November has been and gone and with it, the deadline for the “Write a Novel in November”.
I thought (correctly) that writing a novel without a couple of intermediate steps was a seriously bad idea. As a first step, a short story seemed to be the logical step, and I had my first crack at this. Being a modest person, some critical feedback was sought and received. The best that could be said was that it scored well “For Effort.” Don’t give up the day job. One member of my family said that the short story was good (with a face that looked as if she was chewing a lemon), but that my Blogs were really good (said with the enthusiasm of a diner at a gourmet meal). Point taken.
I was trying to bring the story of the birth of Jesus, the shepherds and the wise men into the 21st century. By this I mean, if Jesus were to be born today, to whom would the angels appear and who would be the wise men?
The other question that had strolled through my mind was why were these events recorded in the bible? They certainly make for some great nativity plays, and where would School Christmas Plays be without these celebrated characters? (Kevin asks where the essential donkey came from in the original).
Leaving such theological niceties aside, I thought that some teenage boys, finishing their shifts at McDonalds, would meet an angel, in the form of a glowing business man, on their way home. The three wise men would clearly have money to give away, so in this day and age, they must be bankers (I have thought about extending the story to cover how they came to look for the star in the first place, but that would be even more speculative and take too long).
As to the point of the story, I imagined that Mary, having travelled so far in the cold for a reunion of some kind, and ending up in a hospital without any staff or beds (nearer to real life in England than you might imagine), was feeling very cheesed off. What of all the promises that had been made months before about the baby. Joseph too might have been puzzled, not to say disbelieving. And into this come our Likely Lads, in the form of the shepherds or McDonalds staff, who had just been given the same message as she had received all that time ago.
Maybe (and only maybe, because I am really stretching a point here) Joseph was still not completely convinced by the whole affair, and worried about the money, when in walk three wise men / bankers bearing gifts to value of a decent win on the National Lottery.
Just because the Bible does not record these emotions does not mean that I am wrong. I might not be correct either, but the story is there for a reason and it makes you think, doesn’t it.
As to the second rate story of my lads from McDonalds, glowing businessmen, and three bankers, I may just put it on my Novel blog, and be done with it. Or I may not.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Business Ethics
I have set myself the challenge of writing a novel in 2011 and have enlisted the support and ideas of my blog followers. Already a number of related ideas have emerged from the creative riches of this group. Without giving the game away, possible common themes involve, in one way or another, the matter of Ethics, or at least Principles. This caused me to reflect on some of the experiences of my own business career. Ethics has always been a topic in business, and frequently talked about, even if not acted on consistently. Into this fray, stepped the Business Schools.
I think that it was the Economist magazine which questioned why Ethics should be a subject at Business Schools. If it was not, then I render my apologies to them. But someone out there asked the question as to whether there was really any point. The line of argument was broadly that Ethics represented what we were, and that if it needed to be taught, then heaven help us.
I do not intend to discuss the ethical behaviour of at a Company level, but to reflect on some events in my own career, that came to mind.
The first involved a very pleasant person, who went on a crusade against me, over the miscalculation of some fees. The first mistake was mine, but the personal war that took place over email and in meetings and that carried on for the following four weeks was well…..wait for the Novel. Some years later, when we worked together on a project, he apologised and said “But, of course, it was the Company that made me do this”.
In the second, I was asked (and gave) my opinion on what factors would be taken into account when deciding on the Vendor for a particular business process, and what answers would be taken as a positive solution. Being youthful and naïve, I was surprised to see these points, almost as I had dictated them, repeated in a very senior presentation to justify a particular product. The person doing the presentation had the choice of inserting these ideas as facts or looking for another job.
A further instance involved a manager being asked to answer an email, which had been addressed to a senior member of the business. The email requested the putting right of a small injustice. The manager was given instructions to write an answer denying the claim, even though he felt that moral right was on the side of the claimant. He wrote the response that he was instructed to give.
