Hi Pete, thanks for checking in and sharing current musings.
The whirlwinds of insight in these past months have swept us up to dizzying heights, and I'm experiencing a bit of vertigo. Not sure where it goes from here. But the trajectory of the world has shown remarkable resistance to course changes based on "enlightenment". The potential is there for utopia, but the difference between how things could be and what they are is always so vast.
Distribution of wealth is not such a big issue for me. It's not something that can be achieved through direct means anyway. (And can we really hope to improve upon the Anna Nicole Smith model?) An NFL football player that retired prior to the days of big contracts and free-agency said when asked about whether his pension was adequate, "a man can only eat so many kosher franks in a day". When John D. Rockafeller was asked how much money is enough, he responded, "just a little more". Not having enough time and wealth to enjoy the "happiness of pursuit (of happiness)" is a problem that will probably never be solved. Conditions are never optimal. We will always lack something necessary to reach a goal. It is possible to "have it all", just not all at the same time. Life is less about absolutes and more about trade-offs.
O.K., let me stop before I get asked to deliver a college graduation speech!
Responses To This Message
© Charles N. Pope, US Library of Congress. All rights reserved.