Phil Intakes: July - September

Hello!

Wow, the end of summer got crazy busy. Some of it was good. Some of it was bad. All of it was life.

Sadly, I didn't find myself reading a lot of philosophy.

Readings:

I didn't read much new philosophy. Mostly, I reviewed works for my classes.

October's review is already looking more substantial.  I promise. 

Audio:

I listened to a ton of audio lectures. The Great Courses series is inexpensive on Audible.com.

In the last couple months, I've listened to lectures on:

Hegel
Mill
The Vedas and Upanishads
Mahavira and Jainism
The Buddha
The Bhagavad Gita
Confucius
Laozi
The Hundred Schools
Mencius and Xunzi
The Pre-Socratics
The Sophists
Plato
Socrates
Aristotle
Stoicism
Epicureanism
Roman Eclecticism
Roman Skepticism
Machiavelli
More
Eramus

That's more than enough for a headache.

Previous Months:
May
June

Lee Dems: Review Status

Howdy.

My busy summer put a beat down on my political activities. I haven't made it to a meeting in months.

Realizing that I couldn't keep up with all the necessary responsibilities, I stepped down as the Precinct Captain for Kingstowne.

I hope that be able to resume meetings for the Lee Dems and the VMFC this fall.

The practice of writing a monthly review, not that I was doing a good job of it, will not be continued.  As most of the activities are repetitive, writing that same thing every month seems pointless. So, I'll only posted unique or new political nonsense.

Stay strong!

Phil Intakes: June Review

Slow month...


Journal:

Science is a Stern God by Harold Punke

I had been wanting to return to the practice of reading scholarly journal writings in philosophy. While surfing around JSTOR, I came across Punke's classic article. Science is a Stern God was published by The Journal of Philosophy in 1945.

Punke describes how a society uses 'faith', and what 'a faith' demands of its adherents. The comparisons between adherents of religion and science are well defined both in scope and severity.

Fear not, Punke is no Sunday morning televangelist. He's not making a science is just a different religion sermon. He's simply suggesting what is required of those relying upon science should they want science to be successful.

Audio:

The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius:

After reading Book 1 in May, June had me listening to Books 2 through 4.

I was able to purchase an audio-book version of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius through Audible. It was rather inexpensive. The narrator had a soft voice which I enjoyed as a walked around my neighborhood.

FYI: Jogging to the The Meditations isn't very productive.


Pop Video:

Diogenes:

Amazon has a video series on it called Famous People of the World, and a section of Famous Philosophers within it. All of this series is currently included in Prime. I just watched the Diogenes clip. The production quality isn't bad. However, the details are predictably paltry with a 6 minute run-time.


March
April
May

Phil Intakes: May Review

Books:

Kierkegaard: A Graphic Guide:

There's a whole series of these "A Graphic Guide" books. I grabbed a handful of them on various philosophers a few years back while in Singapore. I figured that they would come in handy if a younger reader or student wanted to learn a little about philosophy. Plus, I know a lot of people who like graphic novels.

I've been getting back into my Kierkegaard. So, I thought I'd give the one on him a go. It was decent. Mostly, it's something akin to an illustrated Cliff Notes. It does provide some good basic historical and philosophical knowledge. Though, I feel that authors' view of Kierkegaard is a bit jaded.

The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius:

I've owned the Shambhala Pocket Classics version of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius for years. I take it with me on hikes from time to time. Mostly, it sits on the top of one of my bookcases in my Shambhala Pocket Classics "library."

A recent conversation with a friend made me pick it up. Normally, I just pick a random spot to read, or I just thumb around in it. This time, I decided to read Book I. Said book is all Marc-daddy discussing what values, and in some cases virtues, he learned from important people in his life.

I suspect that its a personal flaw, but I'm not sure that I could list what I've learned from everyone in my life.

Audio:


Soren Kierkegaard: Fear and Trembling:

Fear and Trembling was the audio-book that I choose to get with my trial membership to Audible.com. It will not be my last audio-book, and my membership to Audible.com is no longer a trial one.

