Book Review: Blink

The book that makes you think by telling you not to.

Malcom Gladwell is an expert at his trade.  He takes everyday things we all know but can't explain - then he finds a news story as an example and a research study to back up his findings, and then writes a brilliant narrative weaving it all together.

His point in this book?  Our minds judge things instantly, without our input, and without telling us how or why.

He starts off by talking about a statue called a "kouros."  They are thousands of years ago, and only about 200 still exist.

A new one came on the market, and it was the most complete, best preserved one ever found.  The buyer had it tested, had the stone x-rayed and examined and chemically analyzed and proved it was real.  Then he bought it for $10 million.
When a "kouros" expert was brought to see it and the sheet was taken off to unveil the masterpiece - the expert immediately felt uncomfortable.  Something was wrong.  "Have you paid for this?" asked the expert.  "If you have, try to get your money back."

He knew it was a fake.  He couldn't say why, he just knew.  The stone was old, the carving appeared accurate for the period - but SOMETHING was wrong. 

Of course - he turned out to be right.  His mind - due to his experience and expertise could instantly tell that it was fake, even though he couldn't tell the owner why.  He couldn't point out at first WHAT was wrong, he just knew.

Another example from the book is a study about people asked to try a new gambling game.  They could draw cards from 2 decks - red or blue.  The blue cards were slightly better than the red cards.  You'd win more often drawing from the blue deck.

After drawing an average of 40 cards the gamblers would tell the examiners that they thought the blue deck was better.  When the researchers looked at the gambler's card drawing tendencies during the experiment, they found it took only 8 cards before the gamblers "preferred" the blue deck and drew more often from it.

The gambler's minds had already figured out which deck was better, even though their "conscious" mind wouldn't know it for another 32 cards.  Our minds figure things out in the "blink" of an eye.

He gives many more examples, and they are equally compelling.

Then Gladwell does something you don't expect - he shows the ugly side.  He shows us that our minds make instant judgments and determinations, but we can be horribly wrong.  He gives the example of police officers who's minds instantly determined someone to be a threat.  The undercover police saw a gun, fired on and killed the suspect, only to later discover that the person had done nothing wrong.  The suspect thought they were trying to mug him, and he was holding out his black wallet to give it to them to avoid being shot.

This book shows us the power (for good and bad) of our instantaneous subconscious.  It talks about why women are still paid less, and why they are still "thought of" as less capable, even though their employers will swear they have no prejudice against women.

It shows that there is a group that is oppressed in the workplace even more than women... short people.  I wrote an entire blog post about Gladwell's findings Here."

There is good news.  You can train your subconscious.  You can make your snap decisions better, more accurate, more reliable.  Gladwell shows you how.

Gladwell succeeded with this book.  His book "Outliers" is still better, but this one is VERY good.

Book Review: David and Goliath

Genius.

This book shows you why the things we all THINK are advantages - often aren't. Goliath never had a chance against David. The result should have been known by everyone long before the "battle" took place. But everyone was looking at what they THOUGHT was an advantage - size.

Put a big slow soldier in full armor against a slinger - and who do you think is going to win? The guy who can only stab someone within 6 feet, or the guy who has been killing wolves at 100 paces his whole life and has a completely empty field to fight one guy.

The slinger is going to win every time. If they were in the middle of a battle field, people all around, no room to run or move - then Goliath would have a huge advantage. But the circumstances of the battle dictated the result. They put them one-on-one in an empty field. It is an underdog story - but Goliath was the underdog.

Is going to Harvard better than going to a state school?

Maybe not. Yet no one accepted to Harvard is going to say "no thanks" and go to a state school instead - because they THINK Harvard gives them an advantage. Gladwell provides studies, stats, and real stories that would make everyone reconsider.

You want your kid to succeed in school, so you look for a school with smaller class sizes. Are smaller class sizes always better??? Think again.

Gladwell makes you rethink what you've always assumed, and sheds REAL light into our shadowlands.

Book Review: The 5 Laws that Determine All of Life's Outcomes

Moved Me to Action.  That's what this book did for me.

At first - the book looks like all the rest: It's a business book written by a man who teaches others how to perform better and more efficiently to make more money.

The lessons within apply to everyone and can be used outside of business in most every walk of life.

That sounds an awful lot like dozens of other books I've read in the last 3 years:  
7 Habits of Highly Effective People

21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership

Good to Great

Crucial Conversations

The One Minute Manager 

Leadership and Self-Deception,The Anatomy of Peace,Outliers, The Tipping Point,Multipliers,

and the list goes on...

Is this just another "also ran?"

Luckily - it was refreshing and insightful.  How do I know?  Because it caused me to actually DO something.

I read books all the time.  Leadership books, parenting books, business books, marriage books, relationship books, therapy books, as well as religious books, scripture and church sermons.

In short - I read a lot of good advice written by smart people.

This book starts with quite the claim:  The author says the 5 laws are just like the law of Gravity: They are laws.  They affect everyone and everything equally. They are consistent, never change, don't show favoritism, or apply themselves differently based on morality or judgement.

I was pleasantly surprised when the author delivered on his claim. The things he teaches make sense, they are based on natural laws – cause and effect. He teaches us laws we’ve already known because we’ve observed them a thousand times over in our own lives, we just haven’t named them or figured out how to use them to our advantage.

