Home | Notes
Contributors
Archives | Search
Links | About
contact:
editor@ExileStreet.com
..........

Julia Gorin

Clintonisms
by Julia Gorin

..........

Burt Prelutsky

The Secret of Their
Success
by Burt Prelutsky
..........

.........

Ralph Peters
Latest

Wars of Blood and Faith
Ralph Peters

..........

Conservatives Are From Mars, Liberals Are From San Francisco
by Burt Prelutsky
..........

..........

FROM THE PHONE BOOTH: The Smallest Space in  Hollywood

	FINEFROCK

Seminarian Wimps:
Courage of Convictions –NOT!
by Steve Finefrock - Hollywood Forum [scriptwriter] 4/3/08

Princeton seminarians failed the Good Samaritan test in a clever psychology experiment, as outlined in a clever book of clever insights, “The Tipping Point” by Malcolm Gladwell – worthy of your examination at length. From its footnotes I found the origin of “six degrees of separation” and read its original Psychology Today article. Re-reading Gladwell’s book led me to a chapter which I do not remember reading, for it would have long ago – four years past – stuck as firmly as burr under a saddle.
 
Blessed are those who expect little, for they shall not be disappointed – so says a clever bromide. It summarizes so much biblical teaching – folks is sinners, even the best don’t do well enough to deserve general praise. At Princeton this was confirmed in ‘70s social ‘research’ that confirms so much in religious teaching. Even seminarian students don’t measure up to the teachings of our culture.

The setup: various briefings were given the subjects of this experiment, in preparation for each to deliver a presentation at a separate building. A few were given a ‘hint’ in a subtle mental implant, via suggesting the talk’s subject be about the parable of the Good Samaritan. Others had a ‘clean’ mind on that subject, and all prepared their remarks before embarking to their awaiting audience. The ‘control’ factor?  Being in a hurry determined the results – nothing else affected the subjects’ inclination to render aid to a ‘plant’ along the pathway.
 
Half were told to rush to the awaiting audience, as time was short and the subject would be tardy. The other half were assured there was plenty of time, and no need to rush. Each participant encountered a battered, bloody, unconscious man lying across the pathway.  Which group most frequently stopped to render aid? The factor with no effect was the implanted suggestion to speak about the Good Samaritan tale.
 
The results are stunning, and disappointing – TWICE.  The ratio was 10 to 63: a mere ten percent of those who felt hurried stopped to help, one even literally stepping over the battered, prostrate, unconscious man awaiting a seminary-trained Good Samaritan. Of those who were blessed with plenty of time to their appointed delivery? Yep, even they rendered aid only two-thirds of their number. Imagine: the Best of the Best were, in a third of the cases, unresponsive to a needy, bloodied man lying on the very seminarian grounds where they got their religious preparation to preach charity and decency to parishioners.


Courage? The rarest of human qualities, and often thought to mean physical courage. Ah, contraire, it is not the case: it is moral courage one finds least often, in the fewest places, by the rarest humans.  Many who’ve stood the test on physical danger are total seminarian wimps when moral challenges arise: standing up to one’s coworkers, supervisor, community bullies, organizational thugs.  It’s worthy to remember the Princeton wimps in this ever-intenser presidential campaign.
 
If the best of the best, professional trained in moral manners, at an Ivy League campus, cannot abide being late to a class in order to practice charity and render aid, what can we expect of our politicians?  It’s a hard lesson – to learn that even ‘the best’ are not so reliable. They prefer certain social niceties to the inconvenience of abiding by the pretensions of moral guidance.
 
Engineers talk of structural integrity – the ability to resist a force that distorts a supporting beam or post from its intended shape. Think of the Three Little Pigs [not allowed in British classes; offensive to Muslims] and the brick house that withstood the wolf’s mighty force.  Each pig’s home was fine in calmer, untested conditions; only one withstood the force of destruction.
 
Clearly there were only ten percent ‘brick pigs’ in Princeton that experimental week. At best, when there was no ‘wind’ or wolf, only two-thirds held to their long-taught, and presumably long ‘learned’ beliefs. When the wolf huffs and puffs and declares he’ll blow the house down, which pigs will show moral courage?
 
Know any brick-pigs in your circle of friends, co-workers, associates, organizational membership? Count ‘em, those ten-percenters, the principled porkers – on one hand. Maybe even one-finger will do.
 
And you know which finger that is! ExileStreet

copyright 2008 Steve Finefrock

§