Blog Archives

The Influence of Confucius

The Influence of Confucius

Confucianism in general is borne out by the regression that took place over the centuries. It may be characterized as follows:

  1. The idea of the unknowable One is transformed into metaphysical indifference. When Confucius declines to think about the absolute or to pray for help, it is because a certainty rooted in the Encompassing enjoins him to turn to mankind in the actual world. By living in serene acceptance of death, not asking to know what we cannot know, he leaves everything open. But once Confucius’ certainty is lacking, skepticism runs rampant and with it an uncontrolled superstition. Agnosticism becomes a vacuum, which Confucianism seeks to fill with material magic and illusionary expectations.
  2. Confucius’ simple but passionate drive toward humanity is transformed into utilitarian thinking. The result is a pedantic pragmatism shorn of any feeling for man’s independent worth.
  3. The free ethos, implied by the polarity between the li and the power that guides them, is transformed into a dogmatization of the li. Without their ground in the jen and in the One, the li become mere rules of external behavior.
  4. Openness of thought degenerates into dogmatic theory. For example, a controversy arises as to whether man is good or evil by nature, whether training in the li makes man good or only restores him to his true nature.
  5. The knowledge that was inner action degenerates into rote learning. There arose the class of scribes who distinguished themselves not by personality but by formal learning and maintained their prestige by a system of examinations. For Confucius antiquity was a norm which each man must acquire for himself. As transformed in Confucianism, this came to mean the study of ancient works, the pre-eminence of the scholar; instead of making antiquity his own, the student learned to imitate it. School learning produced an orthodoxy which lost its bond with life as a whole.
Tagged
Posted in Philosophy and Wisdom

Confucius on Renewing Disastrous Circumstances

Confucius on Renewing Disastrous Circumstances

Confucius was once asked, “What is the first thing to be done in order to promote a renewal in disastrous circumstances?”

Confucius gave a remarkable answer: Words must be set aright.

'Confucius And the World He Created' by Michael Schuman (ISBN 046502551X) What inheres in words should be brought out. The prince should be a prince, the father a father, the man a man. But language is constantly misused, words are employed for meanings that do not befit them. A seperation arises between being and language. “He who has the inner being also has the words; he who has words does not always have the inner being.”

If the language is in disorder, everything goes wrong. “If words (designations, concepts) are not right, judgments are not clear; works do not prosper; punishments do not strike the right man, and the people do not know where to set hand and foot.

“Therefore the superior man chooses words that can be employed without doubt, and forms judgments that can be converted into actions without fear of doubt. The superior man tolerates no imprecision in his speech.”

Tagged
Posted in Philosophy and Wisdom

Fallacies are Statements that Contain Errors of Logic or Language

A fallacy is an argument that may be persuasive but contains an error of logic or language.

A fallacy is an error in reasoning, but reasoning can be erroneous in a number of ways, so there is no definitive type of fallacy.

Greek Philosopher Aristotle The Greek Philosopher Aristotle (384–322 BCE) was the first to gather and explain the most common types of errors in reasoning, such as equivocation, begging the question, and false cause.

Aristotle wrote in On Sophistical Refutations (c. 350 BCE)

That some reasonings are genuine, while others seem to be so but are not, is evident. This happens with arguments, as also elsewhere, through a certain likeness between the genuine and the sham. For physically some people are in a vigorous condition, while others merely seem to be so by blowing and rigging themselves out as the tribesmen do their victims for sacrifice; and some people are beautiful thanks to their beauty, while others seem to be so, by dint of embellishing themselves. So it is, too, with inanimate things; for of these, too, some are really silver and others gold, while others are not and merely seem to be such to our sense; e.g. things made of litharge and tin seem to be of silver, while those made of yellow metal look golden. In the same way both reasoning and refutation are sometimes genuine, sometimes not, though inexperience may make them appear so: for inexperienced people obtain only, as it were, a distant view of these things. For reasoning rests on certain statements such that they involve necessarily the assertion of something other than what has been stated, through what has been stated: refutation is reasoning involving the contradictory of the given conclusion. Now some of them do not really achieve this, though they seem to do so for a number of reasons; and of these the most prolific and usual domain is the argument that turns upon names only. It is impossible in a discussion to bring in the actual things discussed: we use their names as symbols instead of them; and therefore we suppose that what follows in the names, follows in the things as well, just as people who calculate suppose in regard to their counters.