I won’t name what the 5 Laws are here – because just writing the names or a one sentence description seems useless. Without the examples and explanations it doesn’t teach you anything. They would sound like empty affirmations that look good stenciled on an office wall, and are forgotten by everyone who reads them.

I WILL, however, write some of my favorite quotes from the book.  (To entice you to read it.)

“We find ourselves spending the work day thinking about being at home with the kids, while the time we actually spend with the kids finds us worrying about what’s going on at work. At work we dream of play, at play we stress about work. Yet the most successful people we know seem to have an abundance of time in spite of all the same sorts of activities, and even more, that also demand their attention” – p. 26
 
“The other person always determines the value that you create in a relationship.” – p. 111

“It’s impossible to immerse yourself in something you don’t want.” – p. 31

“The moment we make any type of investment in a given endeavor, we start to lose our sense of objectivity and it becomes difficult to reverse the course we’ve chosen, even if we know it’s leading us astray.” – p. 59

“Being a victim can elicit sympathy, attention, and pity, which are actually enticing counterfeits for the genuine love most humans crave.” – p. 131 

“His need to see himself as a great father was more important to him than actually being a great father.” – p. 71

“We almost always think we see the big picture. More so than those around us.” – p. 83

“What others see is the only thing that matters to them. It determines how they act and what they do. Unless we can see what they see, we won’t reach them.” – p. 94

“When we find ourselves feeling like someone doesn’t appreciate us or something we’re doing “for them,” then there’s a good chance we aren’t tapping in to what they value.” – p. 122

"When you’re in a conversation with another person, notice that there are usually two conversations going on” The verbal one, and the one in each person’s head “wherein we fill in the gaps with what we know or think we know about the other person and what they are saying.” – p. 138

“It’s funny how much more open people are with you when they know you see your own biases.” – p. 147

“The word ‘but’ immediately renders the first part of the statement as dishonest.” – p. 147

“The most accurate predictor of future events is, believe it or not, gambling… because people are betting real money, they are compelled to state how they really feel without the rhetoric that is likely to seep in when there is less at stake.” – p. 167

Book Review: Ender's Game

Third time I've read this book - yeah, it's that good.

A fast paced journey through space - all through the eyes of a six year old.  For being a Sci-Fi novel about a war with aliens named Buggers and genius children under age 10 who are trained to be military elite fighters by the time their 16 - this book is surprisingly realistic.

It's because of the emotion.  This book will not be easy to make into a movie - at least it won't have the same feeling or depth. 
Yes the book is thrilling with a great plot, amazing descriptions of war games, battle school, and futuristic space travel.  The special effects alone would make Michael Bay drool for hours.

But over 1/2 the book is nothing but Ender's thoughts.  You REALLY get to know this character.  you know his hopes, his fears, his dreams, his nightmares, how he views each room he encounters, each situation, each person, each battle. 

What makes this book amazing is the depth of Ender. 

Yes there is some language, and yes there is violence - but about ten times less than Hunger Games.

Ender's Game is a joy to read.  I recommend it - and hope the movie doesn't destroy it.



P.S.  The sequel's - "Speaker for the Dead" and "Xenocide" - are boring, dull, and awkward.  "Ender's Shadow" however is genius, and I would recommend reading it next.

Tough Mudder Tahoe - First Time Advice

I have only run one Tough Mudder. (I'm wearing the bright yellow in the picture)

I have never run a marathon, nor a half marathon.  I was never in the military, never went to boot camp, and until 5 months ago I hadn't run 3 miles since High School.

I also don't have tons of money to spend on the nicest running gear.

(if this sounds like you, my advice might help you out)

I signed up for the Tough Mudder because I wanted to get in shape.  I knew if I signed up for something ridiculously hard and paid over $100 for it - I would force myself to train for it.

Here are my 6 tips.

1. Sign Up Early (It's much cheaper)
2. Train For It (running and upper body strength)
3. Wet Test Your Clothes (soak yourself from head to toe and run 3 miles - then see what hurts and what retained water)
4. Talk To Someone Who Has Done Your Course (ie - get the tips unique to your course)
5. Run As A Team (so much more fun and it's great to help and be helped along the way)
6. Take a Camera (makes it more fun to remember and share with others)

Here's Why:

1. SIGN UP EARLY - I signed up 5 months ahead of time.  This made it cheaper (by $40) and also gave me plenty of time to train, recruit teammates, watch videos and talk to former Mudders who could give me advice.

2. TRAIN FOR IT - Five months ago I was not in shape at all.  I hadn't run since I did Cross Country in High School, and I hadn't lifted weights since 8th grade.
I started by running 1-3 miles every other day, and doing some 10 minute pilates videos for abs and arms.  I realized pretty quickly that this would get my legs in shape - but not my arms. That was when I decided to borrow P90X from a friend, and start it 90 days before the Tough Mudder.  I did it as scheduled, every day, for 14 weeks.  I started out doing 10-15 pull-ups total over the hour long workout, and ended up doing 52 pull-ups over the same time by the end. 
When the Tough Mudder came along - I didn't fall into the water on a single obstacle.  I made it over every single one just fine and still had arm strength to boot.  The training paid off big time.  When I got to Everest at the end - I still had plenty of strength to run up and make it to the top no problem.  I wasn't very sore the next day - I still went to church, and then work on Monday.  I feel great.  TRAIN HARD!

