The torture debate

I've been following the discussion of the "enhanced interrogation techniques" in the last few weeks, in part because of the involvement of some psychologists in crafting these techniques for the Defense Department. In an interview on NPR, one of the military psychologists involved states that these interrogation techniques were fully justified in view of the need to protect America against future terrorist attacks -- in his view, psychologists are not constrained to "do no harm", but rather that they should do "the most good for the most people." The involvement of psychologists in these harsh interrogation practices has been the cause of a strong response within the American Psychological Association, including a restatement of their stance against torture, and a revision in the code of ethics for psychologists. Now there is a call for an investigation into the American Psychological Association's ethics task force, with the accusation that this task force was biased in favor of the Defense Department and that the ethics policy was crafted to conform to Pentagon guidelines. The debate over these harsh interrogation practices has generally focused on two questions: Are these practices morally and/or legally justifiable, and do they work? Let me leave the first question aside for the moment; important as it is, I want to unpack the second question. In general, the "do the techniques work" discussion has been narrowly focused on whether these techniques provide useful intelligence and whether they are necessary for getting such information. That is, do detainees spill the secrets (of other operatives and future attack plans) when they are waterboarded or held in stress positions, and would they have done so if they hadn't been waterboarded or held in stress positions? There has been a significant conflict between those like Cheney who argue that important intelligence was gathered through harsh interrogation techniques that saved thousands of American lives, and the recent testimony of an ex-FBI agent who said that these tactics were unreliable and ineffective. I would argue that torture does not reliably result in accurate or complete information, but rather, the person says whatever they think will make the pain stop. That *might* include useful information, but it might also be incomplete or even be false. President Obama (among others) has also questioned Cheney's reading of the relevant documents, challenging the notion that these techniques were necessary or effective in gathering information. But what seems to be missing in this discussion is what the effect is within the broader international context. If the wake of the Abu Ghraib scandal, there was a great deal of discussion about how these abuses would foster or enhance an anti-American sentiment and might inspire more to join terrorist groups. If our harsh treatment of detainees inspires more to join the ranks of terrorist organizations, then wouldn't it be possible that these interrogation tactics served not to save American lives, but to endanger them?

Weekend activities

On Friday and Saturday, I finally got back to my textile studio after a long hiatus. I did some straightening up and putting things away to clear working space, and then I started a lacy stitched scarf. I laid down a sheet of adhesive, water soluble stabilizer, put various ribbons and yarns on the stabilizer, and then laid another sheet of water soluble stabilizer on top. I used rayon ribbons, chenille yarn, recycled silk sari yarn, and some other fun yarns as well, in a mixture of jewel tones. Then I stitched a grid pattern over the whole thing to keep it all together. As an experiment, I decided to free-motion stitch over the grid pattern in circles with metallic thread (purple and gold). I'm not sure how much it will show up, but I wanted a kind of delicate texture of circles over the gridded structure of yarns. I won't know how it will look until I wash out the stabilizer. I also think I made the scarf too short, so I may cut it apart and insert some sections of more open ribbon work to extend the length and give it more drape (I suspect all the stitching will make it a bit stiffer). I didn't finish the circles because the gold thread kept tangling -- I broke 3 needles, and decided to quit after that. But it was great fun, and I can't wait to get back to it. I'll put up some pictures when I'm done.

Sunday, Q and I laid out the pavers for the pathways in the back garden (we had the vegetable garden part enlarged, and now it needs some hardscaping). We started out with the idea of a symmetrical design, but it evolved into a more flowing, organic design which looks fabulous. Yay for Q's design skills! The garden looks so much better with the pathway lines running through it. We still have all the hard work of digging the pathway and setting the pavers, but I think it will look terrific when it is done. And then I can put in the vegetable garden. Yay for tomatoes and basil and carrots and eggplant and beans and . . .

On an unrelated note, can someone explain why I still have some of my 10th grade chemistry worksheets? What on earth made me decide to keep them? Am I allowed to get rid of them, or do they constitute some kind of important memorabilia?

Only two more weeks until the semester is done. I have so many papers to grade by then!

