The AP reports “Forty percent of Americans have never lived when there wasn’t a Bush or a Clinton in the White House.”

Come to think of it George Bush accepted the oath of office in 1988, 19 years ago. That is a long time for two families to dominate the political scene. Add to that that Senator Clinton pretty much has the democratic nomination in the bag, with no clear Republican challenger in a country weary of (what is perceived as a partisan war) in Iraq and you can bet that we have 4 to 8 more years to add. That could result in a 28 year oligarchy.

Nancy Benac, the Associated Press writer, uses the term “Bush-Clinton fatigue” in her article entitled “Bush, Clinton, Bush … Clinton?” She speculates for those that begin counting with former president Bush’s election as vice president (my first year to vote in a presidential election) that might add up to 36 years straight.

That number is inconceivably high for a nation of 300+ million people. Can’t we find fresh blood and ideas? Is no one else qualified?

Here is a short YouTube film that says a lot in a little over 3½ minutes.

Things I noted:

• It’s carried no matter how long and hard the journey is
• When it comes to relationship and baggage, we choose the baggage
• Even when we’ve spilled it all over, we still pick it up and pack it back in our little bag
• We don’t want others try to help us with it

It’s a basic human need to crave relationship, so why do we insist on carrying that baggage?

If you ask me, the answer is yes! and clearly!

Why do I say such things? Because he has spoken to me on many occasions. Never audibly, but in various ways at various times. When he has spoken to me about something important it has always been confirmed in multiple ways, and when it’s been something that affects my household he has also spoken independently to my wife.

Henry Blackaby authored a study a number of years ago called Experiencing God. The material, especially the workbook, was awesome and opened up this topic in a new way. There are no formulas, there is only relationship… that’s the core of his teaching as he opens up scripture. God typically speaks to us through the Bible, prayer, people and circumstances but he can and has used other methods (e.g. a donkey, an audible voice from the heavens, etc.)

On one distinct occasion he spoke to me and as I related to my wife what I felt God clearly telling me to do, she said that she knew that God communicated the exact same thing to her. We obeyed; the only reasonable thing to do. In this particular case it was to sell a vehicle that was weighing us down financially. We both knew that the money from the proceeds of the vehicle sale were supposed to go to a charitable cause. We did not question how we would manage with only one vehicle. We just said, “let’s put in an ad in the paper in the morning” and that was that. Before I could get a call in to the paper for the ad the next morning a family friend was talking to my wife and said she had a friend that wanted a white, SUV, low mileage and only a few years old. That was our vehicle! A dinner meeting was set up at our friends home for that evening. Before dinner was over a check was written out for the FULL asking price ($18,000) to us for the vehicle. Our mutual friend just happened to have a mini-van for sale for $11,000 – we wrote them a check for $11,000 on the spot. The remainder went toward the cause we felt called to give to. All that in less than 24 hours. I still look back and my head spins, unbelievable!

That was a dramatic instance but there have been many, many times when I knew it was God speaking and as I look back it is so clear that it really was (hindsight has a way of confirming the obvious).

I have noted, however, that there have been vast stretches in my life where I’ve heard nothing. This I have attributed to the “noise” in my life. So often I get too busy that I don’t take time to be still and quiet and simply wait. I am working to improve my track record in this specific area. God doesn’t rest his work because I’m not there listening. He’s always working and I need to tune myself in by taking intentional time out to listen and wait.

If we seek God, we shall find him.

In my studies for this weeks exam, I ran across a fascinating experiment. Fascinating not in the results but that someone could actually carry it out. It raises HUGE ethical issues with clinical experimentation.

The experiment is known as Stanley Milgram’s Experiment on “Obedience and Individual Responsibility”

“Obedience and Individual Responsibility“

Stanley Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University, conducted a study focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. He examined justifications for acts of genocide offered by those accused at the World War II, Nuremberg War Criminal trials. Their defense often was based on “obedience” – - that they were just following orders of their superiors.

In the experiment, so-called “teachers” (who were actually the unknowing subjects of the experiment) were recruited by Milgram. They were asked administer an electric shock of increasing intensity to a “learner” for each mistake he made during the experiment. The fictitious story given to these “teachers” was that the experiment was exploring effects of punishment (for incorrect responses) on learning behavior. The “teacher” was not aware that the “learner” in the study was actually an actor – - merely indicating discomfort as the “teacher” increased the electric shocks.

When the “teacher” asked whether increased shocks should be given he/she was verbally encouraged to continue. Sixty percent of the “teachers” obeyed orders to punish the learner to the very end of the 450-volt scale! No subject stopped before reaching 300 volts!

