Favorite Quotes

I have an odd little hobby. I like to collect quotes. Sometimes they are random, sometimes they are unattributed, but sometimes — most times — when I think about them, they have meaning on multiple levels.

Here are a few of them I feel like sharing today 🙂

I have an odd little hobby. I like to collect quotes. Sometimes they are random, sometimes they are unattributed, but sometimes — most times — when I think about them, they have meaning on multiple levels.

Here are a few of them I feel like sharing today 🙂

“Life is what happens while you’re making plans” — Robert Baumgardner

“Life is politics. Those who claim they aren’t playing the game are simply playing it poorly.” — Author unknown

” Life is politics. And it has nothing to do with holding or seeking elective office. Life is politics at its very root, literally, because the word is derived from the Greek word for citizenship. Since there can be no true citizenship in the absence of participation, politics means being a part of the world around you.” — Carolyn Warner

“All I say is by way of discourse, and nothing by way of advice. I would not speak so boldly if it were your obligation to believe me.” — Michel Eyguem de Montaigne

“Those under 30, while not really stupid, tend to be judgment-impaired.” — Gregory Allen-Anderson

“I am too fond of the stars to be fearful of the dark.” — Sylvia Haegele (improperly attributed? Not sure, even Sylvia isn’t sure of correct attribution.)

“Celestial navigation is based on the premise that the Earth is the center of the universe. The premise is wrong, but the navigation works. An incorrect model can be a useful tool.” — Kelvin Throop III

“It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” — Carl Sagan, “The Demon-Haunted World”

“Anger at queries about our beliefs is the body’s warning signal: here lies dangerous and probably unexamined doctrinal baggage.” — Carl Sagan, “Broca’s Brain”

“I have 100% control over the reality I create and I hold others to the same standard.” — Shoshana Edwards

“The most difficult thing in the world is to know how to do a thing and to watch someone else do it wrong without comment.” — Theodore H. White

“The Proper Office of a ‘friend’ is to side with you when you are in the wrong. Nearly anyone will side with you when you are in the right.” — Mark Twain

“In life, you have exactly two worries: Are you well, or are you sick? If you are well, then no worries! If you are sick, then you have exactly two worries: Will you get better, or will you die? If you will get better, then no worries! If you will die, then you have exactly two worries: Will you go to Heaven, or will you go to Hell? If you will go to Heaven, then no worries! If you will go to Hell, you’ll be so damn busy shaking the hands of all the people you know down there, you won’t have time to worry.” — An Irish Parable, “Why Worry?”

What are some of your favorite quotes?

Mark Twain’s “A Little Story”

I ran across this little gem on a mailing list recently. Though written by Mark Twain, I cleaned it up a little bit, and thought I’d share.

The story may not make sense the first time you read it. However, on subsequent readings, it makes all kinds of sense. I love Twain’s works, and am glad i found this one.


Old Man, speaking to Young Man: I will tell you a little story:

Once upon a time an Infidel was guest in the house of a
Christian widow whose little boy was ill and near to death. The Infidel often
watched by the bedside and entertained the boy with talk, and he used these
opportunities to satisfy a strong longing in his nature — that desire which
is in us all to better other people’s condition by having them think as we
think. He was successful. But the dying boy, in his last moments, reproached
him and said:

I ran across this little gem on a mailing list recently. Though written by Mark Twain, I cleaned it up a little bit, and thought I’d share.

The story may not make sense the first time you read it. However, on subsequent readings, it makes all kinds of sense. I love Twain’s works, and am glad i found this one.


Old Man, speaking to Young Man: I will tell you a little story:

Once upon a time an Infidel was guest in the house of a Christian widow whose little boy was ill and near to death. The Infidel often watched by the bedside and entertained the boy with talk, and he used these opportunities to satisfy a strong longing in his nature — that desire which is in us all to better other people’s condition by having them think as we think. He was successful. But the dying boy, in his last moments, reproached him and said:

“I believed, and was happy in it; you have taken my belief away, and my comfort. Now I have nothing left, and I die miserable; for the things which you have told me do not take the place of that which I have lost.”

And the mother, also, reproached the Infidel, and said:

“My child is forever lost, and my heart is broken. How could you do this cruel thing? We have done you no harm, but only kindness; we made our house your home, you were welcome to all we had, and this is our reward.”

