Author Archives: Dan Malo

About Dan Malo

Dan graduated from the University of Connecticut (Storrs, CT), where he obtained a B.A. in Interdisciplinary Social Sciences. He completed a Planning & Development Internship with the Connecticut General Assembly in 2010 and in 2013, he was elected to his Town of Canterbury’s Planning & Zoning Commission, after sitting four years on appointment. He blogs for #TheGrid about local planning matters in New England and Eastern Connecticut's ‘Quiet Corner.’

Primed To Understand: Psychoanalysis

Leave a reply

This paper discusses the Freudian definition of narcissism, and the idea that this is a normal behavior in childhood which the adult ego reverts back to following trauma.  Viewed as an act of recovery by Freud, this regression, when used in conjunction with psychoanalytic priming, can help those affected to work through their mental disorders by allowing the patient to realize their condition.  

8462853_orig

Narcissism, as defined by Freud, is “the attitude of a person who treats his own body in the same way…a sexual object is ordinarily treated.” Narcissists typically lack empathy, generally showing concern for just themselves.  However, this may be a part of “the regular course of human sexual development,” as Freud suggests that there is a period of narcissism that is normal in early childhood.  This early child hood narcissism develops into the “real ego” and the “ego ideal,” which he regards as an attempt to maintain the “narcissistic perfection of one’s childhood.”  When this perfection can no long be retained, one may unconsciously seek “to recover it in the new form of an ego ideal.”  This new ego ideal is a delusion in a sense, and “the substitute for the lost narcissism of (one’s) childhood.”  According to Freud, these delusions can be “part of an attempt at recovery” (Freud, 1914/1986).  Along with self-introspection and psychoanalytic technique, they can help to assist in recovery by drawing the malignant behaviors to the surface; where, no longer part of the unconscious, they can be ‘worked on’ proactively instead of continually ignored, repressed or ruminated upon.

Donald Capps, in his work “John Nash’s Post-delusional Period: A Case of Transformed Narcissism,” suggests that delusion, narcissism, and other correlative disorders can be overcome by actualization or mentalizing, much like the case of the Nobel Prizewinning mathematical genius he has studied.  Capps hypothesizes the root of Nash’s dysfunction as being from many possible traumas, including inconsistency in parenting, denial as a family habit, a childhood accident in which a friend was killed, awkwardness as a “bookish” young boy, and apathetic behavior towards school in his teenage years.  Nash’s adult trauma’s are also detailed, which included ridicule from colleagues and failure to live up to his (and his mothers) expectations of brilliance.  Capps believed that the delusional state that Nash went into, which included bouts of extreme paranoia, alcoholism, and a dangerous obsession with numerology, signified an unconscious attempt at recovery, much along the line of Freud’s belief.  Although Nash was forced to leave his career for some time, he was able to overcome his delusions.  Capps believes that “the process by which Nash was able to liberate himself from the control of his delusions was the transformation of his narcissistic self” (Capps, 2004).  By using creativity, humor and wisdom on top of his ability to think abstractly about his condition, Nash was able to self-actualize his way to controlling his disorder.

Dr. Michael Ermann also believes that narcissism stems from an unsatisfied ego-state, based an ideal-self created by perceptions made in childhood.   He finds that “archaic” feelings can be “activated,” and ultimately worked through, using psychoanalysis.  Much like the case of John Nash, Ermann believes that patients can be primed to achieve ‘mentalization,’ or the ability to understand one’s own mental state.  He suggests that this activity could prove therapeutic in allowing patients to move beyond the issues they face.  During a specific analytic encounter with ‘Paul,’ who he describes as narcissistic, he attempts to awaken buried “feelings of not being wanted, not being welcome, not being loved, not being cared for, of being abandoned and being done harm.” Ermann describes Paul as outwardly “successful,” but also as someone dealing with “diverse identity problems…associated with depressive feelings.” Paul suffered from persistent dreams and waking ideation regarding the safety of his son in fanciful situations in which, contrary to his idealized protective role as a father, he was unable to save or rescue him.  By priming him on these issues, Dr. Ermann was able to coax further information about Paul’s father’s infidelity, and abandonment of him as a child.  Ermann also found that Paul cheated on his wife and had unresolved parental distrust, believing that his mother risked his life during her pregnancy “because of her hate for her husband.”  Eventually, Paul learns that he was born seven weeks premature; that his mother didn’t risk his life out of spite.  Paul was able to mentalize this and overcome his own infidelities and patterns of indignation.  Ermann believes that by “going through the preverbal states of (Paul’s) earliest existence where he had the unconscious feeling of not being born into his own life,” Paul was able to find peace (Ermann, 2007).

A study by Hunyady, Joesephs and Jost also uses psychoanalytic priming techniques to understand narcissism in their patients.  The three researchers share the Freudian belief “that reminders of…the child’s real or imagined perception of the parents’ sexual relationship—as well as the child’s knowledge of their parents’ own sexual infidelity—can activate unconscious conflict around sexual infidelity in adulthood.”   In their study of 316 people, Hunyady et al. asked primed questions in an attempt to activate “the Oedipal situation.”  They hoped to lead these people, who they described as having narcissistic traits, “to become more prohibitive towards sexual infidelity.”  The researchers conducted their study in three parts, first with questionnaires to measure the degree of narcissism in each individual.  The participants then “read a paragraph that contained the priming manipulation,” which asked them to “identify with the protagonist of the story by writing down what that person may have been feeling or thinking.”  The participants were then asked about their attitudes towards relationships and infidelity, as well as other demographic information and further questions regarding behavioral history.  The evidence the researchers gathered confirmed a correlation between narcissism, infidelity, and parental infidelity.  Hunyady et al. felt that “narcissistic people defend against painful and angry feelings by disidentifying with the victim.” They did find a positive outcome in that when participants were “led to identify and empathize with the victim of betrayal, they became disapproving” of their patterns of behavior (Hunyady, Josephs & Jost, 2008).

The analysis of how primed, but self guided treatment for issues such as narcissism must be explored further.  Successful examples of narcissistic regression, mentalization, and disorder transformation such as that of ‘Paul’ or John Nash’s should be analyzed for the benefit brought to both the patient and scientific community.  The techniques used in the study by Hunyady et al. provide a reasonable ground in which to start from.  Participants were asked to self-rate themselves on 29 different items, and then asked to respond to primed paragraphs, crafted to explore the depths of the respondents’ attitudes towards infidelity (Hunyady, Josephs & Jost, 2008).  This type of questioning could be useful far beyond the just study of the correlation of narcissism to infidelity.

An appropriate size gender segregated sampling of more than 100 people would be ideal to test.  The ideal age group would be individuals aged 28-45, because of the increased likelihood of post childhood traumas in which to study.  Ethnicities, though not outwardly important, should be catalogued, in case surprising data is revealed upon that basis.  The first part of the study should be a self-response questionnaire to gauge personality traits.  The Millon Multi-Axis Personality Measure should be used in which respondents will be asked questions and instructed to offer their level of disagreement (1) or agreement (6) on a number scale.  The participants will then be asked primed paragraph length sample stories with clear victims and villains; afterwards they shall discuss the characters they associated with positively and for what reasons.  The primed questions should reveal the participants’ attitudes about the types of narratives presented (benevolence, infidelity, etc.).  The final part of the study should include other data to assist in the analytic process, such as, but not limited to: history of sleep disturbances, indignation or spite, co-dependency, heightened self awareness, protective instincts, indecisiveness, fixation on past relationships, depression, body image, outlook on relationships, addiction, family history of mental disorders, sexual history, academic performance, recollection of childhood, living situation, socioeconomic circumstances; all based on short answer response or satisfaction indices.  It is likely that a number of these factors correlate, as witnessed in the case of John Nash or ‘Paul.’  As an extension of this project, hormone levels can also be monitored to determine the physiological impact of age.

The development of a narcissistic personality may come as compensation for a shattered self image, but channeled positively, those afflicted can (and do) go on to live healthy lives.  The psychological scar can be worked though with self reporting, testing, primed questioning, and psychoanalytic analysis. Whereby previously, “the frequent causation of paranoia by an injury to the ego, by frustration of satisfaction” could once lead to “the possible transformation of ideals in paraphrenic (schizophrenic) disorders,” (Freud, 1914/1986) many individuals may be able to come out of the psychoanalytic process with a healthy realization of self worth.   Knowing and understanding oneself could possibly be the best treatment for those with these types of mental disorders.

References

Capps, D. (2004). John Nash’s Postdelusional Period: A Case of Transformed Narcissism. Pastoral Psychology, 52(4), 289-313. Retrieved from Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection database.

Ermann, M. (2007). “You touched my heart”: Modes of memory and psychoanalytic technique. International Forum of Psychoanalysis, 16(4), 222-227. Retrieved from Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection database.

Freud, S. (1914/1986). On narcissism: An introduction. In Morrison, A. P. (Ed.). Essential papers on

narcissism (pp. 17–43). New York: New York University Press.

Hunyady, O., Josephs, L., & Jost, J. (2008). Priming the Primal Scene: Betrayal Trauma, Narcissism, and Attitudes Toward Sexual Infidelity. Self & Identity, 7(3), 278-294. Retrieved from Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection database.