In the subsequent centuries of philosophical debate, new categories of fallacies were identified, and the philosophers William of Ockham and John Buridan compiled an extensive number of fallacy types, giving them Latin names such as argumentum ad populum (appeal to the people) and argumentum ad baculum (appeal to the stick, or force).

There are now more than 200 named fallacies, commonly divided between formal and informal.

  • Formal fallacies are mistakes in the logical form of an argument, independent of its semantic content. For example, in the non-fallacious form called Modus Ponens, a correct deduction can be derived from a conditional premise and a correct antecedent, regardless of the content. However, in the related formal fallacy called “affirming the consequent,” a false deduction is derived from the same correct conditional premise and a false antecedent. It follows that not every instance of the deduction would be true, even if the premise statements appeared correct individually.
  • An informal fallacy occurs when the content or organization of the premises of an argument constitutes an error in reasoning, as when an arguer changes the subject (red herring) or appeals to an inappropriate authority (argumentum ad verecundiam).
Tagged
Posted in Mental Models and Psychology Philosophy and Wisdom

Philanthropy and The Passion of Bill Gates

Forbes 400 Summit on Philanthropy In June 2015, about 200 billionaires, outstanding philanthropists and social entrepreneur-game changers convened in New York for the annual Forbes 400 Summit on Philanthropy. The high spot of the event was the presentation of lifetime accomplishment awards to Bill and Melinda Gates, and Paul Farmer, cofounder of Partners in Health. The invention or development should be of great significance scientifically, should be agenda setting, and undeniably must have had a chief influence, both in terms of the development of the field and its applications to advance mankind. The rule is that that the accomplishment should not have been marked by another major prize. This means that the reward should not come too long after the invention, discovery or development. This is why our winners occasionally receive the Nobel Prize and not the other way around.

Paul Farmer, Partners in Health Recalling Bill Gates’s passion for philanthropy and his ability to focus on the task at hand, Paul Farmer reminisced,

I was traveling with Bill once in Africa and we decided to go up to the top of this mountain to see the gorillas up close. We’re sitting there, and there’s this beautiful silver-backed gorilla not 5 feet from Bill Gates. And he turns around to me and goes, “Now, where were we in talking about this tuberculosis vaccine?”

Warren Buffett and Bill Gates Philanthropy In a planet with many celebrities but few heroes, Bill Gates has reached superhuman status by pledging much of his massive fortune to the improvement of global equity. He and his wife have directed the causes of health disparities between rich and poor, and their foundation has become a mainspring in international aid and in research on AIDS and other diseases. In June, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s likely influence on global health was augmented when Warren Buffett, the world’s second-richest man, broadcast plans to give most of his fortune to the foundation established by the richest one. At the same event, Warren Buffett noted the following on Bill and Melinda Gates:

When I was deciding how to give away my money nine years ago, I reached out to Bill and Melinda Gates and struck the kind of deal I usually make: they do all of the work and I sit back and watch. I’ve studied this country’s great philanthropists: Rockefeller, Carnegie. Henry Ford, you name them. None of them ever poured remotely the amount of personal time, effort, and brainpower into their foundations that Bill and Melinda have.

When the Buffett gift was announced, some observers expressed concern that aid from other sources would decline because the Gates Foundation would be perceived as rich enough to solve the developing world’s health problems.

