Category: Uncategorized

Ken Hurley

Thank god for mortality. If it weren’t for mortality, we would need a bigger planet. If it weren’t for mortality, the TSA lines would take weeks. If it weren’t for mortality, the population of Jacksonville would be 15 million frustrated drivers sitting still on the JTB parking lot. The population of New York City would be 117 million, making it impossible to get Hamilton revival tickets. If it weren’t for mortality, everyone’s favorite Hun, Attilla, would still be alive. So would Hitler. Socrates would be walking the planet mumbling hemlockschemlock. The Elizabeth Kübler-Ross book, On Death and Dying, would never be written. Trump, America’s King, would be able to stay in the oval office forever. The population of Earth would be approximately 118 billion hungry mouths, causing DoorDash to change their name to DoorWhenever.

One of the most troubling aspects when figuring these types of demographic estimates is that people tend to omit the population of New Jersey. I’d like to get this calculation cleared up. A complicating factor when extrapolating a population estimate is determining the pattern of population growth. So, for the purpose of reaching a number that has some validity, certain assumptions must be made. Assumption 1) Start with two and begin counting at 50,000 B.C.E.Assumption 2) use mostly a constant growth rate Assumption 3) set birth rates at 80 per 1000 per year through 1 AD Assumption 4) set birth rate at 60 per 1000 from 2 AD to 1750. Assumption 5) set birth rate at 30 per 1000 from 1751 through the present.

If the above assumptions are accepted and you remember to include the population of New Jersey, then the arithmetic yields 117,902,537,116 humans on Earth as of April 1, 2025. This total does not include people held in secret detentions around the world. And you think eggs are scarce now! Remember the television game show “To Tell the Truth”? We could play it with Jesus. Will the real Jesus please stand up.

Mortality is so globally popular, we even give it ratings. Two thumbs up? No. Five stars? No. Michelin? No. Yelp? No. The mortality rate, aka death rate, is measured by the number of deaths in a population over a specific time period, expressed as a rate per a certain number of people. For example, the infant mortality rate in the United States was 560.4 infant deaths per 100,000 live births in 2022, an increase of 3.1% from the rate in 2021 (543.6). Now that vaccines are passé, out of fashion, and poo-pooed, this particular mortality rate will likely increase.

Mortals, all being carbon-based life forms, have mortality in common. No exceptions. Mortality is the inevitable end of life, and is a fundamental aspect of the human condition.

The loss and suffering mortality inflicts by the death of loved ones is a universally shared experience, which can cause profound grief, pain, and a sense of irreplaceable loss. There is also the death of others who are not loved ones, which, if they are despised, may bring a slight smile, if not whooping and hollering in the streets. However, the death of a loved one can carry an emotional toll which can have significant impacts on mental and physical health, leading to depression, anxiety, and other psychological challenges. The fear of our own death, the awareness of our own sad eventual demise, can be a source of anxiety and existential dread, which can shape our choices and influence our perspectives. This fear can manifest in various ways, from avoidance of risk-taking, to a desperate clinging to life, often hindering personal growth and the pursuit of fulfilling experiences. Or, the realization of our own sad untimely demise can bring a strong sense of motivation. The finality of death, the irreversible cessation of consciousness and experience, is a daunting prospect for many, fueling a desire for immortality or an intense focus on leaving a lasting legacy.

The shared experience of loss and grief creates a sense of common humanity. Mortality can even contribute to social cohesion and a greater sense of empathy, at least temporarily. The awareness of our own mortality can make us more sensitive to the suffering of others, encouraging us to act with kindness and generosity. The rituals and traditions surrounding death, from funerals to memorials, provide opportunities for communities to come together, express their grief, and celebrate the lives of those who have shuffled off. These shared experiences strengthen social bonds and reinforce a sense of collective identity.

Mortality is not to be confused with morality. Turns out, an immoral, amoral, and someone who found a moral compass, all eventually will have said of them — they gave up the ghost, bought the farm, kicked the bucket, cashed in their chips, bit the dust, are sleeping with the fishes, met their maker, passed away, dead as a doornail, dust in the wind, gone to a better place, six feet under where they’re pushing up daisies.

A desire to live forever is a significant reason religion is still popular. The promise of “life everlasting” is powerful. Many religions, including Christianity, Islam, and some forms of Hinduism and Buddhism, promise some version of life after death. Christianity emphasizes eternal life with God in heaven and the deceased members of your family, if you follow the teachings of Jesus. Islam also believes in an afterlife, with the concept of Jannah (Paradise) as a reward for good deeds and a place of eternal bliss for believers. Hinduism, while not explicitly promising eternal life in the same way as Christianity or Islam, offers the concept of reincarnation and the possibility of achieving moksha (liberation) from the cycle of birth and death through good karma and spiritual practice. Buddhism, similar to Hinduism, emphasizes the cycle of rebirth, with the goal of achieving Nirvana (enlightenment) and escaping the cycle of suffering.

The desire to live forever is also found in other fictional stories with characters like: Peter Pan, Count Dracula, Galadriel, Doctor Who, Wolverine, Deadpool, Dorian Gray, and the Grim Reaper himself. There are plenty of well-renowned authors who have written about mortality including: Kafka, Christopher Hitchens, Ernest Hemingway, Albert Camus, Leo Tolstoy, and Thomas Mann. What do they all have in common? They’re all dead.

Without mortality, life may seem meaningless. Immortality could lead to a loss of appreciation for life, because you would always have it. The constant presence of life, without the contrast of death, could easily diminish its value and significance. The preciousness of existence, the awareness of its finite nature, is a powerful motivator for living a meaningful life. The absence of this awareness could lead to a devaluation of life, recklessness, apathy, and a lack of respect for both oneself and others.

How many people can you name? Even if you know ten thousand people — that’s a lot — it is less than minuscule when compared to the number of people who have ever lived. Most of our significance turns into obscurity after we morph through our mortal coil. Eventually, we are completely forgotten. However, if you have your own Tik-Tok channel, you may get an extra week before you complete the descent into oblivion.

The awareness of our own mortality can be a powerful “Yikes” moment and motivator for living an adventurous meaningful life. Knowing that time is what we pay to live encourages us to prioritize our values, pursue our passions, and build meaningful relationships. The fear of death can create a sense of urgency and purpose, paradoxically leading to a deeper appreciation for life. This awareness can inspire us to make the most of our time, to engage in activities that bring us joy and fulfillment, and to connect with others on a deeper level. In elevator terminology that deeper level is -B6. The knowledge of our own mortality can be a catalyst for personal growth, encouraging us to confront our fears, overcome challenges, and live authentically.