Image: http://psychapprentice.weebly.com/

Know Yourself: Understand Your World

1 Reply
Psychoanalysis can change a person.

Psychoanalysis can change a person.

Potentials of Psychoanalysis (for better or for worse):

Sigmund Freud, perhaps the most recognized psychologist ever, had a radical idea for his time. He thought that what went on in the mind was “mostly hidden” from conscious awareness.  Freud considered this hidden section, the unconscious, to be a vast area “containing thoughts, wishes, feelings, and memories.” Freud assumed that the unconscious manifested itself occasionally in what we say or do. and that the meaning of our actions could be analyzed and found to represent these primal thoughts. We keep them repressed; “forcibly blocking them from our consciousness because they would be too unsettling to acknowledge.”  He used a certain technique called free association, otherwise, capturing and recording his patients’ spontaneity of thought.  The thoughts would then be analyzed and interpreted in an attempt to map the subconscious.  Freud felt that these techniques could help in “treating psychological disorders by seeking to expose and interpret unconscious tensions.” (Myers, 422) From his ideas, the field of psychoanalysis was born. His techniques would be expanded upon by others and eventually put into practice on a wider scale.

Freud’s personality theories and psychoanalysis would come into pressing need, according to Adam Curtis, producer of the BBC documentary series, The Century of the Self.   He tells how an increase in mental instability had occurred after the depravity of World War 2.  Prominent psychologists and world leaders felt that Nazism had created irrational individuals, and that violent nationalistic tendencies could escalate worldwide.  American soldiers faced “an extraordinary number of mental breakdowns” (Curtis, 2:08) and “forty-nine percent of all soldiers evacuated from combat were sent back because they suffered from mental problems.” The Army began to use psychoanalysis and found that the stress of combat had triggered repressed violent feelings and desires, proving Freudian theory “that underneath, humans are driven by primitive irrational forces.” (Curtis, 5:00) In an interview, Ellen Herman, Historian of American Psychology, states that politicians believed that because of what was witnessed in the war, “that human beings could act very irrationally because of this sort of teeming and raw and unpredictable emotionality…the kind of chaos that lived at the base of human personality could in fact infect the society social institutions to such a point that the society itself would become sick…that’s what they believe happened in Germany in which the irrational, the anti-democratic went wild.” (Curtis, 6:45) It was felt that the use of psychoanalytic principles held hope in erasing these irrational emotions. Freud’s daughter, Anna, expanded on his techniques and led the psychoanalytic movement after his death.  She thought it was possible for people to learn how to manage these dark “inner forces.” (Curtis, 9:45)

In 1946, The National Mental Health Act would be signed into law to raise awareness of mental illness.  Brothers Carl and Will Menninger, who led psychiatry efforts for the Army,  would train hundreds of new psychoanalysts.  They hoped to, according to Curtis, implement Anna Freud’s psychoanalysis techniques on a wider scale.  Robert Wallerstein, Psychoanalyst for the Menninger Clinic from 1949-1966, described the Menningers’ belief that “psychoanalytic thinking could make for the betterment of society…because you could change the way the mind functioned; and you could take the ways in which people did hurtful things to themselves and others and alter them by enlarging their understanding… this was the vision psychoanalysis brought…that you could really change people…and you could change them almost in limitless ways.” (Curtis, 12:38-14:45) Dr. Harold Blum, found that a person who went through the psychoanalytic process became “more insightful, much more understanding, and a much better regulated person…the regulatory aspects of the human mind would really be in charge, instead of being overwhelmed by our passions and our darker impulses.” (Curtis 16:37)

In The Century of the Self, interviews were conducted with many people closely linked to Freud and the Menningers, as well as leading psychoanalysts.  Its credibility as a product of the BBC makes it a trustworthy source.  The information was presented attractively and the language used in the film easily accessible to the average viewer.  The use of historical video footage strongly supported the narration and interview material.  It is impressive to watch footage of 1930s and 40s irrationality, especially during the segments on Nazism.  The video captures the nationalistic fervor and unjustified violence of the time, as shown in one segment with pro-Hitler Austrians chasing Jewish people down the streets. (Curtis, 6:30) The irrationality of their behavior is clearly obvious when shown in context with the historical narrative.  I understand the Army’s concern about combat veterans returning home disturbed.  It is still a concern today, which makes me wonder why we keep “corrupting” humans with darker repressed thoughts and emotions by going to war.  Being at ease with this dark imagery and creating a well rounded individual by looking inside oneself seems purely beneficial; not only for war veterans, but every human being.  I agree with Anna Freud in that through introspection and discussion one can “conquer their inner demons.”

Even though I am certain of the hope that psychoanalysis poses, I have to agree with Dr. Owen Renik, former editor in chief of the American Psychoanalytic Association. He believes that “the profession is in a great decline” and concedes that “the decline will continue.” Renick feels that the failure of its lies in the fact that it “took on a self-perpetuating guild mentality.”  This could be because of the glut of psychoanalysts after the passing of the National Mental Health Act. I theorize that the broadened market of psychoanalysts was probably one of lesser quality or training than the “masters” that had worked in the field decades earlier.  Renick feels that psychoanalysis has lost its “spirit of open-ended inquiry (and)…orientation above all to be helpful to the patient.” I agree with him about the importance of the field and I am just as optimistic about its ability to bounce back.  Renick says it’s possible to mitigate and “reverse the decline, but it will be necessary to escape the clutches of an establishment that, unhappily, has increasingly gotten away from the original scientific enterprise…it means applying concepts scientifically to better understand patients. (Carey)

Psychoanalyst Lucy Holmes is less cynical about the field in her article Wrestling with Destiny: the Promise of Psychoanalysis. She asks, “Can knowledge save us from malevolent destiny? If we can be courageous enough to confront what we don’t know or…what we don’t want to know, can we win control over our own destiny?” Holmes believes this is the type of therapeutic potential that psychoanalysis offers.   She makes the claim that destiny exists and calls is “repetition compulsion”—a “dark power in every human being that unchecked can propel a person against his will to a tragic end.” Holmes mentions the work of LaPlanche and Pontalis, who describe this “as an ungovernable process originating in the unconscious” in which “the subject deliberately puts himself in distressing situations, thereby repeating an old experience that he does not consciously remember.” She also recalls Freud, who stated, “What is not remembered will be repeated.” Holmes believes that if left unchecked, “our fate becomes an automatic and impulsive repetition of unpleasurable situations.”  (Holmes, 44)

Holmes then transitions to the ideas of Bollas, who she felt looked at destiny in a positive manner.  Bollas believed destiny as being the “urge to articulate our true selves…the creative potential in a person’s life.”  Holmes feels that psychoanalysis exists to help an individual meet “with his destiny, to articulate his true nature.” Holmes views psychoanalysis as “a corrective emotional experience…therapeutic in its simple essence—spending time with a person who is completely focused on understanding you.” (Holmes 46-47)  Aiding in this process is a modern comprehension about the evolution of the human brain.  She describes neuroscientist Paul MacLean’s studies of brain as consisting of “three basic structures…each with “its own way of perceiving and responding to the world”…the “three brains” have evolved methods of communicating with each other.”  The more primitive brain governs mechanical and unconscious behaviors, otherwise called instinct. The second brain, or the limbic system, developed next and allowed for the senses to “operate together and create a primitive memory system.”  Holmes feels that “emotions are generated but do not become conscious here.” The relatively modern third brain, called the cerebral cortex, developed over the last one hundred thousand years as the “center of thinking and reasoning… where consciousness resides.”

The hope with psychoanalysis is that patients can “convert into language the electrical impulses pulsing up from the primitive brain.” These impulses pass through circuits in the second brain as feelings and eventually manifest themselves in the consciousness in our repetitive compulsions.  With the psychoanalytic process, “we are inviting access by the cerebral cortex to…the lower brains.”  Holmes believes the process fortifies “the young and often overpowered upper brain against the instincts and primitive feelings.”  When these impulses from the lower brain are articulated, “instincts lose their primitive power…and feelings can be felt and verbalized.” She feels that as individual analysis progresses, “communication from the lower two brains gradually becomes data, not commands…the patient can evaluate this data and then decide how she wants to deal with it…at this point, the patient takes charge of her own destiny.” (Holmes, 48)

References

Carey, Benedict. (2006, October 10). An Analyst questions the self-perpetuating side of therapy. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/10/health/psychology/10conv.html?pagewanted=all

Curtis, Adam. (Director). (2002). The Century of the self episode two [Video]. Retrieved from http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8953172273825999151#docid=-678466363224520614

Holmes, Lucy. (2007). Wrestling with destiny: the promise of psychoanalysis. Modern Psychoanalysis, 32(1). Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid=6&hid=8&sid=0992032c-d42d-41f6-bbed-a1b91f9ed2b9%40sessionmgr14

Myers, David G. (2008). Exploring psychology. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.

neat cover image found here.

