E=MC² and Other Spiritual Matters

Energy is matter times a constant!  That was a revelation from the great Albert Einstein, the culmination of a century of incredible progress in scientific knowledge that set the Newtonian world on its head and ushered in a new age of uncertainty in science where there had previously been unbridled confidence.  For even as this discovery and others that created the fields of quantum mechanics, particle physics and relativity allowed us to harness the energy of the atom and create nuclear weapons and power, we also found ourselves opening new doors faster than we could understand the rooms we were entering.

Now the once unchallenged belief that science would ultimately clearly define everything in our universe and provide clear guidance for our lives and experiences has been more or less abandoned, and scientists have declared themselves satisfied to explore the mystery and the beauty of the universe without a clear path to total comprehension!  (This is of course my interpretation and may not represent the views of actual scientists J)

But what indeed are matter and energy?  As our concepts of matter have evolved we have found ourselves chasing an ever more elusive final tally of matter’s constituent parts – compounds, molecules, ions, atoms, protons, electrons, neutrons, fermions, bosons, leptons, quarks, neutrinos and so on. 

And even as the names of these particles have become familiar to us, their nature has been stubbornly resistant to any “sensible” description.  Are these pieces of matter ‘particles’ or ‘waves’?  They are both!  Do electrons really orbit around nuclei like small solar systems?  No, they appear to be a probability cloud of charge and energy!  They are everywhere and nowhere, phantoms that can only really be conceptualized through quantum physics equations and mathematics.

Energy is even less comprehensible than matter, if indeed we can even regard energy as a different phenomenon.  We have deluded ourselves about energy for a couple hundred years, pretending to understand electricity and magnetism, different types of heat transfer, kinetic and potential energy, and even nuclear energy.  We have become comfortable with its use and speak glibly of its properties, but energy remains just as mysterious and unseen to us in the 21^st century as it did to the ancients.

In the end, the conceptual models we were comfortable with had to be abandoned and new ones attempted that are much more abstract and difficult to grasp.  But the models are not the essence of what we are experiencing.  The ‘essence’ is the way that these physical phenomena impact our lives – their enduring truths!

Perhaps the abstract natures of matter and energy, and their complex but intimate relationship, have something to teach us about flesh and spirit.  Just as our material selves have been exposed as something quite different from what we historically conceived, so perhaps are our spiritual selves in need of a ‘quantum’ leap in understanding.  Our concepts of spirituality and its relationship to the material world have not evolved significantly over the past two millennia.

Of course many will argue that our understanding of the spiritual world has indeed evolved – that a great number of people have totally rejected religion and any idea of a divine or spiritual realm.  This is certainly true, and a great many of those that reject these ideas are scientists.  The ancient models of religion that incorporate a distinct and separate God on high with a heaven and hell seem nonsensical at a time when we have extensive scientific knowledge that appears to refute many of the underpinnings of this type of theology.  Our literal interpretations of scripture have painted us into a corner, but we are reluctant to abandon the models we have relied on for centuries for fear of finding ourselves with an amorphous spirituality that has no real doctrine or ritual.

But an amorphous, untethered spirituality would be loosely analogous to the mysterious nature of the physical world that we explore through science.  A world where certain truths shine through the haze, but where our imaginations struggle to grasp or categorize the phenomena in any comfortable way.

In the end, spirituality and theology are tasked with identifying basic truths about our existence - its meaning and purpose.  Does it really matter what types of models and frameworks we use to discern these truths?  Is God a human-like deity or rather some form of energy?  Is heaven a place of eternal bliss or rather a probability cloud of energy and charge that our own inscrutable ‘matter’ inhabits for eternity in various forms? 

These are fascinating questions and worthy of deep contemplation by those whose passion lies in this domain, but it is more crucial that we confront the spiritual truths that every human attempt at spiritual identification seems to impart – that compassion and love are paramount and profoundly motivating despite the human inclinations toward greed, power, lust and violence; that humility and generosity are more deeply satisfying than selfishness and vanity; that our needs for community and social interaction and harmony trump the disparate forces that alienate and estrange us.

Our pursuit of spirituality in the form of world religions has long been a self-contradictory force in the world, providing solace to many, inspiring incredible acts of love and compassion, but also inspiring hideous forms of prejudice, self-righteousness, exclusion and even violence.  If we could take joy and comfort in the spiritual models that are our cultural heritage yet not regard them as absolute and rigidly literal perhaps we could come closer to living out their spiritual truths.  Like the modern physicist, let us embrace mystery and revel in its beauty and complexity, trusting that the beautiful universe that we inhabit will not let us down.