At times, the worried “teachers” questioned the experimenter, asking who was responsible for any harmful effects resulting from shocking the learner at such a high level. Upon receiving the answer that the experimenter assumed full responsibility, teachers seemed to accept the response and continue shocking, even though some were obviously extremely uncomfortable in doing so. The study raised many questions about how the subjects could bring themselves to administer such heavy shocks. More important to our interests are the ethical issues raised by such an experiment itself. What right does a researcher have to expose subjects to such stress? What activities should be and not be allowed in marketing research? Does the search for knowledge always justify such “costs” to subjects? Who should decide such issues?
Thanks to University of Rhode Island’s web site for providing a summary of the experiment

Audio clips of the experiment can be listened to at: King Edward VII School website

Note that Later, Prof. Milgram and other psychologists performed variations of the experiment throughout the world, with similar results. Moreover, Milgram later investigated the effect of the experiment’s locale on obedience levels, (e.g. one experiment was held in a respectable university, the other in an unregistered, backstreet office in a bustling city; the greater the locale’s respectability, the greater the obedience rate). Apart from confirming the original results, the variations have tested variables in the experimental setup.

Hmmm… the greater the respectibility, the greater the obedience rate – even when it conflicted with moral conscience!

I had to create two basic questions for my psychology class based upon a discovery channel film. Here you go…

1. The skeletal system is constantly adapting and reforming bone mass as required to accommodate external stresses placed upon the bone.
  A. True
  B. False
 
2. The body’s cooling system consists of which type of mechanism to prevent internal organs from overheating.
  A. The only specific mechanism is to drink plenty of cool liquids to reduce the body’s core temperature.
  B. Intricate coils in the ears designed to radiate heat utilizing the curve of the ear in much the same way as a radiator dissipates heat.
  C. Tiny coils connected to pores in the skin, which shrink to expel water, thus cooling the body through evaporation.
  D. Hair follicles covering the body which radiate body heat outward so imperceptible air currents can remove the heat.

The answers are A and C. The skeletal system is constantly shaping and reinforcing bone to accommodate active stress upon it. Every ten years you have a completely different skeletal system. The body cools itself via water evaporation from the surface of the skin.

If you got both, not bad. Not that it was hard but sometimes we forget the basic stuff.

Okay, you ask. What did you do with that nametag assignment? I’m glad you asked. I just finished it moments ago. Interesting. I’m not crazy about it but it says some basic things about my personality. Nothing deep, just some things.

My name ‘Dave’ is in a 150 point font (requirement was to be large enough that it can be seen from my desk across the room) centered on a tri-folded piece of paper so that it stands on it’s own as a desk nameplate would (another requirement). I see my inner self always reaching out to see and learn something new therefore I selected an exploration theme. I pasted clipart across the top, over my name from left to right as follows. A sailing ship with a lookout scanning the horizon, a scuba diver and the NCC-1701 (Starship Enterprise). All fonts and images are black and white. Across the bottom, underscoring my name, in living clipart color, is a brick wall with a mason placing bricks in the wall.

Why color? Why bricks? Color (I think) because the foundation, stability or whatever you call it is kind of like the way I do everything. This differentiates the dreamer from the realist in me.

Don’t over analyze, ’cause like I said I’m not so sure it’s an accurate depiction of me. It is creative and it is an ‘A’ so it’s done.

From a psychological standpoint the dictionary defines personality as “the sum total of the physical, mental, emotional, and social characteristics of an individual.” In typical usage it seems that when we talk about personality we’re talking about one aspect of the personality and not usually the whole of the person.

I have a school homework assignment to create a nametag for class and to somehow convey my personality in that nametag. Somehow I want to convey some aspect that touches all elements of me, something closer to the psychological definition above.

In my thinking, I can communicate my personality in forms of color, shapes and size to meet the requirements of this assignment. I don’t see my personality as particularly “colorful”, so color will be pretty much monochromatic. I can select a font shape that conveys “me” but other shapes that convey my personality must include images because I don’t see any meaningful correlation between geometric shapes and me.

So that leaves me with the core of the assignment. Who am I? How do I sum me up on a nametag that sits on my desk? I have a few ideas and they seem to revolve around the central idea of an explorer. I love to experience new places, new foods and new sensations. Funny thing is that this contrasts other aspects of me such as a more conservative bent that is not so easily swayed once I have made a decision. My decision process itself can be arduous and time consuming. I do not typically make “snap” decisions – they are thought out (sometimes not to well) and this is usually a time consuming process for me as many variables cancel each other out which often leaves me sitting on the fence.

Stay tuned and you can see how I put this together – as soon as I figure it out myself.