December 13, 2006
-
What is Success really?
This week Socrates_Cafe is asking the question: What is Success? How should it be obtained?
Success is defined in the OED as the final step in an undertaking - the end of a succession of events. That ending does not necessarily have to be satisfactory.
Our modern struggles and world situation provides a fairly good example of "Success" in action.
Right now we are in the end game of what may turn out to be a military and political blunder which even exceeds that of the Viet Nam War - one with more lasting world changing results.
A major point in the current discussion is the idea of succeeding in our efforts in Iraq. President Bush has said he will not cut and run, he will not surrender, he will stay until "the job is done" and seems to be contemplating sending even more troops into that horror of a war.
At one time he declared "Mission Accomplished" but made no effort to pull our victorious troops out as his administration apparently hoped to somehow go on to transform that unhappy and divided country into a sort of bastion of American-style democracy which would stabilize the middle East and end the Arab-Israeli controversy.
In the ensuing years we have defeated and captured a bloody dictator, turned him over to Iraqi authorities for trial, encouraged and enabled a country-wide democratic vote which elected a new Iraqi government, and poured billions into the rebuilding of Iraq.
At any time the U.S. could declare victory and remove our troops, but as Johnson and Nixon did in Viet Nam, we have hung on longer in order to achieve some unattainable "success", apparently without ever considering the basic moral problems involved or the historic culture and desires of the Iraqi people.
Apparently our President is now seriously considering increasing the troop level by thirty or forty thousand and using our military might to crush resistance in the Anwar provence and Bagdad, though how this would lead to an end to the conflict is puzzling - after all we did that once and it did not work. This without consulting the Iraqi government which we have set up and which now wants us to begin leaving, not adding more occupation forces.
Is such a success the end we envisaged when we attacked Saddam? Will it be successful? Will we be happy with the outcome?
Comments (43)
I don't think there is any such thing as a successful outcome at this point. There are better outcomes, and there are worse outcomes. But already too many wrongs have been done, not least of all to the men and women who are stuck fighting the battles.
Any ending would, by definition, be a success. It's just that we might not like the form "success" takes.
What we must consider is how to end our present conflict with as satisfactory a conclusion as possible.
Should such a "Success" mostly concern itself with minimizing any further American casualties?
Should we shift the conflict to a diplomatic one - if that is possible?
Should we be concerned primarily with stabilizing the political situation in the Middle East?
Obviously all these questions will have to be balanced as best we can while also taking into account the responsibility we have taken on concerning the unhappy nation of Iraq, our alliance with Israel, and the world terrorist threat as well as our other military commitments.
Another question might be: Just what is America's proper role in world affairs?
This is an area where basic moral and philosophic attitudes and goals should be considered but apparently are not.
Interesting look at success, I think this case study you made of the Iraq war tell us that success in the eye of the beholder. I think Bush thinks he is succeeding, and it reminds me of the recent Israeli invasion of Southern Lebanon, where they came out saying it was a success, where as to me it looked like a dramatic mess up: Nassrallah, the Hezbollah leader, or any other, was never captured or killed, Israelis died needlessly, Lebanese people died needlessly-even UN workers died needlessly. So, where was the success exactly? I am very relieved that people are seeing the mistakes of the Bush administration rather than blindly defending them. It was not too long ago I was starting to feel like A Dixie Chick in Texas in most of these forums, when making any reference to the mistakes in Iraq.
I think the idea time to withdraw from Iraq was when we first grabbed Saddam. At that point we could have declared victory. But the prospect of stablizing the country has never been good. If we left early, we would again be accused of abanding the country to the wolves. But leaving later doesn't accomplish the objective that Bush wanted, because of the culture and the history of the area. Catch-22!
That out of the way, I think success is indeed in the eye of the beholder as sandstorms has said. But only to a point. I as a private citizen can declare my life to be a success and not get too many people disagreeing with me. But in matters of public policy that affect national and international interests it is not so simple. What do you think some of the differences are that make this so?
When an American President speaks for the nation to the World, he is assumed to be following the basic values and beliefs of the nation.
Spokesmen for america must be sure that they are upholding the American belief system as they understand it, which Bush probably is.
That does not necessarily mean they are right or that their interpretation of our basic values is that of most Americans.
Neither Bush nor his fellow neocons are particularly philosophic or even thoughtful in their considerations and they seem to be prone to follow the leadership of political gurus like Karl Rove, whos concept of an ideal philosopher seems to be Machaivelli.