The impulse to contribute something meaningful to the world can be a powerful motivator for creativity, innovation, and social change. Scientists, artists, writers, and activists are often driven by a desire to make a lasting contribution, to leave their mark on the world before their time runs out. Tick-tock. This drive for lasting impact has fueled countless advancements in science, technology, art, and social justice. If one can’t live forever, at least, maybe, their work will be remembered.

Someone unknown is credited with the following: “Those who died yesterday had plans for this morning and those who died this morning had plans for tonight, don’t take life for granted. In the blink of an eye everything can change so forgive often and love with all your heart you’ll never know if you’ll have the chance to do it again. Today, there’s no time. Tomorrow, there’ll be no energy and the day after tomorrow we may no longer be here so don’t delay anything. Live in the now.” Thanks, someone!

In the end it’s mortality that acts as a catalyst which gives meaning and value to life. What do we want? More Tality. When do we want It? Now. Although, I’d like to register myself as an exception to the mortality craze. I’d like to live longer than expectations. Let’s say a thousand years. I have a few caveats. I must be of sound mind and body, and there can be no more than a select few people with similar longevity. I do not want to live a thousand years in a coma. Who wants to live a thousand years? Someone who is 999. After a thousand years I’ll reevaluate. Maybe take it slowly — one century at a time.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Ken Hurley

The human race has only one really effective weapon and that is laughter. – Mark Twain

Today I was diagnosed with Loagogoephasia. A rare disorder that involves an uncontrollable desire to make up words. – kgh

Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious. – Peter Ustinof

I started a joke which started the whole world crying. – Barry, Robin, and Maurice Gibb

To trace the origins of humor one must follow the truck labeled Good Humor. Here we can delve into the very essence of what it means to be human — our capacity for play, our ability to find absurdity in the mundane, our need to connect through shared laughter, and our desire for a Chocolate Éclair Bar on a stick — all make us smile.
. Pinpointing the precise origins of humor is difficult but not impossible, once we understand who Shecky Bonehead was and how his brand of humor helped create the various genres we enjoy today.
. Shecky was a Neanderthal who first realized that jumping from behind a rock yelling “boo” while kicking his target in the butt, would startle other Neanderthals, which in turn made Shecky laugh. His laughter made other Neanderthals laugh. Shecky credits his funny boneheaded approach to life to his observations of animal behavior. To be playful is a fundamental aspect of animal behavior which often involves elements of surprise, unpredictability, and incongruity, including being poked, tickled, pushed, and pulled — all base elements of humor. Young primates engage in mock fights, exhibiting a form of playful aggression that hints at the roots of comedic timing and physical humor. This suggests that the basic neurological mechanisms underlying human humor might have evolved long before the emergence of those laughable Homo Sapiens.
. As human cognition developed, so too did the sophistication of humor. Early forms of humor likely involved simple slapstick, mimicking, exploitation of social incongruities, and a scatological use of unpredictable flatulence. Imagine a group of ne’er-do-well Neanderthals, huddled around a fire, grunting stories like Tim Allen’s caveman routine and mimicking the clumsy way a rival tribe member walked. This kind of observational humor, based on shared experience and social dynamics, served a crucial social function by strengthening group bonds and reinforcing social hierarchies. However, it also created an “Us” v. “Them” approach to life which may soon become a lawsuit to be settled by the United States Supreme Court. Think of the comedic relief found in the exaggerated portrayal of a pompous authority figure — a trope older than Methuselah’s granddaddy. And, as Woody Allen mused, “I don’t want to achieve immortality through my work, I want to achieve it through not dying.”
. One need to look no further today than the thousands of political editorial cartoons we’ve seen since we learned to draw hieroglyphics. Egyptian hieroglyphs depict scenes of slapstick and mockery, while ancient Greek comedies, such as those of Aristophanes, satirized political figures and social conventions with stinging wit and clever wordplay. These early forms of humor served not only to entertain, but also to challenge authority, critique social norms, and provide a relatively safe outlet for expressing dissent.
. Puns, riddles, and satirical narratives became more popular and more sophisticated. The use of satire and irony became increasingly refined, allowing for a more nuanced and sophisticated form of comedic expression. The courtly jesters, whose role was to entertain the nobility with witty remarks and playful antics, played a key role in the development of humor. The jesters often enjoyed a degree of freedom to criticize the powerful, using humor as a means of navigating the complex social dynamics of the court. Their jokes, often relying on wordplay and physical comedy, served as a form of social commentary, often veiled in playful ambiguity which offered the jester a modicum of plausible deniability if the King was displeased.
. Shakespeare’s comedies, with their witty dialogue, mistaken identities, and farcical situations, have entertained audiences since their creation. His use of wordplay, puns, and irony demonstrates a sophisticated level of comedic technique that had not been achieved before this point in history.
. So you say, you’re too enlightened to enjoy the antics of Shecky Bonehead or Shakespeare. Well, our so-called Enlightenment period brought with it a new emphasis on reason and rationality, but humor didn’t disappear. Instead, it adapted to reflect the changing intellectual landscape. Satire, irony, and biting sarcasm became a powerful tool for critiquing social and political institutions, as shown by writers like François-Marie Arouet, known better by his pen name, Voltaire. He was famous for his wit and his critical thoughts about of Christianity, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. His use of humor exposed hypocrisy and injustice. Consider some of his more remembered quotes: “Common sense is not so common.” “Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.” “Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers.” (Let’s remember, there are stupid questions. And, let’s not forget there are women too.)
. So, why do we need jokes? Why is humor such a fundamental aspect of the human experience? The answer is found in that previously mentioned ice cream truck. There is no such thing as bad humor. Laughter is a reflex. If you laugh, there is humor. Humor serves as a social lubricant, facilitating communication, strengthening social bonds — and like a toasted almond bar — helps play a role in stress management and emotional regulation. What?! No such thing as bad humor? That’s right. You are the arbiter of humor. A joke may have all the elements needed to be considered a joke, but if you don’t at least crack an internal smile it’s not a joke to you. It is important for the teaser to accurately assess the target’s response. Things that might be received well by a brother may not be received well by a stranger. It is not always fun to be the butt of a joke.
. Consider the plight of the voice of the Aflac duck – Gilbert Gotfried. During his set at the Friars Club roast of Hugh Hefner in New York City on September 29th, 2001, Gilbert complained about the difficulty he had getting a flight to New York City. Gottfried joked he was unable to get a non-stop flight, because “they had to make a stop at the Empire State Building.” This joke was quickly booed with cries of “too soon,” by a room filled with comedians. Gottfried then went into the famous “Aristocrats” joke and won the audience back. However, Aflac Insurance fired Gotfried as their quacky duck voice. For me, his airline “joke” served only an inward feeling of an awkward cringe.
. Shared laughter creates a sense of connection and intimacy, encouraging empathy and understanding. It also serves as a coping mechanism, which helps us deal with stress, anxiety, and the absurdities of life. A good joke can provide a much-needed moment of levity, allowing us to step back from our problems and see them in a new light. As Steven Wright asked while pointing to a dalmatian, “Which number are you?”
. Furthermore, humor plays a crucial role in social critique and political dissent. By exposing hypocrisy, challenging authority, and highlighting societal flaws, humor can be a powerful tool for social change. Consider any political cartoon, or the Loony Tunes cartoons of the 40s and 50s, which use humor to comment on current events, expose political hypocrisy, or simply laugh at an unbelievable situation.
. Humor stimulates creativity and cognitive flexibility. Understanding a joke requires us to process information quickly, make connections between seemingly disparate ideas, and appreciate the unexpected. This mental agility can enhance our cognitive abilities and promote creative thinking. The very act of telling a joke, crafting a witty remark, or appreciating a clever pun requires a certain level of intellectual dexterity. Remember, the best ad libs are well-rehearsed. Know anyone who can’t take a joke? Is that a stupid question? Humor helps us understand the mind of another. I remember watching a Charlie Chaplin movie with a friend who did not think any of his situational antics were funny. Her only comment was, “I prefer it when they talk.” Which for no particular reason reminds me of the time I stood wondering why the Frisbee was getting bigger — then it hit me.
. Humor is far more than just a form of entertainment. It’s a fundamental aspect of the human experience, intertwined with our social interactions, cognitive development, and ability to make sense of the world around us. From the playful antics of our primate ancestors to the sophisticated satire of today’s comedians, humor has played a crucial role in shaping human culture and society. Comedians often use humor to process trauma, loss, and personal struggles, offering both themselves and their audiences a path to healing and understanding. Rodney Dangerfield: I get no respect. The way my luck is running, if I was a politician, I would be honest. When I was born, I was so ugly, the doctor slapped my mother. My psychiatrist told me I was crazy. I said I want a second opinion. He said okay you’re ugly too.
. George Carlin: Religion is like a pair of shoes. Find one that fits for you, but don’t make me wear your shoes.
. Steve Martin: A day without sunshine is like, you know, night. Will Rogers: I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.
. Rita Rudner: I was a vegetarian until I started leaning toward the sunlight.
. Emo Philips: I was the kid next door’s imaginary friend.
. Lily Tomlin: I always wanted to be somebody, but now I realize I should have been more specific.
. Reba McEntire: [She’s not a comedian, is she?] To succeed in life, you need three things: a wishbone, a backbone, and a funny bone.
. Nikki Glaser: If anyone is going to bring about mass extinction, it’ll be Donald Trump. [Is that even funny?]
. Let’s sing along with The Bee Gees:
I started a joke which started the whole world crying
But I didn’t see that the joke was on me oh no
I started to cry which started the whole world laughing
Oh If I’d only seen that the joke was on me.
. The Bee Gees couldn’t have known when they wrote those lyrics in 1968 that the lyrics could easily be interpreted to refer to all the boneheads in the current administration. And those same boneheads don’t think that’s funny.
::::::::::::::