Philanthropy and The Passion of Bill Gates Venture philanthropy has thrived general philanthropy as a controlling principle in concept and in language. The conversion further blurs the line between the private and the public. Foundations have moved away from setting general humanitarian goals and making grants to outside groups for research and for achievement programs in keeping with the foundation’s general purposes. Foundations today set more specific policy goals and then either create or seek out establishments that will carry out projects for which the significances are set by the foundation. Some of the foundations no longer consent unsolicited applications. Instead of a listing of grants, they are now titled a collection of “investments” directed toward achieving a policy goal. The foundations reinforce research that “aligns with our investment strategy.” The Gates Foundation speaks about its “program-related investments” when speaking of its payments in chase of its aims. Accepting the award, Bill Gates noted:

I have had a lot of fun jobs, but none of them has been as fun as partnering with Melinda and seeing real results. My favorite graph is the one that shows childhood death has been cut in half in 25 years, and my favorite prediction is that we’ll cut it in half again.

I see philanthropy as the venture capital tor government functions. There are certain things the private sector will never fund like fighting malaria or fixing primary health systems, because there is no profit model there. Governments want to fund those things, but it’s difficult for them to work on really long-term issues and to attract the right scientists to solve those problems. Philanthropy can take the risks, do the research and development, and fund the pilot programs to tackle some of the most critical issues in the world.

The late 19th century brought the Gilded Age, with riches created by inventions and opportunities. In the 20th century, capitalism was directed by the managerial revolution that fashioned huge corporations and personal fortunes but also repressed innovation, limited new opportunities, and widened the gap in the distribution of wealth. Executive capitalism is now being replaced by the entrepreneurial capitalism stage, a second Gilded Age, which Acs identifies as the New American Capitalism. Entrepreneurial capitalism necessitates a philanthropy (as represented by Warren Buffett and Andrew Carnegie) that ploughs fortunes into society to offer opportunities for entrepreneurs and capital for entrepreneurial activities such as business incubators. Corporate capitalism reinvigorated traditionally manly rhetoric and actions, from paternalism and self-control to the Great Father and the warrior ethos. Abstracted loyalties to gender and race intensified, and gestures of masculinization saturated American culture. Nor have they slackened much in or own post-millennial atmosphere of white male pathos and bathos. Yet it’s not enough to say that manhood developed new forms of contestation and patriarchal performativity as men’s work alienated their gender codes from their gendered bodies. The rise of large-scale organizations threatened manhood’s usefulness.

Tagged
Posted in Philosophy and Wisdom

Gettysburg Address: A Reaffirmation of a Founding Principle of the United States

A painting of Abraham Lincoln giving his Gettysburg Address by J. L. G. Ferris (c. 1900) Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address wass a reaffirmation of a founding principle of the United States: that all humans are born equal.

The Battle of Gettysburg took place during July 1–3, 1863, and resulted in the retreat of General Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia from its incursion into Union territory. On November 19, months after the battle, President Abraham Lincoln (1809-65) attended a ceremony dedicating a national cemetery at the Gettysburg battlefield site. The Gettysburg Address is the speech he gave to the assembled crowd at the ceremony, and it is widely celebrated as one of the most important and influential political speeches in the history of the United States. Abraham Lincoln said in the Gettysburg Address,

… wehere highly resolve that these dead shall not havedied in vain- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom- and that government of the people, by the people, for thepeople, shall not perish from the earth.

When President Lincoln delivered his address, he was second on the bill to Edward Everett (1794–1865), a famed orator who gave a two-hour-long speech to the assembled crowd. Lincoln’s speech was incomparably shorter, lasting no longer than two to three minutes, and encompassing about 250 words. Yet in that speech, the president reflected the ideals expressed in the Declaration of Independence (1776), the founding document of the American nation. His simple, eloquent expression of the notion that the nation was founded for equality, and for the good of all people, not once referred to slavery, the Confederacy, the Union, or any of the political issues of the day.

It is unclear what the reaction to Lincoln’s speech was at the time, after less than two years after giving it the president was dead and the civil war over. However, the impact of the Gettysburg Address lived on as a model of political rhetoric, oratorical simplicity, and political ideology. The speech turned the nation’s political attention toward the unifying ideal that all people are born equal—an ideal that is almost universally assumed today.