Thaks again Tychecat as always your thoughts and advice I always appreciate.:) Have a good almost weekend. How is your wife feeling? I hope she is better.
Bush himself may be called Machiavelli incarnate. Good comparision.
You're giving Dubyh a little too much credit - he generally, like Reagan, follows his handlers' advice pretty carefully. Unfortunately, also like Reagan, he is apparently extremely bull-headed and once he gets an idea in his head, is likely to hold it forever. Unlike Reagan, he is neither a teflon nor a lucky President.
Just be glad we didn't get the bright Bush brother (Jeb). He oversaw the demolition of much of Florida's well-run civil service and managed to out-source personel records to India, among other disasters. (I won't mention FL's voting fiascos) He is smarter than his older brother and I'm afraid we will see more of him.
We are about ready for Presidential candidates who are thoughtful, respectful of American values, and perhaps even philosophic in their outlook - do you see any on the horizon?
Well my son had a cell phone and it was turned off and turned over to the collection agency the second time he was here. I think it was the second time I can't keep up with it anymore it's like my mom says he goes to California for vacations then he comes back here when he needs money and then goes back and forth and back and forth. It's crazy I know I just hope he pays my mom back soon and gets the heck back to California! I am happy your wife is doing better she is an amazing lady.
RYC, 20/80 is enough to read books designed for a first-grader. It's a bit of a disappointment, obviously. I had visions of reading everything from Mein Kampf to the Harry Potter series - just to make up for so many years of not being able to do so. Unless they manage to add some additional magnification, it looks like that isn't going to happen.
The dream of being able to ace the CCIE because I could easily understand what was going on in class also appears to be shot. While it offers some improvement, I'm still largely faced with the same limitations I've always had. Some improvement is better than nothing though.
I'll have to do some checking, but in Georgia, I think Mopeds and motor scooters are street legal, but don't require a license. You just can't take them on the interstate. I have no particular desire to go on the interstate anyway - I'd just like an easier way to get to the store.
What is failure and how do you define it--everything else is success of one degree or another. I am failing, yet I push on in hope--of what,
success ie. finishing my books living on this planet until I am finished with being seen by others. Then I'd like to move on--sail into the West, to the isle of Women or the isle of berries, dunno-can't decide.
Ketja, What I hear you saying is that your attitude toward some part of your life is unsatisfactory. Why can't you turn your definition around and look at the success part? When you complete a task, if you're like most of us, you find yourself somewhat short of your ideal. That does not mean failure in most cases; but if you really have failed to win the war, then you must make the best peace you can and try to be satisfied with that while hoping for better results or success next time.
Like most platitudes, they contain some truth.
I think the hardest part of life is learning to accept our condition, see the potentials and move forward as best we can. I know sometimes those potentials are pretty hard to discern and the mountain we have to climb is enormous, but one step at a time will take you a mighty long way.
How about that for a bunch of platitudes?
"At one time he declared "Mission Accomplished" but made no effort to pull our victorious troops out.."
You see the world - and pics of Bush - through your own very biased 'liberal' eyes. That sign "Mission Accomplished" pertained specifically to that carrier he was on at the time. That carrier's mission had been accomplished. However, YOU and a zillion other 'liberals', and YOUR media took the sign - as YOUR ilk does with SO many things - and removed it from it's context and blew it out of proportion for you own benefit. It is/was on the greatest pieces of propoganda I've witnessed in my life. Frighteningly Orwellian and so much like that of Stalin and Hitler. I've seen this happen over and over again with a myriad of things and that is why I can't argue with 'liberals' anymore. Most of you begin with falsehoods created by our leftist leaning media that emphasizes the wrong 'syllables', argue for them based on other myths and fiction created for you by nearly ALL of the postmodern world. I'm like a match it a blizzard of BS. You don't care. You can't change because it's too frightful to admit you've been wrong since the '60's.
...the show must go on!
Isn't Politics fun
One thing that bugs me is Creed's condemnation of the term "Liberal".
In the classic and I think, philosophic sense, Liberal is a pretty good term. It comes from the Latin Libertas and means free - a liberal would be a free person.
In modern times it's come to mean a person who is willing to consider other viewpoints without condemning or adversely judging them.
Politically it has come to be a label for those politicians who favor social welfare and reform. Is there something wrong with favoring social welfare? Reform?