These dilemmas are daily. There are countless other examples. They go to the heart of many of the day to day conflicts that employees and customers feel towards Companies. Employees are required to carry out actions which may go against their own innermost ethical compasses. When people have years of service with a company, mortgages to pay, and children to bring up, these matters are not so easy to resolve or to censure.
I do not propose an answer. However, I think that the Economist was correct. This cannot be taught. The person in the first case still knew that it was wrong and perhaps this is a step in the right direction. When people have no feeling at all about their own actions in the workplace, then this is time to become worried. But the question still remains for each person, whether a line exists and where that line might be.
I think that it was the Economist magazine which questioned why Ethics should be a subject at Business Schools. If it was not, then I render my apologies to them. But someone out there asked the question as to whether there was really any point. The line of argument was broadly that Ethics represented what we were, and that if it needed to be taught, then heaven help us.
I do not intend to discuss the ethical behaviour of at a Company level, but to reflect on some events in my own career, that came to mind.
The first involved a very pleasant person, who went on a crusade against me, over the miscalculation of some fees. The first mistake was mine, but the personal war that took place over email and in meetings and that carried on for the following four weeks was well…..wait for the Novel. Some years later, when we worked together on a project, he apologised and said “But, of course, it was the Company that made me do this”.
In the second, I was asked (and gave) my opinion on what factors would be taken into account when deciding on the Vendor for a particular business process, and what answers would be taken as a positive solution. Being youthful and naïve, I was surprised to see these points, almost as I had dictated them, repeated in a very senior presentation to justify a particular product. The person doing the presentation had the choice of inserting these ideas as facts or looking for another job.
A further instance involved a manager being asked to answer an email, which had been addressed to a senior member of the business. The email requested the putting right of a small injustice. The manager was given instructions to write an answer denying the claim, even though he felt that moral right was on the side of the claimant. He wrote the response that he was instructed to give.
These dilemmas are daily. There are countless other examples. They go to the heart of many of the day to day conflicts that employees and customers feel towards Companies. Employees are required to carry out actions which may go against their own innermost ethical compasses. When people have years of service with a company, mortgages to pay, and children to bring up, these matters are not so easy to resolve or to censure.
I do not propose an answer. However, I think that the Economist was correct. This cannot be taught. The person in the first case still knew that it was wrong and perhaps this is a step in the right direction. When people have no feeling at all about their own actions in the workplace, then this is time to become worried. But the question still remains for each person, whether a line exists and where that line might be.
Monday, July 12, 2010
You are Only Allowed to Believe 10 Things
I saw recently that the debate about women priests has popped up again. I do not recollect the context and anyway, the debate probably never really went way. I was most likely just not paying attention (“Sit up at the back and pay attention, Hawker”).
I cannot get my head around this question. Actually, as readers of my Blogs will realise, there are a great many questions that I cannot get my head around. It is not that I am not interested (although that might be the case). It is more that I cannot develop an opinion about which I have any real conviction.
These questions outnumber the questions and beliefs about which I do have conviction. Poor fellow, that I am. These questions are very important to most people. In the Church, for example, they decide which denomination or which branch of the denomination you will join, whether you are high-church or low church and if you have the wrong view or belief on a topic, you will not feel welcome or at least feel very uncomfortable.
So I have decided to make a mid-year’s resolution to only really believe in ten things. I thought of making this five to start with (and still think that five is a good number), but there are Ten Commandments, and there must have been a good reason for making them ten. Jesus had twelve disciples. Now I know that ten is not twelve, but it is more than five. Also as we have all gone metric, even the greengrocer in Brentwood High Street, I will stick to ten.
Now, it is not that you cannot have an opinion about other matters, but these ten will the only ones which are really allowed to matter from now on. Now try it.
It is hard isn’t it? Finding ten beliefs or opinions is not the problem, but there is so much to leave out.
I have a theory (only a theory, you understand) that most of what we believe is clutter. They form a mental attic or garage, where we store up various views that have been collected over the years and never thrown out and never used in any practical sense.
