E7. "Are You Him?" - If someone is crying, are you the kind of person that would stop?

“If someone is crying, are you the kind of person that would stop?”

Kolby, Jeremy, and Jessica discuss the ethics in the short story, “Are You Him?” available for download on Amazon by John Sheirer.

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Discussions - Podcast RSS

Transcripts (By: Transcriptions Fast)

Are You Him

Kolby: Hello and welcome back to After Dinner Conversation, short stories for long conversations. So, all the things that we do each week, you can do with your friends. You read stories, you think about them, you discuss them, you argue over it, ideally maybe you have an adult beverage, you try not to end a friendship over it...

Jessica: Making no promises.

Kolby: Making no promises. And at the end of the day you’ve learned a little bit about yourself and the way you think and why you think what you think, which is really the goal, whatever that may be for you. After Dinner Conversation stories are available on Amazon for download. They’re also... you can catch the newer ones at our website Afterdinnerconversation.com. If you’re enjoying this podcast or YouTube tube video, you can “like” and “subscribe”. That would make us very happy. We are at, once again for our 5th episode, 6th episode? I don’t know, we’re pretty far in now, 7th episode, a ways? Who knows? We are at La Gattara.

Jeremy: La Gattara.

Kolby: La Gattara. And all of these cats are up for adoption. This one in the video...

Jeremy: This is Hemmingway.

Kolby: If you’re watching the video, it’s Hemmingway with a bowtie.

Jessica: Hemmingway is so cute!

Kolby: Because pretty much every cat with a bowtie is pretty awesome. So, if you don’t want to adopt a cat but you just want to visit cats, you can also come by and for like $10 they’ll let you come and hang out. And they do...

Jeremy: It’s a lounge, not a café.

Kolby: Yeah, and they also have special nights where they have yoga and bingo nights and movies nights and all sorts of stuff.

Jessica: And hang out with these adorable cats.

Kolby: So, yea, if you’re not ready to commit to a cat, you can just visit a cat.

(cat jumps on table, stands in front of camera)

(laughter)

Kolby: Or you can have a cat who blocks your camera.

Jeremy: Hi.

Kolby: Hey down front, hey down front. There you go.

Jeremy: There you go.

(laughter)

Kolby: Okay, so the story, or, I’m Kolby....

(bell ringing)

(laughter)

Kolby: Kolby your host...

(laughter)

Jessica: Are you going to bleep that out in post?

Kolby: I’m going to.

Jeremy: Yes.

Kolby: I’m Kolby your host...

Jeremy: And I’m Jeremy.

Kolby: ... And I’m here with co-host Jeremy and Jessica.

Jessica: Hello.

Kolby:  And lots of cats who are hearing us who are really excited. There’s no way that camera is going to stay up there.

(cat is in front of camera, then jumps off)

(laughter)

Kolby: We’ll see how that goes. In any rate, our story today is “Are You Him?”

Jeremy: By John Sheirer.

Kolby: By John Sheirer, yeah. And Jessica, you got picked to do the...

Jeremy: Nope.

Jessica: No.

Kolby: That’s right, Jeremy’s got his... oh my gosh....

(laughter)

Jeremy: This was a long story. So, it’s a long summary.

Kolby: So, Jeremy....

Jessica: Jeremy is amazing at summaries and the rest of us are terrible.

Kolby: Jeremy is setting the bar for summaries.

Jessica: Yes.

Kolby: So, if you haven’t read the story, ideally you would read the story before you listen to the podcast so you would know what we’re talking about. But Jeremy has taken it upon himself to give you a little summary of it, so in the event you don’t have the time to read it...

Jeremy: You’ll know what we’re talking about.

Kolby: Yeah. You can sort of visit anyway and tune in. Alright, so Jeremy, go ahead.

Jeremy: Alright. So, the story opens on our protagonist, Arthur, in the middle of his morning walk to work. After picking up his coffee, the color of which establishes that our protagonist is black, he notices a young woman sitting on a stoop and crying down a side street. Prompted by memories of his own daughter distressed as a teen he finds himself moving towards her to offer aid. After a moment of being startled, the woman realizing that Arthur’s not a threat returns to her sobbing. Arthur addresses the girl, assumes she’s a college student and is probably crying over a romantic breakup. This leads him to several paragraphs of exposition where Arthur provides his own romantic back-story. Arthur married his childhood sweetheart at 18 and after a tour in the army, he and his wife Donna, bought a house down the street from their childhood homes and turned their started jobs into successful mid-level manager careers, fully establishing that Arthur is not a sexual predator in this scenario of middle aged man approaches vulnerable young woman.

(laughter)

Jeremy: Arthur decides to sit next to the girl on the stoop, belatedly asked for permission when she stiffens and asked if she’s okay or wants to talk or that he’ll just sit with her for a few minutes until she feels better. After a couple of minutes of quiet sitting, Arthur notices two white men walk by and that one of them notices the situation: a large black man sitting next to a small white woman in the semi-hidden space. The white man continues on, Arthur guessing that their appearance, his middle-aged and well dressed, hers, their voluntarily not in immediate jeopardy, seemed to not alarm him enough to cause a confrontation. Arthur’s concern though, and mentally goes through possible scenarios of what if he called 9-1-1, which takes him through past memories of racially profiling and how times were and how times are changing and that this was happening to him less frequently and how being a big black guy sometimes had its advantages. But, in this scenario...

Kolby: That’s his quote. His big quote-unquote, big black guy. That’s the phrase he uses.

Jeremy: So, these realizations prompts Arthur to stand up and prepare to leave and at this point the girl has mostly stopped crying and meeting his eyes offers that she just received a call that her dad unexpectedly had died earlier that morning. She asks if Arthur is her dad, come to sit with her one last time to let her know that everything would be okay. And he says he doesn’t know and then the girl thanks him if he has a daughter and then tells Arthur that she is lucky to have him. So, Arthur and the girl part ways and Arthur and pauses to text his daughter a few essential words that needed to be said right at that moment, feelings that he resolved to express to her more often, and then heads to work.

Jessica: Good summary.

Jeremy: Thank you.

Kolby: Good summary. Jessica?

Jessica: Yes?

Kolby: What’d you think? Things that stuck out or jumped out you liked, didn’t like?

Jessica: So, I think probably, the thing that I liked the most was, I felt, well, I did not expect that the woman who was crying on the stoop for her loss to be her dad. And I think the protagonist goes through some scenarios that are related to romantic relationships.

Jeremy: And this is the author of the story really pushing you in this direction.

Jessica: Right.

Kolby: And very subtle good ways, right?

Jeremy: Yeah.

Kolby: It’s a very soft hand.

Jessica: But I also think it’s definitely one that, you know, if we saw somebody crying on a stoop, we would, especially...

Kolby: Near a college.

Jessica: ... a young white girl or a young white woman, we would assume that it is probably a romantic relationship.

Kolby: Because what else could white women have to cry about?

Jessica: Right. Exactly. And I did love that she asked if he was her dad. I just very much enjoyed that moment. And I wondered for myself, if presented in that situation, how would I have answered that. I love that he says, “no” and then he says, “I don’t know”. I love that because I think it says a little bit about the protagonist in the story and a little bit about his belief system or…

Kolby: It mentioned he goes to church. Him and his wife go.

Jessica: I just enjoyed that part of the story. It was very unexpected. It was a very soft and tender twist for me and I think it’s just very pretty. I liked that part of the story.

Jeremy: I liked the story; how well-written the story is; how well the author brings you back and forth between his internal memories and the events that are actually happening in the story. That the transitions are smooth and very well done.

Kolby: I thought from a writing stand point, this is probably just technically the best writing that we’ve probably read so far. It was just so smooth. It was just so much craft to it.

Jeremy: Right. And how the protagonist is really concerned about all these things, and then you see the girl is completely in a different place. It’s not romantic, she’s having this deep existential problem….

Kolby: …these sorts of parallel processes going on. She’s thinking about her dad and he’s having this whole parallel….

Jeremy: Right. It’s really nice.

Jessica: From a writing background, especially when I’m critiquing a story or looking at a story, one of the things that my first checkbox is how has the narrator changed from the beginning to the end of the story. And if they haven’t changed, I have some doubts if it’s a short story or if it’s a vignette. If it’s just a snap shot of their life. And I do feel, in this, that the protagonist does change from the beginning to the end. He texts his daughter something that needs to be said. It was not just him being a good Samaritan, and he sits down on the stoop and look how good I was to this morning.

Kolby: He’s having a moment too by the end.

Jessica: He is. And I think, I forgot Hemingway was here.

(laughter)

Kolby: Because this is the first non-spastic cat we’ve had. This is the one you’re going to adopt.

Jessica: I can’t. My cat per square foot, I’m at my max.

Kolby: Two cats, their friends. Three cats, you’re a cat lady.

Jessica: Absolutely. So, I very much enjoyed that. And I didn’t expect it when I started.

Jeremy: Yes, exactly.

Jessica: And the fact that it kind of evolved that way was a really nice, a very subtle, as Kolby said, a very subtle story.

Kolby: I thought, so for me, I thought it was the strongest craft we’ve seen in a story yet, which I was really excited about to read. I thought the character, the main guy Arthur, I thought his views on race, I thought, were really complex in a good way. In a realistic way, which I was really interested to see because he is not the T.V. nighttime stereotype African American or black man. He’s a guy who went into the military, went on a G.I. bill, married his high school sweetheart, probably never dated, just dated the one girl and married her, he mentions that he’s saving up to get his daughter a car for a graduation present. And yet, he still experiences racism and he understands it and how he has to take it into account with his interactions with society. And I think that was interesting. And yet, he even says, “I inherently think all people are good, I think police officers are generally good with a few bad ones, I’ve experienced driving while black but I think that’s not the case.” But yet he is also very much aware is this person going to call 9-1-1 on me? Is this person, their understanding my attire that I’m dressed in a suit, and so I’m not threatening, and so he very much understand the racist world that he lives in, and yet doesn’t seem to harbor a great deal of animosity about it, which I don’t know how authentic that is, but it certainly read in a very intricate way that I really appreciated.

Jessica: It was definitely a complex way.

Kolby: I also think it made him really strong character because you realize that by stopping and talking to this woman, he’s not just doing something nice, he’s doing something nice at peril.

Jessica: Yes!

Kolby: As oppose to if you or I were to stop to talk to someone that was crying, we wouldn’t think, like…

Jeremy: … we’re at risk in the same way.

Kolby: Right. And I wearing good enough clothes that the person isn’t going to think I’m going to try to do something? Am I old enough that I no longer seem threatening, like a quote-unquote big black man? We don’t have to take in this large calculation before making the most basic human choice.

Jessica: Yes. And just to clarify for the podcast listening that are audio only, we are three white people sitting around a table with a bunch of cats.

Kolby: Yeah, that are black and white.

(laughter)

Jessica: But yes. I think the way the story was written, I think it showed the subtle, almost like an internal view of microaggressions and how they shape how you interact with the world on a day to day basis. Which is probably not something that most people who are not of color would know happens every single day.

Kolby: And they deal with every single day.

Jessica: Right.

Kolby: And the accumulative effect on how you interact with the world.

Jessica: Absolutely. Absolutely.

Kolby: And I think that’s what makes this character so angelic in a way is that he’s aware of all of it, but somehow refuses to internalize it in the same way a person would because that’s just the way it goes. One of things I also thought, it reminded me of another story I read, it was just a small part of the story, where a black man and a white man are walking in the south together, and a white woman comes out of a bar drunk and she’s really, like, fall down drunk, and she starts talking to everybody, and the black man immediately crosses the street, and the white guy chases after him. And he’s like, “why did you do that?” And he’s like, “well, black guy, white woman” and this was the 1960s when the story takes place, “if she falls on me, if something happens, if something happens to her…”

Jeremy: It’s absolutely all his fault.

Kolby: “… it’s all on me. So, I need to remove myself from that situation.” And the white person’s response was, “that’s pretty fast thinking” and the black character’s response was, “it’s just habit. I’ve been black my whole life.” It’s not fast thinking, it’s internalized instinct.

Jeremy: Ingrained behavior.

Kolby: And I thought this was a really good story to show how all those microaggressions and all those ways get internalized and how, just without even thinking about it, how you’re figuring that stuff out.

Jeremy: And the mental paths that it pushes him down, where previously in the first part of the story, he’s really thinking about his daughter in all the this and what possibilities of what this woman is going through and then as soon as there’s this brief moment with the people that walk by, the whole tone of the story changes and now he’s thinking about the potential situation that he’s in.

Kolby: And it’s immediate.

Jeremy: It’s immediate.

Kolby: Right. Because he’s been doing it his whole life.

Jessica: And in the writing one of the things I really enjoyed, was when the white dudes walk by, it’s a micro-second in their stride, it’s this pause that I don’t remember the phrasing that the writer used, and I’ve seen that moment, you’ve seen that moment before.

Kolby: When someone is doing a flash assessment of the situation.

Jessica: Yeah. And as a woman, if I walked by that alley, I would absolutely do the same. Flash assessment. Woman sitting on a step in an alley with another man…

Jeremy: … what’s going on, she looks in distress potentially.

Jessica: She’s in distress…

Kolby: Is she safe?

Jessica: Is she safe? Do I need to make eye contact? I think for women, there’s a lot of things that happen in that micro-second. So, yea, I think it’s a really good internalization event of that society.

Kolby: The conversation I wanted to have after reading it, and I think it’s because it’s a character that’s so 3 dimensional, I feel like I could talk to the person, I really wanted to have a long conversation about, “why aren’t you angrier?” or “how is it this doesn’t bother you?”, “how is it…?” And one of the parts, he talks about, “I see people who kneel, the football players that don’t kneel for the national anthem, and I don’t do it but I understand why they do.” And its like, of course you understand it! It’s not like you’re immune. You’re seeing all these things, and you’re describing all these experiences you have, and yet you’re not kneeling. And I’m like, “why aren’t you?” And not that I’m judging the person, everyone makes their own choices, but I feel like…

Jeremy: You’re wondering what is it then what’s making him make this choice?

Kolby: I could comfortably have an hour conversation with this guy about how he’s come to all of these conclusions when other people come to different conclusions. He even mentions it’s easier going to the mall with a white friend because you don’t get followed around as much.

Jeremy: By security.

Kolby: You don’t get followed by security.

Jessica: I think it goes back to perhaps, and perhaps this contributes to our greater discussion of a deeper conversation about the story, taking this story and then turning to two people that we don’t necessarily understand why they react the way they do. It’s very easy to judge people by the actions kneeling or not, standing for the pledge of allegiance or not, signing up for the military or not, and to have that discussion. I grew up in a very poor part of the United States, I know Jeremy did as well, and I know that lots of people signed up for military service to get out of it, but there were a lot of us that didn’t.

Jeremy: A lot of people that stayed.

Jessica: And a lot of people who stayed in that poor area, and my gut instinct is, “oh my god, get out! Why haven’t you gotten out?” But there’s lot of things that contribute to that person’s internal dialogue of how they deal with the world. And I think this is a glimpse into something we don’t experience, so that maybe we can grow a little bit of empathy. But, then to try and take that and grow a little empathy where is isn’t a story.

Kolby: So, I’m pretty sure Jeremy knows this, I don’t know if Jessica does, so obviously I was in the Peace Corps and I was in Mozambique, and literally the directions to my house, the way they gave it to people was “drive down the EN 1, which is the only freeway, the only paved main road, until you get to kilometer marker 137, pull over to the side of the road, wait until you see somebody, and then ask them where the white guy lives.”

(laughter)

Kolby: Because I lived back in the bush, so you couldn’t really find my house. You can’t be like, “hey take this dirt path.”

Jeremy: There were no GPS.

Kolby: Yea, there’s no GPS at the time.

Jeremy: None of the streets have names.

Kolby: So, you literally get off the public transportation because you just flag then down and tell them when you want to get off. Kilometer 137, where’s the white guy live. And everyone knows where the white guy lives because I’m the only white guy in this African village. I also have a clear memory of, I think it was “Molungo (sp?)” I don’t even know if it’s a derogatory term, it’s just what everyone called me. Like, “the white guy.” Or when I lived in China, we were always, it translated to foreigner, but it literally meant outsider, was the way people would be like, “whatever, outsider, outsider, outsider.” I just remembered thinking, “oh, every day forever huh? You get this every day?” And the main thing I took away from it, and then I’ll stop my little thing, I was amazed in some ways, and I’m not saying this is similar to the American experience or not, how quickly I forgot I looked different because I was surrounded by nothing from Africans. Like, not African Americans, but Africans, day in and day out, month after month, years, and then I’d be walking down the street and I’d see a white guy. I’d be like, “hey, check out the white guy!”

(laughter)

Kolby: My friend would be like, “You’re the white guy.”

(laughter)

Kolby: I’m like, “oh my god, you’re right! I totally forgot!”

(laughter)

Kolby: “I totally forgot I’m the white guy!” Just because, I would see it and I would just, “yea, this is where I am.”

Jessica: And I think that also speaks to an experience where, and I’m making an assumption here but considering your role there, is that the white guy was not derogatory.

Kolby: No. There wasn’t a racial bias. I had a very privileged spot. Television shows didn’t show how I rob everybody and blah blah blah.

Jessica: And so, you got to operate in this idea of, “yea, I got to forget about my race because everybody loved me.”

Kolby: It’s like having a British accent in America.

Jessica: Absolutely. You can be a serial killer, I’ll still have a crush on you.

Kolby: Because you got a British accent.

Jessica: right.

(laughter)

Jessica: So, I think it’s a little…

Kolby: That’s great point. I did not have a similar experience. You’re right.

Jessica: But I think you would have remembered you were white if every day you were made to think, “oh, you’re white and you’re different and that’s a bad thing.” And then when that white guy walked down the street, your response would’ve been like, “(deep breath in) I fear for that white guy” as a white guy, and also is that a bad thing?

Kolby: Oddly enough, the guys who had it the hardest, and then we’ll get back to the story, is actually not the white American’s in Mozambique, it was the African American’s in Mozambique because they were lighter skinned. And so, the African’s were like, “what’s up with the lighter skin?” And the white people were like, “you’re a black guy, we have already got all the prejudices and so…”

Jessica: And that does speak to a lot of the biracial experiences in America.

Kolby: Going back to the story, did either of you pause or did you have any questions about the assumptions that he was making about her? He talks about what could a white girl possibly have a problem about? Only a boy. And he’s wrong. His prejudice, I guess you could say for lack of a better term, about her issues are entirely not correct.

Jeremy: That’s his experience with white privilege, and that’s his stereotype.

Kolby: That they couldn’t have anything to worry about.

Jessica: And although, I will say it’s not harmful.

Kolby: Right. It wasn’t a negative stereotype.

Jessica: It’s just a stereotype. I also find it, it’s one of those things as a woman, I always notice when the word “girl” is substituted for woman. Like in the questions, in the discussion questions at the end, it discusses about the girl and I’m like, “hmm, it’s not a girl, she’s a woman.” It was very well established by the end of the story that she was old enough to be called a woman. But it is something that happens with women all the time, is that we are called “girls”. And I do it myself, it’s a society thing, but it is a very interesting… it then makes the assumption “everything is not negated, but lessened.”

Kolby: Your problems can’t be complicated if you’re a girl.

Jessica: Correct.

Kolby: Yeah, and that is absolutely not true in the story or in life.

Jeremy: And I think I did that in the synopsis too, it was call her a woman as opposed to a girl at some point.

Jessica: Yes, I noticed it.

Kolby: That’s why you’re still sitting at the table. Didn’t get clobbered.

(laughter)

Jessica: It’s something, I think, is part to that whole stereotype you’re alluding to is…

Kolby: There’re other stereotypes going on here, not just the ones going against him.

Jessica: Right. But, in general, that’s not to say inf… what’s the word… infantilizing... haha! Infantilizing women does have negative consequences, but I will say, I think nobody wins in a who has it…

Kolby: Who has it worse.

Jessica: Who has it worse, right? But I think that, it is a stereotype he came in with but he also didn’t act on that stereotype. I don’t know. I think it’s all part of recognizing bias.

Kolby: One of the thigs she asks him, the title of the thing is “Are You Him?” Do you think… I think she says, “are you my father, is an angel?” Which the implication is are you an angel? I, first of all thought it was a great title for the story, but I also thought it asked… in a way it asked an interesting question, of course not literally, he’s not literally her father come back from the dead, but in the sense of is he a kind of angel? I was kind of like, “—ish.” I felt very -ish about that, like, “yeah, in a way you kind of are her dad.” 

Jeremy: Exactly. And you are this visiting angel to do exactly what she needed at that time.

Kolby: It wouldn’t have served the story, but it would’ve been great if he’d been like, “yeah.”

(laughter)

Kolby: “By the way, the cure for blindness and a million dollars are buried under the house, start digging.” Then just gets up and walks away.

(laughter)

Jessica: Well and I thought in that idea of how would I answer? My first thought was would I have just said yes? This woman needs it. She needs it to be yes. She needs her father to come and sit with her, but then it’s super awkward the next time they meet in a coffee shop.

(laughter)

Jessica: Like, “no, not right now, I’m not your dad.”

Kolby: Like, “Right now I’m just putting air in my tires, I’m shopping for underwear I don’t need to have this moment”.

Jessica: So, I think it was a perfect answer for him to say, “no, I don’t know, I don’t think so.” I think that that’s beautiful. Because maybe he doesn’t know? Maybe. We see that he comes from a religious background, perhaps he believes that he was sent to sit on this stoop for a reason?

Kolby: And it talks about his religious background. I was a little jealous of his family. This is not necessarily related to our questions. He is the most perfect dad. If I had any complaint at all about the story, and this is low level complaint, he is a flawless human being.

Jessica: So, I wondered, did the author do that specifically so that white people reading it would not be thrown off?

Kolby: They wouldn’t look for bait of, “oh, he’s got other motivation”. Yeah.

Jeremy: Possibly.

Jessica: I worry that, not that I worry that the author did this, but I worry white readers would be thrown off by it and therefor…

Kolby: Even by the fact that she mentions it, that she was pretty. 

Jessica: Or had his background been that he dated a ton, or was divorced, or had a bad relationship with his daughter.

Jeremy: Suddenly there’s these other motivations that are potentially…

Kolby: Even if the entire story happened the same way, when he got up and left, you’re like, “I bet… I know…” You start wondering.

Jessica: Yeah. And I worry that. And what I’m trying to say is, is it necessary that we can only, as white readers, we can only read flawless black characters? And if that’s the case, gosh- we…

Jeremy: Have a lot of work to do.

Kolby: A long way to go.

Jessica: have a long way to go. So much work to do. Because that’s real sad. We definitely would have not taken a second glance if it was a white dude that was sitting on a stoop with her and was divorced and was…

Jeremy: How would the story would have been if his thoughts are…?

Kolby: Presidential elections much?

(laughter)

Jeremy: No. How would the story would have read if while he’s having these thoughts of sitting next to her, they’re thought of “how do I hit on her?”

Jessica: Right.

Kolby: Then that would’ve hit on every stereotype of every thing that ever would of…

Jeremy: And what would the differences have been if this was a white guy, and this is what he’s thinking? A white middle-aged guy. Yes, there are all these other stereotypes, but how would that have affected this ending, where that’s not why she thought he was there?

Jessica: Yeah, totally. And even if, another interesting question to ask about this, all this internal dialogue that happens, all this internal backstory that happens, she is never privy too. But how would, us as a reader, had he been thinking about when he can ask her out? And nothing else happens in the story externally, how would we, as a reader, walked away from that story? It would have been a much different experience.

Kolby: I also think it would have been a different experience also if we’d gotten the entire story from her perspective instead of his perspective. Because one of the things that makes this character flawless, is as he’s interacting with her, we’re getting the flashbacks of the soccer practice, and the military experience, and the married your sweetheart, so we know his perfect intent when she does not.

Jessica: Correct.

Kolby: She just knows she’s having a bad day and he comes and hangs out.  And so, from her perspective, it would have been, we as readers, maybe would have superimposed because of our own biases ill intent that by seeing it from his perspective, we know is not there.

Jessica: Right.

Jeremy: That’s a good point.

Jessica: I also think about does she think he’s an angel because dudes come and sitting next to her?

Kolby: Morgan Freeman. Because Morgan Freeman always plays God.

(laughter)

Kolby: So of course, if an angel is going to come, they got to look like Morgan Freeman.

(laughter)

Jessica: I was going to say some dude that just doesn’t hit, suddenly is an angel. That’s the bar, it’s so low.

(laughter)

Jeremy: Wow.

Jessica: Just saying.