Humankind Reaching For Mars

Leave a reply

Water_ice_clouds_hanging_above_Tharsis_PIA02653_black_background

For tens of thousands of years, humanity would set its sights on a reddish god which would approach Earth every two years.  Many of the thoughts associated with this observation would have, no doubt, have elicited wonder and fascination.  Spurred on by this curiosity and gifted by technological innovation, mankind would look at the god, which would eventually turn into a sphere.  Features would be noticed; moons, even.  Each discovery from our fixed position on Earth would lead to more questions about the makeup of our solar system.  Foremost, what goes on “out there”: Does life such as our own exist outside our world? The red sphere would be understood to be a planet; one of many, but one close enough and similar enough in type to that of Earth to warrant exploration.   But for all their advances, mankind was still held up by the capability of its best optics.  We had seen as much as we could with the best telescopes available.  To answer the original questions, as well as the new ones that had arisen, mankind would need to touch this planet, or at least accomplish this by a proxy presence with the wild science fiction idea of robots.  Though for all of mankind’s progress, the sheer distance between here and there would keep this red planet out of reach.   “Exploration” of our planetary neighbor would remain a foolish idea; impractical until advances in rocketry, which came as a byproduct of war.  Competition would foster technological innovation and proposals once considered fiction would now make this dream of exploration feasible.

Mars would come “closer” to humanity through a series of expensive experiments in one-upmanship.  The two rival powers of their time would embark on a “Space Race” that would introduce great feats in many fields.  The progress of mathematics, design and engineering would propel one superpower to first launching a vehicle outside of our confines.   The other power, obliged to match, would do the same.  Lesser species would make the journey before man; to test the theories of whether or not life could survive beyond our atmosphere.  Very quickly, mankind would share the view of Earth witnessed by the first artificial satellites and primate space explorers—finally, testing space for himself.  While these tests of “possibility” were being conducted, both powers kept in mind as an objective of their efforts, the exploration, and possible colonization of first the Moon, then Mars.  Because one power, the United States, could not achieve an early victory, they went after the prize of landing their men on the Moon.  However, while preparations for that endeavour were being made, both civilizations were formulating ideas for Mars.  The civilization in competition with the United States, the Soviet Union, would try first for the red planet.

The Soviet Marsnik[1] program, first launched in 1960[2], resulted in what would be the first of many failures by both the Soviet and the American space programs in their attempts at reaching Mars.  Nonetheless, either threatened or inspired by the actions of their rivals, the two programs would continue until they both saw success.  The Americans would counter the Soviets in 1964 with the Mariner probe.  While the first probe proved a dud, the Mariner 4 would complete the seven month journey to become the first manmade object to flyby Mars.  On July 14, 1965, the Mariner 4 probe sent back the first close up photographs of the red planet.[3]  A clue as to who our neighbor really was, was revealed.  Signs of impact craters were observed, dimming the hopes of some optimists who clung to the dream that life existed there, despite indications of a most negligible atmosphere.  Mars was a battered world, much like our Lunar companion.  The Mariner 9 probe would be the first to enter into orbit, and along with two Soviet probes that would arrive within a month, provide an up close visual reference of the red planet.[4]  The probes arrived in the middle of a planetary dust storm.  The images sent back when the storm subsided showed the unexpected—the gigantic volcanoes of Olympus Mons and Valles Marineris, a grand canyon stretching 4,800 kilometers. The Mariner 9 probe would map 100 percent of the Martian surface, as well as study the two moons, Phobos and Deimos.  Riverbeds would also be discovered, teasing mankind with the possibility of water (and by extension, life) elsewhere.  The probe would function for almost a year in orbit before terminating.  It still occupies an orbit[5] around the red planet, while the Soviet probes would become the first human debris on a foreign world. [6]

After a series of high profile setbacks, the Soviet program would stagnate, leaving the exploration of Mars to the hands of the Americans.  The United States would now attempt to position orbiting satellites as well as planetary landings with the Viking program.  On July 26, 1976, in their first attempt at a landing, the Americans were successful.  Experiments aimed at finding evidence of organic life were a failure, but the data collected sparked intense debate.  Among the many photographs taken by Viking 1 and the subsequent lander, Viking 2, revealed clear imagery of frost on the Martian surface—possible evidence of water.  Along with these photographs, many soil samples would be taken and analyzed robotically and entry science[7] would be essentially perfected during the Viking missions.  The Viking 1 lander would continue to function for over six years, sending valuable information about the Martian soil back to Earth. The orbiter would last almost four years, photographing the surface of the planet and its two moons.  While not as long lived as is sister orbiter/lander, the Viking 2 mission would be successful in its own right, providing a plethora of information to supplement the growing reservoir of Mars data.[8]

It is important to note that while there were great triumphs in human ingenuity, there were also devastating setbacks for both the Soviet and the American space programs that threatened the future of their Mars projects.  So much so that there appears to be a “Mars Curse,” dating as far back as the first Marsnik 1 attempt. Nearly 60 percent of the missions have either failed or have been only partially successful.  The Soviets flew only two orbiters that were successful, and none of their landing attempts succeeded. Countries that would enter the space race late would lose missions as well.  Though mostly triumphant in their attempts, the United States has had its share of high profile and costly failures.  When the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA) returned to their Mars objectives in the early 1990’s after focusing on the Space Shuttle program, they had a demoralizing failure in the Mars Observer Mission.   Another critical failure would follow because of careless math, and the public image of the agency would (and the tax dollars they consume) be called into question.

On an ambitious return to the red planet, the Observer mission was to spend nearly a year in orbit studying the climate and geoactivity of Mars.[9] The satellite was inexplicably lost three days prior to orbital insertion.  Communication was never regained, and the fate of the Observer remains unknown.  The total cost of the Mars Observer mission, including development, construction, launch, and ground support was estimated between $800-$900 million dollars.[10]  A less costly, but equally disappointing mission, the Mars Climate Orbiter, was carried out by NASA nearly five years after the Observer incident.  This is likely the most embarrassing mistake of the space program.  The failure of a contractor to use metric units in their trajectory models caused the Orbiter to burn up in the Martian atmosphere. The models were constructed using imperial measurements of feet instead of industry standard meters.  These setbacks would result in wide ranging managerial and technical actions throughout the organization.[11] Although detrimental to the image of the agency, the mistakes were learned from; NASA and its Mars program would push forward with exciting new projects and an increased robotic presence on the red planet.

Looking for a return to glory after setbacks in both the Mars and Shuttle programs, the Mars Pathfinder program would deliver just that.  The mission’s primary objective was to demonstrate the feasibility of low-cost landings on the Martian surface.   On the Fourth of July, 1997, the probe delivered a stationary lander and a surface rover, named Sojourner, which would explore the Ares Vallis.[12]   Knowledge of this area, a valley thought to be carved by liquids—maybe even water—would be crucial to mankind’s understanding of the red planet.  The data collected would suggest that three Billion years ago Mars had large lakes along its equator.  Volcanic activity spurred atmospheric density, which would cause the lakes to overfill and create channels that would go on to create new lakes.  Gigantic floods ran downhill, carving a deep canyon. Rocks eroded from the canyon walls were milled into smaller fractions and carried in the running water where they were deposited into the valley.  This has changed the preexisting notion that the Martian surface was too arid or cold to support liquid water during that time period.  In the search for life, past or present, outside of Earth, these ancient lakebeds and channels would be an ideal place to look.[13]

Building on the success of the Sojourner rover mission, NASA would again achieve victory with their next project.  The rovers Spirit and Opportunity would be launched in 2003.  Together, the tiny robotic representatives of humanity would explore over 17 miles of the Martian surface.  Originally, they were designed to cover only 600 meters[14], but to this day, Spirit and Opportunity have been hard at work analyzing soil and rocks.  The hope is that they can find clues to the history and existence of water on Mars.  The rovers have braved inhospitable terrain and climate, weathering out massive dust storms that threatened the capabilities of their solar panels.  More recently, Spirit became stuck, but the machine and its programmers pulled out another trick and now Spirit functions as a stationary science platform.  Opportunity has defied the odds, trekking along the Martian surface, far after its expected lifespan.  This success has come at a price, however, with a cost of over $800,000 million dollars for the 90 day primary mission alone.  When the rovers outlived expectations, the decision to keep the mission alive comes at a cost of $20 million dollars a year since 2003.[15]

Our understanding of “the universe” now reaches far beyond our sky, our solar system, and our galaxy.  Still today, Mars is considered maybe too far away. The distances of space are still difficult to overcome. The challenge now, as was at the beginning of Martian expeditions, is funding.  Concerns hinge on the practicality of a project that takes billions of dollars yet yields no near term rewards; the projects planned could take decades to complete.  These projects are still part of a larger NASA vision that requires funding and these other programs force the Mars planners to compete for ever scant federal dollars.  There is not a consensus on what the main objective of the space program should be. [16]  Programs that cover old ground could perhaps be left to private enterprise, freeing NASA to continue their exploratory aims, rather than being a mostly maintenance organization.   In the midst of a global economic crisis, dollars spent on faraway planets can be argued a wasteful expense.  It would be necessary to argue the importance of a Mars program, and that argument rests solely on the premise that on Mars, information and resources exist that we cannot get here.