3. WET TEST YOUR CLOTHES - Do this 2-3 weeks before your race.  I did it 6 days before my race.  That was when I learned that my cotton running socks absorb tons of water, and that my wet running shirt rubbed across my chest and caused some painful nipple chaffing.  I then wore band-aids the rest of the week and during the TM race to avoid more nipple chafing.  I even took 3 extra pair of band-aids and did have to use one extra set because my starting pair fell off in the water.
I spent $7 on dri-fit running socks and $14 for a long-sleeve dri-fit shirt.  (yes I could have spent $30-$90 for those things - but I'm cheap and shop around)
You will get soaked early and often - like on this event:  The Cage Crawl

4. TALK TO SOMEONE WHO HAS DONE YOUR COURSE - I watched the TM youtube videos on-line and thought that the "Mud Mile" was going to be one of the HARDEST obstacles ever.  Well - not at the Lake Tahoe course.  Tahoe is all rock - so the mud mile is really just muddy water between rocky burms - you can walk through the whole thing no problem.  The killer obstacle is Kiss The Mud when you're army crawling on your hands and knees over muddy rocks.  This is when I was glad I had spoken with a friend who did the course 3 months ago.  They told me "Long Pants and Long Sleeves, otherwise the rocks will rip your knees and forearms to shreds."
I listened, and did just fine.  Most people were in shorts, and short sleeves or shirtless - and they all got cut up terribly by the rocks.

5. RUN AS A TEAM - I was really fit and prepared for this race and I feel that I could have run more of it than I did.  But we had a member of our team that started having knee trouble near the beginning and needed to walk most of the course.  We all stayed together, helped each other through every obstacle, and had a blast.  All 5 of us completed the course. Yes, we took over 5 hours, which is longer than most - but the point was teamwork, not a fast time.  We have great pictures of all of us with our headbands on, satisfied that we came, we saw, we conquered.  We can now all talk about it with pride, and reminisce on the great and hilarious moments our team had together.

6. TAKE A CAMERA - I can't afford a GoPro Camera.  They cost between $200 and $400.  One of my teammates owns two of them and he brought both.  They made this event 10x more memorable. 
We also had one teammate's wife come as a "Spectator" and she took pictures at about 4 different obstacles.  Her pictures are priceless, like the "Before and After" pics at the top.

Completing the Tough Mudder was great.  Being able to show friends and family the pictures and videos of all of us going through the obstacles and reliving it over and over again is priceless.  I laugh hysterically when I hear myself screaming like a girl in the Arctic Enema video.  (see below) My friend wore the camera - and as he finished and was getting out of the container - I jumped in - screamed 3 octaves higher than any male should, and made it out of the ice before he did.

I've already pre-registered for the Tough Mudder next year - it was that great.

The Good Part of Guilt

"Guilt is to our spirit what pain is to our body—a warning of danger and a protection from additional damage." - D.A. Bednar

Most of the time - Pain is useful.  What happens when people can't feel pain?
Example: What happens when diabetics lose feeling in their feet?  Why do they break bones, and lose toes, and have amputations? Aren't they wearing shoes, and washing their feet, and caring for them just like the rest of us do?

Yes, and no.  They're doing all those things - but they can't feel pain.  The rest of us hardly even notice the tiny pain signals our body sends us when we've been standing on one part of our foot too long.  We just shift.  We transfer our weight to the other leg, we lean back, we do SOMETHING without even knowing why.  But when you can't feel pain - you don't do those little things.  You stay standing the same way, on the same spot, because there is no reason to change. That is when you damage cells and break blood vessels and get pressure sores and stress fractures and all the things that lead to amputated feet.

Lesson: WE NEED PAIN.

Can pain become useless and overbearing and stifling?  Yes.  We can experience pain that debilitates us when what would heal us is movement.  We can even feel phantom pain for an injury that doesn't exist anymore.


The same is true with guilt.  Most of the time - guilt is good.  It is a warning.  It helps us make the little adjustments every day that keep us from getting injured.  When we get a big injury - guilt guides us down the path to healing and recovery.

Guilt is good, just like pain.  No one likes it.  No one enjoys it.  But those who want to grow and progress understand why it is there, and that without it - we would be even worse off.

Book Review: The One Minute Manager

The books we find most insightful are usually the ones that remind us of things we’ve simply forgotten. They don’t teach us something new, they simply remind us in a unique and powerful way of something we already knew.

That is exactly how I’d describe “The One Minute Manager.” The authors wrote a simple book full of common sense – and thus the book makes total sense.

This book sold 13 million copies! It’s only 106 pages, with about 200 words per page. Why would we pay 12 dollars for such a short book?

Because it speaks to us – it reminds us to be people – and that we can succeed and make money and make friends better if we do.

Great Lessons:
1.“People who feel good about themselves produce good results.”
2.If you don’t like the way things are, but you don’t know what you want changed – then you don’t have a problem, you’re just complaining. Once you know what you want changed – then you have a problem and can work toward a solution.
3.People are motivated by praise more than scolding.
4.When there are problems, attack the behavior, not the person doing it.
5.“I’ve never seen an unmotivated person after work.” (People get excited and motivated when they are looking forward to something – like what they get to do after work. So figure out how to get them excited about work)
6.Take a minute – see if your behavior matches your goals.
7.“The key to training someone to do a new task is, in the beginning, to catch them doing something approximately right until they can eventually learn to do it exactly right.”
8.Most employees aren’t trying to produce or accomplish anything anymore other than they’re trying to get paid without getting in trouble.
9.Manipulation is getting people to do something they are either unaware of or don’t agree to.
10.“Goals begin behaviors. Consequences maintain behaviors.”