Fear and Trembling is Kierkegaard's most popular book. I feel that Either/Or is better, but Fear and Trembling seems to bring in both philosophical and Christian readers. Where as, Either/Or doesn't seem to do as well with the Christians.

It was nice to listen to Fear and Trembling as I would partake of my evening stroll around the neighborhood. I only wish that I would have owned this audio-book when I was in Copenhagen last year. Listening to it while walking the same streets that Kierkegaard did would have been a moment of great beauty.

Kierkegaard's work is complex. It can slow your reading down when you pause to contemplate something he wrote. So, having a narrator reading his work to you provides an advantage. You are forced to keep go. This leads you to Kierkegaard's next point which can help you understand what had first perplexed you.

Damn it! I have to plan a trip to Copenhagen.


Pop Reading:

http://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21718460-consciousness-explained-how-humans-became-intelligent?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/intothelighthowhumansbecameintelligent

This is a book review in the Economist regarding Daniel Dennett's From Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds. The article is informative, and I might have to purchase the book.

Previous Intakes:

March
April

Phil Intakes: April Review

Rules.

April Review

I read some. I rediscovered that I have portable devices and ear buds.

Classic Texts:

Kierkegaard: Rotation of Crops: A Venture in a Theory of Social Prudence-

Crop Rotation is one of the shorter pieces within Part I of Either/Or. It's the aesthete character A's attempt to deal with boredom. A believes that boredom is the root of all evil. Though, we as the reader could start to see that boredom is in fact not a cause, but an effect.

In one of Life's great coincidences, I got a Facebook message from a friend about two hours after I finished rereading The Rotation of Crops. He said that Buddhism wasn't working for him like it once had. So, he was thinking of trying Stoicism. I responded that we should grab a beer, and that I might have some recommended reading for him.

I own the Hong translation of Either/Or. So, I read Crop Rotation from there. However, you can find some pdf versions online.

Podcast:

In Our Time: Averroes

This work is both of a history lesson and a short a philosophical analysis. I enjoyed it a great deal. Averroes' life took place in Muslim Spain right before the Reconquista. The podcast does a good job of describing Averroes' contributions to Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Western philosophy.

Audio:

LibriVox: Either/Or

The is not a reading of Kierkegaard's Either/Or, but a reading of David F. Swenson's analysis of that work. I never get tired of trying to figure Kierkegaard out. You might. 

Pop Readings:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/shortcuts/2015/jan/18/beginners-guide-voltaire-philosopher-free-speech-tolerance?CMP=share_btn_tw

https://www.vox.com/conversations/2017/4/23/15343212/9-questions-for-martha-nussbaum

Nussbaum is a talented philosopher. This is a good read.

https://www.1843magazine.com/story/a-practitioners-guide-to-hedonism


Live Event:

I went to a lecture on Simone de Beauvior which I already wrote about here.


Hopefully, this was a little better than March's.

Phil Intakes: March Review

Rules.

March Review

March was a slow month. I had buried myself in school work and politics.

As I'm writing this in May, I can assure you that April will have more than two entries.

Classic Texts:

Aristotle: Generation and Corruption - 

This is Aristotle at his scientific worst. I'm not saying that there isn't any philosophical importance here, but it's a very boring to read. The Selected Works that I have includes Book I chapters 4 and 5 and Book II chapters 2 through 5.

Most of my knowledge of Aristotle is either metaphysical or ethical. G & C is clearly related to his physics, which I don't have a strong background in. So, I didn't feel that I connected a lot with this work. Perhaps, I should continue reading some more of A's physics work to see if it starts to click.

What G & C does offer is razor sharp distinction between the types of elements how they change, and the relationship of those changes.  "Elements", by the way, here is referring to the classical idea of earth, wind, air, and fire. 

I felt that the subject of G & C might be outdated, but I might reread it. 

Pop Reading:

My girlfriend sent me this great article about a student at Boston University who leads a philosophy group at a women's shelter.*

I always hope that my students find avenues to engage. So, this article illistrates how perople can create meaningful opportunities for themselves..