I have nearly completed my ten, but I am struggling. I believe so few things with conviction, that I am not sure that I am going to need ten.
By the way, my opinion about whether you can have ten or twelve does not count towards my ten. (…and believing in the Ten Commandments counts as one). This is my blog, so I make the rules. Fun, isn’t it.
I cannot get my head around this question. Actually, as readers of my Blogs will realise, there are a great many questions that I cannot get my head around. It is not that I am not interested (although that might be the case). It is more that I cannot develop an opinion about which I have any real conviction.
These questions outnumber the questions and beliefs about which I do have conviction. Poor fellow, that I am. These questions are very important to most people. In the Church, for example, they decide which denomination or which branch of the denomination you will join, whether you are high-church or low church and if you have the wrong view or belief on a topic, you will not feel welcome or at least feel very uncomfortable.
So I have decided to make a mid-year’s resolution to only really believe in ten things. I thought of making this five to start with (and still think that five is a good number), but there are Ten Commandments, and there must have been a good reason for making them ten. Jesus had twelve disciples. Now I know that ten is not twelve, but it is more than five. Also as we have all gone metric, even the greengrocer in Brentwood High Street, I will stick to ten.
Now, it is not that you cannot have an opinion about other matters, but these ten will the only ones which are really allowed to matter from now on. Now try it.
It is hard isn’t it? Finding ten beliefs or opinions is not the problem, but there is so much to leave out.
I have a theory (only a theory, you understand) that most of what we believe is clutter. They form a mental attic or garage, where we store up various views that have been collected over the years and never thrown out and never used in any practical sense.
I have nearly completed my ten, but I am struggling. I believe so few things with conviction, that I am not sure that I am going to need ten.
By the way, my opinion about whether you can have ten or twelve does not count towards my ten. (…and believing in the Ten Commandments counts as one). This is my blog, so I make the rules. Fun, isn’t it.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Skiing down Black Runs
„And God said, I am the Lord, and I will bring you into the Land, which I promised to give to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob. I will give this Land to you, a Land flowing with milk and honey.”
For those of you who know your Old Testament (not many of you), you will recognise this as loosely based on Exodus 6.8, and more or less repeated to Joshua, before he led the people of Israel into the promised land.
I don’t know about Joshua, who seemed pretty fearless, but the entry into the Promised Land looks pretty scary to me. Here I am, on the last day of my full time working life, with the promise of great and wonderful things before me. Well, after 35 years of full time doing whatever it is I used to do, it feels like being at the top of a Black Run.
For those of you unfamiliar with skiing, I need to explain two points. First, skiing, like swimming, cycling or playing a musical instrument, needs to be learned at a sufficiently young age, when such skills can be acquired easily and certainly not at 50 years. My skiing is adequate, not fluent and certainly not automatic. Secondly, Black Runs are the most difficult, usually because they are either very steep or very narrow, or most likely both. I have successfully attempted a number of black runs, sometimes deliberately, but mostly by accident and on all occasions have felt a tinge of fear, bordering on terror as I look down the slope. I succeeded in all cases. I am still here, so that must prove something. At the bottom is the thrill of success, and the knowledge, that I have something to tell friends and family for the next few weeks.
So here I am, standing at the top of the Black Run of retirement. I have made plans as far as I can. I have done the numbers. The next 6 months, at least, is mapped out, and some ideas for 2011 in place. But who knows what will really happen.
The children of Israel had two chances at entering the Promised Land, and they should have taken it the first time. That would have saved them a great deal of trouble, wandering around in the Wilderness. But the Black Run was too frightening and they turned back. Better just to let go (as my son would say “Just do it, dad”) and trust (as Louise would say), and do it.
Well, here goes!
For those of you who know your Old Testament (not many of you), you will recognise this as loosely based on Exodus 6.8, and more or less repeated to Joshua, before he led the people of Israel into the promised land.