Self-Absorbed or just Striving to be Better? Why we make ourselves look great on Facebook

Why does Facebook make people depressed?

There are mutiple studies showing it happens: Michigan Study Stanford Study

Experts say it’s because we don’t want to just be happy, we want to be as happy or happier than other people. Most people on Facebook don’t post all the crap and mundane day-to-day normal life stuff – they post the fun, the excitement, the exercise, the new diet, their vacation to a place you could never afford, their beautiful family that looks happier than yours, their successes at work, their new goals, their big changes in life, etc…
Why do we post about going to the gym? To brag? Do we want people to think better of us? Do we post about going to church, or eating a healthy diet, or working hard or getting a new job to brag?

Why did I tell the whole world I signed up for a Tough Mudder? That I started doing P90X? That I was reading scriptures daily? That I was going out with my kids for 1-on-1 dates? That I made 25 goals for the new year? That I was helping a friend load his moving truck? Is it to show how awesome I am? To show that I am the fun, fit, father of the year who is friendly and infallible? (Perhaps that’s all true – some Shrink somewhere can psychoanalyze my posts and figure out my intent.)

I think a lot of the time we want to be held accountable. We want others to know the kind of person we want to be – so we'll live up to their expectation. I want to be fit enough to do a Tough Mudder race. So if I tell people about it 5 months ahead of time and get a team to do it with me – I won’t flake out – I’ll train and get ready for it because I’ve made a commitment and others expect it of me. I tell people I’m reading scriptures so that I’ll keep reading them. I post book reports so people will expect me and ask me to keep reading new books – books I’d never read otherwise. I post about good times with my kids so people will expect me to be a good dad.

I know these are not the best reasons. I shouldn’t need others approval to do these things – but what can I say? Peer Pressure Works. I haven’t reached that state of perfection where I do everything because it’s the right thing to do – sometimes I do it because it’s expected of me – and for now, that’s better than not getting it done, so I’ll take it.

Don’t assume the worst in people – don’t assume they're being prideful. They may be posting about how great they are because they fear they'll only become great if you expect it of them.

Book Review: SOS Help For Parents

A practical and step by step guide for parents who are at their wits end.  I read this book after just finishing 1-2-3 Magic. 

I like the 123 Magic book better for time-outs, but this book better for everything else.  This book gives many more ideas and covers more topics. 

SOS explains the different ways kids misbehave, how to reinforce the good, when to use time-outs, and it REALLY explains well the use of a portable timer.  (I never thought that it could be so important to not use your microwave or stove top timer, but instead use a portable one.  I have 4 kids, I've used both, USE A PORTABLE ONE!)

SOS explains when to time-out both kids, or the toy instead.  It explains how to handle aggressive behavior, how to notice developmental problems and learning disabilities.  SOS give instructions on working together with school teachers, when to get professional help, and how to control your own anger as a parent. 

SOS has quizzes, worksheets, on-line videos, lists of resources, and a never ending flow of ideas to try.  It's perfect for parents who think they've tried everything.

Book Review: Sara In The Army

A very pleasant surprise.

How often am I going to read a chick-flick romance novel? - almost never.  But this book had three things going for it before I ever started reading. 

First - It's about a young doctor who gets thrown in the deep end (after medical school and residency I can relate)
Second - It's based in the military (I worked in mental health at the Veterans Hospital for the last 3 years, and having treated PTSD and much more, I found this very intriguing)
Third - The author is one of my best friends from High School - Brenda Hodnett.

I was very impressed.  The characters were real, they were fun, and you cared about them.  The medical situations were real, well described, and kept the plot moving without getting bogged down in medical minutiae.  The jokes were funny, the character development was paced just right so you could learn to love the characters as you went.  The reader wasn't expected to instantly love one character and hate another (except for Mr. Evil, but the nickname kind of gave that one away)

It was apparent rather quickly that the book was written by a female.  There are far more descriptions of the love interests good looks and sculpted chest and deep seated integrity than there are of the protagonist and her attributes.

What can I say? -  it's a good story.  It's fun to read, it's clean, fast paced, realistic.  It draws you in so you really care what happens.  It isn't all rose colored perfection - bad things happen, and people are left to deal with the aftermath.  Hodnett's descriptions of PTSD are accurate, which makes them all the more heart wrenching.

My main complaint is the ending - it ended like a chick-flick instead of a plotted story.  I didn't feel there was enough resolution.  It reached one conclusion, and left the entire world and outside plots hanging.  Maybe that's because there are sequels to be written, or maybe that's because the point of this book was just that - Enjoy the little victories, the good times, the heart-felt moments - because the world keeps on turning whether you do or not.

Here is where you can purchase the paperback ($10.15) or Kindle Edition ($2.99)

Book Review: Multipliers

 
meh.

60 pages worth of book that took up 250 pages instead.

This book is the quintessential example of researchers trying to find the X factor for success- and just finding common sense.

It's a worthwhile project - to figure out how to make OTHERS better.  How to get the most out of people how to multiply your own work and effort exponentially.

This book does make some great points:

1. You know that "genius" or indispensable person that has the smarts, but drives everyone else nuts and makes everyone else feel like an idiot?  He should likely be fired.  The benefit of his extraordinary brain is not worth the loss is production and creativity he causes in everyone around him.