* https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2017/03/24/this-college-student-teaches-philosophy-to-homeless-women-to-help-them-ponder-lifes-great-questions/?utm_term=.ab00a0d2610a&wpisrc=nl_optimist&wpmm=1

New rules for "readings"

I've claimed a few times on this blog that I would read a philosophical work, and provide my analysis of that work. Here's an example.

I've decided that I'm not going to do that anymore. Why? Here are the stages of what happened every time. I got excited. I wrote a blog post telling you how excited I was. I would read the first part of the text. I would sit down to write a detailed analysis. I would remember that I don't like writing that much. I don't want to publish a crappy analysis. So, I tortured myself over ever detail of what I was writing. I wanted to keep reading the text, but didn't because I hadn't written the analysis regarding the first part. I would put book down, and walk away.

So, I'll produce no detailed analysis. I can't figure out why I'd assigned myself book reports in the first place.

What I will produce is a short monthly write up of philosophical texts, podcast, journals, and articles that I've imbibed.  That way, my students and friends can get a brief rundown of my philosophical intake.

• New Rules
• Write monthly review of that month's philosophical intake
• include:
• type(s) of source(s)
• name(s) of piece(s)
• a couple of my thoughts on the piece(s)
• that's it
• Return to state of enjoying philosophy
• Rinse
• Repeat

Lee Dems: April Review

April

17th: 8th CD Monthly Meeting

This was to be my first attendance of an 8th Congressional District Monthly Meeting. I really wanted to go to it and the monthly meeting in May before going to my first 8th CD Convention on May 20th. Sadly, I suffered my first defeat of the year to tree pollen, and couldn't make it. Hopefully, I'll be able to make the May 15th meeting before the Convention.

25th: VMFC

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to make this meeting either. I had recovered from my allergies for the most part. However, this was the last full week of classes before finals at Nova. So, I was not able to get out of class at a good enough time for me to make it to the committee.

Next month's meeting will be a teleconference.

27th: Resolution Committee

As I mentioned last month,  Alex had ask me if I was interested in joining the Resolution Committee, and I, of course, was. Alex said that she'd pass my name on, and that I'd be contacted to see if I was a good fit. I almost immediately received an email from 8th Congressional District Chair Margo Horner telling me that she was looking forward to working with me. Apparently, they were desparate, or I'm an amazing fit!

The 27th was our getting to know you/schedule of future meetings meeting. I thought that this would be my third missed meeting of the month, because I had my last full class before the finals with my Intro class. But, the students killed it, and I made it to the meeting.

We all made each others' acquaintances, and went over protocol. Most of the meetings will be in the first half of May.

Atima Omara is chairing the Resolution Committee this year.

29th: Round-table Lunch

One of the cooler things to happen to me all month was a luncheon invite to get to know Delegate Mark Sickles. Alex emailed my saying that Sickles would like some of the Lee Dems newer members to come to a round-table, because he hadn't been able to come to any recent meetings.

Mark Sickles has been the 43rd Districts' Delegate since 2004.

We all met at Fiona's in Kingstowne.

I thoroughly enjoyed getting to lowdown on the legislature in Richmond. Plus, I must admit that I like my Delegate.

I had a Reuben.

30th: Opening Day

The biggest fundraiser of the year for the Lee Dems is always Opening Day. There's a big cookout with various long skinny meats and much beer.

It cost $30 to attend. Again, it's a fundraiser.

A lot of office-seekers for the next round of elections stop by, and perform.

The jig last about 3 hours. I, however, had ran (jogged slowly) a 5k in the morning and did some gardening. So, after sitting around for a bit, I didn't feel like moving again. I only made it for the last hour. I missed all the political speeches. I DID get 2 Italian sausages and 3 beers.

Oh, and when I walked around back to the cookout, Dan greeted me with a hearty, "OUTLAW!!!". So, the Lee Dems and I have reached that point in our relationship.

Lee Dems: March Review

March:

2nd: I received an email from Kim Pollard informing me that I've been adding to the Veterans and Military Families Committee (VMFC). This is my first assignment since joining the Lee Dems, and it's an ideal one. Not only am I a veteran, but many members of my family have served in the armed forces. I'll get a better idea of what the committee does when I attend the VMFC meeting later this month.