The Mystery of the Trump Candidacy

The candidacy of Donald Trump continues to mystify me, because I cannot comprehend how such a distasteful person can be so enthusiastically embraced by so many Americans.  In attempting to understand this rather disturbing phenomenon, I have come up with the following ideas or observations:

1.      America’s fascination with celebrity and wealth – A significant part of our population is obsessed with the lives of the rich and famous; possessed by an almost religious awe of these TV and cinema figures that causes them to ascribe special powers and insight to them.  Trump supporters are somehow willing to overlook hideous character flaws in the hope that his business and Reality TV success can translate to similar marvels for the nation.

2.      A population of desperate economic left-behinds – The US economy is in a post-industrial transition.  Globalization and immigration have conspired to create a deep fear of economic doom in many quarters.  The three major complaints are that (a) jobs have fled overseas or been outsourced, that (b) unfair trade practices have eliminated jobs, and (c) that illegal immigrants have taken many of the remaining jobs at the lower end of the economic spectrum.  Add to this the elimination of many jobs due to automation and you have a perfect storm of economic despair for some part of the population.  Poor job prospects can understandably lead to desperate acts, and those affected will grab onto anything that promises relief, even if there is not a shred of evidence that the proposed solution is realistic, or, as in the case of Trump, the only ‘proposal’ is to ‘make better deals’ and ‘win’.  Economics is a complex topic and people do not generally have the patience or the intellect to see past the demagoguery and simplistic declarations.  The truth is that there is no simple quick fix to our economic challenges and the only sensible course is to pursue carefully planned and researched bi-partisan policies that will hopefully create new jobs without jeopardizing the fragile recovery from the near economic disaster of 2008.  But people don’t want to hear that.

3.      Fear of the ‘New America’ or Decline of the ‘Real America’ – Change is always unsettling.  For some part of America the many changes in our society have sparked a frantic sense of isolation and alienation.  This is not a new phenomenon – every wave of immigration and flurry of social change has produced a similar reaction.  However absurd it may seem, Trump seems to represent a return to a more comfortable and familiar world.  What are the changes that people seek to turn back?  Ethnic and religious diversity is probably the most prominent, especially as it also incorporates the economic fear of immigrants taking away jobs, and the security fear of fifth column terrorism.  The increasing indifference to religion and the growth of agnosticism and atheism – a general sense that we are ‘turning away from God’ and no longer the Christian nation that the founders built – is another big one.  Then there is the continuing liberalization of views on sexual orientation and sexual activity, which is seen as a corollary to the rejection of Christian faith and morality.  Add to that the racial tension that appears to have heightened in recent years due to the public focus on police shootings and treatment of black men, and the fear that crime and drug addiction are on the rise and that our society is at risk for some sort of orgy of violence and decay.  These changes are real, but they have been amplified through the right wing blogosphere and media to create a sense of impending doom and disintegration of the America that we knew and loved!  Trump has harnessed this unease and ‘dared’ to speak out in incredibly racist and xenophobic ways that are interpreted as courageous because they flout the conventions of political correctness.  I would argue that reality TV and social media have de-sensitized us to this type of incendiary speech.  Thoughtful, respectful dialog is no longer valued by the general public because it has no drama and will not attract views, shares and ‘likes’.  Political correctness may indeed have been pushed too far, but the race-baiting and xenophobia of Donald Trump will only exacerbate the situation, not improve it.

4.      The Scary World Disorientation – The rise of ISIS, replacing Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden as the new American nightmare, has people understandably on edge.  We are also seeing the resurgence of Russia and the growing challenge of a more aggressive China.  Tough, xenophobic talk and promises of dramatic action are always the easiest way to comfort and reassure a nervous public, even if they would obviously play into the hands of our adversaries.  Trump has mastered the art of the demagogue and armchair warrior.  Careful diplomacy and long-term military strategy are clearly the required attributes of the next US president, but a significant number of people will be dazzled and bewitched by saber-rattling and chest-beating.  Some people long for the good old cold war days when we stood on the brink of total annihilation of the human race but didn’t have to fear a bomb or some nut with an AK-47 at our local shopping center.  We all would love a quick fix to the terrorism problem, but beware of anyone who promises one!  As we have seen in the past, today’s quick fix is tomorrow’s unintended consequence that turns out to be worse than the original problem.

