Education, Law, and People

[Reposted from CTIF.blogspot.com]

Law is only necessary to the degree that education is ineffective. The goal of a civil society is to equip people to govern themselves; self-control is more effective than state-control. But don't get me wrong, I would never advocate the immediate abolition of the legal system. Simply and humbly put, written laws are the awkward mitten-hands that point out the borders between right and wrong. Because human interaction is so complicated and full of nuance, we do not possess effective enough language to define the boundaries for every action that borders on criminal infraction. Definite laws are necessarily only a guide, though hopefully they err on the side of freedom. Like any rigid machine, laws need human intelligence to manage the minute details and produce a quality result.

Human intelligence is developed through education. For our purposes, let us consider education in its two most general forms: science and art. Classically speaking, "science" is any technical knowledge (like facts and figures), while "art" involves a more general understanding of application, especially with regard to people. Law is a science, while self-control is an art.

I think it is fair to say that education involves a transfer of information from a given source to a student's mind. If it is, then I believe it is also fair to think of all informational sources as potential education sources. Many of us think of education as simply the textbooks and lectures of formal schooling. And while that media effectively teaches science, it is by its very nature too rigid to teach art. However, I submit that all media transfers some information, and therefore, also some form of education.

Therein lies an important sub-point: certain media (especially image-based media) passively informs its audience. The goal of advertising media, for example, is to instill a want in the viewer. This is accomplished by "educating" the viewer about a set of circumstances which may not represent the truth. I encourage you to consider the passive education you may be receiving.

The real question here is whether or not our culture is learning (from whatever source) the information necessary for each individual to make effective moral and ethical choices with respect to his or her role in the larger picture. A balance between science and art is necessary for total perspective. The degree to which we are over-educated in science is the degree to which we become culturally inflexible, and the degree to which we are overeducated in art is the degree to which we lack an understanding of absolutes. The rigid use of laws, either to define what we all should accept or to reign in those ideas that are outside what we ought to accept, necessarily limits the freedom of the individual.

To return to the thesis of this article, the ability of the individual to control his own ethics (to find his fit) determines his ability to live in accordance with natural laws of human civilization. The degree to which each person is able to this, is the degree to which law would be rendered unnecessary. It is information about the bigger picture that determines a person's fit, and therefore, his reason to want to live in accordance with natural laws.

It is classic literature that studies these nuances; this information. The philosophers, entrepreneurs, and statesmen that wrote these works, wrote them from the trenches of cultural warfare, not from the comfortable halls of idealistic scholarship. These works represent first-hand experience with the subject matter: people. People--those wonderful, emotional creatures that purposefully defy convention and definition. People--the characters that fill the stages and silver screens of real life. People--the constant flaw in any plan, the exception to every rule, and the enduring force of change and balance on Earth.

For information to flow out of the Consortium and represent first-hand experience, we have to work with people. The process of building the Consortium and inspiring our people to read, discuss, write, and apply will serve as the very process of liberally educating each member of our community. A rising tide raises all ships, and this education process will constantly improve our media output to the point that our momentum will be unstoppable.

What makes a classic is it's level of truth and wisdom. Truth and wisdom govern the individual who understands them. A society of individuals who govern themselves do not need a cumbersome, expensive central bureaucracy. This society will be free.

FEATURED MEDIA: A Thomas Jefferson Education - A phenomenal book outlining the need for an increase in classic liberal arts education. This sort of education, which teaches the student the deeper connections of life, is the sort of education that made the Founding Fathers of America. Our education system today is broken, and it is up the independent individual to set things right.

Fine Wine

"If you're too big to follow, you're too small to lead." - Orrin Woodward

Many people are turned off by the very thought of "following" anyone. Even so, we follow people on Twitter, we follow the news, we follow the favorite sports team, etc. To follow does not mean to do so blindly. The question is not whether you follow, you do. The question is, do you follow with eyes open? If you follow blindly, you'll never gain the wisdom needed to lead when your time comes. On the other hand, if you ignore what everyone else is doing, you might as well be blindly following the blind.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle

Education is like a fine wine. Most people think of drinking anything as a one-step process, but in to a wine aficionado, it is at least a three-step process—outside of pouring it! I will admit, I am not personally an expert on wines, thought I understand the concept. Upon receiving a glass of wine, the natural motion is to circle the liquid in the glass and smell its bouquet. That's the first step. Secondly, the taster would draw the wine into his mouth, and purposefully taste its flavor. Then, and only then, does the taster move to the next step of either swallowing it (accepting it) or spitting it out.