19th: Precinct Operations Meeting

Ed Joseph went over what the Operations Committee is responsible for and what roles needed to be filled. Operations was short a few precinct captains, teams for early voter registration, and a team for back to school nights.

I volunteered to become Precinct Captain for Kingstowne. The group is already well established, but will still need strong leadership. I'm looking forward to it. What scares me is that I'll have to make cold calls to people who "may" want to become volunteers. The mere thought of it tickles my boundary issues. I'll just have to use it as an opportunity to conquer a flaw.

23rd: Lee Dems Monthly Meeting

Outside of normal business, Delegate Paul Krizek and Senator George Barker came to give us a rundown on what the state Democrats were attempting to do in the Virginia House and Senate.

28th: VMFC & FCDC

VMFC: The Veterans and Military Familes meeting was the highlight of the month for me. Due to my teaching schedule, I showed up a half an hour late. Everyone was very understanding.

The committee's vice-chair, Bruce, was giving keynote speech at Quantico National Cemetery the next day for Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day.

Kim will be speaking at the up coming 2017 Virginia Veterans Summit taking place in Chesapeake in June.

Mainly, we all shared our desire for making FCDC as friendly and open to veterans and their families as possible. The committee is new. So, we're still establishing what our outreach and programs will look like.

FCDC: This was a huge meeting with members for every district in the county sending representatives. Lee Dems were well represented.

Multiple candidates for state offices, or their spokespersons, introduced themselves. They ask for our support. None of us are allowed to support candidates in the primary phase. So we mostly just applauded everyone.

We passed our budget unanimously.

There was a bit of contention over a resolution requesting that Gov. McAuliffe to call a special session of the Legislature to vote to end gerrymandering. No one supports gerrymandering, of course. However, some of us thought that it was pointless to put pressure on the Governor when it wouldn't amount to anything since the Republicans in the legislature would just vote "Nay". The "Yeas" carried the day. So, the resolution will be sent, and we'll see what happens.

I was exhausted after working two jobs before coming to the meeting, and I left early.

After the meeting, I received an email from Alex mentioning that their was still an opening for the 8th District Resolution Committee. I responded that I was interested. So, we'll see what comes about from that.

Conclusion:

That's March. Hopefully, I've improved since last month.

I'll try to be quicker, and get April's review out earlier than the 21st of May.

Oddly, I'm enjoying all of this.

SdB panel

I went to a Simone de Beauvior panel discussion over the weekend. The event was at The National Museum of Women in the Arts. The panel consisted of Dr. Susan Suleiman of Harvard, Constance Borde, Sheila Malovany-Chevallier, and Dr. Debra Bergoffen of both American University and George Mason University.

I had been really looking forward to the panel, as I hadn't been to any lectures or the like in a while. Justin, a friend from grad school, had mentioned on Facebook that he would be going. I messaged him when I arrived, but sadly he couldn't make it. I then noticed Richard, another friend from grad school , with who I shared most of my classes at Mason. It was good to catch up with him. He had a couple of his students with him. We promised to try to grab a beer sometime soon.

Before the panel kicked off, the ladies gave brief lectures involving their expertise on de Beauvior.

Suleiman kicked things off. She mainly spoke about de Beauvoir's novel The Mandarins. I found the lecture to be fascinating, because I have only experienced de Beauvoir as a philosopher.  Suleiman did a fab job of mapping out the connections between the fictional characters of the novel and the real people in de Beauvoir's life that they were inspired by.  I think that I'll try to get my hands on a copy, and give it a go.

Borde and Malovany-Chevallier have recently, relatively speaking, released a new translation of de Beauvoir's The Second Sex. As an American who can barely stammer through English, I have nothing but respect for translators. So, it was enlightening to hear them discuss to challenges of their undertaking.

Bringing up the rear, Bergoffen explained a bit of de Beauvoir's philosophy. This was the section I was most familiar with. Richard had taken one of Begoffen's classes while she was still teaching at Mason. He loved it. I never got to take her.

