Freedom of Speech: On the Whole, I Like It 0 (0)

Posted on July 6, 2024 by Brian H. Gill
Walt Kelly's Pogo. (March 30, 1953) Howland Owl, Mole MacCarony, and The Cowbirds; in a discussion of owl migration. Mole MacCarony, in reference to an ignited 'Captain Wimby's Bird Atlas', says 'There's nothing quite so lovely as a brightly burning book'.
“There’s nothing quite so lovely as a brightly burning book”. The Hon:Mole MacCarony in Pogo. (March 30, 1953)

This isn’t the America I grew up in. But human nature hasn’t changed, and freedom of expression still makes some of us uneasy. I’ll be talking about that; and sharing a little family history that relates to the America of my youth.

A Son of Librarians

Ibagli's photo: William Oxley Thompson Memorial Library (Thompson Library) East Atrium, Ohio State University Columbus campus (September 23, 2009)
Thompson Library, Ohio State U: bigger that the libraries I grew up with. Ibagli’s photo (2009)

My parents were both librarians, which may help explain my fascination with books and information in general. I think it also factors into how I feel, when the folks in charge try “protecting” us from information they don’t like.

Or go hunting for people whose opinions aren’t approved by the powers that be.

My father was head librarian at what’s now Minnesota State University Moorhead when earnest Americans like Senator Joseph McCarthy were “protecting” us from commies, fellow-travelers, and scientists.

Years later, he — my father, that is, I haven’t talked with senators — told me that he’d thought about destroying the library’s check-out records, since they showed who had read which books.

Happily, commie-hunters didn’t come looking for students and faculty with “subversive” reading habits.

Information, Attitudes, Access, and Me

Brian H. Gill's collage: a rotary telephone, ca. 1955; Number One Electronic Switching System, 1976 and after; title card for The Addams Family titles, ca. 1964.; family watching television, 1958; publicity still from Batman. (ca. 1967)Then we got the 1960s, and a whole new set of weirdnesses. That’s ‘my’ decade, when I was a teen and not on the same page as either the staunch defenders of yesteryear or folks who were following Timothy Leary’s advice.

More than a half-century has passed since then. Some folks around my age grew up, had successful careers, and are now part of The Establishment — top-drawer folks who think they know what’s best for the rest of us. Or act as if they do, at any rate.1

Me? I’ve been a sales clerk, flower delivery guy, researcher/writer, office clerk, computer operator, radio disk jockey, beet chopper, high school teacher; and finally advertising copywriter, graphic designer, and “computer guy” for a small publishing house.

My views have changed a bit over the decades.

But I still think folks should have access to information they can use. And I still think that expressing opinions is okay: even when they’re not sanctioned by the powers that be.

Free Speech, Social Media, and Perceptions

Social media articles, selected from my Google News feed. (July 2, 2024
From my Google News feed: social media news items. (July 2, 2024)

“If speech is intended to result in a crime, and there is a clear and present danger that it actually will result in a crime, the First Amendment does not protect the speaker from government action.”
(Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919), Primary Holding, Justia (justia.com/)) [emphasis mine]

“…Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment, may become subject to prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent. The character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.…”
(Schenck v. United States. Baer v. United States. 439 Argued January 9,10,1919. Decided March 3, 1919. / p. 48. Library of Congress (loc.gov)) [emphasis mine]

Social media isn’t top of the charts in my news feed’s litany of dreadful dangers, malign menaces, and looming dooms. But it didn’t take me long to assemble a half dozen or so “social media” headlines.

I don’t know how many I’d have found, if I’d searched for “disinformation” articles.

Clarification time.

I think that “disinformation” — a potpourri, mishmash, whatever, of falsehood, truth, half-truth, and opinion, presented as unbiased reporting — really happens.

I strongly suspect that much “disinformation” is actually misinformation — alternatively-accurate information, and facts presented out of context.2

Misinformation, by that definition, is not deliberately deceptive. Folks reporting it don’t realize that ‘what everybody knows’ isn’t necessarily so.

From what’s in my news feed, I’m guessing that assorted politicos and do-gooders are at it again: and that this time they see social media as a threat.

Prepublication Censorship, a Near Miss

Map of Internet censorship and surveillance by country (2018)Fearing the Internet is not exactly new.

Maybe two decades back, I read that “net neutrality” would save the children and defend freedom. As presented, it sounded like the best thing since sliced bread.

Instead of rich folks and organizations having a louder online voice, Internet Service Providers would charge the same rates to everyone, no matter what content the customers put online. It sounded like a wonderful way of updating our rules about free speech.

Just one problem, and I’m relying on my memory here. I haven’t found recent documentation on a particular part of net neutrality that really got my attention.

All this talk about equal rates and free speech was well and good: but how could we save the children and defend freedom from Big Bad Bogeymen with naughty ideas?

The answer was simple: set up a government agency that would check content before allowing it online. That way, the American public wouldn’t be exposed to naughty ideas.

Since it was a government agency, it’d be completely unbiased, approving any and all content that was deemed proper for public perusal.

Nobody, certainly not folks pushing the idea, put it quite that way.

Attempted prepublication censorship didn’t surprise me. It’s an old idea.

What did get my attention was that the Christian Coalition and the Feminist Majority3 united in this effort to — presumably — save the children and defend freedom.

I think my country experienced a near miss when their “net neutrality” didn’t get traction.

Politics, Panic, and Principles

Political cartoons: Homer Davenport's version of Mark Hanna in 1896; Karl Kae Knecht's 1912 Roosevelt mixing 'radical' ingredients in his speeches. From Wikipedia, used w/o permission.My country’s traditional election-year hysterics are in full cry.

