Life Is Not a Free Ride

13 September 2026 Leave a comment

Under the influence of current national politics, irresolvable international strife and a badly damaged global environment, the looming economic turmoil has the potential to worsen the cost of already troubled areas of life – food, medical care and shelter. It hardly matters what more positive changes occur in the near term; the momentum of declining quality of life seems overwhelming. We must do what we can to “gird our loins,” to salvage at least the basics of our accustomed lives, but not simply go back to what was.

We must not strive to recover the life we had, in a cycle of backward leapfrogging. We must instead deal with the conditions that are and plan for a future with justice, equity, and stability, here and abroad. After the fire, forward-looking survivors create water reserves and firebreaks while planting saplings and building new homes.

We must plan for a future in which everyone has a place and uses it responsibly. Mostly, we must understand that all life has value. We must work together. In the future, we must be focused on surviving, not just winning. We cannot continue as competing teams, or we will grind down the planet to a point at which it can no longer support life.

We must override the political short-term strategy and accept that we are morally responsible for the future consequences of our decisions and actions today. Life is not a free ride. We will pay a price one way or another.

Filed under Economic issues, Education Policy, Environmental issues, Philosophy, Politics, Social Commentary Tagged with

Stop Shop-speak

8 September 2026 Leave a comment

I have heard comments from bench scientists that what is called “science” in the popular press isn’t really science. I assume they say that because the content of popular science articles does not dwell on the essential minutiae of research lab procedures. One might reasonably suggest that an abstract of research, with technical terms given metaphorical conversion, would be more universally understandable, hence, popular. Science academics, on the other hand, not only fail to see the value in delivering their discourse in a simpler form, but they also brutalize the language to a degree that makes it painful for audiences other than science academics.

For me, wincing at the rattling of mispronounced Latin is enough of a distraction to cause me to leave the hall. English is the richest and most nuanced of the Western languages. Listening to English reduced to the level of a fourth-grade classroom conversation, by anyone, strongly biases me against whatever they may be trying to say. Often, such abuse so obscures the content as to make what is being spoken meaningless.

Adding to the seemingly arrogant obfuscation of the material’s delivery come the speech viruses: ‘ah,’ ‘um,’ ‘right,’ ‘so’ and the monotonous ‘and.’ Has it not occurred to the great universities and smallest colleges to expect their teaching staff to exhibit successful completion of a middle school speech class? Do presenters even go over their presentations out loud before presenting?

Here are three mantras for good speaking: Be clear. Be concise. Know your audience. This alone is not demanding. It does require Theory of Mind, but then we develop that cognitive capacity at about the time we enter first grade.

No scientist should look down on science for the masses. I read articles ranging from virology to astrophysics in Scientific American and even The New York Times. I enjoy them, and they help expand my worldview.

I’m a retired English teacher. This essay is over the head of a fourth-grader, perhaps. It is trying to make a point with some immured post-docs and lofty professors. Jargon is for in-house. It is meant to keep outsiders from understanding. Outside presentations require effective speaking.

Filed under Social Commentary, Composition, Pedagogy Tagged with , , , , , , ,