Jeremy: We have a long way to go.

Kolby: We have a long way to go. I think that’s one of things though, that you’re right, I didn’t think about this as I was reading it necessarily, but I think you’re comments Jessica, make a lot of sense to me in that I think this story shows that by the way it has to be written, it shows there’s so much more work. I think as a white reader, I think you would be more forgiving of some mixed motivations that good can still come of, from a white character.

Jessica: Well, this definitely was something; I identify as LGBTQ and one of the things that definitely happened in the LGBTQ community with writing in the last decade, was there was this big movement of LGBTQ readers, “For the love of god, can we get not the perfect gay person? Can we get a villain that’s evil but somehow is not just evil just because they’re gay? Evil just because they’re evil”

Kolby: You can be gay and evil and have them be unrelated.

Jessica: Right! Yeah. And I thought it was such a good comment, and we have seen literature evolve especially speculative fiction, evolve since then to fill that void. But it was a void that people were, like, you know, we only get Morgan Freeman as God. That’s it. And we only got gay people who were the best friend, the very effeminate best friend but…

Jeremy: The supportive non-threatening male character.

Jessica: Correct. And that was all we were getting. And now we’re getting a more nuanced evolution of literature through that. And I think that’s good, that shows we’re moving in the right direction.

Kolby: That it’s becoming a characteristic as opposed to a trait. Like a defining trait.

Jessica: Right. Or a motive for that matter. It was definitely motive at that point.

Kolby: What was the TV show I’ve kept insisting that you watch?

Jeremy: Euphoria. HBO.

Kolby: Euphoria, where one the main characters is trans or transitioning.

Jeremy: Transitioning.

Kolby:  It has a little bit, but it’s not he motivating character…

Jeremy: It’s a characteristic, but it’s not the defining characteristic for the character in this scenario.

Kolby: It’s like if she had blonde hair, it doesn’t matter in the thing.

Jessica: I was telling Kolby this on the way in, the reboot of the Jem and the Holograms comic book is frickin phenomenal.

(laughter)

Kolby: I’m going to have to read it or watch it now.

Jessica: Read.  There’s no show.

Jeremy: Yet.

Jessica: Yet.

(laughter)

Kolby: I haven’t seen Evil Dead 2, yet.

(laughter)

Jessica: So, there are gay characters and there are trans characters in Jem and the Holograms reboot, and literally it just doesn’t come up.

Kolby: It’s not the point of their character.

Jessica: There’s like one, it’s definitely not the point of their character, there’s like one point where the woman tells the rest of the group that, “by the way I’m trans because you’re putting me on stage and this may come out in the press.” And they were like, “ok” and that was it. And she was relieved. There was definitely a plot line there, but in general, it was not the point of the story. That’s…

Jeremy: Where you want to see things.

Jessica: …where you want to see things go.

Jeremy: Some realism in our writings.

Jessica: Yes.

Kolby: So, you’ve been listening to After Dinner Conversations, short stories for long conversations. This podcast as well as all the other ones, are available on I-tunes, I-podcast, what’s it called now?

(laughter)

Jessica: Please stop.

Jeremy: Google play.

Kolby: No because they changed I-tunes to I-podcasts.

Jessica: Wherever you get your podcasts.

Kolby: Wherever you get your podcasts, also on YouTube. All of the short stories are available on Amazon. You can also get some of the new ones that haven’t been released as e-books yet on www.afterdinnerconversation.com.

Jessica: Hey Kolby?

Kolby: Yes ma’am?

Jessica: What if I was a writer and wanted to write a story for After Dinner Conversation?

Kolby: So, if you were a writer and you wanted to write a story for After Dinner Conversation, first I would advise you proofread your story before sending it in.

(laughter)

Jeremy: Because Kolby can’t read. I really have to read everything to him over the phone.

Kolby: We get a lot of not final products, I would say, but assuming you’ve proofread it and assuming you’ve asked yourself, “is this sort of a literary version of the trolly problem?” then the short story version of the trolly problem, which by the way nobody has sent it in yet but I bet it’ll happen.

Jeremy: It’ll happen.  

Kolby: Now it will. Then please do send it in, because that would be amazing. We get a lot already; we probably get 3-5 a day that are submitted now.

Jessica: That’s great.

Kolby: But if we got 5-7 a day submitted I would not be disappointed. Particularly if any of those additional ones were good, or amazing or phenomenal or as good as this one. If we got 5-7 “Are you Him”’s a day, I would not be sad.

Jessica: So, where do you submit?

Kolby: You go to our website. Afterdinnerconversation.com

Jeremy: I think that was the questions actually.

Jessica: Where are the submission guidelines?

Kolby: Oh yeah, the submission guidelines are on the website as well.

Jessica: Thanks Jeremy.

Kolby: And if you’re part of…

(laughter)

Kolby: If you’re part of do a trope or, what’s the other one…

Jessica: Submittable…

Kolby: Submission grinder, which is a weird name for a submission thing. We actually just finished a little while ago our writing competition and in a couple of weeks we’ll do that story as well. By the way, that’s the other cool thing about submitting, what do writers want? They want their story not only read, but discussed and what better way than to be, “yea, we’re going to discuss your story for a half an hour with cats.”

Jessica: A cat names Hemmingway.  

Kolby: That pretty much sells itself.

Jessica: I agree.

Kolby: So next week, we have “Lay On.” Three outcast witches visit the hippy era to tempt a street musician. And it definitely sort of flavors Macbeth.

Jessica: Some genre’s going on. Some speculative fiction.

Kolby: Are you going to have a long paragraph like Jeremy to discuss it?

(silence)

(laughter)

Kolby: Okay, okay. Well, hopefully Hemmingway will not be adopted yet and he’ll still be here for us next time we’re back.

Jessica: Yeah, I hope so.

Kolby: Thank you for joining us. Bye.

Jessica: Bye.

E6. "As You Wish" - If you could change anything about yourself, would you ever stop?

“If you could change anything about yourself, would you ever stop?”

Kolby, Jeremy, and Jessica discuss the ethics in the children’s short story, “As You Wish” available for download on Amazon by Tyler W. Kurt.

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Discussions - Podcast RSS

Transcript (By: Transcriptions Fast)

As You Wish

Kolby: Hi and welcome back. You are here for After Dinner Conversation. After Dinner Conversation is a series of short stories and podcasts. Short stories for long discussions. I’m going to get that right someday. And we’re here again. I’m your co-host Kolby with co-hosts Jeremy and Jessica. And we’re once again in La Gattara, a place that adopts cats out because they’re awesome. We were playing with the cats beforehand.

Jessica: Kolby made me stop.

Kolby: Yea, we had to stop to actually work.

(laughter)

Kolby: And they are amazing. So, you should definitely come by. They’re in Tempe Arizona if you’re in this area. Come and check them out. Also, if you enjoy this please “like” or “subscribe” to whatever your thing is…

(laughter)

Jessica: Your thing?

Kolby: Well, no.

Jeremy: Wherever you’re consuming this.

Kolby: It could be on I-tunes, it could be on Stitcher…

Jessica: I use Overcast.

Kolby: Overcast. It could be undercast. It could be…

Jeremy: Google Play.

Kolby: Google Play.

Jessica: I bet you it’s on YouTube.

It is on YouTube. I know because I spend all the time editing the videos. Okay. And so, our story today is “As You Wish” by Tyler Kurt. And Jessica, you are our person. Now, Jeremy set the bar pretty high last week.

Jessicia: Yeah, he did. Now I’m stressed out about it.

Kolby: You should be.

Jessica: And I didn’t type it up.

Kolby: You didn’t rewrite the entire story and call it a summary?

(laughter)

Jessica: I didn’t.

Kolby: Sorry Jeremy. I got to let that go man. I’m self-conscious that I do such a bad job and you do such a good job.

Jessica: He did a really good job.

Kolby: He did.

Jessica: Alright. So, this is “As You Wish”, which is a children’s story. I believe this is your first children’s story to discuss on the podcast?

Kolby: It is actually.

Jessica: So, this is an all-ages story and it’s about Sad Bear and his friends. Sad Bear is a stuffed animal and his friends were stuffed animals that live in a trunk and they have no idea how long they’ve been in the trunk. Then one day the trunk is opened by an elderly lady and she can hear the toys and they can hear here and they converse. She has promised to fix them so that they can be adopted out to other children and the toy’s start requesting fixes. So, some of the fixes are like, “fix my arm that’s fallen off”, or “fix my buttons”, sort of cosmetic. And some that are asking for much larger changes to be completely different animals. Like, “I want to be a giraffe.”

Kolby: The giraffe wants a shorter neck, right?

Jessica: Yea, something like that. Wants a shorter neck. And we are introduced to Sad Bear and she asks Sad Bear if Sad Bear would like for his face to become a happy face. And he says “no” and I believe the other friends don’t understand, or perhaps it’s just that she doesn’t understand, the elderly lady who finds them. But he is very polite about it, but says he wants to remain to be a sad bear.

Kolby: And you read this to your daughter, didn’t you?

Jessica: I did read this to my daughter.

Kolby: And what was her opinion?

Jessica: She was unimpressed.

Kolby: Fair.

(laughter)

Kolby: But I thought the reason she was unimpressed was interesting.

Jessica: Well, I mean, if it’s…

Kolby: She’s like, “I found the writing derivative”.

(laughter)

Kolby: It’s like Toy Story.

Jessica: It’s like Toy Story. No, I think, I definitely spend a lot of time with my daughter in kind of an awareness and emotional intelligence standpoint and so we really try to accept people as they are. And sometimes you want to change who you are, and that’s totally okay. And sometimes, you want to be who you are, and we don’t need to change you to make you our friend. We will accept you no matter what. So, we really try to come from a place of always saying “yes” to people who want to be friend whether that’s, you know…

Kolby: That sounds like really good parenting. I’m going to cry.

Jessica: Well, it actually came, I think a “This American Life Story” about…

Kolby: Of course, it did, of course it did…

Jessica: … a teacher who, she met with high school students and asked high school students “why don’t you play with other groups of high school students? Why don’t you guys hang out? What if you guys just said “yes” whenever someone said they wanted to enter your friends’ group?” And they were like, “oh, maybe if you started with us earlier. Maybe if that was something socially acceptable earlier. Like, try middle school.”  So, she tried middle school and middle schoolers were like, “try elementary school.” And elementary students were like, “maybe try kindergartners.” And kindergartners were like “maybe try preschool.” And so, she started teaching it in a kindergarten and it’s something that I’ve taught my daughter, just because there’s so much, especially with little girls, there’s so much bullying. So, anyway, I’m derailing us.

Kolby: No, so, the reason I bring that up is because I had a follow-up questions I was waiting for.

Jessica: So, you talked to me so you could...

Kolby: I prepped

Jessica: … ambush me.

(laughter)

Jessica: It’s a podcast ambush. So, my question is, first off, that sounds very progressive and very good parenting.

Jessica: I hope so.

Kolby: Accept people as they are. Like, everyone’s different, some people choose to be different than whatever, and if you want to whatever.

Jessica: Right.

Kolby: But, aren’t there things, like, if somebody comes in with ginormous fake breasts, don’t you I roll? I know you must.

Jessica: Ummm.

(laughter)

Kolby: You’re not like, well in your heart…

Jeremy: We know you Jessica.

(laughter)

Jessica: I’m Judgy  Mc Judgerson.

Kolby: So, I know you’re not like, “well….” So, this is, I think the sort of weird thing about that thing, that what you’re saying is if somebody is saying “I’m transitioning”, you’d be like, “be who you are in the inside”. But, if somebody says, “I’m a D”, you’re like, “No, you’re a B. You need to be a B-cup and need to accept yourself for who you are.” And it’s like, “No, I’m a D-cup on the inside.”

Jessica: Right. Well, so I don’t think, and Kolby and Jeremy have known me a long time so they know I’m very judgy so it’s true to call me out on that; what I would say is that the one does not negate the other. Somebody who comes in with, I was hoping to keep this PG so talking about giant breasts is a little weird…

Jeremy: For a kid’s story.

Kolby: For a kid’s story. I didn’t even think about that.

Jessica: Right.

Kolby: I should’ve come up with a better example.

Jessica: Like giant fake nose.

Kolby: There you go. A Pinocchio nose.

(Laughter)

Jessica: That does not negate that they’re a human and that does not negate that can be friends with them. We can still…

Kolby: You can judge them and befriend them.

Jeremy: You can still judge them until you find out this was a nose reduction. You know. And they had a big Double-H nose before.

(laughter)

Jessica: Right. Right. Totally!

Kolby: So, what you’re saying, is I can be friends with people that I judge?

Jessica: I mean, that’s why we’re still friends.

Kolby: Must be.

(laughter)

Jessica: I’m judging you all the time.

Kolby: I know.

Jessica: And I still love you.

Kolby: I just wish you wouldn’t write it on the bathroom mirror.

(laughter)

Jessica: I’m sorry.

Kolby: Okay. So, to go back to the story, Jeremy, I assume you did not…

Jeremy: Are you done with your summary?

(laughter)

Jessica: Yes, was it too short for you?

(laughter)

Kolby: It’s a children’s story.

Jeremy: No, he interrupted.

Jessica: Oh.

(laughter)

Jessica: I was done with the summary, yes. Sad bear at the end decides to stay Sad Bear.

Kolby: So, one thing that I do want to point out though, is he is not just sad, he’s genetically sad, right? His face…

Jeremy: He’s drawn sad, he has a permanent frown.

Kolby: Right, because it’s sown on. And so, it’s like a clinical depression or whatever that’s he’s got, like a genetic depression that could be fixed. So, Jeremy what do you think? You’ve got a daughter, your daughter comes to you and says, “look, I’m sad all the time” and you go, “well…”

Jessica: You’re like, “Welcome to being a teenager.”

(laughter)

Kolby: It’s true. You’re like, “so what you’re saying is that you’re 17.” Do you think one way or the other about somebody who chooses to fix something that might just be hard coded into them?

Jeremy: It’s a really loaded question. It depends on what it is, because I feel like societally, we have different responses to different conditions. Where depression is absolutely a different condition than physical appearance, and where it’s much more acceptable to change your physical appearance than to take medication.

Kolby: To me, they’re the same. It’s like, “a broken arm is a broken arm”, you go fix it. But I understand. Socially…

Jeremy: There’s a lot involved in what. And how much do you try to not fix the problem in, like, make them change, but how do you solve the problem by being supportive and getting them the help that they need to understand if this is really a condition…

Kolby: Hard coded.

Jeremy:  Right. Or something that they need to exercise more and this is just a chemical imbalance they have because they don’t exercise enough.

Kolby: Eat better, more sleep, exercise more.

Jeremy: Right, how much of it is a result of chemical imbalance as opposed, a condition as opposed to a…

Kolby: … so, in the case of sad bear….

Jeremy: Ok.

Kolby: Sad Bear it’s not the more exercise. It is literally sewn on his mouth.

Jeremy: Yes. It’s up to him at that point if he wants to change, then we should be supportive of his desire to change. We should be supportive of the giraffe’s desire to change his appearance.

Kolby: And if he doesn’t want to change…

Jeremy: Absolutely.

Kolby: … be supportive of the not desire to change.

Jessica: And I do want to point out, because I always feel like this is something that we don’t talk enough about, that especially when we’re talking about medication or depression…

Kolby: I would point out this is from the person who wears glasses.

Jessica: Correct.

Kolby: To fix her eyes.

Jessica: To fix my eyes. How dare I? Or, like, I have ADD. There is a definite societal bias to this neural normalcy. This idea that everybody needs to be the same and we all need to think the same and we all need to act the same, and anything outside of that….

Jeremy: … and look the same…

Jessica: Right.

Jeremy: … it sounds like you’re talking about the eugenics program again?

(laughter)

Kolby:  We’re back to eugenics.

Jessica:  This is a call back to “Pretty Pragmatism” which was last week’s episode. Please tune in and you can listen all about that.

Kolby: Way to keep it kid friendly. Good call.

(laughter)

Jessica: It’s only Nazi’s kids. Don’t worry.

(laughter)

Jessica: But I think that a lot of times we get caught up in this idea of what your thinking, feeling, acting, is not what everybody else is and therefor you need to fix it. And that is very ablest, that is very much part of this society of everything has to be homogenous and that’s not okay. There’s a lot…

Kolby: And I also think dangerous too.

Jessica: Super dangerous.

Kolby: If you look at homogenous groups, whether that’s Native American groups for example, because that’s a very small gene pool that all Native American’s derive from, that it creates risks as opposed to have a very diverse gene pool, whether that’s the different sort of things that are going on in people’s heads, whether that’s physical genetics, whether that’s whatever. It creates a resiliency.

Jessica: And I would say, especially with the way some of our greatest thinkers of our time were people that didn’t fit into the school setting well. Einstein was terrible at school.

Jeremy: Diversity is important for a lot of reasons.

Jessica: And that’s not to say that you must be a genius in order to be allowed to be abnormal; you must be super smart and then we’ll let you be in the abnormal group. But, that’s a thing. And I think that that’s what, when I read this story, a lot of the hackles that were raised and that’s not the fault of the author it’s just the fault of the topic, is that I’m immediately, “are we judging the group that wants to change and are we judging the…”

Kolby: I was.

Jessica: Really?

Kolby: I totally was. Yeah. I’ll tell you why. So, some of them I understood. You’re missing an arm because a dog ripped your arm off, okay, replace the arm. Your dress is bad, you want a new dress, okay that’s a little bit odd but whatever, take the new dress. The one that I legitimately got misty eyed on, we were talking about this right before we started, was the unicorn.

Jessica: I made fun of you.

Jeremy: For not wanting to be a unicorn.

Kolby: Because, it specifically says, “you’re unique and special.” And the unicorn says, “I don’t want to be unique and special.” And I don’t… that’s so… and of course, it’s like a gay pride thing too, but like, I can hear somebody saying, “I don’t want to stand out. I want to go to high school or junior high or be an adult and I want to be utterly unnoticeable.”

Jeremy: “why do I have to be different when I just want to fit in.”

Kolby: Right! And it’s just like, you don’t understand! You’re a miracle and you want to un-miracle yourself. So yes. So, I consequently, I judge that unicorn, I was like, “unicorn, you got to….” I was so sad; it’s making me teary eyed right now.

Jeremy: It was a good thing in the story though, from a story perspective, to almost go from this- it’s a broken leg, to a new dress, to progress to all of these deep psychological changes, or deep physical changes that would change your psychology. So, it was an interesting approach of the story to go from that minimum level to that maximum, “I want to completely change.”

Kolby: To a universally acceptable fix to a breast augmentation.

Jeremy: Nose augmentation.

Jessica: Nose augmentation.

Kolby: Nose augmentation. I want a bigger nose. What about the, I think it was a rabbit, that wanted better eyesight than he was born with, because he was born with cheap plastic eyes, and was like, “as long as you’re putting in new eyes, can put you in better eyes?”

Jessica: Look, if I could have better eyes, if I could not…

Kolby: Like, Geordi eyes from Star Trek.

Jessica: If I could not just correct my vision…

Jeremy: I was thinking Ghost in the Shell with the bionic eyes.

Jessica: If I could have, instead of 20/20, is it 40/20?

Kolby: 20/15. Like better than 20/20.

Jessica: I would absolutely. If the doctor was like, “hey, it’s the same price, which one do you want?” I’m going for the 20/15. I would absolutely try to have better eyes.

Kolby: Doesn’t that go a little against the idea of being accepting of…

Jessica: Well, am I making that choice, or am I making a choice for someone else?

Kolby: You’re making the choice for you.

Jessica: Then I get to decide that. I decide not to be medicated for ADD. I decide that too.

Kolby: So, you don’t judge the unicorn then is what you’re saying?

Jessica: I definitely don’t judge the unicorn. I don’t understand it.

Jeremy: But you have to not judge that decision.

Jessica: I don’t know. They don’t have cool parents like I am.

(laughter)

Kolby: Yea, like where did this unicorn parents… where are did all these doll’s parents go? Abandon them to some kid in a toy chest.

Jessica: Right. So, I don’t know how that person was raised. I don’t know what their day-to-day fight is. Just because I don’t medicate for ADD doesn’t mean that I judge people that do medicate for ADD. It’s their personal decision that clearly, they’re struggling with whatever they’re struggling with, and I have a different struggle.

Kolby: Jeremy, what would you think, if your daughter came to you and said, “I want fill-in-the-blank, breast augmentation…”

Jessica: “bigger better nose”

Kolby: “I want eyes that can see in the infrared as well.”

Jeremy: I struggle with the whole idea of them getting tattoos.

Kolby: That’s a great example.

Jessica: Whoa! They did get tattoos?

Kolby: One of them has one.

Jeremy: The older one. The other one just turned 18 is like, “as soon as I have money, tattoo time.”

Kolby: What is their tattoo? What does it say like, “live free or die” or something?

(laughter)

Kolby: Please tell me it’s, “live free or die” but in binary? That would be.

Jeremy: “Do Not Resuscitate”

(laughter)

Kolby: That would be like, that exactly is everything I know about your family if it’s binary or written in barcode.

Jessica: I was going to say in Elvish.

Kolby: If you can read this, go away?

(laughter)

Jeremy: No, I would have to be supportive, but try to play the devil’s advocate of like…

Kolby: It’s forever.

Jeremy: … “it’s forever. Do you really want to do this? Think about it, get good art at least, and find a good…”

Kolby: “Get good art at least. Get a good doctor.

Jeremy: “…get a good artist, the offer from the guy down the street on the corner, yea- don’t get his tattoos.”

Kolby: So, let me get this straight, let’s say your daughter’s 17, and she’s like, “look I need you to sign this slip, they won’t let me do it until they’re 18. Do you sign the slip?”

Jeremy: It really depends on what it is.

Kolby: So, now you’re curator of content.

Jeremy: Absolutely.

Kolby: Wow!

Jeremy: From that perspective.

Jessica: I think that’s okay, because at this point, you have such a responsibility as a parent.

Jeremy: Yes, that if you’re under 18, we really need to discuss the consequences of this and the more drastic the change… like, a tattoo at 17, yeah, you can get a tattoo. But if you want a gender transition, I mean, that’s why they really make you wait 2 years for a gender transition.

Jessica: Although, to bring it to newer science, a lot of newer science especially for gender transitioning, that because kids identify so early …

Kolby: It’s an easier transition.

Jessica: … it’s an easier transition to start when they’re children.

Jeremy: Okay.

Jessica: So, that again, is one of those things you have to judge as a parent, and as a parent, and decide. But I think if my daughter, who is amazing and awesome and has decent judgment…

Kolby: Your daughter is going to use this video, by the way, to get a tattoo now.

Jeremy: Oh, absolutely.

Jessica: Yeah, I know.

Jeremy: She’s already getting a tattoo. She’s 18.

Jessica: If at 16, she came to me and said she wanted a tattoo, I would say, “absolutely not. Nope.” And she would be like, “but mom, it’s 2 years, no biggie, just sign it.” I would say, “no.”

Kolby: What if she showed you the tattoo first?

Jessica: No, absolutely not.

Kolby: What if she wanted laser eye surgery? Like corrective eye surgery.

Jessica: I’d have to talk to a doctor, because there’s a lot of science about them growing and…

Kolby: I’m just saying in the hypothetical.

Jeremy: If a doctor was like, “yeah”, I’d be like “yeah, that’s cool.”

Kolby: But it’s forever. What if she wants to be… this one reminds me of the parents that have the deaf parents that have a deaf kid, that find if you get a cochlear implant right when you’re a baby, your brain rewires better and it’s more effective, and so you are choosing to help your child be in a hearing world as opposed to a deaf world, therefore sort of implicitly saying that…

Jessica: The hearing world is better.

Kolby: The hearing world is better.

Jessica: I don’t believe that. I was just saying…

Kolby: But that’s the implication.

Jessica: Or the reverse, that you are so, you know, the judgement is always that you are so involved in your culture, the deaf culture, that you are now hindering your child’s success because you won’t let them get a cochlear implant and go into the hearing world. It’s hard.

Kolby: But this goes back to your medication thing, about ADD.

Jessica: Different because medication can be stopped.

Kolby: That’s true. I suppose you can take out the thing off maybe. I don’t know, I don’t know how cochlear implants work.

Jessica: Well, so the problem that…. I’m not deaf and I don’t come from the this world… but I think probably the problem is that if you have a cochlear implant and you are in a hearing world, you are exposed to deaf culture, but not so big a part of it in the way you would if you did not have a cochlear implant.

Kolby: I don’t know. I struggle with…. This is one of the things I do like about this story is there’s so many shade of grey you can spin it off too from cochlear implant, to breast implants, to corrective vision, to nose things, I mean… all the way to whether it’s liposuction or whether it’s to whatever, and it’s just like, and at the core of it everyone sort of universally, or most people would say, you need to learn to accept yourself. You’re never going to find that last thing to make you happy.

Jessica: Right, but….

Jeremy: There’s lots of grey.

Jessica: There’s lots of grey.

Jeremy: The other side of it is, when you’re with somebody in a familiar relationship, you need to be supportive of their decisions and help them make those decisions if they’re really difficult. There’s a lot of extenuating situations around it. It depends on what it is.

Kolby: Okay, so Jeremy, just to tie it back to the story…

Jeremy: It depends.

Kolby: It depends. It should be the slogan for the show. None of the stuffed animal changes or refusal of changes you had an issue with?

Jeremy: No, I think…

Kolby: You’re cool with the giraffe getting a shorter neck?

Jeremy: Yeah.

Kolby: But isn’t he essentially changing his giraffe-ness?

Jeremy: Yes, but it’s a stuffed animal anyways.

Kolby: Way to not suspend disbelief man. Alright, and the unicorn you’re okay with?

Jeremy: Yes, disappointing but accepting.

Kolby: That’s how you should phrase it to your daughter when she wants to get a tattoo.

Jessica: Disappointed but accepting.

(laughter)

Kolby: I support you, I’m disappointed but I’m accepting.

Jessica: Well, and I want to point out, that’s also a very American thing.

Kolby: Disappointed by accepting?

(laughter)

Jessica: That’s also a very American thing. No, but I was going to say this idea of specialness, like this idea that you’re so unique and you’re special. There’s lots of cultures that special and uniqueness are something you do want to change. You want to be more… and I don’t want to say homogenous because that’s not fair, that is very judgy… but more part of the general society.

Kolby: And you’re speaking on averages of course. So, there are individual outliers in every culture.

Jessica: Absolutely.

Kolby: So, actually, I’ve had a million roommates over the years, and one of the roommates area of research was cultural, not anthropology, but cultural Darwinism… like how the same studies, when you take the same sort of various studies that have been done in the United States, all the ones that have been well known, and you have the exact same study done in another country. So, like, the prison experiment…

Jessica: Oh, so like a social science study.

Kolby: Yeah. You take the exact same prison experiment but you do it in China, or Japan, or India, or in Africa…

Jeremy: And see how cultural differences effect the study.

Kolby: Or you take…

Jessica: Degree’s I wish I would’ve gotten.

Kolby: The one that this person had talked to me about extensively was the one where they had the person push the button when the person gets the thing wrong, and it shocks them and they’re getting progressively higher shocks until they think that they’ve shocked them enough to where they could kill them. You do that in other places, and you don’t get the same results because the cultural sort-of norms… I’d be interested to know how this discussion took place in different cultures. Because I think you would find…

Jeremy: Different answers. Absolutely.

Jessica: And I think to come from a place of empathy, we have no idea where that unicorn was raised. We don’t know what forms his or hers every single day, and if that unicorn needs…

Kolby: If it’s just miserable every single day, they need to take care of that.

Jessica: And if they need to be a horse, let them be a horse, who cares? Yes, I am also disappointed, I definitely want them to love their uniqueness, but that’s also an American mom talking, and not somebody from a different culture.

Kolby: Or somebody who is struggling.

Jessica: Or somebody that’s struggling.

Kolby: Yeah, that’s a good point. Alright. I think we actually covered all of our questions. I feel like our questions are very heavy pickaxe when we really need like a scalpel but that’s okay.

(laughter)

Kolby: Yea, I think we got all of them… sad bear…. Yeah…. Ah… cool.

Jessica: Wait, if there was one thing you could magically fix about you or improve things to make you better, what would you change? What would you change Kolby?

Kolby: If I could magically wave a wand and fix something about myself…

Jessica: I mean, I have a list for you.

(laughter)

Kolby: I’m sure you do. You know, I’m going to go deep rather than shallow.

Jessica: Ooooo….

Kolby: If I could somehow magically be more empathetic and less engineer-y, I definitely feel like, and this is totally a self-diagnostic, I feel like I’m a little bit on a spectrum and that I see things in a very sort of analytic, like the number of people’s names I don’t know. It’s comical, I just don’t know so many people’s names and it’s because your name is not relevant to who you are. I can tell you your job, I can tell you your thing, I can tell whether you’re judgy, I can tell you 50 things that are relevant to my interactions with you, your name is not one of them. And so, I just don’t know anyone name. I wish I could be less engineer-y, spectrum-y like that and I think that empathy would make me a better person. But I would like to be able to turn that off and on. Because growing up the way I’ve grown up, I understand that this is difficult for you, I feel that I should understand that, but in this case- let me flip the switch- I don’t care.

(laughter)

Kolby: I would like to be able to do that. That would be my “if I could pick something.”

Jessica: Wow.

Kolby: Like, sometimes the bricks just need to get laid and I don’t care if you’ve got an existential crisis about being a brick layer.

Jessica: Just so you know, we empathetic people don’t go around not laying bricks, just FYI.

(laughter)

Kolby: I wouldn’t even know. I have no idea! Jeremy, do you have a…

Jeremy: At the moment, I don’t have anything I would want to change.

Kolby: Flawless.

Jeremy: No, not flawless. I grew up with flaws.

Kolby: What about the grey?

Jeremy:  Oh yea, I’d like a full beard.

Jessica: A full beard? Really?

Jeremy: Yeah, it’s very patchy.

Jessica: I cannot imagine you with a full beard.

Jeremy: Think Leonidas from 300.

(laughter)

Kolby: Oh my god, that’d be…. wait a minute!

(laughter)

Kolby: Wait a minute, you want the beard but not the abs?

(laughter)

Kolby: That’s how I know you work in the tech field.

Jeremy: Yes.

Kolby: Jessica, do you have a magic wand?

Jeremy: She wants a beard like Leonidas too.

Jessica: I want a Leonidas beard.

(laughter)

Jessica: I think I have definitely a whole list.

Kolby: You have a list?

Jessica: I definitely. Because I’m a woman.

Kolby: I don’t even have a list for you. I don’t even have one thing for you.

Jessica: But I grew up a little…

Kolby: Maybe if you gave me a little bit of a break every once in a while, that would be my list for you.

(laughter)

Jessica: I think because I’m a woman, I definitely have a lot of things that society has told me that I have to change.

Kolby: Just scatter those Cosmo’s around the house for your daughter to read?

Jessica: yes, right. Yeah. I mean, there’s lots of things that would have made my life easier in society being a woman if things could change. If I was thinner, I mean, if I had any bigger boobs I’d fall over. A lot of things that are very superficial. I probably would like to be, and this is just me being greedy, I would love to be smarter. I’m pretty darn smart, but gosh, if I could be even smarter, I’d be… ah, maybe I’d be evil. Maybe I don’t want that.

(laughter)

Jessica: I’m so close to evil…

Jeremy: You got to ramp up the empathy too, and then you won’t be evil.

Jessica: Right, maybe that would be it.

Kolby: There’s like a cat discussion going on.

Jeremy: There’s a cat in the box.

Kolby: There’s a cat in the box?

Jeremy: In the overturned box over there.

Kolby: Is that what it is?

Jeremy: I think so.

Kolby: Really? You have been listening to After Dinner Conversation, short stories for long discussions. You can find these stories on Amazon to download, they’re all e-books as well as on our website Afterdinnerconversation.com. You can listen to podcasts and YouTube videos and all of those things. Please like and subscribe if you have an enjoyed this. It’ll make our lives happier. It’ll keep Jessica from medicating herself apparently.

Jessica: Sure.

Kolby: Fixing whatever, I don’t know.

Jessica: I won’t fix anything.

Kolby: Promises. Once again, we are at La Gattara. All of the cats you hear screeching behind us having cat discussions, are up for adoption.

Jessica: There’s this one named Hemingway you should totally come adopt him.

Kolby: He has a bowtie.

Jessica: He has a bowtie.

Kolby: Yeah. In Tempe, Arizona. So please stop by. At the very least, even if you don’t want one, for $10 or $5, whatever it is, you can come and just hang out with all the cats and that way you can find out if you’re allergic before you get one.

Jessica: Or which one you like.

Kolby: Or which one you like or which one likes you because it’s about consent.

Jessica: No, make Hemmingway cat like me.

Kolby: I’m so woke. Alright. Thank you for watching and we will see you next week when we are discussing, Jeremy you’re doing another marathon…

Jeremy: “Are You Him”

Kolby: “Are You Him” a man on his way to work finds a young woman in need of a friend. And you probably have like, some paragraph’s’ going on there.

(laughter)

Kolby: There’s lots of cat talking going on. Alright thank you for joining us. Have a great day.

E5. "Pretty Pragmatism" - Can a good idea come from a horrible source?

“Can a good idea come from a horrible source?”

Kolby, Jeremy, and Jessica discuss the ethics in the short story, “Pretty Pragmatism” by Jenean McBrearty.

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Discussions - Podcast RSS

Transcript (By: Transcriptions Fast)

Pretty Pragmatism

Kolby: Hi and welcome back once again to After Dinner Conversation. After Dinner Conversation is a website and podcasts that promote critical thinking and socializing with your friends and talking about ethical things. We are once again today in La Gattara.

Jeremy: La Gattara.

Kolby: Finally, I’m getting it right. Where they have cats for adoption. I was going to say for purchase.

(laughter)

Kolby: Because you do have to pay for them; they don’t just give you the cats.

Jessica: It’s an adoption fee though.  

Kolby: Give me this cat. They’ve got this cute cat right here. Very cute kitty.

Jessica: It’s not cat trafficking.

Kolby: Yeah.

(laughter)

Kolby: Yes, it’s not cat trafficking. That would be terrible.

Jeremy: That might make a good story.

Kolby: That cat trafficker. So, we’ll continue to do this. If you enjoy it, please like or share as our cat goes right in our camera. Alright, you’re going to get demoted kitten. Please like or share, feel free to submit them. You can buy these e-books wherever e-books are sold, Amazon, whatever, all the places that they go, so you can read along with us. I am your co-host Kolby. I am here with Jeremy.

Jeremy: Hi, I’m Jeremy.

Kolby: I see you remembered to talk this time instead of just waving.

(laughter)

Kolby: It’s the worst podcast voice ever. And Jessica....

Jessica: Hello.

Kolby: …who is going to be joining us for the next bunch of episodes. Ashley is on, what we call sabbatical? What’s she doing? Triathlon stuff?

Jessica: She needs a break.

Kolby: She needs a break from Jeremy and I.

(laughter)

Kolby: But she’ll be back I’m sure to taunt us incessantly. Our story, it’s already that kind of day, so our story, “Pretty Pragmatism” by Jenean McBrearty.

Jessica: McBrearty.

Kolby: McBrearty.  We’re going to go with that, is our first story. And I think Jeremy you’ve got a story summary and you wrote your story summary.

Jeremy: I wrote a story summary this time. I was disappointed with our previous story summaries.

Kolby: Way to bring your A game there, man. Nice. Let’s hear it.

Jeremy: So, our story opens with Senator Sal Boundini talking to a senior staffer, Rob, about the merits of hiring a press secretary based on her looks and introducing a bill proposing compulsory national service.

Kolby: You got to talk slower dude. I’m barely following that.

Jeremy: Okay. Sal and Rob bounce between these seemingly unrelated topics as they prepare Sal for an appearance before the Senate Ethics Committee. Apparently the idea of requiring two years of public service...

Kolby: Are you going to read all that?

Jeremy: Yeah.

Kolby: Dude. Less...

Jessica: Let him read it.

Kolby: Alright, I’ll let him read it. That’s a lot dude. That’s a lot.

Jeremy: So apparently...

Jessica: Don’t be micromanager. Back off.

Kolby: Alright. Sorry.

Jeremy: Two years of public service in the National Parks isn’t sitting well with the Ethics Committee because it was founded by an Italian fascist and was the basis for Germany’s Hilter Jugend or Nazi Youth Party. Sal argues that rich people send their kids to summer camps, why can’t poor people do the same? But Rob counters that it’s not the idea that’s bad, but the source of the idea that’s bad. Rob ends a conversation with advice to not make Senator Whitcomb, presumably the committee chair, mad at Sal since she already thinks he’s a pig. The next scene opens at the end of Sal’s chewing out by the committee where they have basically accused him on proposing child servitude or prison indoctrination camps ending with Whitcomb questioning if Sal was lazy, stupid, a fascist, or all three. Nonplussed Sal spends the next two paragraphs arguing that all good policies spring from other people’s earlier good ideas, mixing examples from fascists and non-fascists alike. This is the crux of the story; can good ideas come from discredited sources? And secondarily, does this matter more in politics, where everything can be used against you in the election cycle? Scene ends with an unappeased Whitcomb recommending censure. In the final scene we see Sal pondering the potential implications of the committee decision. Next, a note from Rob that he’s fired Roxy, the aforementioned press secretary, prompting thoughts of retirement for Sal. Rob reappears then with news that due to a loss of votes, Senator Whitcomb is willing to drop the censure if he’ll vote for her budget bill. Elated, Sal and Rob celebrate his win ending with the revelation that Sal had dumped Whitcomb for Roxy tying our plot points together and adding additional motive for Sal’s proposed censure. The story ends with Sal adding to his Washington memoir equating the strength of good ideas with the strength of the writer of those ideas. 

Kolby: Wow.

Jessica: That is an excellent, excellent, excellent story.

Kolby: When you told me that it took you a half hour to write, I was like, “how could it take you a half hour to write a summary?” And now...

Jeremy: Because it’s a summary.

Jessica: Because it’s a summary.

Kolby: I totally, get, yeah. When it’s my turn to summarize, you need to have lower expectations.

(laughter)

Kolby: Much. You’re going to get, like, “it’s like Jaws in space”, that’s what you’re going to get from me.

Jeremy: Nice. That’s your summary.

Kolby: That’s “Alien” by the way.

Jeremy: Yes, it is.

Kolby: Okay. 

Jeremy: Wait, so who’s the old boat pilot?

Kolby: I don’t know. Sigourney Weaver? I’m not sure. No she can’t. I don’t know, man.

(Laughter)

Jeremy: That’s a different topic. Anyways...

Kolby: So, basically, it’s about a senator who tries to create mandatory two-year youth camps. Like, two-year service things.

Jeremy: Right. And it’s unclear whether it’s...

Kolby: And did he intentionally steal the idea from the Nazi Party or did he find out later, after he came up with the idea? Like, “Oh, yea, that’s what the Nazi party did.”

Jeremy: I think it was unclear. I think it was just an idea. It’s unclear whether he stole the idea or took the idea from earlier writings or came up on his own and just happens to match earlier good ideas.

Kolby: It’s interesting because Jessica and I were talking about this on the way in that she does a Girl Scout Troop.

Jessica: I do a Girl Scout Troop.

Kolby: And one of the things that this story reminded me of, is that people don’t really know.... see, even when I move my bag, the cat goes to my bag to vomit on it....

(laughter)

Kolby: …was that actually the Boy Scouts of America are, low and behold, formed right around World War II, because they are a response to Hilter’s youth things.

Jeremy: When I was doing research on this one, there was originally issues with the Boy Scout party at the same time because of that connection.

Jessica: Right.

Kolby: And it’s not like this is unprecedented. The Boy Scouts is a version of what they were doing in World War II. That’s interesting. At any rate, I’m curious what did you think Jessica? Welcome to the show by the way.

Jessica: Well, thank you Kolby.

Kolby: You’re a rock star.  We flew you in special.

Jessica: You did fly me in special.

Kolby: Like brie, right?

Jessica: I was going to say, “like a cleaner.”

Kolby: Oh yeah.

(laughter)

Jeremy: Like Jean Reno.

Jessica: Yeah

Jeremy: Here with your trench coat and bag of acid.

Jessica: To clean up with mess....

(laughter)

Jessica: I’m just kidding.

(laughter)

Jessica: I think it’s interesting. I have a former life in politics, so I have a lot of experience dealing with how…

Kolby: That’s right! You worked on people’s database things or whatever.

Jessica: Yea, I worked for a company that did database software for campaigns so I worked with a lot of politicians and you know, spin is a big part of that. Contributions and who’s contributing and how they’re going to spend that is a big part… do the ends justify the means kind of thing. And I think that story is a little bit at the heart of that. Especially when we have Whitcomb, the senator who is putting the censure on Senator Sal is, you know, at the end she is asking for a vote. She’s basically saying, “I will step aside and I will not censure you on something that I think is completely wrong as long as I get what I want in the end.”

Jeremy: As long as I get what II want for my constituents.

Jessica: Right.

Kolby: It’s still horse-trading.

Jessica: It’s still horse-trading and although there’s a romantic relationship that complicates the story as well, I think it’s a very interesting, like, my ethics are very strong until I need a vote to pass my bill. And then there’s always the question, is a censure worth people’s jobs? How do you value those ideas?  So, I think it’s an interesting story in that way. I struggle a lot with this subject because especially being a writer, we have lots of artists especially in the last 10 years, whose art has been brought into question because of sexual harassment, or because of pedophilia…

Kolby: Dropping like flies.

Jessica: Right. So, the question always comes us is like, “does the actions negate the art?” And I think a lot of times, when there’s a good idea, does the source of it negate the good idea-ness of it? And I think sometimes it absolutely does. I think one of the things this story reminds me of is in politics, when there is a quote-unquote good idea, but “oh, it was associated with something bad or someone bad”, a lot of times we don’t take it out of the, “oh, it was this person’s idea” and then talk about how did, for example, in the camps, Nazi youth camps aren’t a good idea. I don’t care.

(laughter)

Jeremy: Well when you put it that way.

Kolby: You can’t call it a Nazi youth camp; you have to call it a “Pre-World War II Exercise Facility.” You’ve got to rename it. It’s all branding.

Jessica: Right, but even in the re-branding, we don’t carry the four. So, mandatory youth camps are great if you’re completely able-bodied, you’re not homosexual, you’re not introverted, you’re not… right? All these things are great ideas until you carry the idea farther down and then it becomes, yes, the big reveal happens. So, yes, what a great idea. Summer camps.

Kolby: I think there are two things you’re talking about there. One is, can a good idea come from a bad source? And number two, in this story was having these camps even a good idea? And it sounds like you’re for sure on the having a mandatory camp isn’t a good idea.

Jessica: Correct.

Kolby: And I kind of agree with that. Although I do think mandatory service is not necessarily a bad thing. 

Jeremy: Not necessarily bad. And the whole idea from Sal’s point of view, it’s getting people out in the National Parks to do things. Maintenance of the parks, not necessarily a “youth camp.” But it depends on how you spin that and really what is the goal of the bill. Is it to national service where people are doing things for the common good?

Kolby: Like free labor for the government, for the common good?

Jeremy: Right.

Kolby: Maybe that’s what he should’ve called it, “Free labor for the government for the common good.”

(laughter)

Kolby: F-C-C-P whatever CA….

Jessica: I feel like no party would object at all to that.

Kolby: What about, does it it…

Jessica: Wait, wait, I want to add one thing. It’s not that I think this is a bad idea, although I do think it’s a terrible idea. What I’m saying though, is a lot of times is we don’t learn from our history so looking at the Nazi camps and Sal does in the story, he goes and he looks at those before and after pictures of those weakling kids and then at a 6 pack…

Kolby: And why are there 3 kids less? What? Weird? We started with 20 kids in the camp and we finished with 17. So odd.

Jessica: And I think that’s where we get lost.  A lot of times we’ll say, “oh, it’s a good idea no matter where it came from.” But we don’t explore the bad idea part of it in the historical context. Yeah, these were a bad idea and why and how could that play out in our version of this idea?

Jeremy: Really. And that’s the important part of, or what should be the important part of this discussion is what are the merits of the idea good and bad? As opposed to where it came from, which is a logical fallacy anyways.

Kolby: Which is what the story and all the politics is related and where the idea came from. There’s no discussion at all…

Jeremy: On if it’s a good idea.

Kolby: Right.

Jessica: Well, and I think, that’s just human nature. Every idea Kolby comes us with, I’m immediately going to say it’s a bad idea.

Kolby: It’s a terrible idea.

(laughter)

Jessica: You gotta argue with me that it’s a good idea.

Jessica: And yet, you still got on a plane.

(laughter)

Kolby: I’m going to tangent, half a tangent for a second, years ago a friend of mind was, I suppose they still are, an economist. And got PhD in economy and came here as a German guy, blah blah blah, whole thing. And I asked him, “look, I’ve never understood, in the middle of the great depression, a world-wide great depression the 1930s, the United States a wreck, Europe is a wreck, every place is a wreck, Hitler somehow creates economic policies that creates a massive, not just military, but recovered economy surrounded by shattered economies including the United States. And the only thing that gets the United Stated out of the Great Depression is the government spending on war efforts to fight Germany and fight Japan. So surely…

Jeremy: There’s a lesson in here.

Kolby: Yeah. Besides the fact of “don’t be horrible,” there must be some economic lesson on how you boot strap your own country out of a world-wide depression when there is nobody in the world to sell too because everyone’s in a bad shape. And so, I asked this German economist guy who’s staying with me at this time, I asked him, “how was this studied?”  And he said, “we don’t.” And I’m like, “what do you mean you don’t?” He’s like, “nobody studied it. It would be academic suicide to study something that the Hitler Germany did to understand why it was good.” He’s like, “so we don’t.”

Jeremy: Because there’s so much bad involved.

Kolby: Because there’s so much bad about it. So, I’m like, “You don’t even know how they did it?” He’s like, “Well, we roughly know.” I’m like, “did anyone get a PhD in figuring it out?” And he’s like, “no, probably not.”

Jessica: To be fair…

Kolby: I mean, he was German.

Jessica: To be fair, I think there’s also the human instinct to…

Kolby: The wretch instinct?

Jessica: I was going to say, to take something half-cocked and not understood and run with it as a platform, is so utterly scary, I absolutely wouldn’t study it, because some jerk is going pick that up and say, “hey, the way to economic recovery is to repress and genocide a bunch of people.” And some politicians, is going to be like, “yea, that’s not such a bad idea.”

 Jeremy: “I’d get on board with that because it keeps us in power.”

Kolby: That’s how you go from Darwin to eugenics.

Jessica: Exactly, this is exactly how you go from Darwin to eugenics.

Kolby: I think that’s fair.

Jessica: That’s fair. If I was Germany, I’d be like “guys, just shut it down.”

(Laughter)

Jessica: Whatever might have been good, I don’t even care. I don’t want anybody rehabilitating this movement. Of course, that did not work.

Kolby: Yet, you sent your kid to kindergarten. Let’s just be clear.

Jessica: Well, my kid goes to a German bi-lingual school so….

(laughter)

Kolby: Your political career is over!

Jessica: I was never going to get into politics anyways. I’m a horrible person.

Kolby: Jeremy, let me ask you a question. One of the things that comes up is the guy goes through a listing of good ideas from other sources.

Jeremy: Certainly.

Kolby: I think he talks about the autobahn and a couple other ones. There’s some he didn’t even mention, like the little BMW symbol is a helicopter, is a propeller, because they made war planes for German. I think it’s BMW, it might’ve been Mercedes.

Jeremy: Mercedes.

Kolby: Yeah. Do you think it’s okay to take ideas that are either military ideas or war ideas or all the sort of research that came out of human limitations that were done on concentration camp people, it’s still data, do you think they throw it away?

Jessica: Wait, how do you know its valid data?

Jeremy: Right, you don’t.

Jessica: We just know its data. We don’t know if its valid or not.

Kolby: That’s true. But the example they use in the story is the rocket technology. I want to be clear there was an American who did rocketry first and but Germany continued that from his work, and then we basically gave them all a free pass and was like, “look, if you’ll come to America, we’ll just say you were doing Nazi work and you didn’t have a choice.” And now we have a rocket program. Do you blank that to keep a clean moral slate, or you okay, like, “you were bad but you were bad but useful”?

Jeremy: That’s ethically questionable and the government is typically not very good at that, and they will just blanketly allow SS scientists to come to the US and work in the atomic program and the rocket programs, even though they did bad things.

Jessica: Although I think it’s defiantly more prevalent in government, I do think that’s true for a lot of sectors. Like the guy who invented cardiac catheters, the one that goes up the vein and into the heart, he did it on himself first.

Kolby: What?

Jessica: Yep, his name is Werner Forssmann.

Kolby: That’s Frankenstein stuff.

Jessica: Yeah. He got fired for it.

Kolby: And then he got a Nobel Prize for it, probably.

Jessica: He did! He did get a Nobel Prize for it! Shut the front door. Thank you “imager(?)” for reminding me of this. But he...

Kolby: I wonder how many people got a Nobel Prize for something they got fired for? He’s got to be it?

Jeremy: No. I’m sure there’s more.

Kolby: Madame Curie.

Jessica: But what I was going to say is that, he did that and then he joined the Nazi Party.

Kolby: Really?

Jessica: Right? And so, we as a medical community, of course, we’re not going to just be like, “hey, forget it, were not going to cardiac catheter, that’s probably not good because it came from a Nazi.”

Kolby: So, do you think there’s a distinction between medical and scientific sort of separation, versus political separation?  So, if you come up with the version of the something catheter…?

Jessica: Cardiac catheter.

Kolby: So, if you come up with the political theory version of the cardiac catheter, do you chuck that opinion out because it’s a different world in politics?

Jeremy: Politics and finances and economics. Which is what we’re saying…

Kolby: So, you’d say yes then?

Jeremy: Because they’re much more a public sector, there is a larger impression and it’s much more visible. In politics, because of the election cycle, everything you do it brought forth.

Kolby: Aren’t we kind of glad that scientists don’t follow that same rule otherwise you wouldn’t have a cardiac catheter?

Jeremy: We wouldn’t have a rocket program.

Kolby: Right. So, if it’s good enough for science, why isn’t that good enough for economics?

Jessica: Okay, but here’s the thing, we have to be careful even in science because they we start saying anything for science as long as it advances humanity, therefor it’s valid. And then we get Henrietta Lacks and the woman whose DNA, I’m going to mess this up, sorry internet, Henrietta Lacks, there’s a whole book on it, there’s a really great radio lab podcast on it.

Jeremy: I think I’ve heard this the same way.

Jessica: Her DNA, her cells in her body, she was dying of a disease, a uterine clot or something, and a sample was taken without consent, and it now is the basis of almost all the vaccine science in the world. Henrietta Lacks. She’s amazing. She died. Nothing was ever attributed to her, her family received no financial gain, she was a poor black woman, and she was taken advantage of.

Kolby: Of course, she was. Let me guess, in Alabama or something.

Jessica: Exactly. And so, again, it’s that anything for science. Without Henrietta Lacks, we would not be where we are today medically. However…

Jeremy: There’s still ethical issues with what they did.

Jessica: There’s still big ethical issues and we should have done it right and instead we did not. And so, that always is going to concern me. Yes, we should learn from bad people. Hello, there’s cat fighting.

Kolby: There’s cat fighting going on.

Jessica: They’re displeased with this line of inquiry.

Kolby: I feel like any cat not named Logan is a wasted opportunity. I gotta be honest.

(laughter)

Kolby: I’m just going to throw that out there right now.

Jessica: My nephew is names Logan.

Jeremy: But your nephew isn’t a cat.

Kolby: Or Krueger. Krueger would work too. Not the park, the horror guy. Sorry.

Jessica: Anyway, I think that’s a slippery-slope. I think that is to say, “oh, as long as it’s science or medicine,” because again, medicine is one of those, how much did we learn from horrible experimentation or the repression, especially black women in the United States, the whole OBGYN field is just marred with terrible atrocities that we never ever recognize. So, I think I have a problem with that.

Jeremy: Right, but the other side of the, basically critical thinking in the scientific process, is that you’re building on previous work and so people aren’t always, I would assume in science, looking at who did the work, they’re just looking at the work, reproducing the experiments, or building on that research. And so, there’s a disconnect between who did the research and the research itself.

Kolby: So, I don’t necessarily disagree, but I’m just going to throw blood in the water.

Jessica: We’ll tell you when you’re wrong.

Kolby: I feel like there’s an understanding then, that when it comes to physics, when it comes to medicine, that truth until we know better truth exists. Like, we know that Newtonian physics is correct until we get Einstein-ian physics and then we know that’s correct until we get…. And truth simply exists. So, I don’t know why that belief of like, “well truth exists but I’m going to take a pass on these other ideas because I don’t like where they came from because I question their motivation in gathering truth.”

Jessica: I think probably because the scientific method does exist.

Kolby: As opposed to politics where it’s just the sausage method.

Jeremy: Yes.

Jessica: Right, and it’s a lot of PR and a lot of spin and it’s a lot of what was society ready for at the time and what are they not? I think trying to apply that to art, why did Edgar Allen Poe die penniless and alone? Why did that happen when he was so popular later on?

Kolby: That makes sense in politics and art, truth is a much more fluid thing.

Jessica: And very nuanced and dependent on a lot of things. I still think that’s true for science. I just think we do a better of sussing it out. When you were talking about the data for the Holocaust victims and you said, “validated.” And I said, “how do we know it’s valid?”

Kolby: Sure. We try and reproduce it but we can’t.

Jessica: We can’t. So, I think it goes back to that as well.

Kolby: Jeremy, generally what did you think of the story? Like it, dislike it, did you find it interesting?

Jeremy: It’s pretty well written, the points that it brings up are good. I feel like there could have been more research done, or research presented in his argument as opposed to the pretty well-known ones that were provided.

Kolby: And nobody ever talks about the caffeine pills and all the speed that they gave all the pilots and the people in German.

Jeremy: Right, they were all on meth.

Kolby: I just read a stat a little while ago that when they figured out how many meth pills that they were giving out, that it worked out to like, 2 a week per soldier. Millions, hundreds of millions of them were produced. And we don’t really talk about any of that. What about the idea? Not necessarily the go away to camp, but the idea of some mandatory…

Jeremy: Mandatory national service.

Kolby: Mandatory national service. And that’s not necessarily saying that it has to be going to this guy’s idea, but you could go be a lifeguard or whatever the government thinks they need you for.

Jeremy: Exactly. And because the government is running it, it’s going to be fraught with problems.

(laughter)

Kolby: Yes, of course.

Jessica: I mean, way to bring some reality to it.

Kolby: And corruption and nepotism.

Jeremy: Yes. I’ve talked to people from Israel where they go through…

Kolby: Turkey also does mandatory service.

Jeremy: And there’s a lot of countries where people are involved with national service and sometimes it’s, honestly, I was in the Army and there’s a lot of…

Kolby: That could’ve been 2 years national service what you were doing, right?

Jeremy: Absolutely. It was not a glamorous job and really there’s too many people and it was fraught with issues as well, even though it wasn’t compulsory. So, because it’s run by the government.

Kolby: Sure…

(cat meow)

Jessica: Oh, did you guys hear that? There’s a cat fight.

Kolby: There’s a government fight going on over there.

Jessica: I think it’s a fight over the litter box? Which is a very bad scene.

Kolby: You don’t want to be the one waiting for the port-a-potty.

(laughter)

Kolby: You don’t want that world.

Jessica: Get into a fist fight waiting for the port-a-potty.

Kolby: I think, it’s particularly for Jessica and I, you’ll find an audience that’s like, “when government does something, it tends to be bloated and inefficient and corrupt.” But, does that mean it’s not worth doing? So even if you’ve only got 70% efficiency, you might still get the levee built.

Jeremy: Absolutely and I think you see that a lot in the depression area or the Roosevelt’s programs. There were a lot of good programs that came about from that, that were the same ideas. Some sort of national service work programs.

Kolby: I still see, every once in a while, when you walk on a sidewalk, you can see the stamp in the sidewalk, the CCC stamp or whatever, because the sidewalk was built as part of a work-labor program. But they didn’t wall it a labor-camp, they knew better.

(laughter)

Kolby: Yea, they knew better.

Jessica: What you’re talking about also was not just for young people coming out of high school.

Kolby: It was for unemployed adults, there an Unemployment Program.

Jessica: It’s a program which is very different from compulsory service.

Kolby: Yea, no, that’s right. I feel like there’s a branding issue with this for sure.

Jessica: And not even just a branding issue, but make compulsory… I don’t know if you met me, but you tell me that you want me to do something, my first instinct is to do the opposite. So, to tell me, “you have to do this thing for 2 years”… I love the national parks. If you told me I had to work in the national parks for 2 years, I’d be a jerk about it.

Kolby: Just because you told me too.

Jessica: Just because you told me too.

Kolby: Yeah. I feel that’s a very American trait.

Jessica: And whatever, it’s a very Jessica trait. But I don’t think the government shouldn’t be in a position to tell you what to do, especially for two very prime years of life.

Jeremy: Right. You could…

Kolby: Like 18-20 or something…

Jeremy: We could probably spend another half an hour arguing about ways to improve that program, but still, it’s not going to please everybody no matter what you do.

Jessica: Yeah.

Kolby: Alright, let me finish one last question. Jessica, you’re going to get it since you’re our new guest. Do you think that learning more about the person can diminish the legacy of their idea? So, Martin Luther King is famously, or maybe infamously, known as a womanizer that we found out later. That does not mean he’s not Martin Luther King. Henry Ford actually went and visited Hitler in Germany and talked about and he believe in eugenics and he believed in what he was doing, but that doesn’t mean we don’t build things on an assembly line.

Jessica: Correct.

Jeremy: And again, it’s a logical fallacy to condemn someone’s ideas because of who they are or what they’ve done outside of that idea. The idea has merit in itself.

Jessica: It does. What I will say is….

Kolby: Nobody is going to be listening to R-kelly pretty soon.

Jessica: We can only hope.

(laughter)

Kolby: Agreed. I actually didn’t even know who he was.

Jessica: I think the thing that we have to steer away from, is I feel like it’s this binary.

Kolby: Bad guys or good guys.

Jessica: Either it’s 100% their ideas and the person are amazing, or they’re all trash. And I think that…

Kolby: The Christopher Columbus sort of thing.

Jessica: We have to get away from heroes. Heroes is the biggest problem we have. Martin Luther King and his womanizing, should be part of…

Jeremy: His legacy.

Jessica: The whole story of Martin Luther King. Dr. Seuss had cheated on his first wife, she committed suicide over it.

Kolby: Really?

Jessica: Yep. Theodor Geisel. He married his second wife and lived a very long, loving life with her. And I don’t judge, I don’t know that situation, I don’t judge that, but knowing that history gives me a full complete picture, a fuller completer picture or Theodor Geisel than just Dr. Seuss who just wrote books.

Kolby: Let me ask a follow up question. That was going to be the last question, but that’s such a good answer, I want to ask one follow up question. What about the fact that learning history and learning our past is a little bit of an onion process in that when you’re in second grade you don’t say, “Columbus discovered American and  genocide and rape and disease and wiped out a 1/3 of the population, brought back people to show off as objects, and died thinking that he had found India because he literally didn’t know he’d found a new continent on his deathbed.” You don’t cram all that into a 2nd grader.

Jessica: No, but I think, and Jeremy I’ll let you answer as well, sorry, I just totally ran into…. I think….

Kolby: Can you start off with “Columbus started America” and then just by 9th and 10th grade be like “and he was a horrible human being”?

Jessica: I think you have to tease a little. Like, when Jeremy was reading the story and he talked about the research on it, that was because something peaked his interested. He was like, “I wanna learn a little bit more.” I think you can tell as a mom of a 3rd grader; you can tell the Christopher Columbus story and the terrible things that happened with Christopher Columbus and the Native Americans.

Kolby: You just start getting that in at age appropriate level.

Jessica: Absolutely. You don’t have to go and tell horrible…

Jeremy: In an age-appropriate way.

Jessica: You don’t have to go into horrible detail, but you have to give them… because here’s what happens:  they grow up and think you lied to them and that’s a much worse place to be. Whereas instead, you were like, “remember when I told you about Christopher Columbus and the horrible stuff that happened to the Native American’s because of his arrival? Great. Let’s move onto the next…” right? And that’s more intriguing to them than “Christopher Columbus was the best!”

Kolby: Jeremy, you’re nodding yes?

Jeremy: Yes. I would agree. It’s the same way. There are age-appropriate ways to introduce that information and it should all be presented in that fashion.

Kolby: From that start in an age-appropriate way.

Jeremy: Yea, I think so.

Kolby: That’s fair.

Jeremy: And I think it would be very good for, again, from a hero perspective that if we were presented all of these people we get from history, every single one of them did questionable things.

Jessica: Absolutely!

Kolby: Then doesn’t that make studying something like this and the Senator’s idea… if it wasn’t heroes and villains, then his idea is no longer lumped in the villain category, and then it can be discussed in a more rational way.

Jeremy: Exactly.

Jessica: It’s still a bad idea.

Kolby: And Jessica is working at a national park.

Jessica: No, I’m not.

Kolby: Alright. Well, we’re going to wrap it up there. You’ve been listening to After Dinner Conversation with myself Kolby and Jeremy and Jessica. After Dinner Conversation is a series of short stories for long discussions about ethics and morality and all the things we’ve been doing today. We hope that you have the same conversations that we have with your friends. All of these stories can be purchased and reviewed on e-books, at Amazon, you can get these podcasts at all sorts of place where podcasts are, I think they’re everywhere now. And if you’ve enjoyed this, please subscribe, please like this. One, it makes us feel good but also it gives us the ability to do more of these and to leverage this and to have more exciting topics that we talk about. It really does help and adopt a cat.

Jessica: Adopt a cat.

Kolby: Adopt a cat.

Jessica: And what’s the website?

Kolby: That’s a great question. Afterdinnerconversation.com and if you go on Amazon and type in “After Dinner Conversation”, a whole array, there’s dozens of these books up now. And next week, I forgot, we’re talking about “As You Wish” and Jessica you’re going to go our summary. Did you type up a 3-paragraph summary for next week?

(laughter)

Jessica: I will for next week.

Kolby: You will for next week?

Jessica: I will for next week.

Kolby: “As You Wish” is a story of an elderly woman who finds a trunk of tattered stuffed animals and makes a promise to fix them all. It’s a genuinely a children’s story, unlike the one we just did. So, join us next episode. Thank you.

E4. "This I Do For You" - Can you be a hero, if you didn’t know you volunteered?

“Can you be a hero, if you didn’t know you volunteered?”

Kolby, Jeremy, and Ashley discuss the ethics in the short story, “This I Do For You” available to download on Amazon.

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Discussions - Podcast RSS

Transcript (By Transcriptions Fast)

This I Do For You

Kolby: Okay, welcome back again to Episode 4. It’s a thing now. It’s not just a hobby. After Dinner Conversation, short stories for long conversations. After Dinner Conversations is a website of a growing collection of short stories across genres meant to draw out deeper conversations like the one we’re having today. I’m your co-host Kolby, here with co-hosts Jeremy and Ashley. And we are at the…

Jeremy: La Gattara.

Kolby: La Gatarra, thank you, for our fourth week in a row.

Jeremy: Cat Café.

Ashley: Come visit. It’s in Tempe Arizona.

Kolby: Here with a very large cat that’s freaking out over whatever’s in that thing.

Ashley: The cat’s up for adoption. This is a big, big lover boy.

Kolby: Yeah, this would be a good cat to adopt especially if you needed some home protection because I feel like that cat could take out a criminal.

Ashley: Nah, the cat would just go up to him and lay on him like, “I got him!”

Kolby: Seriously, that’s like a 15-pound cat right?

(laughter)

Ashley: Yeah, but get that cat some catnip. Look at him, he turns into a butterball.

Kolby: So, the story that we’re discussing today is “This I do for you” by Margaret Karmazin, maybe?

Jeremy: Karmazin?

Kolby: It’s available on Amazon, Apple, every place that you can get e-books and you can download it to your e-reader, tablet, computer, whatever else. You should ideally read it before you’ve listed to the story.

Ashley: Especially this one. There’s a spoiler alerts that we’re going to be talking about.

Kolby: Yeah, so we’re totally going to spoil the story.

Ashley: Hit pause on this, go read it, then hit un-pause and then watch.

Kolby: Yea for sure because this is one where once you’ve heard this you kind of ruins it. So, I forget who’s doing the… Ashley you want to do the “what happened?”

Ashley: What happened… dun dun dun. So, there is the main character, Ah- Deet. It’s basically her life story, she’s growing up but she’s kept indoors in a special room.

Kolby: I totally thought it was a guy, not a girl.

Ashley: Yeah, I thought it was.

Jeremy: I have no idea.

Jeremy: There was a line, “you’re my favorite brother, Ah-Deet”.

Kolby: Maybe because you’re a woman, you always read with your gender in mind.

Ashley: Oh, I see what… okay.

Jeremy: It wasn’t revealed until the very end.

Ashley: Okay. So technically it’s a he/she/it/them. Anyway, kept indoors, kept being fed, not allowed outside, not allowed to learn about the outside world.

Jeremy: I’d want to point out it’s in an alien culture, it’s not people.

Kolby: You never really get what they are, right?

Ashley: They are hatched and they live underground dorms, 4 legs…

Jeremy: Almost like giant ants but not ants, that’s how I got it.

Kolby: Just sort of a fictional thing.

Ashley: The only thing we know, is that her father who’s no longer around, was also large. And she’s also pretty darn big.

Kolby: Full figured.

Ashley: Yes, she’s curvy. Or he’s curvy. Or it is curvy. Either way, the story progresses until finally the main character is revealed that their entire life’s purpose is to feed the community in time of famine…

Kolby: With their bodies.

Ashley: With their bodies, and sure enough, that time has come.

Kolby: And just to be clear, not in the “I’m going to milk you” sort of way. In the…

Ashley: Like the, “we will eat you.”

Kolby: Like, “bullet in the back of the head, grind you up, and you’re now like food mullet.”

Ashley: Now keep in mind, this person has been kept watching television, basically has a servant, no outside communication but just gets fed a bunch of food.

Kolby: All the time.

Ashley: All the time. Like, living the dream.

Kolby: Until he gets killed and fed up to everyone during the time of starvation.

Ashley: But the point is, this character doesn’t know why it’s been kept, the mother doesn’t tell why he’s kept inside. Siblings are taken away; they no longer visit.

Jeremy: Just eats and watches tv.

Ashley: To that leads us to our ethical dilemma of the ultimate sacrifice.

Kolby: Is this person a hero?

Ashley: Is this person a hero?

Kolby: I’m a hard no.

Ashley: For helping to save the community. Not a hero?

Kolby: I’ll tell you why… let’s say, I’m like, “hey, I’m going to cross the street because I need to go to work.” And in the way of crossing the street, I unknowingly set off a chain of events that saves humanity.

Jeremy: So, you’re turning this into a trolley problem…

Kolby: Everything’s a trolley problem.

(laughter)

Kolby: All I was doing was, just doing what I do. I feel like in order to be a hero you need a couple of things. I feel you need fear and I think you need to act in the face of that fear. So, if I get in a fight with a toddler, I’m not a hero because I’m not afraid and I knew I was going to win.

Jeremy: You’re not going to win.

(laughter)

Kolby: If it was a scrappy toddler, I’m definitely not going to win. Let’s say, you go skydiving to save the world but you like skydiving. You’re not a hero. If I’m terrified of heights and I go skydiving to save the world, I’m a hero because I’ve sacrificed some fear or something intentionally, with intent, because I know there’s a greater good for it. And that’s why I don’t think this person is a hero because they never, until they got clubbed in the back of the head, they never even knew their purpose.

Jeremy: So, that’s the interesting thing I came away with this story. And I don’t know if this was the intention but, if you look at tribal cultures, basically smaller cultures that live in villages, everybody knows each other, there’s a lot more ritual around death. The societies grieve in a different fashion and there are rituals around that and community involvement. And what I get from this story is a very similar, that once you modernize into larger communities, or at least what we’ve done, is we push death to the background and nobody talks about it and it’s this taboo for your culture. So, that has happened in this society where in the past, when it was a more tribal community, this it was something that the person was raised to do, and they knew the entire time that this was their purpose but, in this story, that has been taken from them, they’re not told what they’re doing.

Kolby: There’s no choice.

Jeremy: There’s no choice. And maybe they’re probably would not have been a choice in the past, there may have been, but it would’ve been “this is what you’re going to be raised for, but this is a position of honor.” In this story, it’s not a position of honor, the family that has to take care of her is ashamed and it’s a burden on the family, it’s not an honor. And that’s a change to their society and how their society deals with death. At least this was the interesting sub-text to this and how our society has changed in the same way. And so, because it’s really, the honorific thing is the mayor comes by at the end and says, “hey you’re going to save everybody, good job!”

Kolby: Yeah. Take a picture with the person before they die.

Ashley: How about even just the original selection criteria? It’s you were born big; you were a big baby. That is literally it. It’s this character and what, three others that were deemed big and did the mother even have any say over that? Keep in mind her father was large, and didn’t get selected, so there might have been enough larger babies that didn’t need to be selected.

Jeremy: Now that’s a question that’s raised too… would my father have allowed this to happen.

Ashley: Exactly.

Kolby: Here’s what I think would’ve made the character a hero, is after they found out their purpose, the very end of the story, if they’d been like, “and we’re going to have to kill and eat you just so everyone else can live.” If the character would have just said, “ok.” That’s all they would’ve had to done to be a hero in my mind, as opposed to not having any choice in the matter. Even if you didn’t choose to walk down that path, if you choose the last moment, you’re like, “I’m ready” that’s all that would have needed to been said to be like, “yep, hero!”

Ashley: I’d like to know why, again, why did they choose to make this, like, .. hide her purpose. It’s a shameful thing. When in reality without that, you all would be dead. You think they would’ve flipped a switch community wise to be like, “Yo, this person is going to be the greatest thing ever. We will not live without it.”

Jeremy: I think that would completely change the story if there were more… if it were a position of honor and there was a bunch of ritual and meaningful things around this so the person knows.

Kolby: As opposed to a shameful secret.

Jeremy: Yeah, where they’re not even going to tell you about it until the last minute.

Ashley: My only thing with the way you talked about heroes was there has to be some fear and then them overcoming that fear. What about those people that aren’t afraid to join the army? That aren’t afraid to be sent over to Iraq? Like, they know that’s what they’re meant to do. They aren’t afraid to die. Are they still considered a hero?

Kolby: Yes, I think for me yes. Because, when you join the military, maybe you’re doing it because you want to get a free college education or maybe to get out of a bad situation. And even if you’re not on the frontline, even if you’re an accountant in the military, when you sign up you have at some point said, “I know that I am putting myself potentially in harm’s way, I might not be, but I might be and I  understand I’m getting free college education out of it, but I choose.” And if it turns out you’re doing it for the free college educations or you end up being an accountant for the Air Force, you might not have been an accountant for the Air Force, you might not have ended up…. I think it’s that decision is the thing.

Jeremy: The decision is part of it.

Ashley: My whole thing is if she’s a hero, is my main point was the overcoming the fear and it was not by choice. It wasn’t her decision to put herself in that situation so I think it’s a choice thing, not necessary an overcoming fear or having a fear to begin with. It’s a sacrifice, it’s your choice to give of yourself so something greater.

Kolby: So, does that mean every breastfeeding mother is a hero?

Ashley: They are sustaining life.

Kolby: So, it’s kind of the same.

Ashley: They’re kinda awesome. Mom’s are kinda awesome.

Kolby: I don’t want to get in trouble with my mom.

(laughter)

Kolby: Let me ask this then, do you think that there’s any bad guys in this story?

Jeremy: No, not directly.

Kolby: Not even the mom or society.

Jeremy: It’s a society problem, it’s not an individual, you know, this is a bad person for…

Kolby: So, anything that perpetuates the race, whatever that race may be, is it not a bad thing, is a necessary evil? I don’t know if I can buy that.

Ashley: I think its societies construct as a whole.

Kolby: Next thing you know you’re killing off old ladies with cancer to make space.

Ashley: The thing is, say the mom doesn’t follow the rules and feeds the kid to be huge, like she’s supposed to, are there ramifications against her? Isn’t she just following the laws? Is she a bad person for following the laws? So, I think it goes back to being more communal of an issue, their social constructs, not necessarily that the mom did anything bad by not telling the kid, not that the butler did anything by telling the kid, everyone kept it a secret. I don’t think they were bad; they were just following their social construct. Now is their social construct bad? 

Kolby: But that’s a sort of cultural thing.

Jeremy: Which it is a very cultural thing.

Kolby: I’m going to take the other side on it. I think there’s a bad person in this, maybe… maybe I’m just throwing stones. I think the main character, the one who becomes heavy and dies, is a bad character, is a bad person, and I’ll tell you why… The mom, you can be like, “well, maybe it’s a cultural thing, maybe she didn’t have a choice, maybe it’s an honor, maybe it’s a selection process.” Even the society, they’re perpetuating your race. Surely you must make some hard choices but for the main character, how do you go your whole life and not do anything to seemingly ask “why? Why is everyone feeding me, why don’t I get to leave the house?” Why do you take no…

Jeremy: Personal responsibility.

Kolby: Yeah, personal responsibility for being different in a way that you don’t understand.

Jeremy: I guess in her defense…

Kolby: Agency, that’s the word I’m thinking of.

Jeremy: Agencies, sure. But I feel like by the time in the story that she is asking questions, she’s no longer able to walk, or really, you know, she’s stuck in this position she’s been fed.

Kolby: Because it’s from the time it was an infant, so it wouldn’t know any different anyway. You can’t hold a toddler accountable, that’s a good point.  

Ashley: I want to disagree; she asks questions from the very beginning. “Mother, where’s our money come from? Why is father gone? Why don’t the siblings come and visit anymore?” Maybe not asking the right questions, but continually questioning the whole…

Kolby: So, do you think there’s some accountability there?

Jeremy: In the mom? Certainty.

Kolby: In the mom, for not giving better answers?

Jeremy: Yes.

Ashley: How do you handle it? How do you handle the social pressure to lie to your child? Every single parent lies to their kid about Santa Claus.

Kolby: WHAT?

(laughter)

Ashley: Oh, busted, spoiler alert! Oh man.

Jeremy: What about Santa Claus?

Kolby: Yea, what about Santa Claus?

(laughter)

Ashley: You have to lie to this kid and she has to tell this terrible, terrible, lie, maybe she just didn’t….

(laughter)

Ashley: Sorry, the cat just went flying off the table, full paws in the air.

Kolby: I think that also creates a separation between mother and child.

Ashley: Oh absolutely.

Kolby: If you’re the mother that knows you might have to kill your kid someday, but you don’t tell them, how do you ever have a great conversation with them?

Ashley: Again, is she ashamed of the kid? Remember, you don’t talk about it, you don’t anything, you don’t even want to be around. Like, later on it sounds like the mother isn’t even around anymore, it’s just the butler for most of the part.

Kolby: Yeah. So, you think the mom’s the rougher one in this story?

Jeremy: The mother could’ve taken a more active role.

Kolby: Do you think the mother had an obligation, on the sly to be like “hey kid..” Sorry, I gotta do it this way towards the camera, “hey kid.”

Ashley: He could’ve gone on a hunger strike if you told her.

Kolby: “if you quite eating and make a run for it, you might live.”

Ashley: No.

Kolby: Do you think you have an obligation to provide the child enough information to create choice?

Ashley: Yea, but then here comes the government, “why is the chosen one down 18 pounds? Why are they on a hunger strike? What did you tell them?”

Kolby: But honestly, I think you have an obligation to do that anyway.

Jeremy: Yeah.

Kolby: I feel like even though it affects the future of the culture, and the future of the culture/group to go through a famine, I think you have to provide it.

Ashley: It’s not about going through a famine. This is life or death. If these people don’t gain the weight, if these select 4, the whole society is dead. Is dead. There is no, “well, maybe we’ll survive.” No, they are dead.

Kolby: I agree. I’m… I’m… I’m struggling with this one more. I think that you have to give someone that choice and if they choose…

Ashley: What if nobody chooses?

Kolby: Then everyone dies. I think that’s what you have to do. I think you have to give people choice, because for me, I’m not saying for everyone, I think the rights of an individual are paramount to the rights of the group. They’re higher than the rights of the group. And that you would hope the individual would have enough personal responsibility to understand their obligation to the group.

Ashley: I’m going to back it up for 2 points: 1) What if it’s only the people that are born fat have whatever it is that allows them to gain so much weight? 2) they have to start at a young age. They have to start eating at such a young age because they can make choices.

Jeremy: Yes and no.

Ashley: Just throwing that out there.

Jeremy: You could just have more of them and let them decide.

Kolby: Right! Just have a dozen of people instead of 3.

Jeremy: Exactly. And at some point, first you’re selected, you will have the option when you’re older to really do this for the community but it has to be a choice.

Ashley: But what if you have to start the process when they’re so young? All of a sudden, you’re 18 and they’re like, “You have to gain 100 pounds in 5 days”, that’s not going to happen there bro. Again, you’re making the assumption there are enough people born that meet the criteria that can start putting on that weight super-fast.

Kolby: Here’s the thing I struggle with though about that; So, it’s one thing to say, and this makes a really clear black and white example, like somebody must do this or we all die. And so therefor the rights of the individual are not as important as the rights of the community. But here’s the thing. Why don’t you say that same thing with high fructose corn syrup? Be like, “look, we as a society, we’re not all going to die, but we’re all going to be worse, and so we want to take you’re right away as an individual because we want the society to have lower medical costs, to be healthier, to not have to make seats bigger on airplanes or whatever. In this case, it’s a simple yes and no, but I think once you’ve made that distinction, you can start lowering the bar, all the way down to like, “look, we’d really rather you didn’t have any cigarettes.”

Jeremy: Exactly. But is everything a slippery-slope.

Kolby: Like, I know that’s a total easy way to go. The slippery slope arguments always the easy one, but I think that just means this civilization dies, which is sad because that’s the way it goes. That’s just for me. I’m not saying that’s the definitive answer.

Jeremy: Right. But without knowing there’s an age factor, there’s a better way to do this, make it a more honorable thing, everybody’s included, you can start this at a later age, even if there’s an initial weight requirement, you can still allow those people that choice.

Ashley: Yea.

Kolby: So, here’s what I think would make it a harder question, is if there was something about the way your body developed.

Jeremy: And that’s the questions we don’t know. That you have to start early.
Kolby: That if you don’t start within the first 6 months of life, you can’t do it. And once you start it, you can’t undo it because of some enzyme comes on that you store fat in a different way.

Jeremy: There’s still a better way to do that.

Ashley: Then who’s decision is it? Is it the mother? Is the parent?

Jeremy: It’s still not their decision, but you can approach it in a different way that makes them more honored and makes them understand what the decision is.

Kolby: You get a statue before you get killed?

(laughter).

Kolby: Like, “look, you got this statue. By the way here’s the baseball bat.”

Ashley: Make them seem like kings, like, “you are the chosen one, you are all great and all worthy.”

Kolby: Joe Vs the Volcano.

Jeremy: You’re still not just isolated your entire life until we need you.

Kolby: I think that’s also the cruelty of it.

Jeremy: That’s really the cruelty of this, is they’re not included in the society and they need to be included in the society in a way that is beneficial to them so that once they do have to sacrifice that they understand what it’s for and they’re okay with it. There’s a way to do that.

Kolby: What if they opt out though? What if they’re like, “nope.” Are you okay with the society then just dying off because everyone’s like, “look, I love everyone, but I love me better.”

Jeremy: That’s a different question. You get a choice until you don’t. You can’t opt out of this, this is your role, it was chosen for you, but here are the advantages.

Ashley: Think of the King of England, like Prince Charles, he’s going to have to take it. He can give it up, he knows it’s a big no-no.

Kolby: This person never went hungry their whole life. They never went without their whole life.

Jeremy: They went without contact and love.

Ashley: What if this was only temporary? Like, they say they’re looking for other solutions. The brothers working in the scientific community, they’re like, “listen, this is a great honor you can do this for us and trust me, we’re not trying to do this forever.” Is it permissible for a small period of time?

Kolby: I’m more okay with that actually.

Jeremy: Yeah. While they’re continuing to look for other avenues.

Ashley: So, you would be okay with your kid getting eaten as long as they’re looking for alternatives. What if they never find an alternative?

Kolby: And it’s a totally… yeah, that’s totally unfair flip-flop that I’ve done.

(laughter)

Ashley: I’m just throwing it out there.

Kolby: I feel like there are different… it’s different if it’s like, “look, this is a one-time problem, we have a one-time solution, we’re coming up with something different.” As opposed to, “this is our culture and it’s forever.”

Ashley: What if this has been going on for decades and decades and decades.

Jeremy: I think this is a thing going on for centuries.

Ashley: Exactly.

Jeremy: And to me, it feels like the culture used to do something.

Kolby: It was a more ritualistic thing, more medicinal.

Jeremy: It was more ritualistic, and because of modernization, and because they’ve become a complex society, death has been pushed into the background.  And it’s a taboo item, so you can’t talk to these people about what they’re doing, what they’re doing for the community.

Kolby: I want to ask a couple of questions on our sheet really quickly. So, if you were living in this community, would you eat the person?

Ashley: So, there you go… there’s choice.

Kolby: You could choose non-participation. That can be your silent protest, like, “I’m just going to starve to death.”

Jeremy: Again, it’s a culture where this has always been done.

Kolby: So, you’d eat Bob is what your saying? I’m never going to be on a drifting raft with you, that’s my main goal. You’re telling me you’re going to eat me?

Jeremy: Going back to last weeks story, you’re in the cave. You’re part of this culture, this is the norm, so until you’ve stepped out of that, you’re going to just keep looking at the shadows.

Ashley: This is where you get your option. This is where it comes down to you get your option to eat it or you don’t. That’s where you get to decide, “I’m going to die off because that’s my personal moral code not to survive.”

Kolby: I can make my choice for me, and my choice for me is no. I’m not faulting you guys for saving the society necessarily. I say that until I can’t skip a meal.

(laughter)

Kolby: Hypothetically, if I could skip a meal. I’m getting kinda peckish right now.

Ashley: I’d like to touch on one point. When I was reading this story, the entire time of seeing this one child being put into a certain room and being fed and being ignored and put in their special zone, I was thinking it was being like the next queen bee. Being the mother ant. The queen of the hive. That was my actual interpretation.

Kolby: I don’t think being pregnant all the time is a much better future.

Ashley: But I was thinking, doesn’t need to move, gets fed, just chills out and watches TV all day, I’m like, “man, they are treating this thing like royalty.” That was my initial...

Kolby: I can see it being a queen bee thing.

Ashley: I was like, all of a sudden to flip it and be like, “no, you’re going to get eaten.” Boom.

Jeremy: And I think the difference, maybe the difference again, is how it’s presented to them and what their knowledge of their life is. So, to not know is the bigger crime here.

Kolby: I’m curious, were you guys both eat or don’t eat?

Jeremy: Eat.

(laughter)

Ashley: On one hand, you gotta do what you gotta do to keep the society keep on going.

Kolby: It’s your choice though, you don’t have to eat if you don’t want to. But the only one who starves is you.

Ashley: I’d be in the scientific community being like, “work harder guys, we gotta figure it out!”

Kolby: While you’re snacking?

Ashley: Shhh, just little bits. I would definitely, enough to keep me going, but not enough to take advantage of the situation.

Kolby: I assume nobody is feasting on these people.

Jeremy: I think they’re getting a little bits at a time.

Kolby: It’s the 400 calorie a day.

Jeremy: Its famine food.

Kolby: It’s famine food, you’re spreading it out. Okay, one more question then we can call it quits I suppose on this one. Is it fair to impose cultural norms on goodness, morality on others? Is it fair for us to tell them, “you’re wrong.”?

Ashley: No.

Jeremy: I think absolutely not. That’s the prime directive.

Kolby: I knew that’s your answer, which is why I have a follow up question. What about if you go somewhere, to another culture in America or in the world, and they think prostitution is okay, or they think theft is okay or they think that rape is okay? Do you just go there and be like, “who and I to judge?” And we do judge and do we have a right to do that?

Jeremy: We absolutely do judge and again, it’s complex, it depends because there’s a lot of factors behind whatever’s going on and yet it can be immoral and it can be immoral in their culture.

Kolby: What about hitting kids? Say you go to some other country and it’s totally okay to just like, wail on your kids as part of like, you know, teaching your kids rules but not like a little bit, like whaling on your kids. Do you jump in and stop the dad from hitting the kid, or do you, “different culture, different rules?”

Jeremy: Yes, I think you have to jump in and stop.

Kolby: But you just said… that’s the exact opposite of what you just said.

Ashley: You come in with the understanding that you need to be respectful of their traditions and their cultural norms. You can sit down and be like, “just so you know, just putting it out there, there’s another way you can go about this. It’s worked it our community, maybe give it a try? The choice is yours.” But maybe it hasn’t even come into the consciousness there is a different way of going about it.

Kolby: Like in this story, you’re like, “hey, there’s some pretty fatty foods that would hold you over.” Have you ever seen a choco taco, it might…

(laughter)

Ashley: Do you think anyone derives pleasure from beating their kid? Do you think anyone derives pleasure from eating one of the own society?

Kolby: No, but I think from a cultural standpoint, I think your dad did it, your grandfather did it, you’ve seen your friend’s do it, it seems to be a pretty effective way to steer behavior.

Ashley: There’s gotta be one kid, who was like, “yo, I really didn’t like this, I’m willing to give anything else a shot because I didn’t like getting beaten. I’m pretty sure that kid doesn’t like it either.”

Kolby: I’m just to sort of taunt you, you don’t think it’s a little hypocritical to be a little like, “yo, this culture is okay, but if I go and see somebody hit their kid, which by the way isn’t killing their kid, I’m going to step aside.” So, in one hand you’re like, leave him alone and then in the other hand, you’re like, I’m going to step in. How do you hold those two ideas simultaneously? I think it’s both or neither.

(silence)

Kolby: I see you’re thinking, it’s a good sign. You went to India right? Let me tell you what, in India they wail on their kids.

Jeremy: They do.

Kolby: And you didn’t step in and were like, “hey.”

Jeremy: Nobody did that in front of me.

Kolby: I don’t know man. I think, I don’t know.

Jeremy: It’s a difficult question.

Kolby: I don’t think you get to say one or the other. You get to say both or neither.

(silence)

Jeremy: Okay, no that’s a fair way to look at it.

Kolby: I don’t know. I’m not trying to pick on you, I’m just saying logical consistency, sometimes you gotta kill a kid apparently.

(laughter)

Kolby: I wouldn’t eat him. I wouldn’t do it. I would just let myself starve. I think. Of course, I don’t know that for sure.

Ashley: I think going off of that, you’re okay with buying shoes that you’ve known were made by a kid making 10 cents.

Kolby: I actually am.

(laughter)

Ashley: You’re okay with that part though?

Kolby: And I’ll tell you why. Because…

Ashley: Inhuman conditions and…

Yea, I totally get that, but because there’s a larger economic theory there that I buy into. And that is that you start with low-level menial repetitive low wage jobs, and that culture works its way up a technological thing until you’re eventually building semiconductors and there’s no longer a labor shortage and that labor shortage means you have to pay more rights and people unionize. But the first foot in the door is the Nike factory. Which I know is a very controversial thing to say but I think you start with a labor glut and you work your way up. In this case, I don’t know. I don’t even know what our story is for next week. I think it’s “As You Wish”?

Jeremy: Yea, I don’t know.

Kolby: I think next week…

Ashley: There’s going to be another one… tune in, hit subscribe if you’re watching this on YouTube. You’ll be notified.

Kolby: And we’re going to have a different… you’re being replaced Ashley, not because you’re bad.

(crying)

Ashley: No, it’s cool.

Kolby: A friend of ours, Jessica, is coming in to guest host.

Ashley: Can I still come and play with the cats if we’re doing it here?

Kolby: Yea, I think we’re doing it here again and I think the next story will be “As You Wish”. I could be wrong, just check the website or whatever. And “As You Wish” is a story about stuffed animals that have the…

Jeremy: I haven’t read it yet.

Ashley: It’s a good one.

Kolby: You’ve got your homework then. It’s a story about stuffed animals that meet a lady who says “I’ll fix you”. At first, she fixes little things like torn off ears and then she fixes them to make their necks less long. It’s a way to… how much is okay to improve yourself before your, you know, you become a Kardashian.
(laughter)

Jeremy: Okay.

Kolby: Yea, it’ll be a good time. So read that one before the next one. And again, you’ve been listening to After Dinner Conversations. The website’s Afterdinnerconversation.com and all the stories are there. They are also online on Amazon, Apple, and everywhere else. You can watch this and other podcasts anywhere you hear podcasts or even on YouTube. And thank you for tuning it and well see you again at the next episode. Bye.

Ashley: Bye.

E3. "The Shadow Of The Thing" - Would you take a pill that showed you the truth about the world?

“Would you take a pill that showed you the truth about the world?”

Kolby, Jeremy, and Ashley discuss the ethics in the metaphysical short story, “The Shadow Of The Thing” available to download on Amazon.

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Discussions - Podcast RSS

Transcript (By Transcriptions Fast)

The Shadow of the Thing

Kolby: Okay, welcome back again to After Dinner Conversation. I am your co-host Kolby with co-hosts Ashley and Jeremy. After Dinner Conversation is a growing collection of short stories across genres meant to draw out deeper conversation. I feel like I’m getting better at that now. And they are available for download to read either on the website or you can go to wherever e-books are; Amazon, Apple, various places. And download them to your e-reader, laptop, all that. And all things we’re talking about and all these stories that we’re doing, even some of the questions are online. So, you can post your own comments and thoughts in the comments section below.

(Kolby points downward)

Kolby: I always see people do that in YouTube videos and I think that looks so weird.

(laughter)

Kolby: We are today once again at La Gattara, a cat café in Tempe, Arizona. Mostly because we just really thought this would be a fun place to do these. And they are super nice to let us stay here. So, come on by. You can play with the kitten any time you want.

Ashley: By the way, every cat here is up for adoption. Including this little spunk-a-doodle.

Kolby: Although by the time you see this, it might already be adopted because it’s freakin’ adorable. But there will be new kittens. You should probably read the stories before you watch the thing, but if you haven’t that’s okay, we’ll give you a little bit of a description. Matter of fact, Jeremy, you want to give a little bit of a description of the story?

Jeremy: The story is called “The Shadow of the Thing.” Who’s the author on this? Kurt? We haven’t been doing the authors.

Ashley: Tyler Kurt.

Jeremy: Tyler Kurt, sorry.

Kolby: Next week we’ve got somebody different.

Jeremy: So, “The Shadow of the Thing” by Tyler Kurt, is a short story about two people, a relationship between two people. Somebody comes over to their friend’s house, or is invited to their friend’s house, and the woman wants her friend there, because she’s about to take a drug that is going to change her perspective on reality.

Ashley: Forever.

Jeremy: Right.

Kolby: Forever.  

Ashley: For-Ev-Er.

Kolby: It’s a single use drug.

Ashley: The drug’s called apple.

Jeremy: And the conversation that happens around that. Not really the ramifications, but the conversation about the ramifications of this decision.

Kolby: So, we don’t ever get to see what happens when she takes it?

Jeremy: Right. There’s some second hand because her husband has already taken it, and you do get to see how he interacts with them.

Kolby: He’s freaky.

Jeremy: A little bit.

Kolby: A little bit, yeah.

Jeremy: I don’t know, he’s an engineer.

Kolby: This cat is super energetic this week.

Jeremy: He acts like every engineer I know.

Kolby: Yea, he acts just like an engineer, I get it.

Ashley: So, the main narrator of the story his name is Dakota. And the lady who’s taking the drug, her name is Maeve and her husband Jason, who’s already taken the drug, just to get names out there.

Kolby: Maeve, I think.

Ashley: Maeve. M-A-E-V-E.

Kolby: I think Maeve, honestly, because it’s a deviation from Eve. That’s my guess.

Ashley: Oh. There ya go.

Jeremy: Maeve has a U.

Ashley: Oh, well, never mind. Sorry.

Kolby: That’s alright. Please continue.

Ashley: That’s it.

Kolby: That’s it.

Ashley: I was just giving names.

Kolby: Dakota, Maeve, and what’s Maeve’s husbands name? I don’t remember.

Ashley: Jason.

Ashley: So, Dakota comes over and Maeve answers the door, every excited, this is a friend of his, obviously they’re very close, and she’s sits him down and goes “I’m so glad you’re here, I want to take this drug apple.” And basically, it was “I want to take it...”

Kolby: Do you remember why it’s called that?

Ashley: It looks like an apple.

Jeremy: The pill has a dimple.

Kolby: Oh, because it looks like an apple. Okay. So, it’s not red or something like that?

Jeremy: Right.

Ashley: Now, her situation is she wanted someone to be there that could keep an eye on her, make sure she’s safe, while she takes this drug. And she also wanted to see him for the last time as he is, before…

Jeremy: Or as she is.

Ashley: Or as she is, before she changes.

Kolby: And the drug is a weird drug. It’s definitely a fictional drug, right?

Jeremy: Yea.

Kolby: Because it’s not like an ecstasy, or pot, or heroin sort of drug.

Jeremy: No, it would be a neurotrope.

Kolby: What’s a neurptrope? Did you do research?

(Laughter)

Jeremy: I’ve done a lot of research on this. So neurotropes are drugs that affect you’re mind. Effect how you process information, or basically, there’s a lot of fads around neurotropes to make you a better worker.

Kolby: Like Ritalin?

Jeremy: Yeah, very much the same thing or focused. The drugs that allow you the focus. A lot of gamblers take drugs to keep them awake.

Kolby: So neurotrope is like a focus drug, but you don’t mean like a single use drug where you take it once and it lasts forever?

Jeremy: No, and that’s the fictional component of this. Although some of those, some of neurotropes, you can take for a long time and they do effectively change the way your brain works and you don’t have to take them anymore.

Kolby: This reminded me a little bit of Limitless, except a creeper version of Limitless. Because Limitless is really a focus drug as opposed to this which is just a mind expansion drug.

Jeremy: Right.

Ashley: Keep in mind this is a relatively new drug. It’s not one that’s been on the market for a very long time. And according to the headlines, it’s known as the new party drug, or the teen dies, or the miracle mind bender. So, it’s a relatively new drug making news headlines. So, there’s not a whole lot known about it.

Kolby: Not a whole lot of research it seems like.

Ashley: No.

Kolby: It’s the way it goes, right? First the drug comes out, people take it without knowing what it does except for what their friends say it does, then in like 20 years later, all the research says “Oh, by the way, this is bad news.”  Oh, we got a second cat.

Ashley: Cat city here!

Kolby: So, one of the things I thought, is that there were a lot of symbolism parallels in this one. So, number one obviously the idea that it’s called apple is pretty simple symbolic right? It’s this idea of Adam and Eve and taking an apple and because here’s the thing that I think is the interesting parallel for me, because you think of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden in that sort of biblical story, and they’re really just, I don’t want to be mean, but like cows? They don’t know they’re naked, they don’t get hungry, they don’t… all that stuff.

Jeremy: They’re innocent.

Kolby: They’re innocent. Right. The idea of it. And then when they take this apple, they…

Jeremy: They see the world.

Kolby: They see the world as it is, right? They see their own nakedness, they see, they feel hunger, they feel cold, all of that. And so, one of the things I think is interesting is the parallel of would you do it anyway? Do you want to live pre-apple, or do you want to live post-apple? Would you want to know, if even knowing is pain?

Ashley: The way that Jason had come down, Jason the husband who’s actually taken it, the way that he explained it as “imagine if there was a true world on top of the world that you see around you. And you were just seeing it for the first time now.” That’s the only way. And he seems very, in my opinion, kind of distant. He says hello but then he goes back to his work. Granted, we don’t know if that’s his personality to begin with.

Jeremy: He’s an engineer.

Ashley: Maybe he is an engineer. But that’s the best way that he could kind of understand it. Now Maeve is also wanted her friend to Dakota here because Jason, in her opinion was…

Jeremy: In incapable of sitting her for the experience.

Ashley: Exactly. So that made me go, even if your husband can’t even be there to help you...

Kolby: That’s a bad sign?

Ashley: Is that a bad sign? Is that a good sign? You know?

Kolby: You were going to say something?

Jeremy: It’s interesting. So, this actually brings two different aspects of two different types of drugs. So, neurotropes in terms of mind-expanding drugs, but also entheogens, which are drugs that are used for spiritual enlightenment.

Kolby: What were the people in Peru also into?

Ashley: Oh… it starts with ah….

Jeremy: There’s a bunch of them…

Kolby: Like psychotropes, mind expansion drugs.

Jeremy: Yes, mind expanding drugs that are used in a spiritual sense for two reach enlightenment. DMT is a really good example of that.

Kolby: Like the native Americans’ as well with they would take Peyote?

Jeremy: Right, so that’s a whole another class of mind-altering drugs that are really used to expand your spiritual connection to the universe. So, it feels like it’s a combination of these two things going on. Which is an interesting way…

Kolby: Except forever, right? Like you take, whatever, Peyote, or whatever you mind expanding drug is, and you’re not just changed while you’re on it. The experience changes you forever.

Jeremy: Yes, instead of just being in this different state, it changes you and your perceptions and you incorporate that into your personality and continue on.

Kolby: I feel like there are variations of that exist already, right?

Jeremy: Right, absolutely.

Kolby: Ayahuasca. That’s was the name. The idea of, whether is a Native American tradition, whether I’s in Peru with Ayahuasca, or wherever it’s whatever, this idea that I take this thing and it allows me to understand in a way that I couldn’t have understood before. But this is like to the next level stuff.

Jeremy: Exactly.

Ashley: So, I’d like to talk about what would make someone want to take this in the first place? So, you have this girl who’s working, she’s seems content in herself, they live in a track home.

Jeremy: She does a lot of traveling.

Ashley: She does a lot of traveling.

Jeremy: She does a travel blog.

Ashley: But she also seems like she’s missing out on something. And same thing with Jason. He’s a base-jumper who squirrel dive, suit dives, who’s like the totally extreme, and on the other end he’s making his money as a programmer, it’s like, what makes someone want to take this drug in the first place? Are they divided in two different lives? Like, she’s this homebody, wearing sweatpants and slipper, yet she travels a lot.

Jeremy: They’re both people into extreme experiences.

Kolby: They are extremists in their own ways.

Ashley: Yes, that’s what I was getting at. So, what is their ultimate goal to find out of this drug? Is it going to lean them to be more authentic versions of themselves except they are …?

Jeremy: I think that’s the idea, to get to the most authentic version of yourself. And the most in-touch with your life and the universe you can get.

Ashley: You have to truly commit to that extremist part of yourself in a way? Because they have two parts of their lives?

Kolby: But I don’t think it’s a commit to an extremist. I think it’s a commitment to… we’re about to get a cat to tackle the camera…

(laughter)

Kolby: I think it’s a commitment to truth. It’s interesting because the biblical reference is that Adam and Eve made a mistake by eating the apple. But then we spent the rest of humanity existence trying to understand the universe and the world around us. Where is our place in it? How does it work? So, if you are committed to that pursuit, then why would you stop? Once you started down that road, I don’t think there’s an end. Or maybe there is?

Jeremy: There doesn’t have to be an end. It’s just you’re moving to yet another level of understanding.

Kolby: Yeah. So, one of the things I thought was interesting about the way Jason explains it, is it says “Jason held up the tea to show me and says ‘when I hold up this cup, you see a cup of tea and together we’ve given it the name cup of tea. But what if it’s just a form of the thing in this moment that we call tea, but not the thing itself?’” There was a couple other part where he talks that I thought were interesting.

Ashley: Like we call the thing coming into the beach a wave, instead of calling it a form of the ocean. It’s the exact same.

Kolby: Yea, like I’m seeing the cup of tea, and it’s what we call the separation of everything, the same way we call the wave the separation of the ocean.

Ashley: You’ve separated it, and called it something completely different, when it’s still an extension of its same thing.

Kolby: Right.  Which I can see how that would be appealing.

Jeremy: Absolutely.

Kolby: Even if it totally messed up your understanding of…

Jeremy: And that’s really the question that comes about with all drug use, even if they’re neurotropes or enthogens, or psychoactives. Does it affect you to a point where you can no longer interact with society?

Ashley: And that’s what tipped me off with the Jason guy. When he comes down, they said he is kind of glossing eyed. And she can’t even trust him to take care of her. Now again, we don’t have the backstory if that’s just his personality in general or is this a side effect of apple.

Kolby: Think about it this way though too, and I hadn’t thought of this when I was reading it, but now that we’re talking about it… Imagine if there were two Adam and Eve’s. And I keep going back to this example, because it seems like a good parallel. So, let’s say there’s an Adam and Even that eat the apple and then there’s the Adam and Eve that didn’t that see them. How would the pre-apple Adam and Even see the post-apple. They would see them as odd and distant and angsty and sad. They would seem sad because they would know hunger and they would know pain and they would know nudity. And so, the pre-people would look at the post-people and be like, “why would anyone want that?”

Jeremy: Why would you do that?

Kolby: Why would you want that?

Jeremy: Ignorance is bliss.

Kolby: Right. I don’t understand what you’re going through, but I understand that you don’t seem happy anymore. And I feel happy.

Ashley: Isn’t there like, you can’t understand happiness without sad? Or you get a greater understand of happiness once you’ve had trauma and sadness and those effects? So, it’s, again, it’s a mind opening rather than an enhancement of your sensations around you in a way? So, at the end of the stories there are a series of questions. That brings us to question #2, do you think Maeve is making the right choice by taking apple? 

Jeremy: Oh no, we didn’t ask #1.

Ashley: Oh, sorry, I was going off what we were just saying. So, #1 is while she’s taking the apple, there’s a couple extra leftover, and it says, “do you think Dakota is going to take it?”

Kolby: I love how there’s one left on the table. Just in case.

Ashley: Just in case. I don’t think you should. At least not in the moment when he himself doesn’t have someone to watch over him while he taking it.

Jeremy: If he hasn’t done the research, I think with any of them, you don’t know what to expect. And you’re not in the right place, it’s not the right decision.

Kolby: I also don’t know though… whoa, we got craziness going on behind us… I also don’t know how you research it? How does a post-person explain to a pre-person what their understanding?

Ashley: It’s like describing color to a blind person.

Kolby: Yeah, I think at a certain point, you can be like, “well, he didn’t die of hunger, I guess that’s good.”

(laughter)

Kolby: I don’t know how it’s anything but a leap of faith.

Jeremy: Certainly.

Kolby: Because maybe everyone is wrong. Maybe it doesn’t show you anything. Maybe… cats just having …

Ashley: There’s a cat running behind us on a walkway and she’s just like “Ahh”

Kolby: So, you say don’t take it, without more research?

Ashley: With Dakota? Yeah. More research, also do his own experiment. See how his friend changes. And thirdly, see if it’s something he wants to do himself.

Jeremy: Exactly. Where’s he at in his life and is this something that…

Ashley: There is this subtle like, “I need you here to take this by the way,” and slides a couple on the table. So, I don’t think he should. Absolutely not.

Kolby: I think this is the most don’t do it because of peer pressure drug there is. Because it’s a drug…

Jeremy: If it’s a permanent change.

Kolby: It’s not like cigarette. We’re it’s like, “well, I coughed and I didn’t like it.”  You take it once and that’s it. You’re good for life. I think that’s one you don’t take that with the peer pressure.

Ashley: What about Maeve…

Kolby: Maeve.

Ashley: Sorry, I’m going to butcher that name all throughout this thing.

(laughter)

Ashley: Do you think Maeve is making the right choice by taking apple? Has she done her research? Has she prepped herself accordingly? Is she ready to commit to this life changing?

Kolby: I think that, for me, the only part of the story, I was like “hmmm”.

Jeremy: We don’t know because we don’t really know.

Kolby: Of, course there’s this inherent desire to be with your husband. So that’s the part I didn’t know. Is she doing it because she wants to be with her husband, or is she doing it, making a permanent, forever change to your perspective in the world potentially because internally she believes it’s the right choice?  And I think that’s a huge difference in motivation that decides in if she’s making the right or wrong decision.

Jeremy: I mean, they’re linked but you would want them to be linked, not only is it just a continuation of he’s changed but clearly, he’s changed in positive enough ways that she sees it as a positive example.

Kolby: I think he’s kind of rude to have taken it without her actually.

Jeremy: I agree.

Kolby: I think that’s a conversation you have with your wife. You’re not just like, “hey, this guy slipped me this thing at the bar”

Ashley: No, no maybe it was, they sat down, we’re both interested. We’ll, I’ll take it first in case it kills me. I’ll be the test person. I see that a lot. That people come in, “my husband is going to go first, try it out for both of us just to make sure it’s safe.”

Kolby: What do you see that the husband’s like….

Ashley: Okay, so I work in the dental field.

Kolby: Oh, that’ my husband’s going to test out a crown first.

Ashley: No, well they come in and they’re like, “I want you to test out this dental office to see if it’s good, you go first.”

Jeremy: Oh, okay.

Ashley: So, I feel like this is the same situation. You test it out, you let me know if it’s okay. One thing I’d like to point out too, keep in mind she has taken almost everything in a non-addictive manner.

Kolby: That’s right, she’s like the one person who doesn’t get addicted to anything…

Ashley: So, is she at this point where she’s tried everything and now, she’s looking for that nothing else does it for her? Why not? Why not take this other thing? Why not, I’ve taken everything before and I’ve lived. Why not take this other thing?

Kolby: I don’t think so though.

Jeremy: It doesn’t get presented in that way. It doesn’t get presented in the “I’ve taken these things and they no longer do anything for me”, it’s just she’s taken all these things and there’s never been an addiction or an adverse reaction to that. So, I think it’s more presenting her as this isn’t an addiction problem, this is an experimentation.

Kolby: You don’t get the impression that she’s doing it as a party drug. She’s doing it as a rationally.

Jeremy: And that seems a little odd in the story too as a party drug.

Kolby: I think that’s just the press getting it wrong. The press presents everything as a party drug.

Ashley: The one with that point though too, is if she’s never taken any drugs before, do you think someone would take this? I mean I feel like someone in her case who’s taken stuff and been like, “oh, I’m not addicted and I turned out okay.” So, I feel like there has to have been like potentially some prior drug use to willing to go this deep into taking some drug like this.

Jeremy: Again, it depends on what kind of press it’s getting though.  

Ashley: Exactly.

Jeremy: How it’s presented.

Kolby: So, one other thing that I thought was an interesting parallel, which I don’t know if you guys have heard of or not, there’s the Socrates Allegory of the Cave. Where you know... where all the people are staring at the shadow of the thing, and the one person comes back in and is like, “no, you’re looking at the shadows. There’s an actual real thing behind you and you just can’t see it. Just get up and look around. And everyone’s like, “no, we’re committed to the vision of the world that we see and we’re unwilling to believe somebody who tells us that…

Jeremy: There’s something else.

Kolby: There’s more. And I feel like that’s a really similar thing with this story. Where this drug is the version of turn around and look behind you. There’s the real thing that you’re not seeing. And when I read that story, it’s really easy as a reader of this story to be like, “well of course you should turn around” …

Jeremy: Because we’re coming from that perspective.

Kolby: Right. We’re already one of the people who think we’ve already turned around. So, you look at all the people looking at the shadows thinking, “what a bunch of idiots. Only a simpleton wouldn’t turn around because you just are an idiot.”

Ashley: Now for me from a medical background, it’s the example of someone taking an experimental drug. It’s like, I would need to have, for me personally, I would need to have other people take it, write up their symptoms, side effects, all that other stuff, for me to know… to verify that it’s actually effective. I would like to see a control group that have taken it, combine their findings, and then is this legit? Are your changes similar, are they not similar? It’s easy to turn around and say, “no, this is the real thing,” but is everyone having that same experience and is that a guarantee thing?

Kolby: Did it give you pause that some of the people who took it just killed themselves? They just couldn’t take it.

Ashley: Absolutely. It makes you wonder what chemically it’s doing in the brain if anything, or what it’s doing to your synapses or your neurons, or brain balance, and then collect the findings and figure out is there, should it be readily available? Do you need to know if you should take it or not?

Kolby: It’s interesting because you’re looking at it much more like a data driven thing and I’m looking at it more like a…

Jeremy: Philosophical

Kolby: Yeah, like why wouldn’t I turn around? Why wouldn’t I turn around? Even though I could total just be wrong. You also have to think, if there were a 1000 Adam and Eve’s took this apple, a few of them would be like, “life is too hard.” Some of them would kill themselves, because they would be like, “wow, I got to go hunt stuff all the time.”

Jeremy: I’m suddenly thinking of the interesting story of the clinical trials for the people in the cave.

Kolby: Oh my gosh right

(laughter)

Kolby: They like come up, “ok, we’re going to do clinical trials. You and you and you, go step outside.”

Ashley: “You get a placebo effect.”

(laughter)

Kolby: I feel like this is the ultimate drug that can’t have a placebo, right? Like nobody can be like, “Am I on it?” No, clearly, you’re not.

Ashley: That brings us back to being more like the matrix, do you take the blue pill or the red pill. Are you ready to accept reality as it truly is as we perceive it to be, or do you just continue living life as it is? I’m turning it more into a scientific.

Kolby: No, but you’re right, it’s a red-blue pill kind of thing.

Ashley: It very much is. It very much is. What are you hoping to find out about yourself that you haven’t found in your life already? That you’ve tried every single method possible to find your own, you know mental space…

Jeremy: Your universal truth.

Ashley: Yeah.

Kolby: So, this brings us to a harder question now that we’ve sorta talked a bit, if you were in that situation, you’re Dakota in this story, do you take it?

Ashley: No! And I wrote it down. I wrote it down because there’s no scientific evidence, it’s a new drug, there’s no long-term studies completed, I’d like to know…

(laughter)

Kolby: You were a no. You were a solid no.

Ashley: I was a no. Now, would I be intrigued by it? Yes. Would I want to be around those that’ve taken it? Yes, would I want to learn from their experience? Now this is the other thing… to take Jason, he took it and he didn’t…  he tried his best to explain it, but does the drug inhibit you from really revealing the whole truth?

Kolby: I think you can’t explain, like your example though with color blindness. You can’t explain color. You can be like, “well, it’s grey but it’s more grey.”

(laughter)

Kolby: I don’t know. How do you say that? Okay, Jeremy, do you take it or not?

Jeremy: I don’t think you take it at that time. I’d have to do some research.

Kolby: But you’d pocket it is what you’re saying?

(laughter)

Jeremy: Yes.

Kolby: Ah, ha, okay.

Jeremy: I’ll take this with me.

Kolby: I’m with you on that one Jeremy. One, I don’t think I’d want two people going through that experience simultaneously. I think that’s too much. But I think honestly, I would pocket it and hold it for later. I do think it’s interesting to go back to that Allegory of the cave thing. At the end, the, I think one of the last lines of the story, is she, after she takes it, she stars at the wall. At a shadow of the wall.

Jeremy: That was really nice.

Kolby: I think that was like a tip of the hat to the Allegory of the cave.

Jeremy: Where’s the best way to experience it is by looking at the shadows.

Ashley: She sits down, turns off the lights, turns on the fire, and looks at the shadows with the fires going.

Kolby: Online they said it would take half and hour to an hour for the pill to start, another hour for it to take effect, so I guess we wait… she turned the chair to face the shadows the fireplace cast on the wall, and sat back down in the chair and was told watching the shadows on the wall is the best way to experience this. I think that’s a really clear tip to, “by the way, we’re talking about the Allegory of the cave.”

Ashley: I’d like to show just how much she’s not even prepared for this, or anybody, because she’s like, “I bought a few, I don’t know how many I should’ve bought.” That’s why she had extra. She’s like, “I don’t know how many to buy”… she did it just like that by the way.

(rumbling talking)

Kolby: This cat is just like intense.

Ashley: If it turns out what Maeve says to be true, that the effects of apple are a change in your… cat move… of your whole perspective of the nature of the world around you, even after the drug worn off, does that change your opinion of the drug. So, it’s a permanent thing basically.

Kolby: So that’s the second part to the question.

Ashley: If it was temporary, would I take it? Yeah. But if it’s long term, meh.

Jeremy: But it depends.

Kolby: So, Jeremy and I both said we’d pocket the pill, you said you’d do more research. So, let’s say, just for the sake of argument, that it is all as it says presents. It really is a new way to understand the world around you. Now we’ve got some clinical trials, now are you in?

Ashley: Again, it would depend on what those clinical trials find. Can you interact with society or not?

Kolby: Can you still feed yourself basically?

Jeremy: Right, and can you only interact with those that’ve taken it? And the people in the cave are just left out?

Kolby: Here’s the thing right, let’s say you’re one of the people that’s left the cave, what would you ever have to talk about to the people in the cave? The only thing you’d have to take about is, “you’re all idiots!” You’d have no common ground. So, I assume in this case, to pre- and post-people, just wouldn’t have much to talk about except like, “Oh, that’s what you think the world is.”

Jeremy: It doesn’t necessarily appear that way with Jason’s interactions. You know they’re brief and he tries to explain it. I don’t know. Again, I would need to see more of what those interactions are and what the real effects of it are it in long term.

Kolby: You all sound pretty on the fence.

Jeremy: Yeah.

Ashley: So, you find out that, yes, it can…

Jeremy: Oh, I’m on the yes side, just leaning.

Kolby: Okay, you’re like 60-40 on this.

Ashley: This is the interesting thing, what would lean someone to take it? Do you find that your world is not whole?

Kolby: I think the truth is important.

Ashley: Okay, so for humanity to find enlightenment, does it take this artificial pill to take?

Kolby: That’s the one problem I have with the whole story.

Ashley: You can’t find within yourself. You can’t find it within your own world? You can’t find it within your biological with how you were born? You need this pill?

Jeremy: But again, that’s the whole thing with psychoactives anyways, and leading you to spiritualism and how they’re used in spiritualism.

Kolby: So that’s the one problem I had with it. If we were intended to understand this world in this way, we wouldn’t need a pill. But here’s my counter-argument to this, I was thinking about as you were talking, so this is the equivalent of the written word. So, let’s say you’re the first person to figure out how to read all the books in the world. You could make the argument, “if man were meant to read, you wouldn’t have to learn it.”

(laughter)

Kolby: And so, then you’re walking around being like, no, but these aren’t just squiggly lines, they mean something.

Jeremy: But this is good for our culture, this is good for our society.

Kolby: I understand more and maybe I’m sad in a way, but I understand more. But you’re like, “but I can’t read it so…”. “I’d been born to read if I needed to know it.”

Ashley: But what if someone is totally content with their life? Life is fantastic, life is great, they love it the way that it is. Should they just live in ignorance without taking Apple and not knowing this other aspect? Does that make them a bad person?

Jeremy: No, it’s doesn’t make them a bad person.

Kolby: It just makes them a person who believes that happiness is the goal of life. I think that’s what this come down too.

Jeremy: Whether happiness is more important than truth or knowledge or understand.

Kolby: And I think it’s really hard to take a moral judgment on either person’s choice.

Kolby: Yes.

Jeremy: Because, how can you fault someone for wanting to be okay?

Ashley: That’s true.

Kolby: Like this cat. This cat is like solid. This cat…

Ashley: I wish the cat would turn around because that face is just like nodding off, it’s doing the head bob thing. You okay? Yeah, you’re sleeping.

Kolby: The cat’s just like, “yea, I’m just thinking. I’m waiting for adoption.”

Ashley: Oh, hello. Stretches.

Kolby: Alright. That probably covers this one pretty well unless there’s anything else you guys wanted to jump on that… I think we’re roughly on…

Ashley: Oh, what are the factors that make you think Apple is or isn’t what it claims to be? Is there’s anything that makes you question?

Kolby: I think it’s legit. I mean, basic on what Jason’s saying, I think it’s so legit.

Jeremy: Right.

Kolby: Like the idea…

Ashley: One person.

Kolby: Yeah, but the idea.

Ashley: There’s a thing called placebo effect. I’m just saying.

(laughter)

Ashley: People will literally take a placebo and be like, “yeah, I totally feel better.” And we’re like, “we gave you a water pill.”

Kolby: I know I’m super bias in this, but the line you talked about with “we call the thing a wave but it’s just a form of the ocean.” I’m like… oh man, that sounds like… maybe because I grew up on Yoda and Star Wars. This idea that everything is just one thing, and you’re just seeing variation of one thing. Variations in the form of the one. Just like the wave of the ocean and it’s like, if I can understand that better, like man I want to do it. Assuming that’s really what it is.

Ashley: But again, it comes down to if can you function in this society after you’ve taken that mind-bender. Can you still function or does everyone need to take it? Does there need to be… you’re born, then you’re given apple as a baby.

Kolby: I think that’s the sequel. The sequel to this story is fast forward 30 years, and like 80% of societies taken it, and 20% of people are like, “if I was meant to see more, God would’ve made me see more.”

(laughter)

Kolby: I don’t want to learn no reading. I think that creates a schism between like… that I think is an interesting science fiction novel as well.

Ashley: So, pretend in that world that 80% of the people have taken it and 20% of people haven’t, what if there’s a side effect, a detriment, that people are just like, “whoa, the world’s all connected man” and they don’t become innovative.

Jeremy: They’d become France with the previous story about not working. Not contributing to society.

Ashley: Because they feel it’s all connected, its all one.

Jeremy: Suddenly capitalism isn’t the goal.

Ashley: So, in that case, the 20% that didn’t take it are the ones that are building, using tools, who’s to say? I’m just putting it out there.

Kolby: That’s putting a cultural, sort of standard, on a new society really. That’s like saying, “I work this way, you became different, so I don’t really value….” I don’t know. I think it’s an interesting question.

Jeremy: It asks interesting questions for sure.

Kolby: I like this story more than the last one. I can’t lie. Alright, so if you want to read this story, you can go online. You’ve been watching After Dinner Conversation, short stories for longer discussions.

Ashley: Something we missed, write a comment, pose your own questions, this is meant to derive more conversation, it’s not meant to put one person over another, it’s just to evolve thought. Heck, read it with your friends and sit down after dinner and talk about it yourselves.

Kolby: Talk about it, post comments, questions about the things we got right, got wrong, forgot, didn’t think about. You know, we’re not perfect. We’re not on apple.

(laughter)

Ashley: It made me really hungry after this. I could really go for an apple right now.

(laughter)

Kolby: Next week, what is our story?

Ashley: This I Do For You, by Margaret… I can’t speak her last name… Karmazin.

Kolby: Yeah, “This I Do For You”. This one has got a spoiler; you can’t really tell what it’s about. It’s about a kid growing up that’s called to make a sacrifice for the community and again, it asks a pretty interesting ethical question.

Jeremy: It’s an interesting story, I like this one.

Ashley: Not just with her, but her mom and the community as a whole.

Kolby: For next week. And we’ll be back at the cat café next weekend again with a new cat probably.

Ashley: But this one’s up for adoption if you’re watching this and this cat is still around, this cat is awesome. This one just like to cuddle. Sorry.

Kolby: Alright, we’ll see you next week.

Ashley: I like this one!

Kolby: Bye.

E2. "My Fellow (Immortal) Americans" - Don't you have a right to immortality?

“Don’t you have a right to immortality?”

Kolby, Jeremy, and Ashley discuss the ethics in the short story, “My Fellow (Immortal) Americans” available to download on Amazon.

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Discussions - Podcast RSS

Transcript (By Transcriptions Fast)

My Fellow (Immortal) Americans

Kolby: Alright, hello and welcome to After Dinner Conversation. After Dinner Conversation is a growing collection of short stories across genre’s meant to draw out deeper conversations. Download After Dinner Conversation short stories on Amazon, to your kindle app devices, phone, laptop, kindle tablet, all those things or wherever they are sold. This is our podcast to support that and talk about some of the stories. I’m your co-host Kolby. I’m here with Jeremy co-hosting as well as Ashley co-hosting.

Ashley: Triple Co-cost.

Kolby: Triple co-hosting. And we are in, again this week, we’re in..

Jeremy: La Gattara.

Kolby: La Gattara. Thank you. I screwed it up twice now. La Gattara in Tempe, Arizona where there are cats up for adoption. And they were nice enough to let us host here. Alright. So, our story this week is My Fellow (Immortal) Americans. Ashley, you want to sort of run it down for people who haven’t read it so they know what we’re going to be talking about?

Ashley: So, yea, if you haven’t read it, hit pause, go read it really quick. But I’m going to just give you a quick, kind of, overview, but then after you’re done reading it, hit un-pause and come back and watch this. But basically, what it is, it’s a speech given by the American president sometime in the future, couple hundred years. And the issue is that there’s overpopulation. So, his way to kind of get around this, is instead of having a cashed based system.

Kolby: Societies, not his right. Right? Like it happened before.

Jeremy: Society already had it.

Ashley: Society already established.

Kolby: Society already had it.

Ashley: So, instead of it being a cash-based society, he decided that there should be, you work for time. They have found some scientific way that you can be… you work and you earn this time which makes you live and infinite amount of time, so you can be 100, 200 years old.

Kolby: You never get older; you never get sick.

Ashley: So, the debate is how they want to regulate this system. There are other societies that they mentioned where you work 40 hours means you get 40 hours of life, plus 6 hours of, like, bonus time. But he’s thinking “well, if you’re rich, like, why can’t that money be passed down to your kids? Or does it get put back into the system to give to other people?”

Kolby: So, your kids could inherit time.

Ashley: So, your kids could inherit time. So that’s basically the premise of the story. Again, it’s based off a speech he’s giving to promote…

Kolby: It’s like a donors club, or something.

Ashley: Pretty much, yeah. And so, it’s basically his reasoning of why shifting that paradigm that you can pass off your time to your kids, or how you should earn your time.

Jeremy: Right.

Kolby: My impression was, I think this is pretty clear, he thinks free capitalism, right? You should be able to make as much time as you want. You should be able to pass it to your kids. You should be able to exploit workers, like whatever.

Ashley: Yeah.

Kolby: So, one of the things I was a little confused about when I read it, was it seems like you’re born at like zero, and if nothing happened, you’d die at like 60 years old. 60-70 years. But if you work, then you essentially stopped that clock. So, you might be 20 years old and if my math is wrong, if I’m getting this wrong let me know, like you start working at 18 or 20 years old and then basically that freezes your time.

Jeremy: Right.

Kolby: And then if you’re ever like “I don’t want to work anymore,” then you still got 40 more years before you sort of die of cholera of something.

Jeremy: In the way he presents it is, in the US the system is for an hour of your work, you basically get an hour of your life extended. An hour for an hour.

Kolby: Which is kind of a bad deal.

Jeremy: It is kind of a bad deal.

Kolby: Because I only get one more hour so I can work, like…

(laughter)

Kolby: Like, someone at a call center is like, not worth it.

Jeremy: Like, if you have your normal life expectancy of 60 years and if you work 40 of those years, you will live to 100.

Kolby: Right. Even though those are 40 years you spent picking up trash or something.

Jeremy: And really 40 years of 40-hour weeks, so

(laughter)

Kolby: Yeah.

Jeremy: So, and he mentions other systems like France as a bad example…

Kolby: Socialists.

Jeremy: Right, were they get way more hours of life for hour worked. So, says, the country is in a depression because nobody wants to work.

Kolby: Right, oh, that’s right because you work 8 hours but you get paid 20 hours.

Jeremy: Something like that.

Kolby: So, you essentially can get extended life forever for only working some of the time.

Ashley: So, you basically promote not over… like, why would you do overtime then?

Kolby: Yeah.

Ashley: That was the whole thing.

Kolby: Why would you work if you didn’t have too?

Ashley: Yeah, exactly. So, it’s promoting laziness is what his concern is.

Kolby: Yeah. We should also mention there’s a horrible movie roughly based on this idea.

Jeremy: Yes.

Kolby: With…

Ashley: I thought it was pretty good. Justin Timberlake.

Kolby: Like it’s not bad. But I feel so much more could’ve been done with that movie.

Jeremy: Yeah.

Kolby: But it’s not exactly the same idea but it’s roughly the same idea where there’s…

Jeremy: Time is currency.

Kolby: Where time is currency, yeah.

Ashley: So yea again the whole reason for this time shift is the overpopulation so in the reading they said they a solution for those that have worked hard and those that have earned their future, to have that future, and those that have squandered their opportunity to gracefully make space for the next generation of children.

Kolby: Isn’t it like 15 billion like the world cap number that they came up with?

Ashley: Yeah, so basically, in a way, you can set your own death.

Kolby: Sure.

Jeremy: Right.

Ashley: If you think about it. Which I thought that was very interesting because right now, outside of Oregon, there is no assisted suicide. Whereas here it puts that in the people’s hands. I don’t want to live anymore, let me just stop working, and then you’re not longer given those drugs that keep your life going. So, I thought that was… I know that’s not the premise of this, but I thought it was interesting concept.

Jeremy: It’s an interesting additional concept it brings up.

Kolby: That you can choose.

Ashley: Yeah, that you get to choose when you want to live and when you want to die. And what if you don’t want to live anymore but you want to give your time to my kids? Anyway…

Kolby: Like Delta frequent flier miles.

Ashley: Exactly

(Laughter)

Ashley: I thought that was interesting.

Kolby: There were a couple things about it that I thought, for me, were really interesting right? Like, one of them was this idea of are… the president seems to assume, our fictional president, not our current president of course, seems to presume that people are inherently lazy. That if you chose not to, if you didn’t have to work, no one would work.

Jeremy: Right, and you know, as always there’s hypocrisy in the argument where he says “rich people should be able to give their time to their children, but people should be working.” So, there’s a hypocrisy there, so if you’re lazy and don’t want to work, you shouldn’t get to live forever, oh, except for rich kids.

Kolby: Right. And I think one of the things the story that frustrated me, I mean there’s a lot of things that frustrated me about the idea is the point of it, is this idea that you assume that everyone gets paid the same amount for their same thing, like whether you’re the CEO…

Jeremy: No, I think they’re even stating there’s income inequality.

Kolby: And that’s the part that frustrated me. They did this to solve income inequality from people that are being hungry, and yet.

Jeremy: And yet there’s still inequality.

Kolby: I bet the Jeff Bezzos’ in the future might work an hour and get paid 40 years, right? And it’s like, so you arguing people are inherently lazy, but in the same breath you’re arguing of this income inequality that encourages this lazy view, like, “Oh, they’re just more efficient. They are just doing better things.”

Ashley: They say about the government tampering with the marketplace, one is to discourages hiring, it discourages investment, it encourages laziness, and it causes American jobs to be shipped to cheaper labor markets overseas.

Kolby: Yea, I feel like you could pull that out of a newspaper today as to why you shouldn’t raise the minimum wage.

Jeremy: That’s one problem with the story in general, is that it’s just replacing one aspect of our current economic system when it’s a more complex system, so income inequality isn’t the only issue. So, it isn’t enough of a change to really bring out the questions or you really only focusing on income equality when it’s a more dynamic system.

Ashley: Yeah.

Kolby: I’m not following you. I get it that it’s only changing one

Jeremy: One aspect of it so…

Kolby: One thing of the overall economy.

Jeremy: Right. I’m saying it doesn’t go far enough.

Kolby: Ok.

Jeremy: In terms of questioning what the problems are with the current system.

Kolby: Oh, sure.

Jeremy: Because you’re only questioning one factor of the current system.

Kolby: But I think that’s the thing that it’s drawing out, right? For some reason, and maybe I’m reading too much into it, but for some reason when somebody who doesn’t have a lot of skill, they’re not good with technology, they’re not good with engineering, whatever, they get paid $8/hour, you’re like “we’ll you kinda deserve that because if you’ve gone to college, or whatever, I’m not saying that’s fair but that’s the sort of rule.” It seems fairer than saying if “you didn’t get a degree in engineering, you should die”. That’s a much more extreme view which I think it creates, to me at least, it creates more of a bad taste in my mouth. Like, you are so unproductive, I am okay with your death.

Ashley: Now, I’d like to know, in every society, you need those people that do pick up the garbage, that do the... they don’t need to higher education to do those tasks, so are they basically devaluing those people?

Jeremy: Yes, and that’s what I’m saying, it’s not…

Ashley: How does society run?

Jeremy: It’s not changing it enough. It’s really the same system.

Ashley: Yeah.

Jeremy: You could talk about the current system in the same fashion without having to change one aspect of it to bring focus on it.

Kolby: So you’re saying the time aspect of it, it makes it interesting but it’s the same problem?

Jeremy: Yes.

Ashley: They even go into it with the taxes. Like if you make “X” amount of money, you get taxed 10% of time, which gets redistributed to social services. Those that may be can’t… oh my gosh you’re adorable… sorry there’s a cat right in front of me that’s on his belly, that’s like “ah, pet me!”. Or if you make a certain amount, you have to pay 20%, where would it end? And why would any of us work? That’s the concern with payment. And then where does it go to help out your fellow man? That’s still becomes an issue.

Kolby: But that’s the same argument. I don’t think it comes up when you’re talking about minimum wage. Like, nobody says “if you change the minimum wage to $15 per hour, people will just stop working” because there’s this assumption somebody is going to want to buy a TV, or might actually want to send their kids to college, or have a dollar in savings. In that aspect it’s a little bit different.

Jeremy: A little bit different. But that’s not what they’re focusing on. There’s still just focusing on income inequality. It seems to be…

Kolby: They just swapped out what the inequality is.

Jeremy: Right.

Ashley: So, we keep talking about income inequality, what about of quality of life? You keep trying to buy this time for more time, but what are you filling that time with. I’m totally just extracting it from the currency aspect.

Jeremy: I think that’s not even talked about in this story.

Ashley: Yeah, but I’m just bringing it up as a side thing. For example, everyone now wants to live longer and it’s like, “well, you’re going to extend your life 5 years but what kind of quality of life will you have there?” It’s kinda the same thing. They’re talking about these people living for 200 years and I’m like, “great, you’re living 200 years, but…”

Jeremy: But what are you doing…

Ashley: “…but what are you doing with that 200 years?”

Kolby: It also made me think about the inter-changeability of time and money, right? Money is just a portable version of time.

Jeremy: It is.

Kolby: I got to work, I spend an hour to get $30, so that I can have a car, so that I don’t have to walk somewhere, so I have saved…

Ashley: …saved time, in a way. So now money is time.

Kolby: Right. And one of the interesting things about it, is this idea of, ok- so would I work for an hour to buy a car, to drive somewhere, or would it be a better sort of way to spend my time to just walk there in a hurry, right?

Jeremy: Right. To spend that time walking.

Ashley: Well, see you work to afford the car, the car to get you more time, time that you use to go to work, to make more money, to afford the car, to get you to work.

Kolby: I feel like that’s the same treadmill people are on now.

Ashley: Absolutely.

Kolby: I feel like that once you have a car you can drive to a job that pays better. But now I have to pay for the car. What about the idea that, everyone now isn’t sick? Like, yes, you’re swapping out one inequality for another, but if you choose, if you’re like “look, I don’t want to work. I want to surf every day.”

Kolby: You could spend your whole life never working a day and live to 60ish or 70ish and die. And I mean, that would in some sense be like, the dream. The only reason that’s not the dream, is because there are people who live 100,000 years. But if not for these other people, you’d think you had the best life ever.

Jeremy: And they’re aging where the rest of the world is not.

Kolby: Yeah

Jeremy: So that’s another factor of this, by working you’re getting the drugs that not only keeping you young, but keeping you young for a long period of time.

Kolby: Able to do those interesting things.

Jeremy: Right. So, if you were to just opt out of the system, you would live a normal life and age.

Kolby: Right. 

Jeremy: And I’m sure it doesn’t, the story doesn’t go into it, but that would also be an interesting story of what are the age stigmas that would come up because of that?

Kolby: Oooh…

Ashley: Oh yea.

Kolby: Oh, you’re older? You’re 60. You just be lazy. You must’ve lost a lot of time in the divorce.

Ashley: Discriminating against younger people. Discriminating. Like, you’re young, what happened, like why are you 60, and you only have 10 years left, like what’s your deal?

Kolby: And what did you do wrong.

Ashley: And interesting enough…

Jeremy: You must be a felon.

Kolby: Must’ve had your time taken away.

Ashley: Now another interesting concept. Nowadays when you have money, you can show that wealth with a car, with clothing. In this issue, there is no money, there’s just aging.

Kolby: So, age is a sign of wealth.

Ashley: Do you show you age on your forehead, because keep in mind how are you going to show the aging.

Kolby: In the movie they have the thingy.

Ashley: They have the thing on the arm.

Kolby: Which would seem pretty weird to me…

Ashley: So how do you know how much time the other person has left.

Kolby: I suppose you have wrinkles. Sunscreen becomes the currency.

Ashley: But again, the aging goes slower.

Jeremy: All topics, not really addressed in the story.

Ashley: It’d be interesting to see…

Jeremy: But interesting questions it brings up.

Kolby: I think it would be interesting spin off story of this, you would think in this society, there would simply be people who just opted out of this.

Jeremy: Exactly.

Kolby: Like, communes, or hippies or whatever that are just like “I’m going to be born, I’m going to live, I’m going to die, I’m not going to get into your game”, and just like live a separate  sub-class of people that’ve opted out of this immortality.

Ashley: Now keep in mind, in this case in this story, there is no cancer, there is no disease, they’ve eradicated almost all accident related deaths. So, you literally… there’ no famine. You’re just living.

Kolby: You’re just live and get old and die.

Ashley: Exactly.

Jeremy: Well, and I think they even get rid of the getting old in it, it seems like.

Ashley: Unless you stop taking the medication, yea.

Kolby: What about the idea, does it offend you, because it kind of offended me, that there are people who believe that they have a right to effectively be God? To have immortality. And that they feel that through their work, or through their endeavors, or through their manipulation of their employees or whatever, all the ways that people get rich, they inherit it, they do something, they open a factory in Thailand. Like, there’s something that really just got me like, you’re trying to argue to me, that you have the right to be God. And that, I think, is more offensive somehow than the right to be a billionaire.

Jeremy: Right, exactly.

Ashley: They mention in there too that these drugs, are not mimicable, like you can’t…

Jeremy: They’re limited.

Ashley: They’re limited, so there’s someone who controls it. So, it’s still a corrupt system. There’s someone that controls it, someone that distributes it, like, somebody.

Kolby: You know somebody is stealing pills out of the factory.

Ashley: Exactly.

Jeremy: And selling them on the black market.

Kolby: The other thing, that isn’t touched on… I’ve totally lost my train of thought… I forgot.

Ashley: Now it’s gone.

Kolby: It’ll come back to me.

Jeremy: I don’t know. The story does raise a lot of questions and it would be interesting to see this as a more flushed out longer story.

Kolby: As a novel. I bet there is a novel about it.

Jeremy: Because the world building would be so interesting and the other ramifications. And I feel like we have seen a lot of stories like this that do talk about immortality and how that effects humanity. It’s an interesting topic for science fiction.

Kolby: It is. I agree with that. Is there anything else about this story you guys felt interesting, or I’m still trying to think of the thing I was thinking about.

Ashley: Let’s just go through the questions. By the way there’s a list of questions at the end of each story. We’re going to kind of go through one by one, chime in your answers, give us your thoughts in the comments below. Also, you know, read these stories with your friends. This is after dinner conversations, it’s designed to be sit down with your friends like we are. Cats are optional to have sitting on your papers.

Kolby: And in the comments, feel free to comment of what we got right or what we forgot about, or whatever you think we should’ve talked about.

Ashley: Chime in your two cents.

Kolby: We do have some questions in case you forgot about stuff. Oh, this is going to show your… this is going to show your leanings. Would you support or oppose the time re-distribution laws?

Jeremy: That’s proposed in the story? By congress?  Absolutely.

Kolby: So, you’re like, “I want to surf more, not work?”

(laughter)

Jeremy: You know France has a good system. We should absolutely do that.

Kolby: So, you think progressive time tax?

Jeremy: Yes. Progressive time tax.

Kolby: Oh wait, I’m going to call you out on this dude.

(laughter)

Kolby: I’m not disagreeing because I’m that way. But, let’s say that you’re like time paycheck from the government, your unemployment, and so every week they give you an extra 5 days, so you’re going to keep getting your medication, are you seriously….

Jeremy: It’s vacation.

Kolby: Are you seriously going to work a day in your life dude?

(laughter)

Kolby: And if your answer is “no, no I’m not going to work”, then isn’t the president actually right in this story?

Jeremy: No.

Kolby: Seriously. If somebody wrote you a check for time, you’d be like, “ya, I’m definitely going to work.”

Jeremy: It would depend.

Kolby: Ok, let’s hear it.

Jeremy: There are reasons for wealth distribution, or time re-distribution. But again, it needs a larger story to really flush this out, in the sense...

Kolby: No, I’m not asking the story, I’m asking you man.

Jeremy: But still, you have to put it in perspective of the world in the story. So, in the world in the story, no one is injured, so everybody should be able to work.

Kolby: But why would I?

Jeremy: Nobody has back injuries.

Kolby: I’m just saying, if I get my low-income money...

Jeremy: But you want to take a vacation, right? You need extra time to take vacations. I want to take a year sabbatical, how do I do that if I have to continue to work, for an hour for an hour?

Ashley: How do you pay for things then? You pay with time?

Kolby: You pay with time.

Jeremy: Again, it’s on a monetary system. Like the movie with Justin Timberlake, you’re paying for everything.

Kolby: Ok, I remember what I was going to talk about really quickly, but I totally think you bonked on that questions.

(laughter)

Kolby: This is the other part in the story they didn’t talk about, how do you decide you get’s a kid? So, there’s an absolute cap of 15 billion people in the earth. Somebody dies because they just whatever, decided to die or decided just not to work anymore. So now you’ve got 1 new person that can be born out of 15 billion. Is it a lottery?

Jeremy: Or is it within your family?

Ashley: I think maybe you have to pay for that kid in time up front. Like you have to pay for the first 18 year. You have to have 18 years’ worth of wealth built up to pay for that kid to get to 18 years, so they can start working and accumulating their own time. Boom.

Kolby: And I also think in this system, education would be way longer. Because if you live 500 years why wouldn’t you be in a 30- or 40-year education system?

Jeremy: I know people like that now.

(laughter)

Ashley: Life- long student.

Kolby: Stay in school.

Jeremy: Going for another degree.

Kolby: I took it literally. I want to go back to the original question though- so you’re telling me, you work at a regular job for 32 hours a week…

Jeremy: But it’s the same thing, we’re getting PTO now as part of your salary, so you want to take time off, you have to work for that time off. So, if it’s an hour for an hour, and really…

Kolby: And the only free time you have is the money from the government.

Jeremy: Exactly.

Kolby: I also think it would change the type of work the people would do.

Jeremy: Absolutely.

Ashley: Ok, so if it’s an hour for an hour, are they working 12 hour shifts?  12 hours on, 12 hours off?

Jeremy: No, they’re still working 40 hours.

Kolby: Well, you’re still losing time if it’s an hour for an hour, because every time you’re not working, you’re getting closer to death. Every time you go to sleep you’re burning time.

Ashley: Dun dun dun.

Kolby: What about you Ashley? If you got an extra 40 hours a week from the government, would you just work less.

(pause)

Kolby: That pause says yes

Ashley: I think the thing is, what are you using that time for. If these people don’t have a purpose, if they don’t have a drive, if they don’t have anything that interests them, if they don’t have any limitations with disease or needing things, like, it feels like everything in the world has been solved. Someone who is in the healthcare, I’m continually looking at the newest research and now those things don’t exist even to begin with.

Kolby: Right

Ashley: Well, then it’s like, what am I going to use my time for?

Jeremy: Things that you love.

Kolby: I think it depends.

Jeremy: Exactly. And not everybody has a job that they love, they’re just jobs. You know. If you’re in an industry or you’re in a position where you like what you’re doing, yes, you’re going to work more.

Kolby: Movie theatre popcorn people.

Jeremy: Exactly.

(laughter)

Jeremy: No

(laughter)

Kolby: Oh, c’mon. There’s no way they don’t love that job.

(laughter)

Kolby: They love that job.

Jeremy: Right. So, I like my job, but if I could work my job less I would.

Kolby: Okay.

Ashley: Yeah. Everyone is not like you that likes to work all the time, Kolby.

Kolby: Yeah.

(laughter)

Kolby: Yea, I don’t know. Man.

Ashley: So you think people aren’t inherently lazy because obviously Jeremy and I are like “we’ll work less, take what we can get”

Kolby: This is what I think would happen. And this is me just totally making this up. Like, of course I’m making it up. I think there would be 2 ways people would work. I think you would either work at like, you’d optimize your time. If I knew work was only for time. If it was only work. And it served no other purpose, then I would do whatever paid the most possible.

Jeremy: Exactly.

Kolby: I wouldn’t think to myself “well, what I really want to do is..”, no, I’d be like “oh, you need me to clean out the sewage with my bare hands?”

Jeremy: And you’re going to pay me…

Kolby: It pays me 10 hours for every 20 minutes, like yeah, cuz I’m going to go fishing for 10 hours.

Ashley: How about the opposite? Like, you’re going to get paid $10/hour on this really simple task, you don’t think I’m going to go as slow as possible on that task?

Kolby: I think for me…

Ashley: You have to fold these papers, “okay”

Jeremy: It depends, it depends on what you’re doing. It plays into the pay by the unit or paid by the hour.

Kolby: I think, and again, I’m just guessing, I would optimize the time if I was trying to make time. Or I would just do what I wanted to do, and not worry if I got paid at all. Like they would only be 2 choices. There wouldn’t be an in-between.

Ashley: What’s the percentage of the population? What do you think they would do? Do you think most people would try to optimize their time, get the most bang for their buck? Or do you think most people would be like…

Kolby: I think fear of death is a really big motivation.

Jeremy: True.

Jeremy: I think fear of death is greater motivation that poverty. So, I also think that most people would be like, “I have to bank, I always have to have 100 hours in the bank, just in case.” I don’t know.

Ashley: Now what’s going to take you out of working? We obviously said they stopped all non-accident related deaths, no disease, no hunger.

Kolby: I just have this vision of foam over everything.

(laughter)

Ashely: Everyone is walking around in bubble-suits.

(laughter)

Kolby: I can never get hurt again.

(laughter)

Ashley: So, what’s the limiter there? The fear of death?

Kolby: Yeah, it is.

Ashley: But now you’re in control of your own death? Do you think there would be people that just… hello kitty… you know, never want to die? Just go forever and ever and ever and ever.

Jeremy: Absolutely.

Kolby: Does the story mention if depression is solved as well?

Ashley: No, they say....

Kolby: I feel like that would be the #1 cause of death.

Ashley: All non-accidental deaths, cancer, dementia, heart disease, AIDS, malaria, and many other global scourges in the past were eradicated in a generation in a generation.

Kolby: So, this is like a little bit of a rabbit hole, I don’t want to go too far down.

Ashley: Ut oh, here we go.

Kolby: I feel like, if I had a 1000 hours saved up, the first thing I would do is just sigh.

Jeremy: Yeah.

Kolby: I’d be like… I don’t mean in a good way, I mean like, a lack of purpose. I could see somebody who had a bunch of time saved up not understanding being like, like, I’m not afraid. So, if I’m not afraid what’s my gold. So, I can see depression a bigger…

Jeremy: Be a huge issue

Kolby: Being a bigger point, because a lot of people, the need to provide for your children, the need to get a car, the need to achieve is their driving motivation in their life, and without that, I think just depression sets in.

Ashley: What about the living the same day over and over and over and over and over again? Because right now we know we have…

Kolby: How many days can you go fishing?

Ashley: Like, for example, we all know approximately we’re all going to live 80-100 years. We know that’s our cap. There’s some time when we go, “Ok, I’m 35 years old, I’m 1/3 of the way through my life right now.” There’s that cognizant set in that goes “oh crap, I’m a 1/3 of the way through my life.” There’s this reflection period.

Kolby: What do I have to show for my time.

Jeremy: What have I accomplished? What are people going to remember me by?

Ashley: Exactly. And here there’s people can go, I haven’t done what I’ve needed to do, let me bank up more time, and then do they get to that point where they’re fully satisfied?

Jeremy: No.

Ashley: You don’t think so? You don’t think they’ll be like “I’ve done everything”

Jeremy: I think that’s the human condition.

Ashley: Oh.

Kolby: I’ve thought, “oh, I’d love to do this, but I’m 45, what’s the payback? It’s 5 more years of school, 10 more years of student loans..” I think if you thought you had a couple hundred years; you might change careers 5 times or more.

Ashley: I would. I would like to try several different things. So, there would be constantly this new innovation

(Jeremy bugs cat, cat nips at Jeremy, laughter)

Ashley: Now knowing people live forever and ever and ever, and this system has been in place for quite a bit of time, do you think this will evolve even further? Because you have these people changing careers, being more innovative, going on.

Kolby: I think they way society works totally changes.

Ashley: So it’ll change even further.

Kolby: How long education is.  How long the maturation period is with your children. How long all of it.

Ashley: Even the whole pill factor.

Kolby: How many times you change jobs.

Ashley: What if you no longer need to take a pill? Like you just genetically modified the people. There the evaluation aspect could be crazy if you have people living forever and ever and ever.

Kolby: It would make gambling a lot more interesting.

(laughter)

Kolby: You’re literally like, “I’ve got 40 years left, I’m playing it.” Like you lose the hand, you just drop dead at the table.

Ashley: People would probably do that. I do not doubt that.

Kolby: Craps would be a whole different game man. Alright, I guess that pretty much wraps this up on this one. You’ve been listening to After Dinner Conversation with myself, with Jeremy, with Ashley. We just got done talking about My Fellow Immortal Americans. You can download this story if you’re just tuning in and you haven’t read it, on Amazon, on Apple, wherever you can get e-books, and you can download it to all the places you can get e-books, you know, computers, laptops, cell phones. You can also listen to this podcast, or if you’re watching on YouTube, there are other ones so you can keep watching. And next week we will be talking about, what is our next one?

Jeremy: The Shadow of the Thing.

Kolby: The Shadow of the Thing, a story about a drug. Wow, this is a lot of science fiction-y stuff.

Ashley: It’s awesome.

Kolby: About a drug that allows you to maybe see the true nature of the world around you. Of everything. It’s like that apple… there’s not even an apple in the bible… the apple that people think is in the bible about becoming a special thing.

Ashley: By the way, if you are a writer, or would like to try you hand in writing and you have a couple of short stories with ethical dilemmas or scenarios that you think would spark up a really good conversation, send on in.

Kolby: There’s a contest going on right now too.

Ashley: There you go.

Kolby: There’s a writing contest where, sorry I cut you off.

Ashley: No, that’s exactly…

Kolby: Yea, if you submit that, I think the entry fee if $10 or $20 bucks, and if you’re selected, you’ll be $250 and your story will be discussed on this show and put on a website and published on amazon. So, you can submit stuff if you’re like, “I’ve got a really good idea, a way better way to do time, currency, or whatever cat currency”. Maybe yours is the cat currency.

Ashley: What if that cats took over the world?

Kolby: Cats are the only form of currency in the world.

Jeremy: I would live in that world.

Ashley: Kittens are worth a lot.

Kolby: So, we’ll see you next week. We’ll be back again at the cat café. Thanks.

E1. "Patchouli Lost" - How far would you go to help a friend, who is unwilling to help themselves?

“How far would you go to help a friend, who is unwilling to help themselves?”

Kolby, Jeremy, and Ashley discuss the ethics in the short story, “Patchouli Lost” available to download on Amazon.

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Discussions - Podcast RSS

Patchouli Lost (Transcript) (By Transcriptions Fast)

Kolby:   Hello, and welcome to After Dinner Conversation. After Dinner Conversations is a collection of short stories across genres meant to drive out deeper conversations. Download After Dinner Conversations short stories including the one’s we are discussing here today—hello kitten – at Afterdinnerconversation.com or read them on your readers, tablet, e-reader from amazon, apple, or wherever E-books are sold. I am the co-host Kolby. This is my co-host Jeremy as well as my co-host Ashley. We are today taping our first episode in, and I got it wrong before, it’s not La Gatteria, it’s La Gatarria, which means crazy cat lady. So we’re going to have cats all over us today, which is kind of the point, which is super fun. And today were talking about the first story that we’re doing- The Patchouli Lost. Jeremy you want to talk about that? Or give us the general idea of the story for those that haven’t read it?

Jeremy: The general idea of the story, from the point of view from our protagonist who is talking to a girl in an abusive relationship…

Kolby:  I don’t even know; does he have a name? I’m not even sure.

Jeremy: The Narrator.

Kolby:  So, he’s like Fight Club, he’s just the narrator.

Jeremy: And how that interaction goes with a girl who is in an abusive relationship.

Kolby:  Ok, fair enough, that’s very brief. Yea, that works.

Ashley: To the point. You should’ve read it already, if you haven’t read it, again check out amazon, those other e-readers, read it, hit pause on this, read it, then come back.

Kolby:  This will work better if you’ve read the story otherwise, you’re just going to hear us talking about a book you’ve essentially never read. But if you haven’t, that’s okay too. You’ll get the gist of it as we talk. So, I’m curious, what did you guys think? What likes, dislike, things that you found interesting?

(silence)

Kolby: That’s it, okay. We’ll go with that.

(laughter)

Kolby: I can start. So one of the things I found interested is the narrator continually pushes… it’s a very conversational, like, here’s why… it’s a very low key thing for a serious conversation, and it’s meant to make the narrator sound more sympathetic, or I don’t know, something… something like approachable or sympathetic.  But when you dig into it, I’m not sure the narrator is that great of a person.

Jeremy: Exactly, and it’s interesting because the narrator approaches the story almost from a point of view like an anthropologist.  He’s looking at it and asks the question “I’ve never met people this, in an abusive relationship, so tell me about it?”, which is a little sociopathic.

(laughter)

Kolby: Yeah, I think that’s exactly the word for it. So, for those that haven’t caught up, I’m going to help Jeremy a little bit with the story. So basically, the story is, this woman Patchouli is what she’s called in the story, she calls the narrator and says basically “hey, I’m locked in the bathroom because my boyfriend/ex-boyfriend is like banging on the door and trying to beat me up.” The narrator says “I’ll come over.” Luckily, I guess for the narrator, the boyfriend isn’t there anymore otherwise it’d be a very different story. And then the narrator…

(crash sound in background)

Kolby: There’s going to be cat noises everywhere, it’s going to be awesome… takes Patchouli under his wing to try and take care of her but under conditions. The conditions are you really can’t interact with this person anymore, you have to delete his cellphone number, block his cellphone number.

Jeremy: The crux of the story is that he asked her to block his number, and that sets up the conflict.

Kolby: He’s unwilling to help her once she’s unwilling to block his number. The narrator isn’t willing to help her anymore.

Ashley: To break it down even a little bit further, you have this super complex relationship with this girl and her boyfriend. And obviously she’s keeps coming back to him and it’s a complicated situation. And the narrator comes about it very simply. “I’m coming to get you”- simple. “We’re going to get ice cream”- simple. “I’m asking you questions that have straight-up answers, give be answers”- simple. But it’s this super, complex, emotional and psychological issue this girl is having, and the narrator comes about it with simple little, check-boxes, like “ok, get you out of the situation, lets go get ice cream, talk to me about it, delete his phone number”. And it’s not that easy.

Kolby:  It’s like an engineer’s view on it.

Ashley: Exactly.

Jeremy: Let’s analyze the issue, here’s a solution.

Kolby: And if you’re unwilling to do that solution, I’m unwilling to help you.

Jeremy: Right, yep, which again is very sociopathic. Again, the very interesting subtext of the story is the narrator basically saying if you want an abusive relationship, I can do that for you or I can be controlling for you, for Patchouli.

Kolby: Just swapping out one person for another.

Jeremy: That’s what he’s offering her and that’s why she rejects it.

Ashley: One of the interesting notes I made was exactly that. The narrator in the very first paragraph, him talking about her was a very obsessive way of talking about her. The way that she smelled, the way she looked, so obviously he has an obsession with her.

Kolby: It’s obviously not a friendship sort of thing, right? You don’t mention those things if it’s just a person.

Ashley: And then later on, he is just like the clique boyfriend. When she tells him “no don’t come over here”, and he disobeys her orders. He comes over to get her anyway. And then later on too, again it was a demand… “I do however have a request, consider it payment for services rendered”. So again, he’s also putting demands on her which is just like what the boyfriend would do. And then he also doesn’t respect her opinion because she tried to tell him why she won’t block his number after he threated suicide, “it’s my right from my perspective to do that.” And he doesn’t respect her opinion, he’s like “no, you need to do it my way.” And then he won’t even let her speak. In one of the very end of the story, she starts to respond but I interrupt her.

Kolby: So, it’s swapping out one controlling relationship for another.

Ashley: Exactly.

Jeremy: Yeah.

Kolby: So, it’s like a softer kind of control.  Like abusive but in a different kind of abusive way.

Ashley: Correct. Those were the parts that I…

Jeremy: More of just emotionally abusive as opposed to physically abusive. 

Ashley: But he comes across as a nice guy, let me take you to ice-cream, I’ll save you.

Kolby: But he’s also the narrator, right? So, his intention…

Jeremy: An unreliable narrator.

Kolby: Yeah, I think that’s the theme of every story, right? Is an unreliable narrator. Yeah. So, I guess one of the things, we were talking about some questions with this, so the first one is… I feel bad for just reading off a piece of paper but it’s the easiest way to do it…

Ashley: You can find these questions too at the end of the stories. There’s a link for these set of questions that we’ll be talking about. And at the end of this podcast, chime in your two cents too. Write in, “hey..”

Kolby: Yeah, write in the comments.

Ashley: Yeah, please, add in your two cents into everything.

Kolby: Write in, “yeah, you guys were wrong. This is what you should’ve done. He should’ve hit her with a brick.”  Yeah…

(laughter)

Ashley: No.

Kolby: I meant hit him with a brick.

(laughter)

Ashley: Oh okay.

Kolby: So, the question from the narrator is that real friends keep their word. Is that true? I feel like, I’m kinda yes and no on that.

Jeremy: The questions has complicated answers. Ideally no. Personally I’ve always felt we have a certain amount of social capital within friends and acquaintances. And the more you violate a person’s trust, the more they push you out of their lives.

Kolby: What do you mean by that? I need a better explanation.

Jeremy: The more you violate a friend’s trust.

Kolby: Like example

Jeremy: Like example: people who always make up stories, always one up you…

Kolby: OH! Yeah yeah yeah.

Jeremy: You’re like “we’ll, I just did this.”

Kolby: Yeah, like “I just skydived with supermodels.”

Jeremy: And that’s a violation of the social capital, of us being friends and being honest and open with each other. And the more you violate that, the more people push you out of their lives.

Kolby: Because they don’t want that kind of interactions.

Jeremy: They don’t want that negative energy, is a way to put it. So, the narrator here is taking a pretty drastic measure in what appears to be a first infraction.

Kolby: So, he’s seeing it as binary, seeing it as black and white. If you do A, B happens every time. As opposed to being like, look, “I wish you didn’t but you give friends a chance.”

Jeremy: Exactly. And he’s not being a friend here because he’s not giving her a chance.

Ashley: My big thing on that too is can you be a true friend to someone and break your word to them. Well, it wasn’t even her idea.

Kolby: It was his idea and he forced it one her.

Ashley: Exactly.

Kolby: She was in a weakened place to even say no.

Ashley: Exactly, so it’s like, do true friends even do those ultimatums to one another?  Like, I get it there’s a part where you need to set your own boundary for what you’re willing and unwilling to deal with from someone.

Kolby: Because you don’t want to get wound up someone else’s everything.

Ashley: Exactly. But she wasn’t even a willing participant. She had to repeat it several times. “you will block his number, promise me, you will block his number, promise me.”

Kolby: That’s just a Fight Club reference, sure it is, say it three times.

(laughter)

Kolby: I agree, I feel like it is too black and white, right? I wonder, we’ve all been in that situation where someone drags us into their problem. Like, they call the first time and say “oh, my boyfriend’s drunk,” or “my girlfriend is, ya know, whatever”… and you’re like, “ya, of course I want to help you.” And then a day later you get another phone call.  And a day later you get another phone call. And eventually you’re like, “you know man, I’ve got a life too. I’ve got my own issues. And I can’t be you’re all day support network.”

Jeremy: And in the frame of the story it demonstrates what the authors trying to demonstrate about this relationship and about that standing out moral ground. It’s a slice of this relationship.  It’s more of a metaphor for all of these interactions to instead of how this will really play our inner life. Artistic license.

Kolby: Yeah, I uh, yeah I don’t disagree.

Ashley: Very well spoken.

Kolby: I think everyone’s data in that situation where the excellent into somebody else’s drama but I feel like the narrator in this case is so black and white and unforgiving that you’re like, “dude, you’re being a mean person”.  OK, so next one.  Is that the narrator being ethical totally by cutting off all communication with Patchouli?  Is he doing in to help her?  Or to help himself?

Jeremy: I think being true to his own moral code that doesn’t mean it’s ethical

Kolby: Yes, I don’t necessarily disagree

Ashley: The other thing I want to know is when did their relationship start?  Obviously, he has this infatuation with her.  There’s that moment when they are, I don’t want to say intimate, but when they bumped heads and they rubbed noses together. Like, okay, so they’re close enough to be that close of personal space?

Kolby: I given a lot of foot massages to a lot of people then

(Laughter)

Kolby: None of them met nothing.  That’s exactly what that is, right?

Ashley: So again, how close is their relationship? And is he needing to draw a line because her drama is just too overwhelming for him, or does he have real emotions for her? Like really, really care for her on a deeper level?

Kolby: I think that’s more the point, right?

Ashley: Is it a crush on her? Is it not?  So, it’s like you have to protect yourself if the person is not interested or you just, if it’s truly just a friend, you can’t watch them go down that rabbit hole.

Kolby: I feel like actually, maybe, as a friend, it was a wrong choice, but as someone he was romantically interested in… because you never want to see the person you have a crush on, not only are you not with me but you’re also with a horrible person. So, I don’t know, I understand you’re point though.

Ashley: So, I think he did it for both reasons. Because he both wanted to help her out. He’s been there with her, so now she just needs to stand up on her own 2 feet.  And then also to help himself.  I think he did it for both reasons.

Kolby: Some new fault him for this? You fault the narrator for his?

Ashley: For cutting her out?

Kolby: Yeah?

Ashley: No, um..

Kolby: It’s almost douche… like almost 40% douche

Jeremy: 80%

Kolby: 80% douche…

Ashley: Yeah

Jeremy: He really that puts his of motives into focus.  You can really tell…

Kolby: He has motives.

Jeremy: He has motives because she’s not living up to his expectations of her.  He’s just cutting her off.

Ashley: I’d like to bring into the other additional thing. He mentions he’s never been in this situation before where he gets to be the hero. When I get to go and save you. Remember? He says “Thank you, thank you for giving me this opportunity to do the right thing.” So, is he using her?  Have…

Kolby: To perpetuate this internal version of himself, right? “This is who I see myself as and you’re screwing it up by not breaking it off. I’ve got a story in my head and by you not breaking it off with this abusive guy you’re not continuing the story in my head about being a hero. And therefor I’m out.”

Ashley: “My methods of helping you didn’t help, so now I see myself as a failure.”

Jeremy: Right

Ashley: Because he went into that whole thing. “Thank you for that, thank you for that opportunity,” then bam- throws in the demand to seal the deal that what I did was right.

Kolby: I feel like had… I think you’re right… I agree… if it had been a swap out it would’ve just swapped out one abusive relationship for another. Maybe it would’ve stayed a relationship but it doesn’t feel like it.

Jeremy: It doesn’t feel like it. It wasn’t his goal.

Kolby: If Patchouli came back to the narrator after another round of abuse, do you think the narrator would again support her? Do you think he should?

Ashley: I for sure think he would.

Jeremy: I think he would, because he kept reaching out. The narrator clearly says, “Just trying to be social, I don’t know why, but yes”

Ashley: Who doesn’t like that feeling like they’re helping somebody too? Like here’s a lost cause, okay it’s been a little bit of a time, let me try and help you again. I feel like he derives some sort of personal satisfaction from trying to help this person, that he obviously deeply cares about. So, I definitely think he’d come back to her to try and solve her issues again and maybe even put on harsher demands? Who knows?

Kolby: It’s interesting though because “I’m cutting you off because you won’t do what I say. But if you come back a second time, I’ll let you back in a second time”, which kinda goes against the first part, right? It’s weird, I’ll continue to interact with you but only in the ways that I demand you interact with me. Every time you knock on the door, so to speak, I’ll continue to let you in on my terms, but always on my terms.

Ashley: Do you think he should let her back in?

Kolby: I think if you want to be a decent human being, you’d have too.

Ashley: But knowing his personality, is he going to have certain regulations for that relationship?

Kolby: I think it’s always.

Jeremy: I think that’s why she’s not contacted him again. She recognizes this.

Kolby: Yeah. Because it’s always an interaction on his terms or nothing at all. It’s funny because there’s an abusive guy in this story, but the narrator sounds like the worst person in the story.

Ashley: Well they parallel each other. It’s just a different way of demands, a different way of mentally screwing, of mental manipulation. Screwing the other person over, thinking you’re the nice guy, and then once you feel like you’ve gained their trust, let me slip in another demand, let slip in another regulation for our relationship, rules, laws.

Kolby: “Wear this, you’d look good in it.”

Ashley: Yeah, exactly.

Kolby: You know what this reminds me of a little bit? I’ve been thinking about it a little bit. Is that, what’s the movie, with the robot that breaks free and kills the guy in the compound?

Ashley: Oh.. ugh..

Kolby: We watched it.

Jeremy: Ex-machina.

Kolby: Ex-Machina. Yeah. And I feel like it’s a little like that in that the creator views his machine as an object but the savior guy that also gets trapped in there, also views her as an object. But one views her as a physical machine object, and one views her as a feminine object. And so, you end up with two versions of the same objectification. Just one feels softer than the other. And I feel like it’s the same with these two characters.

Jeremy: One recognizes her humanity, or her, not humanity but…

Kolby: Version of humanity, or whatever, her emulation of humanity.

Jeremy: Right.

Kolby:  Right. But it’s still objectifies her for it.

Jeremy: yes

Kolby: So, you end up with not a good guy and a bad guy in that movie. You end up with two people that are both treated a person, conceptually, as an object. And I feel like it’s the same thing here where you’ve got a harder and softer version of the same bad-ness. Does the narrator have an ethical obligation to call the police? I think probably has a legal obligation, but maybe not an ethical obligation.

Jeremy: Probably, yes.

Ashley: So, the fact that she had cell phone service and she’s locked in her bathroom and she picks up the call for him.

Jeremy: She’s not calling the cops.

Ashley: She’s not calling the cops.

Kolby: This is within the sphere of appropriate amount of crazy-town.

Ashley: Yeah.

Kolby: It hasn’t left the like…

Jeremy: Right and within the story there is no physical abuse.

Ashley: That’ve seen or we’ve witnessed.

Kolby: Yeah, if she had a black eye and bloody nose, now you’ve got a very different story. Yeah, I don’t know. So, here’s the thing, if the narrator just called the police, he would have both been absolved from responsibility at least and have done something pro-active. But instead he’s like, “no you’re not interacting with me in my way so I’m not going to help you, I’m not going to do anything.” Which also leads us up to our last one… is the narrator a good person?

Ashley: Oh, we forgot question #4 too.

Kolby: There’s a cat tail in the way. Sorry.

(Laughter)

Ashley: Is Patchouli in any way responsible if she stops talking to cliché…

Kolby: And cliché kills himself. Because in the thing, the reason she takes his phone call is he says if you don’t pick up the phone, I’m going to kill myself. I say good riddance. I gotta be honest. If the dude… if an abusive guy is going to kill himself because he doesn’t get to abuse you anymore, I’m just like, let’s just call that a win for humanity.

Jeremy: She does not have an obligation at all.

Kolby: I agree. Then why does she do it? Because she still likes him? Because she still thinks oh, maybe he’ll be different this time?

Ashley: Okay, so just like that narrator wanted to feel good about himself for helping that girl, she derives the same sense of self…

Kolby: So, she wants to interact with him but on her terms?

Jeremy: She wants to help him. A type of co-dependency

Ashley: More of the terms of, who doesn’t like to feel like a hero? Who doesn’t like to feel like they helped save someone?

Kolby: Wait a minute, so are you saying that the abused person is just like the narrator, which is just like the abusive boyfriend.

Ashley: I’m just saying though, she wanted to feel like she made an impact, helped save someone’s life just like the narrator tried to save her and she’s doing the same thing to cliché.

Jeremy: I wish I did a little more research on abusive relationships, if there is an element of co-dependency and abusive relationships. It’s a way to control somebody to allow them to feel like they’re helping you.

Kolby: Yeah, I don’t think the guy is really going to kill himself. I think it’s going to be one of those calls for help

Jeremy: It’s not even a call for help. It’s just a bluff.

Kolby: Yeah, I agree. That’s like the last card he’s got to play.

Ashley: And if she doesn’t pick up on it, he’ll go pry on some other girl.

Kolby: And I feel bad for her. I feel like the only way she gets out of it is he gets shiny keyed by some other girl that he focuses his life’s attention on, right. Because I don’t think he ever goes away, he just has to eventually find someone else to obsess over and abuse.

Ashley: Now questions 6.

Kolby: Hello kitty. Is the narrator a good person? I think it’s percentages. That’s the way I was thinking of it. Like, the abusive guy is like 100% and horrible. Like, the narrator….

Ashley: Well, who’s to say? We didn’t really hear a lot about cliché. Like, we did make these generalizations.

Jeremy: He’s not 100% horrible either.

Kolby: You don’t think the abusive guy is?

Jeremy: Not 100%. We don’t know him.

Kolby: Are you saying that maybe she was asking for it?

Jeremy: No

Ashley: No no.

Kolby: I don’t think that’s the way you want to go with this.

Jeremy: I’m just saying, from what we’re presented…

Kolby: We’re only getting it from a guy’s perspective, that is in love with her anyway.

Jeremy: It’s an unreliable narrator.

Kolby: It’s a double unreliable narrator.

Ashley: All we get are these assumptions. That his dad makes a certain amount of money, what kind of car does he drive, let me guess, he’s supposed to take medication. And it’s like, hold on, those are all assumptions. We haven’t even met cliché.

Kolby: It’s second step removed un-reliable narration. So, we don’t know what he is, but our hunch is not good.

Jeremy: Right.

Kolby: And the narrator?

Jeremy: Again, it probably depends on his motivation. If you look at this from his point of view that he is also looking to control Patchouli, definitely no. if he really is coming from an altruistic place and just trying to help, he’s still not being supportive…

Kolby: Here’s the one thing I wonder about though… and I’m just going to play, there’s this phrase devil’s advocate, which I think is a stupid phrase because it’s not like the devil needs an advocate. He’s doing fine on his own.

Jeremy: He’s a lawyer anyway.

Kolby: Yeah, he’s a lawyer anyway. Good point. The thing I wonder though is… say I get a flat on the side of the road and somebody comes to help me change my flat. Because they were hoping to get a $20 tip or somebody helped them out of a jam and they’re required to pay it forward, or something like that. At the end of the day, my flat got fixed. And so, I think there’s a motivational side of it that you judge but there’s also a results side of it as well. Sure, you might have been fixing my flat for all the wrong reasons, but the flat is fixed. So how do you separate those two in the case of the narrator. The narrator arguably has not great motivations, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t supportive when a person needed support—in the limited way he was able too.

Ashley: And the manipulative way he was able too.

Kolby: And in the manipulative way he was able too. Yeah, that’s the issue right.

Ashley: Now in the grand scheme of things through, the narrator did go and help her.

Kolby: At the potential risk of getting a beat down.

Ashley: Exactly. He slept on her steps.

Kolby: Waited. Without telling her he did.

Jeremy: A little stocker-ish

Ashley: He did try to cheer her up with ice-cream, but then he immediately after giving her ice cream went deep dive questions that she was obviously uncomfortable for. So, he tries and it just goes side-ways. And then he tries and it just goes weird-sideways. I think with good intentions but…

Kolby: It’s within the weird psychosis framework going on here.

Ashley: A little bit. Or that deep crush where you’re just like, ugggh… just can’t quite control his emotions because he’s getting to the tipping point of wanting to control her as well.

Kolby: Yea, I know! You’re like I’m so excited about this!

Ashley: By the way, all the cats you see here are up for adoption.

Kolby: Yeah, including the one licking its butt.

Ashley: So, if you’re in Tempe, Arizona, come on by. This little guy is up for adoption too.

Kolby: Yeah, there’s all cats everywhere. This is just the one who’s bonded with us today.

Ashley: We might take this one home with us today after. I mean, c’mon, look at that face!

Jeremy: I feel like the narrator is pretty true to his own code, even though I again…

Kolby: Yes, that’s an interesting thing as well… is this assumption that ethical is following a set of universal ethics. And I think ethical can also mean the phrase consistent within your personal ethics. Like, do you change your ethics when it helps or hurts you, or are they consistent in whatever they happen to be.

Jeremy: Right.

Kolby: Okay, so there’s a closing and I don’t know yet, I haven’t memorized it yet, and because there’s a cat on it.

Ashley: No, not that one.

Kolby: No, you took the closing sheet.

Ashley: Oh, Sorry.

Kolby: Where’d the closing sheet go. We’re very prepared.

Ashley: You used it.

Kolby: It’s gone. You can’t blame the cat

Ashley: You didn’t memorize your own closing.

Kolby: I didn’t memorize my own closing. Yeah. It was here but at any rate, you’re listening to After Dinner Conversation. We just got done talking about Patchouli lost. That short story is available for download on kindle apps, which is everything now, everything takes a kindle app whether it’s a kindle, e-reader, or your phone or computer. You can download it on amazon.com. I think it’s free right now. And our story next week, will be… what is it?

Ashley: My Fellow Americans.

Kolby: My Fellow Immortal Americans, about the president giving a very strange speech where, its like a sci-fi thing, where time is the currency and money is irrelevant now. So, there’s this question of can people be immortal and can you be rich enough to live forever. So, tune in next week to watch that. Definitely try and read it ahead of time before you watch the one next week. It is also available on amazon, and we’ll be back next week at La Gattara in Tempe, Arizona. Thank you.