I think the outcome matters. But I won’t echo either — any — side’s ardent assertions that [candidate A] will surely doom us all, while [candidate B] is above and beyond reproach. Or that you must vote for [candidate A], for otherwise [candidate B] will surely doom us all.

I suspect that politicos use wild claims and fearmongering because it’s easier to get votes when voters are too terrified to think.4 I’ve never been a fan of moral panic, I talked about that last month, and that’s another topic.

I was going somewhere with this. Let me think.

Reading habits and the Sixties.

Circumstances and censorship.

Politics and moral panic.

Right.

One reason I like living in America is that we can vote for a candidate: even if some judges disapprove of the person. I also like living in a country where we’ve got some respect for freedom of speech: and where rules about those freedoms are reviewed occasionally.

That said, I don’t think the way we run America’s government is the only right way.

There isn’t any one ‘correct’ form of government. Folks living in different cultures and eras have different needs, and that’s okay — If whatever system they use lets folks take an active part in public life, and the system follows natural law: ethical principles which apply in every time and place. (Catechism, 1915, 1957-1958)

Social Media: New Forum, Old Principles, and Being an American

Brian H. Gill's 'Internet Friends.' (2017)Another reason I like being an American is that our government has (generally) maintained its respect for our freedoms.5

“Article the third — Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
(United States Bill of Rights (1791) via Wikisource)

That won’t keep folks — well-intentioned and otherwise — from panicking when others, who aren’t the right sort, express “subversive” ideas.

And sometimes I figure the “subversive” ideas really are aimed at undercutting the common good — possibly with good intentions, and that’s yet another topic.

I might want tighter controls over who gets to express opinions online. — If I believed in the infallibility of experts and the divine right of congress to decide what we may and may not see.

But I figure that experts, journalists, members of congress, and judges are human beings: which is both good news and bad news, and that’s several more topics.

For now, I’ll be glad that folks like me are still allowed to share what we think. Even if we are doing so in a medium that didn’t exist when I was young. Again, that’s a reason I like an American.

If all this sounds familiar, it should. I’ve talked about it before:

1 Those were the days, my friend; we thought they’d never end; then they did:

2 Times change; human nature, not so much:

3 It seemed like such a good idea — or — very strange bedfellows:

“…misery acquaints a man with strange bed-fellows….”
(“The Tempest” , William Shakespeare (ca. 1610-1611) from 1863 Cambridge edition of Shakespeare, via Gutenberg.org)

From Gainsborough Pictures: Isabel Jeans, in the film 'Easy Virtue', directed by Alfred Hitchcock. (1928) from Wikipedia, via https://www.flickr.com/photos/193889603@N04/51533655578/ and Yellow Cap Data, used w/o permission.4 Clutch those pearls!!! — or not:

5 The United States Constitution, a work in progress:

Posted in Discursive Detours, Journal | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Independence Day, 2024: America and Context, a Short Ramble 0 (0)

Posted on July 4, 2024 by Brian H. Gill
Udo Keppler's 'False Alarm on the Fourth' cartoon for Puck. Uncle Sam tells Lady Peace: 'It's all right. There's no fighting. The noise you hear is just my family celebrating!' (1902)

“A False Alarm on the Fourth” Udo Keppler, Puck. (1902)
“Uncle Sam — It’s all right! There’s no fighting!
The noise you hear is just my family celebrating!”

I like that double-page cartoon by Udo Keppler. And I like his image of America: a family of sorts, where everybody doesn’t look just like me, but we can celebrate together anyway.

Another Udo Keppler cartoon, made eight years earlier, shows a different attitude. I’ll get back to that.

I’ll also be quoting John Adams, with a little the quotes’ context.

Declaration of Independence: 248 Years Ago Today

John Trumbull's 'Declaration of Independence.' (1819)Formerly-loyal English subjects signed the Declaration of Independence on this date on July 4, 1776. That’s what Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin said, at any rate.1

I gather that “most” historians say they didn’t — that the document was signed about two months later. Why that’s so, I don’t know. I’m just glad that “most” historians aren’t trying to believe that the Declaration of Independence was part of a MAGA plot to pollute the Potomac.

I’d better clarify a few things.

First, I don’t think that history is either useless, or a pack of lies made up by folks who don’t agree with me. By academic training, I’m an historian: and wish that more professional historians would remember that today’s academic fashions are just that: fashions.

Second, as a slogan, I think MAGA — Make American Great Again — is silly. As I see it, America never stopped being great. My kids told me that the slogan is a response to a still-fashionable ‘blame America first’ attitude. They’ve got a point, and I think they’re right.

Third, I think America is great. And that my country isn’t perfect. That was true when we got started, and still is.

Flights of Oratory, Compromise, and a Missed Opportunity

Alfred Gale's 'Pictorial Illustration of the Cause of the Great Rebellion' and 'Pictorial Illustration of Abolitionism.' (ca. 1865) via Library of Congress, used w/o permission
Alfred Gale’s broadsides (ca. 1865) via Library of Congress.
Ardently-held beliefs don’t necessarily make sense.

Grant Hamilton's cartoon comment on William Jennings Bryan's 1896 'Cross of Gold' speech at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.I haven’t heard the “you can’t legislate morality” slogan for quite a while.

There’s some truth in it. Making, say, pick-pocketing illegal won’t keep some folks from pick-pocketing. But we criminalize pick-pocketing anyway.

Then there’s slavery. It’s a bad idea and we shouldn’t do it. Ever. Even if it’s legal. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1903, 1950-1960, 2242, 2414, and more)

It’d have been nice if the Declaration of Independence made the abolition of slavery a founding principle for the new country.