The heart of the Infidel was filled with remorse for what he had done, and he said:

“It was wrong — I see it now; but I was only trying to do him good. In my view he was in error; it seemed my duty to teach him the truth.”

Then the mother said:

“I had taught him, all his little life, what I believed to be the truth, and in his believing faith both of us were happy. Now he is dead, — and lost; and I am miserable. Our faith came down to us through centuries of believing ancestors; what right had you, or any one, to disturb it? Where was your honor, where was your shame?”

Young Man: He was a miscreant, and deserved death!

Old Man: He thought so himself, and said so.

Young Man: Ah — you see, his conscience was awakened!

Old Man: Yes, his Self-Disapproval was. It pained him to see the mother suffer. He was sorry he had done a thing which brought him pain. It did not occur to him to think of the mother when he was misteaching the boy, for he was absorbed in providing pleasure for himself, then. Providing it by satisfying what he believed to be a call of duty.

Young Man: Call it what you please, it is to me a case of awakened conscience. That awakened conscience could never get itself into that species of trouble again. A cure like that is a permanent cure.

Old Man: Pardon — I had not finished the story. We are creatures of outside influences — we originate nothing within. Whenever we take a new line of thought and drift into a new line of belief and action, the impulse is always suggested from the outside.

Remorse so preyed upon the Infidel that it dissolved his harshness toward the boy’s religion and made him come to regard it with tolerance, next with kindness, for the boy’s sake and the mother’s. Finally he found himself examining it. From that moment his progress in his new trend was steady and rapid. He became a believing Christian.

And now his remorse for having robbed the dying boy of his faith and his salvation was bitterer than ever. It gave him no rest, no peace. He must have rest and peace — it is the law of nature. There seemed but one way to get it; he must devote himself to saving imperiled souls.

He became a missionary.

He landed in a pagan country ill and helpless. A native widow took him into her humble home and nursed him back to convalescence. Then her young boy was taken hopelessly ill, and the grateful missionary helped her tend him. Here was his first opportunity to repair a part of the wrong done to the other boy by doing a precious service for this one by undermining his foolish faith in his false gods. He was successful.

But the dying boy in his last moments reproached him and said:

“I believed, and was happy in it; you have taken my belief away, and my comfort. Now I have nothing left, and I die miserable; for the things which you have told me do not take the place of that which I have lost.”

And the mother, also, reproached the missionary, and said:

“My child is forever lost, and my heart is broken. How could you do this cruel thing? We had done you no harm, but only kindness; we made our house your home, you were welcome to all we had, and this is our reward.”

The heart of the missionary was filled with remorse for what he had done, and he said:

“It was wrong — I see it now; but I was only trying to do him good. In

my view he was in error; it seemed my duty to teach him the truth.”

Then the mother said:

“I had taught him, all his little life, what I believed to be the truth, and in his believing faith both of us were happy. Now he is dead — and lost; and I am miserable. Our faith came down to us through centuries of believing ancestors; what right had you, or any one, to disturb it? Where was your honor, where was your shame?”

The missionary’s anguish of remorse and sense of treachery were as bitter and persecuting and unappeasable, now, as they had been in the former case.

Old Man:The story is finished. What is your comment?

Young Man: The man’s conscience is a fool! It was morbid. It didn’t know right from wrong.

Old Man: I am not sorry to hear you say that. If you grant that one man’s conscience doesn’t know right from wrong, it is an admission that there are others like it. This single admission pulls down the whole doctrine of infallibility of judgment in consciences. Meantime there is one thing which I ask you to notice.

Young Man: What is that?

Old Man: That in both cases the man’s act gave him no spiritual discomfort, and that he was quite satisfied with it and got pleasure out of it. But afterward when it resulted in pain to him, he was sorry. Sorry it had inflicted pain upon the others, but for no reason under the sun except that their pain gave him pain. Our consciences take no notice of pain inflicted upon others until it reaches a point where it gives pain to us. In all cases without exception we are absolutely indifferent to another person’s pain until his sufferings make us uncomfortable. Many an infidel would not have been troubled by that Christian mother’s distress. Don’t you believe that?

Young Man: Yes. You might almost say it of the average infidel, I think.

Old Man: And many a missionary, sternly fortified by his sense of duty, would not have been troubled by the pagan mother’s distress — Jesuit missionaries in Canada in the early French times, for instance; see episodes quoted by Parkman.

Young Man: Well, let us adjourn. Where have we arrived?

Old Man: At this. That we (mankind) have ticketed ourselves with a number of qualities to which we have given misleading names. Love, Hate, Charity, Compassion, Avarice, Benevolence, and so on. I mean we attach misleading meanings to the names. They are all forms of self-contentment, self-gratification, but the names so disguise them that they distract our attention from the fact.

Also we have smuggled a word into the dictionary which ought not to be there at all — Self-Sacrifice. It describes a thing which does not exist. But worst of all, we ignore and never mention the Sole Impulse which dictates and compels a man’s every act: the imperious necessity of securing his own approval, in every emergency and at all costs.

To it we owe all that we are. It is our breath, our heart, our blood. It is our only spur, our whip, our goad, our only impelling power; we have no other. Without it we should be mere inert images, corpses; no one would do anything, there would be no progress, the world would stand still. We ought to stand reverently uncovered when the name of that stupendous power is uttered.

Young Man: I am not convinced.

Old Man: You will be when you think.


Matthew P. Barnson

Thought for the moment:
Beware of computerized fortune-tellers!

Parenting Moments: the eight-egg challenge

So I decided I need to start archiving some of the cute stories about my kids. Yeah, I know, not everybody’s interested, but hey, it’s my blog 🙂

Sara volunteered to cook dinner tonight — bacon and eggs. My children seem to learn best the same way I do, by experience, and particularly by screwing up.

So I decided I need to start archiving some of the cute stories about my kids. Yeah, I know, not everybody’s interested, but hey, it’s my blog 🙂

Sara volunteered to cook dinner tonight — bacon and eggs. My children seem to learn best the same way I do, by experience, and particularly by screwing up.

We discussed the particulars of bacon and egg cooking in the front room. “OK, now Sara, the first part of this is a math problem: how many eggs do we need to cook? Well, I’ll eat two. You’ll probably eat two. Zach and Elijah will probably only eat one apiece or so. Christy will probably have two when she comes home, and there probably will be enough left over for little Joshua. How many eggs do you need to prepare?”

Sara thought for a moment, then replied, “Eight!”

Having just arrived home from a hard day, I headed up to the facilities to do the usual “just finished a one-hour commute after drinking way too much water” duties. Upon completion, I walked downstairs, and began setting up my laptop in the front room on a large table set aside for the purpose.

“Hey, Dad!” called Sara from the kitchen, “This is so cool! Did you know that I can carry eight eggs, cradled in my arms, from the refrigerator to the stove?”

I stifled a grin, knowing what was coming. “No, Sara, I didn’t know that. That’s pretty impressive. How did you manage to carry eight at once?”

The answer was the unmistakable sound of an egg smashing from a height of roughly four feet onto a vinyl floor echoing in my ears. I gently shook my head side to side, a half-cocked grin on my face as I plugged in the power cord and mouse on my laptop. I chuckled softly to myself.

“Well,” Sara intoned ruefully from the kitchen, “I can carry seven, at least.”

Movie Review: The Village

We rent, borrow, or buy many movies. It’s a better deal, at this
point, for us to just buy a movie than to take the family out to see the
movie new in the theater. Don’t get me wrong, we go out to movies, but
unless it’s a “must-see”, we just don’t go, and wait for it to come out
on DVD.

So anyway, Friday night Christy and I watched M. Night Shyamalan’s
“The Village” together. The thing I really enjoy about Shymalan’s
movies is that they are rarely about what you think they are about, and
that unpredictability keeps you guessing, without in-your-face gore and
horror-type stuff.

We rent, borrow, or buy many movies. It’s a better deal, at this point, for us to just buy a movie than to take the family out to see the movie new in the theater. Don’t get me wrong, we go out to movies, but unless it’s a “must-see”, we just don’t go, and wait for it to come out on DVD.

So anyway, Friday night Christy and I watched M. Night Shyamalan’s “The Village” together. The thing I really enjoy about Shymalan’s movies is that they are rarely about what you think they are about, and that unpredictability keeps you guessing, without in-your-face gore and horror-type stuff.

I’m not sure I want to give the movie a rating, really. It’s a movie that made me think. Made me think about how legends are born and grow. It made me think about issues that touched intimately on how I view the world.

If you haven’t seen it yet, please bookmark this review and come back another time. There are some spoilers contained herein that very well might ruin the movie for you. It’s a movie about a blind girl taking a scary trip through the woods in order to retrieve medicine to save her ailing fiance. In a nutshell, that’s what it’s about.


But that’s not at all what it’s about.

The movie opens, and one is left wondering whether the people displayed are Amish or something. Something’s not quite right — they all have stories of murdered loved ones, for instance — that causes one to resist stereotyping them into some sort of religious group. For one, there is no mention of religion anywhere in the movie, except one:

Those Whom We Do Not Discuss

As J.K. Rowling put it, using the voice of Hermione Granger, “Fear of a name only increases fear of the thing itself.” And, actually, they discuss Those Whom We Do Not Discuss quite often.

Now, I’ve read some reviews (after seeing the movie) that rip Shyamalan a new one for playing the same tired trick again and again: the surprise ending. The Big Shock. The Unexpected Twist. Yet, I think that in this movie, Shyamalan actually plays on the audience expectation of The Big Twist by delivering it early, and ending the movie with simple, classic drama. It seems as if he expects the audience to come to the conclusion early this time, and to wait to see how it plays out.

And, in my opinion, it delivers in a big way, leaving many unanswered questions and allegories to relatively modern-day events which kept me thinking about it for days afterwards:

  • Where did the Walker Foundation get the money to buy the whole reserve, and continue to keep security guards employed keeping it safe?
  • Who administers this Foundation on a day-to-day basis?
  • Why did The Boss let his employee steal the medicine right in front of him?
  • What did the employee do after his encounter with the blind girl?
  • Why did the people of the village choose to abstain from all contractions and slang in their speech?
  • That one fat guy who wears the suit… it didn’t look homemade. How old was that suit he wears for basically the whole movie?
  • Why can’t the schoolteacher have a relationship with the gal played by Sigourney Weaver? And when did Weaver get so @$!^*(!% old???
  • What happens after the story ends?

The movie is about heartache following humanity regardless of our attempts to escape it. It’s about a girl choosing to perpetuate a myth based on her subjective realities, even when confronted with the truth of their mythology.

It’s about the birth of legends, and how easy it is, with a little vigilance, to deceive others, particularly if one has the best of intentions.

That last point, to me, is the biggest, and has many allegories to my past, and that of many others I know. A man leads a group of others, united in heartache, to a new land in an attempt to get away from worldly influences. The leaders agree to perpetuate a myth in order to persuade the townsfolk to live in a way most suited to their control (of course, with the best of intentions to keep evil at bay). Yet despite their efforts, things fall apart in the specifics, and those who challenge the myth are alternately venerated and suppressed by those in power.

And finally, the one most motivated to do what needs to be done is let in on the secret, but even the leader involved doesn’t understand that her unique perspective will only reinforce the strength of the legend. By passing on the torch, the schoolteacher has created another generation that will continue to use the same myth to control their children.

The real question is: is this a good thing, or a bad thing? Does serving the “higher purpose” of keeping the community isolated from external “bad things”, in the long run, mean anything at all? Since even in such an isolated community, bad things continue to happen, does this just mean that such efforts to protect the sanctity of the “chosen people” are, ultimately, doomed to failure?

A very interesting movie, with very interesting ramifications. Then again, one of my friends said it’s a “snoozer”. I wonder why our perspectives are so different?

Philandering Presidents: DNA can’t lie

DNA doesn’t lie.

Back in the late 1990’s, I watched the impeachment of President Bill
Clinton due to the Monica
Lewinsky Scandal
with some incredulity. Ultimately, the impeachment
was due to perjury and obstruction of justice.

The DNA evidence on Monica Lewinsky’s dress proved to be the key to
those charges; were it not for definitive, absolute DNA evidence that
the President had behaved improperly, it is unlikely the case could have
been proven. It would have been a “he said, she said” situation. But
DNA markers were proof positive that, at the very least, Clinton had
been in a compromising position with Ms. Lewinsky.

