A Grain Of Salt – Part One: Respect

Guest essay by Caleb Shaw

One sign of healthy skepticism is that you take things with a grain of salt, but there is a problem inherent in having this attitude, namely “disrespect.” We are suppose to respect our elders and teachers, and I can’t say my skepticism has always led to such respect.

For example, as a teenager in the late 1960’s I embraced the Jack Weinberg quote, “Don’t trust anyone over thirty,” in a way that seriously thwarted learning from my elders. To be blunt, the reason I distrusted elders was because I wanted to break the law, and they’d put me in jail if they knew what I was up to. (I wish I could say I was breaking rules for some noble cause, such as pacifism, but that would be dishonest.)

Basically I wanted to do things elders would disapprove of, and didn’t want to hear elders rebuke me for doing things that they claimed were bad for me. Therefore, instead of learning from elders, I learned the hard way that many of the things they said were bad for me were, in fact, bad.

Apparently, if I was going to be skeptical, I should have been more skeptical of the statement, “Don’t trust anyone over thirty,” however it didn’t seem possible I’d ever be so old. That particular skepticism didn’t sink in until my thirtieth birthday approached, and I looked in the mirror and thought to myself, “Oh Lord, I’m about to be one of those people you can’t trust.”

Now that I’m over sixty I thoroughly approve of respecting elders. In fact I have revised the Weinberg quote, and it now goes, “Don’t trust anyone under sixty.” After a significant pause I add, “And I wouldn’t trust those over sixty either.” After a second significant pause I conclude, “For that matter, I wouldn’t trust myself.”

The simple fact of the matter is that humans aren’t perfect. (Some say there are such things as Perfect Masters, but I can’t claim I’ve ever met one on the street.) Sooner or later everyone I’ve met, including myself, makes a mistake, and, by making that mistake they, in some way, shape or form, break the trust. Even a minor mistake, such as being one minute late for an appointment, breaks the trust. Even if you have a thousand excuses, you failed to keep your word. Therefore it is quite true to state that no one can be trusted.

Life would be a complete drag if I took human imperfection to heart, and walked about scowling at everyone. Another attribute of humans is that, just as you can’t trust them to do right, you can’t trust them to do wrong, either. At times the most unlikely people pull off amazing deeds of kindness, strength and heroism. Humans are a lot like the weather in this respect: You can’t forecast them with 100% certainty.

Though you can’t trust humans to be perfect, you can develop a form of government that takes imperfection into account, and, through a system of checks and balances, makes it possible to make, recognize, recover-from and forgive mistakes. In like manner you can create scientific disciplines that allow one to make, recognize, recover-from and forgive mistakes. In fact all areas of life, right down to a game of darts, can be governed in a way that allows one to make, recognize, recover-from and forgive mistakes. All people need to do is accept a system of rules.

This was precisely what I refused to do, as an ignorant, young jerk. People much smarter than I had worked long and hard to create various systems that effectively deal with the fact humans are prone to making mistakes, but their systems involved rules, and I didn’t like rules. I would find a better way, an “alternative lifestyle.” Rules didn’t seem to be the same as freedom, and I wanted to be free, unaware (to a ridiculous degree) that one thing I’d never be free from was making mistakes. Then, when my mistakes became apparent, I, in the spirit of a true do-it-yourselfer, set out to reinvent the wheel. Because I was very lucky, my mistakes didn’t kill me, and I eventually arrived at a solution that looked very much like a wheel.

Now I sit back and wonder, “What in God’s name was I thinking?” I wasted decades reinventing a wheel that teachers were trying to give me for free. What made me such a stupid rebel? What a mistake!

I suppose I could play the blame-game, and say someone else made a mistake that led to mine. America is a nation founded upon rebellion, and Americans are such rebels that even the motto on their money states you can’t trust humans. It was therefore my homeland that put rebellion in my blood.