That didn’t happen. But it might have, if an early draft hadn’t rubbed too many folks the wrong way.

“…A meeting we accordingly had, and conn’d the paper [the Declaration of Independence] over. I was delighted with its high tone and the flights of oratory with which it abounded, especially that concerning negro slavery, which, though I knew his Southern brethren would never suffer to pass in Congress, I certainly never would oppose. There were other expressions which I would not have inserted, if I had drawn it up, particularly that which called the King tyrant. I thought this too personal; for I never believed George to be a tyrant in disposition and in nature…”
(John Adams to Timothy Pickering (August 6, 1822) via monticello.org) [emphasis mine]

“…Our Pleasing Hopes…” and a Persistent Perception

H.E. Fowler's 'Papal Octopus,' featured in Jeremiah J. Crowley's (1913) 'The Pope: Chief of White Slavers High Priest of Intrigue,' p. 430. (1913)The Declaration of Independence, minus some of the “flights of oratory”, got signed.

Decades later, John Adams wasn’t happy about the continuing imperfections in his still-new country.

And he apparently saw problems in other countries, where “a free government” was dealing with “the Roman Catholic religion”.

“Must we, before we take our departure from this grand and beautiful world, surrender all our pleasing hopes of the progress of society, of the improvement of the intellect and moral condition of the world, of the reformation of mankind?

“The Piedmontese revolution scarcely assumed a form, and the Neapolitan bubble is burst. And what should hinder the Spanish and Portuguese constitutions from running to the same ruin? The Cortes is in one assembly vested with the legislative power. The king and his priests, armies, navies, and all other officers, are vested with the executive authority of government. Are not here two authorities up, neither supreme? Are they not necessarily rivals, constantly contending, like law, physic, and divinity, for superiority? Just ready for civil war?

“Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion? The art of lawgiving is not so easy as that of architecture or painting. New York and Rhode Island are struggling for conventions to reform their constitutions, and I am told there is danger of making them worse. Massachusetts has had her convention; but our sovereign lords, the people, think themselves wiser than their representatives, and in several articles I agree with their lordships. Yet there never was a cooler, a more patient, candid, or a wiser deliberative body than that convention….”
(John Adams to Thomas Jefferson (May 19, 1821) via National Humanities Center) [emphasis mine]

I’m pretty sure that the “Piedmontese revolution” Adams mentioned was connected with the Piedmontese Republic, something that happened when the French Revolution and Napoleon hit Turin’s neighborhood.

I could let myself get upset that one of America’s founders wondered: “Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion?” But I won’t.

Instead, I’ll be happy about my country’s occasionally-grudging tolerance for us.

Besides, John Adams grew up in 18th century New England, was the great-great-grandson of an immigrant from England, and saw the world through English-American eyes.2

Brian H. Gill. (March 17, 2021)I grew up in 20th century Minnesota. I’m the grandson of an Irish-American, the son of a Norwegian-American — the short, black-haired kind, not those blond giants — and see the world through the eyes of someone who spent his youth in the 1960s.

Expecting John Adams to have attitudes and perceptions like mine isn’t reasonable.

“…The relationship between the Catholic Church and the various political powers of the last two millennia is thorny, to say the least. Over the next few days, I will make a few observations on this important issue for provocation, conversation, and, hopefully, clarification….”
(“Rick Santorum and the Kingship of Christ, Part One“, William Edmund Fahe, Crisis Magazine (March 5, 2012)) [emphasis mine]

“…thorny, to say the least….” I’ll leave it at that. For today.

Being a Good Citizen AND a Catholic

Udo Keppler's anti-Catholic cartoon for Puck magazine: 'The American Pope'. (1894) Persuasive Cartography, The PJ Mode Collection, Cornell University ( https://digital.library.cornell.edu/catalog/ss:3293832 ); via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.
“The American Pope”. Udo Keppler’s anti-Catholic cartoon for Puck magazine. (1894)

“Print shows Cardinal ‘Satolli’ holding a crosier, sitting atop an enormous dome labeled ‘American Headquarters’, and casting a large shadow in the shape of Pope Leo XIII across the landscape of the United States, from New York City south through Washington, D.C. to the Gulf of Mexico, and west to San Francisco….”
(“The American pope / Keppler“, (1894) Summary, Library of Congress)

I can see why ‘regular Americans’ would be suspicious of Cardinal Francesco Satolli and Pope Leo XIII.

Rev. Branford Clarke's illustration of a particularly perilous lurking threat: the Catholic Church. Bishop Alma White's Guardians of Liberty (1943) via Wikipedia, used w/o permissionThey were both Italians and Catholics, which made Satolli a foreign agent in league with an international organization which was — well, not American.

Fear of foreign influence was still in play when Reverend Branford Clarke drew that “SHALL HE BE ALLOWED TO RULE AMERICA?” cartoon in 1943.

I’ll be pleased if we get through this election year without someone whipping up fears of a Catholic conspiracy. Or calling for left and and right to unite in common cause against Popish plots. The slogans would be different these days, of course.

Now, individual Catholics can be just as bonkers as anyone else.

But those of us who understand the basics of our faith, and take them seriously, must contribute to “…the good of society in a spirit of truth, justice, solidarity, and freedom….” (Catechism, 2239)

I’ve talked about that before, and probably will again.3

A “Patriot Dream That Sees Beyond the Years”

Charles Dudley Arnold's photo of Chicago Expo 1893; Court of Honor, Columbia fountain.John Adams didn’t live to see it, but slavery is no longer legal in America. I think that’s a good thing.

Some other long-overdue corrections were getting attention during my youth. Now, a couple decades into the 21st century, America still isn’t perfect.