I don’t know about Joshua, who seemed pretty fearless, but the entry into the Promised Land looks pretty scary to me. Here I am, on the last day of my full time working life, with the promise of great and wonderful things before me. Well, after 35 years of full time doing whatever it is I used to do, it feels like being at the top of a Black Run.
For those of you unfamiliar with skiing, I need to explain two points. First, skiing, like swimming, cycling or playing a musical instrument, needs to be learned at a sufficiently young age, when such skills can be acquired easily and certainly not at 50 years. My skiing is adequate, not fluent and certainly not automatic. Secondly, Black Runs are the most difficult, usually because they are either very steep or very narrow, or most likely both. I have successfully attempted a number of black runs, sometimes deliberately, but mostly by accident and on all occasions have felt a tinge of fear, bordering on terror as I look down the slope. I succeeded in all cases. I am still here, so that must prove something. At the bottom is the thrill of success, and the knowledge, that I have something to tell friends and family for the next few weeks.
So here I am, standing at the top of the Black Run of retirement. I have made plans as far as I can. I have done the numbers. The next 6 months, at least, is mapped out, and some ideas for 2011 in place. But who knows what will really happen.
The children of Israel had two chances at entering the Promised Land, and they should have taken it the first time. That would have saved them a great deal of trouble, wandering around in the Wilderness. But the Black Run was too frightening and they turned back. Better just to let go (as my son would say “Just do it, dad”) and trust (as Louise would say), and do it.
Well, here goes!
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Has the Evidence been Tampered With?
The debate about the age of Creation has gone quiet recently. Not so many people insisting that Adam and Eve were created about 6,000 years ago. With the UK Elections and the World Cup football, perhaps people have just lost interest. I am told that the number of years, 6000, is derived from the Old Testament narrative, but I have not done the arithmetic myself. At least, if the disagreement has been continuing, it has not been in the news recently.
The science evidence points to the Universe being over 13 billion years old. Of course, science does not prove that the age of the Universe one way or the other. This does not prove that it was not created 6,000 years. It merely says that all the evidence indicates that this is not the case. Perhaps the evidence, your honour, has been tampered with.
Take this further. The Universe might only be 120 years old, again with the evidence suitably modified. (No particular reason for 120 years, except that none of us were alive then). Even more absurdly, the Universe might only be 5 minutes old, with our memories engineered, to create the illusion of experience and memories.
I should stop at this point. You might decide that the kindest thing to do is to come over and put me out of my misery.
I will make one further observation, before I have another beer. We generally assume that the creation of man was God’s main objective in creating the Universe. Also, man is likely to live on this earth for only a few thousand years, before he runs out of space to put all the empty beer bottles. Creating the Universe 6,000 years ago would show signs of impatience, not to say anything about potential tampering with the evidence. So, having decided what to do, God just got on with it. He got straight into the plot.
It might be more impressive and incredible to believe that God decided to create man (for whatever reason), and then to wait 13.7 billion years. During this time, he built a universe of unbelievable proportions and detail. Now this also requires patience and planning.
Perhaps both are correct.
The science evidence points to the Universe being over 13 billion years old. Of course, science does not prove that the age of the Universe one way or the other. This does not prove that it was not created 6,000 years. It merely says that all the evidence indicates that this is not the case. Perhaps the evidence, your honour, has been tampered with.
Take this further. The Universe might only be 120 years old, again with the evidence suitably modified. (No particular reason for 120 years, except that none of us were alive then). Even more absurdly, the Universe might only be 5 minutes old, with our memories engineered, to create the illusion of experience and memories.
I should stop at this point. You might decide that the kindest thing to do is to come over and put me out of my misery.
I will make one further observation, before I have another beer. We generally assume that the creation of man was God’s main objective in creating the Universe. Also, man is likely to live on this earth for only a few thousand years, before he runs out of space to put all the empty beer bottles. Creating the Universe 6,000 years ago would show signs of impatience, not to say anything about potential tampering with the evidence. So, having decided what to do, God just got on with it. He got straight into the plot.