After the lectures, all the ladies came back out on stage together for the panel. There was a good back and forth with the audience. The questions mostly involved the nature of the translation, how de Beauvoir's ideas matched or failed to match up with current feminism, and her personal and professional relationships. Everything was overwhelmingly positive. No one brought up anything negative about de Beauvoir including her history of statutory rape. I thought that it was worth bringing up since the topic of de Beauvoir's work to bring the sexual assault of women to the forefront. No one else did, and I didn't feel like breaking the vibe. So, I didn't bring it up to the panel.

When the panel had concluded, I approached Dr. Bergoffen. I was wearing my George Mason t-shirt, and I was glad to see that it made her happy. I ask her if de Beauvoir ever answered for her habit of sleeping with underage students? She said that de Beauvoir absolutely refused to even admit that what she did was wrong at all. Bergoffen added that in their letters to each other that de Beauvoir and Sartre could be awful in how they spoke of other people. I was glad the Dr. Bergoffen found this as disturbing as I did.

I hit the road after that. It was an excellent event.

Despite her moral failings, I do find de Beauvoir, and her philosophy, worthy of study.

The Test of Euthyphro

Below are the "Tensions" that I received from answering the Euthyphro test on Philosophyexperiments.com.

I allow my PHI 102 students to do a write-up about their results for extra-credit. They have explain the tensions they got, tell me whether or not they already knew about the tensions, and how they can attempt to grow past them. I don't allow them to critique the test, even though there is room for it. I want them to work on themselves. Most students already know how to discredit something they don't want to face.

My tensions were brought about by my trying to imagine a logically possible God.

The test is amusing. Plus, we can all grow from analyzing the inconsistencies in our beliefs.


"

Talking with God - Analysis

You responded that there are moral standards independent of God's will. This response has been given by 47% of the 71970 people who have completed this activity to date.
Tensions
If you look in the right-column, you'll find an explanation of what is meant by the term "tension".
We have identified 2 tensions in your responses, which represents a tension quotient of 25% (where lower is better). The average tension quotient for this activity is 69%.
Note: Since you do not believe that God exists, you should read the analysis below as referring to your archetypal construction of God rather than God.
Tension 1 (potential): God has freedom of will
You claimed that God has freedom of will, in that he is at liberty to exercise his power in any way he chooses. However, assuming that it is morally wrong to command what is evil, then God cannot command people to do what he knows to be morally wrong unless you accept that God is capable of immorality (which it is possible you do, since you do not think God is omnibenevolent).
Tension 2: God can obligate?
You claimed that there are moral standards independent of God's will. This claim sits uneasily with the widely held belief that any being that counts as God must have the ability to obligate through its commands: in other words, that it is necessarily morally wrong to disobey a command given by God. This view suggests at the very least that some aspect of morality flows from God. Although there is no logical inconsistency in conceiving of a God whose comamands do not obligate (see note, above, about "tensions"), it would nevertheless be a rather strange or unusual conception of God. One possible way of resolving this tension is to argue that while there are independent moral standards, it is also true that some of God's commands impose obligations. This is the position held by Christian philosopher of religion, Richard Swinburne, for example.
God and Stringency
Your concept of God has been judged by this test to be non-stringent. This indicates you think that God possesses only few of the characteristics traditionally associated with the God of the Abrahamic tradition (i.e., omnipotence, freedom of will, omnibenevolence, etc). As a result, this test will likely have judged your tension quotient to be relatively low. However, this is bought at the expense of a certain specificity in your concept of God. This brings its own problems. By stripping God of many of the traditional attributes of Godliness, it is possible to avoid some of the difficulties one tends to run into when considering whether "the good" and "the just" are loved by God because they are good and just, or whether they are good and just because they are loved by God. However, this comes at a cost, since the question which then arises is whether the entity you're left with is worthy of the designation "God". The trouble is it isn't at all clear that it is. "

Plagiarism

I recently had to report a student for plagiarism. In 5 years of teaching at Nova, it's​ the first time that I've had to do so. 