2. Leaders fall somewhere on the "Multiplier-Diminisher" spectrum.
Multipliers make everyone want to do better.  They make you want to work harder, inspire you and make you excited to go to work.  They make you think, listen to your input, and help you really succeed. Then there are the diminishing dictators whom everyone despises, and who never encourage meaningful feedback or criticism or want to hear your ideas for improvement.  They know what to do and now they just need you to do A,B, and C.  Stop thinking and get back to menial labor.

This book basically teaches you, as a leader, how to identify other's strengths, motives, and drive - and then use it to their fullest potential.  To seek meaningful discussion, and not give answers, but seek answers.  It teaches you to be such a great leader that when you are gone, others will do just fine without you because they've been trained, allowed to grow, and can think for themselves and succeed.

Like I said - the ideas are worthwhile, but 40 examples of the same principle just seems ridiculously redundant and annoying.  So while this book may be good, it bogs itself down and is not really worth finishing.

GRADE: C-

Book Review: 1-2-3 Magic

This book works because it is simple, straightforward, and hits at the heart of parents dilemma:

"I love my children, now if I could just like them as well."

I have 4 children under age 8.  I get it.  I love them, I just wish I spent more time playing games and chatting and really teaching and helping my kids rather than lecturing and scolding and correcting and reminding and stopping them all day. 

 - "But it's our duty to teach our kids responsibility, and to get along, and to be nice, and to play fair"  Yeah we all know that, but there has to be a better way.  Kids will grow up, and they'll likely be just fine, but will we miss them?  Will we cherish the memories of daily good times, or just those few fleeting moments or vacations?

1-2-3 Magic teaches the counting system - but only for things you want children to STOP doing.  Stopping something bad takes seconds.  Doing something right takes minutes to hours to days.  So you can't use counting for making their bed, or cleaning their room, or eating their dinner.  You only count for behaviors you want them to STOP.

Next big revelation - you don't lecture.  You don't talk or show any real emotion in moments of discipline.  When they are acting out - you count them.  "That's one."  Then you just wait.  If they honestly don't know what they did wrong, you say one sentence to explain.  Usually they know but they feign ignorance - "WHAT'D I DO?!"

You count, and that's all.  You don't say "That's One!  I told you to stop touching your sister, why do you have to keep buggin her, can't you just sit and eat your dinner like everyone else?  Do you really want to go to your room? (kid continues)  THAT'S TWO.  Don't make me do it.  I will send you to your room.  Do you see your sister bugging anyone?  Why can't you be like her?  Why do you have to make everything so difficult?  Are you trying to drive me Crazy? (kid continues) THAT'S IT.  THREE!  Let's go.  Get upstairs NOW!  I've had it - I've just had it.!"

This book is great because the examples are real.  I could see my kids and hear myself in the different conversations.  It was sad and scary to think of how much time and breath I've wasted lecturing my kids when there was no chance they were going to hear it.

Yes, I started reading this book so I could know whether or not to recommend it to other parents.  Now my wife and I are using it in our own home with our 4 kids.  I don't know what the long term results will be, but I like the change in myself after just 1 week, and just that is worth it.

Book Review: Alcatraz Versus the Evil Librarians

This book is pure fun and silliness. 

You can tell Brandon Sanderson had a blast writing this book.  He had the chance to tell a fun story, make up mythical powers and abilities, interject with funny insights or lifelong pet-peeves, and keep me laughing the entire time.

I am now reading this book out-loud to my kids and I'm loving it. It's told from the main characters perspective so he gets to explain as he writes the book why he wrote it, what parts of his writing are annoying, when he's foreshadowing, and when he's leaving a hook at the end of a chapter (knowing that this is torture to the reader!)

The plot is fun, and he's thought of some rather ingenious magical powers.  He's also given people magical talents (which most of us would see as faults) - such as the talent of always arriving late, tripping all the time, or breaking everything you touch.

It's fun waiting to see how each character's "talent" will help them or hurt them throughout the book, and how they're talent always presents itself at the wrong time, or in the wrong way.

Here are a few of my favorite little tangents from the book:

"People can do great things. However, there are somethings they just can’t do. I, for instance, have not been able to transform myself into a Popsicle, despite years of effort. I could, however, make myself insane, if I wished. (Though if I achieved the second, I might be able to make myself think I’d achieved the first….)"

"At this rate, it won't be long before this story departs speaking of evil Librarians, and instead turns into a terribly boring tale about a lawyer who defends unjustly accused field hands.

What do mockingbirds have to do with that, anyway?"

At one point there is a character who can only speak gibberish and he says "Churches, lead, very small rocks, and ducks."

 - When I read this I laughed out loud in the middle of a library.  (He's quoting Monty Python and the Holy Grail)

"Some people assume that authors write books because we have vivid imaginations and want to share our vision. Other people think we write because we are bursting with and therefore must scribble those stories down in moments of propondenty. Both groups are completely wrong. Authors write books for one and only one reason. Because we like to torture people. Now actual torture in frowned upon in civilized society, fortunately the authorial community has discovered in story telling an even more powerful and fulfilling means of causing agony. We write stories, and by doing so we engage in a perfectly legal way of doing all sorts of terrible things to our readers. Take for instance, the word I used above, "propondenty", there is no such word. I made it up. Why? Because it amused me to think of thousands of readers looking up a nonsense word in their dictionaries."