The Gettysburg Address is credited as being largely responsible for the introduction of that ideal into U.S. political discourse, and it remains an important political reference point today.

Tagged
Posted in Philosophy and Wisdom

The Controversial Differences of Opinion between Rabindranath Tagore and Mahatma Gandhi

Described as a “world poet,” Rabindranath Tagore is considered a mystifying ecumenical figure and an archetype of human creative possibility. Rabindranath Tagore bestowed the title of ‘Mahatma’ (“Great Soul”) on Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi in 1915. Mahatma Gandhi called Tagore Gurudev (“Revered Master”) and he attained a certain classicality. Tagore’s literary works have universal appeal and that illuminates his complexity and “myriad-mindedness.”

Nevertheless, experts have said that although Tagore admired Gandhi, he differed with him on specific issues.

The Controversial Differences of Opinion between Rabindranath Tagore and Mahatma Gandhi

“Tagore admired Mahatma Gandhi immensely and expressed his admiration for his leadership time and again, but sharply differed with him when Gandhi was departing from adequate reasoning,” Nobel-prize winning economist Amartya Sen once said.

After the Nepal-Bihar earthquake of 1934, Gandhi credited the disaster to the custom of untouchability among Biharis. Gandhi had said the earthquake was “a divine chastisement for the great sin we have committed against those whom we describe as Harijans”.

Although Tagore was against untouchability, he found this line of reasoning on Gandhi’s part unfounded and irrational.

Apparantly, Tagore shot off a refutation on rationalist lines, with a appeal for it to be published in Gandhi’s periodical, Harijan. The correspondence expressed “painful surprise” at “this kind of unscientific view of things”. It was plainly erroneous, Gurudev argued, to “associate ethical principles with cosmic phenomena”:

In the Harijan issue of 16 February, 1934, Tagore wrote his article The Bihar Earthquake to which Gandhi wrote his rejoinder Superstitions vs. Faith (pp. 115-121). Tagore considered Gandhi’s view that untouchability had brought down God’s vengeance upon certain parts of Bihar in the form of an earthquake as ‘unfortunate’, ‘unscientific’ and “too readily accepted by a large section of countrymen” (pp. 115): “If we associate ethical principles with cosmic phenomena, we shall have to admit that human nature is superior to Providence that preaches its lessons in good in orgies of the worst behaviour possible” (p.116). This amounts to “making indiscriminate examples of casual victims…in order to impress other at a safe distance who possibly deserve severer condemnation” (p 116). He felt the kind of argument that Gandhi used by exploiting an event of cosmic disturbance far better suited the psychology of his opponents than his own; and, “We, who are immensely grateful to Mahatmaji for inducing, by his wonderworking inspiration, freedom from fear and feebleness in the minds of his countrymen, feel profoundly hurt when any words from his mouth may emphasize the elements of unreason in those very minds — unreason which is a source of all blind powers that drive us against freedom and self-respect”. (p117).

Differences of Opinion between Rabindranath Tagore and Mahatma Gandhi

To this, Gandhi had replied that he felt phenomena like droughts, floods, earthquakes et cetera, though they seem to have only physical origins, are somehow connected with man’s morality.