This event, of course, was terribly upsetting. 

I have all of my students submit their work electronically via Blackboard. When they do, there's a program called SafeAssign which compares their works with past works on various databases. Then, it gives me an originality report. It's not uncommon to have students with originality reports in the teens meaning that a percentage in the teens of their work matches the work of someone else. This is acceptable due to a combination of simple sentences or phrases that are likely to be in multiple papers and the fact that citations will often be near identical if they're cited properly. A quick comparison of the work in question has always, until now, shown the student to be innocent of any wrongdoing. 

This particular student had an originality score of 98%. The student had excuses, but none that were able to pass muster. 98%!

Nova's policy is that the student gets an automatic zero for the assignment, and that a disciplinary report be filed to see if any further action is required. As this student plagiarized on the research paper that is twenty percent of the course grade, his overall grade dropped from an A to a C. I'm not sure when the hearing will be. 

The Readings: Contingency, irony, and solidarity... Introduction

As promised, and just a little over a year and a half late.  

Richard Rorty's four-page introduction to Contingency, irony, and solidarity does exactly what an introduction is meant to do: it prepares the reader for the work ahead.  This might seem a weak compliment, but I've read more than one book whose author failed to grasp that concept.  Rorty's introduction tells the reader what the philosophical problem that he sees is, defines some key terms, and presents a solution.

The problem: Society has been long bogged down by failed attempts to come up with a theory that will unify the ideas of "private perfection" with those of us being "fellow citizens". "Private perfection" uses a vocab of "self-creation" which is "private, unshared, and unsuitable to argument". On the other hand, justice is the vocabulary of the citizen. Justice's vocab is "public and shared, a medium for argumentative exchange".

The solution: Rorty desires the creation of a *liberal ironist utopia. The utopia would not be built on a theory that would bring justice and self-creation together. Instead, a narrative must be created which will realize the equal necessity of these mutually-exclusive human desires and their vocabularies.

* Rorty uses Judith Shklar's  understanding of "liberal". For Shklar, liberals are people who believe that cruelty is the worst thing that humans do. So, there's nothing left-wing about Rorty's utopia. American Republics would fit under Rorty's liberal umbrella with Democrats.


Like most present-day philosophers, Rorty writes in a simple style that is easy to read.  He doesn't try to win over the reader by impressing him or her with his poetic style.  He does use his fair share of jargon, but he always does his best to define it for you. 


Intro completed. I'm getting ready to start on Part I: Contingency. Given current trends, I'll be posted a thread about it in roughly two years.

Peace. 

Joining up: So, what's Left part 2

As I was saying...

I do like the Green's platform, but I also feel that those same issues are not alien to the Democratic Party. Democrats are also in favor of equal rights for everyone, a cleaner environment, and strengthening labor. The Democrats platform isn't as streamlined as the Greens, but I suspect that's because the Dems have so many more members and office-holders. Inclusion almost always leads to ideas becoming more nebulous. Since I feel that my political views are supported by both parties, party platform can not be the determining factor in my choosing between them. This would, of course, require reexamination should daylight begin to shine through any growing distance between the two platforms. .

There is also the whole third-party factor. The Greens, along with the Libertarians, never get tired of telling anyone who will listen just how much the two-party system is rigged against them. In many ways, they're correct. There are many difficulties that "third-party" candidates shouldn't have to deal with. However, even if all of the difficulties were removed, it wouldn't solve their biggest problem. Their biggest problem is that many elections for offices in the U.S. are "first past the post" contests where only a plurality is needed to win that office. So, anyone outside of the two major parties will find it difficult to win an statewide or federal offices. There are, of course, office-holders who are Greens. However, none are at the federal or statewide level. Furthermore, most seem to have been elected to at-large seats where outside candidates have the best chance to win a seat on a council or board.

Both parties support my views. However, only one of them participates in my government at every level. So, I choose to join the more involved party. It's not an original argument, and I'm sure that the Greens are tired of hearing it. Sadly, for them, it's an argument that has legs.