Works Cited:

ESA: Mars Express.  “Ancient floods on Mars: Iani Chaos and Ares Vallis.” June 1, 2005. (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEMIKO0DU8E_0.html

Isbell, Douglas and Don Savage.  Mars Climate Orbiter Failure Board Reaches Results.”  November 10, 1999  (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msp98/news/mco991110.html

Klaes, Larry.  The Astronomical  Society of the Atlantic.  “The Rocky Soviet Road to Mars.” Volume 1, Number 3.  October, 1989.

MSNBC.  “NASA Extends Mars Rover Mission.”  October 16, 2007.  (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21327647/

National Aeronautics and Space Administration.  “Solar System Exploration: Mission to Mars: Mariner 9.” (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/profile.cfm?MCode=Mariner_09

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Jet Propulsion Laboratory.  “Mars Exploration Rover Mission.  March 12, 2010.  (Accessed April 26, 2010)  http://marsrover.nasa.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/20100324b.html

National Space Science Data Center, “Marsnik 1,” (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/masterCatalog.do?sc=MARSNK1

National Space Science Data Center, “The Mariner Mars Missions,” (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mars/mariner.html

National Space Science Data Center, “Mariner 9,” (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraftDisplay.do?id=1971-051A

National Space Science Data Center, “Viking Mission to Mars,” (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/viking.html

Wilford, John Noble.  New York Times. “U.S. Launches a Spacecraft On a Mars Trip.” September 26, 1992 (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://www.nytimes.com/1992/09/26/us/us-launches-a-spacecraft-on-a-mars-trip.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

O’Neill, Ian.  Universe Today.  “”The Mars Curse”: Why Have So Many Missions Failed.” March 22, 2008 (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://www.universetoday.com/2008/03/22/the-mars-curse-why-have-so-many-missions-failed/

[1] Marsnik is a blend of the words Mars and Sputnik (the first Soviet satellite); the word does not exist in the Russian language.

[2] National Space Science Data Center, “Marsnik 1,” (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/masterCatalog.do?sc=MARSNK1

[3] National Space Science Data Center, “The Mariner Mars Missions,” (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mars/mariner.html

[4] National Aeronautics and Space Administration.  “Solar System Exploration: Mission to Mars: Mariner 9.” (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/profile.cfm?MCode=Mariner_09

[5] National Space Science Data Center, “Mariner 9,” (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraftDisplay.do?id=1971-051A

[6] Klaes, Larry.  The Astronomical  Society of the Atlantic.  “The Rocky Soviet Road to Mars.” Volume 1, Number 3.  October, 1989.

[7] The art of entering an atmosphere and landing a vehicle.

[8] National Space Science Data Center, “Viking Mission to Mars,” (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/viking.html

[9] Wilford, John Noble.  New York Times. “U.S. Launches a Spacecraft On a Mars Trip.” September 26, 1992 (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://www.nytimes.com/1992/09/26/us/us-launches-a-spacecraft-on-a-mars-trip.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

[10] O’Neill, Ian.  Universe Today.  “”The Mars Curse”: Why Have So Many Missions Failed.” March 22, 2008 (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://www.universetoday.com/2008/03/22/the-mars-curse-why-have-so-many-missions-failed/

[11] Isbell, Douglas and Don Savage.  Mars Climate Orbiter Failure Board Reaches Results.”  November 10, 1999  (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msp98/news/mco991110.html

[12] ESA: Mars Express.  “Ancient floods on Mars: Iani Chaos and Ares Vallis.” June 1, 2005. (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEMIKO0DU8E_0.html

[13] Sanjeev Gupta, Nicholas Warner, Jung-Rack Kim, Shih-Yuan Lin, Jan Peter Muller. “Hesperian equatorial lakes in Ares Vallis as evidence for transient warm conditions on Mars.” Geology, January 2010; Vol. 38, pp. 71-74

[14] National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Jet Propulsion Laboratory.  “Mars Exploration Rover Mission.  March 12, 2010.  (Accessed April 26, 2010)  http://marsrover.nasa.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/20100324b.html

[15] MSNBC.  “NASA Extends Mars Rover Mission.”  October 16, 2007.  (Accessed April 26, 2010) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21327647/

[16] Leary, Warren E.  New York Times. “Committee on Space Is Optimistic On Devising Plan to Reach Mars.”  February 12, 2004

04/26/2010

Managing Space Administration

Leave a reply

?????????

NASA is more than astronauts.

We are scientists, engineers, IT specialists, human resources specialists, accountants, writers, technicians and many, many other kinds of people.[1]

**

The space agency best known to the public as ‘NASA’—National Aeronautics & Space Administration—was brought into existence by the United States Congress with the passage of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958. Congress created NASA to research matters related to flight, both within and outside the Earth’s atmosphere. While pioneering space/flight research, it was also developed “to ensure that United States’ space activities were peaceful and beneficial to mankind.” NASA is technically an independent civilian space agency under the purview of the executive branch of government, created for ‘special services’ in the ‘national interest’. Similar to a cabinet-level organization, the agency’s administrator gets nominated by the President and then must be confirmed by the Senate.[2]

 “…I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish…” (President John F. Kennedy) [3]

Presidents have set long term policy directives; achievable & ambitious, grand & impossible. NASA establishes goals, objectives, and implementing strategies to accommodate these policies while also pursuing directives to meet the needs of external customers.[4] The agency proposes an annual budget, which gets incorporated into the President’s annual budget and submitted to Congress for appropriations. “NASA’s success in carrying out its mission and achieving presidential directives is highly dependent upon funding from Congress” [5] and vice versa, the agency’s rate of success (or failure) subject to their scrutiny and tightening of the purse strings.

As a “civil service employees responsible for conducting aerospace research and development, managing resources, and operating the various NASA facilities,”[6] the agency “must have an infrastructure to deliver goods and services and account for the money spent…it requires an enormous work force (over 18,000 employees and 40,000 contractors) and a large budget ($17B, FY 2008)…they need people to develop and build new technologies, assemble and test spacecraft and their components, train astronauts/pilots and provide mission support services. With each task, there are workers to employ and pay, contractors to hire and supplies to purchase.”[7]

The organization incorporates both vertical and lateral structures within two primary levels of management responsibility. The first is Agency management, headed by the Administrator and chiefs (and deputy chiefs) of staff; followed by Strategic Enterprise management, of the ‘endeavors’ and ‘operations’ of the agency, which includes facilities and programs. “Internal integration is ensured through a number of management councils and boards that coordinate activities and planning among the individual Enterprises and between the Agency and Strategic Enterprise management levels… on critical topics that cross organizational lines.”

“Agency management provides Strategic Enterprise definition and is responsible for cross-Enterprise efficiency, synergy, investment, performance assessment, and resource allocation…This management level is responsible for Agency leadership, managing across the Strategic Enterprises, and developing NASA’s strategy (“what, why, and for whom”).” It serves as the intermediary between the Agency and stakeholders; the Presidency, Congress, and external. “It is the external focal point for accountability, communication, and liaison; the Administrator is the Agency’s highest level decision maker, providing clarity to the Agency’s vision and serving as the source of internal leadership to achieve NASA’s mission.” [8] The Administrator’s Office (and apparatus) is headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Office oversees all aspects of NASA operations. It “includes the administrator, deputy administrator, associate deputy administrator, associate administrator, assistant associate administrator, chief of staff and deputy chief of staff/White House liaison. “

The Administrator’s office also has a support staff, responsible for much of the Agency’s management and performance. This includes the offices of the Chief Safety and Mission Assurance Officer, Program Analysis and Evaluation, Program and Institutional Integration, and Inspector General.[9] Other officials within the Office of the Administrator “include Chief Engineer, Chief Information Officer, Chief Scientist, and the Chief Technologist…“These offices overall strategic direction and policies for the organization and establish the Agency’s relative priorities, associated budget guidelines, and performance assessment.”[10] The Administrator’s Office also receives independent advice and assessment from several NASA Advisory Committees, including: Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, NASA Advisory Council, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Public Administration; with the aim of improving Agency safety, efficiency, and accountability.[11]

Under the Administrator’s purview, the Strategic Enterprise (mission aspect) of NASA consists of four principle organizations called mission directorates: Aeronautics, Exploration Science, and Technology.[12] The bulk of the Agency’s employees and contractors work in this arm of NASA, and jobs are mostly related to the technicalities of high-stakes research. 60% of NASA employment is characterized by Professional, Engineering and Scientific specialists with mid-level or advanced degrees. Of the remainder, approximately 25% are employed as technical writers, or in public relations. Analysts, administrative, labor, and technical support/specialists round out the remainder of the operations, in positions related to infrastructure maintenance and quality assurance.[13]

The process of Strategic Planning enables alignment between the NASA Strategic Plan with the Enterprise Strategic Plans, the Agency’s institutional capabilities, and its functional requirements and initiatives. This process provides the direction for all Agency efforts and forms the basis for strategic (5 to 25 years) and tactical (1 to 5 years) decision making, resource allocation, and capital investment. (1998 NASA Policy Directive) [14]

