Frustration during discussions about any topic arise from conflicts between the following things: ought, is, first-hand knowledge (a.k.a. experience), second-hand knowledge (heard/read something somewhere), theoretical knowledge (expert and/or personal opinion).
~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~
everyone ought to have a chicken (go with me here and assume it’s the consensus of the majority everyone ought to have a chicken — although, this works with almost any topic).
It sounds simple enough; give everyone a chicken.
But, wait. Some people already have chickens. Do they get an extra chicken? Do they want an extra chicken? Can everyone that is given a chicken afford to take care of it? What happens if someone kills it and eats it; do they get another chicken? What if they don’t want a chicken and would rather have a duck of commensurate value? How do we ensure all the chickens (or ducks) are of the same quality? Does it make sense giving a chicken (or duck) to someone who lives in an apartment? Who pays for all these chickens (or ducks)? Who benefits from having to hand out all these chickens (or ducks), as in where do we buy them and how much do we pay for them? What’s the minimum age to qualify for a chicken (or duck)? Who’s going to ensure proper handling of said chickens (or ducks) after they’ve been distributed? Is there a possible health hazard associated with the distribution of all these chickens (or ducks)? What are the unintended consequences? What about geese?
~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~
It sure sounded simple but now all these questions have cropped up. How do we get the answers?
~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~
Obviously, we have to ask experts so that we can get the facts and make a sound decision.
But, wait. Not all experts agree. In fact, you can’t spit without hitting two or more experts standing in disagreement spanning everything from the minutia to giant and contentious differences of opinions.
An expert who owns chickens stands up and says the main benefit of owning a chicken is the egg they produce. Another expert who owns chickens stands up and says that’s true only for multiple chickens. The two experts argue feed storage cost and calculating the initial outlay of a coop versus the number of chickens and the desired number of eggs per week versus how many people are in the house. (HERE and HERE)
Meanwhile, an expert who has studied farming practices stands up and presents a different set of numbers both for the cost and for the return of investment over time. However, it involves an untried method of chicken rearing. The first two experts stop arguing with each other and start arguing with the new expert and explaining why this new method wouldn’t work. A fourth expert — one who used to raise chickens but now raises ducks — chimes in and proposes a compromise based on the differences between the raising and cost-benefits of chickens versus ducks.
A fifth expert who has a degree in sociology chimes up and explain the intangible benefits of having to care for chickens. Things such as learning responsibility and independence and also the self-satisfaction that comes from knowing the chickens you’re raising have a happier life than those in a factory farm. The first four experts start throwing chicken poop at the sociologist and he (or she) calls in young idealists who have no experience in life (let alone chickens and/or ducks) to yell at the other experts. While yelling, the young idealists start arguing among themselves about the ethical implication of eating unborn chicks.
Fox news comes in with scary details about avian flu and MSNBC immediately counters Fox is avianphobic. At this point, CNN comes out with a story they read in the NYT that a whole shipment of chicks spilled onto a road when their truck collided with a truck carrying lions to a state-owned zoo. The chicks were slated to be food for two immortal fresh-water porpoises recently discovered in the Amazon and housed in the same state zoo but said chicks are now in danger of becoming lion food, instead. A live report from an ABC affiliate shows footage of the drivers enticing the chicks onto a road bridge so as to move them out of harm’s way without being seen by the lions resting under the bridge.
At this point, the FBI shows up and arrests the drivers for enticing young chicks over state lions for immortal porpoises.
~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~
As you can see, things are never as simple as originally presented . . . you should remember that when listening to the news, your favorite pundit, politicians, or even yourself.
If someone says it’s simple, you can pretty much bet it isn’t. Ask questions; inform yourself; listen to both sides; do your own research. Lots of information out there about chickens and other stuff. Especially other stuff.
And now, the photo:
This is a small portion of a tree I featured in Project 313 No. 055. I enhanced the colors and processed it in Topaz Glow and Restyle.
. . . it makes the garbage more visible, so that’s something, anyway.
On a separate note, let me say a few things about happiness . . . like time, happiness is relative. Contrary to what people think, you can’t always be happy because that would then become the norm. To wit . . .
I’m telling you; the guy — Joe Martin — is a philosopher.
I have a number of phone tools for messing about with photos and even my doodles . . . I give you . . . Octopus Moonlighting as an Exotic Dancer in Las Vegas Behind Neon Screen.
. . . I almost didn’t recognize it . . . it’s just not the octopus it once was . . .
And . . . that’s it
Some of these posts will likely be longer as the mood hits me, but most will be thus; short, uninteresting, bland, and relentless.
You can read about Project 313 HERE.
That’s it. This post has ended . . . except for the stuff below.
Note: if you are not reading this blog post at DisperserTracks.com, know that it has been copied without permission, and likely is being used by someone with nefarious intention, like attracting you to a malware-infested website. Could be they also torture small mammals.