Gandhi replied by saying that he long believed phenomena produce results both physical and spiritual; and, “The converse I hold to be equally true … We do not know all the laws of God nor their working… I believe literally that not a leaf moves but by His will. Every breath I take depends upon His sufferance …. what appears to us as catastrophes are so only because we do not know the universal laws sufficiently … (catastrophic) visitations… though they seem to have only physical origins are, for me, somehow connected with man’s morals … My belief is a call to repentence and self-purification … even as I cannot help believing in God though I am unable to prove His existence to the sceptics, in like manner, I cannot prove the connection of the sin of untouchability with the Bihar visitation even though the connection is instinctively felt by me” (pp.118-l20). And the utilitarian then spoke and bared himself thus, “If my belief turns out to be ill-founded, it will still have done good to me and those who believe with me. For we shall have been spurred to more vigorous efforts towards self-purification…” (p.120). And answering Tagore’s stinging comment that “our own sins and errors, however enormous, have not got enough force to drag down the structure of creation to ruins” (p. 117), he said, “On the contrary I have the faith that our own sins have more force to ruin that structure than any mere physical phenomenon” (p, 120), And he concluded, ” …the connection between cosmic phenomena and human behaviour is a living faith that draws me nearer to my God, humbles me and makes me readier for facing Him”. Gandhi, in arguing thus, is proved one who must maximise utility and make use of every circumstance to forward ends he considers desirable. And his conviction about his belief obliterates from consciousness any apparent factual inconsistencies that his system of faith has with a physical phenomena as ordinarily understood. Both, in their own way, are relevant and unimpeachable.

Tagged
Posted in Philosophy and Wisdom

The Science of Fear

'The Science of Fear' by Daniel Gardner (ISBN 0452295467) Confirmation bias leads us to accept more readily perceived facts that keep to our existing worldview more willingly than objectively considering all of the evidence. Many corporate leaders leverage disruptive change by making targeted, courageous moves toward new market opportunities. Many companies face up to risk with a strategic framework based on extenuating and managing the probable consequences but that line of attack might build bigger protective walls without guarding against the greatest risks—the ones that are unidentified. The uncertainty advantage is something different: an approach that compels managers to recognize the unknown as a market differentiator and an opportunity to give a free rein to innovative solutions that appeal to customers, investors, strategic partners, regulators, and competitors. Concisely, it is an opportunity to go well beyond the characteristic meaning of risk management—that is, seeking ways to achieve the best of the worst outcomes—to create new and sustainable value out of confusion.

In his book, The Science of Fear: How the Culture of Fear Manipulate Brain, New York Times bestselling author Daniel Gardner describes some of our pitfalls when it comes to framing risk properly:

Once a belief is in place, we screen what we see and hear in a biased way that ensures our beliefs are “proven” correct. Psychologists have also discovered that people are vulnerable to something called group polarization—which means that when people who share beliefs get together in groups, they become more convinced that their beliefs are right and they become more extreme in their views. Put confirmation bias, group polarization, and culture together, and we start to understand why people can come to completely different views about which risks are frightening and which aren’t worth a second thought.

It’s also much easier to simply be afraid of that with which we can easily recall to memory. Gardner uses Daniel Kahneman’s two systems of thought to explain:

You may have just watched the evening news and seen a shocking report about someone like you being attacked in a quiet neighborhood at midday in Dallas. That crime may have been in another city in another state. It may have been a very unusual, even bizarre crime—the very qualities that got it on the evening news across the country. And it may be that if you think about this a little—if you get System Two involved—you would agree that this example really doesn’t tell you much about your chance of being attacked, which, according to the statistics, is incredibly tiny. But none of that matters. All that System One knows is that the example was recalled easily. Based on that alone, it concludes that risk is high and it triggers the alarm—and you feel afraid when you really shouldn’t.

Tagged
Posted in Investing and Finance Philosophy and Wisdom

Knowledge is Never Really Acquired

A portrait statue of Socrates The famous statement, “All I know is that I do not know,” is attributed-questionably, according to some scholars-to the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates (c. 470-399 BCE), based on two dialogues written by his disciple Plato (c. 424-c. 348 BCE).

In The Republic (c. 360 BCE), Socrates concludes a discussion with Thrasymachus on “justice” by saying, “the result of the discussion, as far as I’m concerned, is that I know nothing, for when I don’t know what justice is, I’ll hardly know whether it is a kind of virtue or not, or whether a person who has it is happy or unhappy.”

