Mathematics and other Magic

  

HS #123 2025.10.9

 

Mathematics and other Magic

 

Here’s a riddle my father told me when I was young: Three men enter a hotel and pay $10 apiece for their rooms – a total of $30.  After they go to their rooms, the manager realizes he has overcharged them, so he gives the bellhop $5 to split between them. But the dishonest bellhop pockets $2 and then gives each of them $1. 

 

So each of the three men has now paid $9.  That’s $9 x 3 = $27. Plus there is the $2 which the bellhop kept. $27 + $2 = $29.  Where did the extra dollar go? 

 

It’s simple 3^rd grade arithmetic – try to solve it before reading further. 

 

Nope – only 30% of you have tried to solved it. We don’t go on until everyone tries. 

 

OK – some of you have now succeeded. I’ll explain it to the rest of you. First, where are the 30 dollars?  The manager has $25, the bellhop has $2, and each of the three men has $1 - a total of 30. 

 

So how did I intentionally confuse you with my question?  I misdirected your attention by suggesting that you ADD $27 and $2 together, even though there was no reason to do so. Instead of adding them, you should have subtracted the $2 from $27. Why? Because subtracting them answers the question: How much money did the hotel make? The hotel made 3 x $9 = $27 MINUS the $2 which the bellhop kept which gives: $27 - $2 = $25. 

 

This sort of intentional misdirection lies behind much magic. 

 

Years ago, Barbara Walters had the psychic Uri Geller on her show. As Walters and viewers watched, Geller seemingly effortlessly bent a thick key just by lightly stroking it with his finger. As I understand, Walters called it one of the most spiritual moments of her life. Years later, the Amazing Randi reproduced the trick for Walters, showing how both he and Geller had quickly bent the key when he had diverted Barbara’s attention. Then, with the key already bent, he held it in such a way as to conceal that it was bent, and then made it look as if he were effortlessly bending it with (he claimed) psychic power. I have fun entertaining my math students with similar tricks. 

 

Now back to mathematics. Have you heard of Zeno’s Paradoxes? Zeno was a math-magician of the highest caliber who has misdirected the thoughts of his readers for millennia - usually involving the infinite. Here’s an example: A hare and a tortoise are in a race in which the tortoise has a 10-meter head start, and the hare runs ten times faster than the tortoise. Zeno argued that it’s impossible for the hare to pass the tortoise because by the time the hare has run to the starting point of the tortoise, the tortoise has run another meter. By the time the hare reaches that point, the tortoise has run 1/10^th of a meter. By the time the hare has reached it, the tortoise in turn has run 1/100^th of a meter and so on. Thus, whenever the hare has reached where the tortoise was, the tortoise has advanced. Conclusion: The hare can never pass the tortoise. 

 

Isn’t this mind-boggling? Of course, we know it’s not true - there must be a flaw in the reasoning somewhere because obviously the hare will in fact pass the tortoise. But where’s the flaw? If we didn’t know the truth from experience, we’d likely find the argument convincing.  

 

As with the other examples, your gaze has been misdirected. If you took a pie and split it in half, then again, then again, and continuing, you would get increasingly smaller pieces. But putting them all back together again you would still get just the one pie. Agreed? Cutting the pie this way illustrates that ½ + ¼ + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 + . . . = 1. Conclusion: An infinite series of numbers can sum to a finite number. 

 

The hare and tortoise example is similar. The number of seconds needed to catch the tortoise (assuming the hare runs 1 meter/sec) is 1 + 1/10 + 1/100 + . . . = 1.1111 . . . which is 10/9 seconds (check with your calculator).  Zeno tried to confuse you – to misdirect your gaze – by breaking that time into an infinite number of pieces.  Now that you know his trick, you can sleep again at night. 