Or I could blame women, (especially schoolmarms), because it was only when women got the vote that drinking beer became unconstitutional. Prohibition didn’t merely engender a disrespect for the law, but even for the Constitution our forefathers died for, yet, as a young boy, I could hear old-timers laugh about how they brewed beer in the basement, blithely unaware they were encouraging disrespect for the Constitution.

Or they laughed about how they drove 1000 miles in ten hours, though the speed limit signs said sixty-five.

On the fourth of July everyone set off fireworks in my Massachusetts neighborhood, though fireworks were illegal. Does that not celebrate independence from the Law? Is it not in the very nature of Americans to disobey elders, whether they be King George or one’s schoolmarm? It isn’t my fault! I am not to blame for the fact I wasted decades reinventing the wheel!

The blame-game may be fun, but it cannot pull you out of quicksand. At some point it simply doesn’t matter how you wound up to your neck. Getting out of the mess becomes the focus. However, providing you survive, it is a healthy intellectual exercise to look back and ponder the mistakes that got you into quicksand. Even if it doesn’t get you out of the ooze, it might help you to avoid jumping back in. It is in this spirit that I would like to cause trouble, by pointing the blame-game finger at the schoolmarms.

I think I can say, with a high degree of probability, that it is a mistake for schoolmarms to put boys (such as I once was) in rows of desks, and expect the boys to sit still. Boys squirm. Boys kick. Boys dream out the window, dip pigtails in inkwells, shoot spitballs, and fail to memorize six words of Shakespeare even while writing twenty lines of rhyming doggerel mocking schoolmarms, (with hilarious cartoon illustrations.) You are just begging for disaster if you fail to recognize boys will be boys. You will turn a boy who might have been law-abiding into a law-breaker. Boys, by their very nature, need to run wild, and if you squelch this impulse you will have hell to pay.

(I’ve talked with schoolmarms who know this, for they have seen that boys sit most still and learn most right after recess, and right after summer vacation, and squirm worst and learn next to nothing just before recess, and when spring is in the air. However, being schoolmarms and not boys, they don’t even whimper when their government and/or teachers-union urge recesses and summer vacations be banned “so boys may learn more.”)

I actually think it isn’t a schoolmarm’s duty to discipline boys. That job is the father’s. If I wrote the laws, then, rather than a bad boy being expelled to the principle’s office, the boy would be sent by taxi to the father’s workplace. If the Dad was in jail, send the kid there. That would get men’s attention darn fast.

That never happened when I was little. I suppose I should point the blame-game finger at Dads, for when I was young they put widgets ahead of family, and ran away to the rush-hour each day-break, leaving their poor, defenseless sons in the quicksand of classrooms, and at the mercy of schoolmarms.

Due to a weird twist of fate, I grew up dead center in a wormhole in the space-time continuum, wherein I escaped the wrath of schoolmarms when it was expressed by caning, and escaped the wrath of schoolmarms as it is now expressed by drugging. When I made chaos out of their quiet classrooms, all I faced was the wrath of schoolmarms expressed by words.

Much of my skill with the use of the English language was absorbed from schoolmarm’s tongue-lashings. In order to keep order in classrooms of twenty to thirty Baby Boom rebels, they had to exploit adroit sarcasm and cynical sneering, and employ twists of dubious logic and clubbing condemnation. Their wit could be superb and set the entire class laughing, but when you are a little boy and the whole class is laughing at you, you do not think of witty rebuttals as much as you think of getting some sort of completely unholy and uncivilized revenge. An abscess of resentment brewed in me. Schoolmarms may have kept me quelled, when I was small and helpless, but when my hormones hit and I swiftly loomed taller than they, all my study of their use of English came back to haunt them.

They had created a monster. True, Frankenstein is not usually portrayed as jovial, nor as being able to out-argue the doctor who bolted in his brains, but reality is often even stranger than a monster movie. I became an outlaw, but one of the most harmless outlaws imaginable. Initially my sinister activities involved dreaming out windows, wandering into the classroom after the bell, or shrugging when asked where my homework was. It was when I stopped shrugging, and started answering the sarcastic questions, that I think I set some sort of modern record for the most after-school detentions ever received for being cheerful.