But I think many of us have a “patriot dream” of an America that’s less flawed than the one we’re living in. I think that’s something to remember and work toward.

“…O beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam
Undimmed by human tears!…”
(“America the Beautiful,” Katharine Lee Bates, 1911 version, via Wikipedia)

I’ve talked about that before, too:

1 Today’s celebration:

2 Background, mostly the 18th century:

3 Being Catholic and American, and a little background:

Posted in Being a Citizen, Being Catholic, Discursive Detours, Journal | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Animals, Consciousness, and Conscience 0 (0)

Posted on June 29, 2024 by Brian H. Gill
Getty Images' colorful cuttlefish; Wikimedia/Canva's images of fish, molluscs, and arthropods. Via BBC News, used w/o permission.

I haven’t researched it, but I’m guessing that ‘animals are conscious’ headlines peaked about two months back.

“Animal consciousness” makes more sense than some headlines suggest — so this week I’ll be talking about new research, old ideas, and how I see being human.

Science, Attitudes, and Conscious Animals

Unknown artist's cartoon: ape wearing a sign saying 'AM I NOT A MAN AND A BROTHER?' an abolitionist slogan. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedgwood_anti-slavery_medallion#Origin and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Hippocampus_Question#Public_interest_and_satire (1861) via WikipediaAlthough I’m not even close to being on the same page as folks with “meat is murder” posters over their desks, I think that, by one definition, animals are conscious.

“Are animals conscious? How new research is changing minds”
Pallab Ghosh, BBC News (June 15, 2024)

“Charles Darwin enjoys a near god-like status among scientists for his theory of evolution. But his ideas that animals are conscious in the same way humans are have long been shunned. Until now.

“‘There is no fundamental difference between man and animals in their ability to feel pleasure and pain, happiness, and misery,’ Darwin wrote.

“But his suggestion that animals think and feel was seen as scientific heresy among many, if not most animal behaviour experts.

“Attributing consciousness to animals based on their responses was seen as a cardinal sin….”
[emphasis mine]

Pallab Ghosh may have taken his cue for religious-themed terms like “near god-like status”, “scientific heresy”, and “cardinal sin” from a scientist’s frustration with his field’s status quo.

“Unholy Trinity”, “Heretics”, Galileo — Folklore is Fine, But …

Dustin Dewynne's dualism/monism comparison. (2012) via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.Neuroscientist Anil Kumar Seth apparently thinks the trouble started with René “Je pense, donc je suis / Cognito ergo sum / I think therefore I am” Descartes.

Descartes apparently also said that “language is the only certain sign of thought in a body”. That’s from the BBC News piece, and lines up with Descartes’ ideas about mind-body dualism, but I haven’t verified it.1

“…‘This unholy trinity, of language, intelligence and consciousness goes back all the way to Descartes,’ [Sussex University’s Prof Anil Seth] told BBC News, with a degree of annoyance at the lack of questioning of this approach until recently.

“The ‘unholy trinity’ is at the core of a movement called behaviourism, which emerged in the early 20th Century. It says that thoughts and feelings cannot be measured by scientific methods and so should be ignored when analysing behaviour….”
(“Are animals conscious? How new research is changing minds” , Pallab Ghosh, BBC News (June 15, 2024)) [emphasis mine]

Behaviorism and 20th century antics — are rabbit holes I’ll sidestep today.

I think Anil Seth and Pallab Ghosh have a point. Taking a second or third look at what ‘everybody knows’ is a good idea: particularly after we’ve collected new data.

But I could do without the conventional slant on “heretics” and Galileo.

“…It is a field of study that the modern-day heretics who have signed the New York Declaration claim has been neglected, even ridiculed. Their approach, to say the unsayable and risk sanction is nothing new.

“Around the same time that Rene Descartes was saying ‘I think therefore I am’, the Catholic church found the Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei ‘vehemently suspect of heresy‘ for suggesting that the Earth was not the centre of the Universe….”
(“Are animals conscious? How new research is changing minds” , Pallab Ghosh, BBC News (June 15, 2024)) [emphasis mine]

Oh boy. A little background. In 1633, the Roman Inquisition found Galileo “vehemently suspect of heresy”.

Galileo’s “Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems” said that Earth goes around the Sun. As it turns out, he was right. But it took tools we developed later, and more precise observations, to demonstrate that the heliocentric model is essentially accurate.

Cristiano Banti's 'Galileo facing the Roman Inquisition.' (1857)I strongly suspect that Galileo’s abrasive personality, regrettable connotations of “nuncius” in his 1610 “Sidereus Nuncius”, and 17th century European politics factored into Galileo’s trouble.

I’ve talked about this before, and probably will again. Mainly because folklore about ‘Galileo, champion of science against the forces of superstition and oppression’ is so firmly embedded in my culture.

It makes a good story, but it also does no favors to either science, religion, or folks who think pursuing truth is a good idea.2

Conscious? A Better Term Would be “Sentient”

Cover of 'American Phrenological Journal' (March 1848, volume 10, number 3) published by Fowlers and Wells, New YorkWhether or not animals are conscious depends on what “conscious” means.

Being “conscious” could mean being self-aware, or being aware of phenomena inside (or outside) oneself.

Neither of those definitions say what the “self” is, or how the state of self-awareness could be measured by an outside observer. Or, for that matter, whether an outside observer would be sufficiently not-self to be considered truly “outside”.

Wrenching myself back to whether or not animals are “conscious”, one more excerpt from that BBC News piece:

“…The argument went that projecting human traits, feelings, and behaviours onto animals had no scientific basis and there was no way of testing what goes on in animals’ minds.