Wrong again. The reason I put the word LIBERAL in quotes is specifically because "liberals" in the (post)modern world are NOT liberal. They are first and foremost non-judgemental. This is their supreme virtue: to not make judgements (i.e. thoughtless). They live in absolute FEAR of being wrong. Thus the answer is: No one is right! People have been wrong in the past therefore they will be wrong today and in the future ...so lets not make judgements. I think that translates into being a moral retard. I'm more liberal than so-called "progressives" and they call me a "conservative." I think it is one's moral duty to make judgements. Yes! Isn't that refreshing? To believe things are knowable.
"Liberals" and "progressives" simply don the garb and the wording. Typically, but not always, "liberal" is the shell that hides the socialist nut.
I know the classical meaning of the word "liberal". But, of course, because you PREjudge me due to my politics you think I don't read anything but the Bible and Pat Robertson books. After a few glasses of wine you might quip, "Creed is probably a KKK member who secretly disembowels minority children." You are probably mildly amused when I string two sentences of coherent thought together.
Your VIEWPOINT was/is distorted in regard to the sign! All viewpoints are not equal by virtue of their existence! But, you took your distorted viewpoint you proceeded to make an ADVERSE JUDGEMENT on your own which is was comletely false. At least have the gumption to take it on the chin and now whine about Creed being judgemental! You put forth the "Mission Accomplished" sign as evidence for your assertion. It was not correct. AND you know it!
Like I said ...I think you've had your beliefs too long to change them. You are set in your ways.
Matthew 7:1-5 Pretty much sums up my "non-judgmental" attitude.
I assure Creed of Kings That I have not and do not judge him. I do not however, agree with all his political statments.
Creed is right, I have had my beliefs for a long time, but looking back, I can remember several times when I have fundimentally changed my attitude and beliefs regarding pretty basic matters.
Well that was interesting and extremely disappointing. I'm at the library. I have one hour to surf the net. I typed a response to your comments above but I was running out of time. I requested more time before I got locked out. The lady comes over and "X's" me out of this page so I lost several paragraphs of delicious thoughts of which I may never recover.
Now there are people jabbering loudly next to me (in a library!) on the computers and I can't concentrate on what I consider a very important clarification that needs to be made here. I shall return.
*sigh*
Ah finally a moment.
I was not judging you in the sense of condemnation. I was talking about your assertions, not you.
You said, "Matthew 7:1-5 Pretty much sums up my "non-judgmental" attitude."
What Jesus is refering to here is a state of being constantly condemning in your thoughts and being hasty to judge out of the insecurity of fear not the continual state of being non-judgmental. The misunderstanding of these verses means you are saying Jesus and you are neutral in all things: rape, war, murder, movies and food. Refusing to judge anything and being pre-judgmental are equal but opposite errors. Jesus was talking about the hypocrisy of pointing out someone's specific error when the person pointing out the specific error has a bigger problem in that same area. If I tell you to stop smoking because it's wrong and then I light up my 60th cigarette for the morning when you walk away then I'm being the kind of thing Jesus was talking about. You are taking these verses out of context as you did with the "Mission Accomplished" sign.
I also have gone through fundamental changes. Of course not ALL change is good by virtue of things being different today than they were yesterday. I've made errors, many of them, as a result of a misguided shift in my paradigm. It is difficult to acknowledge this kind of error. It is embarassing and one feels like a fool. I've almost gotten rid of the fear of appearing the fool. One can make monumental changes that are profoundly wrong. We can do expedient things that seem correct at the time like getting a tattoo while drunk or a quip that seemed like apples of gold at the time but horrible statement in reflection. Unfortunately we can also make philosophical errors like drunken tattoo-getting or slips of the tongue. Rather than correcting it we often build vast monstroties to cover and/or justify our error. Errors can become our "precious" like Gollum's ring. We build high walls and vast defenses to protect them. Nothing wrong with high walls and vast defense, but what are they protecting?
Lastly. I wrote on something that touches what I'm saying here. I will include a quote from the entry I made on 11-30-2006.
As Ludwik Fleck put it in his book Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact, "Once a structurally complete and closed system of opinions consisting of many details and relations has been formed, it offers enduring resistance to anything that contradicts it." He goes on to prove that the higher the person's education and social status, the more likely the person is to be closed-minded. - Rev. Dr. Michael Wayne Braudrick | Senior Pastor .
Here is the link http://www.xanga.com/Creed_of_Kings/551968330/no-truth--will-to-power.html
I should have put this section is quotes, it's not my writing:
**********************************************
As Ludwik Fleck put it in his book Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact, "Once a structurally complete and closed system of opinions consisting of many details and relations has been formed, it offers enduring resistance to anything that contradicts it." He goes on to prove that the higher the person's education and social status, the more likely the person is to be closed-minded. - Rev. Dr. Michael Wayne Braudrick | Senior Pastor .
