MAYBE SOME PROBLEMS DON'T HAVE A SOLUTION

Educator John Dewey famously said: "A problem well put is half solved." To test this, here are three problems:

* Why do the folks who publish magazines like the NATIONAL ENQUIRER achieve such extraordinary circulation using such undistinguished language to print such unsubstantiated gossip about such really unimportant people?

Researchers at Northwestern University conclude: "Humans are hardwired to pay special attention to scandals and other negative information about other people.....not so much a character flaw as a good evolutionary tool for survival." The study proposes early man needed to avoid untrustworthy or threatening members of their tribe, hence the special attention given to them and their behaviors.

While the proposition sounds reasonable, it is equally reasonable to assume not many paparazzi are thinking evolution as they slither through the slime of celebrity faithlessness and fecklessness. To them and us, their un-admitted readers, gobbling up gossip is not a societal problem as much as salty habit.

* Why do theists and atheists appear to differ about human sex and sexuality?

Another university, Kansas U, decided to study this question. Using responses from 15,000 volunteers the researchers found "almost no difference in the sex practices of atheists and highly religious people." Chief researcher Darrel Rey explained: "In the case of adultery, masturbation and certain other acts, the frequency was the same, only the guilt was different." Summing up their work, Rey added: "The guilt didn't stop them, it just made them feel bad."

* Why do reporters now act like archaeologists?

Night after night cable channels travel with archaeologists to distant lands, none more frequent than Egypt. Notice how they endlessly peruse the hieroglyphics of the ancient kingdoms. King Tut is one of their favorite subjects. A Pharoah who lived, loved and died thousands of years ago, but whose narrative for us today continues to depend on how each succeeding archaeologist decides to interpret and re-interpret a fist, a face, or a facade.

Which, in a funny way, brings us back to how modern reporters will use much the same to reach what they like to call their psycho-social "interpretations" of everyone from Mel Gibson's scowl to John Boehner's tears.
++++++++++

I'm not entirely sure Mr Dewey would have approved any of this. I'm just saying......