Posted by Mike O on: 10.04.2007 /
I got this from a friend of mine last week. It’s been making it’s way around the internet for years, but it’s still a good reminder to get our eyes off of ourselves and onto more important, more fulfilling things.
The paradox of our time in history is that we have taller buildings but shorter tempers, wider Freeways , but narrower viewpoints.
We spend more, but have less, we buy more, but enjoy less.
We have bigger houses and smaller families, more conveniences, but less time.
We have more degrees but less sense, more knowledge, but less judgment, more experts, yet more problems, more medicine, but less wellness.
We drink too much, smoke too much, spend too recklessly, and laugh too little, drive too fast, get too angry, stay up too late, get up too tired, read too little, watch TV too much , and pray too seldom.
We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values. We talk too much, love too seldom, and hate too often.
We’ve learned how to make a living, but not a life. We’ve added years to our life but not life to our years. We’ve been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet a new neighbor.
We conquered outer space but not inner space. We’ve done larger things, but not better things. We’ve cleaned up the air, but polluted the soul. We’ve conquered the atom, but not our prejudice.
We write more, but learn less.
We plan more, but accomplish less. We’ve learned to rush, but not to wait.
We build more computers to hold more information, to produce more copies than ever,
but we communicate less and less.These are the times of fast foods and slow digestion, big men and small character, steep profits and shallow relationships. These are the days of two incomes but more divorce, fancier houses, but broken homes. These are days of quick trips, disposable diapers, throwaway morality, one night stands, overweight bodies, and pills that do everything from cheer, to quiet, to kill. It is a time when there is much in the showroom window and nothing in the stockroom.
Comment by: Ir (Helen)
1FYI that was written by Dr Bob Moorehead, who was pastor of Overlake for almost 30 years (Overlake is the church in Seattle where last year’s Off The Map event was held). There have been rumors a Columbine student wrote it but they are false.
Dr Moorehead resigned after allegations of misconduct surfaced. I read about last year when I was wondering why the former pastor of Overlake resigned. As I recall reading it was a nasty business with the elders vilifying the people who made the allegations but a year later admitting they now had corroborating evidence they were true.
I often run across this and another piece he wrote called “The Fellowship of the Ashamed”. That one also has false rumors associated with it - that it was found on the person of a martyred Christian who wrote it.
The second one in particular is disappointing in that the author of it evidently lived a life nothing like the words he penned.
I suppose if a piece of writing is inspiring, it’s inspiring so maybe it doesn’t matter.
I don’t particularly care for the paradox of our times because I find it one-sided and negative: I don’t think everything has got worse. But, if it inspires you, that’s great: keep being inspired!
Comment by: Mike O
2You always bring such an unexpected perspective!
Yes, I knew about the pastor that wrote it. To me, that doesn’t take away from the words he wrote. I don’t know about the timing of the writing compared to his fall from grace, so the words still work for me.
Do you find it untrue?
Comment by: Ir (Helen)
3Do I find it untrue? Interesting question…am I being too evasive if I say, it depends what you mean by ‘untrue’? :)
If I said a student got a failing grade in one subject and I failed to add that they got As in all others, would what I have said been untrue? Strictly speaking, no, however it would have painted a very distorted picture of that student.
I see this as a distorted picture. I think I may be rather sensitive about it because it reminds me of hearing Christians focus on the negative and not mention/discount the positive. As I moved away from my conservative Christian world I found myself thinking the world of doom and gloom they described was in their heads; it was not reality. The things they said were terrible I thought were good. Like, being more tolerant of gay people and their interest in having a marriage certificate and being respected and valued the same as all other human beings.
This piece brings all that back.
I would say some of it is true and describes our times. But there are good things about our times too - I think we have made progress in tolerance, respect, shedding prejudice. Yet since some Christians see these as bad not good things, who knows if they’d show up in a piece like this anyway?
It’s also partly a stylistic thing; I dislike this type of rhetoric - it turns me off.
But I do respect that your mileage varies on this!
Comment by: Mike O
4I just read the fellowship of the unashamed … I don’t see a problem with it.
Just because those words may have been less than true for him, they can still be something I strive for.
His actions don’t make his words a less-lofty goal.
Comment by: Mike O
5OK, now THAT’S interesting! And I wonder if this is what’s happening - I’d like your feedback:
At the core, I agree with the sentiments expressed, so they don’t turn me off, they show me what could be.
But if it were, say, something similar written from/for a gay agenda, I wonder if I wouldn’t be a little more cynical. Like maybe they’re just coloring things the way they need to to make their agenda work?? I hope you get what I’m getting at here - I have nothing against gay people, that’s not the point. I wonder if maybe you’re similarly cynical, seeing this piece as written by someone with a need to “spin” things a certain way to validate their worldview, so you react to it?? Regardless if the words are true or not, maybe you see an underlying sinister (for lack of a better word) purpose behind them?
