Welcome statement


Parting Words from Moristotle (07/31/2023)
tells how to access our archives
of art, poems, stories, serials, travelogues,
essays, reviews, interviews, correspondence….

Monday, July 9, 2012

Cheating and fair play

Limerick on narrow self-interest
With all immediate interests in a balance weighed,
Your job matters less to you than the money you're paid.
    It's less that you get thine
    And more that I get mine.
Doesn't matter who the girl is, so long as youth gets laid.
One of the fish served up in my new Friday feature column has provoked a challenge.
    Lyndia Storey, in the "Friends of the Sea" excerpt, called on people to take the simple action of signing a petition "to stop the deliberate killing and maiming of our sea life."
    A reader challenged us to do more than just wait and hope for a petition to have impact: He challenges us to stop eating shrimp.
    How many people who currently eat shrimp would stop eating shrimp if the challenge reached them? Or, less theoretically, what percentage of people whom the challenge does reach (and who currently eat shrimp) will stop eating shrimp as a result?
    Of course we don't know. I couldn't poll everybody who viewed the page, and not everyone would respond. But I'm almost certain it wouldn't be everyone, and I'm not entirely confident that it wouldn't be zero. After all, not everyone who received Lyndia Storey's email to simply sign a petition responded by signing the petition. Not everyone forwarded the plea to their friends. I didn't. The only thing I did was excerpt her plea for my new feature.
    Today, though, upon receiving Ms. Storey's follow-up appeal for the final day before submitting her petition (and maybe feeling guilty?), I did share her final call on my Facebook page and on the pages of a few of my Facebook friends.

But many will not do anything. And I may not do more. Why is that?
    There are many reasons, some of them specific to the person involved, such as he or she was called to help a child and got distracted. Any number of things like that. Lots of things are going on in everyone's life today.
    Deeper, underlying reasons affect everyone. Humans (and other organisms) evolved to act in their own perceived self interest or in the perceived self interest of people who are related to them, by degree of relatedness, whether biological or social. Children first, cousins second...your pet before strangers, neighbors before solicitors.
    Acting in your own best interest leads you sometimes to cheat. Some species of bird cheat by laying their eggs in other birds' nests, so the other birds will expend their energy feeding the young. Can you tell me you've never cheated? I can't tell you I haven't.
    Sometimes a challenge to help (to sign a petition) provokes the thought,
I'm busy, let other people who have the time sign it. Why does it have to be me? I'll just cheat this time.
    I've thought that more than a few times.
    And we want fair play. We know that good things affecting everyone rarely happen without the involvement of many or even nearly all. A challenge to help can provoke the thought,
Not enough people are going to get involved in this, they don't care enough, they're going to go on cheating, taking care of their own. A few trying to play fair and getting involved won't be nearly enough to turn the tide. So why bother?
    I've occasionally had that despairing thought.

I could say that wanting fair play and cheating are two sides of the same coin, except that a better metaphor might be two edges of the sharp sword of non-involvement.
    The sword is sharp and dangerous because it kills the chances of our forming a comprehension of self-interest deep enough to include our dependence on the well-being of other people and other species of life on the planet, and the well-being of Mother Earth herself, that she may continue to be capable of nurturing all life here.

9 comments:

  1. Morris, it sounds like you're writing about virtue and virtuous living. What exactly would that be? Ask 100 people at random.

    Whatever it is, it seldom produces political consequences, and when it does, they are likely as not to be disastrous. Prohibition, for example. Manifest Destiny, for example. Perhaps we should tend to our own gardens, as Voltaire teaches. Perhaps we should surrender to the tides that swirl around us.

    "Sweet, sweet surrender. Live, live without care. Like a fish in the water. Like a bird in the air."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, Ken! Right on. The tides will swirl on in any case, from time to time broken or channeled by a Napoleon or a Roosevelt or some other man or woman whom chance favors for a moment.
          Thanks for asking only rhetorically what virtue might be.

