Einstein understood that every observer was the ultimate ground of observation. I’m sitting at my desk in my library, apparently motionless—except for my fingers moving on the keyboard that, by the way, I observe to be stationary. But I live on a turning planet moving in an orbit around a sun that is moving around the galaxy that is moving through space. From my perspective, the squirrels, deer, and birds outside the window move through the woods while I remain still. If I type on an airplane going at constant speed, I perceive the ground below to be moving, demonstrable, I think, because I can get up, walk to the restroom and back, and find my seat in the same place—seemingly—where I left it. In the interim, the plane might have moved relative to the ground below by some ten or more miles in a minute. Physical relativity is a fact of physical existence. But what of mental and emotional relativity?
Apparently, absolutes of any kind are difficult to acquire or identify. I think, for example, of what I heard as I walked—and yes, changed positions in my moving house ostensibly firmly planted on my tree-covered property—through the kitchen to get a cup of coffee. On the news a retired military “expert” was talking about the United States sending equipment to Ukraine, a policy with which he agreed. But he pointed out that those in the Pentagon feel no apparent need to rush replacement equipment into the hands of the soldiers, causing, he opined, a weapons deficit while adversaries like China are posturing a threat. The “expert” was concerned that the United States military was concerned about optics centered on Wokeism. That is, those in the Pentagon want to demonstrate their “inclusiveness” and “sensitivity.” The point here is that what anyone or any group believes to be important—sees as absolutely important—is, in fact, relative. The Chinese I’m pretty sure, don’t care about equity and inclusivity or Wokeism as much as they care about stuff that breaks things and kills people, specifically, weapons. Thus, importance is a relative term.
And so it is with individuals, as demonstrated by my thinking that sitting and writing these blogs is important though I have on average only about 100 daily site visitors (Thanks, by the way, for stopping by). So it goes with every human: Border Texans think border security is important, whereas until the Texas governor began sending migrants to their cities, mayors of major cities like New York and Washington that lie outside border states gave illegal migration little public attention.
Whatever lies on one’s list of importance might not lie on another’s list. And so, for generations humans have acted at cross purposes, each believing that what the other does is relatively “unimportant.” Now, there’s nothing inherently wrong in such a belief just as there’s nothing inherently wrong in acting on what one believes to be important—unless such actions run up against diametrically opposed values. Take the Pentagon’s seemingly lax position on rearming. As the Poles found out during the onset of World War II, men on horseback cannot compete militarily with men in tanks. Germany under a tyrant thought a strong military was important. Japan under a strong military leader thought a strong navy was important. At the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor, America had a relatively small navy for the territory it wished to protect. Had the Navy not won the Battle of Midway in the course of ten minutes, the war in the Pacific might have had a far different outcome. After Pearl Harbor, the importance of a strong navy became a focus.
Human relativity is notably a driver of individualism. I find that to be a good thing. But the downside of human relativity has a parallel in stepping off a moving train. I might believe I am stationary while on the train because all the seats remain in their relative places, but I am, in fact, moving relative to the ground. The US military might believe that their focus should be on sensitivity training, but their potential enemies are not similarly concerned; stepping off the train means encountering the ground that, although moving itself, is not moving at the same speed or in the same direction. Yes, everything is relative, but there is a difference in relative motion that has consequences just as two vehicles moving in opposite directions cannot collide without consequences.
Not to kick a dead horse, but the same applies to the current energy policy of the United
States that wants to achieve a “zero carbon” status for the country. At the same time the country’s leaders are quashing coal use in the US because of the “importance” of climate change, the American coal industry is acquiring more markets abroad, indicating a difference in how “important” climate change is around the world. Does it not occur to those who see the issue of “warming” as so important that they label it an “existential threat” that others don’t place the same importance on climate as revealed in their coal use increase? China, for example, just issued a statement about increasing coal production by 300,000,000 metric tons per year.
It behooves us to ask ourselves what we think is important and to evaluate it against what others believe to be important. Everything is in motion. Our successes in life depend on our understanding those complex motions and even more complex emotions.
Apparently, absolutes of any kind are difficult to acquire or identify. I think, for example, of what I heard as I walked—and yes, changed positions in my moving house ostensibly firmly planted on my tree-covered property—through the kitchen to get a cup of coffee. On the news a retired military “expert” was talking about the United States sending equipment to Ukraine, a policy with which he agreed. But he pointed out that those in the Pentagon feel no apparent need to rush replacement equipment into the hands of the soldiers, causing, he opined, a weapons deficit while adversaries like China are posturing a threat. The “expert” was concerned that the United States military was concerned about optics centered on Wokeism. That is, those in the Pentagon want to demonstrate their “inclusiveness” and “sensitivity.” The point here is that what anyone or any group believes to be important—sees as absolutely important—is, in fact, relative. The Chinese I’m pretty sure, don’t care about equity and inclusivity or Wokeism as much as they care about stuff that breaks things and kills people, specifically, weapons. Thus, importance is a relative term.
And so it is with individuals, as demonstrated by my thinking that sitting and writing these blogs is important though I have on average only about 100 daily site visitors (Thanks, by the way, for stopping by). So it goes with every human: Border Texans think border security is important, whereas until the Texas governor began sending migrants to their cities, mayors of major cities like New York and Washington that lie outside border states gave illegal migration little public attention.
Whatever lies on one’s list of importance might not lie on another’s list. And so, for generations humans have acted at cross purposes, each believing that what the other does is relatively “unimportant.” Now, there’s nothing inherently wrong in such a belief just as there’s nothing inherently wrong in acting on what one believes to be important—unless such actions run up against diametrically opposed values. Take the Pentagon’s seemingly lax position on rearming. As the Poles found out during the onset of World War II, men on horseback cannot compete militarily with men in tanks. Germany under a tyrant thought a strong military was important. Japan under a strong military leader thought a strong navy was important. At the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor, America had a relatively small navy for the territory it wished to protect. Had the Navy not won the Battle of Midway in the course of ten minutes, the war in the Pacific might have had a far different outcome. After Pearl Harbor, the importance of a strong navy became a focus.
Human relativity is notably a driver of individualism. I find that to be a good thing. But the downside of human relativity has a parallel in stepping off a moving train. I might believe I am stationary while on the train because all the seats remain in their relative places, but I am, in fact, moving relative to the ground. The US military might believe that their focus should be on sensitivity training, but their potential enemies are not similarly concerned; stepping off the train means encountering the ground that, although moving itself, is not moving at the same speed or in the same direction. Yes, everything is relative, but there is a difference in relative motion that has consequences just as two vehicles moving in opposite directions cannot collide without consequences.
Not to kick a dead horse, but the same applies to the current energy policy of the United
States that wants to achieve a “zero carbon” status for the country. At the same time the country’s leaders are quashing coal use in the US because of the “importance” of climate change, the American coal industry is acquiring more markets abroad, indicating a difference in how “important” climate change is around the world. Does it not occur to those who see the issue of “warming” as so important that they label it an “existential threat” that others don’t place the same importance on climate as revealed in their coal use increase? China, for example, just issued a statement about increasing coal production by 300,000,000 metric tons per year.
It behooves us to ask ourselves what we think is important and to evaluate it against what others believe to be important. Everything is in motion. Our successes in life depend on our understanding those complex motions and even more complex emotions.
RSS Feed