Could I have been any *more* confusing?? :)
Comment by: Karen
6I’ve seen several similar pieces and they all drive me nuts. Sorry, but I can’t stand them, and I couldn’t stand them as a Christian either, so my reaction has nothing to do with religion. It’s probably more to do with my being an optimist, and this seems so terribly pessimistic to me.
To me, these things appeal to some kind of conservative nostalgia that worships an undefined, gauzy “golden age” when things were “simpler and better.” In the process, they’re almost entirely inaccurate, totally unsubstantiated and completely ignore all the positive things about the present day, not to mention the horrors of the past.
I never could understand why people like this kind of thing. Why do you find this so appealing, Mike?
Comment by: Ir (Helen)
7Mike O wrote:
Fair enough.
Karen’s reasons for disliking the piece seem similar to mine.
Evidently what bothers us and puts us off it doesn’t bother you or put you off, so you’re able to derive something inspirational and helpful out of it.
I know lots of people like it, because as you said, people have been forwarding it around the Internet for years.
Comment by: Mike O
8I don’t know, I just think the ideals it’s shooting for are good.
It’s funny, I usually don’t like these pappy, koochy-smoochy things either, but this one just strikes a chord in me.
Comment by: Ir (Helen)
9Mike O wrote:
I’m glad to hear you say that, Mike!
Comment by: Karen
10I agree the ideals are good, but it goes about advocating them so dishonestly that it ruins the good part for me.
Just a few things I find dishonest: We’re smoking a lot less now than we did when doctors used to do TV commercials touting the benefits of cigarettes. People are living far longer and are much more productive later on in years than they were back in my grandparents’ day. We haven’t totally conquered prejudice but we’ve made enormous progress compared to the days of institutionalized racism. People communicate all the time across lines that used to be taboo or unsurmountable thanks to this crazy phenomenon of the Internet. We’re all living proof of that!
I think we’re very lucky to be living in this time. :-)
Pappy koochy-smoochy? LOL! I love it!
Comment by: Rachel
11I feel exactly the same way, Karen!
BTW, we’ve gotten into a similar discussion over on Justice and Compassion: Were things really better in “the good old days”?
Especially those of us who happen to be female!
Comment by: joe
12Hi - I believe this is almost entirely empty rhetoric. Yes, it is legitimate to point out failings in our culture. But this ceaseless comparison with some mythical ‘better time’ is just irritating.
People used to be born, lie and die within a days walk of their village. So how exactly have perspectives narrowed?
This *might be true*, but obviously depends on exactly what is being compared with what. As it stands, it is unprovable nonsense.
Again, depends on what you are comparing with. Wealthy families have always had small families and large houses. I’m not sure the amount of ‘time’ has markedly decreased, we’ve just filled it with different things.
What does that mean? In the past the birth rate was much higher, many women and children died in childbirth, people died in their 40s. What less wellness? People are sicker than when they used to work in the mines? I don’t think so.
Ever heard of the gin epidemic in the UK? Look it up. Things are bad now, but nothing compared with that. All the rest of this is heresay.
Who is this ‘we’ he is talking about? I don’t believe we talk as much as people from my grandparents generation.
This might be fair comment - but more a reflection of middle class angst than a comment on wider society.
Again, some elements of truth, although I’d suggest we have made enormous strides on tackling prejudice. It isn’t good enough, but things are improving.
Speak for yourself.
Not sure that is true at all. Websites like this surely enable rather than prevent communication.
This is probably the section that makes the most sense out of the whole thing.
As I have said elsewhere, our society is clearly broken and has serious problems. But the problems are our problems and it makes no logical sense to compare the problems with those in other societies, because these are our problems and those were theirs.
Comment by: Mike O
13When I first got this in email, it was attributed to George Carlin. I liked it and knew I wanted to post it here, but before I did, I went out to snopes to verify it’s authenticity - yes, I learned that here after I was taken to task a few times for not checking my sources (the wharf rat experiment, for example!).
Anyway, here’s what snopes said George Carlin said when asked about it:
I find it interesting, however, that some people actually don’t like it.
Comment by: Mike O
14Good piece, Rachel! Is it wierd that I also see it that way? Maybe the “sappy load of - whatever” I posted here is only part of it. We’ve also managed to right a lot of wrongs over time.
Comment by: Rachel
15Mike, I agree that some things have gotten better and other things have gotten worse. It’s impossible to make a blanket statement one way or the other.
But I would like to ask people like you, and the writer of this piece, to consider how their assessment is influenced by their own vantage point. If you were not a white middle-class straight male, would you see things differently? Could it be that the 1950s in the US, for example, was a wonderful time for some people and a horrible time for others?
Comment by: Ir (Helen)
16Rachel - I agree that many things have got much better for women; however, some still need addressing as the video I posted on CatE today points out…
I suppose I would have liked the piece better had it a) not seemed to say ‘the old days were better’ as if that were an accepted truism b) been more careful in its critiques of our time - because I think some of them are good points, yet others seem more like rhetorical devices than accurate descriptions.