Detentions were a half-hour spent sitting in a classroom after school, and were a bad idea when boys are bursting with energy. I could only serve four detentions a day, because the last bus left at four-thirty, and for a time it looked like I might not graduate due to not-having-served the amazing numbers of detentions I was amassing. It was at this point an uneasy truce descended. Likely the teachers dreaded the prospect of another year with me, though perhaps the teachers were also embarrassed by the prospect of failing a student who was going to win the award for creative writing, and not failing him because of his grades, but rather because he cheerfully answered their sarcastic questions. In any case they stopped being sarcastic, which meant I had won.

It was at this point, at my moment of victory, that I fell flat on my face. The culprit was drugs, but I’ll talk of that later. For now I want to remain on the topic of respecting elders.

Schoolmarms did teach me a sort of respect for elders, but it was not the sort of respect that leads to one rushing to elders, desiring their attention like a rock-star’s fan desires the star’s autograph. Instead my primary goal in school became to avoid the attention of schoolmarms. They were the Gestapo, and I was the French Resistance. My respect was the sort of loathing respect one has for a bully. After the hormones hit and I won my victory I became like the Norwegian Resistance, and schoolmarms became like the trembling Quislings after the Gestapo had fled Norway.

Now I look back across a half century and wonder: What was it that made them the bad-guy Nazis, and me the good-guy? Why didn’t they seem like millionaires, loaded with knowledge, as I myself was a mere beggar, with the empty pockets of ignorance? Schoolmarms were offering me a free hand-out. What was I fleeing?

I think the answer lies in the single, dreaded word, “Drill.”

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

99 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Alan Robertson
June 27, 2014 5:49 am

Stephen Richards says:
June 27, 2014 at 5:16 am
“Sadly she brought up her son to be a real asshole who bullied her for most of her life and lives off social security.
I adnmire her for her determination and perseverance but I do not respect her for her son.”
__________________
Are you somebody else? Neither is she. You are blaming her for the actions of someone else. Her son is an asshole because that’s what he is. It had nothing to do with her. Have you not seen other such examples, perhaps in a family with several children, all of whom are great people, save for one?

Tom O
June 27, 2014 5:51 am

“Greg Goodman says:
June 27, 2014 at 2:45 am
” in my book”
It is also lost much quicker than it is earned or regained, as climatologists are finding.”
I will agree wholeheartedly with this statement. As a youth, I automatically respected professionals of all nature – brought up to believe that. I found out, as I went out on my own, that too many “professionals” weren’t. They were mostly pedigreed crooks. I decided that respect can be considered, but not guaranteed – to elders, professionals, teachers, etc. And yes, do something that is dumb and make no attempt to correct it, and you have lost my respect completely, and it truly is difficult to gain it back.
Wisdon and age have very little in common. As you grow older, you generally have had time to discover more facts for yourself, thus your knowledge base grows. Does that signify wisdom? Not at all. I have seen wiser 5 years olds than I have 50 year old politicians, and in this field, so called climate science, I have seen more wisdom displayed by those 5 year olds that 80% of the warmists because wisdom implies you learn from mistakes, and warmists don’t.

Brian P
June 27, 2014 5:54 am

There is a huge difference between respecting people and treating people with respect. If you can’t treat people with respect (whether you repect them or not) you cannot function well in society.

Alan Robertson
June 27, 2014 5:58 am

Matthew Benefiel says:
June 27, 2014 at 5:18 am
___________________
Well said.
Have you ever had the experience of someone saying to you, out of the clear blue sky, “I don’t trust you”? Usually, this comes from someone you’ve just encountered for the first time, and who knows what motivated their position? As sure as the day is long, you’d better watch out for that person (do not trust them,) because they have already judged and condemned you and are just looking for an opportunity to “execute” some form of retribution against you.