In The Apology (399 BCE), Socrates says of a well-respected politician that “he knows nothing, and thinks that he knows; I neither know nor think that I know.” The resulting slogan was adopted by later thinkers and incorporated into the tradition that became known as “Academic Skepticism.” Rather than believing that it is impossible to know anything, Academic Skeptics actually claim only that we can know very little about reality—namely, truths of logic and mathematics. This contrasts with Pyrrhonian skepticism, which involves an attitude of doubting every positive judgment, including logic and mathematics.

A serious problem with Socrates’s statements is that he seems committed to an incoherent position. If he truly does not know anything, then it is false that he knows that; but if he does know he does not know anything, then it is false that he does not know anything. Thus, the claim “I know that I do not know” is self-defeating (resulting in the statement also being known as the Socratic paradox). In response, many scholars argue that this is an uncharitable reading of Plato. They contend that Socrates’s claims are expressed in a particular context, referring only to specific concepts and not to knowledge generally (“Justice” in The Republic, and “beauty” and “goodness” in The Apology).

Tagged
Posted in Education and Career Philosophy and Wisdom

50 Inspirational Quotes for Mothers’ Day

50 Inspirational Quotes for Mothers' Day

  • A Jewish proverb says, “God could not be everywhere and therefore he made mothers.”
  • John Erskine said, “Woman in the home has not yet lost her dignity, in spite of Mother’s Day, with its offensive implication that our love needs an annual nudging, like our enthusiasm for the battle of Bunker Hill.”
  • Golda Meir said, “At work, you think of the children you have left at home. At home, you think of the work you’ve left unfinished. Such a struggle is unleashed within yourself. Your heart is rent.”
  • Sam Levenson said, “Insanity is hereditary; you get it from your children.”
  • Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis said, “If you bungle raising your children, I don’t think whatever else you do well matters very much.”
  • Abraham Lincoln said, “I remember my mother’s prayers and they have always followed me. They have clung to me all my life.”
  • Gregory Nunn said, “Anyone who doesn’t miss the past never had a mother.”
  • Tenneva Jordan said, “A mother is a person who seeing there are only four pieces of pie for five people, promptly announces she never did care for pie.”
  • James Joyce said, “Whatever else is unsure in this stinking dunghill of a world a mother’s love is not.”
  • Germaine Greer said, “All that remains to the mother in modern consumer society is the role of scapegoat; psychoanalysis uses huge amounts of money and time to persuade analysis and to foist their problems on to the absent mother, who has no opportunity to utter a word in her own defense. Hostility to the mother in our societies is an index of mental health.”
  • Dorothy Canfield Fisher said, “A mother is not a person to lean on, but a person to make leaning unnecessary.”
  • Barbara Kingsolver said, “It kills you to see them grow up. But I guess it would kill you quicker if they didn’t.”
  • Chinese Proverb says, “There is only one pretty child in the world, and every mother has it.”
  • Peter De Vries said, “A suburban mother’s role is to deliver children obstetrically once, and by car forever after.”
  • Mildred B. Vermont said, “Being a full-time mother is one of the highest salaried jobs… since the payment is pure love.”
  • William Feather said, “Setting a good example for your children takes all the fun out of middle age.”
  • Helen Hunt Jackson said, “Motherhood is priced; Of God, at price no man may dare/To lessen or misunderstand.”
  • Aristotle said, “Mothers are fonder than fathers of their children because they are more certain they are their own.”
  • Baltimore mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake to Sophia: “I love everything about you. I love that you want to wear jeans under a bridesmaid dress. I love that you are competitive yet kind. I love that you have friendships that will last a lifetime, and one day I hope you count me as one. Your independence shines through everything. And even though I am biased, I believe you will be a leader. Your life is just getting started. I am so excited to see where you go and what you do. I hope when you read this letter, you don’t turn your nose up and think it’s too sappy. I know I embarrass you all too frequently these days. But know it’s because I am so proud you are my daughter.”
  • Elizabeth Stone said, “Making a decision to have a child–it’s momentous. It is to decide forever to have your heart go walking around outside your body.”