Ultimately, when it's time to pull the lever, I'll select whichever candidate I feel is the best fit. Though both my history and intellectual tendencies suggest that I'll mostly continue to vote for Democrats. I do suspect that a Green candidate will tickle my fancy now and then.

Regardless of who I vote for, my goal is to contribute in my own little way to make my local Democratic Party the best it can be.I know that that sound cheesy, but that's life.

Lee Dems: Jan/Feb Review

I think that I'll write a review at the end of each month summarizing my engagements with the party. Since I didn't do so for January, this post will be for both January and February.

January:

26th: Monthly Meeting:

Having already joined the DNC and making a small donation to the Democrat Party of Virginia, I wanted to join the Fairfax County Democratic Committee (FCDC). Joining the county party seemed like a slam-dunk decision for me, because my goal has always been to be involved at a community level. However, the FCDC website recommends that anyone considering joining should come to a meeting before submitting his or her application. To get things moving, I decided to go to a Lee Dems meeting.

The meeting was at a local member's house. I barely made it on time, because I teach a class on Thursdays. By the time I got there, the house was packed. It was the biggest meeting the Lee Dems had ever had. The orange man, it appears, has the magical ability to make other people turn blue.

I met so many people. As there was more than one person, I don't remember any names. Fatima being the exception. I had worked with her at the City of Alexandria Department of Community and Human Services. It was nice to see her.

The meeting ended up being more of a social gathering than anything else. The Lee Dems just weren't prepared for that many people. There was a small round of motions, but they were Greek to the 3/4 of the people in the room who were new. 

Nevertheless, I enjoyed myself.

February:

2nd: Indivisible Mt. Vernon-Lee:

I had been told about this event at the first Lee Dems meeting. The folks that invited me put their best feet forward to explain what the meeting would be about, but I didn't understated because everything was new to me. I just assumed that it was another meeting, and I'd attend to keep my momentum rolling along. 

This was not a Democrat meeting so much as an interest meeting for Indivisible. Many Democrats having been inspired and encouraged by the turnout for events like the Women's March of Washington wanted to keep engaging in that fashion.

This movement is for people who want to be political, but want to march and not be tied down with boring committee meetings. On the other hand, I joined specifically to become a member of boring committees. Plus, despite my participation in the Women's March, I'm not a fan of protesting. I'm not looking down on the activity. It's just not my style.

To wrap up, I don't think that I'll be participating with this group. Though, I wish them well.

9th: Lee Dems Welcome Night :

This meeting was to explain the structure of the FCDC to new members and to folks who were considering joining. 

I got a lot of good information out of it. The local party fights in many arenas. I'll need to figure out were I can help out the most.

I did have a nice conversation with Ed Joseph. Ed is the Vice Chair of Precinct Operations for Lee District. We discussed the possibility of me becoming a Precinct Captain. This seems a pretty good fit given my background working as an election official in Alexandria. So, hopefully this will come to fruition. 

23rd: Monthly Meeting:

In anticipation of a large crowd like January's meeting, this meeting took place at the Landsdowne HQ. Given the number of people in attendance, this turned out to be a wise decision.

I, among others, was approved as a member.

Ed and I had another detailed discussion about Precinct Operations. The conversion occurred after we both remembered each other. So, there's progress!

I also had a lovely conversation with Kim Pollard about joining the Veterans Military Families Committee (VMFC). Kim is the VMFC Secretary. We had a lengthy conversation, and she thinks that I could be a good member for her committee. So, cross those figures.

Ending Notes:

Like any other group you want to be involved with, you end up having a lot of meetings to plan future meetings. I do feel that I'll be able to get some work done in the near future. Hopefully, I'll be working in operations and with veterans.

OLLI: date confirmed

As I mentioned last week, I'm planning a lecture for the Osher Livelong Learning Institute that will take place in July. I've been waiting to hear back from them with a time and place.

They just got back to me. And...

Class: Philosophical Case Study: What Makes a Good U.S. citizen?

