Quack_Quotes

.. for only with humility can one ask, during a righteous venture, the question, 'Am I wrong?'

I have nothing against bureaucracy per se.In fact, bureaucracy in motion, when things happen within a bureaucracy, is sign that things are going well. It is when it is stalled, when things stop happening or working within a bureaucracy is where you should be careful. More often than not, it is stalled on purpose. Someone doesn't want things to work or to happen. They don't want thing to go on record or don't want to make the decision that will make the bureaucracy work again. The more blatant corruption is where someone wants something in return to make bureaucracy work again.. Bureaucracy is like a machine in a box that you put something into it, you get something out. Just like a vending machine. If it doesn't give what its supposed to, it called broken. So don't blame bureaucracy. Look for the broken parts, the people stopping it from doing its job.

Quite often our goals are hazy at best. Some people think that living in a hazy world is the norm. But we have wants, even if they are vague. Peering into the fog to get a clearer picture is worth the effort. Or else you'd be looking for that second football post forever. Or better still " Know your goals even though you may not see them. "

Nothing is more vilified than blame constructed of  facts. Often the people at fault attack the source of the fact or the logic of the construction because they cannot find fault with the facts. The more arrogant simply dismiss the facts without acknowledging either way in public but only to themselves.

So go ahead and take that risk, possibly making a fool of yourself. Apologize or take on the chin, it's your choice. At least you know how it feels to be an idiot for a while.  Some people choose to feel like that all the time.

Let there be light (Photo credit: Priyantha Bandara ) We can get confused about faith and certainty. Blind faith makes us believe that something is certain. No doubt about it. When what it really is .. is that we can be certainly wrong. The refusal to even reconsider what we believe can lead us to the extremes. Rather than reinforcing our belief, we seek to extend a tower higher up, not even looking at it's foundation. Inspired by  this NYT article

The structure here sets up a general statement or belief for a question or questioning and provides a factual statement (related or not) to set up the question. This is tool is used more as a general tool to produce a reaction which the speaker can then use to gauge the audience later. This statement itself is deeper than the usual ones I bring out. Think about it. The scientific method is partly based on testing a hypothesis and observing and recording the results. But if our senses can be fooled (and the numerous visual trickery images on the net is a testament to this), what does it say for our observations? Is our science limited to our senses? Is it limited to what our equipment translates what we cannot sense into something we can? Even then, do we lose some data in the process. How does this relate to the concept of a personal reality? If a person is never explained basic scientific concepts and observes them in action, do they come out with the same conclusions?