Eustace Cranch
June 27, 2014 6:04 am

I don’t expect anyone to trust me or accept my authority by default. Nor the other way around.

Tom J
June 27, 2014 6:06 am

‘Prohibition didn’t merely engender a disrespect for the law, but even for the Constitution our forefathers died for, yet, as a young boy, I could hear old-timers laugh about how they brewed beer in the basement, blithely unaware they were encouraging disrespect for the Constitution.’
I must respectfully disagree, sir. I think that if our forefathers knew that their fighting and dying would later have produced Prohibition, and the Wilson administration that helped produce it, well then, they might have fought and died with a lot less vigor. I don’t think anyone, anywhere, at anytime is going to sacrifice their life so people can’t drink beer. (Except, of course, for a certain region of the world that shall go unnamed.) Our forefathers wanted a government that approached being no government at all. Prohibition was an insult to their vision and the Constitution that described that vision.

Alan McIntire
June 27, 2014 6:06 am

“Therefore, instead of learning from elders, I learned the hard way that many of the things they said were bad for me were, in fact, bad.”
That reminds me of another aphorism:
“Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment”

TinyCO2
June 27, 2014 6:08 am

Caleb, you’re mistaking ‘respect’ for ‘doing as you’re told’. You can respect someone but still do what you want and also the opposite. You can respect a person for one area of their lives or personality but you don’t have to extend it to areas where they are ignorant or deficient. Eg a person can be very kind but be a disaster area on DIY. Learn from their generous spirit but never ask them to help put up a wardrobe.
Doing as you’re told by your elders/betters is something else entirely and is only connected to respect because we use our feelings about people to pre filter what they say or do. Children are supposed to do as they’re told because the adult is usually more knowledgeable. As we grow, we are able and expected to substitute blind acceptance for personal judgement. Don’t let your own lack of respect for the education system of your youth fool you into thinking that your young self was as knowledgeable as you thought you were. You may not have been in the mood to learn as a child but it doesn’t mean you couldn’t.
We’re seeing the side effects of a generation of adults who wanted to learn from their own school experiences and improve things for the next group of kids. While some of them are worthy, like trying to eradicate bullying, others, like encouraging kids to be independent, have led to chaos in schools. I too spent much of my time looking out the window but I’ve grown up to understand that if I’d been given my way, I’d never have been in the mood to sit still and listen. I realise that being forced to accept that I had to do boring tasks and do as I was told, were good things because those skills are as necessary as maths and English and probably harder to learn.

Richard
June 27, 2014 6:10 am

Respect for Stephen Goddard for outing himself, he has an interesting cv.

Matthew Benefiel
June 27, 2014 6:13 am

@oldspanky
“Matthew Benefiel in particular, but to anyone else mystified by my earlier comment: I wrote “science” not “scientists”.”
I understand. But considering science is a set of rules and those rules reuquire a peer review, then peer review by inference requires a ceratain amount of respect, otherwise no one would listen to criticism.

Caleb
June 27, 2014 6:38 am

RE: Alan Robertson says:
June 27, 2014 at 5:49 am
I have witnessed similar situations, where a good woman has a bad son. In fact, to a certain degree I myself was, at times, “the bad son,” and on at least one occasion “the asshole.” If I don’t accept responsibility for my own stupidity, and play the blame-game, I think my mother was not so much to blame as the lack of fathering I was a midst. Single mothers have it rough.

Caleb
June 27, 2014 6:45 am

I have to get back to work, but would like to thank people for commenting. An elder like me relishes respect, and even taking the time to tell me I’m wrong involves effort, which is more respectful than ignoring me.
I think some are missing a certain nuance in the point I am making. I am not saying I should have respected dopes, just because they were old. I am saying there were people who were not dopes, offering me knowledge for free, who I avoided. Later on, with 20-20 hindsight, I smack my forehead.
I’ll be back later.