In wine, this last step is generally predetermined by the purpose of the tasting. Is the taster experiencing a single glass of wine for personal satisfaction, or sampling a variety of different wines in order to make a selection. A liberally educated person drinks deep of great books and other exceptional media for the benefit of his mind. In doing so, he must be vigilant in his decision to accept or reject what is coming into his mind. Only with time are his mental "tastes" sophisticated enough that he can inspire others to follow him.

So if you never taste the fine wines of life, you can never lead others to their secrets.

Think Different

Do you remember Apple Computer? Likely, the answer is, of course! My first Mac was a beige box with a rainbow apple logo, a clunky CRT monitor, and a 1.2 GB hard drive. It was a great machine for page design, web design, and word processing; but not much else. Apple was suffering greatly at that time, and the question was whether or not it would even be around in a few short years. Looking back, I don't understand what I saw in that computer. But I DID see something, because I've been loyal ever since.

The company had a campaign with a simple message: "Think Different." The print ads featured great people, free-thinkers, and world changers of history. Eventually, the apparently excommunicated founder, Steve Jobs, returned to his seat as CEO of the company which was the catalyst for the realization of this long-running motto. Grammatical correctness aside, it was a profoundly simple statement that may well have shaped my thinking life, but certainly motivated me to work harder to do so.

More than a catchy marketing slogan, the company obviously took the philosophy to heart. It has been an almost non-stop, ahead-of-the-curve innovation machine since the release of the original iMac. They feature a whole line of now-trite but catchy "i" products. I'm told it stands for "internet," but it could easily stand for "innovation." One simple letter defined an entire technophile culture—reinventing digital communication from music and movies to business and social networking. From the iPod to the iPhone, and now the iPad, Apple has even changed the way we use technology. Not only have they innovated products, but they innovated culture.

The point of all this is to ask: what did I see in the future of a struggling company, whose product was almost as beige as their competitors'? Simply, I saw something different. Inside that beige box was a heart of gold (which, incidentally, is still ticking 15+ years later). It was just easy to use, without trying to smother me with user-friendliness, and yet it was extremely reliable—with never any viruses or fatal system errors that required technical support. In short, it isn't pretty now, but it still works.

The seeds of that simple greatness have compounded for Apple to form the authority on innovation that they now are: both technology and culture leaders. How not, with a statement like this:

Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.

How's that for Thinking Different?

FEATURED MEDIA: The Magic of Thinking Big - A tried and true manual to help you expand your thinking. Whatever you can envision is possible, it merely depends on the size of your thinking.

Third Side Philosophy

There are three sides to every coin.

Think about it. If you are confused, that's okay. That is why so many problems arise in society today. It is very easy to get drawn into either/or debates when nothing is ever that black and white. Give up? The third side of the coin is the edge of the coin. It may not enter your mind because it is seemingly insignificant, but it is an alternative to heads or tails.

Third side philosophy is not any one specific philosophy, as far as I'm concerned, but an open-minded attitude toward all political and philosophical thought. The lack of such open-mindedness is most evident (but by no means exclusive to or 100% defining of) partisan politics and well-established big business. Both of these represent big institutions with strong central powers which have been doing what they are doing for far longer than current innovations have been around. That is to say, the game is changing but the players are not.

The reason is because a coin mostly lands on heads or tails. So often, in fact, that any other occurrence is likely man made and not a matter of chance. This is a telling analogy of current societal issues. First, most people leave these large matters up to chance (or at least feel they have little control over them). Second, nearly all change is man made. Major societal and technological shifts are the product of a few people working hard to stand that coin on its edge. Naturally, that requires balance. It also requires a different approach than a standard flip.

For as often as corporation mavens are cited as saying "think outside the box," their ability to actually do so is very limited. Inherently, big institutions are the box. Anything outside that box is actually a threat to the comfortable bureaucrats at the top and the security-minded employees in the middle and toward the bottom. The only way to fix the problems with society is ask (and genuinely seek to answer) dangerous questions.

Media, of course, is a linchpin in this problem. It can either agree with the status quo (the populists' approach), or take a risk in asking the dangerous questions (the truthful approach). If these questions are asked consistently, there will most certainly be a measure of creative destruction, which will wain with time as the truthful form of media is revealed. However, once media creators find their fit, the reinvention of business and political structure will gain an exponential pace.

So it is up to free-thinking individuals to develop media that breaks the stranglehold of reactionary thought and chance-based thought. Those who are proactive, must encourage others to be proactive as well, and equip them with the tools necessary to do so.