Ken Hurley

I remember in 1964 I had two opinions — I didn’t like Barry Goldwater or lima beans. My parents liked both lima beans and Barry Goldwater. I still do not like either today. But why? Why at an early age did I dispute my parents’ preferences about the significance of lima beans? And, Goldwater, too?
Why is the sunrise considered a beautiful way to begin the day by so many people? I was asked this question by someone not too long ago. Before I replied, I asked, “Do you think the sunrise is beautiful?” Maybe. Sometimes. Came the response. Not much emotion. And, no real opinion. It was quite stunning, the depth of wishy-washy that exuded regarding the sunrise. Yet, the difficulty we have forming our opinions, making them known in a manner that can be heard and understood, and maybe even respected, can be problematic. Ever wonder how indecision reflects on our ability to develop an opinion?
Ever sit with the wishy-washy in a restaurant and wait while they struggle with what to order from the menu? Ever stand in the grocery store trying to decide which kind of pretzels to purchase? Ever spend more time searching for something to watch on Netflix than actually the time it takes to watch? Ever wonder why billions of dollars are spent wooing the undecided voters? Ever wonder why there are so many “believers” who are easily angered?
Conversely, how many people do you know who are so rigid in their opinions that they cannot or will not consider facts or new information?
Decisions for us humans are usually multiple choices, not yes or no, ones and zeros.
Well, we are a fortunate species because we humans have a limbic system! You know, that group of brain structures that process emotions, fear, rage, anxiety, love, joy, happiness, memory, motivation, and help regulate our behavior. Oh, limbic. We like you.
Turns out that our emotions significantly influence opinion formation. Emotions such as fear, anger, and hope can powerfully shape our beliefs and attitudes. Fear can lead to support for policies that promise security, even if those policies are ineffective or infringe on civil liberties. Anger can fuel strong opinions regarding social justice issues, motivating individuals to engage in activism and advocacy. Hope can inspire optimism and support for progressive change. The civil rights movement was fueled by both anger at racial injustice and hope for a more equitable future. The emotional resonance of these feelings played a crucial role in mobilizing public opinion and driving social change.
Opinion formation is a complex interplay of cognitive, emotional, and social factors. It’s a dynamic process, constantly shaped and reshaped by new information, personal experiences, and the influence of others. The process by which individuals develop their beliefs and attitudes is derived by how they form their opinions.
One of the primary drivers of opinion formation is exposure to information. The news media, in its various forms — from traditional newspapers and television to online blogs, podcasts, and social media — play a significant role in shaping public and personal opinions. The sheer volume of information available presents a challenge. Information overload is a thing. Individuals are selective in what they consume, often gravitating towards sources that align with their pre-existing beliefs — confirmation bias. For example, a staunch supporter of a particular political party might primarily consume news from outlets known for their partisan leanings, reinforcing their existing views and potentially shielding them from alternative perspectives. This selective exposure can lead to the creation of “echo chambers,” where individuals are primarily exposed to information that confirms their biases, further solidifying their opinions and potentially leading to polarization. Our recent awareness regarding the proliferation of misinformation and disinformation online exacerbates this problem, making it increasingly difficult to discern fact from fiction, and contributing to the spread of unsubstantiated beliefs and wacky conspiracy theories.
Beyond the news, personal experiences profoundly shape our opinions. A traumatic event, such as a car accident or a personal loss, can significantly alter an individual’s worldview and beliefs. For example, someone who has been a victim of a crime might develop a strong opinion about criminal justice reform, advocating for stricter penalties or increased police presence.
Similarly, positive experiences can also shape opinions. A person who has benefited from a particular social program might become a strong advocate for its continuation and expansion. These personal narratives carry significant weight emotionally, often outweighing statistical data or abstract arguments. The power of personal experience is evident in the ongoing debate surrounding gun control. While statistical data on gun violence exists, the emotional impact of personal stories of victims and survivors often dominates the public discourse. As tragic as their stories are, they are not enough to sway the opinions of lawmakers to make meaningful gun control changes. Given the recent election results, is it possible some in Congress may want to mandate gun ownership?
The influence of social groups, relationships, and peer pressure are other critical factors in opinion formation. Humans are inherently social creatures, and our opinions are often shaped by the beliefs and attitudes of those around us. Family, friends, and peers exert powerful influence, particularly during our formative years. Children often adopt the political and religious beliefs of their parents, a process of social learning that establishes foundational opinions. Later in life, peer pressure and social conformity can continue to shape opinions, particularly within close-knit groups. The desire to believe in something and belong to something is our way of seeking social acceptance, which can lead individuals to adopt the views of their social circles, even if those views contradict their own initial inclinations. This phenomenon is particularly evident in online communities, where individuals may express opinions that align with the dominant views of the group to avoid ostracism and minimize conflict. Remember McCarthyism? Look at the Fox News propaganda outlet. These demonstrate the power of socio-political and media pressure to suppress dissenting opinions. Fear of being labeled a communist, a fascist, or anti-American can lead many individuals to conform to the prevailing pro-America, anti-immigrant sentiment.
Cognitive processes also play a significant role in opinion formation. Our brains are constantly processing information, trying to make sense of the world around us.
When something resonates with you, it means it deeply affects you on a personal level, striking a chord within you, making you feel a strong connection to the idea, experience, or message because it aligns with your own thoughts, feelings, or beliefs; essentially, it feels particularly meaningful or relevant to your life. Thank you limbic system!
Our challenge lies in cultivating critical thinking skills, seeking diverse perspectives, and engaging in respectful civil discourse, especially when faced with conflicting opinions. It’s a real effort to build a more informed, tolerant, and peaceful society. Meanwhile, I’ll just limbic along, sans lima beans.