It might be more impressive and incredible to believe that God decided to create man (for whatever reason), and then to wait 13.7 billion years. During this time, he built a universe of unbelievable proportions and detail. Now this also requires patience and planning.
Perhaps both are correct.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Underwood’s Got Radioactivity
I remember an incident at School in about 1961, when I would have been 9 years old. We were being shown the back of the science labs by the Head of the Science Department, “Mad” Mike. The school had a narrow shaft, which contained a small amount of radioactive material, no doubt long since removed under layers of health and safety.
Our excitement at the sound of the Geiger counter clicking was matched by our subsequent hysteria on hearing, in the afternoon, that Underwood had been taken ill. “Underwood’s got radioactivity”, we all squawked, like a noisy herd of geese. I am not sure whether our emotions were more of excitement than fear, but very vivid and noisy it was.
The reality was more banal. Underwood had had his holiday typhoid jab that morning, or whatever it was that was injected in those days and had the common reaction to this.
I was inspired down this trip through memory lane by yesterday’s headlines on the Financial Times (Wednesday 26th May). “Fears over Eurozone banks”; “Markets take pounding”; “Korea tension rise” and then in big and bold capitals: “INVESTORS FLEE RISKY ASSETS”.
Oh no! It’s time to panic and run round the class screaming, like Chicken Licken. “The sky’s fallen in”. Like everyone who does not know where to turn, we spin in circles. The world, or at least the world that we know, is coming to. We had better tell the King.
If the gods wanted to destroy us and send us mad, then they could worse than create, well, I was going to say, the Financial Times, but that would not be fair. But certainly create people to write these headlines. (But they do sell newspapers, which is the headline writer’s job.)
All of this is predictable for avid readers of Deuteronomy (the fifth book of the Bible, i.e. the near the front). It explains how God tries to get the message home. Pretty harsh stuff. Chapter 28 verse 20 talks about God sending confusion and frustration. Why all this has happened to us, is not a question that I see posed in the newspapers. But it would not sell newspapers.
What does God say through the panic? That’s what you have to work out.
Our excitement at the sound of the Geiger counter clicking was matched by our subsequent hysteria on hearing, in the afternoon, that Underwood had been taken ill. “Underwood’s got radioactivity”, we all squawked, like a noisy herd of geese. I am not sure whether our emotions were more of excitement than fear, but very vivid and noisy it was.
The reality was more banal. Underwood had had his holiday typhoid jab that morning, or whatever it was that was injected in those days and had the common reaction to this.
I was inspired down this trip through memory lane by yesterday’s headlines on the Financial Times (Wednesday 26th May). “Fears over Eurozone banks”; “Markets take pounding”; “Korea tension rise” and then in big and bold capitals: “INVESTORS FLEE RISKY ASSETS”.
Oh no! It’s time to panic and run round the class screaming, like Chicken Licken. “The sky’s fallen in”. Like everyone who does not know where to turn, we spin in circles. The world, or at least the world that we know, is coming to. We had better tell the King.
If the gods wanted to destroy us and send us mad, then they could worse than create, well, I was going to say, the Financial Times, but that would not be fair. But certainly create people to write these headlines. (But they do sell newspapers, which is the headline writer’s job.)
All of this is predictable for avid readers of Deuteronomy (the fifth book of the Bible, i.e. the near the front). It explains how God tries to get the message home. Pretty harsh stuff. Chapter 28 verse 20 talks about God sending confusion and frustration. Why all this has happened to us, is not a question that I see posed in the newspapers. But it would not sell newspapers.
What does God say through the panic? That’s what you have to work out.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Read the Bible - Get a Lawyer
In the late 1980s, I had some experience of the workings of European Community law. One interesting point that was explained to me was which translation is correct, where there is a discrepancy in the translation of a Directive. The answer that was given to me is that they all are. The English version is correct for England, the German version for Germany etc. How very confusing for the lawyers. How very straightforward for the local people in a single country.