NASA’s approach to Strategic Planning establishes the long-term direction of the organization “in the context of a vision of the future, organizationally unique mission, and a specific set of goals, objectives, and policies developed in response to customer requirements, external mandates, and the external and internal environments.” The expectations developed by the institution are to be Specific, Measureable, Aggressive but attainable, Results-oriented, and Time-bound.[15] The organization must also comply with the Requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), which attempts to improve performance in governmental agencies by requiring these Federal agencies to implement longer term Strategic Planning. This is done to “effectively measure program outcomes and to systematically hold them accountable for achieving program results.” This approach is initiated with a series of pilot projects, and these projects “set program goals, measure program performance against those goals, and report publicly on their progress…and aims to improve delivery by providing new focus on results, service quality, and customer satisfaction.”[16]

The Implementation Planning phase of NASA’s work encompasses “detailed performance planning and proposed resource allocation to implement the goals, objectives, and other organizational initiatives” that were identified during the Strategic Planning. It helps to ensure Agency-wide alignment of strategy and cooperation of supporting organizations. Implementation Planning works within of the processes established in the Strategic Plan, and it’s responsible for “the commensurate milestones, resource requirements, schedules, and performance criteria at both the program and task levels.[17] The goals primary goals are to Provide Aerospace Products and Capabilities, Generate Knowledge, and Communicate that knowledge.[18]

In execution, NASA is expected to ‘Crosscut’, as a Quality Assurance/Control, while it fulfills its mandate of delivering products, research, technical, and other scientific expertise to its customers. These Crosscutters “work at all levels within the Agency to ensure that products and services are effective and delivered efficiently.”[19] Performance is rated by NASA Managers using Agency-established measures to evaluate progress in meeting the goals identified in the Strategic Plan. These measures are uniform between both the Agency & the Enterprise. The goals and objectives established in the Enterprise Strategic Plans are also “aligned with the Administrator’s Performance Agreement with the President.”

Personnel goals are delivered to the Agency through the Associate Administrator for Human Resources and Education. Their office “designs, develops, and administers appropriate levels of training for all levels of managers and employees on both the general principles of strategic management. They also convey to employees and contractors “specific details regarding GPRA, NASA’s Strategic Management Process, the NASA Strategic Plan, performance planning and measurement, and the role each individual plays in supporting the implementation of strategy.”[20] Human Resources also “ensures that employees, and the teams on which they participate, are rewarded through bonuses, promotions, and development opportunities. These are provided for meeting or exceeding: Excellent performance in the implementation of NASA strategies; Contributions to the achievement of the goals and objectives contained in the Agency Strategic and Implementation Plans; Encouragement and implementation of agency change and an increase in process efficiencies; and Explicit contributions to the identification and satisfaction of customer needs.”[21]

**

“NASA, the world’s leader in space and aeronautics, is always seeking outstanding scientists, engineers, and other talented professionals to carry forward the great discovery process that its mission demands. Creativity. Ambition. Teamwork. A sense of daring. And a probing mind. That’s what it takes to join NASA, one of the best places to work in the Federal Government.” (NASA Career Webpage)

NASA describes its workforce as “consisting of Federal civil service employees, students, contractors, university researchers, and many others, representative of all levels of America’s rich diversity.”[22] NASA notes that their application process has been “specifically developed to ensure that (they) only ask you for the information (which they) absolutely need to evaluate…qualifications and eligibility. “In order to apply, you only need to submit your resume and answer the screening questions and supplemental information.”   The application and resume screening is conducted by a recruitment software program, called STARS, which uses a commercial rating tool named Resumix. The software “uses artificial intelligence, and an enormous grammar base, to “read” resumes, extract information, and rate resumes in ‘context’,” after which, they are “reviewed by a Human Resources specialist before referral decisions are made…to make sure that referred applicants meet job qualifications.” [23] NASA also gives ‘special consideration’ to applicants who qualify with ‘10-point preference’. These people are individuals who, “as a result of military service or as a result of their connection to someone with military service, are entitled to special preference in the Federal hiring process.” Disabled veterans, spouses of disabled veterans, widows/widowers of deceased veterans, and mothers of deceased veterans are also included.[24]

‘Pathways Programs’, signed into law by a 2011 Executive Order, provide an avenue for students and recent graduates to be considered for Federal employment. The Pathways Programs include the Internship Program, the Recent Graduates Program (RGP), and the Presidential Management Fellows (PMF); all designed “to provide clear paths to Federal employment for students and recent graduates…by replacing the Student Temporary Employment Program (STEP) and the Student Career Experience Program (SCEP), and enhancing the Presidential Management Fellows (PMF) Program.”[25] Much of the NASA team “consists of the numerous contractor companies located both at NASA facilities and throughout the world.” While the in-house hiring is standardized, “each of the contractor companies handles their own application process and hiring” which must work within the NASA parameters.  Members of a uniformed service of the United States apply for work with the agency (of any variety) through their service branch.

“What’s in it for the workers?” NASA appears as an organization which balances the many trades, skills, and personalities of its institution, and gives them a chance to participate in a large, worthwhile human endeavor. Far more than just a bunch of astronauts and rockets, NASA is a ‘machine’ of skill and applied expertise, ‘a small city’ of diverse background and experience, and ‘a bureaucracy’ which governs a strict, but quality achieving mandate.

[1] http://www.nasa.gov/about/career/index.html

[2] http://science.howstuffworks.com/nasa.htm

[3] President John F. Kennedy, “Special Message to the Congress on Urgent National Needs,” May 25, 1961

[4] http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codez/strahand/planning.htm

[5] http://science.howstuffworks.com/nasa.htm

[6] http://nasajobs.nasa.gov/jobs/occupations.htm

[7] http://science.howstuffworks.com/nasa.htm

[8] http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codez/strahand/roles.htm

[9] http://science.howstuffworks.com/nasa6.htm

[10] http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codez/strahand/roles.htm

[11] http://science.howstuffworks.com/nasa6.htm

[12] http://www.nasa.gov/about/highlights/what_does_nasa_do.html

[13] http://nasajobs.nasa.gov/jobs/occupations.htm

[14] http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/nsp/NSPTOC.html

[15] http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codez/strahand/planning.htm

[16] Ibid.

[17] http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codez/strahand/implemen.htm

[18] Ibid.

[19] http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codez/strahand/execute.htm

[20] http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codez/strahand/perform.htm

[21] http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codez/strahand/perform.htm

[22] http://nasajobs.nasa.gov/careers_lp.htm

[23] http://nasajobs.nasa.gov/NASAStars/about_NASA_STARS/overview.htm

[24] https://resume.nasa.gov/10pt.html

[25] http://nasajobs.nasa.gov/studentopps/employment/default.htm

Galileo: Beyond the Dogma

Leave a reply
A detail from Cristiano Banti's Galileo Before the Inquisition (1857).

A detail from Cristiano Banti’s Galileo Before the Inquisition (1857).

In 1616, when it was formally declared heretical, it didn’t matter that heliocentricity was true and could be proven.  The scientific community of the time was biased by popular opinion, and did little to challenge archaic beliefs with persistent scientific inquiry.  Galileo believed that science reconciled with the Bible; that facts should be discovered, and then analyzed and interpreted based upon observation.  A devout follower of Christianity, Galileo felt that “the Bible shows the ways to go to Heaven, not the way the heavens go.”[1]  He thought that the facts of what he had seen through the telescope could not be denied, and expressed the challenges his ideas faced in a letter to the Grand Duchess Christina of Tuscany in 1615. He shows regret at the controversy his observations had caused when writing about the trouble he had “stirred” amongst other professors, proclaiming “as if I had placed these things in the sky with my own hands to upset nature and overturn the sciences.”  Galileo felt that scientists showed “a greater fondness for their own opinions than for truth” and felt that if they had just “cared to look for themselves” truth would be discovered “by their own senses.”[2]

 

There was a tendency for rational argument to be dismissed in Galileo’s era, in favor of old beliefs which clung to Aristotelian ideas and a “sprinkling” of church dogma.  Galileo felt that his critics brought “vain arguments” against him, mixing in passages from the Bible “which they had failed to understand properly, and which were ill suited to their purposes.” He points out that “these men have resolved to fabricate a shield for their fallacies out of the mantle of pretend religion and the authority of the Bible.” These poor arguments won debates because they did little to challenge the power system of the Catholic Church.  Instead of adequately countering his viewpoint and critique on Aristotle and Ptolemy, Galileo’s scientific contemporaries, as well as those of the Church, polarize themselves, spitefully, against “arguments that they do not understand and have not even listened to.”  His ideas were hardly given a chance, and “for deceitful purposes,” they were proclaimed as being contrary to the bible. He felt that his idea would live on, because it was the truth, and that truth would have “adherents,” contrary to what his critics believed.  For the issue to be effectively erased, the Church would have to “ban the whole science of astronomy” and “forbid men to look at the heavens, in order that they might not see Mars and Venus” while they changed positions in the sky.[3] As a pious man, he felt that “the Bible can never speak untruth—whenever its true meaning is understood.”[4]  He was not out to disprove Christianity, he was seeking to share with those around him, the discoveries that reaffirmed his faith.

