Good, Better, Best... or Just Different

If I were to ask which is the most important body part, what would you answer? The brain controls everything but without muscles, nerves, skin, and bones it wouldn't have anything to direct. The heart provides blood with all the nutrients but without lunges, our body wouldn't have needed oxygen. Legs may move us from place to place, but are nothing without the previously mentioned organs. Every part of the body is needed to help the body work to full capacity. Even when there are parts that don't work, are misshapen, or have other issues, this doesn't make the body as a whole less useful. It is different and can be of value given the right situation. 

So why do we place things in a hierarchy of good, better, best? More importantly, why do we place higher value to certain people over others? Is it their clothes? Their job? How much money they make, have saved, give to charity? Is it the number of people how know about you? What about their intelligence? Art abilities? Athletic abilities? What gives people their value?

I have grown up believing that all people are valuable and that God care about all of us. As His children, we have divine qualities and royal lineage. Just as importantly, we have individual worth. We have value because of our divine qualities and royal lineage but our individuality makes us different, unique, and special. They don't decrease our value. Actually, the increase it. Like the body, any one part by itself may work to its greatest capacity but still not be able to reach its full potential without the other parts of the body. 

So why do we treat people better or worse based on what value we've given them? 

It's happened throughout all of history. People who were considered less valuable were conquered and made slaves, or killed. Now I can't say for sure but I assume that's what happened with the Native Americans and the African Slaves in the beginning of modern times in North America. Boats of people showed up in "modern clothing" and with knowledge and technology. They had written language and long distance sailing capabilities. They found groups of people wearing clothing from items directly from the land. Their language sounded more primitive and they lacked a written history. The people were often more nomadic in nature or lived in basic dwellings. The new arrivals determined the others were of less value or put the land to better use and so they captured the natives and took them away from their land or took their land away from them. They had decided these people were of less value. 

We are seeing similar mentalities today. Groups of people are determined to have less value because of their beliefs, because of the actions of others who look like them, because they don't live up to the clothing standards arbitrarily set by a group of people, or any number of things. Now that this value has been assigned, the people are treated that way. It's very heartbreaking to see. 

What if we change that way of thinking? Instead of placing value on people we looked at them and said "they are different and that's ok. I wonder how they can help or benefit society." Maybe then the  only judgments passed on a person would be based on that person's actions and only more of an assessment. 

I wonder if we thought of the people of the world as parts to the same body, all performing different but important functions. When a part of the body isn't working right, some areas compensate while others rush to the aid of the injured or ailing part. 

This is how I try to teach my children. When they comment about clothing, language/accent, ability/disability, or any other characteristic we talk about how that makes them different but then we talk about how they still do things similar to us and how they might be able to do things better. Different makes us unique and special but does not make us greater or less than someone else.  

God is an explanation! (Does God exist: part 2)

Sometimes I wish I knew a bit more about computer algorithms but most of the time I'm ok as long as they work right. I'm not sure how, I mean I have a small idea/theory bit it, but on the explore option on Instagram I have been seeing some strange accounts pop-up based on what I "like" and what I follow. These are posts about extreme political affiliations, holistic or vegan lifestyles, conspiracy theories, and atheism. On occasion, I read them and even sometimes I have commented. I like learning about what other people think and why.

But what made me want to add to an earlier post was some internal insight I gained while looking at one of these posts. It was from an atheist account. The post starts with "'God' is not an explanation." I couldn't comment on the account because it would take too much space but also I have tried that before and although the owner claims "question everything" and "open mindedness" they are unwilling to hear anything about God that goes against their current beliefs. I still wanted to share how I see things.

I say God is an explanation. What I am about to explain are my personal opinions (as I state frequently) but it also a theory, one that has evidences and not much proof.

The Bible teaches that God is all-knowing. Given that assumption, wouldn't He know exactly how and why all the laws of nature and science work? Wouldn't He know how to influence or introduce catalysts in ways that would organize and form worlds, bring about life, and cause life to evolve? With this, wouldn't He know which laws would benefit us and which could hurt us?

