The purpose of vocation education is to get a good job; the purpose of education is not, although job training may, in some cases, be contained in some aspects of education. As one sets out on one's own life path, attention must be given to both. You can educate yourself by reading extensively, particularly things that you don't agree with or have not experienced. You can educate yourself by listening to educated people, particularly those that you don't agree with or don't understand. You can educate yourself by participating in a variety of activities, particularly activities that you aren't accustomed to.
Education is not just for one's self but for society, to broaden one's perspective, to understand others, to learn to appreciate our world and everything in it. And, more.
If you've always lived in the same place, spend time only with people just like you, go only to the same places you've always gone, do only the things you've always done, you don't know much, and, I'm guessing, you don't like things, people, places, ideas that aren't just like what you're familiar with.
"An investment in knowledge pays the best interest." Benjamin Franklin
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle
"The goal of education is the advancement of knowledge and the dissemination of truth." John F. Kennedy
"Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education." Franklin D. Roosevelt
Beware what you learned, as a child, at home. Outside what you learned to get along socially, behaviorally; the beliefs, assumptions, biases, prejudices and misconceptions you learned, unconsciously, as a child, are best unlearned.
Good education should open your eyes, your ears, your mind, your heart. Not everything you are expected to learn in school will be used by you, personally, at some point in your life, but, if you actually pay attention, it will teach you perspective and will break down your assumptions and beliefs. Life is a great deal more than what personally affects you. If you pay attention to your education, you'll learn that you are far from being the center of the universe.
Your inner development is another matter....Neither training nor education - nor a great deal of religion, for that matter - addresses one's inner development. All three are important, in varying degrees, at various times, particularly your inner development. You're not finished until you draw you last breath.
Just my educated opinion.
All quotes are from BrainyQuote and exact sources are not given.
Copyright, Lorraine I. O'Dell, 2014. Please cite the source if you quote anything on this blog. Thank you.
I just finished watching an excellent 2011 documentary called Pink Ribbons, Inc. about the rah rah phenomenon surrounding breast cancer and breast cancer research that has, at best, become a distraction from the devastation of the disease itself and from finding causes, preventions, treatments and a cure for the disease.
My mother died of breast cancer. There is not much that I can say about that except that some of the avoidance thinking about the disease might have spared her some of the suffering she experienced in the last year of her life.
It's clear that we don't know enough about the disease, about what causes it, about the course of the disease and, apparently, because we don't know that much yet, rather than investing in learning more, we choose to fight something we know little about by spending much effort, time, energy and money in cheer leading those suffering from it. This not only is a waste by accomplishing little but is a monumental waste of resources that could be spent finding out more.
Much of what is said about the pink ribbon movement can be said about other charitable ventures, particularly those involving corporate efforts. Those who become enthusiasts of these activities need to step back and ask themselves what benefit, if any, other than their own deluded sense of well-being, comes of all these efforts. What goals, objectives and outcomes are being measured to determine if these efforts are doing anything positive toward the issue at hand or are they just robbing the energy and attention away from needed efforts to actually address whatever problem is the supposed focus. Look at who's speaking about these charities. Look at how they're dressed. Listen to who they're championing. There's a lot of money in fund raising and in running not-for-profits. Where is the money going; is it going to where it's needed?
Please watch the film: Pink Ribbons, Inc. It's available on streaming video at Netflix.
Watch and learn.
Breast cancer is NOT a pretty pink ribbon. Breast cancer is NOT patting people on the back for getting through it. Breast cancer is NOT cute products colored pink to sell to concerned customers, making profits for corporations who donate pennies for what results? Breast cancer is a nasty, killing disease.
If you want to donate to research on breast cancer, do your homework, find out what research is being done, where, by whom. Find out how they're funded, donate there. If you want to donate to palliative care for breast cancer sufferers, do your homework, find out who's providing such care, find out how they're funded, donate there.
I DO NOT donate to charities through any corporation; I'm perfectly capable of donating directly to any charity of my choosing. I DO NOT purchase any commercially manufactured product that might generate a % of a cent toward any charity. When I am able to donate to a charity of my choosing, I send them a check. I make every effort to research any charity that I'm interested in for how they spend their money, their administrative costs, their executive compensation, what projects they fund, etc. I highly recommend that you do the same.
A post appeared on Facebook this morning; I re-posted it. It's about registering your pet as an Emotional Support Companion animal so you can get into a housing rental with it.
I try to investigate certain types of Facebook posts before I Share them; like missing person's notifications. I find many to be erroneous. I often Share missing person's reports with a link to updates that show them found, etc.
So, this morning, I did a quick search about companion animals to verify whether or not such a designation as emotional support companion animal actually exists. It does. And, like other companion animals, they can be registered and there are laws about how companion animals and their owners must be treated. For example, I'm a librarian by profession. I've worked mostly in public libraries for most of my career. Pets are NOT allowed in libraries, for what most people would understand is a policy for obvious reasons. In case you don't see the obvious reasons here are a couple: You can't have animals running around pooping and peeing on the floor; you can't have animals running around biting people. That's just a couple of reasons.