 

Galileo did not see his work as besmirching that of God, who wasn’t “any less excellently revealed in Nature’s actions[5] than in the sacred statements of the Bible.”[6]  Centuries later, Pope John Paul II would echo the idea that “science and religion are both gifts from God” when issuing a posthumous apology for the treatment of Galileo during the Inquisition.  Unlike Popes of an earlier time, John Paul II believed, much as Galileo did, that faith can coexist alongside discoveries in the natural world.  He labeled the “Galileo case” a “regrettable past event of history” that “undermined the good understanding between the Church and the scientific community.  The Pope called for an “objective review” of the past controversy in that it could “do honor to the truth of the faith and of science and open the doors for future collaboration.”[7]  Seeing both as essential, he stated “that science and religion are at the service of the human community.” Both, in his opinion, would do well to shed the mutual suspicion while aspiring “to establish a constructive and cordial relationship.” The Pope believed that “the light of reason, which made science possible, and the light of Revelation, which makes faith possible, both emanate from a single source.” He sees them as harmonizing and by their “very nature,” he claims, they are designed to coexist, “never on a collision course.”  He saw science as a “gift,” a precious tool which helps “the natural capacity of the mind to grasp reality by means of rigorous and logical procedures.”  John Paul II makes the claim that any time the two are in discord, it is because of “an unfortunate pathological condition,”[8] as can be assumed the case in Galileo’s time.

 

The concern in the 1600s was that ideas such as Galileo’s were “dangerous,” and they can be.  The evolutionary tract of humanity’s awareness of the natural world has led to sinister creations like the atomic bomb, the dangers of which John Paul II addressed. Just as dangerous is the adherence to dogmatic biases, and although humanity is far removed from executions by burning, strict convictions continue to blind many, stifling the John Paul II’s natural “trajectory” of both science and faith.  The work of natural philosophers such as Galileo and today’s scientists, according to John Paul II, is meant to go together with the work of theologians and priests for the protection of all and the benefit of both; both science and faith, he expressed “must take on a precise ethical responsibility in regard to their relationships and applications…the stakes are too high to be taken lightly.”  He saw it as “necessary to be tireless in promoting a scientific culture capable…of serving the universal good.”[9]  Past shortsightedness and the failure to understand science should be learned from, the former Pope believed. Critical observation and reason, along with faith, in their proper dosages, fosters and nurtures a sound and happy society, while dogmatic subscription sets back and stifles the natural order of existence.

Bibliography

Coffin, Judith and Robert Stacey. Western Civilization, Volume Two.  15th ed. New York:  W.W. Norton & Company, 2005.

Modern History Sourcebook: Galileo Galilei: Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina of Tuscany, 1615.  Hosted at: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/galileo-tuscany.html (accessed January 5, 2010)

Pope John Paul II.  The Resolution: Science and Faith are both Gifts from God.  1993.  Hosted at: http://mycommnet.blackboard.com/webct/urw/lc1419885091071.tp1566710861121//RelativeResourceManager?contentID=1666442825081 (accessed January 5, 2010)

 

[1] Judith Coffin and Robert Stacey. Western Civilization, Volume Two.  15th ed  (New York:  W.W. Norton & Company, 2005), 584.

[2] Modern History Sourcebook: Galileo Galilei: Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina of Tuscany, 1615. Hosted at: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/galileo-tuscany.html (accessed January 5, 2010)

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] The study of “nature’s actions,” being Galileo’s life’s work.

[6] Modern History Sourcebook: Galileo.

[7] Pope John Paul II.  The Resolution: Science and Faith are both Gifts from God.  1993.  Hosted at: http://mycommnet.blackboard.com/webct/urw/lc1419885091071.tp1566710861121//RelativeResourceManager?contentID=1666442825081 (accessed January 5, 2010)

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

Daniel Malo

Western Civ 2

01/05/2010

 

M13 Globular Cluster

Leave a reply

a

The star cluster, M13, is a well known among astronomers for being the most prominent globular cluster in the Northern Hemisphere.  It is sometimes called the “Great globular cluster in Hercules,” as it is located in the Hercules constellation.  Similar to other globular clusters, M13 is a spherical assortment of stars orbiting a galactic core.  The stars are held close to the center because of strong gravitational forces.  The strong gravity causes the spherical shape, as stars are bound to the high stellar densities in the core.  Globular clusters typically contain hundreds of thousands of old stars. These old stars are low-metal, Population II stars; most of their metallic material was used up long ago in the creation of other stars.  No new stars are made in these in M13, and it is assumed that this cluster, like other globular clusters, is among the oldest objects in the galaxy.

The M13 cluster is over 25,000 light-years away from Earth, located in the right “armpit” of the constellation Hercules.  It lies about a third of the way down a line drawn from Eta to Zeta Herculis.  M13 spans well over 145 light-years, containing at least several thousand, but possibly over one million stars.  The majority of these stars are concentrated into a core region with a diameter of nearly 100 light-years.  The stars in the center are almost 500 times more concentrated than in those in the solar neighborhood, leaving the average distance between stars inside the cluster to only be about 1 light-year.  Estimates of the age of the cluster range from 14-24 billion years. The M13 cluster contains a young blue star (or a ‘blue straggler’), which is considered rare for a cluster that old. It is speculated that the star, Barnard 29, was captured by the cluster. The brighter stars in the cluster are red giants.  The galaxy NGC 6207 can also be seen in the vicinity of M13.  Its luminosity is over 300,000 times that of the Sun, and the sun would likely not be visible from M13.

The first recorded observation of M13 occurred by accident in 1714 by Edmond Halley. Halley found another cluster, the much larger Omega Centauri, thirty-seven years earlier. M13 has a small visual magnitude, making it difficult to see from the Earth, especially when the Moon is visible, or in areas affected by light pollution. With the best instruments of his time, Halley noted that the “Nebula in Hercules…is but a little Patch, but it shews it self to the naked Eye, when the Sky is serene and the Moon absent.”  When observed with small telescopes, it appears as a misty patch with a denser center.  When M13 was catalogued by Charles Messier in 1764, with a four and a half foot telescope, he called it “A nebula without a star,” unaware of the hundreds of thousands of stars beyond the visual reach of his Newtonian telescope.  When William Herschel observed it twenty-three years later on a twenty foot telescope, he would note that that M13 “is a most beautiful cluster of stars.”

On November 16, 1974, a frequency modulated radio wave was directed at the cluster.  From the Arecibo radio telescope, a single beam was aimed at M13 to mark the telescopes reopening after a remodeling.  The logic behind it was that M13 contained a large number of stars, thus increasing the odds of receipt.  Other factors for choosing M13 as a destination for the message, also weighed into the decision, the foremost being that it was in the sky at the time and place of the ceremony. The three minute binary message of ones and zeroes was written by Dr. Frank Drake of Cornell University and Carl Sagan.  The message contained a good deal of information relating to humanity’s understanding of math and the makeup and disbursement of the human species, as well as representations of the Solar System.  Rather than an outright attempt at interspecies contact, the message was more a demonstration of the capabilities of the new technology.

 

 

M31 Details:

NGC-6205 = M13

Dreyer’s description: !! glob. cl. , eB, vRi, vgeCM, st 11…; = M13

Cross Identifications: GC 4230, h 1968. Hercules Globular Cluster; Halley (1714), Bode 30; BD +36 2768

visual magnitude: 5.9

apparent diameter: 23′

actual diameter: 165 light-years

distance: 25,000 light-years

position: R.A. 16h 41.7m, Dec. +36° 28′

 

13

Works Cited

 

http://www.lafterhall.com/atk16_m13_sv80sf5_deep_highpass_005.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Arecibo_message.png

http://seds.org/messier/Mdes/dm013.html

http://seds.org/Messier/glob.html

http://www.physics.utah.edu/~cassiday/p1080/lec06.html

3/8/10

The Conquest – [Historical Fiction]

Leave a reply

The meeting of Moctezuma II and Cortés: detail from a folding-screen mural painted by Roberto Cueva del Río (1976)

Foreboding and Omens

It has been said that the native peoples of this land witnessed a flaming tongue of fire, lasting a full year—beginning ten years prior to the date of our arrival on this new earth. This carried the effect of omens upon the people who witnessed it as a sight portending a radical change of events. Accompanying the comet were critically placed lightning strikes, meteors from the sky, and the boiling and flooding of the great lake. Some thought the gods brought the comets here to smite their enemies in the hills, but the majority thought themselves accursed, haunted by the wail of women, crying “we are about to go forever, O my children!”  Dreamers told their great king, “do not be troubled in your heart for what we are about to tell you…In our dreams, we mothers, saw a mighty river enter the doors of your royal palace… it ripped up the walls from their foundation…until nothing was left standing.” This flood took the temples and caused the people to flee for the surrounding hills. The king, greatly displeased, cast them in jail to starve to death, slowly, for relaying their vision.