      Delete
  2. How ironic for a North Carolina-based blog to raise the issue of cheating and fair play. Isn't "if you aren't cheating you aren't trying" the unofficial motto of the state's homegrown sport of auto racing?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha, Motomynd, I'm afraid I wouldn't know what North Carolina auto racing's motto (official or otherwise) might be. I have zero interest in auto racing. I remember being dumbfounded a dozen years ago when a married couple at work reported that they had spent much of their recent vacation at the races.
          I won't be the least surprised, however, to be told now that you are somewhat of an afficianado of auto racing, except for the possibility that you might look down on auto racing from the seat of your moto!
          I want to be completely clear about this and make no mistake: You have made me be very, very interested indeed in motos! And I'm well aware that motomynd.com's motto is stated above its masthead: "The motorcycle is a vehicle for living." I also know that Motomynd never cheats!

      Delete
  3. Moristotle, while I may literally look down on many autos from my motorcycle seat, a perch which is a foot higher above the roadway than the driver's seat of any of the two-seat sports cars I have owned, I wouldn't dare claim to figuratively look down on auto racing. That is a sport that is a lot tougher and much more dangerous than it looks on TV or from the stands, particularly in the open-wheel Indycar class where Danica Patrick used to race before she agreed to drive a car of cookie-cutter design and joined the slam-bang ranks of NASCAR.

    That said, yes, for many of us, even the skills of the greatest NASCAR drivers, such as the revered Dale Earnhardt, Sr., who was tragically killed at Daytona 11 years ago, and Jeff Gordon, who continues to excel a decade past his prime, pale in comparison to the abilities of MotoGP champions such as Valentino Rossi and Casey Stoner.

    It is impressive to watch five-time NASCAR champ Jimmy Johnson hit 190 miles per hour in a straightaway and then steer his car through the next corner, even if he is protected by nearly two tons of incredible engineering and the best safety gear available. It is awe-inspiring to see Valentino Rossi or Casey Stoner clock 215 miles per hour in a straightaway and then slide - yes, slide - their Ducati or Honda race bikes through the next corner at 160 miles per hour, protected only by a helmet, riding gear and their incredible reflexes.

    That is why Indycar and NASCAR racers are called drivers, and MotoGP riders are called pilots.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Motomynd, Thanks for yet another colorful, on-the-spot comment manifesting a love for careful observation and reflection on any activity demanding courage and skill.
          I'm sufficiently awe-inspired by just reading such accounts of these particular activities—or, it occurs to me (just having written my July 22 movie review, of Warrior), sufficiently awe-inspired by watching a good dramatic movie of NASCAR or MotoGP racing. Have you seen the 2005 Anthony Hopkins movie, The World's Fastest Indian? "Indian" refers to New Zealand speed bike racer Burt Munro's highly modified Indian Scout motorcycle" (from Wikipedia).
          I think you'd love the movie.

      Delete
  4. Moristotle, "The World's Fastest Indian" tops many a list of "greatest motorcycle moves" and Hopkins is perfect for the role of Munro. Just from its name alone, the motorcycle movie "On Any Sunday" might fit well with your Sunday review theme. This documentary about racers and enthusiasts was nominated for an Academy Award in 1972. Follow-ups to were released in 1981 and 2000.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hmmm....that last line should obviously read "Follow-ups to it were released in 1981 and 2000." And now that I think about it, a documentary about the original documentary was released in 2001.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Motomynd, thanks for reminding me via email that it was here you identified the movie for me. Netflix has the original and the first sequel ("On Any Sunday II," 1981), for instant download. Didn't see mention of the 2000 follow-up, but maybe Netflix offers it on DVD, to which I don't subscribe at the moment. Same title (with a "III" suffix perhaps)? IMDb doesn't list that either.
          Ah, but Wikipedia has this:
      Several follow-ups to the film were produced:
          "On Any Sunday II," 1981, starring Bob Hannah and Larry Huffman
          "On Any Sunday: Revisited," 2000, by Dana Brown
          "On Any Sunday: Motocross," Malcolm, & More, 2001

          I look forward to watching.

      Delete