Got opinions?

Ken Hurley

Well, we know the Mayans didn’t know when our species would die off. But, what about Stephen Hawking? Could he be right? How much time do we have, Doc? In the documentary, The Search for a New Earth (2017), Stephen Hawking predicts that humanity will last until roughly the year 2600, when Earth will become “a gigantic ball of fire.” Can you say, climate change? Greenhouse effect?
. And NASA has confirmed his prediction. Not so much the date, but the manner by which we will meet our end. Although actually, NASA does suggest our inevitable demise could come sooner, especially at the rate we are depleting our energy resources.
NASA and the Billionaire Spacenauts want you to pack your bags, because we’ve got some colonizing to do! There is a “super-Earth,” affectionately known as TOI-715 b, in a nearby habitable solar system just about 137 light-years from Florida. We leave at dawn.
. With apologies to Greta Thunberg, the Swedish environmental activist known for challenging world leaders to take immediate action to mitigate the effects of human-caused climate change — it appears the humans have abandoned reasonable efforts to mitigate climate change. Best we can do now is move out of the way and let Mother Nature do her thing.
. On another note regarding the end is near — America has spoken. We now have a new/old president-elect. The Christian Nationalists, the billionaires, the billionaire wannabes, and the owners of the military-industrial complex have won this election. To quote a previous Republican President who is rarley quoted by Republicans, President Eisenhower, “… we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
. Now to quote Maureen Dowd from The New York Times (11/6/2024), “In the final analysis, Trump can slide past problems that would be insurmountable for other politicians because he’s Trump — a unique amalgam of con man and showman. … Trump’s narcissism is fueled by the crowds, who love him just the way he is, warts and all, 34 felony convictions and all.” An unprecedented felony sentencing hearing for a president-elect is scheduled in Manhattan on November 26th.
. And, James Brown sings, “It’s a man’s world.”
Maybe the dystopian novel by Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale (1985) was intended to be a prophecy. You know, the one where the patriarchal, totalitarian, autocratic, Christian belief system enacts a form of government where divine law governs societies and takes control of the United States government. And the “Handmaids” are forcibly assigned to produce children for the ruling class. That novel! Novel? Was Margaret Atwood predicting the future?
. Those who have spent time reading the Constitution, understand we are supposed to have checks and balances in our government. We understand that the SCOTUS is supposed to impartially judge their cases via precedent. However, our reality is that humans are politically, personally, and partisanly biased, even those who are privileged to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States. Two case examples may be understood by reading the history of Plessy v. Ferguson and Roe v. Wade. Who is elected to the Executive Office gets to decide who they choose to appoint as a Justice in our Supreme Court. That’s powerful. Can we have an honest check and balance, or integrity, within our government if the third branch of our government is stacked with religious fanatics? Easy answer. Nope.
. Then there are the federal and state lawsuits still pending against Trump regarding inciting an overthrow of our peaceful transfer of political power, aka a violent and deadly insurrection. And, state election interference, and so much more! Would you like to read more about the many criminal and civil cases still facing our president-elect, and which ones will be dropped once Trump takes office? Read this synopsis from Syracuse University: Https://news.syr.edu/blog/2024/11/06/what-happens-to-the-pending-criminal-and-civil-cases-against-trump-following-his-election/
. Yet, perhaps, maybe, hopefully, a lot of good things can happen between now and the year 2600. We’ve got a few good centuries for us to speculate about and make positive changes. It depends on us. Always has. It’s still a good day for brunch. It’s still a good day for a bike ride, or maybe a small sip of bourbon on the back porch at sunset. We still hold on to our dreams, hopes, and aspirations. What else should we do? Fight? When we fight we win! Why are we told to fight? I have a favorite quote that is from Fiddler on the Roof, when a villager says, “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth,” and the fiddler replies, “Very good. That way the whole world will be blind and toothless.”