The great king of the native peoples called for the jailing of all who prophesied any dark vision, for its reality come true. He ordered his jailers to tear down the houses and “kill their wives and children… all their possessions are to be destroyed.” This was mercilessly done, and the corpses dragged through the street, and from then on, there was no more prophecy. The king never smiled again, it is said, and he secluded himself to private chambers, and attempted to find out through his most trusted advisors, who it was that had come to their land and where they were from. He commissioned a painting from a witness, secretly, to depict the encounter with our peoples, and it presented as a galleon, bearing white men, bearded, with swords. Further into his frenzied inquiry, other symbols turned up fish-men, cyclops’s, and beings half man, half snake, but none appeared like the image with the galleon. He came to be told of an old man who could answer his questions, and he summoned the old man for his testimony and papers.
The old man spoke of mounted, armor clad people of a great wooden house on the water. These men were white and bearded, and brought with them horses and other variety of beasts unfamiliar to these peoples. According to the old man, these foreigners came to the shores to possess these lands, multiply their numbers, and claim the gold, silver and precious stones of the earth. He presented the king another image from his ancestors, one similar to the painting he commissioned before, depicting Spaniards in hats. This shocked the king, who wept and told the old man that these foreigners were just here, in their country, only a few days ago, from lands east. The king attempted to comfort himself, saying that he paid them tribute and asked them to leave—an order which they obeyed. The old man, wiser than the king, informed him, that it is possible that they came and went, but within two or three years, these strangers will return. “Their coming was meant only to find a convenient way to return…Do not believe them: they will not go that far.”

 

The Siege and fall of Tenochtitlan

On the third year, the prophecy of the old man was fulfilled. After unloading their wooden houses on the water, the Spaniards quickly sought alliances with natives dispossessed by the king, and the king was forced to form alliances where he could. He sent messengers to the lands around him to warn of the newcomers: “Montezuma, the Master of Mexico, sends us with orders to report to our brothers the strange people who have come and taken us by surprise.” The messengers would describe the beasts in armor, horse and human, and the treachery of another tribe which turned against them in battle. The chieftains of the neighboring peoples would thank the king for the information, but resisted offering their men to fight these intruders. The advisors of the chieftains asked: “What shall we do? This message is serious.” However, seeing it as a trick to steal lands and conquer them through treachery, the chieftains dismissed the messengers. “Let the strangers, kill the Mexicans because for many days they have not lived right.” Besides, their gods proclaimed that the city of the Mexicans would never be destroyed.

Soon, the peoples of the land were bleeding from the bowels, and suffering the hardship of smallpox, which ran rampant throughout the land, it killed many: princes, priests, and the ordinary person. The Great Rash, struck before the intruder, lasting sixty days, and when the population began their recuperation, the Spanish arrived. The slaughter was immense, but the Spaniards were, at first, repelled. The kings had captives taken and herded to Yacacolco, where one by one, they were sacrificed at the Mexican alter. Spaniards suffered first, with their heads winding up on poles, along with the heads of their horses. Still, after the sacrifices, the people of the land suffered greatly, and large numbers died of hunger, brought about by famine. A meteor would portend the fate of the city, in the darkest nights of the siege, and it is near this point, when the myth began that these peoples saw themselves and their king, as lesser “to the gods, the Spaniards.” The Spaniards then set to acquiring the spoils of their victory, stopping people by force, for their precious stone and metal. Robbing the people by force, of their possessions and beautiful women, and scarring any capable boy still left into errand servitude, branded at the cheek.

The leader of these men, Cortés, first marched through Texcoco, and provisioned and quartered his troops there. He constructed boats for the conquest of the lake, and made allies, and then made his move for Tenochtitlan. He positioned his men at the crucial causeways that led to the island city, and battered the city both by water and land. The people defended their water supply from their springs of Chapultepec, and bravely formed barricades to block the Spaniards entrance to the city. They defended from rooftops. But alas, the Mexicans would be driven out, escaping by night in the shallow parts of the great lake, in depths higher than the chest of most. The fighting had concluded, but for random skirmish or shout. The Spaniards had conquered the city, and when and with the remaining native people in the throes of smallpox and starvation, passed on, the conquest of the Mexicans was complete, and the king and peoples scattered far beyond the hills.

Burying the White Gods

This total devastation was, of course, seen as the act of gods by some of the Mexicans. But, these were not the actions of gods they were the doings of men, with their beasts, tactics and mode of warfare, new to these peoples, and many of them understood this well. The Cartas of Cortés may suggest a grand number of things, perhaps that his conquest of this land and its inhabitants were done for your majesty, on behalf of the faith, or for the noblest of reasons. Others will no doubt write the same in our time, of varying prose. The great fear is that in the future, those looking to describe the fall of the Tenochtitlan will have, solely, the Spaniards record to rely upon, for they completely burned or otherwise obliterated the language and symbols of the people they conquered. The record of these men have them poised to stand as heroes through eternity, however it is the nature of men to aggrandize their exploits.

Contemporaries will also be quick to describe the deeds as ‘godlike’, and then weakly associate that these people saw their conquerors as gods, from the awesomeness of the power they wrought, because that has become the popular rumor.  Though “these men are not gods,” this topic will never go away, having been let loose upon the imagination of mankind. The characters and narrative will continue to embellish themselves, as new ‘witnesses’ write into history, that which they heard third- or fourth-hand. As well, the words of informants and their interpreters can never well describe the events, in part from biases and preconceived notion. The conquest’s best description can only be told contaminated and partly ineffable, as translations which have gone through many iterations on its way to print. These interpreters of events did not have their interviews or conversations with the king, yet they pretend to know and make assumptions on his sorrow and anguish.

The literature and history of the future will suggest that Montezuma should have read into the signs and omens witnessed by his people, and prepare for the Spaniards by the insights they could have provided, rather than punish them cruelly. In his fear of what was to be, he himself may have imbued the power of god against him, but never forget that it was the conquest of men and the notions of empire, power, and wealth—of the Spaniards—which delivered destruction to these people. Cortés was not Quetzalcoatl, nor were his men divinely elements conducting the work of a higher deity. All of this perpetrated and employed by ruthless and disease carrying men, white-skinned and bearded—not a single god among them.

 

Westinghouse: The Riveter

Leave a reply

We_Can_Do_It!
More people in the modern era have seen the iconic “Rosie the Riveter” poster, than when it was originally released. Although the image now carries a feminist connotation, Dr. Gwen Sharp, in her review of “Visual Rhetoric Representing Rosie the Riveter: Myth and Misconception” conveys that the origin of the image was as an internal Westinghouse propaganda piece. Its beginning, according James Kimble and Lester Olson, was in a commissioned series of images and messages, shared in production facilities to soften labor issues. The 1940’s labor unions struggled with the controversies of communism, discrimination and red-baiting. Kimble and Olson feel that the posters were created to stabilize the mood of the workforce from those disruptive sentiments. They find that the modern understanding of the image is grounded in myth, and that the poster’s purpose wasn’t necessarily to reflect women’s empowerment, or to encourage women into the workforce.
“The image is widely seen as a symbol of women’s empowerment and a sign of major gender transformations that occurred during the 1940s. The assumption of current viewers of the image is usually that it was meant to recruit women into the workforce, or to rally women in general — an early example of girl power marketing, if you will — and was widely displayed. But the audience was actually only Westinghouse employees.” (Sharp)
“Events and process are often more important for what is expressed than for what is produced.” (Bolman, p. 253) Although the intention of the image was not for mass dissemination, nor was it produced with the aim of aiding women’s issues, the poster has had a second life in modern times, where it is widely disseminated and perceived as a gender equality icon.
“The company commissioned artists to create posters to be hung in Westinghouse plants for specific periods of time” (Sharp)
“Culture forms the superglue that bonds an organization, unites people, and helps an enterprise accomplish desired ends.” (Bolman, p. 253) Culture, rather, the creation of culture by Westinghouse propaganda, worked, it appears, to allay labor issues during the war effort. It also seems that it reflected something underlying and subconscious in their workforce, perhaps the mindset of equality, and it reinforced the idea—an unintentional, self-fulfilled prophecy—to give the poster it’s modern interpretation.
“Westinghouse workers would have seen it in a different context, as one of a series of posters displayed in the plant, with similar imagery and text. When seen as just one in a series, rather than a unique image, Kimble and Olson argue that the collective “we” in “We can do it!” wouldn’t have been women, but Westinghouse employees, who were used to seeing such statements posted in employee-access-only areas of the plant. By addressing workers as “we,” the pronoun obfuscated sharp controversies within labor over communism, red-baiting, discrimination, and other heartfelt sources of divisiveness.” (Kimble, p. 550)
“Facing uncertainty and ambiguity, people create symbols to resolve confusion, find direction, and anchor hope and faith.” (Bolman, p. 253) The War Committee was faced with the potentiality of extreme labor issues and discontent, at a time when they needed certain output. ‘We’ is a strong pronoun, which could be argued to have an effect on the mind, and individuals’ willingness to participate in a group endeavor. It is commonly used in propaganda campaigns, and its use within the context of the Westinghouse posters, gives validity to the notion that the image was created with propagandist intent, rather benevolence or specific concern to gender. Rosie, in many respects was a cardboard stock image, a “default” warehouse employee in a marketing campaign.
“One of the major functions of corporate war committees was to manage labor and discourage any type of labor disputes that might disrupt production. From this perspective, images of happy workers expressing support for the war effort and/or workers’ abilities served as propaganda that encouraged workers to identify with one another and management as a team; “patriotism could be invoked to circumvent strikes.”(Kimble, p. 562).
“In collective bargaining, labor and management meet and confer to forge divisive standoffs into workable agreements. The process typically pits two sets of interests against each other.” (Bolman, p. 253) To avoid work stoppages during a critical time, the Westinghouse Company attempted to minimize the friction of the competing interests by working a patriotic angle and incorporating teambuilding imagery and language into art.
“Of course, today the “We Can Do It!” poster is seen as a feminist icon, adorning coffee cups, t-shirts, calendars, and refrigerator magnets (I have one). Kimble and Olson don’t explain when and how this shift occurred — when the image went from an obscure piece of corporate war-time propaganda, similar to many others, to a widely-recognized pop cultural image of female empowerment.” (Sharp)
“What is most important is not what happens, but what it means.” (Bolman, p. 253) Ultimately, the image has acquired its modern connotation, which differs from its roots. The current interpretation is noble, and as Dr. Sharp discusses, it is an effective and empowering symbol, that will mean different things to different people. Seventy years into the future, it may have yet more meanings, but it remains a good exercise to understand and gain insight from its origin.