Comment by: Karen
17Boy, ain’t that the truth! Not to mention those of us who are non-white, those of us who are developmentally or physically disabled and those of us who are mentally impaired.
I’m severely near-sighted (legally blind without corrective lenses) and I often wonder what my life would be like if I’d been born a few hundred years ago. I picture myself relegated to a corner doing needlework, with Coke-bottle thick glasses on, and still barely able to see more than a couple feet in front of my face. :-(
Comment by: Siamang
18On this note:
I can see that the person who wrote this doesn’t know many brown people in Los Angeles.
I know LOTS of people with larger families and SMALLER apartments. The demographic trend, at least in the population centers of this country, where most people live, IS toward larger families and smaller dwellings.
I’m guessing Overlake has an affluent membership.
Comment by: Rachel
19You guessed right, Siamang!
Comment by: Mike O
20I’ve been thinking about this discussion all day, and I’m sure you’re right. I’ve basically had a good, protected, upper-MC white male two-parent mom-at-home life. It’s all I’ve ever known. So, yes, now that you mention it, I would feel differently if my history were different.
One thing’s been kind of gnawing at me, though. I’m not sure if anyone actually said this, but the feeling I get is that y’all see conservative, Christian males as negative because we can get nostalgic. And in all honesty, I would have to say that I see it the other way around. I see the people who spend their lives changing the status quo (minorities, women, religious minorities, what have you) as more dissatisfied. And righty so. But how can you call the people who like the way things were negative, and the people who dislike the way things were as positive? That’s backwards.
I know I’m not saying it well, but it seems that if the ideals weren’t tied to the olden days, if they were just ideals we’d like to see, we wouldn’t be perceived as negative.
I just don’t get how liking the way things were is a bad thing. Things were good for me. Now I see all this crap going on today (school shootings, terrorism, a basic distrust of government, religion, autority) and I don’t like it. I think we could do better if we just got our priorities lined up (I was going to say “back in line,” but that would be the old nostalgia thing again).
Somehow, I think we all want the world to be better than it is. The difference seems to be that I thought it was good before (sure, there was bad, too), and you don’t.
Comment by: Karen
21Not sure what you’re asking here, Mike. Could you clarify?
Comment by: Mike O
22I’m not sure, either. I just have this jumble of thoughts running through my head, and they don’t necessarily all jive with each other.
But I’ve come down to this … I liked the way things were. I watch The Wonder Years, and A Christmas Story and Cosby Show and all that. Just today on my paper route, I was listening to this sports talk show, and they were getting nostalgic about the “good ol’ days” when they had to write their columns on a typewriter and change the ribbon, and you flip the ribbon over so you could use it twice, blah blah blah. I’ve just come to the conclusion that I LIKE nostalgia. I like remembering the good times, and the hard times. I don’t think about slavery and Viet Nam and Nazis, I think about Maple Street and old Radio shows.
There was a lot of good back then. And there’s a lot of good now. We’ve righted a lot of wrongs, and (in my opinion) we’ve wronged a lot of rights (which this piece seems to be getting at). But either way, the world is a better place now than it was. Sure, the “evils” referred to in the piece are there IMO, but you’re right … there’s a LOT of good too. I see it every day, so it didn’t really occur to me that it was missing from the piece.
By nature, I’m a very positive person. I liked it then. I like it better now. And my future will likely be better yet. Will it include some things I wish we could undo? Sure. And this piece reflects some of them. But all in all, there’s no place I’d rather be than right where I am right now.
The bottom line is, I liked the way things were then. I like the way things are now, too.
Comment by: Karen
23We love A Christmas Story. That’s required viewing at least once every holiday season in our family.
:-)
You have a paper route?! Talk about nostalgia … I remember when kids did paper routes on their bikes. Of course, that job seemed to be open to boys only when I was a kid. :-)
Heck, I get nostalgic too - there’s nothing wrong with remembering old times and enjoying reflecting on them. I don’t think that’s a bad thing at all.
What I try to do, however, is not sugarcoat anything - past, present or future. The Cosby Show isn’t an accurate reflection of real life for 99% of African-Americans in the ’80s any more than Desperate Housewives accurately reflects what happens on my street in suburbia in the ’00s.
Each era has its good and bad. As long as we recognize that, we’re less likely to forget that everything wasn’t rosy in the past and so there’s no point glorifying it.
Comment by: Rachel
24Thanks for clarifying, Mike. What I react against is the theology I grew up with that says everything will just get worse and worse and there isn’t much we can do about it and we should actually be happy when things get worse because it is “a fulfillment of prophecy.” That just doesn’t sound like the good news Jesus preached. But I know that’s not your viewpoint.
I think it’s awesome that you are so positive about the future. I just got done reading Brian McLaren’s new book “Everything Must Change: Jesus, Global Crises, and a Revolution of Hope” and it really inspired me!
I agree, Karen. Each era has its winners and losers. What was a Golden Age for one group of people could have been a total nightmare for another.
Comment by: Daniel
25I couldn’t understand some parts of this article y atheist |, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.