These are a few of the conditions that appear to buttress the Trump candidacy.  In previous blog entries I have expressed my fear that Trump is a megalomaniac not so dissimilar to the likes of Mussolini (whose bluster and facial expressions he seems almost to mimic) and Hitler.  With our long history of democratic rule and the relative stability of our nation it is unlikely that a Trump presidency could devolve into a tyrannical state.  However, one cannot dismiss the dangers associated with a personality like Trump - a man who:

1    1.   Engages in the lowest forms of insult and slander of his opponents to gain favor with an audience.
2.      Tells lie after lie and refuses to acknowledge or correct them.
3.      Is extremely thin-skinned, has absolutely no self-humor and is hyper-sensitive about any criticism.
4.      Brags about himself and his accomplishments with not the slightest hint of humility.
5.      Never backs down from a quarrel, but rather doubles down and escalates in all cases.
6.      Rarely takes the advice of others and relies almost solely on instinct and reaction.
7.      Preens and gloats and struts with a smugness that masks a deep insecurity and a fearsome ego.
8.      Makes no apparent effort to master the details of any issue or topic or to acknowledge the complexity of problems he says he will ‘fix’
9.      Promotes the most absurd conspiracy theories such as the Obama birther theory, the rigged election theory, the theory that somehow Obama and the democrats are in league with terrorists or ‘Muslims’, the Obama as a secret Muslim theory, the Obama inciting race riots theory, etc.
10.  Ridicules or insults women, other religions, handicapped people, Hispanic people and anyone who disagrees with him.

These are the character traits of a dictator, a demagogue and a megalomaniac.  Putting a man like this at the helm of the most powerful nation on earth because he makes good theater might be the worst mistake that we could ever make.

The Curious Hagiography of Muhammed Ali

I will confess that I have always been a bit perplexed by the seemingly universal adulation of Muhammed Ali.  His death has prompted so many tributes that I am almost reluctant to express any reservations whatsoever about his place on the pantheon of heroes, but I will forge ahead anyway.

I can understand why Ali is a fascinating figure.  Certainly as an athlete he appears to have been uniquely gifted and convincingly successful (a career professional record of 56 wins and 5 losses).  What is even more remarkable is that he was able to achieve this record despite being suspended from boxing for three years during what could have been the most productive years of his career.

His athletic endeavors were accompanied by a penchant for publicity.  His professions of invincibility (“I am the greatest”) and his trash talking were as much a part of his persona as his success in the ring.  From the little bit of research I can do on the topic, Ali is credited with legitimizing trash talk and bringing it to an art form.  He even is credited with a full length record album consisting solely of trash talk that apparently sold quite well.

I have written previously about my opinion of trash talk and the decline of sportsmanship, so it should come as no surprise that this aspect of Ali’s fame leaves me rather cold.  But the story does not end there, and it is what Ali did after he achieved fame in the ring that secured his place in history.

Cassius Clay began his association with the Nation of Islam around 1961 and came under the influence of Malcolm X in 1962.  By the time he fought Sonny Liston in 1964, he was a Black Muslim.  He soon changed his name officially to Muhammed Ali, which was a pretty dramatic move in the mid-60s.  The new Muhammed Ali began speaking out very energetically on civil rights and black empowerment, taking a much more aggressive stance than the dominant civil rights leaders such as Martin Luther King, Jr.  He famously stated: "I am America. I am the part you won't recognize. But get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, not yours; my religion, not yours; my goals, my own; get used to me."

Even his trash talking reflected his growing focus on black liberation.  He frequently referred to his opponents as Uncle Toms and ridiculed them for being part of the white establishment.  He referred to his birth name, Cassius Clay, as his slave name.

To African Americans who had grown up under almost apartheid conditions and, though grateful for the MLK inspired non-violence movement, thirsting for more triumphant and provocative claims of liberation and pride, Muhammed Ali was a potent symbol.  He was a fist in the face of the white plantation owner, a no excuses, stand-your-ground example of black manhood.

In this way, Muhammed Ali was transformed from a braggart to a prophet.  He was not afraid to provoke the white establishment, indeed he relished the opportunity.  And he went one step further: He refused to be inducted into the U.S. military on the basis of his unwillingness to fight for a country that was oppressing his race.  He said "Why should they ask me to put on a uniform and go ten thousand miles from home and drop bombs and bullets on brown people in Vietnam while so-called Negro people in Louisville are treated like dogs and denied simple human rights?"

His refusal to be drafted was not a simple publicity stunt.  It cost him about three years of his prime fighting period.  One has to respect the courage it took for him to stand by his principles and give up the lost income and opportunities.