“But if new evidence emerges of animals’ abilities to feel and process what is going on around them, could that mean they are, in fact, conscious?

“We now know that bees can count, recognise human faces and learn how to use tools….

“… ‘If bees are that intelligent, maybe they can think and feel something, which are the building blocks of consciousness,’ [Queen Mary University of London’s Prof Lars Chittka] says….”
(“Are animals conscious? How new research is changing minds” , Pallab Ghosh, BBC News (June 15, 2024))

John Tenniel's Alice and the Knitting Sheep, Alice Through the Looking-Glass.Quebec University’s cognitive scientist Stevan Harnad said — good grief, another excerpt; but this’ll be the last one (this week) from BBC News.

“…’The field is replete with weasel words and unfortunately one of those is consciousness,’ says Prof Stevan Harnad of Quebec University.

“‘It is a word that is confidently used by a lot of people, but they all mean something different, and so it is not clear at all what it means.’

“He says that a better, less weasley, word is ‘sentience’, which is more tightly defined as the capacity to feel. ‘To feel everything, a pinch, to see the colour red, to feel tired and hungry, those are all things you feel,’ ….”
(“Are animals conscious? How new research is changing minds” , Pallab Ghosh, BBC News (June 15, 2024)) [emphasis mine]

Sentience, as defined by Professor Harnad, is a pretty basic function. Stretched a bit, it would make our Mars rovers like Curiosity sentient: or conscious.

That doesn’t bother me. But I’m also not upset that Lewis Carrol had Alice chatting with an anthropomorphic sheep. It’s been years since I read about some psychologist having fits over anthropomorphic animals in stories, and I’m wandering off-topic.

If animal “consciousness” is like Harnad’s “sentience”, then I figure all animals are “conscious”: all those that have nerves, anyway. They wouldn’t last long, without some capacity to ‘feel’ their environment.

Being sapient, that’s something else.3 Having wisdom, being able to think about memories — in my darker moments, I’ve wondered how many humans actually use those abilities.

On the ‘up’ side, Pallab Ghosh is right. There hasn’t been a “eureka” moment when scientists suddenly realized that animals feel stuff. Rather, awareness that animals aren’t insensate lumps is (slowly) becoming accepted and acceptable.

Of Mice and Men and Little Albert

Jeffery Mogil's photos: facial expressions in mice. (2010) via Nature/Wired, used w/o permission.Dr. Jeffrey S. Mogil’s research was, I think, useful. But the Wired Science headline isn’t accurate.

Mice can’t show pain in their faces “just like humans”; more accurately, humans can’t show pain just like mice.

Our ears hardly move at all, and we don’t even have vibrissae/whiskers.

“Mice Show Pain on Their Faces Just Like Humans“
Wired Science (May 10, 2010)

“Mice in pain have facial expressions that are very similar to human facial expressions, according to scientists who have developed the ‘mouse grimace scale.’ The pain expressions of mice could help researchers gauge the effectiveness of new drugs.

“People have been using similar facial-expression coding systems in babies and other humans who are unable to verbally express their pain. ‘No one has every [!] looked for facial expression of pain in anything other than humans,’ said Jeffery[!] Mogil of McGill University, co-author of the study….

“…Mogil first noticed that mice can sense the pain of other mice in 2006. He saw that mice were communicating their pain visually, which had to be either by interpreting each other’s facial expressions or body movements. Mogil wondered if we could see whatever the mice were seeing….

“…To test for facial expressions of the mice, Mogil put them through mild to moderate pain tests (similar to a headache or swollen finger, easily treated with Tylenol or aspirin) and used high-definition cameras to monitor their expressions. Pictures from before and after the pain stimulus were shown to technicians at the lab of colleague Kenneth Craig….”

On the other hand, our nearly-immobile ears and lack of whiskers notwithstanding, humans and mice do share facial expressions.

Maybe Mogil was the first scientist to notice “that mice can sense the pain of other mice”. Burrowing into digitized research papers would be more work than I have either time or inclination for, so I haven’t confirmed it.

My guess is that Jeffrey Mogil was right, that no scientist had (1) noticed murine facial expressions as possible social signals and (2) studied them.

However, Charles Darwin’s “The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals” (1872) looked at facial expressions and body language from a biological viewpoint. It didn’t get the traction of his “Origin of Species”.

An 1873 Quarterly Journal of Science review said “The Expression…” had “so much of acute observation and amusing anecdote” that it might appeal to the general public.

Maybe Darwin’s description of expressions we share with animals offended Victorian sensibilities, or maybe “The Expression…” fell out of academic fashion.

Either way, instead of studies of emotional states shared by humans, mice, and dogs, we got behaviorism and the Little Albert experiment.

I suspect part of the problem with “The Expression…” was that it might have made the right sort feel uneasy about tormenting lab animals and using undesirables and disposable kids in their research.4

But time passed, attitudes changed. Now we’ve got new bioethics rules — and a grimace scale that’s helped keep track of how critters are feeling.

Animals, People, and Paying Attention

T. W. Wood's illustration for Charles Darwin's 'The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals': Figure 15 - 'Cat terrified at a dog. From life'. (1872) University of Chicago Press via Wikipedia, used w/o permissionI don’t have scholarly research to back this up, but my experience suggests that there’s — not so much two sorts of people, as a continuum with a fair number of folks at each end.

Over on the ‘I’m a highly educated and intelligent person’ end, you’ve got folks who say that animals don’t have emotions, can’t feel pain, and are basically animated lumps of occasionally-useful material.

At the other end, you’ve got the ‘poodles are people too’ set, who take anthropomorphism to disturbing heights. Or depths.

