Skip to main content

"Find the good and praise it"

The title of this post is a quote from an article entitled "If it ain't broken, it must not be America"  by George Korda in the Knoxville News Sentinel of 1 November 2016.

That article suggests things may not be as bad as they seem. We humans do seem to have a proclivity towards pessimistic presentism whereby, when we feel that things are going badly for us (like now in the midst of this appalling US presidential election campaign), we tend to think that our lot is worse than it has been in the past. Clearly this is an over-reaction.

In the previous post on this blog I suggested that although things do feel pretty rum in the world right now, fear not; we are all probably not going to ruin, provided enough of us stick to our jobs and do our duty undistracted by the whirling noise of potential chaos.

Similarly, George Korda in his article quotes his own father as telling him:
 “Quit worrying. Times are always desperate.” 
And George counsels us to lead by finding the good and praising it, rather than calling on people to act simply because the system is broken.  I hear what he is saying.  I may have been partially guilty of doing that in my "...We'll all be rooned" post. That is saying: "Hey you out there, do the right thing because no-one else is". What I understand George to be counseling us with is we would be better served by saying act positively because it is positive. "Find the good and praise it" he says, quoting Alex Haley (who?).

I'm listening George. Here's an example of perceived good being praised, and I'm here to praise the sentiment too, even if the praise being praised here is over the top, American centric and politically slanted. I get what he's saying about standing tall to do the right thing, even when doing so risks your personal advancement:
"The FBI Agents Who Stood Up for the Rule of Law Make me proud to be an American". So says David P Goldman in an article dated 31 October 2016 in PJ Media. 
This article seems to make a similar point in the heat of a real political battle, to the more generic point I made at the end of the previous post about being prepared to make personal sacrifices for what you believe in. More interestingly, it also may just help explain to mystified non-Americans like myself, just what the appeal of Donald Trump is to so many Americans, even though they know he is a blow hard egotistical creep who shoots from the hip.

If the tendency to polarization in politics seems largely to do with the contest to claim higher moral ground than your enemy, the kind of perspective Goldman's article brings may help us observers outside the US understand just what moral ground Trump could possibly even be standing on in this contest. Until this article I perceived him as just standing for "I'm not one of those Washington types". A negative. What this article is suggesting, as George Korda would have us do, is that many see Trump as standing for something positive. Something along the lines of standing for those who "do their duty and what they believe is right, rather than following the latest whim of some perceived prevailing political and cultural fashion."  

Can this ghastly election spectacle therefore really be just the latest iteration of the ancient civilizational contest between those who believe in permanent values and those who see values as changing (conservatives v progressives), but now amplified to new dizzying and unprecedented heights by the spectacular speed and pervasiveness of contemporary communications?

The more things change the more they stay the same.









Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Michael Jackson, martyr ?

. Someone has to die for their beliefs to be a martyr . Drudge pointed to headlines last Friday saying that Jackson's was a " Death by Showbusines s". So in the sense that Jackson seems to have died for his belief in celebrity, yes, he might be called a martyr. I never got Michael Jackson. Thriller didn't thrill me at all ( Now Noel Coward, that's another story ). But I did get a bit of a kick from seeing others get him. He was boppy and catchy and slick, as well as monumentally fluffy and hugely impaired. What I struggle with is the apparently massive consequentiality of fluffiness and impairment like Jackson's. What is the fuss about the passing of a semi-talented song and dance weirdo from decades past? Boris Johnson, the London Mayor, has had a stab at explaining it to we mystified souls who struggle to get with the programme. He reckons it's just like Princess Di. And I agree, to the extent that I was almost as unprepared for and dumbfounded by th...

Bullshit detection is our main AI protection

The volume of chatter in recent online musings about the hydra headed peril of AI dominance, is becoming ear piercing. These piercings will likely support even more garish burbles of thought to dangle decoratively in front of both the curious and accidental victims. A brief diversion - it seems one of the more remarked upon "tells" of the presence of AI in a piece of writing at the moment, is what I now know to call the " Em Dash " (_). Thank you NYT of 18 Sept 2025.  I'll keep an eye out for them. And I'll need to, if I'm to live up to the pleas of the balance of this post. The main subject of this post has been prompted by yet another article that Arts & Letters Daily has pointed me to recently. It's entitled " Large Language Muddle "  and is an editors article from an online magazine called "n+1" published in the Fall of 2025. The central proposition of this muddle piece seems to be that we human authors need to fight back...

The list of "tell"words for LLM speak grows, but these Bots are now teaching us to speak like them ..

According to an article in the Washington Post on 20 August 2025 by Adam Aleksic " people are starting to talk like ChatGTP ".  The previous post here on the Realm pointed to some words that have been nominated as indicators that a Large Language Model (LLM) is the likely author of the piece. According to Mr Aleksic's article we can now add to our list of" delve ", " adept ", " realm " and " meticulous ", the words " intricate " and " commendable ".  As he says elsewhere, it is becoming hard to keep up. But his more telling point is that as LLMs become more and more prevalent contributors in our discourse, it's not just the bots that are using these words, we've all started using them more too; in our own speech.  It seems that the feedback loop from the LLMs gulping up so much of their own outputs when scraping content from the web, is intensifying this linguistic shift.   Aleksic says:  ...  In the two...