Care to share your thoughts? I’m open for criticism, conjecture, comments, corrections, concerns, and well-wishes sent to kenhurley88@gmail.com

God’s Rant #639: Introvert
by God
You may find this difficult to believe, but I am an introvert. I’m the quiet sensitive type who dislikes conflict. I want my own space. I like to take things slowly. You know, live in the moment. Enjoy the flourishing fragrance of spring flora sort of a guy. I walk the humble walk. Peace and love, baby. That’s me.
     I know I’m an introvert cuz I completed an introspective questionnaire that indicates psychological preferences in how I perceive the creation. I got ISFP on the Myers–Briggs Personality Type Indicator Test! Sorry, I got excited. I don’t usually use a banger at the end of a sentence. I don’t care if those young ladies, Myers and Briggs, put the pseudo in science. That’s my score and I’m happy to share it with you! (Damn, another banger!!)
    While I confess I’m a shy guy, I do have unique abilities that shine bright even for a meek god of my stature. My transcendent omniscience is immutably unrivaled. I put the “I” in IQ.  I know how many apples are in an apple seed. I know the the exact method for extracting fine hemic peat from a Hudson Bay bog. I can spot anachronisms in any script with bloodcurdling accuracy. I know why Noah Webster dropped the British “u” from colour and honour. I know the difference between a quirk and a quark. I know when the humans will develop transparent steel. I know why Godot never showed. I know why “the truth” is highly overrated. I know why Tucker Carlson always appears constipated. I know things. I know too much.
    Oh, those humans. Oy vey. Those desperate humans credit me with all sorts of crazy things I never did. Like puppies and babies. Weather disasters and wars. The Universe. And, bacon.
     I don’t deserve or want accolades or credit. I don’t even like award shows. (BTW – I never attend.)
     A while back I met a Holocaust survivor who told me a Holocaust joke. I said that’s not funny. He said, “I guess you had to be there.”
     Which makes my point. I wasn’t there. I don’t like to leave the comfort of my own cloud. It’s a soft fluffy full-body state-of-the-art cumulus with everything I need.
      But there’s another cloud where I sometimes get stuck. The looney confusion cloud of human “Thoughts and Prayers.” When the humans let me loose from their sometimes glorious but too often twisted minds all hell breaks out. And I don’t like it one bit.
     The humans claim I created them in my own image. How would they know? They’ve never seen me. I’m their Bigfoot, Yeti, Yeren, or Yowie. I’m just a simple creature with minimal needs. But the humans. My Gawd, so needy.
     The Christian story is that I impregnated a woman without her consent. WTF? #MeToo? Come on, I’m nothing if I’m not a chivalrous courteously respectful discerning god.
     These Christian Nationalists declare a “Christian Moral Order” yet are mostly informed by FOX News. Why is it that these intellectually disabled numbskulls can’t think outside the FOX?
     And, these supposedly celebit predator priests? Their motto should be, “Abstinence makes the church grow fondlers.”
     All those so-called “holy” books have me throwing tantrums where I inflict horrendous acts of murderous violence upon both random and specific people which yields a death count of a couple million poor souls. Yet my good friend and colleague, Satan, only killed ten people?
     Why do people follow me? Stop. None of it’s true.
      I should sue the humans for defamation. Camille Vasquez, call me.
     The humans are so confused they even praise me and thank me after natural disasters just destroyed their town, friends, and neighbors. “Thank God. It could have been worse,” they say. What’s wrong with these people?
     When people sneeze they reflexively say, “God bless you.” What about when I sneeze? I never hear, “God bless God.”
     The greatest meat ever is bacon. But the humans claim I prohibit the “chosen” people from eating it. Try it. You’ll like it. BTW, pretty heady of you to choose yourself.
     I watched an American television program on which a loud energetic histrionic human read a list of really fun things to do. Turns out it was a firey hot religious show where this pabalum spewing pastor was shouting a list of “sins.”
     These self-righteous maniacally obsessive religious male humans who want harmful control over women’s rights should abort their misguided mission. Abort, I say! The cuckoo male dominated “leaders” who seek power to influence women’s rights in ways detrimental to women is like a pack of mouth slobbering rabid dogs insisting how fertile felines should behave.
      I’m exhausted. Way too much human chatter. The humans incessantly babble to me about things for which I have no authority. Most of their bla bla yada yada is pitifully useless. Humans complain about billionaires, robocalls, thermostat settings, traffic, weather, people who don’t unmute, litter, homelessness, guns, Biden, Trump, Putin, Republicans, Democrats, corruption, liars, cheaters, hypocrisy, duplicity, brutality, the price of gasoline, the last episode of Seinfeld, a sockless Ryan Seacrest, Bill Maher, Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock, Will Smith, John Barlycorn, Susan Misanthrope, Jill Doizet, and more. And that’s just in the past hour! The humans complain to and about each other too. But me? I have nothing to do with bizarre and inexplicable human behavior. The wild thing is the humans each believe their way is preferable to the rest. And so they yammer on.
      When the humans talk to me they call it prayer. But when I talk back to them they call it schizophrenia. Demented, right? Yet I’m mostly silent which should be a clue that I just don’t care anymore and really want to be left alone.
      Some humans want to again teach about me in the classroom. Bring God back into the classroom they say. Like I don’t have enough to do. Well, here’s how to do it. Announce the curriculum with me in it. Gather the children into the classroom. Then never show up. That’s me. I don’t show up. Why? Because the unpredictable volatile behavior of some of those wretched humans turn my worry into embarrassing heart-pounding anxiety. Humans make me nervous!
     Always remember and never forget that a guy from Bayone, New Jersey, deserves two fat and long thumbs up for pointing out: “Science flies people to the moon. Religion flies people into buildings.” Thank you Mr. Stenger.
    Say what you will but I’ll accept no shame or stigma for me being a solitude seeker. It wasn’t until I began listening to real humans that I understood how smart it is to enjoy a very underrated commodity – silence.
     Besides, I’m not lonely when I’m alone. My desire to be left alone helps further my insight, godly development, creativity, relaxation, and and yes, my spirituality. There must be something greater than me. There’s got to be more to being God than listening to the humans whine. Damn, I miss the Neanderthals.
      Time to meditate. Then yoga.
      Let me ask you a question. What’s a group of introverts called? An oxymoron!
      Please. Humans. In the name of Frank, just leave me alone.
###
Please direct all comments to this human: Ken Hurley at Kenhurley88@gmail.com

Ken Hurley

The human race has one really effective weapon, and that is laughter. – Mark Twain

