An Expectation in respect of the future always is rooted in some already available information or knowledge that, ideally, objectively is true. In this respect, note truth is not tantamount to fact. ‘Mr. A shot Mr. B’ does not, in of itself connote murder. Many Mr. A’s (ordinary citizens, not policemen or soldiers) have, rightly so, been absolved in Court of any wrongdoing whatsoever in shootings of many Mr. B’s.
But then, I digress.
When parents enroll their children in school, it is with the expectation that they acquire self awareness, ability, skills, and expertise that transforms them into well rounded individuals who, having satisfied society’s conditions, have acquired the right to earn a living. This expectation is built on objective evidence, evinced in lives of parents and others, that formal education does indeed enable self awareness, ability, skills, and expertise.
Ideally, whenever a man proposes marriage to a woman, the proposal is built on the expectation that, together, the two generate synergies, such that with the return to partnership in marriage denoted by r, rather than being 1+1=2 while they as yet remain apart, together, (1+r)(1+r) generates [2+2r+r^2]>2. The basis of the expectation? In context of a seeking out of each other, knowledge gleaned of each other in context of friendship and courtship; or, in context of marriages that are planned, with the two families respecting of each other, the bond of friendship that subsists already between two sets of families, the bond that constrains the man and the woman to do their utmost best to make the most of the marriage. How then do we arrive at divorces? Because people allow themselves not to be bound by their initial expectations, or do not base their marriage decisions on expectations. Whenever a couple choose not to grow together, they produce a violation of their initial expectation, decide that r, the return to marriage no longer is important, or reveal they never really viewed the marriage as a ‘till death do us part’ partnership. It is normative that it is impossible for partners who do not coordinate their activities to remain in partnership. In the contradiction that is assertion of the self to be more important than the partnership, there is arrival at either of self-violation of the initial expectation — voiding of ‘r’ as having of any importance, or absence of any initial expectation.
Just because we all are able to get married, does not imply we all know how best to arrive at marriage.
I should know. I am divorced.
Whenever a person chooses to invest in stock markets, ideally, this decision is based on some verifiable information that relates to stocks. In presence of leveraging of the decision to invest in stocks on some verifiable information, such as past performance, staying power of the product or company etc., the decision to invest in stocks has character of an expectation.
Expectations always are rooted in, ideally, some objectively verifiable information or knowledge.
Consider then, Beliefs. A belief is some proposition, which subsists in a person’s mind, about how exactly the world works.
While a belief can be rooted in a person’s observances (observations that affect how life is lived), the belief — perception of how the world works — that is arrived at cannot be asserted to be the only reasonable interpretation of said observances.
In respect of beliefs and observances, consider the belief, in ancient times, that the earth was flat. This belief was rooted in certain observances, such as, the seeming observance that the earth is motionless; the observance that everywhere on earth, man stands upright; and the seeming observance that the sun revolves around the earth.
None of highlighted seeming observances have turned out to be true, because, right from the onset, none were exclusionary of truths of which we now are cognizant. First, rotation and/or revolution of the sun does not imply non-rotation and/or non-revolution of the earth. Second, whenever two objects are in motion, but at different speeds, and one is much larger than the other, ‘parallax’ created can create the appearance that one, in relation to the other, is motionless. Third, gravity and earth’s atmosphere make it possible for man to stand upright everywhere on face of the earth.
Fourth, with every man always looking out into space, location on earth, and location of the earth in space or time become irrelevant to determination of human existence. For determination of essence of life, neither of rotation nor revolution of the earth is of any consequence, the earth then just as well might be reckoned to be still. In the seeming stillness of the earth, you and I have opportunity to focus on ‘becoming and doing’, as opposed to fretting over where exactly we find ourselves in space and time.
When you are on a plane, you are conscious of a journey in space and time, your focus is on arriving, not doing, not becoming.
.The earth appears to be still, because only in it’s stillness does our journey become more about ourselves — our becoming and doing — than about our positioning in space and time.
Whenever an observance induces a belief, extrapolation of the observance for arrival at a belief does not enable arrival at propositions or assertions that are exclusionary in nature; that is, does not enable propositions that exclude just about all other feasible explanations for said observances.
For concreteness, consider the belief, in some quarters, that White men are, intrinsically, superior to other races.
There exists some observational support for this proposition, namely, if you look around the world, just about every country, which seems to function as a civilization, is Caucasian ‘White Man Country’. The USA, England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Finland etc., all are ‘White Man Country’.
The empirical evidence is strong. White men really ought to be proud of themselves, of the things that they have accomplished.
Consider, however, that the mere fact, to wit, White Man Country is more developed and civilized, does not necessarily imply presence of some intrinsic superiority. As I have articulated in much greater length in this preceding post, there exists one commonality to all of White Man Country that is inconsistent with intrinsic superiority of the White man. This commonality runs as follows.
While Christianity did not originate in White Man Country, and while White Man Country has, in presence of seeming incapacity at responding to some intellectual challenges progressively trashed commonsensical essence of teachings of Jesus Christ, as such currently has been experiencing trashing of ‘Communality’ that is essential for well functioning of any civilization, all of White Man Country used to be Jesus Country. If Jesus indeed is who He says He is, meaning attempts at economic development have little chance of success if they are not predicated on love for oneself and neighbors, as opposed to desire for aggrandizement of some segment of society, the evidence that we see — White Man Country as sole purveyor of civilizations — is exactly what we should expect to see.