To Spank or Not to Spank

I get this question all the time: Is it okay to spank kids?

Whether or not parents use spanking as a discipline technique has almost nothing to do with the child, or what the child did, or the severity of their action - it has to do with the parent.

This is my response to the question:

Have you ever spanked you're child when you were angry? 
Have you ever regretted spanking, or how hard you did it, or how much? 
Has your spouse or someone else ever reprimanded you for it afterwards?

If any of those are true - you have lost the right to discipline your children with spanking.  You are not punishing them, you are showing them that YOU have lost your self control.  You are teaching them that "When you lose control, I lose control, and because I'm bigger and older, you're getting spanked."

I know.  There is a parent out there who will respond that "when I was a kid my dad only had to look at the belt and I stopped cold in my tracks because I didn't want to get a whooping like I had the last time.  That's how you teach a kid!"
 - I don't think I have any chance of really discussing spaking with that parent.

So my answer is - Yes.  I have seen benefits from spanking.  I have seen kids respond to spankings, and I've seen them grow up just fine, and well disciplined.

I am never going to recommend it - just like I'm not going to recommend a glass of red-wine to every person every day.  Yes, there can be benefits - but the number of people who go too far is not worth the risk of recommending it. (get the correlation?)

So I don't tell parents NOT to spank as an absolute rule.  I tell them to be very careful - once they lose control, once they cross that line - it's no longer spanking, it's abuse.  Punishments only teach a real lesson if parents remain in control, and the children know that part of the punishment is going to be an increased showing of love afterwards. 

If we are heated, angry, at our wits end, etc... - we don't get to spank. 

A Searching and Fearless Moral Inventory

I have read the Alcoholics Anonymous big book, and multiple other books on addiction.  I have read the entire Holy Bible and the Book or Mormon many times.  I have read the Bhagavad Gita, the writings of Confucius, and many books by other religious leaders and deep thinkers.  I have taken classes from a Zen master, spent hours doing Yoga, sat for long periods in contemplation and meditation, fasted for days, and prayed thousands of times. 

There is a unifying theme: Self discovery, meditation, reflection, inner peace, or in other words: an analysis of oneself.

As I study the "12 steps" I find Step 4 to be the most important, the most daunting, and the most meaningful for life in general. 

Step 4 does not say: "List all the bad things you've done."  It asks you to make a "searching and fearless moral inventory of yourself."  Figure out who you are.  What makes you tick? What failures have you had, and what led you there?  What resentments do you still hold?  Why are they still there after all this time?  What are your greatest strengths, your talents, your abilities?  What keeps you from excelling?

Step 4 isn't just about getting over an addiction, or repenting, or fixing past mistakes.  It's about self-discovery.  This is about answering the hardest question we've ever asked ourselves: "Who am I?" 

Writing out this fearless moral inventory will help you discover your true relationship with yourself, with God, and with others. You will find weaknesses. You will find strengths.  You will also find reasons for both.  You will find heartache and joy, but mostly you will find understanding. 

I began working on this four months ago.  I'm still not even close to finishing.

Today's Self-Contemplation: Why do I connect with certain fictional characters?

Why do I connect so well with Jean ValJean from Les Miserables?  Why did I write a 1400 word essay comparing ValJean to Tevye from the Fiddler on the Roof?  Why do connect with Tevye?

When I read the massive book about King Arthur (The Once and Future King) - why didn't I relate to Arthur, or Merlyn, or Pellinore or Galahad, but rather it was Lancelot who struck me to the bone as if our struggles were identical?

I'm beginning to see the themes:

Val Jean: I have done wrong, and cannot escape it. I want to do good, forever, for everyone. Even if I became as wealthy as a King, I honestly don't think I would spend it on myself - I'd use it to help other people. I can forgive myself, and I can forgive others - but I will not excuse myself or resent the law or accusers when I am in the wrong. When I am wrong, I deserve the punishment. Another person should never have to suffer in my place.
ValJean worked his whole life to love other people, to fulfill his promises, his duties. He found in the end that "To love another person is to see the face of God."

Lancelot: I have this strong desire inside me to be the best - at so many things. Not because I want to be better than others, but because I want to reach my potential. I want to be the best doctor. I want to be able to perform miracles - to be so pure that God could work through me.  But like Lancelot - I know I fall short. I don't even know if I want it for the right reasons. Like Lancelot, I repeatedly question my own motives. Do I want to do great deeds for God? for country? for right? or for my own glory? Lancelot's struggle is my own.  The struggle in the mind to be the best, but not compare myself with others. The struggle for perfection, but for the right reasons. The struggle to figure out what really matters in life and who God really wants me to be.

Tevye: The struggling man trying to maintain tradition and his religion while being accepting of others.  He must accept those who change his faith, who leave his faith, and who even go so far as to persecute and mock his faith. He tries to love all and accept all, but then says "how can I turn my back on my faith, my people? If I try and bend that far, I'll break."
Tevye's family and his religion are the most important things in his life, and he cannot live without them. Like him, I struggle to figure out how to be true to myself, my God, my family, yet be open, accepting, loving, and adaptable.

Hopefully this post was helpful to someone in some way.  Hopefully it leads you to a moment of self-reflection, and eventually, to a searching and fearless moral inventory of yourself.

Are There "Levels" of Heaven?

Let's suppose there are multiple levels of heaven.  Would everyone want to go to the top level?