Washington, D.C. - A Great City

  

HS #122 2025.9.11

 

Washington, D.C.: A Great City

 

 

Years ago, I Amtracked to Chicago for a day of sightseeing the Navy Pier, Chicago River Architecture Tour, Buckingham Fountain, Millennium Park and (don’t miss!!) the Old Library by the bronze bull directly across from The Bean, all capped off with Chicago-styled pizza. Returning home, I wrote the Chicago Chamber of Commerce that a great city is one which, after having spent a day there, one leaves invigorated, and by such a measure Chicago is a great city. 

 

I recently had a similar experience with Washington, D.C. In July I attended a three-day National Science Foundation conference which housed us in the heart of the city. Arriving early and leaving late, I made use of the opportunity for sightseeing as well. Here are discoveries I recommend. 

 

As a child I wanted to see dinosaurs and spacecraft. Now I am drawn to art.  So I visited the National Gallery of Art and the Smithsonian American Art Museum and National Portrait Gallery which together fill the third oldest building in D.C – after the Capitol and the White House. Can you guess what the building was originally built to be?  It was the U.S. Patent Office. Isn’t that impressive? What does that reveal about our forebearers? Never mind defense or the Federal Reserve, the 19^th century was so vibrant with invention and innovation that patents were top priority. In fact, the only U.S. president with a patent (for inflatable floats on cargo barges) lived in the 19^th century:  Abe. 

 

Speaking of Lincoln, Ford Theatre where Lincoln was shot, and the just-restored ornate 1200 capacity theater in Calumet, Michigan’s UP are two theaters listed as a National Historic Site/Landmark. When Calumet Theater was built, 20,000 lived within walking distance. 

 

Also speaking of Lincoln, who was the most photographed American of the 19^th century? Nope – not Abe. Instead, it was a man with whom Lincoln had mutual admiration and friendship:  Frederick Douglass. With striking features and penetrating eyes, he was certainly the better looking. 

 

I’ve always thought that a great photograph or painting tells a story. Turns out that Winslow Homer thought the same. Especially neat was “Hound and Hunter” which shows a teenage boy lying on his belly in a boat grabbing the antlers of a deer (he had presumably shot) from the river.  The boy has the same vexed expression as the dead buck, while the swimming hound is obviously enjoying the struggle. 

 

Another painting which left an impression was “Lamentations over the Death of the First-Born of Egypt” by Charles Pearce. A handsome young couple sit, heads bowed in mourning, by an infant-sized mummy-like casket. How many times have I read that Bible story of wholesale slaughter without ever considering the grief of the parents. Israel’s heritage of vengeance. 

 

The Presidential gallery provided a “mixed feelings” experience. Portraits of Washington, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt hung alongside Andrew Johnson and others of dubious distinction. 

Three stood out for the unique and playful style. Can you guess?  JFK, Clinton and Obama. 

 

However, as beautiful and interesting as paintings are, when touring art museums, I often reflect that the people walking about are masterpieces as well – each beautiful and intriguing in their own way. And I found D.C. to be filled with interesting people. No better way to initiate conversation than to be lost and bewildered.  I seem to get more sympathy at age 67 than I did at 37. Anyway, D.C. folk I met were without exception friendly and helpful. Though the city is filled with massive brick buildings and ubiquitous columns, it is pedestrian friendly with quiet and orderly traffic.

 

There was even room for personal expression. An elderly Chinese man by the White House kept up a steady stream of heavily-accented gospel hymns: Jesus Loves Me, Blessed Assurance. I joined in on “How Great Thou Art” and got an appreciative thumbs up from him. 

 

But even more enthusiastic was the response from fellow patrons at the karaoke bar when I finished my best rendition of Elvis’s, “Can’t Help Falling in Love.” Another outdid me with his fully memorized rap “My Shot” from “Hamilton”. But I got the bar going with Neil Diamond’s “Sweet Caroline” at which every audience now knows to yell on cue: “So Good! So Good! So Good!”  All of this reassured me that no matter who occupies the offices of Washington, D.C., the spirit of the ordinary American people who walk the streets and fill the bars remains firm and vibrant. 

Why Must the Beautiful Die? (Published in Ottawa News Network)

  

ONN #1 2025.8.30

 

Why Must the Beautiful Die?

 

I’m a student of the Bible. But the older I get, the more I find in it with which to disagree. Take, for example, the most ancient book of the Bible, Job. This book struggles honestly with the problem of pain for 42 chapters. But then the author blows it in the last six verses. It’s similar to attending an inspiring orchestra concert concluded by a rapturous piece and thundering ovation.  Then the director diminishes the memory of the powerful concert by playing some little ditty as an encore. 

 

Similarly, without the last half-dozen verses, the book of Job makes a powerful point: Pain is part of life. Moreover, it’s capricious – it makes no sense. What is there to do except to accept it stoically and be willing, as did Job, to die naked as he had been born naked. That’s what life is. That’s what life is. That’s what life is. But the author couldn’t stomach the honesty. Hence, he tags on a “they lived happily ever after” ending as Job gets back everything double over. 

 

The Psalmist tries. He honestly admits that “the rain falls on the just and the unjust”. But that really misses the point. What has justice to do with it?  Bible students especially should be fully aware that life isn’t fair. Jesus’s parables (Matthew 20: all workers get the same compensation) and the Apostle Paul (Romans 9) explicitly argue that life isn’t fair. Most eight-year-olds have learned the lesson. 

 

Instead, the most honest lament of tragedy I’ve encountered is from Stephen Foster. In a less-well-known song, he asks, “Ah! may the red rose live alway, To smile upon earth and sky! Why should the beautiful ever weep? Why should the beautiful die?” Find the entire poem online – it’s powerful. 

 

Why indeed? 

 

I just now returned from kayaking the Au Train River. I passed through my favorite place where my good friend Ryan Weaver and I used to have breath holding contests underwater. He and his wife, Leanna, have been joining me at my cabin for a week each summer for the last eleven years. I watched the family grow from two, to pregnant, to now an eight-year-old. During that time I watched Ryan spend endless hours playing Legos and building sand castles with Beckett. 

To watch him, you’d think it was Ryan’s favorite activity. Their pics decorate my fridge. 

 

Simply stated, Ryan is the most beautiful person I have ever known. He was my Hope College research student and a cross-country runner. The afternoon of June 9, 2012, I celebrated their joy-filled wedding, in stark contrast to the funeral of Hope colleague brain-cancer victim David Klooster that morning. 

 

Since that time we stayed close. Indeed, I chose Ryan as my medical power of attorney and he came to my aid five years ago following a heart attack and anticipating quad-bypass surgery. My nurse, when she discovered I had taught at Hope, told me she had good friends from there. Of course. 

 

So it was an ironic twist when, sixteen months ago, Ryan called and asked if I could meet him at Spectrum because while running his leg was dragging and his arm swinging  involuntarily. 

 

Ryan handled brain cancer with the same positive drive as he handled living. Through his network of friends, his surgery was done by the Duke University surgeon who operated on John McCain and Ted Kennedy. He volunteered for experimental studies and kept to a strict diet without a bit of sugar – all to live as long as possible for his wife and son. Learning that it might be beneficial, he trained his body via holding his breath - - up to 5 minutes. That’s commitment. 

 

Why must the beautiful die? Why indeed.  Irony of ironies, his whole life as a father, Ryan wore long sleeves at the beach to avoid the sun, ate a scrupulously healthy diet, no plastic bottles . . . Like Abraham, Ryan was blessed to be a blessing, and he took his commitment seriously. Yet now cancer has had its say. 

 

C.S. Lewis argued in his essay “Learning in Wartime” that since death comes for us all, it doesn’t really matter whether it comes at age 20 or 90. Bullshit! My 41-year-old friend expressed it powerfully: “I WANT TO LIVE!” Of course. 

 

I have kayaked the Au Train for fifteen years. Today, for the first time, I returned home soaked from a drenching downpour of rain. Each drop was a tear. 

 

Making Choices

  

HS #121 2025.8.14

 

Making Choices

 

Kayaking recently down the Au Train River towards the sandy beach of Lake Superior, I approached a young lad who was singing to himself – a catchy tune with words I didn’t recognize. Passing him, I asked, “That’s a neat song, what language?” He replied with the straight authority of Walter Cronkite, “I just made them up – it’s gibberish.” 

 

I continued on, but would have enjoyed engaging him in a quick conversation. Not only was it impressive for him to reach within himself to find his own words and tune, it was even more impressive that he represented himself to the outside world with unvarnished truth. His actions were true, excellent, and praiseworthy. More on that later. 

 

I’m in my sixties. Folks at my age are making choices about when to retire, when to start Social Security, what sort of Medicare package to get, and perhaps where to move for their retirement years. Subtract twenty-five years, and folks are choosing whether to change careers, whether to move, perhaps whether to change spouse, how to deal with children and relatives. Subtract another twenty-five and folks are deciding whether to go to college or military or work, and if so, which one, whether to start/continue a romantic relationship . . . 

 

As you read this, you are likely thinking of some pressing choices you are wrestling with presently. 

 

And humans aren’t alone in such things. As I ponder this column, I am kayaking up the Au Train River. I just passed a log with five turtles on it. As I passed, a couple of the turtles scurried off, while the others decided to take the risk and stay basking in the sun. I imagine them laughing at their friends as they claw their way back onto the log.  On the other hand, if the jumpers poked their heads out of the water and saw their companions being whisked away by an otter, they’d likely feel rather satisfied with their decision. 

 

Yes, we are confronted with many weighty decisions, but when counseling high school students about which college to attend, I point out that while they are rightfully spending serious effort on this “big” decision, success in college and in life may well depend more on the small decisions: Who are your new friends?  Do you go to class consistently?   Do you manage your time well, balancing study with recreation and fun?  Are you deliberate with spending money? 

 

The right answers are not the same for everyone. Years ago, a conscientious first-year advisee at Hope College told me he was planning to pledge a fraternity in the spring semester. I cautioned him that the time commitment might affect his studying and grades. His eyes teared up a bit and he said, “I’m getting a 4.00 GPA this semester. I wouldn’t mind having a 3.7 GPA in exchange for more friends.” I gave him my hearty blessing. 

 

But another such student asked my counsel of how to do better because his goal was medical school.  I told him what I had learned, “Matt, decide when you want to go to bed each night and commit yourself to it. You’ll find that that will force you to make better time-management decisions throughout the day.” Years later, he thanked me as he graduated, bound for medical school, and many years later he thanked me again when I saw him at DeVos Fieldhouse, telling me that he’s now a surgeon and researcher at Corewell. 

 

C.S. Lewis counsels in “Mere Christianity”, “Every time you make a choice you are turning the central part of you, the part of you that chooses, into something a little different than it was before.” 

My father saged a similar theme, “Sow a thought, reap a deed. Sow a deed, reap a habit. Sow a habit, reap a character. Sow a character, reap a destiny.” 

But perhaps the most measured advice about “small” choices comes from the Apostle Paul. In most of his letters to churches, he had to address pressing problems. But when he wrote the trouble-free church at Philippi, he had opportunity to discuss his own priorities:  Whatever is true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent, praiseworthy – think on these things - - and the peace of God will be with you.   

Good advice. And choosing to habitually think on such things, even though it takes discipline, leads to a life such as the young man with inner song and outward truth. God knows we need more of that. 

Empathy

  

HW #120 2025.7.10

 

Empathy

 

 Readers, meet Jim and Tom – Tim’s internal discussion team. 

 

Jim: I just heard a story on NPR   https://www.npr.org/2025/03/22/nx-s1-5321299/how-empathy-came-to-be-seen-as-a-weakness-in-conservative-circles

Some conservative Christians agree with Elon Musk that the fundamental weakness of western civilization is empathy. Musk argues that too much empathy can destroy a civilization and cause a person to actually “suicide themselves.” Others claim that “Empathy is dangerous. Empathy is toxic. Empathy will align you with hell.” 

 

Tom: Empathy is bad?!  As I understand, sympathy is feeling sorry for someone, while empathy goes a step further: feeling badly for someone because you imagine yourself – or actually have been - in their situation. How can that be bad? Granted, we don’t always live up to our highest ideals, but we have never rejected them. We have never called a good thing bad. Trial by jury of one’s peers is based on empathy. Abraham Lincoln said, “As I would not be a slave, so I will not be a master.” His ethic was built on empathy. 

 

Jim: But Lincoln’s empathy concerned not HARMING others. These conservatives are questioning to what extent we should be HELPING others. The President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary hosted the author of “The Sin of Empathy” in his podcast. He claimed that “Empathy almost needs to be struck from the Christian vocabulary.”

 

Tom: Struck from Christian vocabulary?  Doesn’t that thinking run counter to Jesus’s Golden Rule and the commandment, “Love thy neighbor as thyself?” Wasn’t Jesus’s coming to earth the supreme example of empathy – of becoming human – a man of sorrows acquainted with grief so that He could be an empathetic advocate? 

 

Jim: Agreed, but Musk’s statement about suicide reminds me of “Lifeboat Ethics.” 

 

Tom: What’s that? 

 

Jim: My version: Imagine a lifeboat filled to capacity with 50 middle-aged men from a sinking cruise ship and all about are similar men perishing in the water. Those in the water plead for help. Occasionally a man in the lifeboat feels so badly, that he changes places with a man in the water. What’s the end result? Fifty will still be saved, but they will all be ones who care mostly for themselves. The virtuous die. Similarly, because of empathy there is a degradation of society because the virtuous give their resources to the non-virtuous. In time, society suffers and degrades. 

 

Tom: But empathizing with and helping others doesn’t hurt us, it helps us become better people. Isn’t empathy necessary and sufficient to both instruct and motivate us to live moral lives?  Isn’t it the universal foundation of moral living? What else helps us understand others than to “walk a mile in their moccasins.” 

 

Jim: But we’ve only walked in certain moccasins. Acting according to empathy is dangerously self-centered because we empathize more easily with folks similar to us. Remember Elian Gonzalez, the Cuban boy who was snatched from his father by his relatives so they could bring him to the U.S. The case split America. Some empathized with the boy – they wanted him to enjoy the freedom and opportunities in the U.S. Others empathized with the father – his son had just been taken from him. Or a darker example: Why did some Roman Catholic bishops not take appropriate action against priests who abused children? These bishops weren’t uncaring. But as priests themselves with no children of their own, it was likely easier for them to empathize with fellow priests. It took the judicial system from the outside world to set things right. 

 

Tom: Yes, that likely explains many recent presidential pardons of folks like himself, all while showing no empathy for thousands who have been deported. The key then is to develop disciplined imagination to empathize even with those unlike ourselves.  Lincoln described it as 

following “the better angels of our nature.”  Those better angels were inscribed on Lady Liberty: “Give me your tired and poor, [those] yearning to breathe free”. 

 

Jim: However, even though it may be good for individuals to be empathetic, does that mean that nations should be? Should personal virtues translate to societal/governmental ones? 

 

Tom: Good question. But either way, empathy should start with the individual. Opportunities abound.  Does one give $19/month to starving dogs or to Shriner children or to wounded veterans? Realizing our connectedness with others, we must make tough choices about who and how to help. 

 

Jim: Perhaps Musk and others against empathy are so rich/powerful that their autonomy separates them from others. But realized or not, empathy does seem essential for living well in community. 

 

Tom: Exactly. 

Einstein: Foil for Quantum Physics

 HS #119 2025.6.12

 

Einstein: Foil for Quantum Physics

 

 

Do you remember Vivian Vance, Lucy’s friend on “I Love Lucy”? Vivian was crazy and trouble-prone, but not to the extent of Lucy. As such, Vivian served as a literary foil for Lucy. Her presence (Lucy! You can’t do that!) highlighted Lucy’s defining characteristics. A foil highlights (by contrast or comparison) the qualities of another central character. 

 

In the tavern scene of “Raiders of the Lost Ark” the enormous tough man was a foil for the girlfriend of Indiana Jones. She outdrank him. Then she in turn served as a foil for Jones (Harrison Ford). As tough as she was, Jones was tougher. Then in the sequel, “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade”, in a stroke of cinematic genius, instead of finding another foil for Indiana, they instead used him as a foil for his father (played by Sean Connery). 

 

How about “Frazier”? The two brothers were foils for each other. 

 

Foils highlight. And none other than Albert Einstein served as a foil to highlight the inconceivable mind-boggling strangeness of modern quantum physics.

 

Einstein ushered in the 20^th century with his own mind-boggling discoveries: i) Light is neither just a particle nor just a wave, but both – simultaneously. ii) Nothing can go faster than the speed of light (seven times around the earth in a second). iii) If an eastbound train and a westbound train are approaching the station at 50 miles/hour, how fast are they approaching each other? 100 miles/hour is the obvious answer. It took Einstein to realize the obvious answer is not the correct one. iv) As an object’s speed increases, its length decreases, its mass increases, and its time moves more slowly. v) Gravity bends a light beam passing an object. vi) Gravity, stranger than Newton described, affects time. Essentially, matter tells space how to bend, and space tells matter how to move. (See a graduate physics course for details.) vii) Forget what you learned in junior high, matter and energy are not distinct categories. Instead, take a little matter, stir in the speed of light, stir it in again, and you’ve just made (a lot of) energy. 

 

It took the imagination and open-mindedness of Einstein to conceive these bewildering results. His cognitive nimbleness stood him head and shoulders above other scientists. 

 

But with quantum physics, Einstein met his match. As the saying goes, “Not only is the universe stranger than we imagine; it is stranger than we CAN imagine.” 

 

Einstein, serving as foil, described quantum physics as “spooky.” What was he objecting to? Read on. 

 

One claim of quantum physics is that it is impossible to know both the exact velocity and the exact position of a particle. It’s not just that we don’t have precise enough instruments; it is theoretically impossible to exactly determine both. Why?  To find the position, you have to observe it; to observe it, you have to shine light on it. And photons of light energize the particle, affecting its velocity. Thus, by observing something, we affect it. So all we can know is its probable location (like a weather forecast).

 

That inherent probability-of-nature bothered Einstein, thus claiming that “God doesn’t play dice with the universe.”  He pictured a pool table. If you hit two balls simultaneously with the cue ball, then, using conservation of momentum, knowing the velocity of the cue ball and of one of the struck balls allows you to determine the exact velocity and position of the second ball. 

 

Einstein reasoned the same technique could be done with atomic particles.  Hit a particle so that it breaks into two pieces moving apart. Then by measuring the velocity of one of the moving pieces, even though you altered it, you can use conservation of momentum to exactly determine the velocity of the other piece. 

 

Neils Bohr said, “Nope.” The two pieces are mysteriously connected via “quantum entanglement.” Observing one piece INSTANTLY affects the velocity of the other piece as well. 

However, this “spooky action at a distance” does not let useful information travel faster than the speed of light, so Einstein’s claim that nothing goes faster than the speed of light still holds (sort of).   

 

Though inconceivable to Einstein, this spooky action has now been experimentally verified. In fact, predictions of quantum physics, accurate to one part per trillion, are the most precise in science, and are relied upon for much of modern technology including GPS, MRIs, and the computer on which you are reading this column.

 

Mind-boggling, but true.  

 

 

Tragedy of the Commons

 HS #118 2025.5.8

 

Tragedy of the Commons

 

Imagine a pasture dedicated to the production of wool which optimally feeds 1000 sheep. Less sheep than that, and some grass goes uneaten. More than 1000, and the total wool produced decreases because the underfed sheep are not as robust.

 

Suppose that the pasture is shared by ten shepherds, each with 100 sheep. All goes well until one shepherd realizes that by doubling his herd to 200, although the total wool output decreases, his own wool production will increase. So he acts in his own self-interest. 

 

Soon the other shepherds realize what he has done and so increase their herds to 200 as well. What’s the final result? By each shepherd acting in his own best interest, they all lose. 

This truth is called “Tragedy of the Commons.”

 

A corollary is that to optimize the general welfare, folks need to form agreements, to compromise, to work together. This was a central theme of W. E. Deming (Japan’s Deming Prize) when he visited Hope College in 1993 shortly before his death. His point: Instead of competing for limited resources, work together to “enlarge the pie.” That is, “win-win” situations are possible through innovative thinking and cooperation.  

 

Sadly, in the last few years, we have seen many (local and national) who don’t understand and appreciate this truth.

 

Any politician who claims, “Your money is best kept in your own pocket” doesn’t understand Tragedy of the Commons. Here in Ottawa County our lives are better because we all contribute a little towards our great county parks. If we kept all our money to ourselves, we’d all lose. 

 

Wearing masks during COVID provided a great example. Those who wore masks were protecting the community by i) reducing their own risk of illness, ii) reducing the risk of spreading it, and iii) serving as a role model for others to do the same. However, masks were uncomfortable and bothersome. Thus it would have been in my own selfish best-interest for everyone else to wear a mask, but not me. Those who wore masks, then, showed they understood Tragedy of the Commons – everyone acting unselfishly for the greater good. 

 

Firearms is another example. In nations which outlaw handguns, the number of violent deaths is a fraction of that in the U.S. where we are trained to think selfishly of our own rights.  However, admittedly, it might be optimal for an individual if he were the only one to carry a firearm for protection. Thus, we have seen Tragedy of the Commons play out in tragic fashion in the U.S. as everyone acts in their own self-interest rather than as part of a greater community.

 

Those who don’t understand Tragedy of the Commons, but instead act in their own selfish interest, hurt everyone. It’s no coincidence that those opposed to wearing masks during the COVID pandemic are largely the same as those who promote carrying firearms.  And it’s no coincidence that Ottawa County is now spending a million dollars and counting in lawsuits and litigation because of the decisions of those who didn’t understand the wisdom of compromise and working together. Lose-lose. 

 

Nationally, vaccinations is a prime example. Whether it be measles, COVID, or other communicable diseases, our entire population benefits by everyone having vaccine resistance. Yes, there is a miniscule chance of a slight reaction when inoculated. Thus, it’s best for me if everyone but myself got vaccinated.  Then disease won’t spread, but I incur no personal risk or inconvenience. But if everyone made that choice, we’d all lose. Only by living and acting in community do we win. 

 

Taxes provide yet another case in point. A strong and effective IRS ensures that everyone (especially the rich) pays their share of taxes. Reducing IRS personnel invites Tragedy of the Commons as people may act with impunity by shrinking from their responsibility. 

 

Internationally, free trade and curbing CO2 emissions via renewable energy are ways nations can work together for the world’s betterment. Tariffs and continuing fossil fuel (especially coal) production leads to everyone losing as each nation looks to itself. 

 

This is why after the collapse of the USSR, George H. W. Bush spoke eloquently of the “New World Order.” He realized we could all be winners if we acted cooperatively. 

 

Indeed, we will all live better when we understand the truth of John Donne that no man is an island. Our lives are interwoven. Maybe, just maybe, like the shepherds, we all win or we all lose together.