Campus: Tallwood, 4210 Roberts Road, Fairfax

Time and Date: Thursday, 11:50-1:15, July 20

Now, I owe them a bio for their catalog. Writing my own bio always creeps me out. Bios are an exercise in bragging about yourself in the 3rd person. "Chris has a master's degree..." "Chris had the honor of interning at..." You know what? It's like being Donald Trump! "Nobody philosophizes like Outlaw. Sad."

Joining up: So, what's Left. part 1

Howdy!

I just reread my last post, and I apologize to everyone who endured all of its errors. I've corrected some of the more egregious ones. I would hope that the post's attempt to show why I couldn't join either of America's right-wing parties was clear enough.

If I discovered that anyone who knows me is surprised that I'm on the Left, I would be shocked and amused. My migration towards left-wing ideologies has been progressing steadily since my early 20's. Even Libertarian me used to describe himself as a social progressive and a fiscal conservative. 41 year old me is a social progressive and fiscal progressive.


Greens:

I truly identify with the Green Party's platform. They, among other things, do a fabulous job of supporting both land and labor. Balancing those issues is paramount for the success of any left-wing movement in any country.

The Green's commitment to environmentalism is second to no one. Their ideas are science based, and sustainable.

The GP is more than pro-labor. They're pro-union. That is not a distinction without a difference in contemporary American politics. Every politician claims to want to help workers, but many are also anti-union. I've become increasingly more pro-union as my hair grays. I find the GP's loud and proud support of unions to be refreshing and promising.

Globally speaking, I like Green politicians. Former Mayor of Bogota Colombia Antanas Mockus is probably my favorite current politician.


So, why did I join the Democrats when I identify so strongly with the Greens?

To be continued...

Joining up: What's wrong with right?

Following up from my earlier post.

Why the Democrats?

It wasn't an easy decision. Even after deciding that I wanted to join a party, I wasn't sure which one to choose.

Over my voting lifetime, I've voted for Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Greens, and independents. I did consider all four of these parties. Obviously, one can join neither the independent party nor the oxymoron party. 

Why not join either of the parties on the Right?

Republicans: As a teenager, I identified with the Republican Party. I was, after all, a poor white boy from Indiana. Any hold that the Party had on me withered as my identity moved away from being white, poor, and Hoosier. By the time I was 20, the Republican message was lost on me.

Both of my parents are Democrats. So, part of my attraction to the Republicans might have been an act of rebellion.

Still, I did consider joining the county Republican Party. It appeals to me that they are in the minority here. Plus, I thought that they could use more moderates in the Party. But, no. I just couldn't see it working out.

Libertarians: My 20's were dominated by the Libertarian Party, or ,at least, the idea of it. I never joined. However, I often sung the praises of the LP loudly. 

Again, I've changed. I no longer believe in many of the ideas that made me a Libertarian. Furthermore, I don't think that the Libertarian Party is the same party it was. When I was 22, the LP position on abortion was that it was an individual choice which should not be infringed upon by the government. The average Libertarian now seems to view it as a States' Rights issue. 

Most people like to claim that they're moderates. I'm not immune to the pull of this trend. In reality, I doubt that many people are so nonpartisan. It would be a lie to say that I am. I simply don't identify with the Right. So, joining either the Republicans or the Libertarians would be endeavors unlikely to bear fruit.

I'll return with my views of the parties of the Left.

P.S. I'm not in a proofreading mood. So, you'll just have to live with any grammatical or spelling errors.

Joining up.

I joined the Democrats.

Such a simple statement might seem pointless to most people, but it's a rather uncharacteristic one from me. My track-record is something less than a model of participation.

I joined about a month ago, and was voted on to the rolls of the county party last week.

I'll elaborate on the whys, whats, and hows later.

For now...

Notorious nonconformist and general nonbeliever Chris Outlaw has joined a political party.

Even typing it feels weird.

OLLI update.

I few weeks ago, I finally submitted my proposal to the Osher folks. Stunningly, I'm only one year behind schedule!

I'm happy to say that they have accepted the proposal, and are attempting to schedule me for a lecture date in July.

This, of course, is most welcome and exciting news. While I love teaching at NVCC, I want to engage other public groups.

So, knock on wood.