‘Animals are lumps’ may be out of fashion now. I haven’t run into it for decades. Not in print, at any rate.

I’m not at either end, but didn’t have trouble with the idea that non-human animals experience emotions. Possibly because I grew up around animals. Cats, specifically.

Reading feline. and canine. emotions isn’t hard. It just takes paying attention. Mind you, my experience may not be normal.

I enjoy interacting socially with folks. But it’s a bit exhausting. I understand that I come across as — eccentric. Then, well into middle age, I (finally) listened to my wife and talked with a psychiatrist.

Folks with autism are supposed to be none too bright, and about as talkative as your average stump.5 I’m anything but. Even though ASD shows up in my medical chart:

  • ADHD: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, inattentive type
  • ASD: Autism spectrum disorder
  • Cluster A personality disorder
    • Schizotypal personality disorder
  • GAD: Generalized anxiety disorder
  • PDD: Persistent depressive disorder
  • PTSD: Post traumatic stress disorder

Good grief, I’m not even normally abnormal.

The point is that I’ve long since learned how to read facial expressions and body language when interacting with other people.

Doing the same with critters is, if anything, easier. They’re nowhere near as complicated as we are.

“Little Less Than a God” —

The Century Magazine's page 325 illustration of 'The Monitor,' used for hydraulic mining in California. (January 1883) from the United States Library of Congress, via Wikipedia, used w/o permission
“The Monitor” — hydraulic mining in California. The Century Magazine (January 1883)

We’re the lords of creation, with dominion over the world and all its creatures.

So we can do whatever we want, right?

Wrong.

Make no mistake. We have “dominion”, and are very hot stuff.

“Then God said: Let us make human beings in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, the tame animals, all the wild animals, and all the creatures that crawl on the earth.”
(Genesis 1:26)

“When I see your heavens, the work of your fingers,
the moon and stars that you set in place—
“What is man that you are mindful of him,
and a son of man that you care for him?
“Yet you have made him little less than a god,
crowned him with glory and honor.
“You have given him rule over the works of your hands,
put all things at his feet:”
(Psalms 8:4–7) [emphasis mine]

But our “dominion” isn’t ownership. It’s more like part of our job description.

We have authority over the creatures of this world: as stewards. We’re responsible for taking care of our home, and leaving it in good working order for future generations. (Genesis 1:26, 2:5–8; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 16, 339, 356-358, 2402, 2415-2418, 2456)

I don’t know how many folks actually said that we were “lords of creation”. Or, rather, that gentlemen from a few countries were the rightful rulers of everyone and everything.

The only 19th century “lords of creation” references I found were from 1838 and 1859. Both were snarky commentary on current assumptions about men, those household appliances they called women, and women who weren’t cheering for the status quo.6

Those assumptions, along with a smug confidence that the upper crust were this world’s ultimate authority, were eroding during my childhood, snapped shortly thereafter, and that’s another topic. Topics.

Which reminds me. It’s been a while since I talked about being Catholic, taking the Bible seriously, Tradition with a capital “T”, the Magisterium, and making sense.

“…Know what the Bible is – and what it isn’t. The Bible is the story of God’s relationship with the people he has called to himself. It is not intended to be read as history text, a science book, or a political manifesto. In the Bible, God teaches us the truths that we need for the sake of our salvation….” (“Understanding the Bible” , Mary Elizabeth Sperry, USCCB)

I put definitions, and links to some of what I’ve said, in the footnotes.7 Moving on.

— With All the Responsibilities That Come With Our Nature

William Hogarth's 'The Second Stage of Cruelty, detail. Tom Nero beating his horse. (1751) see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Four_Stages_of_CrueltyI’m human, so I’m “an animal endowed with reason”. (Catechism, 1951)

That, and being made in God’s image, means we can and should think about what we do. (Catechism, 1950-1974, and more)

We’ve been told that we should treat animals humanely. And people, too.

“For six days you may do your work, but on the seventh day you must rest, that your ox and your donkey may have rest, and that the son of your maidservant and the resident alien may be refreshed.”
(Exodus 23:12)

“You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out grain.“
(Deuteronomy 25:4)

“The just take care of their livestock,
but the compassion of the wicked is cruel.”
(Proverbs 12:10)

“It is written in the law of Moses, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.’ …”
(1 Corinthians 9:9)

“For the scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox when it is threshing,’ and, ‘A worker deserves his pay.'”
(1 Timothy 5:18)

Recapping, we’re animals.

But besides being animals, we’re people: made “in the image of God.” Responsibilities come with our nature, like not inflicting needless death and suffering on animals. (Catechism, 355, 361-368, 1701-1709, 1951, 2418, 2415-2418)

Using animals for food and clothing is fine. So is using animals in medical/scientific research, along with having pets and farm animals. Within reason. Loving animals is okay: loving animals the way we (should) love other people isn’t. (Catechism, 2417-2418)

That’s why I don’t have a problem with scientists (finally) coming to grips with the idea that animals are “conscious”: that they have sensations the way we do.

Maybe that recognition will help us treat animals more humanely. I hope so.

Folks in my part of Western civilization have been making some progress in terms how we treat animals. Meanwhile, some of us have been promoting daft ideas.8 And that’s yet another topic.

Or maybe not so much.

I’ve noticed that, even with election hysteria howling across my news feed, nobody’s pushing equal rights for alligators as a party platform plank. Maybe some ideas are too crazy, even for American politics.

