“If all you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail,” is an adage my mother imparted to me.  When I became a psychologist I saw behavior as a mental abnormality. When I became a neuropsychologist those same behaviors became physical in origin.  My tool box held more tools.

“Opinions are like assholes, everybody’s got one,” is another adage from my mother.  This proved problematic for me because I had a desire to be accepted and liked by others.  When they said things that I believed untrue, I had to either accept their logic or argue and possibly lose a friend.

Over time I realized that there are certain types of people that have no logic.  They may have education but no logic.  So I used logic to apply to arguments thinking this would save friendships.

Finding my logic sound and their logic faulty I came upon another adage my mother said,” it’s like pissing up a rope.”  She often left these sayings unexplained but years later I realized that arguing logically with an illogical thinker is like pissing up a rope.

So I opted to collect these illogical processes , keep quiet, accept my friends as they were and be content in the knowledge that I had used logic upon which to base my thinking.  When I met other logical thinkers I enjoyed their thinking.  If I were a dog my tail would have wagged.  I had good success in keeping friends but poor success in finding logical partners.  I actually moved to a country where the North Americans reveal the resultant damage of years of illogic.

The most common form of illogic is what Aristotle referred to as asserting the consequent.  Another fallacy is denying the antecedent.  I would practice and plot out the syllogism for example,

If it is a fish

Then it lives under water

Denying the consequent is reversing this to read

If it lives under water,

Then it is a fish. (of course this is false)

I learned several things in my logic studies.  First people do not have facts.  They tend to fill in the blanks with what they believe or hear through media.  Surprisingly, they do not change their thinking when given the facts.

Secondly, they misuse the facts they have by adhering to a fallacious form or reasoning.

Thirdly, nearly every discussion has the underlying understanding that I am ignorant.  For example, in a recent discussion on abortion I was informed of the overwhelming number of incest cases that needed abortions.  Since incest was not the question and I did not know the number of estimated pregnancies due to incest, I differed.

Looked up the U.S. statistics, which are tabulated state by state by the Guttmacher Institute, I learned the estimate  of unwanted pregnancies due to incest to be around one per cent.

The point being, you must not accept the initial premise until you have the facts.  The initial premise, the point of agreement in any argument, must be clearly spelled out.

Lastly, I learned that once a person’s mind is made on any subject, they seek reasons to substantiate their belief, regardless of the facts.  In order to bring this about, they will resort to a myriad of logical fallacies.

Klingons are by culture politically incorrect.  But they would be accepted in America, not as a counter culture, but as different.  And accepting the different is acceptable, even fashionable, in the U.S.

The Klingons could talk against gays, women and various selected minorities and their comments would be accepted by the media and powers that be.  But if an individual, not of the accepted group, made these comments she would be vilified.  This vilification would be enhanced if she was not a member of the prevailing media political culture.

To be clear, if you want to exercise your free speech, do it as a minority or a Klingon

If you had two people running for political office and one was very religious and another was not.  And you came to find out that the religious person followed the 10 commandments strictly while the other had a track record of lies(characterized as misstatements) and relationships with people who broke the law.

Would you call one immoral?  Would you call the other moral?  Just on this information who would you want as your representative?

I am a resident in another country.  I stood in line, applied, paid my fees and followed procedures that would be ridiculous in most countries.  I came across a culture that is different than where I grew up.  But it is their culture that I must assimilate into.

An open or porous border is not in the interest of the people, culture or economics of the people in any country.  In today’s world, there is a need to protect entry into most countries.  Some countries have the borders set up to keep the people from leaving.

I see no reason to reward bad behavior.  I know people here who did not follow the correct procedures to become residents of this country.  Most will be discovered, possibly jailed but definitely deported.  They are here illegally.

People here illegally are removed.  You could be robbed or injured and nothing will happen to you but overstay your visa and suddenly there are laws that must be followed.  That’s the way it is.

I feel for the illegal citizen.  Here, the reasons for illegality center around convenience.  I think that is true in the U.S. as well.  It is easier to be illegal than legal.  I get it, I understand.  At the same time I will not punish those who stand in line legally to get into the U.S. but reward those who skirt the law.  That’s just me I guess.

My stand on immigration is simple.  If you are here legally, welcome.  If you are not then get to the back of the line and wait your turn.

I asked my friend at breakfast “why do people do graffiti?”

His response sounded good enough that I did not want to research it – just accept it.  He said, “It’s a form of power, a way to express yourself when no one will listen.  Also there is a thrill of getting caught.”

I noticed that graffiti in Cuenca Ecuador tended to be removed quickly.  The writings were aimed at the government.

I was told that every graffiti expressionist could be identified, usually because of the way they drew or the misspellings in their statements.  Trying to decipher a foreign language that violates common grammar rules slowed up my Spanish learning.

It dawned on me that FaceBook is the modern day graffiti.  I click on and see the more socially accepted way of showing power.  The expression is cleaner, less artistic and you put your name and picture on the comments.

There are many forms of expression from really nice pictures to hateful comments about politics.  The bottom line to me is that they are forms of power.  It is like they are saying, “See I am involved.” They sit at the computer and communicate without doing anything about the issue they express.  Like the disenfranchised street graffiti expressionist, they don’t have the kind of energy needed to do something.  But they can comment.

I follow my daughter on FB. I feel bad that she has to share her feelings in this format as opposed to having a friend to share with, in a face to face.  I also noticed that the younger crowd avoids the older crowd on FB.  All these communication tools and we don’t communicate, possibly because we believe our power of expression will rule the day.

Here’s the kicker.  I have a street wise rescue dog.  He is cunning and quick.  I looked on my computer and the screen revealed these words “Gruffiti is communication from the disenfranchised.”

You don’t think that…  nah?