The Bible also teaches that God is just and no respecter of persons. That means we, everyone, gets what they deserve (cause and effect) and He doesn't play favorites. Now say someone is more willing to listen and follows His commandments (which are meant to lead and direct us to keeping the laws of nature that benefit us), it seems like a blessing to believers and that God favors them but to non-believers simple good fortune. Are there non-believers who inadvertently obey these laws (and the corresponding commandments) who still receive the same benefits as the believers? Yes. He is not respecter of persons. They met the requirements for the law to take affect.

Because God is just, He obeys the laws. He gave us agency and allows us to learn from and deal with the consequences of our's and other's choices. He will not interfere with these laws but will offer guidance on what to do to set the right conditions for the laws to give the desired results. Faith and gifts of the spirit are seemingly possible outcomes to obeying certain laws that allow the person the ability to use knowledge God has to perform miracles as seen in miracles of healing and such.

His desire is for us to learn and understand these laws. To connect how life acts and interacts. Some of the answers are their within reach and some are a little farther out for the time being.

Do I know, understand, or have explanations that happen for everything? No I don't. But I believe that God does. I believe that one day I have the potential to know as He does. That is why I have faith and that is why I trust His counsels. God is an explanation especially when science tells us that something is near impossible/highly improbable.

Love and support...?

I have had a few debates/arguments within the past few months on Facebook. I actually started the debates/picked the fights. I did this because the people I was debating had decided to bad mouth, name call, and other similar things people who voted for Donald Trump. However, I wasn't upset or offended because I voted for him. I did not vote for him. I was upset because I have friends and family who did vote for him. I don't know all of the reasons why they chose to support him. What I do know is that someone who disagreed with my friends' or family members' choice was mocking, "disowning", and belittling my friends and family. So I stood up for them. Sadly, in 2 of the instances the person/people who were saying such things about Trump voters have/had close relationships with the people they were talking about. In one of instances, they all but mentioned the person they were treating so disrespectfully by name.

Here are the list of reasons why these people acted so horridly towards others (according to what they said to me):

1. Their opinions or reasons are stupid and are invalid so I don't have to acknowledge them. 
2. They chose what they did and have to live with that choice of choosing hate. 
3. Trump is evil and they are supporting evil. 
4. If they were a real (the person's ethnicity) they wouldn't even consider voting for him.
5. I am standing up for what is right while they are in the wrong. 

I am sure there are more but this is what I am drawing from memory of how the conversations made me feel. 

These interactions have left me feeling bothered; not because of what was said to me in the moment or what I said in return. What bothered, and continues to bother me, is the lack of love and understanding being shown. 

As I have previously written about, I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and based on what I have learned from the teachings of the Church I think tattooing your body shows a lack of respect for your body and God's creations. I think drinking alcohol and taking certain drugs (marijuana, crack, meth, etc.) impair thinking and acting which prevents you from using agency properly. For moral reasons, I don't think abortion should be legal. The list could go on. However, here is my point and one I believe that Jesus Christ taught. We can disagree without being rude or disagreeable. We can love and support without agreeing or condoning the choices that person makes. I try to encourage others to not do those things I think are wrong or sinful even if it means supporting laws that seem to limit choice or freedom. If asked about it, I would try to teach them what I believe and why and then encourage them to change their lives to better follow God's commandments. And here's the big BUT...even if they don't change or if they don't ask, I'm not going to end friendships, point fingers and mock, or anything else that might jeopardize those relationships. If its a person with whom I don't currently have any type of relationship, I will still try my best to treat them with love, respect, and kindness.

Somehow people have decided that in order to love someone, you must agree and accept their life choices. I don't buy into that. They are not mutually exclusive ideas. Jesus Christ showed compassion for all but it didn't stop him from chastising the woman caught in adultery or from throwing tables and throwing out the money changers at the temple. He didn't agree with what these people did. He loved them and did what He thought was necessary for for them to change. 

Seeing the Bigger Picture: Evidence versus Proof

A while back I posted about how I like doing puzzles. I have a puzzle app where many of the puzzles don't show the entire picture to start out. As I start one of these puzzles, I try to guess what the picture might be. Sometimes this is quite easy and others, I was more than halfway done before I realized what was going on.

I believe there is often a bigger picture to be seen than the small puzzle pieces we seem to focus on. As parts are connected and come together, we can see and understand what that picture is and start to understand the effect it will have on our lives.