Make no mistake: Standing the coin on its edge is a game changer.

FEATURED MEDIA: Leadership and Self-Deception - An excellent book about changing the way people think. A must read for anyone who wants to think different or help other to do so.

"LOST: Recon"

DISCLAIMER: In a previous post, I discussed the importance of ABC's "LOST." Therefore, I am beginning a series which briefly explores thoughts on the show with respect to FITmedia and Truth in Fiction. Being as the posts are philosophical in nature, I will try to keep story spoilers to a minimum. However, because many of the philosophical pillars are tied to critical events, it is impossible to discuss without some spoilers. For those of you not following the show, I hope that these posts will be worthwhile on their own merit, and should they inspire you to watch the show, that they will not have ruined the plot for you. You have been warned.


"Recon"

Executive producer Damon Lindelof suggested in this week's Official LOST Podcast that the title of this episode might have a double meaning. Specifically, he suggested "to con again" in addition to my first thought of "reconnaissance." Reconnaissance is, of course, scouting to gain information, which is what a confidence man like James Ford would need to do prior to an effective con. However, James is revealed to be a detective in the flash-sideways, whose undercover work includes using grifter techniques (like the "pigeon drop") to catch other con artists, hence the word "re-con."

The repeated theme of this episode is "trust." Most notably manifested in his partnership with Miles in the flash-sideways, and the deals he made with Charles Widmore and the Man in Black on the Island. This is a question inherent to James' nature, though it now seems that he has the choice to use the asset of trust for good or evil. He can gain a person's trust to catch a criminal, or to pit two foes against each other and rescue his friends.

In what has become traditional flash-sideways fashion, the trust issues between him and Miles are resolved by the end of the episode when James tells him the story about "Sawyer" and the death of his parents. Unlike on-Island James, he also reveals his hope that Miles will talk him out of killing the man who is responsible for the death of his parents. Because of this moral character in Det. James Ford, it is interesting to note that in the Island timeline it was Jacob's pen that allowed young James to write the letter to "Sawyer" ("The Incident"), which he eventually reads to Anthony Cooper before killing him ("The Brig"). It seems that Jacob caused James to go down the dark path, which seems inconsistent with a character who is supposedly good.

On the Island, James goes to Hydra Island at the request of the Man in Black to gain information about Widmore's people. James tells Widmore that he will march "Locke" to him, unaware, so that Widmore can kill him. James then tells the "Locke" what he told Widmore, and that he'll be surprised when they change their plans. What is interesting to me about this, given the "re-con" title, is that we do not know for certain that Widmore wants to kill the Man in Black. If Widmore is as evil as Ben Linus claims, then James is the one who was conned.

FEATURED MEDIA: Preorder the final season!

Überfans

When it comes to entertainment media, there are several levels of interest. Regardless of its presence in the mainstream or the number of people in its own unique culture, all media inevitability rests its influence on three basic groups. First, the largest group worldwide is made up of those who know nothing about a given project, but may nonetheless be indirectly influenced by its effects. Second, those who consider themselves to be fans. Third, those who go beyond a simple appreciation to become überfans.

From the German word for "super," "über-" means "denoting an outstanding or supreme example of a particular kind of person or thing." As I see it, there are also two kinds of überfans: enthusiastic and crazy! While regular fans enjoy the value intrinsic to the media they choose, they are unreliable consumers. They may purchase a copy of a movie, album, or book that they particularly liked, but they may well not shell out the money for a TV series on DVD, and they likely would not own the entire discography of any one band—accept one they might be überfans of. Regular fans pick and choose, and are valuable in indicating weak spots, which they forgo.

Überfans, on the other hand are characterized by their thoroughness. They pride themselves in owning the entire discography, including imports, B-sides, and rarities. Today's staggered release of digital media means they may end up purchasing TV shows and movies for iPod before their formal DVD releases, then again for the hard copy and additional special features. They are likely to collect action figures of movies and TV series, as well as being part of available fan clubs. The advantage to these fans is their loyalty, even though "crazier" fans might go overboard.

Speaking of fan clubs, many überfans have the desire to be part of the "cause"—an element which in itself might create überfans. They want to be involved in any way they can be, because they see some value in a given work or artist that others do not. It is debatable what exactly motivates überfans, but one thing is certain: they want others to feel the same way. Aside from the financial stability they create through their support, they are invaluable for two other reasons. First, they are the most enthusiastic promoters of whatever they support, and do top-notch promoting without compensation. Second, their enthusiasm is contagious, because they know like-minded people and speak their language. So they are the most well-equipped to find new überfans.