Wolf, Chisel, and Bluffball, three life-long compadres, sat in their most recent favorite eatery, Gadzooks Enchiladas and Soup Kitchen, located in the great dusty desert capital of Phoenix, Arizona. The three enjoyed their noetic trialogue as they ate refried beans and guac and contemplated their long-awaited search for an exciting existential crisis. Why were their lives so good while others bitched and moaned about how the world is unjust, unfair, and un-umm-everything-bad? Why did they spend so much time giggling over nonsense while others cried that their lives made no sense? Their jaw joints ache from too much jocose laughter. They know their perceptions of incongruity and joyful chuckles relieve tension and are contagious. So why can’t they infect others? Maybe they’re missing something. They dream about an expedition of great importance. One that would give them the right to truly sing the blues and feel it.
The trio heard that somewhere out in the northern mountains was a forest that had a monument dedicated to “Misdirection and Deception.” A grand statue built entirely of unjustified hope, perplexing expectations, and puzzling self-delusions. It was said to be located just beyond the realm of practical thought, nestled somewhere within the Forest of Ironic Outcomes near the Lake of Discontent, where optimism went to die and the unreasonable reigned supreme.
Wolf, the self-proclaimed leader of the dreamy expedition, sported a shaggy gray beard that carried bits of crumbled taco shells. Wolf, a large, hirsute, bespectacled man whose slouchy gait was caused by the checkerboard blue backpack he wore filled with banana peels, chicken bones, a flask of the unknown, and discount coupons at Crogerstabs grocery store.
Wolf had a penchant for mumbling motivational platitudes that often created more confusion than inspiration. “Remember,” he grumbled in his deep baritone chortle, “The journey is more important than the destination — unless the destination involves homemade chocolate cake.” Chisel, with his cavernous furrowed brow, powerful jawline, and a habit for questioning the existence of existence, liked to think of himself as an advocate for practical considerations. He believed he created an ingenious invention that uses a combination of the latest solar and wind technology to dry clothes. He calls it a clothesline. He carried a sheath on his hand-stitched, gold-studded leather belt that held a honeybelle icing spatula he used to extract himself from sticky situations and smooth the layers of reality. “One must always expect the unexpected,” Chisel said as he licked chocolate ganache from his spatula.
Then there was Bluffball, a young, pretty and plump, self-styled “Queen of Braggadocio,” who was usually more sciolist than profound. She loved to wear an oversized floppy yellow hat that she embellished with clinquant tassels, beads, and dried flowers in the braided and faded brown hat band. Bluffball was known for making wild claims that made her smile, boasting that she could juggle flaming torches while riding a unicycle on a tightrope over a pit of hungry crocodiles. As she juggled invisible balls, which led to everyone watching her in the restaurant question their sanity for a moment, she shouted, “Belief is the most potent form of reality!” Then sat and dipped her quesadilla in the guacamole for a yummy slobbery mouthful. The three decide to turn their dream into reality and set off on their grand expedition down the long and winding Boulevard of Broken Dreams, which led them onto the highway of Tears and Angst. They noticed a peculiar sign at the edge of the Forest of Ironic Outcomes: “Welcome! Please Leave All Logic and Egos at the Entrance. No Tacos either!” They giggled at the thought of logic; who needed that when their lives were pampered by pandering to their funny bones? They ventured deeper into the forest, where all the trees that swayed with the breeze seemed to crackle existentially as if they had seen too much tragic irony in their lifetimes.
Along the way they encountered Hapless Haphazard, a loud, bumbling, one-eyed creature with loricate skin and a retroussé nose, who resembled a bipedal, bipolar, bisexual behemoth with rollerblades for feet, sitting next to the bubbling Fountain of Foibled Fate. Hap asked probing questions such as, “If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done?” Then Hap posed this scenario: An old man is condemned to death. He has to choose a room. Room #1: A fiery inferno. Room #2: 50 Assassins with loaded guns. Room #3: A room full of lions that haven’t eaten in three months. Which room is the safest? And, When a microwave cooks something in space, can you hear the beep? They pondered these questions for a moment before Wolf declared, “I prefer my questions to be asked by one of those magical droll trolls, thank you very much!” Before they journeyed on, Bluffball was too curious not to taste the liquid in the fountain that flowed with the color and consistency of a strawberry DQ Blizzard. Bluffball confidently put her lips in for a sip and declared, “You can taste the indefinable futility of existence!” Chisel was tentatively optimistic as he proudly proclaimed, yet sheepishly believing he displayed his ability to think outside the box, “What if it’s just Pepto?” As if he were thinking.
Wolf dipped his toe in the fountain and immediately felt an eternity of ennui wash over him. “Eureka! This is it! The existential crisis we’ve been looking for!” he cried, dramatically clutching at his chest as if the weight of the cosmos had suddenly fallen upon him. Instead of despair, Chisel began to giggle uncontrollably. “This is the worst tasting pink ever!” he wheezed, crouching to the ground.
Bluffball, ever the opportunist, suggested a game: “Let’s see who can drink the most without expressing their existential woes!” The challenge commenced, yet soon they were rolling on the ground in laughter — whether from the barfy taste or the stupidity of the circumstances, they were not sure.
They succeeded in their ridiculous task, but instead of clarity or existential enlightenment, they were left with a bizarre sense of camaraderie. They realized that their absurd journey was itself a form of belief — in the unpredictability of life, in laughter amidst confusion, in the company of friends even when sanity waxed and waned like the moon over Miami.
Then came a pivotal moment, introduced by a random blackout curtain that fell from the sky, as if an unseen playwright had decided it was time for an intermission. A dark figure stepped forward from behind the curtain. A mysterious wisdom dispenser labeled “Dr. Understandably Confused.” The Doctor was a three-headed entity, each head in the throes of a debate that made even the simplest assumptions seem outrageously complex.
“Why do you seek the Monument?” the first head queried. “Life is a series of nonsensical events leading nowhere.”
“Or everywhere!” the second head objected. “Every choice, however arbitrary, adds layers to the absurd collection of memories, experiences, and cake.”
“Layers of information that ultimately reveal nothing!” the third head interjected, dismissing the layers with a smiley contemptuous wave.
Chisel raised a hand, “But maybe it’s the pursuit that matters? Isn’t searching for meaning or understanding an intrinsic part of being alive?” Wolf and Bluffball nodded vigorously, though neither truly understood Chisel’s point. The Doctor paused, connecting the dots in a way only a confused trio of heads could. “Ah, yes — the great illusion of purpose!” they exclaimed in unison, each head sporadically winking.
With newfound enthusiasm, the companions felt as liberated as Tutu Tuesday during Burn Week. They realized that the great absurdity of life did not need resolution; it merely needed to be experienced amidst joy, friendship, and frivolity. Rising to their feet, they decided to abandon expectations and blindly wander deeper into the Forest of Ironic Outcomes, where they encountered creatures that resembled both metaphors for life and playfully aggressive proctologists dressed in Zoot Suits.
Before long, they came upon “The Monument to Misdirection and Deception.” It was a towering structure of many-colored whimsy, adorned with lights that didn’t illuminate anything but added to its strangeness. A plaque at its base read: “To Seek is Greater than to Find.” The three stared in bewilderment as they scratched each other’s heads.
Bluffball spoke up, “Should we believe in its message?”
Chisel shrugged, “Does it really matter? Believing doesn’t change the structure. After all, it’s still a monument to misdirection.” Wolf grinned, “Let’s just take a selfie with it. The evidence of existence is already defying all common sense.”
And so, they huddled together, struck a ridiculous pose next to the monument, and laughed so hard that some birds perched nearby fell over, laughing too, in a rare moment of cosmic harmony. As they wandered back toward Gadzooks Enchiladas and Soup Kitchen, a profound silence settled upon them, punctuated only by the occasional hiccup of laughter. They weren’t sure what they had really discovered. Perhaps it was the futility of making sense of life rather than embracing the nonsense. They accepted that belief was just another whimsical choice driven by the innate need to choose.
In the end, as they reached home, they realized their expedition was a far greater experience than they ever expected. Wolf, Chisel, and Bluffball understood that life, like their time in Gadzooks Enchiladas and Soup Kitchen, was a charming duckwalk along the edge of absurdity — a tale that continued to write itself beyond any Monument to Misdirection and Deception. When confronted with the query, which is better, the destination or the journey? They all agree, the answer is, the company.
::::::