DNA doesn’t lie.

Back in the late 1990’s, I watched the impeachment of President Bill Clinton due to the Monica Lewinsky Scandal with some incredulity. Ultimately, the impeachment was due to perjury and obstruction of justice.

The DNA evidence on Monica Lewinsky’s dress proved to be the key to those charges; were it not for definitive, absolute DNA evidence that the President had behaved improperly, it is unlikely the case could have been proven. It would have been a “he said, she said” situation. But DNA markers were proof positive that, at the very least, Clinton had been in a compromising position with Ms. Lewinsky.

In talking about this subject with relatives later, I submitted that “Bill Clinton was just following in the footsteps of many of the Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson had children by his slave, Benjamin Franklin was a well-known philanderer, and there are reasons to suspect other signers of the Declaration of Independence did not adhere to modern-day ‘traditional values’.”

In response, one of my relatives grew very upset at my allegation of infidelity on the part of the Founding Fathers, claiming those men were righteous, God-fearing individuals who did not deserve such horrible allegations levelled against them. He demanded a retraction, which I refused to provide, saying “I’ll look into it later”.

Well, “later” finally arrived. I was researching the origins of the terms “left-wing” and “right-wing” politics. Originally, these terms referred to where people sat in chambers after the French Revolution: members of the ruling aristocracy who favored the monarchy and traditional authority sat on the right, while those who favored democracy and individual liberty sat on the left. They were united in the fact they were wealthy landowners who would probably all today be labelled “right-wingers”.

Sorry for that tangent. Anyway, while researching, I came across a name I know: Fawn Brodie. Brodie is well-known in the LDS Apologist and Post-Mormon communities due to her 1946 biography of Joseph Smith, Jr., entitled “No Man Knows My History”. The book gained wide acceptance amongst many scholars as being the definitive work on Smith, while simultaneously being repudiated by church leadership. Though I’ve not read the book, it’s generally regarded as moderately authoritative, but a somewhat sloppy and unreliable work prone to selective source choice. However, there are several controversial aspects of the book, notably Joseph’s polyamory with several other men’s wives while those men were still living and/or on missions for the church, that have been thoroughly confirmed in the intervening fifty years of research.

Brodie was further known for biographies of other obscure historical figures; due to her choice of little-known individuals, like Smith, her books gained little scholarly inquiry or publicity. No other work of hers caused as much furor as NMKMH until her 1974 publication of Thomas Jefferson: an Intimate History. Her most controversial allegation was that he had carried on an extended affair with Sally Hemings, his slave. Ultimately, it is probably due to Brodie’s work that I had ever heard the rumor I stated as fact before my relatives that forgotten day.

Well, anyway, I finally found it: strong DNA evidence that Jefferson fathered at least one child by Sally Hemings. DNA doesn’t lie, and there is now no doubt that at least one of Hemings’ children was closely related to Jefferson — vindicating Brodie’s work on Jefferson, and her publishing of it despite extreme opposition to sullying the name of a Founder.

As always, there are those who oppose the conclusion. Jefferson traveled extensively and was rarely home for more than a few weeks at a time. Combining DNA evidence with the fact that he was home exactly nine months before the birth of several of Hemings’ children, unless his brother chose those particular times to sneak in some romance with Jefferson’s slave, seems to make it self-evident that he was the father. The 2000 Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation report makes this very clear. On the other hand, the Monticello Organization (descendants of Thomas Jefferson) voted in 2002 not to allow Hemings’ descendants into their club, and persuaded the Memorial Foundation to change their statement.

Yeah, I know, I’m six years late on the research, which was performed in 1998 and widely published in 2000. At the time I made the statement, six years ago, it was probably still recent news.

I’m the kid that always thought up the perfect retort for an insult several weeks later.

Happy freakin’ New Year

Hey, Humbugs. Happy New Year. May you love the stars too fondly to fear the dark, deal with very few jerks, and enjoy prosperity throughout 2005.

Hey, Humbugs. Happy New Year. May you love the stars too fondly to fear the dark, deal with very few jerks, and enjoy prosperity throughout 2005.