Alan Robertson
June 27, 2014 7:14 am

The Golden Rule covers all human interactions and is a pure explanation of karma.
There is precious little else that Christ talked about. He explained that we make our own world and are free only to the extent that we will live out the consequences of our own thoughts and actions. Sow and reap, love and forgive…

huxley
June 27, 2014 7:26 am

Now I look back across a half century and wonder: What was it that made them the bad-guy Nazis, and me the good-guy? Why didn’t they seem like millionaires, loaded with knowledge, as I myself was a mere beggar, with the empty pockets of ignorance?
Apparently you had better luck, but quite a few of the adults in my life were bad-guy nazis or unhappy, weak, crazy people, who had authority over me but I knew I couldn’t trust or rely upon them.
I’m more conservative now and not quite so quick to dismiss conventional wisdom, but looking back I haven’t changed my estimation of those adults.
For instance, the Catholic nun, who was principal of my elementary school, was dismissed as mentally ill years later. But while I was a student none of the parents or teachers would brook any criticism of her, although she embodied the caricature of the vicious authoritarian teacher.
Who was I to respect in that situation? How was I to know they were offering me riches of knowledge? How was I to choose to ignore one teacher and respect another if not by my own impertinent, youthful judgment?
I don’t think this stuff is as simple as you lay it out.

urederra
June 27, 2014 7:33 am

Nullius in verba
Nullius in computer output. 😛

Matthew Benefiel
June 27, 2014 7:41 am

@huxley says: “I don’t think this stuff is as simple as you lay it out”
June 27, 2014 at 7:26 am
It’s a good statement, because as with many things there is never a simple “do this and everything will be all right.” Our faults as people is what makes actions like respect so hard, because everyone of us has times when we don’t deserve it. That is where grace comes in, understanding that someone has failed that trust but giving them the opportunity or help to gain it back. Sometimes even that won’t work like in your case. How you approach it though makes all the difference. I’m reading into things but from the sound of your post it sounds like while it creates a sadness you do not hold a grudge, you have learned and moved on, making the best of the worst situation. Sometimes that is all we can do. Sometimes we need to take those experiences and help lead the next generation to be better leaders and as someone else mentioned, treat others like they would like to be treated.

Ed Hinton
June 27, 2014 7:45 am

Perhaps I am jumping the gun and later parts will address this, or perhaps not, but I believe our sometimes misplaced compassion as a society has significantly degraded respect for the wisdom of others as well as the wisdom that others develop to deserve respect. In ages past, many of the rules that developed (even dating back thousands of years to rules around what foods to eat together) and the wisdom elders were seen to have related to the fact that mistakes could have very harsh consequences. I am not referring to the consequences rulers imposed for lawbreaking. I am referring to the very personal consequences that occurred naturally when we were not so good at taking care of and ameliorating the negative harmful things that could happen. In a way, it was a sort of human Darwinism that our compassion and technological advances have managed to largely defeat. I speak not only of physical dangers either. Society breaks down with higher crime and violence when bad behavior has no consequences. We have “progressed” so far to all but eradicate the concept of shame. So now there is no shame for bad behavior, and seldom any physical consequences that cannot be taken care of for risky or even violent behavior. Respect is meaningless if there are no values or principles to aspire to. Wisdom becomes less common when stupidity and risk taking are looked back on as not having had any long term consequences, especially when cultural and technological supports have made that lack of consequences a reality. We have evolved to a point where it is only individual strength of character that makes the difference without the societal/cultural support that once helped most to gain the wisdom that should earn respect while others used to have to face the very harsh consequences of injury, loss of life, or loss of acceptance that once reinforced development of strength of character over a lifetime.

Richard Wright
June 27, 2014 7:49 am

You can respect a person without trusting him. But science has nothing to do with trust anyway. You shouldn’t trust anyone’s data or experiments. Verify the theory yourself independently. That’s what it’s all about – independent reproducibility. Satellite temperature data vs ground-based thermometers is a good example. Satellites couldn’t care less about station siting and data fudging. They are a completely independent means of gathering data.