  • Florida Scott-Maxwell said, “No matter how old a mother is, she watches her middle-aged children for signs of improvement.”
  • Henry Ward Beecher said, “We never know the love of the parent until we become parents ourselves.”
  • Lin Yutang said, “Of all the rights of women, the greatest is to be a mother.”
  • Rajneesh said, “The moment a child is born, the mother is also born. She never existed before. The woman existed, but the mother, never. A mother is something absolutely new.”
  • Sophia Loren said, “When you are a mother, you are never really alone in your thoughts. A mother always has to think twice, once for herself and once for her child.”
  • Ezekiel 16:4 says, “As is the mother, so is her daughter.”
  • James Fenton said, “The lullaby is the spell whereby the mother attempts to transform herself back from an ogre to a saint.”
  • Businesswoman and Philanthropist Ivanka Trump to Arabella, Joseph and Theodore: “Arabella, when I started my company I thought of you. I considered the opportunities available to women in my generation, and I knew that I had a role to play in continuing to push the needle further. … There will be lots of things I’ll teach you in the years to come-some you’ll remember, some you’ll dismiss. But I hope that in my leading by example, you’ll each make your own decisions and chart your own course. Take nothing for granted. Know that in life, the harder you work, the luckier you’ll get.”
  • Ali Wentworth (writer, comedian, and wife of ABC News’George Stephanopoulos) to Elliott and Harper: “You were born with determination, fierceness and the kind of inner strength that moves mountains. Don’t ever let anyone tell you you can’t. People say, “Carpe diem.” But I say, don’t seize only the day, seize the life-“Carpe vitam!”
  • Elaine Heffner said, “Women do not have to sacrifice personhood if they are mothers. They do not have to sacrifice motherhood in order to be persons. Liberation was meant to expand women’s opportunities, not to limit them. The self-esteem that has been found in new pursuits can also be found in mothering.”
  • Oscar Wilde said, “All women become like their mothers. That is their tragedy. No man does. That’s his.”
  • Actor and film historian Debbie Reynolds to Carrie and Todd: “our life continues to be a terrific adventure. You make me proud on Mother’s Day and every other day. I love you more than words can ever say.”
  • An unknown author said, “All mothers are working mothers.”
  • Anne Morrow Lindbergh said, “By and large, mothers and housewives are the only workers who do not have regular time off. They are the great vacationless class.”
  • Henry Ward Beecher said, “The mother’s heart is the child’s schoolroom.”
  • Lawrence Housman said, “If nature had arranged that husbands and wives should have children alternatively, there would never be more than three in a family.”
  • Henry Bickersteth said, “If the whole world were put into one scale, and my mother in the other, the whole world would kick the beam.”
  • T. DeWitt Talmage said, “Mother – that was the bank where we deposited all our hurts and worries.”
  • Zora Neale Hurston said, “Mama exhorted her children at every opportunity to ‘jump at de sun.’ We might not land on the sun, but at least we would get off the ground.”
  • Pop singer Britney Spears to Jayden and Preston ‘God always comes to us in tiny whispers. I pray you always find his whisper and follow your inner voice as well.”
  • Retired professional boxer Laila Ali to Sydney and Curtis: “i love you when you win, i love you when you lose.i love you no matter what, because you can’t make mommy stop loving you.”
  • Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “Men are what their mothers made them.”
  • Nancy Thayer said, “Who is getting more pleasure from this rocking, the baby or me?”
  • Betty Rollin said, “Biological possibility and desire are not the same as biological need. Women have childbearing equipment. For them to choose not to use the equipment is no more blocking what is instinctive than it is for a man who, muscles or no, chooses not to be a weightlifter.”
  • Jill Bennett said, “Never marry a man who hates his mother, because he’ll end up hating you.”
  • Harriet Beecher Stowe said, “Most mothers are instinctive philosophers.”
  • Oliver Wendell Holmes said, “The real religion of the world comes from women much more than from men – from mothers most of all, who carry the key of our souls in their bosoms.”
  • Spanish Proverb said, “An ounce of mother is worth a ton of priest.”
  • James Russell Lowell said, “That best academy, a mother’s knee.”
  • Honore de Balzac said, “The heart of a mother is a deep abyss at the bottom of which you will always find forgiveness.”
  • W. Somerset Maugham said, “Few misfortunes can befall a boy which brings worse consequences than to have a really affectionate mother.”