Works Cited:
Bolman, Lee G, and Terrence E. Deal. Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2003. Print. Page 253.
Kimble, James and Lester Olson. “Visual Rhetoric Representing Rosie The Riveter.” Rhetoric & Public Affairs. 9.4 (2006): 533-569. Print. <Excerpts: http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/01/04/myth-making-and-the-we-can-do-it-poster/>.
Sharp, Gwen. “Myth-Making and the “We Can Do It” Poster.” Society Pages 4 January 2011. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. <http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/01/04/myth-making-and-the-we-can-do-it-poster/>.

Politics of Race in 20th Century Africa

Leave a reply

Rainbow Nation

Prior to the Afrikaner-dominated Nationalist Party coming to power and implementing their apartheid policies, the British grappled with the question of how to handle the ‘native question’. In 1911, Maurice Evans, the listened-to expert of his time on offered, “I have put the question many times, often without answer, and at best to have been told that our policy would be to keep him (the African) in his place,” his defense of a paternalistic policy towards Africans.  To Evans, that place was a role of subservience and obedience to White interests. Even he would acknowledge, though that the African’s “place is a shifting one; we ourselves are altering the plane; what was his place yesterday may not know him tomorrow.” He was ahead of his time, forecasting the violence that would result in the second half of the century as a result of such oppression, “in other words, repression with an appeal to the rifle.” (Kidd, 171)

It is this uncertainty alarmed Afrikaners, in an age of systemic racism. The bitter end of the Boer Wars and white poverty birthed sympathy and attraction to the Nationalist cause. Issues such as black suffrage and equitable land apportionment were seen as a direct threat to Afrikaner interests—even equated with ‘suicide’. It was also seen as damaging to the morality of whites to associate with blacks. Very often, the ‘natives’ were portrayed as contented or childish, on the whole. In 1925, Ernest Stubbs would claim that “contact means the utter and irretrievable ruin of the white races of South Africa.” (Stubbs, 224) The fact that blacks could obtain a Western intellect, or that they had it, innately, was a hard matter for many whites to grasp. Like Dudley Kidd’s account, westernized—therefore qualified to vote blacks—were few and far between, confined to a niche. In 1908, Kidd posits “if we may judge by the violence and intemperance of their language, this handful of educated Kafirs wants the franchise very badly.” (Kidd, 171)

A series of pass laws prohibited black migration. At a hearing for African labor concerns in 1904, one line of testimony calls it “Giving a right to a man to interfere with another man when he is in his own castle. (African Workers Discuss, 194) The Native Land Act would be passed in 1913, and like the pass laws and the franchise, it affected everyone. However, “this Act satisfied no one,” said DDT Jabavu who offered an analysis of the Act in 1928. The Professor found that the Act “confirmed the natives in the sole occupancy of their reserves in which they were already overcrowded.” (Jabavu, 224) Sol Plaatje would say fifteen years earlier that it “allowed Dutchmen, Englishmen, Jews, Germans, and other foreigners may roam the ‘Free’ State without permission—but not natives…It would mean a fine and imprisonment to be without a pass.” (Plaatje, 218)

To address these grievances, Africans organized politically, first in local Congresses, and then ultimately consolidated into the African National Congress. The movement attracted many intellectuals. According to ANC President, Reverend J.A. Catala in 1938, “the inception of the National Congress was due to a crying need for comprehensive machinery by which to manage and direct national affairs.” The ANC’s purpose was “to unite, absorb, consolidate, and preserve…existing political, and educational associations, vigilance committees, and other public and private bodies whose aims are the promotion and safeguarding of the interests of the aboriginal races.” (Catala, 1938) Catala reasons that their work was “to make the Government realize that the African is an integral part of the body politic of South Africa.” In response, the Nationalist sentiment of the Afrikaners grew stronger. Catala would lament that “South Africa is a funny country in that its rulers are full of fear…they fear the black people who outnumber them by 3:1…It is a country of many races, yet it is possible for it to have a Cabinet composed of men of one race. This signifies that the problem of race relations is not easy to solve.” (Catala, 1948)

The older rhetoric of a separate Black and White South Africa would still pervade the country even after the close of World War Two, which saw whites fighting alongside blacks in many areas of the globe. The Stubbs sentiment, that separateness could be obtained and would be beneficial to all, was popular, albeit quaint. “We cannot have an all-white South Africa…We can have, with all the elements of permanency a White South Africa and a Black South Africa, side by side.” (Stubbs, 224) Kidd’s point-of-view still carried weight, and many Afrikaners agreed—“If (blacks) are left to follow their own natural political development, the result arrived at will be more stable and will have a more permanent value than the outcome of an impatient patchwork of our own.” (Kidd, 171) However, blacks were not left to their own natural development. Their efforts were increasingly thwarted by the state, and whites were still dependent on black labor. The conditions were so onerous that they demanded challenge. In reporting on the condition of African Farm Workers, Drum Newspaper opines that “while the Industrial Revolution is causing as much chaos in South Africa as it caused in 19th century Europe no lessons have been learnt…the same abuse of labor is repeated in the same style…farm prisons and contracted labor…depends upon compulsion, not persuasion. (Drum, 267) International and internal pressure would mount on the Nationalists, and laws would be passed, such as the ‘Abolition of Passes Act’ and the ‘Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Bill’ but typically, according to Nelson Mandela, these titles meant “the opposite of what the measures contained.” (Verrwoerd’s Tribalism, 2)

Robert Sobukwe labeled the treatment “humiliation, degradation, and insult,” stating that blacks were “ruthlessly exploited.” Steve Biko would later elaborate that “the leaders of the white community had to create some kind of barrier between blacks and whites so that the whites could enjoy privileges at the expense of the blacks.” (Biko, 87-88)  This policy of labor exploitation and segregation became a moral weak point for whites and the violence at Sharpeville became the proof of this moral degradation. The efforts towards non-violent revolution would peak in 1960 with Nobel Peace Prize winning ANC President Lutuli, but go by the wayside. Despite their position on the moral high-ground, the ANC would respond with violence. Umkonto we Sizwe, or “the Spear of the Nation” would be called to action by Nelson Mandela. The ANC would splinter off its non-violent activists like Sobukwe, and adopt more radical ideologies and tactics offered to them by Communism. The South African Communist Party would face bans, and imprisonment, and create figureheads out of Robben Island prisoners, whom the public could rally around for another thirty years.

Kidd recognized in 1910 that “if we insist upon keeping alive racial conflict, we must be prepared for the inevitable consequence; racial problems will then remain an open sore.” (Kidd, 172) Apartheid would finally reach a settlement and majority representation and a new constitution obtained. The new government carries with it the stain of the past racial struggle and the violent history of both the Afrikaner and ANC, though it remains very plain as it did 100 years in the testimony of Dr. Abdurahman in 1912: “Show the…people that the government is for the good of all, not for the privileged class…grant them equal opportunities. If you do so, then the happy harmonization of the community will be achieved.” (Abdurahman, 214)

Afrikaner Migration – ‘Open’ Land

Leave a reply

a

The Afrikaner Great Trek is mostly responsible for the settlement of Europeans in the interior of Southern Africa. On the accounts of missionaries and explorers, colonists and their wagons set out for the high veld from the Cape Colony in search of ‘open’ and ‘available’ land.

Led by Piet Retief, they crossed the Orange River and the Vaal, where they would encounter resistance by the Matabele, then, into Natal, where they would meet the Zulu and their Chief Dingane. Retief and his party would be slain by Dingane in 1838, but the ‘Voortrekkers’ would win a decisive victory at the Battle of Blood River later in the year. Within two years, the Afrikaners had formed an alliance with a Zulu ‘crown’ competitor, which quickly led to the defeat of Dingane, and a more secure environment for settlement. Within twenty years, three Afrikaner states had been created: the South African Republic with its capital in Pretoria, the Orange Free State, and the Natal Republic.