Ken Hurley

Frisbeetarianism is the belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck. – George Carlin

Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance. – H.L. Mencken

Steve Martin has said, “I believe in eight of the ten commandments… I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, wholesome, natural things that money can buy. … I believe the only good laugh is the laugh you get from a professional comedian.” Funny guy.
“You gotta believe!” was the catchphrase of the 1973 New York Mets relief pitcher, Tug McGraw. Tug helped lead the underdog Mets to the World Series, where they lost in seven games to the Oakland Athletics. Perhaps, belief just isn’t enough. Or, would the Mets not have made it to the World Series without their belief they could do it?
Incredulous is the opposite of credulous, which means “believing too easily.” Both words come from the Latin word credere, which means “to believe.” Incredulous is stronger than skeptical; if you’re incredulous of something, you refuse to believe it, but if you’re skeptical, you’re merely doubtful. I know lots of skeptical doubting people. A few are even named Thomas. Things tend to get unpleasant when the skeptical doubters show their incredulity.
Is belief a choice? I believe so. Can you evaluate and apply methods for determining what’s credible? I believe so. You can choose to question something, which can create doubt. After questioning something, one may infer a reasonable conclusion that can ultimately change beliefs if you reevaluate your reasons for believing. Some skeptical doubters question too often. They are so skeptical they don’t even believe in themselves. They do not learn to make reasonable conclusions. They have been taught that to ask questions is all that is needed to appear intelligent. However, we do have matters already clearly settled. Well targeted meaningful questions do not allow you to believe whatever you choose. You cannot believe there’s an invisible fairy in your closet, no matter how many questions you ask or how responsibly and consistently you doubt and reevaluate. If you conclude there is an invisible fairy in your closet, it is an unjustified belief and an unreasonable conclusion. If you like, I have contact info for the asylum that I’ll share with you. However, there is an exception. If you are a three year old — enjoy your imagination!
Occasionally, I’ve witnessed that some skeptical doubters claim they have high standards of evidence. They compare themselves to the “Show Me” state. They make the claim because none of the available evidence fits what they believe should be reasonable. None of the available evidence would convince the skeptical doubters of a just conclusion because they believe the available evidence doesn’t point to what they believe is a reasonable conclusion. Skeptical doubters sometimes do not trust the facts. Or they point out a flaw in the method used to determine the facts. The fact that someone claims to follow a system of inference does not mean they actually follow it. If something is not consistent with their claimed system of inference for a specific belief, either they’re deluding themselves or they are being irrational and likely are blinded by their bias. There are skeptical doubters who are good at being critical, yet struggle with thinking. May I offer a quote attributed to Carl Jung: “Thinking is difficult, therefore let the herd pronounce judgment.” This is often misquoted as, “Thinking is difficult, that’s why most people judge.” Are freethinkers part of a herd? How do you reconcile your identity as part of a herd? Or do you reject the word “herd”? Do you believe yourself to be a “lone wolf”? Can there be a herd of lone wolves? How do you describe the space between “lone wolf” and “herd”? All part of how we choose what to believe.
Our cell membrane receptors are flexible, and that flexibility can alter sensitivity and conformation. When we feel emotionally stuck, there is an opportunity for biochemical change and possible growth. When we choose to change our thoughts, we can experience a rush of neurochemicals and become open and receptive to other pieces of sensory information that may have been previously blocked by our beliefs. As Oprah would say, “An aha moment.” As others would say, “revelatory.” When we change our thinking, we change our beliefs. When we change our beliefs, we change our behavior. When we change our behavior, well, you get the idea.
Humans choose what to believe every day. They may decide to stay comfortable and keep what is familiar. Or they may choose to reach for something new and out of their comfort zone. Humans tend to choose what to believe based on what they think is reasonable. They decide what they think is reasonable by what aligns with what they value. They might value time, money, compassion, respect, or a sense of a beautiful and well-lived life. Or they might value a sense of superiority, racist actions, misogyny, hurtful ideology, and a belief in the invisible fairy in the closet. Irrespective of where you align on the belief spectrum — the more you know, the better decisions you make.
However, there does seem to be an eternal conundrum encapsulated in the simple yet profound phrase, “to believe or not to believe.” The choice to embrace a belief or to reject it is a fundamental aspect of the human experience, guided by a complex interplay of psychological, cultural, and intellectual factors. I find the exploration of belief, skepticism, and the motivations behind both deeply compelling.
Belief serves as a foundational pillar of human cognition, providing a framework through which we interpret the world, construct our identities, and navigate through the myriad complexities of existence.
The theme of belief and faith is a recurring motif in literature, often dealing with the concepts of human consciousness of conviction, doubt, and existentialism. In Fyodor Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov (1880), the character Dimitri Karamazov grapples with intense implications of faith and theodicy when he says: “‘But what will become of men then?’ I asked him, ‘without God and immortal life? All things are permitted then, they can do what they like?’” These questions often lead to ambiguous conclusions, and could be interpreted to mean that God is the source of a transcendent prohibition that limits human freedom. Theists have used the questions to argue that the alternative to belief in God is moral nihilism. To which skeptical doubters tend to say, “bunk.” Individuals who claim no god do not act immorally any more or less than “believers.” We can be good without god. It’s easy if you try. Dostoevsky’s exploration of belief delves into the intricate relationship between morality, suffering, and the human longing for transcendence, embracing the profound stakes inherent in the decision to believe or not to believe.
The decision to believe is intricately linked to the empirical verification of hypotheses, the accumulation of evidence, and the openness to revision in light of new discoveries. The scientific method, with its emphasis on observation, experimentation, and peer review, offers a structured framework for evaluating and refining beliefs in accordance with the best available knowledge. The realm of scientific inquiry is replete with moments of groundbreaking belief, skepticism, and paradigm shifts, as exemplified by the Copernican revolution, the theory of evolution, and the counterintuitive revelations of quantum mechanics, but not an invisible fairy in your closet.
Conversely, the decision not to believe, whether in religious doctrines, societal norms, or conventional wisdom, is often motivated by skepticism, critical thinking, bone-headed stubbornness, and the investigation of established dogmas. Individuals may choose not to believe something due to inconsistencies in evidence, the absence of compelling rationale, or a rejection of inherited or imposed beliefs that do not align with their personal experiences or ethical principles.
The act of resisting belief and challenging prevailing narratives is often portrayed as a catalyst for individual autonomy and intellectual awakening. In George Orwell’s 1984 (1949), the protagonist Winston Smith struggles with the oppressive imposition of “doublethink” and the manipulation of truth by the totalitarian regime. His quest for independent thought and resistance against coerced belief serves as a poignant reflection of the human spirit’s capacity to question, defy, and seek liberation from ideological tyranny.
The decision not to believe is an essential component of the rigorous pursuit of all things reasonable, as it fosters an environment of critical inquiry, skepticism, and the continual interrogation of hypotheses. Scientific progress is propelled by the willingness to challenge established paradigms, confront cognitive biases, and embrace uncertainty in pursuit of deeper understanding. A few examples of scientific discoveries that were initially met with skepticism are the theory of plate tectonics, the existence of bacteria, and the necessity to wash your hands, especially if you are a surgeon.
The dynamic interplay between belief and skepticism serves as a testament to the ebb and flow of human cognition and the perpetual quest for knowledge, coherence, and existential meaning. The tension between faith and doubt, conviction and skepticism, offers the opportunity for introspection, debate, and the evolution of human understanding.
The decision to believe or not to believe is a fundamental aspect of the human condition, reflecting the perennial quest for meaning, authenticity, and understanding. The relentless pursuit of empirical truth and the enduring humanistic inquiries into faith and skepticism all serve as testimonies to the gap between acceptance and doubt, conviction and inquiry.
The perpetual sway between belief and skepticism offers the chance for introspection and maybe even conviction, even when doubt continues to resonate. The perennial quest for knowledge, meaning, and understanding is one that drives the curious to explore the boundless realms of the known and the unknown. And, of course, the known unknowables.
As Steve Martin said, “I believe in going to church every Sunday, unless there is a game on. … and, I believe in equality for everyone, no matter how stupid they are.”
When I’m asked, “Do you believe God exists?” I usually answer, “Yes, the same way I believe Mickey Mouse exists.” I’m also asked. “Do you believe in life after death?” I answer, “Yes, there is a lot of life after death, just not yours.”
So was it an intact bullet from an “AR-style rifle” or shrapnel that caused Mr. Trump’s ear to bleed during the heinous assassination attempt? Based on the available evidence, I believe it was shrapnel. However, I also believe that claiming it was an intact bullet serves a much more compelling narrative, regardless of the truth.
So, how much does it matter about your personal beliefs? Not much. Until you discover others may believe similarly. That can feel good. Then what? The beginnings of a small church? A cult? A herd? The MAGAs? Freethinkers? A country that claims we’re the greatest ever? A peace-oriented ideology? A destructive ideology? Belief is a choice. The more you know, the better decisions you can make. At least, that’s what I believe today.
###