The Tao of Gratitude to a Mother

'The Taoism Reader' by Thomas Cleary (ISBN 1590309502) Per Thomas Cleary’s handy The Taoism Reader, Lu Yen, more commonly known as Ancestor Lu, who lived during the Tang Dynasty, reminds that one cannot thank one’s mother enough:

A woman carries a child in the womb for ten months, then gives birth in pain. Breast-feeding for three years, she watches over the infant with great care, aware of when it is sick, in pain, uncomfortable, itching. Whatever she does, even when she is not there, she always thinks of the baby. She is happy when she sees it laugh and worries when it cries. Seeing it stand and walk, she is at once anxious and exhilarated. She will go hungry to feed the child, she will freeze to clothe it. She watches, worries, and works, all for the child’s future. How can one ever repay the debt one owes to one’s mother?

Tagged
Posted in Philosophy and Wisdom

How to Create a Personal Leadership Brand

How to Create a Personal Leadership Brand The pressures of work are constant. In a world of discombobulated messaging, you can communicate with more impact and integrity by engendering a personal leadership brand. Personal branding can increment mindshare among audiences as much as branding for products can increment market share.

What rate of return do your speeches, interviews, and visits with customers and partners generate? What impact do these efforts have on your bottom line? A high Return on Communication means that with every interaction, you meet one or more strategic objectives, deliver clear messages that people understand and remember, and enhance your brand and the company’s brand. Executive branding ensures that the time and money you spend on communication translate into desired business outcomes.

Senior executives often communicate without making much of an impression. Either they don’t say anything memorable, or they are remembered for all the wrong reasons-a bad media quote, poor slides, annoying body language. Worst case: their communication is mistrusted and misinterpreted, achieving exactly the opposite of what they intend. High turnover rates and a paucity of effective leaders suggest either that there’s no correlation between studying leadership and leading or that the scientific approach could benefit from a bit more art.

Personal Branding Building a brand is about creating value for other people. The business reasons for executive branding are pellucid: the CEO’s reputation accounts for about a moiety of the reputation of the company; the CEO’s personal brand impacts employee allegiance and resilience; and a brand is the premium that shareholders are disposed to pay for the stock or the product. No bellwether can leave to chance the way that he or she is perceived.

While many leaders know how to brand companies and products, few know how to brand themselves. Why go to the trouble? Let’s look at what personal branding can do for you:

  • Differentiation: A personal brand differentiates you from others, enabling you to stand out and be memorable.
  • Consistency: A personal brand ensures that you are consistent-reliably the same in situations, which creates trust. People know what to expect of you, and you communicate from the same platform, whether announcing good news or bad news.
  • Clarity: When you have a brand, you stand for something. Your brand leverages the power of clear non-verbal messages, and helps determine the verbal messages you want to convey.
  • Authenticity: Personal branding allows you to speak with authenticity. Your brand communicates who you are. When leaders speak with sincerity, they are much more persuasive than when they speak the party line.

There’s been an increased interest in leadership presence over the last few years, perhaps because simply being present has become one of the chief executive obstacles in our highly distracting 24/7 culture. The spread of highly injuctively authorizing, even invasive, technologies is no doubt partly to inculpate. But many organizational cultures have in effect become toxic, which is a designator of pristinely human failure. If we can’t muster up the presence of mind to recognize this state of affairs, we have little chance of learning better leadership.

Tagged
Posted in Education and Career Philosophy and Wisdom