One of the things I have noticed about society is the need for data and information to support our belief as to where a puzzle piece fits, how it fits, why it fits, or even simply what it is, or data and information to oppose another person's belief that we don't agree with or believe ourselves.

Two similar concepts that have helped me in forming opinions and seeing where pieces fit into the picture are the scientific method and (my very basic understanding of) the proceedings in a court of law.

The way I understand it, a law, for both science and in court rooms, is the absolute at the given point. In science, this is because it has been proven. In a court room, this is because the law makers have decided this is what they feel is best for the benefit of society (or depending on your point of view, the best to keep them in office). Laws in science very rarely change. Laws in the legal sense change, it seems, about as often as the wind changes.

However, when trying to understand something, anything really, it seems as though you can use a process similar to either legal proceedings or the scientific method to determine an outcome.

Both start with an idea or question of what happened or what will happen. Then comes research, discovery, data collection. Now you can create an hypothesis which is a suggested outcome based on the data and information collected. At the testing phase, you see if your hypothesis will hold up. In a court, this depends on many human variables. Science is generally in a slightly more controlled environment. Now, either the judge or jury for a court of law or you if conducting an experiment can analyze results and draw conclusions.

While some people have a firm grasp on this part of the concept, the piece I find many forget is the difference between proof and evidence. Proof means there is no way to show any other alternative or come to a different conclusion. Evidence is just something that points towards, leads to, or gives hint of a possible conclusion.

In a court of law, DNA is proof. No one (except clones and maybe identical twins) shares DNA. So you can't claim that DNA isn't yours. However, depending on where the DNA was found and what source it came from, alternate theories of how it got there can be given. Science has only a few laws; gravity and thermodynamics are the only 2 that come immediately to mind. However, similar to law, these laws are only in force given certain criteria.

On the other hand, evidence only points or nudges to a certain outcome. The legal system gives instructions on how much weight evidence should hold when making a decision and how far decided on that outcome you should be before coming to a decision; for example, preponderance of evidence, reasonable doubt and beyond reasonable doubt. In science, usually the outcome needs to be repeated several times with the same outcome or the end data needs to be scientifically significant.

The reason I wanted to talk about all of this is too many people in debates or arguments over political, societal, and moral topics treat evidence as proof. Or in collecting data and information, they saw trends and simply skipped straight to draw conclusions. I have seen people who ignore the opposing party's evidence because it doesn't fit. Sometimes during testing, they allowed too many variables or didn't have a control group to compare their data against.

Doing these things blurs the edges of each puzzle piece and makes it appear as though the piece fits when it really doesn't. I have done a puzzle with 1 or 2 pieces in the wrong spot and struggled to complete the puzzle. One puzzle I was actually convinced there was a piece missing from the brand new box rather than the simpler conclusion of a piece out of place. Being open minded to other possibilities helps us not fall into this problem of being convinced we are always right or the only one right, when it may be us who has the piece in the wrong place.

Living up or down to expectations

Recently there has been talk of making community college tuition free. While this sounds like it could help more people attend college, I don't think it will have the desired affect people hope for. They say this will help people from lower economic situations be able to attend college and help better their situations. However, there are already plenty of programs in place to help in this area.

Yes, paying for college can be hard and there are other things the money could be used on but it isn't impossible. I attended 5 1/2 years of college (transfers and a change of majors caused the delay). My parents didn't pay anything towards my living expenses (accept while I lived at home), tuition, books, or anything else. I worked through high school and worked through college. I received a half tuition scholarship for my first 2 years after that I applied for grants and financial aid. One year I only got student loans instead of grants because they application process took into account my parents' income. However, I hadn't earned any money or lived with them for a year and a half (I was servings a mission for my church). I still managed to pay for school and pay off loans. I have friends who were essentially paid to attend college between scholarships, grants and such. 

What makes my situation and those of my friends different from those of lower economic classes? It wasn't money or opportunity to attend. There are colleges everywhere. At my high school, there were counselors who helped the students look for scholarships and grants and help fill out applications for college. Are there not counselors at all high schools? Even if there aren't, all this information can be found online. Both schools and libraries have computers available for use to look up all this information. 

So what's the difference? Here is story I read recently that demonstrates exactly how I feel. This story comes from an article I read.