Getting into the highest level of Heaven isn't like getting seats on the 50 yard line at the Super Bowl, it's like being the quarterback of the winning team.

Would a high school quarterback enjoy going to the Super Bowl and sitting on the 50 yard line?

OF COURSE!

Would he enjoy playing in the game with the most elite NFL players in the world, trying to read the routes, thread the needles, and trying to evade 350 lbs linemen trying to slam him into the turf??

That is how people misunderstand heaven.  

Heaven isn't a "one size fits all happiness."

Heaven isn't just a standard gift that can be given to anyone.  They wouldn't enjoy it.  There are "levels" or degrees of heaven.  Like the Bible describes in 2 Corinthians 12:2 about "the third heaven" - there are different levels and parts, where each of us will be the absolute happiest and most comfortable.

Would you enjoy being on stage in front of thousands of musical theater fanatics to play the role of the Phantom in the Phantom of the Opera?  Would that be amazingly awesome, or would it be humiliating, and the most uncomfortable experience of your life?  Would you be very very out of place singing next to professional broadway singers?

Going to heaven is about being happy, and you will inherit the kind of heaven that will make you happiest.  

What if you didn't make it to the top?  Like someone asking me why I want to become a child psychiatrist making $150,000 per year.

"But you could have been a plastic surgeon making $400,000 per year. You could have been the medical director at the Mayo Clinic.  You could have been more!"

If I never wanted those things, then I'll be most comfortable right where I am.  I think heaven is the same way.  We will know exactly what we could have had, but we'll be exactly where we want to be.

Book Review: The Wizard of Oz

Not what I expected.

I've seen the Judy Garland movie at least five or six times.  I've also seen the musical Wicked, and I have all the music memorized.  So I thought I knew the world of Oz, both the original and the revamped version... I was wrong.

Surprise #1: The introduction. The author says rather openly that there is no moral to the story.  No gruesome ending like Grimm's tales, and no educational value other than entertainment.
"The Wonderful Wizard of Oz was written solely to please children of today.  It aspires to be a modernized fairy tale, in which the wonderment and joy are retained, and the heartache and nightmares left out."

Surprise #2: Dorothy is YOUNG, like between 7 and 10 years old.  She is really a very innocent and simple child going through this adventure.

Surprise #3: The Wicked Witch doesn't show up until you've read over half of the book.  She is mentioned earlier, but she doesn't show up in munchkin land at the beginning and try to get the shoes, and she's actually not a huge part of the story.  15 pages after she is introduced, she's melted, and there are still 80 pages of story left.

Surprise #4: The Tinman, the Scarecrow, and the Cowardly Lion are all developed characters with story lines that continue even after the Wizard leaves Oz.

This is a fun little book.  It's a quick read, kids can enjoy it.  The drawings and pictures are fun, and the author doesn't take himself too seriously.

I can honestly say I was pleasantly surprised.

Book Review: Atlas Shrugged

 

Ayn Rand discovered a few plain and precious truths:

1. Money is made.  Money is simply a way of trading the worth of your goods for someone elses.  It doesn't matter what your goods are - it matters if others are willing to trade theirs for yours.
Money is not finite, because all money is based on the worth of something your produce.  The more you produce and the better you do it - the more money is made.  Everyone can be rich at the same time.  There is no such thing as "one person became rich, and that made the rest of us poor."  There is no "pie" so when one person has a "bigger slice" it doesn't detract from anyone elses ability to make money as well. 

2.  Mercy cannot rob justice.  Both can be met - but never one at the expense of the other.

3.  Those who "produce" with their minds are often worth far more than those who "produce" with their bodies.  A blacksmith could make a steel beam in about three days.  But if someone develops the technology, that same blacksmith can use equipment and engineering to produce 100 steel beams in three days.
The blacksmith does the same "amount" of work - yet produces 100x more.  Who gets the profit?  The blacksmith doing the work, or the inventor who made it possible?
 - the answer is both.  Everyone benefits and makes more.  But her point is that - If no one has ideas, then muscle and production are pretty useless.  The metal and glass used to make an iPod probably cost about $15 as raw materials. - so why do we pay $300 for them?  And why don't those profits go to the makers of the glass and metal, or the workers assembling the iPods?  They make money - but they are not the reason the final product is worth so much.  It's worth so much because of what it can DO - what the inventors programmed into it!

The problem with Ayn Rand is that once she discovered these truths - she stopped searching.
She thought she could sum up the purpose and motto of life in one sentence:

"I swear—by my life and my love of it—that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."

She assumed she found the only truth there ever was - and she took 1168 pages to explain it.  The only moral principle is that of production.  There are no morals other than the moral of doing the best job you can do - nothing more, nothing less.

She openly mocks sexual morality in her book.  Caring for others, love, religion - there is no purpose to any of that.  There is no truth there, no morality, nothing.  You either produce or you don't.  That is your worth.

That is what destroys her book.  She realized something great.  She pointed out that you don't have to limit "the big guy" to make room for "the little guy."  If one person succeeds, that doesn't mean others fail. Profit is not evil.  It is those who produce who feed the rest of us. Corporations are not bad - they employ people and make money and products that all of us want and use.
Laborers aren't any better than thinkers.  It doesn't matter how you produce or contribute, it matters that you do - and that you do it well.

She is right - But she thinks you must ONLY produce.  You cannot be nice.  You cannot care about what happens to others.  You cannot love and you cannot live by standards.  You cannot believe in God.  There is one standard and one God to her - that is production.