Hart Studio's Wizard of Id comic strip: 'Hey, you. Hold on a minute ... Trust me. They needed it.' (May 20, 2024)And on that note, I’ll take a deep breath, sit still for a second, and wrap this up with the usual links:

1 Thinkers and thoughts about thinking:

2 Mostly the 17th century, one of recent history’s livelier eras:

3 Thinking about animals and thinking isn’t as straightforward as it might seem:

4 Animals, emotions, and why bioethics matter:

5 Animals, autism, emotions, and not-entirely-unrelated topics:

6 “Lords of creation” and changing attitudes, 19th century:

7 Definitions, mostly:

“BIBLE: Sacred Scripture: the books which contain the truth of God’s Revelation and were composed by human authors inspired by the Holy Spirit (105). The Bible contains both the forty-six books of the Old Testament and the twenty-seven books of the New Testament (120). See Old Testament; New Testament.”

“HOLY SPIRIT: The third divine person of the Blessed Trinity, the personal love of the Father and Son for each other. Also called the Paraclete (Advocate) and Spirit of Truth, the Holy Spirit is at work with the Father and the Son from the beginning to the completion of the divine plan for our salvation (685; cf. 152, 243).”

“MAGISTERIUM: The living, teaching office of the Church, whose task it is to give as authentic interpretation of the word of God, whether in its written form (Sacred Scripture), or in the form of Tradition. The Magisterium ensures the Church’s fidelity to the teaching of the Apostles in matters of faith and morals (85, 890, 2033).”

“TRADITION: The living transmission of the message of the Gospel in the Church. The oral preaching of the Apostles, and the written message of salvation under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (Bible), are conserved and handed on as the deposit of faith through the apostolic succession in the Church. Both the living Tradition and the written Scriptures have their common source in the revelation of God in Jesus Christ (75–82). The theological, liturgical, disciplinary, and devotional traditions of the local churches both contain and can be distinguished from this apostolic Tradition (83).”
(Glossary, Catechism of the Catholic Church)

I’ll occasionally talk about the Bible, the Magisterium, and Tradition with a capital “T”:

8 Animals, amusements, and ideas; good and otherwise:

Posted in Discursive Detours, Journal, Science News | Tagged , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

A Substation Gone and a Dam in Trouble: This Year it’s Flooding 0 (0)

Posted on June 25, 2024 by Brian H. Gill

Noted:

From that NBC piece:

“…An Xcel Energy substation at the dam, which supplies power to about 600 customers, was washed away early Monday. The utility company said its crews were working to replace the destroyed substation and restore power….”
(“Rapidan Dam in Minnesota is in ‘imminent failure condition,’ officials warn” Doha Madani, NBC News (June 24, 2024))

That dam is very roughly five miles southwest of Mankato, Minnesota – about two and a half hours south and a little east of the town I live in.

That’s not the only place in Minnesota with flooding problems this week. This spring was the first time in two years that no place in Minnesota was experiencing a drought. That’s good news, but the flooding isn’t.

It’s been a warm, very warm, summer day here; with a slight chance of severe weather tonight. (That’s Monday night, June 24, 2024.)

Here in central Minnesota, that’s rather routine. I’m keeping an eye on the weather anyway. The house is on high ground, here in Sauk Centre. But — there was a storm a few years back, when part of a car dealership landed across the street, so situational awareness is a good idea.

That’s all I’ve got for now: just a quick look at regional news that’s also international news.

And, yes: we talk about weather a lot out here.

Posted in Discursive Detours, Journal | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Sledding With My Dad: Good Memories 5 (1)

Posted on June 22, 2024 by Brian H. Gill
Google Street View's image: Prairie Home Cemetery, seen from near 9th Street South and 9th Avenue South, Moorhead, Minnesota. (February 2022) via Google Street View, used w/o permission.
More than six decades later: new buildings, new snowfall, old memories. (February 2022)

Most of the neighborhood I grew up in is now a parking lot.

But Prairie Home Cemetery, a block west of the house I grew up in, is still there. I mostly remember it as being next to the sledding hill.

My father and I went by, or maybe through, the cemetery on our way to the ‘hill’.

The sledding hill wasn’t, technically, a hill.

It was part of a coulee going through the southwest corner of Prairie Home Cemetery. Or, rather, it was part of what had been a coulee.

There must have been a culvert under 8th Street South, since the coulee continued through Concordia College. All that’s left of that part is “Prexy’s Pond”, and a bridge over a lower-than-average stretch of lawn.

There’s another trace of that coulee; although I haven’t seen it mentioned. It was in a small home’s back yard, near the corner of 9th Street South and 10th Avenue South.

It’s still there. Or was, at any rate, in February of 2022, when Google Street View recorded that particular part of south Moorhead.

I probably wouldn’t have noticed it, back when I lived nearby: but Moorhead is in the Red River Valley. That’s one of the flattest expanses of land on Earth.1 Any dip will stand out.

Flexible Flyer and Winter Clothing

Orton R. Emmett Owen's illustration for 'Bobby of Cloverfield Farm', by Helen Fuller. (1922)Anyway, my Dad and I, along with a number of other kids and adults, would slide down the east side of the coulee.

Actually, the kids did nearly all the sliding.

This would have been around 1960, so the sleds would have been like the Flexible Flyer in that illustration. It’s from a book published in 1922, but the design hadn’t changed much. Still hasn’t.

These days, most sleds I see in Walmart are those plastic things with ridges running along the bottom.

I can see advantages to the new design. For one thing, they’ll probably slide along surfaces that’d have stopped my old sled. As I recall, snow had to be fairly firm.

On the other hand, they don’t look particularly steerable. Which the Flexible Flyer was, at least in principle. I don’t remember my sled being very maneuverable, but maybe my expectations were too high.

In any case, a quick online check tells me that Paricon Sleds still makes “Classic Sleds”. So someone, somewhere, has probably written about the pros and cons of old-school Flexible Flyers and today’s plastic sliders.