If you are not, yourself, a White supremacist, if you decide not to consider ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ and ‘love yourself as someone deserving of love, that is, as someone having of intrinsic worth’ as source of greatness of White man country, well, the only other interpretation that is feasible is, ‘White man is superior’.
But which of this is supported by all of the scientific evidence?
The genetic, historical, and archaeological evidence debunks any notions of intrinsic superiority of the White man, declares all of mankind originated from exactly the same ancestors.
With respect to the socio-archaeological evidence, it is a stylized discovery that all societies which transform into true civilizations are societies within which the greater good of the society is factored into individuals’ decisions as to right courses of actions. This, of course is confirmation for importance of ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ and ‘love yourself as someone deserving of love, that is, as someone having of intrinsic worth’ for success of attempts at economic development.
The scientific evidence declares then that feelings of intrinsic superiority within any segment of any society are no more than beliefs that are rooted in non-unique interpretations of observances. In the ruling out of intrinsic superiority as source of White Man Country we are left, in entirety, with historical affinity for ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ and ‘love yourself as someone deserving of love, that is, as someone having of intrinsic worth’ as sources of greatness of White Man Country.
Just because a belief is rooted in some observance does not imply that the belief is truth.
Prevalence of glorification of ‘wallowing in self pity’ in many movies eats at the ‘love yourself as someone deserving of love, that is, as someone having of intrinsic worth’ foundation that is essential to success of economic development.
So then, you retort that White Man Country practiced slavery. But then I ask, when, starting in 1833, White Man Country, on basis of Christian Scriptures, and starting with the United Kingdom, abolished slavery, was slavery still not yet legal in Arabia, Asia, Latin America, South America, and Africa?
In the commity of nations, while the White Man has been hugely imperfect in his or her commitment to equality of all men, still yet, he has been more humane than just about any other commity of nations.
The supporting evidence is straightforward. Most of Asia practices caste systems that typically are rooted in religion. Africa is filled with the equivalent of racism — tribalism and nepotism. Latin and South America? Well, they continue to function on power, as opposed to love rubrics. The strong either become successful in politics, then take everything, or peddle drugs, then provide schools, doctors, and nurses to those ignored by the politicians.
The evidence from non-White Man Country is consistent with the ‘affinity to teachings of Jesus Christ’ evidence, and the scientific evidence for ubiquity of association of White Man Country with the very best civilizations. Non-White Man Country has, historically, not demonstrated affinity for societies that do not embed some sort of stratification that derives, not from achievements, but from circumstances of birth.
In the rearing of the head, once again, of calls to feelings of superiority, White Man Country — the USA particularly — has been toying with destruction of all of the gains that it has built on the expectation that all men are equal in intrinsic worth.
In presence of the scientific evidence, ‘all men are equal in intrinsic worth’ has character, not of a belief, but of an expectation.
In this respect, consider that it was not until the White man abolished slavery that the agricultural revolution, which enabled development of modern civilization, was kickstarted by invention of the tractor in 1892.
The White man delayed abolition of slavery, precisely because he wondered how exactly he, not desirous of hard labor, would cope with running of his plantations. Turns out doing the right thing produced the answer that could have been arrived at a 100 years earlier if the focus had been on ‘what is right’, as opposed to ‘what seems to be expedient’.
Doing of what is right eventually would produce the answer: the tractor. Consequent on arrival at the tractor, if you asked the White man to choose between the tractor, and maintenance of 50 men to work on his plantations, the answer from every reasonable White farmer is not difficult to project. Today, a 65 year old White man sitting on different tractors at different times of the year can produce enough food to feed an entire town.
If society is to function right, beliefs are kept personal, and interactions that subsist in society are guided, in entirety, by expectations. More importantly, in equilibrium, and in personal spaces, only expectations survive and thrive.
In this respect, consider the push towards Socialism in the United States. It is matter of fact that the USA is more developed than every Socialist nation on the face of the earth. While income inequality in the USA is more severe than in the Socialist countries, it only is so much more severe.
All Socialist countries still are characterized by relatively severe realizations of income inequality.
In 2013, the USA ranked 58 with respect to income inequality. France, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom ranked, respectively, 26, 32, 38, & 29. On Per Capita Income (GDP Per Capita), the USA ranked 7. France, Italy, Spain, and the UK ranked, respectively, 15, 17, 18, & 16. If Socialism means less to share, but some mediation of income inequality that, still, will not place the USA in top 10 or top 25 of countries with respect to income inequality, does society not end up yet again, at exactly the same spot?
Expectations always are rooted in some objective evidence. On basis of the objective evidence, it cannot be asserted that the solution to ills in America is a knee jerk reaction towards Socialism.
The solution to income inequality in the USA cannot be actions that reduce the size of the pie, rather must reside in actions that enable a more equitable sharing of the pie, and actions that increase the size of the pie. So then, Capitalism that is accompanied by income shares for labor that are more equitable.
If the political establishment will not take on the private sector for arrival at more equitable sharing of the pie that already exists, how exactly will Socialism arrive at mediation of income inequality?
If modern civilization is to survive and thrive, if developing countries truly are to transform themselves into civilizations, there is desire for living by expectations, and for rooting out of beliefs that, on basis of objective evidence, do not have any likelihood of arrival at character of expectations.