If you work in public service and experience hundreds of individuals walking in off the streets daily and their behavior, you'd understand how many more reasons there might be.
Companion animals for the blind and physically disabled are allowed and they are usually easily recognizable from obvious needs of their owners. However, I'm quite sure that, if the owners are unable or unwilling to control their animals, they can be asked to leave. It's important to know laws that might affect you more than occasionally.
So, apparently, there are Emotional Support Companion Animals. The first agency's site I found had substantial information about the criteria for the designation, the registration process, what such animals are exempt from, etc.
I posted the link to that site, then was asked a question by a Facebook friend and did a little more looking and discovered several other "agencies" and their sites. I'm now confused about the "official" capacity of these agencies. I'm not going to bother looking into the all of this; it doesn't directly affect me. What I do know is that laws can be federal or state or a mix. I don't know what laws exist about companion animals; I'm not going to investigate but I am going to contact my state and federal reps and ask them to.
I did just a link that says that Emotional Support Companion Animals are protected by ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) which is a federal law.
One of the functions of government, as I probably learned it and certainly think of it, is to protect and intervene for us and to control flim-flam, sham and dishonest enterprises that misrepresent themselves in order to scam us out of our money. I don't know if the evidence of these multiple "agencies" to certify and register companion animals is about that or just no standards. There are, if you are or aren't aware, multiple companies that can register a domain name (web site address) for you. I initially thought there was one and I see no reason why I need any company to do it for me if I could get through the maze to the "agency" that maintains the database. I digress.
Another purpose of government, as I understand and wish it to be true, is setting standards. If there are federal and/or state laws concerning companion animals, there have to be criteria (standards) so designating them. Therefore, there have to be agencies, legally designated agencies to certify companion animals; otherwise everybody could and would just say their pet is a companion animal. By the way, setting standards, at all levels of government, has fallen by the wayside.
The following are links to the "agenies" in the U.S. that I've found, so far, that register/certify companion animals:
Service Dogs of America
NSAR - National Service Animal Registry
Yesterday, I watched a video recording of the CSpan broadcast of Tuesday's Senate hearing on single-payer healthcare. The purpose of the hearing, apparently, was to listen to reports of single-payer healthcare programs in other countries. Senator Bernie Sanders, (D-VT), was chair and ranking member was, Sen. Richard Burr, (R-NC). I admit, I'm quite ignorant about these protocols and, quite honestly, I'm quite tired and sick of them.
I found the speakers, who were from academia in the U.S. and administrators of programs in Taiwan, Denmark and Canada; two of whom are physicians. I found their presentations interesting and informative, although their written remarks have to be downloaded and read to get the entire information.
What was most telling, appeared when the Q and A began and Sen. Burr and Sen. Enzi, (R-WY) asked their questions and made statements. Neither listened even slightly to the responses they were given. They are, clear from their behavior, so completely embroiled in their beliefs, that they are unable to hear, or see anything that doesn't conform to those beliefs. I'm not sure how one gets past the closed minds of such people but they are not thinking in the least. If such a person believes that a stop sign is round and purple and you tell them it's octagonal and red, you can stand them in front of it forever and they will refuse to see it.
What I doubt that the general public understands, is how statistics are used by a variety of people to make a point. I know many people believe they are being lied to and stop listening which is a mistake. Having worked for a significant manufacturer at one point in my career; and having assisted in producing presentation materials for the shareholders of that corporation, I can tell you that the statistics chosen, for any presentation are those that support the point of view of the speaker and they are only a tiny piece of the picture. They are most often completely accurate but they are selected to create an impression that is often false in the omission of the rest of the facts. They are not lies, except in those omissions. Both sides of the argument in the hearing presented statistics that supported their stance; neither side listened to the other.
Another interesting aspect of the hearing was the presence of the speaker, Sally Pipes, who has written a number of books against single-payer healthcare. You will find little about her qualifications to address the topic. I have not yet found anything about her education. She has headed a variety of organizations and, apparently can write (I have read nothing that she's written and have no interest in doing so) and has gained the attention of people in power who have used her organizational and spokesperson skills. She has suffered a family medical tragedy that is clearly the impetus and basis for her activities and opinions. I found her to be an unconscious zealot with little background on which to base informed opinions. Her opinions have, in my mind, no validity or importance whatsoever.
I stopped watching the recording of the broadcast after about 10 minutes of the Q and A which made it obvious that our government is mostly disinterested in facts and problem-solving and is mostly interested in promoting entrenched beliefs and in denying We The People solutions that will enhance and improve our daily lives.
I am truly disgusted and divorce myself from considering anyone in D.C. to be working for my best interests. I wish almost everyone there would just go home and shut up.