This act of defiance, occurring at a time when even white young Americans were beginning to question the Vietnam War, created an impression of Ali that transcended his comic boasting and arrogance.  As one of the most famous athletes in the world during that period of time, his racial radicalism and anti-war stance took on a profound significance that propelled him to a place of status based on courage and independence rather than athleticism and self-confidence.

To better understand why Ali is so cherished, read Kareem Abdul Jabbar’s reminiscences: "I remember the teachers at my high school didn't like Ali because he was so anti-establishment and he kind of thumbed his nose at authority and got away with it. The fact that he was proud to be a black man and that he had so much talent ... made some people think that he was dangerous. But for those very reasons I enjoyed him."

The impact of Muhammed Ali and his place in history are unquestionable.  He is a symbol that encompasses much more than athletic prowess.  And he appears to have had a charm that few could resist.  There are few major public figures that have anything but high praise for Ali.  And all this from a man whose IQ was below the threshold that the Army would accept for recruitment until it reduced the threshold in 1966.  So add to his accomplishments the dispelling of the belief that IQ does anything but quantify a narrow range of potential.

I started out to write this essay with a view that Ali’s fame and exalted status were somewhat mystifying, but as I finish up now, having explored the topic and read quite a bit about the man, I am much more sympathetic to the prevailing interpretation of his contributions.  Rest in peace, Muhammed Ali!

The Future of Work

The ever-widening income gap, the loss of middle class jobs, the increasing automation of factories, services and agriculture all conspire to paint a fairly bleak picture of the future of work.  On the one hand, automation has long been anticipated as a solution to the de-humanizing aspects of industrialized work – the tedious assembly line job, the numbing repetitive work that so many laborers perform.  However, the prospect of no work at all for significant groups in society makes one rather nostalgic for the good old days of relatively low-tech factories, banks with human tellers, and other real people jobs.

Automation was supposed to free mankind from the drudgery of certain types of work and allow us to direct our energies toward more productive, creative and self-fulfilling endeavors.  But if that was the dream, the reality is rather disappointing, at least at this stage in the process.  Of course, the U.S. accelerated the transition by moving many of its middle class, industrial jobs to lower wage economies in a spasm of off-shoring and outsourcing that had nothing to do with automation.  This tsunami of job losses was probably much faster and more disruptive than a steady evolution of automation would have been.  But now, even with significant increases in manufacturing output in recent years, the number of manufacturing jobs is still a shadow of its former self, due in great part to gains in productivity and automation.  Factories that once hosted thousands of workers are now typically running with hundreds, and even the hundreds may soon be unnecessary.  The genie is out of the bottle.

The effect of automation is not limited to the manufacturing sector.  Many types of service jobs are also on the chopping block and easily replaced by robots and other high tech gadgetry.  Once the self-driving and navigating vehicle and associated robot are available (and that day is not far off), then many of the remaining service sector jobs will be readily accomplished by inexpensive, reliable and low maintenance (compared to messy human beings!) automatons.  We have already experienced a similar transition in the incredibly frustrating world of automated telephone support systems that take us on a Kafkaesque journey in every attempt to interact with a company or medical provider.

Were it not for protectionist efforts in many countries, farming would already be automated and collectivized to a very high degree.  Autonomous tractors, combine, spreaders and sprayers are already roaming across fields like some sort of dystopian nightmare, and agribusiness long ago accomplished the almost complete extinction of the family farmer in the U.S.

Automation in healthcare, legal work, accounting, construction and a host of other industries is certain to come before too long.

In theory, automation should ultimately reduce the number of hours of work that are required of every human being - a supposed blessing and desirable outcome!  But of course that is not how it is playing out.  Work is not reduced but rather jobs are eliminated.  The lucky, skilled and connected maintain their jobs and increase their income, and the unfortunate and unskilled find themselves in unemployment lines and rallies for Donald Trump.

It seems clear that some serious analysis and planning is needed to avoid a cataclysmic breakdown of our economic and social systems.  It is highly doubtful that the free market will resolve this fast-moving rupture in our economic fabric before major social unrest occurs.  A Darwinian approach is unlikely to produce a very satisfactory outcome.  

The last major technology shift, the industrial revolution, brought us perilously close to a world revolution.  The millions of lives lost in the Soviet Union, communist China and a host of other revolutionary attempts to counter the calloused indifference of free-market capitalists should serve as a warning.  If we do not act to make this next transition less traumatic then there will surely be hell to pay.