**********************************************
Creed is an "autodiadact", or so he claims. That's a fancy-schmancy way of saying he's self-taught. (He doesn't use that word - but I think it's a neat one and use it whenever possible. Incidentally, it's spelled right)
I must admit most of my education was probably obtained the same way (through reading and conversing with knowledgable people), but I think I have an advantage: I also have had pretty extensive exposure to higher learning - everything from a service academy to Harvard - which, if nothing else, taught me how to read and listen critically, logically, and rationally.
I think a major problem of the autodiadact is that he may tend to be less critical and selective in his absorbtion of what he reads and hears.
I was much amused at Creed's quotes from Fleck. If you think about it that's precisly how and why some religious dogma is still passionately preached and believed despite being contradicted and scientifically disproved centuries ago.
I'm not sure that either a person's social status or his education has much to do with his "close-mindedness". I think other factors are much more important. Come to think of it, so is your definition of "closemindedness".
"Once you label me you negate me. " - Someone Kindakool
We seem to have a "pot and Kettle" thing going here which I think Creed started:
"You see the world - and pics of Bush - through your own very biased 'liberal' eyes......YOU and a zillion other 'liberals', and YOUR media took the sign - as YOUR ilk does with SO many things - and removed it from it's context and blew it out of proportion for you own benefit. It is/was on the greatest pieces of propoganda I've witnessed in my life. Frighteningly Orwellian and so much like that of Stalin and Hitler. I've seen this happen over and over again with a myriad of things and that is why I can't argue with 'liberals' anymore. Most of you begin with falsehoods created by our leftist leaning media that emphasizes the wrong 'syllables', argue for them based on other myths and fiction created for you by nearly ALL of the postmodern world. I'm like a match it a blizzard of BS. You don't care. You can't change because it's too frightful to admit you've been wrong since the '60's."
Creed goes on to condemn "Liberals" for not making judgments, but I think he really means for not pre-judging. Liberals, at least the ones I know, make lots of judgments - and some even do a lot of pre-judging, which I don't think is a good thing.
I am guilty of accusing Creed of being self-taught - which he claims to be at his website (A very interesting and thoughtful one, incidentally, even if you don't agree with all his premises.)
What do you have to say about it? You've not answered me. I pointed out the error of the sign and the misuse of the versres. What do you say in response? You call me an "autodiadact" as if to dismiss my thoughts. You are "amused". You mock me. Did Socrates go to your classes? Did Leonidas go to the West Point? Who taught Shakespeare? Thank you very much. I'm in good company.
Thank you for the kind words regarding my blog but I think you observe me there like a zoologist does a chimp in the wild as the chimp looks at a mirror placed by you - I amuse you.
Concerning those verses from Matthew; They are. of course, among the most often quoted of Jesus' teachings and have been interpreted many ways in the past two thousand years. I choose to stick with a literal reading without interpretation.
Jesus taught, as best we can know at this late date, that man should strive to attain, as best he could, the perfectibility that Jesus considered God's alone. He gave several directions as to how this was to be attained:
His directions can be summarized as: 1. They are to live a life of utter integrity - called purity of heart. 2. They are to live with a whole-heartedness which excludes pride of any kind. 3. They are to be sensitive to the sufferings, hopes, and needs of others, sensing the oneness of oneself and others and ministering to human needs. 4. They are to love one another.
The point of such behavior is, not only that it is right and pleasing to God, but also that it establishes a new form of human community. Also he enjoined then to simply ignore human actions and responses motivated in some other manner - accept persecution, turn the other cheek, and love their enemy. They are to do unto others as they would have them do unto them. Too bad his directions are so seldom followed.
I was my church's religious education director for some years and have a little knowledge of this subject.
Socrates, like me, was a teacher who was not above gently chiding his pupils as he steered then into the paths he thought true and desirable.
Leonidas wasn't a very successful general - he and his whole army was slaughtered. I doubt his soldiers had much say in the matter.
Shakespeare was not a college man, he was probably the greatest genius of language of the past few thousand years, but we really don't know where he got his knowledge and ideas - so broad that many have argued that he couldn't possibly have been the writer of all that ascribed to him.
I think he was probably the world's best autodidact - you're in good company.
I do think you should learn how to accept a compliment a little more graciously.