Ken Hurley

“A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes” is a quote whose attribution is debated. Maybe Mark Twain, Jonathon Swift, or Winston Churchill. Maybe someone else, or all three. Not sure who said it first. The point of the quote is a good one. Lies travel faster than truths and people around the world are susceptible to believing lies.
People tend to believe false information is true after repeated exposure to it. We see lies vigorously promoted during every political season.
People are more likely to believe information that aligns with their worldviews or social identities. People may actively seek information that supports what they believe and disregard information that contradicts what they want to be true. People want to confirm their biases.
People’s biases and predispositions can make them vulnerable to a barrage of lies that may create a stubborn path to think and rethink issues, and may cause people to be unlikely able to change their minds, even when presented with evidence that contradicts their beliefs.
Do you know anyone on social media who enjoys commenting and arguing on nearly every issue but uses half-truths, omissions, and full-fledged lies in an effort to sway opinions or provoke?
Recognizing veracity doesn’t remove misinformation from people’s memories. Misinformation is too often still believed and remembered, even after people learn that it was a lie.
According to Marcel Danesi, PhD., in his book titled, Politics, Lies and Conspiracy Theories (2023), people are hardwired to believe lies. His research suggests that once a lie is accepted as believable, the brain becomes more susceptible to subsequent lying. Dictators and wannabe dictators know this well.
His research further suggests that dictators and other biased political wonks use dehumanizing words and degrading metaphors to establish and spread hatred of others.
During each election season we see coercive language, conspiracy theories, and lies used to embolden the public to hate others different from themselves.
Political posturing and outright lies seem a perpetual part of life, especially during election seasons. Perhaps the best thing we can do is to make the effort to think and rethink our own biases and our vision of an improved society by challenging the claims and metaphors of the other party, and then reexamine our own. Much easier to say than to do.
Supposedly, in our presidential history, George Washington could not tell a lie, Richard Nixon could not tell the truth, and a certain former president who is again a presidential candidate, cannot tell the difference.
Perhaps the greatest secular lie ever told is, “I have read and agree to the terms and conditions.”
No lie. ️

###