The dream of a less tedious work-life through automation is fast transforming into a nightmare of inequality and disorientation.  In the end, neither border walls nor artful trade negotiations and tariffs will do anything but provide short-lived band-aids for this societal hemorrhage.  The world is changing rapidly and our ability to adapt is dependent on bold new ideas for sharing work and creating new types of enterprise.

Of course if automation only serves to free us up for longer spells of watching TV and engaging in various forms of mind-numbing social media and virtual reality, then perhaps the real solution would be to fully embrace neo-ludditism and take hammer and chisel to the devices that have insidiously transformed us from master to slave.  Humans of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your cyber chains!

Vanity, Envy and Competition Part 5

This is the final segment in my essay on Vanity, Competition and Envy.  Previously we have explored the tight relationship between our cultivated need for praise, our fragile egos, the endless oscillation between insecurity and vanity, and the envy that results or feeds this dynamic.

In this segment we will look at competition.  Praise, vanity, envy, insecurity – they all have at their core either an explicit or implicit comparison between ourselves and other human beings.  And that comparison is nurtured or confirmed through competition.

Of course there are times when we are praised for having done well in comparison to our own capabilities or previous accomplishments, but I would argue that these are the exception rather than the norm.  Almost every aspect of our culture and society is based on competition and there appears to be a basic assumption that the competitive spirit or drive is a fundamental and even desirable element of human nature.  Moreover, competition is seen in a generally positive light as the primary motivation for personal achievement, character development and the general progress of civilization.

But is this really true?  Is competition a positive force in our world?  Is it a necessary one?  When I think of competition I remember a Peanuts cartoon I saw long ago.  Linus is telling Charlie Brown about a football game he just saw on TV.  He describes in vivid detail over several panels how his team snatched victory from the jaws of defeat in the final seconds of the game.  He can scarcely contain his joy.  On the last panel, Charlie Brown, looking pensive as always, responds ‘How did the other team feel?’

The fact is that competition creates winners and losers.  In many cases, the winning and losing have only psychological impact, though clearly this impact should not be trivialized.  But in other cases, losing has more dramatic consequences – the failure of a business, the loss of prestige or reputation or self-confidence. 

There are numerous platitudes about the benefits of failure and losing.  Our culture accepts as orthodoxy that the struggle of life requires competition and that it is important to experience both winning and losing to develop character and resilience.  Indeed, there are many contemptuous references these days to a perceived tendency to make everyone a ‘winner’ – trophies or participation medals for every child in a sport and grade inflation at schools come to mind.

Losing and failure are declared to be prerequisites for later business success by every entrepreneur and executive on the motivational speaking circuit.  The idea that people learn from mistakes does indeed seem to be a truism.  But is a competitive environment required to create the conditions for the crucible of success and failure?  Could cooperation be just as effective for development of character and capability, but far less damaging than competition?

Much of my life has been characterized by competition – in school, in sports and in business.  The moments of winning, of being acclaimed as ‘better’ than my competitors, were stimulating, but they were also unsettling, creating a separation between me and my competitors that was at turns awkward and alienating.

A competitive instinct is viewed as a favorable character trait, as in ‘that person is a real competitor’, or ‘he/she has a real competitive drive’!  But how is this competitive spirit different from a basic energetic trait?  What we are really saying about a person is that they will work hard, overcome obstacles and endure heartache, pain and fatigue (and even failures or setbacks) to succeed.  Does that character trait have to be defined in terms of beating someone else at something or proving someone is better than someone else?  Aren't the characteristics commonly associated with a ‘competitor’ – work ethic, resilience, energy, passion – valuable and commendable qualities in any endeavor, and particularly well suited for working cooperatively?

Would focusing human energy more on cooperation rather than competition be a laudable goal of 21^st century society?  Can human passion be developed to as high a level when there is a common goal rather a prize that can only be defined or won by beating or diminishing another? 

Cooperation would not imply an easy path with no frustration or disappointments.  All human activity is subject to the vicissitudes of success and failure, of agony and ecstasy.  The difference is where the motivation lies – in achievement for the sake of a group and one’s own self-fulfillment rather than proving oneself better than others.

Competition was a necessary by-product of our quest for survival and progress in the first fifty thousand years of our evolution.  But perhaps cooperation is the key to the human race surviving the next few millennia!

21st Century Fascism

Donald Trump continues to defy all expectations.  His surprising popularity has been analyzed every possible way, and it seems to rise in almost inverse proportion to the condemnation he receives from every quarter.