I suppose that the same question arises for the Bible. With so many languages, and so many versions, in the event of a difference, which is correct? (and they are different, even if only at the margins, as I know from my readling of the Bible in German.)
This point occurred to me some time ago, when two different people referred to the original Greek or the original Hebrew. “In the original Hebrew, the word used here is xxx, which means yyy”. Perhaps this is a “Golden Source”, to interpret matters that are in doubt.
I always thought that this was unfair. Only the (classically) educated may enter the Gates of God’s knowledge, according to this train of thought. You would never really know the value of what you are reading. It would need a person, educated in these ways to explain what is really meant. You cannot speak to God, without your lawyer or translator.
But God speaks to all of us individually. (“How” exactly is another question…..and “Why”, is another question again). Whichever version we are reading at that time is correct. Of course, it does need to be read, but whether it is a Book of Law, like the European Directives, with rules and regulations, is yet another question.
More questions raised than answered.
I suppose that the same question arises for the Bible. With so many languages, and so many versions, in the event of a difference, which is correct? (and they are different, even if only at the margins, as I know from my readling of the Bible in German.)
This point occurred to me some time ago, when two different people referred to the original Greek or the original Hebrew. “In the original Hebrew, the word used here is xxx, which means yyy”. Perhaps this is a “Golden Source”, to interpret matters that are in doubt.
I always thought that this was unfair. Only the (classically) educated may enter the Gates of God’s knowledge, according to this train of thought. You would never really know the value of what you are reading. It would need a person, educated in these ways to explain what is really meant. You cannot speak to God, without your lawyer or translator.
But God speaks to all of us individually. (“How” exactly is another question…..and “Why”, is another question again). Whichever version we are reading at that time is correct. Of course, it does need to be read, but whether it is a Book of Law, like the European Directives, with rules and regulations, is yet another question.
More questions raised than answered.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
A Cosmic Joke
When I was about 10 years old, the breakdown of atoms into electrons and protons had been discovered. According to the knowledge of the day, these particles were the ultimate building blocks of all matter. Now, nearly 50 years later, we have uncovered a few more layers. Actually, the layers have reached the point where these atomic building blocks may or may not exist, depending on whether they are being observed or not (I think). Whatever.
Isaac Newton had the laws of motion all tied up, until scientists came along with a better slide rule, and noticed that some of the observations were not consistent with this. It took Einstein to explain this. Now we cannot explain all the motion and gravitation in our galaxy, so we think that Dark Matter makes up the difference. (I think that Dark Matter is another way of saying that we do not know and we are waiting for Einstein Mark II.)
As you can tell, I do not understand any of this anymore. Perhaps mankind was not meant to understand it. (I certainly was not meant to understand this). We were meant to discover this, of course. Each layer of discovery leads later to more unknowns. Unlike the onion, whose layers unpeel, but eventually come to and end, before being chopped up and eaten in a Fish, Prawn and mash potato pie, or ending up on my kitchen floor, these layers will never come to an end.
God is having a joke with us. He can keep this up for ever. We are meant to look for these secrets. These discoveries are captivating. In doing so, we are meant to realise that we will never find the end of this path, as it has no end. God made it this way.
Chicago's 81-storey Aqua hotel and residence has recently won the Emporis Award for best skyscraper of 2009. (Have a look on Google.) I have not seen any awards yet for the Best Universe of the Year.
Each discovery is heralded as the ultimate piece of knowledge to unlock the secrets of the universe. The next scientist should announce his discovery as “This takes our knowledge of the universe from 0.0021% to 0.0022%”. Not much of a headline there for the Scientists International Conference.
Perhaps the universe only exists if it is being observed. Creepy.