There are three ways I see to create überfans. The first is basically: "if you build it, they will come." In other words, any project worth two hoots will naturally speak to a hand full of fans who are just in the looking zone. This is a bonus, and should not be counted upon. The second is through superficial hype. Make the piece noticeable, glitzy, fun, and unavoidable. Make it the "cool thing," and sell a lot of related merchandise to help with viral marketing. This is standard practice for mainstream entertainment media, but it does not develop sincere überfans and its market block therefore collapses whenever something better comes along. The third method is depth of story. If the story speaks to the greatest number of people in a meaningful and even life-changing way—it is "moving" in some way—then it will spawn überfans by the busload. This is the ideal, but most difficult method. This is art.

"Firing the customers you can't possibly please gives you the bandwidth and resources to coddle the ones that truly deserve your attention and repay you with referrals, applause and loyalty." -Seth Godin, author Linchpin

Art may be a challenge, but it is a worthy one. Creating depth may, at first, seem expensive, but it pays off exponentially. The creators of media need to understand these fans, and have a relationship with them. That is what they want, and they are far more valuable than fair-weather fans. If what you create has enough value to attract a community of überfans, then their collective voice will keep you on track and improve your art—if you're listening. My suggestion to creators of collaborative media is to find new and innovative ways to involve these fans in the creation of new projects. Many of us are aspiring artists ourselves.

Are you listening?

FEATURED MEDIA
Flight of the Conchords: The Complete First Season - New Zealand's fourth most popular folk parody duo! Season one is a hilarious, truthful portrayal of two naïve "kiwis" trying to succeed as a band in New York City. Their random gigs are in an assortment of odd venues, though every one is attended by their crazy überfan, Mel—their only fan.
Mallrats - A hilarious commentary on mall culture, "the 90s youth market," and reality TV gone horribly wrong. Two slackers: T.S., who just got dumped by the love of his life, and Brodie, who is a Marvel comics überfan, crash a reality dating-show in support of T.S.'s love life.

The Wilds

It is difficult to see the supernatural from the heart of civilization. The more wild, the more is possible. The wild is an essential part of literature, as it is connected to and revealing of the heart of man, which is the force that moves a civilization forward. The very thing that compelling art seeks to capture in media, I believe, is the truth of the human heart (or soul). However, this is not something that stories can reveal as long as the fictional characters are ensconced in the routines of civilization.

The wilds are the untamed areas of the universe. They can be literal wilds like the Australian Outback, where there is little or no human civilization. They can be post-civilized type areas, which through any number of disasters from earthquakes to political collapse, have lost their former structure and security. They can also be areas of the mind and soul, such as the exploration of organized crime. Wilds merely need to be without definite boundaries or rules, and this can be achieved as easily through finding a frontier as in creating or re-creating a new frontier.

Truth be told, a story isn't even a story unless it uses some "wild" elements. Routine is not a story, but a deviation from routine is—pretty much by definition. After we are introduced to the characters in a story (ie: their routines), we are given the conflict, which drives the rest of the story. So I think it is also fair to say that all stories are mysteries, at least to the degree that you want to know how it ends. That being said, the greater the deviation and the more levels on which it deviates, the more compelling the story.

If something physical happens to a character (like an earthquake or an illness), he can still be ensconced in the routine of both mental and spiritual life. However, if the deviation is great enough to warrant the Great Question, why? then it has impacted the character on the spiritual level. It has called into question his belief system by challenging it. This is the reason that the wilds are important. Most people expect a certain behavior from the physical and political world, which is reenforced when catered to by media. Introducing the wilds is the act of opening these primary assumptions to questioning.

Without the wilds, no perspective can be gained by modern man on his spiritual and mental beliefs. He is merely trapped within his understanding of the physical world, which is limited to his proximity, and therefore a biased and limited perspective. I urge writers of fiction to take the hard road and shake spiritual foundations. I also urge you to do it with respect and fairness. Just go the extra mile and cover all the bases. You'll be glad you did.

FEATURED MEDIA
Lost: The Complete Sixth And Final Season - This groundbreaking, epic TV series is based largely on philosophy and classic literature, but is told in a mysterious and thrilling style which is very contemporary. Its use of the wilds comes literally and figuratively. Not only do the characters crash on a mostly uninhabited island, but the island has mysterious powers. In my opinion, the most important thing ever aired on television.
FlashForward: Season One Pt.1 - This fledgeling show has many of the earmarkings that went on to make LOST great. Everyone in the world sees the future at the same time, the wild element is whether the visions will come true.