The question for me is whether Trump is truly the neo-fascist that he appears to be, or whether he is masquerading as one in a cynical but clever ploy to gain the nomination.  He has been compared with Il Duce (Benito Mussolini of the ‘glory’ days of the short-lived Italian empire in the 1930s) because of his huge ego and his smug proclamations.  Indeed, the continuous smirk on his face and his puffed-up demeanor are amazingly similar to those of Il Duce.

Calling Trump a fascist is not really an exaggeration.  Fascism has the following characteristics:  a fanatical demagogue as a leader; a maniacal embrace of nationalism; a set of enemies that are blamed for the current perceived downfall of the state (e.g. immigrants, Muslims, blacks, media, political correctness, liberals, tax laws); a belief that a strong leader can ‘solve’ economic problems through central control; a belief that a nation can recover its past glories by adopting an aggressive, unyielding position on global affairs; a strategy of economic growth by large infrastructure projects and military build-up.

It is difficult to discern what Trump’s platform and plans are, but his appeal to ‘angry’ Americans seems to parallel the classic fascist pattern.  The big difference between Trump’s rise and those of Hitler and Mussolini is that the economic conditions are far less dismal today than the late 1920’s.

The ‘anger’ that is accepted as a given in today’s political environment is somewhat of a strange phenomenon.  Clearly our political process is frustratingly dysfunctional.  However, the country is not in any great economic or social distress when compared to the rest of the world.  So why the almost palpable anger?

For the average white American, there are certainly unsettling trends – the increasing diversity of our society, the changing sexual and gender mores, the decrease in traditional religious affiliation, the erosion of American influence in world affairs. 

But these trends and circumstances do not really impact people in a very direct way.  The everyday of our lives is no worse for these changes.  Our economy, though not robust, is still functioning fairly well and indeed performs better than that of almost any other nation on earth.  We still have all of the freedoms, opportunities and pleasures that make the U.S. an incredible place for most of its citizens.  Very few of the people who are so angry are in any type of distress, other than psychic.

I believe the anger is a manufactured entity, a Frankenstein created by right-wing media, bloggers and politicians that is now out of control and about to destroy its master, the Republican Party. Let’s hope and pray it doesn’t also destroy the whole country.

Sportsmanship

The recent Super Bowl was yet another reminder of the decline of sportsmanship in the sports world.  I rarely watch football, but when I do I am disheartened by the endless, mean-spirited displays of poor sportsmanship that occur after almost every tackle, reception, interception, sack or touchdown. Taunting, mocking, grandstanding and rubbing your opponents nose in his or her defeat are standard behavior in most sporting events these days. The gracious victor, the humble sportsman is almost extinct.  Instead, most contests are spectacles of trash-talking and in-your-face confrontations, expressions of the worst in human nature.  How has it come to this?

I suppose it all ties back to money and the business of entertainment.  Television has always reached out to the lowest common denominator, and once it was discovered that people who sit mindlessly watching hours of sports on TV enjoy seeing crass behavior there was no holding it back.

It may be entertaining for fans to see someone perform a dance in the end zone after scoring a touchdown for their team.  But I would argue that it is appealing to our baser instincts.  We know that the opposition is already disappointed.  Why do we want to make them feel worse?  Our own joy and satisfaction are already assured.  Do we really need to revel sadistically in the face of the opposing team and fans?

Worse still is the fact that this type of behavior has become expected entertainment for viewers.  Trash talking and victory dances have become a type of art form that is encouraged by fans and the media.  Of course the only ones delighting in each instance are the fans of the mockers and the grandstanders.  The opposing teams fans are grinding their teeth in bitter frustration and perhaps even fury.

One may argue that this form of entertainment is harmless, just boys (or girls) being boys and having a little fun.  But I don’t view it as harmless.  It sets an example for everyone in terms of acceptable behavior.  It erodes the general civility of our society and of sports in particular.  It has all of the classic characteristics of a cheap thrill – momentarily titillating, but insidiously damaging in the long run.

The other justification that might be raised for this type of behavior is that it is a clever strategy to throw one’s opponent off his or her game - to deal a psychological blow – and therefore an acceptable tactic.  But I find this specious reasoning.  Following this line of argument could make any ploy acceptable, including purposely injuring an opponent, which, sadly, in many sports is also increasingly utilized to win at all costs.

With so much money at stake in professional and college athletics, it is not surprising that such despicable behavior has become the norm.  But this behavior trickles down to impact every sports contest, and we are the poorer for its dissemination.