Josh
June 27, 2014 7:51 am

Tom J says:
June 27, 2014 at 6:06 am
Preach on brother. Preach on! I wish more people in this country understood why the founding fathers implemented the system they did and understood their intentions. The constant bombardment from seemingly intelligent people about the “interpretation of the Constitution” drives me insane. It is a trick used by those with an agenda to promote an idea or ideology that is in stark contrast to the intent of those who helped frame the most wonderful and free country the world has ever known. We, as a society, have fallen into a trap that has been carefully designed and slowly implemented to make the masses believe that our unalienable rights are privileges and privileges rights.
We have become a nation of “useful idiots” because so many simply don’t understand nor care to discover what the real meaning is behind all of the rights and powers granted to the feds, states, and individuals. It’s very easy to know what the authors of our Constitution meant and why they chose the words they used. All people have to do is read the Federalist Papers and it becomes very apparent. But, alas, how many people in this country even know who John Jay is?

rabbit
June 27, 2014 8:04 am

An easy way to identify pseudoscience is if the author(s) shows contempt for researchers who came before, denouncing them as regressive and unable to think outside the box, and gloating over their own superior insight.
Even as Einstein was overturning the very foundations of physics, he showed great admiration and respect for Newton, Maxwell, and others. He knew full well he was building on, not disrespecting, their work.
To the Master’s honor all must turn, each in its track, without a sound, forever tracing Newton’s ground. ~ Einstein

Jim Clarke
June 27, 2014 8:25 am

I’m not sure where you’re going with this Caleb, but it was an enjoyable read. Thank you! It reminded me of this:
Speak your truth quietly and clearly, and listen to others,
even to the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story.
-Desiderata

Pamela Gray
June 27, 2014 9:08 am

re: interpretation
Josh, be careful what you say about the Constitution and its interpretation. Plain words are plain words, but only in their time and space. They become more or less interpretable in another time and space. A case in point, the phrase from our Declaration of Independence, “All men are created equal…” led to all manner of concurrent discriminatory laws and regulations based on its plain word. It was only later, in another time and space that those plain gender words were broadened to mean male and female, and usually after they were changed to mean white and black “males”.
http://womenshistory.about.com/od/laws/a/Constitution-Sex-Discrimination.htm
The Bible is another instance where plainly spoken words interpreted as plainly spoken words are plain only in the time and space they were written. We certainly can no longer take the whole of that text literally the way it was used in its time and place of origin.
http://www.christianbiblereference.org/faq_BibleTrue.htm.
re: looking back
Which speaks to the “looking back” notion. We see our own past through different colored lenses. The author above interprets his past. But it is his past. He cannot speculate on the past of another (and it irritates me no end that many do just that). I speculate that humans learn best through mistakes, meaning they are necessary. That decades are spent making mistakes is very likely the normal condition. I have yet to see a perfect and law abiding youth not make mistakes. That the mistakes are different from the mistakes of a rebel is simply context.

Oscar Bajner
June 27, 2014 9:18 am

“When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years. ” Mark my words, Twain.
“Don’t trust anyone over thirty”, is a credo so vicious, it is shocking that anyone could find it entertaining, let alone entertain it. It is a full scale assault on social relations, starting with those who are seemingly distant strangers, and ending with our own parents, sick.

Brian R
June 27, 2014 9:20 am

You shouldn’t take anything “with a grain of salt”. Don’t you know salt is bad for you.
/sarc

Rick
June 27, 2014 9:29 am

“When we start to forgive our friends we are leaving childhood, and when we start to forgive our parents we are leaving adolescence, but not until we start to forgive ourselves have we gained wisdom.”
or alternatively Mencken’s quote
“The older I get the less I believe in the old saw that age brings wisdom”