The part that really disturbed me was her understanding of sex.  To Ayn Rand - sex is a prize, a reward to be given to the best producer and the most genius mind.  Literally.  Her protagonist sleeps with one man, then finds someone smarter and richer and starts sleeping with him - then finds the smartest man ever - and sleeps with him.

Then she tries to show all three men being perfectly happy and content with this arrangement.  The first two say "you found someone smarter and richer, I'm happy for you and still love you, and go have all the sex you want with the new guy instead of me - he deserves it."

That's just wrong on so many levels - I can't talk about it anymore.

Then she makes a rather glaring mistake in her book: She realized another truth, but refused to admit it.  She discovered that once people are independent, self sustaining producers - they gladly share and collaborate with others of their caliber. 
She writes vehemently that human beings should NEVER give each other ANYTHING.  Everything must be purchased, even between the closest of friends.  Yet - she shows them giving new-comers things for free, knowing they'll be able to produce on their own later, and pay back all the generosity shown to them.

Ayn Rand realized that motivated and driven people can be kind, and caring, and generous, and can give things freely to others of the same mind.  She ends her book with people risking their lives and fortunes to save those they love - but she just tried to cover it up and never admit it openly.

Some of Rand's characters are deep and real - but those characters are few and far between.  Most of her characters are uni-dimensional, artificial, and ridiculous.  They are over the top, overzealous, and they make the book feel like a parable instead of a good story.

This book does make you think.  It makes some great points - but it gets so bogged down teaching the same lesson 47 different ways, that it really isn't worth recommending.  If an abridged version exists - try that.  It wasn't worth the 1168 pages.


* * * * * * * * * *


Here are some good quotes from the book:

What's the most depraved type of human being? The man without a purpose.

"I've hired you to do a job, not to do your best—whatever that is." 

"You are an unusual, brilliant child who has not seen enough of life to grasp the full measure of human stupidity.”

Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth—the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. 

Money will not serve the mind that cannot match it.

“Miss Taggart, I can proudly say that in all of my life I have never made a profit!"

Her voice was quiet, steady and solemn: "Mr. Lawson, I think I should let you know that of all the statements a man can make, that is the one I consider most despicable."

Do you know the hallmark of the second-rater? It's resentment of another man's achievement. Those touchy mediocrities who sit trembling lest someone's work prove greater than their own—they have no inkling of the loneliness that comes when you reach the top. The loneliness for an equal— for a mind to respect and an achievement to admire. They bare their teeth at you from out of their rat holes, thinking that you take pleasure in letting your brilliance dim them—while you'd give a year of your life to see a flicker of talent anywhere among them. 

"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco d'Anconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce."

Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made—before it can be looted or mooched—made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can't consume more than he has produced. 

Let me give you a tip on a clue to men's characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it. 

When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing—when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors—when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you—when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice—you may know that your society is doom.

All your life, you have heard yourself denounced, not for your faults, but for your greatest virtues. You have been hated, not for your mistakes, but for your achievements. You have been scorned for all those qualities of character which are your highest pride. You have been called selfish for the courage of acting on your own judgment and bearing sole responsibility for your own life. You have been called arrogant for your independent mind. You have been called cruel for your unyielding integrity. You have been called anti-social for the vision that made you venture upon undiscovered roads. You have been called ruthless for the strength and self-discipline of your drive to your purpose. You have been called greedy for the magnificence of your power to create wealth. 

“If you saw Atlas, the giant who holds the world on his shoulders, if you saw that he stood, blood running down his chest, his knees buckling, his arms trembling but still trying to hold the world aloft with the last of his strength, and the greater his effort the heavier the world bore down upon his shoulders—what would you tell him to do?"

"I . . . don't know. What . . . could he do? What would you tell him?"

"To shrug."

 

Robin Hood is remembered, not as a champion of property, but as a champion of need, not as a defender of the robbed, but as a provider of the poor. He is held to be the first man who assumed a halo of virtue by practicing charity with wealth which he did not own, by giving away goods which he had not produced, by making others pay for the luxury of his pity. He is the man who became the symbol of the idea that need, not achievement, is the source of rights, that we don't have to produce, only to want, that the earned does not belong to us, but the unearned does. He became a justification for every mediocrity who, unable to make his own living, has demanded the power to dispose of the property of his betters.

There's no such thing as a lousy job—only lousy men who don't care to do it.

What were they counting on? Those who had once simpered: "I don't want to destroy the rich, I only want to seize a little of their surplus to help the poor, just a little, they'll never miss it!"—then, later, had snapped: "The tycoons can stand being squeezed, they've amassed enough to last them for three generations"—then, later, had yelled: "Why should the people suffer while businessmen have reserves to last a year?"—now were screaming: "Why should we starve while some people have reserves to last a week?" What were they counting on? 

Man cannot survive except by gaining knowledge, and reason is his only means to gain it. 

The name of this monstrous absurdity is "Original Sin." A sin without volition is a slap at morality and an insolent contradiction in terms: that which is outside the possibility of choice is outside the province of morality.

'The public,' to you, is whoever has failed to achieve any virtue or value; whoever achieves it, whoever provides the goods you require for survival, ceases to be regarded as part of the public or as part of the human race. 

Every man is free to rise as far as he's able or willing, but it's only the degree to which he thinks that determines the degree to which he'll rise. Physical labor as such can extend no further than the range of the moment.