"Ben Carson said of himself, “I was the worst student in my whole fifth-grade class.” One day Ben took a math test with 30 problems. The student behind him corrected it and handed it back. The teacher, Mrs. Williamson, started calling each student’s name for the score. Finally, she got to Ben. Out of embarrassment, he mumbled the answer. Mrs. Williamson, thinking he had said “9,” replied that for Ben to score 9 out of 30 was a wonderful improvement. The student behind Ben then yelled out, “Not nine! … He got none … right.” Ben said he wanted to drop through the floor.

At the same time, Ben’s mother, Sonya, faced obstacles of her own. She was one of 24 children, had only a third-grade education, and could not read. She was married at age 13, was divorced, had two sons, and was raising them in the ghettos of Detroit. Nonetheless, she was fiercely self-reliant and had a firm belief that God would help her and her sons if they did their part.

One day a turning point came in her life and that of her sons. It dawned on her that successful people for whom she cleaned homes had libraries—they read. After work she went home and turned off the television that Ben and his brother were watching. She said in essence: You boys are watching too much television. From now on you can watch three programs a week. In your free time you will go to the library—read two books a week and give me a report.

The boys were shocked. Ben said he had never read a book in his entire life except when required to do so at school. They protested, they complained, they argued, but it was to no avail. Then Ben reflected, “She laid down the law. I didn’t like the rule, but her determination to see us improve changed the course of my life.”

And what a change it made. By the seventh grade he was at the top of his class. He went on to attend Yale University on a scholarship, then Johns Hopkins medical school, where at age 33 he became its chief of pediatric neurosurgery and a world-renowned surgeon. How was that possible? Largely because of a mother who, without many of the advantages of life, magnified her calling as a parent."

Children learn and take social cues from those they spend time with. After my daughter was bit on the face by a dog, I worried about how she would react when people asked about the band-aids and scars. Would she have flash backs to what happened and be afraid? Would she shy away and be afraid to answer? However, she did none of these things. When asked by the first person about it, she looked to me for reassurance and when I nodded for her to talk about it, she did it. She would act in the manner that I would. 

Kids will live up or down to the expectations set for them by those who love them and who they love. When parents, teachers, mentors, and friends all work to help each other, they will accomplish great things. I wonder what would happen if more parents and teachers and friends expected more of each other and expected more of those under their charge? 

What do you say to someone...

If you are like me, you know so many people who are going through so many different trials and challenges; sickness, divorce, death of loved ones, struggles with not being able to have kids, etc. I have always thought it was hard to know what to say to someone dealing with these kinds of trouble. Lately I have felt that even more so.

I have seen list after list of things not to say to a parent who has lost a kids, things not to say to someone who has all boys, things not to say to someone who has a terminally ill family member, things not to say to a couple who doesn't have children, etc. The list seems to grow longer and longer. There seems to be a new one every few weeks.  

Part of the problem, I believe, is that if you yourself haven't specifically dealt with one of those situations, you don't know what to say or how to deal with it. The best you can do is offer what you think you might like to hear or have offered to you if you were placed in that situation. 

What should I say? What should I do? When I am done reading these lists, I am left with a feeling that no matter what I say or do, it will never be good enough or will hurt the other person more. At this point, is it better to do or say nothing at all? 

I wanted to have kids before my husband and I were in a situation in which we would be ready. I was 27 years old and had been married for 2 years but didn't have kids. Sometimes in Mormon culture that is hard to deal with. Somehow along the way, some people believe women are supposed to get married by 21 and start having children immediately. Anyway, many times people would ask why we didn't have kids yet or when we were going to start having kids (because "you don't want to wait too long"). There were times when those questions really hurt because I did want to have kids. 

I don't believe any of those people intended to hurt me or cause me pain. As I look back now, I think I understand what would possess them to ask such personal questions. They simply wanted to form some sort of friendship and you do that by talking to and learning about the other person.

I try to believe that people are good. We don't want to see others suffer, we don't like feeling helpless, and occasionally, despite our best efforts, we may say or do something that unintentionally hurts or offends someone else. When someone says or does something that hurts or offends me, I try (and sometimes I need to be reminded) to remember that they probably had good intentions behind it.