Moderation

“To a man with a hammer, everything is a nail.” As I get older and more burdened with experience, I see more people who forget that carrying only one tool in your nail belt limits your capacity to build.

“… moderation is avoiding extremes and choosing the right tools and materials for a task.”

My first clear lesson in carrying tools came when I left academics and became a construction carpenter for a decade. I was raised on a farm and I thought I knew hammers, saws, and the tools of the building trades but I quickly discovered how unskilled, uninformed, and clumsy I was. Experienced carpenters drive nails smoothly with a few swings of the hammer, sometimes sinking a thorn, as they call a smallish nail, with a tap and a single blow.

Not me.

My first day, I saw the lead carpenter staring at me with his hands on his hips, shaking his head, as I flailed away, missing and bending nails. I’m certain he would have sent me home before lunch if I hadn’t been hired by my cousin to help build his house and was paid only pocket money, not a real wage. I stuck with it for nearly a decade and eventually became a certified journeyman carpenter. A hammer became a natural extension of my hand.

I discovered that for seasoned carpenters, driving nails with their hammers was only an opener. Need to loosen a frozen nut and bolt– careful hammer taps will free it faster with less damage than reaving on it with a wrench. Forget the key to the padlock on the gang box? Grab a come-along, run a cable through the hasp, and put a strain on the lock; tap the lock body with your hammer and pop it open in a jiff.

A less obvious carpentry skill is the chef’s “mise en place.” Carpenters are expected to gather up all the tools and materials they need and take them to the task. Taking the wrong tools, dragging along extra tools, or the wrong materials all get a frown from the foreman.

Which brings me to my subject: moderation is avoiding extremes and choosing the right tools and materials for a task.

Rather than ease into it, I’ll dive straight into the mudhole: capitalism in 2025.

In a previous post, I mentioned that Steve Thomason, dean of St. Mark’s Cathedral in Seattle, brought up Thomas Kuhn and paradigm shifts in a discussion group. His question was whether we are on the verge, or in the midst, of a shift? Given current events and moods, the question is apt. The dean mentioned the possibility of a shift away from corporate capitalism.

When I speak against American corporate capitalism, I am a blazing hypocrite. I live off the returns of investments in stocks and bonds. Before I retired, I attended monthly corporate stock analyst briefings, trying to convince them that my employer was worthy of a “buy” rating instead of a neutral “hold” or the dread “sell.” The quality and profitability of our software products were irrelevant if they did not lead to a “buy” rating for the month.

My employer was likely extreme, but reading the business and tech news, I seldom see anything that contradicts my former employer’s model for corporate America.

But I will risk hypocrisy and speak out. Capitalism– the pursuit of profit through the ownership of private property, organized work, and free markets– is the hammer in the American tool belt. The capitalist hammer can accomplish many things and it would be foolish to throw it away. Woe to the carpenters who enter the jobsite without their hammers, but equally benighted is a sliver-picker who tries to cut a rafter with a hammer instead of a skilsaw.

The murder of Heathcare United’s CEO in December and the scores of false alibis that appeared on Facebook is an example of what happens with the wrong tool. The assassin’s point was valid: a for-profit corporation that lives and dies on its share price is the wrong tool for choosing who receives lifesaving drugs and who does not. Share buy and sell orders do not justify innocent death in any morality.

Nevertheless, corporate capitalism is exactly the right tool for efficiently manufacturing consumer products like automobiles and washing machines with desirable features and low prices.

Moderation, choosing tools carefully, is a far better way for a nation to thrive than thrashing away with the wrong tools. The secret is finding the right tool for the job. That is a challenge for every trade and profession. Moderate choices offer better results for all, but blindly sticking to one tool leads to destructive outcomes.

Paradigm Shifting

Last night, I attended an online class led by Steve Thomason of St. Mark’s cathedral in Seattle. He mentioned Thomas Kuhn and paradigm shifts as a tool for understanding the forty-seventh presidency.

Simply mentioning “paradigm shift” brought me back to my first university classes in the late 1960s. A reading was Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions, one of the most discussed and cited books of the twentieth century.

Up until that class reading, I understood science as a steady progression of discoveries starting from formulating a hypothesis, then confirming or disproving the hypothesis with experiments that eventually led to established scientific law; science forever changing as knowledge accumulates, but a gradual incremental process.

Oh how naive that farm boy was.

Kuhn ended that neat scenario. Instead of a steady progression, he amazed me with a series of revolutions from Aristotle to Galileo, on to Newton and Einstein. Each revolution came as an abrupt change following a period of a growing doubt that the reigning paradigm could answer or explain increasingly pressing issues.

I liked the notion of paradigms so much that twenty years later I jumped on the bandwagon to name one the first software products I designed and developed. We called it “Paradigm Trouble Ticketing.”

A paradigm shift is shifty. (Sorry. I can’t help myself.) During a shift, the obvious and important is in flux, making paradigm spotting difficult while the shift occurs and seldom plain until the dust has settled.

This morning, I decided play the fool and declare my choice for the 2025 paradigm shift.

G. K. Chesterton, an incorrigible polemicist who I think often thought clearly, wrote in 1928:

“The unconscious democracy of America is a very fine thing. It is a true and deep and instinctive assumption of the equality of citizens, which even voting and elections have not destroyed.”

I am afraid that America’s “unconscious democracy” is the paradigm that is going by the wayside, destroyed by the 2024 election. I fear that the assumption of equality that sustained the United States for the previous century has been rejected and replaced by faith in oligarchy, government by the wealthy.

We saw it in the conclave of billionaires at the inauguration, we read it in the executive order to abolish the directive against racial discrimination in federal hiring.

But paradigms don’t only move away from old assumptions. They also move to something new. I don’t know what the new paradigm will be, but I have my eyes open. I hope I will not be blinded.