Now that I think of it, I’m not sure how accurate that 1922 picture is. The book starts on a “cold morning in March”, but I don’t know where. If it’s where the author grew up, east of Niagara Falls, that cold morning’s day might have stayed below freezing.

But I grew up in Moorhead, Minnesota, where it was not quite ten degrees (Fahrenheit) colder that time of year. On average.2 Going sledding with a light cap on my head, short pants, and no mittens, was not a reasonable alternative.

Memories and a Legacy

Google Street View's image: The gates of Moorhead State, now Minnesota State University, Moorhead; seen from 11th Street South and 7th Avenue South, Moorhead, Minnesota. (October 2011) via Google Street View, used w/o permission.
Moorhead State’s gate: The trees are bigger, the paving fancier, than when I lived near there. (October 2011)

I don’t know how often my Dad and I went to the sledding hill.

I do remember what it was like: cold, bright, a swift ride down to the coulee’s bottom, a slow trudge back up, pulling the sled behind me. Then back on the sled and down again.

I learned that leaving my mittened hands on the runners wasn’t a good idea.

It was my left hand that slipped down from the runner’s leading curve, caught on the snow and shot back; throwing me off-balance. I wasn’t hurt, but feeling my weight pressing the runner onto my hand wasn’t pleasant.

I don’t remember how we decided it was time to go back home. Or even what time of day it typically was. Probably afternoon. And probably determined by my father’s noticing how cold he was getting.

But home we went, at least once stopping to look at some of the stone markers in Prairie Home Cemetery. I’m not sure why my Dad did that. My guess is that it’s because he had my ‘interested in everything and anything’ attitude.

No. It’s the other way around.

I have his ‘interested in anything and everything’ attitude.

As legacies go, that’s a pretty good one. I hope I’ve passed at least some of it on to my kids.

Children, Dreams, and Choices

Brian H. Gill. (March 17, 2021)Encouraging my kids to pay attention to the wonders around us, and think, is one thing.

Insisting that they be just like me, or achieve something I wanted to do, that’s another: and not a good idea.

Imprudent parental pressure was highlighted with a light touch in a Phineas and Ferb episode:

“…You, Monty Monogram, don’t have to give up my dream of becoming an acrobat….”
(“Minor Monogram” / Transcript (2012) via Phineas and Ferb, fandom.com)

One of the many things I like about being Catholic is that what the Church says makes sense. Like how to be part of a family. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1601-1617, 1633-1637, 1914, 2197-2206, 2214-2233, 2366ff, and more)

The ‘you can fulfill my dream’ option for raising kids is not part of the package.

Part of my job as their parent is teaching them about our faith. (Catechism, 2226)

Books have been written about that. Today I’ll just say that telling my kids what I believe and why I believe mattered, and matters. So did, and does, acting like I think it matters.

Another angle is — was in my case, the kids are long since grown — seeing to it that our children learn what’s needed in today’s world. And then, once they’re adults, letting them decide what they do with what they’ve learned. (Catechism, 2229-2231)

In the case of our kids, “letting” them was a given. Each, in his or her own way, is as stubborn as their mother and I are. “Strong-willed” might be a nicer way of saying it.

Happily, neither my wife nor I had a family tradition of following some specific career.

As adults, each of the kids have “the right and duty to choose their profession and state of life.” (Catechism, 2230)

One of them opted for being married, the other three surviving kids haven’t. Either way, this is okay. (Catechism, 2231)

Giving them “judicious advice” has been part of my job. (Catechism, 2230)

Success and Vocations

Carl Hassmann's 'The Almightier' illustration for Puck. (May 15, 1907)Insisting that our children have a “successful career”, or conform to some other societal standard: that was not a priority.

I spent my teens in the Sixties; and retain a lack of enthusiasm for spending money I don’t have, to buy stuff I don’t need, to impress people I don’t like.

Misgivings about being “successful” didn’t start in the Sixties:

“I’ve got my standards. ‘I’ll lie, cheat, steal for this company…’ but I will not give up my integrity. I feel that a man is of value to the organization as long as he…”
“Brigadoon” (1954) (via springfieldspringfield.co.uk))

And that’s another topic.

A few more points, and I’m (almost) done for this week.

Having kids can be a good idea. But not having kids — sometimes that happens. Which is why we’re told that adoption can be a good idea. (Catechism, 2366-2379)

It should be obvious, but we’re also told that children are people, not property. (Catechism, 2378)

Each of us — single, married, in religious life — has a vocation. Mine is being part of the laity, and being married. Which reminds me. It’s been a while since I defined “vocation” in this context:

“Vocation: The calling or destiny we have in this life and hereafter. God has created the human person to love and serve him; the fulfillment of this vocation is eternal happiness (1, 358,1700). Christ calls the faithful to the perfection of holiness (825). The vocation of the laity consists in seeking the Kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and directing them according to God’s will (898). Priestly and religious vocations are dedicated to the service of the Church as the universal sacrament of salvation (cf. CCC 873; 931).”
(Glossary, Catechism of the Catholic Church)

Good Memories

John Tenniel's illustration: looking-glass world's chessboard landscape, for Lewis Carroll's 'Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There'. (1871)Our kids won’t have Dad taking them sledding as childhood memories.

But they’ve got story time in the attic to remember, and — I hope — other good memories.

That, I think, is a pretty good legacy.

I’ve talked about ‘family’ stuff before:

1 Flatland, and a town across the river from Fargo, North Dakota:

2 An enduring sled design, a common activity, old books, an obscure author, and climate:

Posted in Discursive Detours, Family Stories, Journal, Series | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments