have not talked with one person who believes significant improvements are being made. Maybe it's time for foreign policy to be made on the basis of majority rule.

 

When President Barack Obama cited cost as a reason to bring troops home from Afghanistan, he referred to a $1 trillion price tag for America's wars. Staggering as it is, that figure grossly underestimates the total cost of wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan to the U.S. Treasury and ignores more imposing costs yet to come, according to a study released on Wednesday.

The final bill will run at least $3.7 trillion and could reach as high as $4.4 trillion, according to the research project "Costs of War" by Brown University's Watson Institute for International Studies

(Daniel Trotta, "Cost of War at Least $3.7 Trillion and Counting," Reuters, June 29 2011)

 

2,106 Americans have died in

Operation Enduring Freedom

 

The suicide rate among the nation’s active-duty military personnel has spiked this year, eclipsing the number of troops dying in battle and on pace to set a record annual high since the start of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan more than a decade ago.The military said that there had been 154 suicides among active-duty troops, a rate of nearly one each day this year.
 

 

 

 

Brick Parents: "We Don't Need No Ed-u-ca-tion"

“If a child sees something in a parent that the child aspires to, he or she will copy that parent and be content. If a child feels that a parent is living a life that shows compassion and understanding, patience and love, that child will not have to reach a stage of rebellion against that parent. 

"Why rebel against someone who has listened to you and wants to help you fufill your dreams? A parent who has proven time and again that growth and happiness of his or her children is priority number one does not have to worry about where these children are heading in life. They will be sensitive and productive members of society for as long as they live.”

 

-Alice Ozma, The Reading Promise: My Father and the Books We Shared
 

What image do children see when they look at their parents? Of course, they see loving providers, unselfish models who work hard to give their families the best life they can afford. And, most children see important dependent relationships with their parents who continually mentor and guide them through every phase of their upbringing. In a perfect world, love would be the foundation upon which all family relationships are built and maintained.

But,unfortunately, many kids do not see one important ingredient in Mom's and Dad's life that fosters their children's important progress and eventual independence. Especially in poor, depressed areas like Appalachia, children should witness their parents' thirst for knowledge. Kids must see, firsthand, that their parents are constantly learning new information vital to their betterment.

Today, too many parents are doing relatively nothing to strengthen their own intellects. As models for their children, these parents do not provide enough positive reinforcement that learning is the most important process for lifelong achievement and eventual happiness.

To me, the quest for information can be an intensely rewarding experience, so I always encouraged students in my classes to find subjects they liked and to "dig to their very roots." I noticed the happy, aggressive learners took pride in their discoveries -- the more they knew, the more they became interested in other, related subjects. For many, an intense craving for information became habitual. Their initiative led to greater self confidence that fed their particular desires for acquiring more and more information and sharing their findings. These students taught me, the teacher, more than I ever would have dreamed.

A relatively new study suggests that the same neurons that process the primitive physical rewards of food and water also signal the more abstract mental rewards of information.

"Ethan Bromberg-Martin and Okihide Hikosaka trained two thirsty rhesus monkeys to choose between two targets on a screen with a flick of their eyes; in return, they randomly received either a large drink or a small one after a few seconds. Their choice of target didn’t affect which drink they received, but it did affect whether they got prior information about the size of their reward. One target brought up another symbol that told them how much water they would get, while the other brought up a random symbol.

"After a few days of training, the monkeys almost always looked at the target that would give them advance intel, even though it never actually affected how much water they were given. They wanted knowledge for its own sake. What’s more, even though the gap between picking a target and sipping some water was very small, the monkeys still wanted to know what was in store for them mere seconds later. To them, ignorance is far from bliss." (Ed Yong,"Why Information Is Its Own Reward...," ScieneBlogs, July 15 2009)


Dopamine neurons (dopamine = pleasurable hormone) are thought to be involved in learning about rewards – by adjusting the connections between other neurons, they “teach” the brain to seek basic rewards like food and water. Bromberg-Martin and Hikosaka think that these neurons also teach the brain to seek out information so that their activity becomes a sort of “common currency” that governs both basic needs and a quest for knowledge.

Now, I know many of you are saying, "Thirst for knowledge? Isn't that what teachers and schools are supposed to be instilling in my children. I don't need any more knowledge. I went to school years ago and already have all the information I need. Besides, junior has a computer and a television."

Reread that last paragraph. Put yourself in the role of your child. Basically, you are instilling the belief in your child that learning stops once outside the schoolhouse door. In other words, children begin to believe that their parents see no reason to continue critical, independent, life-long learning.

This view is tragic. Knowledge is the great equalizer, the only true asset for those who lack other means to structure a good life. Today, more than ever, a thirst for knowledge will lead a child to greater opportunities.

If parents do not show their children their own active quests for information, for improvement, for learning "for learning's sake," they stifle their children's development. And, I am not just speaking of taking an interest during children's grade school years, but just as important (probably more important considering the pressures and stresses of teens), they must engage in developing the thirst during children's high school years and beyond.

Parents learning? What a radical idea for many. But that is exactly what I mean. Parents must diminish negative behaviors that encourage laziness, disengagement from the learning process, and a self-chosen contempt for acquiring intelligence. Instead, they must sacrifice unproductive free time to improve their own stations in life. Their kids will see this, digest its importance, and follow their lead.

Numerous studies support the fact that the majority of children consider their parents to
be their most important role model. In the American Bible Society survey, 67.7% of teens aged
12-18 believed parents are the most important role models in today’s society. More than 1,100
12-18 year olds participated in an eight-question survey conducted by Weekly Reader Research
on behalf of the American Bible Society. 

According to a research study
by Harvard Researcher Ronald Ferguson,

"Nearly half of a child's achievement in school

can be accounted for by factors outside the school,

including parent support."

Consequently, the most important support

any child can receive comes from the parents.

This support ranges from being responsible for making sure that the child arrives at school well-rested, well-fed, and ready to learn, to setting high expectations for their child. The following are suggestions of how parents can support their child's education:


* Attendance: Good school attendance is important to academic achievement. When students are absent from school they miss vital instruction. Parents have control over their child's attendance and this includes arriving on time to school, and not taking students out in the middle of the school day.

* Attitude: Parents need to display a positive attitude toward school in general. If parents have a positive attitude, the child will also have that positive attitude toward school. Parents must be careful in how they address school concerns in front of their child. If they display a negative attitude toward school, their child may adopt that as his/her own attitude toward school.

* Priority: Education must be given a top priority for it to come out on top. Therefore, parents must make education their first priority, above all other after school activities.

* Support: Children need their parent's help. When a child needs help on homework or other special projects, it is their parents that they turn to. Parents need to offer support and help their children. They may even need to find help outside of the home, a tutor, for example.

* Role Model: The parent needs to be a positive role model for the child in helping to shape the child's opinions and attitudes about learning.

* Get Involved: Research reveals that high self-esteem and student achievement are closely related to positive parental involvement in school. When parents get involved at school it can be a motivating factor to the child. It tells the child that the parents think that school is important.

* Communication: Parents need to keep in touch with their child's school and have a positive relationship with the teacher.

My Take

NOTHING could make a bigger difference in the problems faced by youth in Scioto County than kids seeing a parent involved in education. This does not mean merely attending ball games or helping with a school activity or two. Children need to see parents who are actively bettering themselves. This, I am sure, will have the biggest impact on their children's positive development.

Some tough kids from the inner city get out of their undesirable environments by developing their athletic skills and later employing them in professional sports careers. This accomplishment is a rarity.The chances of becoming a professional athlete is about 24,550 to 1—so you have a better chance of getting struck by lightning, marrying a millionaire or writing a New York Times bestseller. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are 9,380 professional athletes you have a .00565% chance of becoming a professional athlete.

On a personal note, I spent 34 years as a student and a teacher at Valley High School in Lucasville. To my knowledge, one person, Gene Tenace, became a prominent professional athlete. Just rounding figures to 100 graduates a year would make the odds 3,400 to 1 during my tenure alone.

Developing a keen mind and a thirst for knowledge will help insure much better odds for finding a good job and a better life than betting your future on brawn. Parents, you must quit depending upon schools to take 100% of the responsibility for educating your children. If you don't believe in lifelong learning and SHOW IT, your children will likely hate school, refuse to do their homework, neglect their studies, and learn to pattern themselves after you, their role models with stagnant, semi-developed brains.

Dehumanizing Dirty Criminal Trash Before Disposal

Problems in community life are among the most distressing and troublesome aspects of our modern society. A great deal of attention is given to individual problems, yet community problems arguably are broader and more important because, to a large degree, they affect us all – young and old, rich and poor, male and female, and majority and minority group members.


Believing “bad people” are responsible for creating social ills, "good people" often tend to ignore helping to stop a community problem that doesn't directly affect them or their loved ones. They generally abhor those “bad people” who engage in criminal activities such as theft, child abuse and neglect, violence, drug use, welfare fraud, racism, and domestic violence, yet they fail to understand how they, the “good people,” contribute to the continuance of the problems.


Sure, “good people” complain about their own susceptibility to problems. After all, they must live in the same setting as “bad people” who practice unacceptable behavior. They also believe those in charge of enforcement and the judicial system should solve the problems so that decent residents like them can live a better life. In other words, they want “the system” to repair “the broken system.” They rally behind cries of "Do your job and hang 'em high!" 


Many “good people” become proactive with their immediate families. Of course, this is recommended to anyone in danger of becoming a victim of problematic criminal behaviors. They buy guns, install home security systems, talk extensively with family members about possible threats and appropriate reactions, and plan procedures with strategies to employ in case of personal intrusion. In essence, they recognize “bad people” access their neighborhoods, so they address the problem by strengthening their own castles and protecting their occupants.


So, to “good people,” the proper response to a problem is calling for tougher action in what they perceive as a failing system and taking care of their own. Nothing is wrong with these actions. We all would love to see more people take responsibility to improve their own conditions. But, the problem with this equation is the lack of action taken for the sake of others in the community, the lack of response to improving the common good and finding workable solutions.


All citizens even have a responsibility to help prodigal “bad people” to improve their lot and learn better to coexist. Instead, many “good people” want to “tighten the screws” on the “bad people” without looking at the roots of their behaviors. They care nothing about rehabilitation. Oh, sure, “good people” believe in second chances and understand making mistakes as long as “good people” are the ones who receive the benefits.

Without empathy, love, and action on the behalf of the entire community, the “good people” allow the problems to thrive. Problems cannot be wished away or ignored. “Good People” who are concerned chiefly with "looking out for Number One," and ignoring their responsibilities of citizenship, soon cannot "insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare" or carry on their other major duties as members of the state.


When a crisis comes, the people may turn in desperation to some hero-administrator. But in the end, that hero administrator will not restore the order without the cooperation and action of the citizens. A community cannot long endure unless a great many of its citizens stand ready and willing to brighten the corner where they are, and to sacrifice much for the good of all others, if need be. Citizens all have civic and social duties to address community needs and to serve the public good.

What moral responsibilities do all people have? Should they restrict their responsibilities only to doing things deemed beneficial to themselves or to doing things for those they judge as “good”? Moral responsibility is primarily the responsibility related to actions and their consequences in social relations. It generally concerns the harm caused to an individual, a group or the entire society by the actions or inactions of another individual, group or entire society.


When is it time to take action for the sake of all? When should "good" people decide to dirty their clean hands and reach out to those they deem unworthy? I believe they must when a murderous problem threatens their existence. You see, we often choose to let them exist, and they could cost us our lives.

 

 

Hangman

by Maurice Ogden

1.
Into our town the Hangman came.
Smelling of gold and blood and flame
and he paced our bricks with a diffident air
and built his frame on the courthouse square

The scaffold stood by the courthouse side,
Only as wide as the door was wide;
A frame as tall, or little more,
Than the capping sill of the courthouse door

And we wondered, whenever we had the time.
Who the criminal, what the crime.
That Hangman judged with the yellow twist
of knotted hemp in his busy fist.

And innocent though we were, with dread,
We passed those eyes of buckshot lead:
Till one cried: "Hangman, who is he
For whom you raise the gallows-tree?"

Then a twinkle grew in the buckshot eye,
And he gave us a riddle instead of reply:
"He who serves me best," said he,
"Shall earn the rope on the gallows-tree."

And he stepped down, and laid his hand
On a man who came from another land
And we breathed again, for another's grief
At the Hangman's hand was our relief

And the gallows-frame on the courthouse lawn
By tomorrow's sun would be struck and gone.
So we gave him way, and no one spoke.
Out of respect for his Hangman's cloak.

2.
The next day's sun looked mildly down
On roof and street in our quiet town
And stark and black in the morning air,
The gallows-tree on the courthouse square.

And the Hangman stood at his usual stand
With the yellow hemp in his busy hand;
With his buckshot eye and his jaw like a pike
And his air so knowing and business like.

And we cried, "Hangman, have you not done
Yesterday with the alien one?"
Then we fell silent, and stood amazed,
"Oh, not for him was the gallows raised."

He laughed a laugh as he looked at us:
"...Did you think I'd gone to all this fuss
To hang one man? That's a thing I do
To stretch a rope when the rope is new."

Then one cried "Murder!" One cried "Shame!"
And into our midst the Hangman came
To that man's place. "Do you hold," said he,
"With him that was meant for the gallows-tree?"

And he laid his hand on that one's arm.
And we shrank back in quick alarm,
And we gave him way, and no one spoke
Out of fear of his Hangman's cloak.

That night we saw with dread surprise
The Hangman's scaffold had grown in size.
Fed by the blood beneath the chute
The gallows-tree had taken root;

Now as wide, or a little more,
Than the steps that led to the courthouse door,
As tall as the writing, or nearly as tall,
Halfway up on the courthouse wall.

3.
The third he took-we had all heard tell
Was a user and infidel, and
"What," said the Hangman "have you to do
With the gallows-bound, and he a Jew?"

And we cried out, "Is this one he
Who has served you well and faithfully?"
The Hangman smiled: "It's a clever scheme
To try the strength of the gallows-beam."

The fourth man's dark, accusing song
Had scratched out comfort hard and long;
And what concern, he gave us back.
"Have you for the doomed--the doomed and black?"

The fifth. The sixth. And we cried again,
"Hangman, Hangman, is this the last?"
"It's a trick," he said, "That we hangmen know
For easing the trap when the trap springs slow.""

And so we ceased, and asked no more,
As the Hangman tallied his bloody score:
And sun by sun, and night by night,
The gallows grew to monstrous height.

The wings of the scaffold opened wide
Till they covered the square from side to side:
And the monster cross-beam, looking down.
Cast its shadow across the town.

4.
Then through the town the Hangman came
And called in the empty streets my name-
And I looked at the gallows soaring tall
And thought, "There is no one left at all

For hanging." And so he calls to me
To help pull down the gallows-tree.
And I went out with right good hope
To the Hangman's tree and the Hangman's rope.

He smiled at me as I came down
To the courthouse square through the silent town.
And supple and stretched in his busy hand
Was the yellow twist of the strand.

And he whistled his tune as he tried the trap
And it sprang down with a ready snap.
And then with a smile of awful command
He laid his hand upon my hand.

"You tricked me. Hangman!" I shouted then.
"That your scaffold was built for other men...
And I no henchman of yours," I cried,
"You lied to me. Hangman. foully lied!"

Then a twinkle grew in the buckshot eye,
"Lied to you? Tricked you?" he said. "Not I.
For I answered straight and I told you true"
The scaffold was raised for none but you.

For who has served me more faithfully
Then you with your coward's hope?" said he,
"And where are the others that might have stood
Side by your side in the common good?"

"Dead," I whispered, and sadly
"Murdered," the Hangman corrected me:
"First the alien, then the Jew...
I did no more than you let me do."

Beneath the beam that blocked the sky.
None had stood so alone as I.
And the Hangman strapped me, and no voice there
Cried "Stay!" for me in the empty square.

 

 

 

Meaning In Life: Deeds, Human Encounters, Love

"Ultimately, man should not ask what the meaning of his life is, but rather must recognize that it is he who is asked. In a word, each man is questioned by life; and he can only answer to life by answering for his own life; to life he can only respond by being responsible."

-Viktor Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning

The originality and deep humanism of Viktor Frankl's thinking enabled him to develop his own approach to the human soul: he became founder of the so-called Third Viennese School of Psychotherapy. Thrown into a Nazi death camp in 1942, he, by his spiritual strength and his will to life, had managed to survive and thus became a living proof of the main thesis of his philosophy:

"One can live only for so long as one's life has a meaning."

Frankl (1905-1997) believed a societal sickness had been haunting the world for over 50 years and has now become pandemic. This sickness is the loss of meaning in people's lives. More and more people today have the means to live but no meaning for which to live. Boredom is the main symptom of the sickness. When boredom becomes unbearable, then addiction and aggression threaten the individual and society.

“Unlike an animal, man is no longer told by drives and instincts what he must do. And in contrast to man in former times, he is no longer told by traditions and values what he should do. Now, knowing neither what he must do nor what he should do, he sometimes does not even know what he basically wishes to do. Instead, he wishes to do what other people do... or he does what other people wish him to do...”

(Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Ultimate Meaning, 2006)

Robert Kaplan, noted American journalist, calls this illness that has engulfed America an “existential vacuum,” the meaninglessness of life. He actually believes democracy may be slipping away because of a passive voyeurism. An important symptom of the vacuum is the willingness to give up self and responsibility, which Kaplan sees as a form of tyranny. He gives the following image to illustrate his understandings:

 

“When voter turnout decreases to around 50 percent at the same time the middle class is spending astounding sums in gambling casinos and state lotteries, joining private health clubs and using large amounts of stimulants and anti-depressants, one can legitimately be concerned about the state of American society. We have become voyeurs and escapists. Many of us don't play sports but love watching great athletes with great physical attributes. It is because people find so little in themselves that they fill their world with celebrities. The masses avoid important national and international news because much of it is tragic, even as they show an unlimited appetite for the details of Princess Diana's death.”

(Robert D. Kaplan, “The Coming Anarchy,”

The Atlantic Monthly, February 1994)

Frankl

Are the most serious problems in America direct consequences of boredom, loss of self, and loss of responsibility?

Addiction to illicit drugs is one of the most pressing problems in the United States today. Drug-related crime is also a huge threat. Of course, the demand for drugs is at the heart of the problems.

Although, in percentages, the numbers of ethnic minority drug users are higher, the market itself — and that is what is important even if one only wants to stop the spread of drugs — is sustained mainly by whites, middle and upper-middle class whites. Why are these people involved in drug activities? The cause is almost without exception linked to the meaninglessness in the lives of American adults and children

How about other forms of addiction? Gambling – through numerous state-supported lotteries, and legal and semi-legal casinos spreading in America – is rapidly increasing. More numbers of children are becoming addicted to video and computer games. And, of course, enslavement to the Internet is on the rise. Are these problems signs of boredom?

People now often claim their lives have no meaning, and they become depressed. Depression has reached epidemic proportions in America. According to Mental Health America, it affects more than 21 million American children and adults annually and is the leading cause of disability in the United States for individuals ages 15 to 44.

The rate of increase of depression among children is an astounding 23%. And, unbelievably, pre-schoolers are the fastest-growing market for antidepressants. At least four percent of preschoolers – over a million – are clinically depressed.

Depression is also the principal cause of the 30,000 suicides in the U.S. each year. Suicide is the third leading cause of death for teens. It is the second leading cause of death in colleges. Every year there are approximately 10 youth suicides for every 100,000 youth. Certainly, many of these people found no meaning or no reason to continue living and facing life's many struggles.

The CDC Youth Risk Survey found that for every suicide completion, there are between 50 and 200 attempts. 8.5% of students in grades 9-12 reported a suicide attempt in the past year, and 25% of high-school students report suicide ideation. (www.teachervision.fen.com)

How do many of the living cope? Many medicate. Psychotropic drug prescriptions for teenagers skyrocketed 250 percent between 1994 and 2001, rising particularly sharply after 1999, when the federal government allowed direct-to-consumer advertising and looser promotion of off-label use of prescription drugs, according to a new Brandeis University study in the journal Psychiatric Services. (“Psychotropic Drug Prescriptions For Teens Surge 250% Over 7 Year Period,” ScienceDaily, January 4 2006)

How about aggression? Doesn't Hollywood and television deliberately engulf America with violent content? A.C. Huston and colleagues have estimated that the average 18-year-old will have viewed 200,000 acts of violence on television (A.C. Huston, E. Donnerstein, H. Fairchild et al. Big World, Small Screen: The Role of Television in American Society. 1992)

It is the problem of supply vs. demand. But why do people like and want to watch these kinds of movies and TV programs? The reason is exactly the same as that, which, two millennia ago made the Roman mobs pack the Coliseums where gladiator slaves killed each other, or were thrown to wild animals. Could the reason be boredom?

In a recent (March 20, 2005) Time Magazine Poll 53 percent of respondents said that they think the FCC should place stricter controls on broadcast-channel shows depicting sex and violence. 68 percent believe the entertainment industry has lost touch with viewers' moral standards. 66 percent said there is too much violence on open-air TV, 58 percent said too much cursing and 50 percent said there is too much sexual content on TV. 49 percent say FCC regulation should be extended to cover basic cable.

A powerful factor that also feeds aggression in America is the proliferation of firearms. It is now threatening normal life in our cities and towns. Is the desire to "bear arms" a result of Americans' deep-laying mistrust of government as a potentially oppressive institution? Could it really be a response to the high level of the boredom-born aggression in American people?

It seems all segments of society have been penetrated by the existential vacuum, or as Frankl also calls it, the "frustration of meaning." The American Dream - the dream of affluence and success - does not even seem to promise happiness anymore. And evidently acquiring wealth and success does not add meaning to life anyway: among the drug users there are more affluent than poor.

So, what is meaning? In his Autobiography Frankl writes:

"As early as 1929 I developed the concept of three groups of values, three possibilities to find meaning in life - up to the last moment, the last breath. These three possibilities are:

1) a deed we do, a work we create,

2) an experience, a human encounter and love, and
3) when confronted with an unchangeable fate (such as an incurable disease, an inoperable cancer) a change of attitudes. In such cases we still can wrest meaning from life by becoming witness of the most human of all human capacities: the ability to turn suffering into human triumph."

(Viktor E. Frankl, Recollections: An Autobiography, 1997)

Simple? Yet, meaning cannot be learned or taught, or shared."Meaning" is always personal, the meaning. In other words, life gives the individual an assignment, and a person has to learn what that assignment is. But what is important," the true meaning of life is to be discovered in the world rather than within man or his own psyche, as if it were a closed system." (Viktor E. Frankl Man's Search for Meaning, 1985.)

Frankl stresses that finding a meaning in life inevitably requires what he calls "self transcendence" - rising above one's own self: "being human always points, and is directed, to something, or someone, other than oneself - be it a meaning to fulfill or another human being to encounter.... The more one forgets himself - by giving himself to a cause to serve, or another person to love - the more human he is and the more he actualizes himself."

Many thanks to Genrich L. Krasko, VIKTOR FRANKL: THE PROPHET OF MEANING.

Genrich L. Krasko is a retired physicist still affiliated with Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. He lives in Peabody, MA with his wife Zeya. Full article: http://stuff.mit.edu/people/gkrasko/Frankl.html
 

 

Video Viktor E. Frankl: