38. Offer students these classes

In the movie "Good Will Hunting," Will (Matt Damon) walks into his new therapist's office (Robin Williams), looks at his collection of books and comments, "All these books, but nobody reads the right books." When asked what the "right" books are, Will replies, "I don't know, whatever blows your hair back." I think he means that the right books are those that challenge your mind, beliefs and biases.

I think of that scene whenever I consider high school curriculums. How do students get the best education possible? I do not know but I think all classes should do one of two things, 1) be of practical use in the future or 2) make one think and challenge his or her preconceived notions. The pursuit of intellectualism is the journey of reasoning without emotion and the understanding of relationships and differences.

Not that anybody asked, but here are five classes I would like to see considered by high school curriculums. Perhaps some are currently offered, though probably not required- and certainly none were available when I was in high school.

1) Personal Finance. Each day the class would begin with a pledge not to use credit cards for items of life-style or luxury. In this class, students will learn how to buy a car, a house and save for retirement. They will learn the aspects of compound and simple interest, as well as fixed rates, adjustable rates and points. Illusionary expectations of becoming rich will be studied and realistically applied (at least statistically speaking). The realties and impact of bankruptcy and foreclosures will be examined. Since wealth is a factor of time and money, the sooner individuals learn about personal finance the greater the chance of financial success. Too many kids move out, buy a new car, sign up for a credit card or two and enroll in a few college classes on their minimum wage job.

2) Human Origins. It is time to lay the cards out on the table. Science and each major religion will have the opportunity to present their views on human origins. Not only would this give each student a background in each of the major philosophical viewpoints, but it might also provide an understanding and tolerance of the others. Each discipline will be given both the time to present the history and meaning of its belief or understanding, in addition to the time to debate other viewpoints. It is time to confront this ever-increasing and dividing social issue. Science refuses to teach religion (Intelligent Design, Creationism) in its classes, and churches do not teach evolution in Sunday school.

3) Race, Ethnics, and Minority Issues. The focus of this class is several-fold. Students will study the plight of minorities in this country from African-Americans and Native Americans to women and homosexuals (with this one, I'm sure I've added to the home-schooling craze). They will read books by the likes of Dick Gregory and Fredrick Douglas. Again, issues will be confronted before the narrow-mindedness of prejudice sets in. Students will also study the Constitution and its amendments related to the freedom of speech and religion.

4) Philosophy. The focus of this class will be thought and discussion. Philosophers will include Socrates, Plato, Hume, Thoreau, Marx, and Kant- just to name a few. Conversation will include governments, politics, religion and revolution. In this class, there will be no tests, just a grade of satisfactory /unsatisfactory for participating in discussions and presenting written ideas. There will be more questions than answers.

5) Discovery Class. In this class, each student will prepare two papers/presentations. One subject will be completely of his or her choosing and the other will be of random selection. Students will be encouraged (and selected) to research topics from Aristotle to automobiles. The focus would be the far-reaching effect of each topic. For example, a paper/presentation on automobiles must consider history, technology, business practices, market share, global influence, labor, politics/lobbying, natural resources, etc. Students will experience the effect that their subject has across a spectrum of disciplines.

Honorable Mention: Geography. We study geography in our younger years, but adult testing of world geography is embarrassing. Global economics, travel, and the Internet keeps making the world a smaller and smaller place. Location, culture, language and currency will be studied.

The "no child left behind" act is a highly controversial program. Those I have spoken to, have not endorsed the program, with responses ranging from, "the program is a joke" to "I feel like my hands are tied." Students feel the pressure of having to pass standardized tests and teachers feel as though they have to teach according to those (and only those) standards. Learning and discovery, to some extent, have gone the way of memorizing and test taking skills. Perhaps these classes will spice things up a bit.

37. It's a dog-gone runaround

My wife and I, on two occasions now, have "rescued" dogs, that is, we pick up a stray or neglected dog, nurse them back to health, give them their shots and then have them neutered or spayed (to prevent additional unwanted or uncared for animals). After they are healthy, we try to find them a good home.

Our first endeavor went off without a hitch. The dog, we named Foster, was a Dalmatian that wandered to my place of employment so hungry that he was eating cigarette butts outside the front doors. The veterinarian visit indicated heartworm, which we had treated. He was adopted shortly after neutering to a family that had just lost a Dalmatian. The family has been wonderful, even recently calling us to update us on his latest veterinarian visit and welcoming us to visit again, whenever we pleased.

Unfortunately, our second endeavor did not quite follow this script. The dog, we will call Spike, was noticeably neglected. We asked if we could have the dog, and the owners, who obviously did not want the dog, were more than happy to relieve themselves of his burden. We took the same approach. We took him to the veterinarian for his shots and a checkup. Shortly thereafter, he returned to be neutered after which he was ready for adoption.

We ran an advertisement that did not bring a response until the last day. A couple was interested and came to see Spike. The man seemed to fall in love with the dog, often recalling stories of his childhood dog and jumping on the floor to play with him. They asked if we would take less than our $100 asking price. We set the price at $100 not because we want to recover a portion of cost, but rather to ensure that the new owners are serious about taking in a new dog. We agreed to $50, simply because he seemed to fall in love with the dog. Our request has been that if things do not work out with the dog that the dog is returned for a full refund. We do not want the owners to feel trapped, and we do not want the dog to be passed around from home to home.

That night, the couple called and said that Spike had scared their young child and asked if they could bring him back. It was Friday night, and we agreed that we would get Spike back on Sunday, as Saturday did not work out for either of us.

On Saturday, we put another advertisement in the paper, anticipating his return Sunday morning. That Sunday morning we received several calls about the dog. We explained that we were anticipating his return shortly. We did not hear from the couple (they were supposed to call us), until finally late Sunday evening I called them. Suddenly, things were working out with the young child and now they wanted to keep him. We said that was fine and notified the inquirers that Spike was no longer available.

Several days later, the bank called to inform me that the couple's check has returned with insufficient funds. Here is where the story goes bad. I called the couple, told them of the apparent error and asked them to make amends. We understand that those things happen, and were happy to work things out with them.

When we contacted the couple, they asked if they could bring out the money, though danced around when exactly they could come. We offered to come get the money whenever it was convenient, since we wanted to see how Spike was doing. Without going into extensive detail, as soon as we mentioned that we wanted to see Spike, communication broke down. Instantly, we began to grow very concerned about Spike's well being- why were we not permitted to see him?

The worst of images began circumventing in our heads. My theory was that he ran away and that they did not want to tell us. My wife was literally sick for a week with worry. They offered every excuse imaginable as to why we could not see him. Once they said they would not be home, although we drove past their residence to verify that they were indeed home. We even offered at one point to disregard the bounced check if we could just see him, and in desperation, we offered $200 to buy him back. They refused both offers.

After receipt of our certified letter, to our relief, they agreed on a time when we could come over to get payment and see Spike. We visited, received our money and saw Spike, who seemed to be reasonably healthy and happy. We knew something was wrong; that they were lying about something, but legally we could not do anything- for they did make good on their debt. As it turned out, they were convincing deceivers, even if our skepticism knew better.

Earlier this week (three months later), a different couple called and told us they had Spike, and that were getting ready to move and needed to "get rid of him." They said that they got our number from the veterinarian bill. They said they wanted the $150 they had paid for him. They seemed incredulous when we told them that we had only sold him for $50.

Apparently, the "real" story, for whatever that is worth, is that the original couple was not permitted to have another dog (they told us they did not have a dog). That Saturday, they had talked to this couple, and sold Spike to them for $150. Thus, when I called that Sunday, they had already sold Spike for a considerable profit. When the check bounced and we wanted to see Spike, they put us off until they could coordinate Spike's visit with ours. When we arrived they put on an Academy Award winning performance- stories of Spike dressing up for Halloween, how attached their son had become to him, etc., etc. Spike played his part as well, jumping around the house as though he owned it and comfortably playing with their child. When my wife said we would rather have the dog back, the couple pleaded that we not do "that" to their child.

Today we purchased our rescued dog from this second couple, which for all we know may have been a part of an elaborate extortion scheme. Perhaps they even split the $100 profit. It is hard to know whom to trust after an experience like that. However, and most importantly to us, this poor dog is now on his fifth home in less than six months- looking for his sixth and final home.

36. Government's all Greek to him

Success is often built upon the bricks of knowledge formed from studying both the triumphs and failures of its predecessors. The founders of this country sought to examine previous governments in order to frame a constitution and government that might encapsulate the best of each, without repeating the mistakes of the past. Some of the failed republics studied were those of the ancient Greeks. The challenges of government that we experience today are not apart from the hindrances pondered by Athenian philosophers centuries before modern time.

Aristotle and Thucydides, in particular, noted the tensions and potential incompatibility between ideas such as "democracy," and "freedom." Too often, these terms are used interchangeably, despite their very different meanings and applications. Their musings and postulations are exemplified in our modern government, with the differences often unnoticed.

According to Thucydides, expounded by Daniel N. Robinson, Ph. D. in his Greek Legacy series, "democracy assumes that all have equal moral and political standing, and that rewards will be distributed equally, " whereas "freedom presumes that rewards will be distributed unequally, since some people have more ability than others."

In Thucydides' definition of democracy, the assumption of equal moral and political standing does not refer to a casteless society. However, the plausibility of a society of equal moral and political standing is improbable. To this, according to Robinson, Aristotle noted that a "democracy creates the potential for a tyranny of the majority." One could argue that Aristotle prophetically detailed the last election in which the "moral" majority tyrannically eradicated potential marital arrangements between homosexuals. Thus, in this definition of democracy, the rights of minorities exist only so long as the majority refrains from extinguishing them.

Fortunately, the American founders fought for the ratification of several rights as Constitutional amendments to preserve minority beliefs and opinions. Again drawing from tyrannical study, the inclusion of these rights guaranteed, at least to some degree, a democratic state in which individuals would have equal moral and political standing- at least in the right to express one's minority or unpopular opinion, without the fear of being hauled off to prison (although this, of course, hasn't always held true).

The presumption that freedom rewards those based on ability or effort lends itself to a meritocracy or what is sold as "the American dream." In this concept of governance, the rewards are to be reaped by the deserving and successful- as the most talented individuals rise to the top. Ideologically, citizens would begin at the same place but end (or succeed) according to merit- some rich, some poor. This premise, however, fails in the light of nepotism, elitism and privilege. Fewer citizens, as the wealthy entrench their stronghold on the path of success, realize the American dream.

The Economist magazine examined American's "fading meritocracy," in what it titled, "Ever higher society, ever harder to ascend." It found that income inequity "is growing to levels not seen since the 1880s." In addition, it noted that it is "not any easier to climb from rags to riches, while the children of the wealthy have a greater chance of staying at the top of the social heap."

Again, in our recent election, both President George W. Bush and candidate Senator John Kerry came from very privileged backgrounds. The privileged path consists of growing up in wealthy and prestigious families, attending private schools and then Ivy League colleges- after which, the opportunities are endless. With education often being the key to success, especially for those that graduate from the top schools, it is disheartening to note, according to The Economist article, that "three-quarters of the students at the country's top 146 colleges come from the richest socio-economic forth, compared with just 3% from the poorest forth." Harvard students, for example, come from families whose median income is $150,000. Furthermore, 10-15% of all Ivy League classes are made up of "legacies"- those that are often granted special acceptance because they are the children of alumni.

Some leaders of the recent past, likewise, expressed their concerns over the plight facing the poor. Teddy Roosevelt favored inheritance taxes to preserve a meritocracy (and prevent an aristocracy), that is, to level the playing field so that fewer individuals realize such a head start. In addition, philanthropists such as Andrew Carnegie, who donated millions of dollars to free libraries, attempted to thwart the implications of a class-based society.

The ideology of America's democracy and meritocracy, it can be argued, is slowly being eroded, as exemplified by the distribution of wealth and education. An aristocracy can succeed in a democracy so long as it prevents overthrow from the mob. To do this requires a content middle class and a perceived majority ideology. As long as the middle class is relatively satisfied, the voice of the poor will not be heard. Moreover, as long as the country is moving in the "right" direction politically, culturally or morally, the aristocracy will be permitted to survive (consider conservative values that sparked this year's election, regardless of social standing).

Ancient Greek philosophers proposed that we must choose between the majority mob that rule democracies (because they can) and societies that rewards its citizens (in terms of wealth and power) proportional to their accomplishments. Similarly, Robinson concludes that, "The American founders realized that their democratic experiment would fail if it were not restrained (from) the excessive tendencies to which democracy is prone." Today, it seems, America must tread cautiously through the principles of government, balancing democracy, meritocracy, freedom and liberty- while dedicated to controlling the excessive tendencies of democracy and the oppressions of aristocracy.

35.Global warming a real fear

Dolphin-safe tuna, gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, rainforest destruction and recycling- where does it end? Similar to being on a strict diet around the holidays, it is difficult to be consistently environmentally conscious. Looking out for the environment is a time consuming endeavor, practiced in varying degrees to save animals, rain forests or our atmosphere. What are the dangers and what does it all mean for future generations and us?

Michael Crichton, of Jurassic Park and "ER" fame, recently released his latest novel, "State of Fear." Already controversial, and unread personally, the book makes the statement that the issue of global warming is significantly overblown. His point, as reviewers eloquently note, is that the idea of global warming is more, "faith over fact," "more political than scientific, " and even a "quasi-manipulation of our society."

Crichton has often molded his stories around science, most notably Jurassic Park, as his background is both in anthropology and medicine. I thoroughly enjoyed the last book of his that I read, "The Lost Word," although I still have not forgiven Steven Spielberg for completely destroying the screenplay. Crichton's argument in "State of Fear" is an interesting one, even if I disagree. And, statistically, based on his premise, I can only assume he is a Republican and that perhaps he even owns a logging company (want some wood?).

Fear has always been a powerful motivating factor and, as we recently witnessed, the fear of terrorism was a major factor in the presidential election. As Georgetown law professor Richard J. Lazarus notes in his new book, "The Making of Environmental Law," it was the environmental scares of the 1970s that prompted even Richard Nixon to begin passing environmental laws that lead to the Environmental Protection Agency and the Clean Air Act. The question is then, how real are those fears today?

The recent election was hardly influenced by environmental factors, as George W. Bush will be remembered as one of the least environmentally and scientifically informed presidents in history- the signing of the February 2004 petition condemning the White House for "deliberately and systematically distorting scientific fact," by scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates, more than exemplifies this statement. Further to this, Lazarus notes, "the GOP has become experts in managing the spin, repacking environmentally damaging laws under titles like "Clean Skies" or "Healthy Forests" (I might add the "Patriot Act" and "Operation Iraqi Freedom to that clever, though unrelated, list). From this, despite Crichton's claim, fear has clearly not influenced recent political thought.

Crichton's book has fallen victim to poor timing as the World Meteorological Organization just released its report for 2004, noting it as the fourth warmest year on record (since 1990 the ten warmest years have been recorded). In addition, the carbon dioxide on the side of Hawaii's Mauna Loa volcano has registered a carbon dioxide increase of two parts per million now for two consecutive years. The increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere may raise global temperatures. Increasing temperatures may, in turn, melt ice caps, setting in motion climatic and environmental changes. Models differ in the projection of possible consequences, but we recently witnessed nature's power in the tsunamis that hit Asia following an oceanic earthquake.

The issue or concern, depending how one views the situation, is a global one. And more than an economical issue, it is a cultural and moral issue. Our "fast-paced" culture has little understanding of the gradual nature of environmental decay, notes Lazarus. Furthermore, our industrial, scientific and technological advancements have created a culture that, "ever more disconnects us from the real world." Meaning, of course, that we have become separated from the physical world that challenged our ancestors. Bill McKibben in "Legal Affairs" magazine, best summarizes the cultural and moral dilemma encompassing the globe, "...real progress on global warming demands figuring out ways to let poor nations use more energy for necessities while we use less for luxuries."

Granted, on a planet that is measured in billions of years, a ten-year trend towards global warming does not prove that it exists. But it does not take much to understand that fossil fuels, and our other natural resources, will not last forever. It would be easy to list the atrocities placed on this planet in just a couple of generations- from the depletion of natural resources to the alarming rate of extinction. Human beings, especially in first world countries, continue to tear through this planet like an Enron shredding party. At some point, we need to slow down and recognize the moral obligation to future generations (and other species). And perhaps consider their, impending, "State of Fear."