Excellent blog post. I certainly love this site. Keep it up!
Does yοur blog Һave ɑ contact page? I'm Һaving a tough tіme locating it but, I'd like to ѕеnd ʏou an е-mail.
I've gߋt ѕome creative ideas for yoսr
blog уou might be interеsted in hearing.
Еither wаʏ, ɡreat website and I loߋk forward tο seеing іt
develop over time.
This will allow the site to flourish and urge more visitors
leading to high traffic and more likes. Hiring SEO services nowadays is not a big deal as you can easily get in touch with the number of companies offering such services.
But ultimately what matters most are the results and not the
hour these agencies are spending on the work.
For giving that extra exposure to your website SEO is compulsory
whether your business size is small, medium or large.
For example, if I can make $200 per page of content I produce then I can afford to spend
$150 to have it produced. There are several services available agents to help you find an appropriate one.
Indeed, a specialist would always find better ways to optimize websites so that the results are not daunting.
For example, if I can make $200 per page of content I produce
then I can afford to spend $150 to have it produced.
But ultimately what matters most are the results and not the hour these agencies are spending on the work.
As a result, individuals suffering from below-average credit ratings like defaults, defaults, late installments, CCJs, bankruptcy, neglected payments, missing of installments, foreclosure,
IVA or even expected payments are allowed in order to rise to
the function of paperless payday loans? Pupils
applying for financial loans in the anchored form have favorable small print?
Indeed, a specialist would always find better ways to optimize websites so that the results are not daunting.
Hiring SEO services nowadays is not a big deal as you can easily get in touch with the number of companies offering such services.
Fully understand what exactly SEO is and if
it will accomplish those goals for you.
For giving that extra exposure to your website SEO is compulsory whether your business
size is small, medium or large. Web users have little patience, and often don't know what to do if their flash is out of date or the website won't
load. But now,as google change its policy in both 'crease the proportion of smo'and 'more conecering on bidding spam',we nowadays would enjoy a more bright surfing further and clean marketing
scheme.
More and more people in Winnipeg are becoming aware of the digital marketing sector to boost their brand
value. For example, if I can make $200 per page of content I
produce then I can afford to spend $150 to have it produced.
Fully understand what exactly SEO is and if it will accomplish those goals
for you.
Without a balanced approach to your needs, any SEO program could fail.
Remember to try and include your title within your introduction. Ethical or
white hat SEO techniques which are developed
by search engines like Google, improves organic search engine
rankings.
Indeed, a specialist would always find better ways
to optimize websites so that the results are
not daunting. Customization of a website means your websites compatibility with devices like- mobile phones,
tablet, i - Phone etc. Now, Cheap SEO Services in Melbourne, a person is able to optimize your website by searching for relevant keywords on the site.
Most of e - Bay functions like a standard content management system.
Rather you ought to pick one that fits your financial plan furthermore has knowledge of
working with organizations like yours. It is the most competent means to impress your website viewers.
For giving that extra exposure to your website SEO
is compulsory whether your business size is small, medium or large.
For example, if I can make $200 per page of content I
produce then I can afford to spend $150 to have
it produced. But now,as google change its policy in both 'crease
the proportion of smo'and 'more conecering on bidding
spam',we nowadays would enjoy a more bright surfing further and clean marketing scheme.
Most of e - Bay functions like a standard content management system.
100% guarantees of #1 ranking are a big warning sign, for
example. But ultimately what matters most are the results and not the hour these agencies are spending on the work.
Indeed, a specialist would always find better ways
to optimize websites so that the results are not daunting.
Remember to try and include your title within your introduction. But your business will not work only by a good looking or with a well customization website.
Indeed, a specialist would always find better
ways to optimize websites so that the results
are not daunting. Rather you ought to pick one that fits your financial plan furthermore has knowledge of working with organizations like yours.
It is the most competent means to impress your website viewers.
Social Networking,Directory Submissions, Link Exchange, Three Way Link Building, One Way Link Building, Blogging, Blog Comment Posting, Forum Discussion, Internet Marketing as well as in ON-page
SEO. A genuine company would have positive feedback from previous clients so you
must ask your service provider for feedback or testimonials from other clients.
The fame of internet has actually opened big stage for the web designers.
Build on your online business reputation because that is where trust and so much more
will come from. After all, if you could watch a video of a new product or concept online, or read about it, which would you
choose. Various benefits can be achieved through it like nonstop promotion, faster loading pages, targeted traffic, high
ROI and much more.