Bose-Einstein Condensate and more

I ran across a wonderful article outlining Albert Einstein’s contributions to science. If you’ve ever wondered what a Bose-Einstein condensate is, or why light is a “wavicle”, but you don’t have the grounding in math to fully appreciate Einstein’s use of C (the speed of light) as a constant (rather than the use of Time) in calculations, this is the article for you.

I ran across a wonderful article outlining Albert Einstein’s contributions to science. If you’ve ever wondered what a Bose-Einstein condensate is, or why light is a “wavicle”, but you don’t have the grounding in math to fully appreciate Einstein’s use of C (the speed of light) as a constant (rather than the use of Time) in calculations, this is the article for you. In addition, courtesy of Slashdot, I found this little tidbit: the 10 most important scientific advances of 2004.

Google Zeitgeist

The Google Zeitgeist for 2004 is out. This tracks the most popular people, places, trends, etc. according to search terms typed in by individuals throughout the year. Very interesting peek into popular culture and what people are most curious about.

The Google Zeitgeist for 2004 is out. This tracks the most popular people, places, trends, etc. according to search terms typed in by individuals throughout the year. Very interesting peek into popular culture and what people are most curious about.

Cheeriness of Christmas

I recently had an online discussion with some friends, and mentioned I’d been feeling a little blue lately. Thought I’d share.

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:22:57 -0500, PGO <nnobrien@PROTECTED> wrote:

> Matthew Barnson said:
> << … Yet I’m cheerless.>>

< Me (Pat): Did anyone yet think Matt might be still in a stage of grief

> over losing the realness of God, Jesus, and all the afterlife he had

> truly believed in before?

It's an interesting thought.  Last night, I spent several hours playing
a computer game. Around 11:30 PM, my wife pulled a chair up next to

I recently had an online discussion with some friends, and mentioned I’d been feeling a little blue lately. Thought I’d share.

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 12:22:57 -0500, PGO <nnobrien@PROTECTED> wrote:
> Matthew Barnson said: > << … Yet I’m cheerless.>>
< Me (Pat): Did anyone yet think Matt might be still in a stage of grief
> over losing the realness of God, Jesus, and all the afterlife he had
> truly believed in before?

It's an interesting thought. Last night, I spent several hours playing a computer game. Around 11:30 PM, my wife pulled a chair up next to mine, grabbed a pillow, leaned back, put one foot up on the bookshelf next to the PC and said, "So, Matt, what's up?"

"Not much," I replied distractedly as I blasted more bad guys. "Guess I've played a bit long tonight, huh?"

"I'm not worried about that," she responded, "I want to know why you're depressed."

I quit the game and turned to face her. "I'm feeling pretty up today," I replied quietly.

"I'm not buying," she said. "You've spent the last week and a half cooped up with your computer when you come home. You're spending longer hours at work, and you're not spending the time you usually do with the kids. You've been like this before, and I recognize the symptoms. Why are you so down lately?"

I thought for a moment, and replied, "Well, it's the season, I guess. I find myself thinking of Christmasses past, and how joyful they are, and this year, I kind of feel... I don't know. Outside looking in. It just doesn't have the magic like it used to."

"Is it because you no longer believe?" she asked, chewing her bottom lip and gazing pointedly at the bookshelf so as not to appear confrontational.

"I don't think so," replied half-heartedly, "it's more other things than that."

But there was a kernel of truth to what she had to say. Everything I do, I do with gusto. I go all the way, or very little of the way. I used to throw myself into church callings with all the energy I could muster. I used to throw myself into the Holiday Season, being the loudest singer as we happily tossed tinsel and decorations onto the tree.

But this year, for the first time really in the two-and-a-half years I've been a nonbeliever, it hit me: I'm not celebrating the same thing as other people around me are. I'm going through the motions, but this year I finally ponder the meaning of what it is I'm doing, and find that my existing motivations are not enough.

This year, I choose to find my own meaning in the Holidays. It's a harder, but more rewarding, road than choosing to celebrate for the same reason everyone else is. I think the road less travelled by is where I need to focus my eyes and heart, and find my own cheer rather than imbibe of the ready-made, pre-packed cheeriness offered by religious celebration.

-- Matthew P. Barnson