Isaac Newton had the laws of motion all tied up, until scientists came along with a better slide rule, and noticed that some of the observations were not consistent with this. It took Einstein to explain this. Now we cannot explain all the motion and gravitation in our galaxy, so we think that Dark Matter makes up the difference. (I think that Dark Matter is another way of saying that we do not know and we are waiting for Einstein Mark II.)
As you can tell, I do not understand any of this anymore. Perhaps mankind was not meant to understand it. (I certainly was not meant to understand this). We were meant to discover this, of course. Each layer of discovery leads later to more unknowns. Unlike the onion, whose layers unpeel, but eventually come to and end, before being chopped up and eaten in a Fish, Prawn and mash potato pie, or ending up on my kitchen floor, these layers will never come to an end.
God is having a joke with us. He can keep this up for ever. We are meant to look for these secrets. These discoveries are captivating. In doing so, we are meant to realise that we will never find the end of this path, as it has no end. God made it this way.
Chicago's 81-storey Aqua hotel and residence has recently won the Emporis Award for best skyscraper of 2009. (Have a look on Google.) I have not seen any awards yet for the Best Universe of the Year.
Each discovery is heralded as the ultimate piece of knowledge to unlock the secrets of the universe. The next scientist should announce his discovery as “This takes our knowledge of the universe from 0.0021% to 0.0022%”. Not much of a headline there for the Scientists International Conference.
Perhaps the universe only exists if it is being observed. Creepy.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
The Day of Shopping
It is Sunday today. It is pouring with rain outside, but I am warm and snug inside, looking out over the lake. The other side is just about visible now, through the gloom.
“Six days shall you work and on the seventh shall you look out over the lake”. This is the fourth of the Ten Commandments (in Exodus 20, if you are interested). Well not exactly. “The seventh day is holy to the Lord. You shall do no work”. It is actually much longer than that, but that is the gist of it. Fourth in the list of ten, as well. Fairly high up. (Not killing, not stealing and not coveting your neighbour’s Audi all come after this.)
But as it is said in England, “Six days shall you work and on the seventh shall you shop”.
Going to church used to be the traditional way of observing this, combined in the afternoon, with visiting relatives or just having a snooze in front of the Television, before cooking the Sunday Roast and then falling asleep again. In Switzerland, (after going to church, if you go), it is traditional to climb a mountain, complete a 20 km hike or cycle 150 km. Those are summer observed activities, of course. In the winter, it is skiing or falling over on the pavement and breaking an arm.
There is a discussion currently underway in Switzerland about Sunday shopping. It was a great shock to us, when we first arrived to find that the supermarkets closed at 4.00 pm on Saturday. After the experience of having no Sunday Roast, we just got ourselves organised to do the shopping on Saturday. Not so hard, once you get used to it.
We try to explain to our Swiss friends and colleagues, that they really do not want Sunday shopping. Just as ex-smokers are the most evangelical campaigners of the merits of not smoking, we are devoted “No Sunday Shopping, but Sunday hiking” campaigning.
Do you know what the first three commandments are?
“Six days shall you work and on the seventh shall you look out over the lake”. This is the fourth of the Ten Commandments (in Exodus 20, if you are interested). Well not exactly. “The seventh day is holy to the Lord. You shall do no work”. It is actually much longer than that, but that is the gist of it. Fourth in the list of ten, as well. Fairly high up. (Not killing, not stealing and not coveting your neighbour’s Audi all come after this.)
But as it is said in England, “Six days shall you work and on the seventh shall you shop”.
Going to church used to be the traditional way of observing this, combined in the afternoon, with visiting relatives or just having a snooze in front of the Television, before cooking the Sunday Roast and then falling asleep again. In Switzerland, (after going to church, if you go), it is traditional to climb a mountain, complete a 20 km hike or cycle 150 km. Those are summer observed activities, of course. In the winter, it is skiing or falling over on the pavement and breaking an arm.
There is a discussion currently underway in Switzerland about Sunday shopping. It was a great shock to us, when we first arrived to find that the supermarkets closed at 4.00 pm on Saturday. After the experience of having no Sunday Roast, we just got ourselves organised to do the shopping on Saturday. Not so hard, once you get used to it.
We try to explain to our Swiss friends and colleagues, that they really do not want Sunday shopping. Just as ex-smokers are the most evangelical campaigners of the merits of not smoking, we are devoted “No Sunday Shopping, but Sunday hiking” campaigning.
Do you know what the first three commandments are?
Friday, March 19, 2010
The Communication Question
If you were God, how would you communicate with Man (and that is assuming, of course, that you thought that this was a worthwhile activity). This could be communication to men (and women) individually. “Johnny, come down here at once, and eat your breakfast” could be one example. This is in contrast to the collective communication “You shall not covet your neighbour’s Audi”, a very pertinent instruction at this time for owners of a Toyota.
Back to the question. How would you do this?
You could just speak words to them out loud, so that the man (or women) hears the words. There are people who claim that this has happened to them. They would do better to keep quiet, as they are generally regarded as being not completely sane, probably unsafe to take the neighbours children to school, and would no doubt fail a CRB check.
However, there are important exceptions to this. If you grow a long beard, have a stick that is nearly as tall as you are, and are able to cause a sea to part, so you can walk across on the dry land, you are in with a chance, but even then, only with a limited audience.
You could write a book and have it published. This supposes that the audience can read. If they cannot, this provides those who possess this ability to act as interpreters and filters of this. The room for misinterpretation are clear for all to see.
Then, there are all the different versions. How would you know which one is correct?
Supposing there is a mistranslation. Imagine if the translator of the word “Audi” read it as “Auntie”. We would have all kinds of discussion groups about not coveting relations in general (what about “uncles”). , People who said they had never coveted another Auntie, would be told that they were in denial and would have to undergo special remedial counselling.
The Rewards approach would seem to have something going for it. When people do the right thing they get rewarded. But are the rewards that you (as God) would give to people (the ability to enjoy a sunset) the same as those that people want (a new Audi).
You could take a “dog training” approach. “Listen “Ginger”, you’re a bad dog, Ginger. How many times must I tell you, Ginger. You’re really going to get it this time, Ginger.” The trouble is that Ginger hears “Blah blah Ginger blah blah blah Ginger blah Ginger blah blah” (With apologies to Gary Larson, Far Side Cartoon).
So now you are beginning to understand God’s problems.
Back to the question. How would you do this?
You could just speak words to them out loud, so that the man (or women) hears the words. There are people who claim that this has happened to them. They would do better to keep quiet, as they are generally regarded as being not completely sane, probably unsafe to take the neighbours children to school, and would no doubt fail a CRB check.
However, there are important exceptions to this. If you grow a long beard, have a stick that is nearly as tall as you are, and are able to cause a sea to part, so you can walk across on the dry land, you are in with a chance, but even then, only with a limited audience.
You could write a book and have it published. This supposes that the audience can read. If they cannot, this provides those who possess this ability to act as interpreters and filters of this. The room for misinterpretation are clear for all to see.
Then, there are all the different versions. How would you know which one is correct?
Supposing there is a mistranslation. Imagine if the translator of the word “Audi” read it as “Auntie”. We would have all kinds of discussion groups about not coveting relations in general (what about “uncles”). , People who said they had never coveted another Auntie, would be told that they were in denial and would have to undergo special remedial counselling.
The Rewards approach would seem to have something going for it. When people do the right thing they get rewarded. But are the rewards that you (as God) would give to people (the ability to enjoy a sunset) the same as those that people want (a new Audi).
You could take a “dog training” approach. “Listen “Ginger”, you’re a bad dog, Ginger. How many times must I tell you, Ginger. You’re really going to get it this time, Ginger.” The trouble is that Ginger hears “Blah blah Ginger blah blah blah Ginger blah Ginger blah blah” (With apologies to Gary Larson, Far Side Cartoon).
So now you are beginning to understand God’s problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