New blogging project

In honor of Mother's Day, I just wanted to let you know about my new blog, Memories of My Mother, where I will be posting weekly explorations of memories of my mother. This project represents an exercise in mindfulness, as I spend some time each week reflecting on my mother's life. In addition to the regular blog posts, I'm raising funds toward a college scholarship in her name at Montgomery College(as part of the Women's Studies Scholarship program). All net proceeds from sales of my handcrafted goods in my Etsy shop will go toward the Nancy Driessel Stearns scholarship fund. Right now, there is only one item in my Etsy shop, but more will be listed in future, so check back regularly to see what I have available. The project is described more fully on the blog, so if you are interested, pop over and read about it there. Feel free to post comments, if you are so moved. There are links on the blog to subscribe via a reader or via email (to have new posts emailed to you), as well as a link to my Etsy shop (on the right hand menu).

Happy Mother's Day!

Weird (musical?) instrument

I heard on Wait Wait Don't Tell Me about this early pre-cursor to the Muppaphone . . .the Pig Organ. From Everything2.com:

The Pig Organ was another such combination of Louis' two loves. 17th-century writer Nathaniel Wanley describes it better than I ever could: "The Abbot of Baigne, a man of great wit, and who had the art of inventing new musical instruments, being in the service of Louis XI, king of France, was ordered by that prince to get him a concert of swine's voices, thinking it impossible. The abbot was not surprised, but asked for money for the performance, which was immediately delivered him; and he wrought a thing as singular as ever was seen. For out of a great number of hogs, of several ages, which he got together, and placed under a tent or pavillion, covered with velvet, before which he had a table of wood, painted, with a certain number of hogs, he made an organical instrument, and as he played upon the said keys, with little spikes which pricked the hogs he made them cry in such order and consonance, as highly delighted the king and all his company." In the mid-19th century, this idea was resurrected by the inventor of the so-called Porco-Forte instrument, which pinched the tails of pigs to elicit their squeals.

I still like the Muppaphone better.

Can money buy happiness?

I'm giving a talk on happiness this week, so I've been immersed in the research on causes and correlates of happiness (as well as measurement issues and a host of other topics). This field is often quite complex. For example, the research on the relationship between income and happiness has found that:

• Within nation, there is a very slight correlation between income and happiness, which is only significant at the lower levels of income (that is, the very poor are at greater risk of unhappiness).
• Across nations, there is a fairly substantial correlation between the GDP of the nation and the average happiness of its citizens -- wealthier nations have happier individuals, on average.
• Although there have been substantial increases in affluence within nations historically, this has not resulted in increases in happiness -- that is, although there is higher average affluence in the United States today than in the 1940s, Americans are not happier, on average.
• Individual increases in income are not consistently related to increased happiness. Getting a raise at work may result in a brief increase in happiness, but it is generally temporary (the person drifts back to their previous level of happiness). Studies of lottery winners find that they report a slightly higher level of happiness, but also considerable difficulty and unhappiness as well.
• Those who value materialist goals over other (non-materialist) values are less happy later in life.

So, looking at all this data, does money bring happiness? Discuss amongst yourselves.

Amazing talent

If you've never seen Bobby McFerrin's version of the Wizard of Oz, you should.

New book and wonderful sweetie = happiness

I came home covered in existential angst, only to find that Q had pre-ordered the paperback of Charlaine Harris' latest Sookie Stackhouse novel for me. Existential crisis temporarily averted. And I love that Q knows me so well and loves me so dearly. He rocks my world.

I really should wait to start reading the book until after my midterm grades are in, though.

Movies

It's a rare day -- I actually watched two movies. One of my student clubs wanted to watch Kids (1995), which I had never seen before. It's a day in the life of a group of young teens and children in NYC, including promiscuity, shoplifting, violence, drugs, alcohol, smoking, HIV, homophobia, deception, manipulation, and rape. I found it profoundly disturbing and depressing; the main characters are unpleasant, to say the least, as they pursued hedonistic pleasures without any thought or concern for the impact of their behavior on others. The youth group embodied what I would call a culture of "toxic masculinity" (even the females, to some extent), and it was sickening to watch at times. There was camaraderie among the boys and among the girls, but the relationships between males and females were not only purely sexual, but also generally manipulative and deceptive; there was seemingly no possibility of authentic or loving partnerships. While thematically it wasn't all that different from the many shocker films about the horrors of youth culture (e.g., "Reefer Madness"), the film's inclusion of very young teens and children lent a more disturbing air. Watching pre-pubertal children smoke pot and posture about how many times they've been laid was unnerving. As I watched it, I felt that the depiction of urban youth culture was overstated, and that most young people would not be immersed in such an extreme setting; however, the students who watched it felt that it was an accurate depiction of lower-income teens in NYC. I truly hope not; it felt a bit like Lord of the Flies (with the similar absence of supervising adults).

Then tonight, I watched Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice (1969), a much lighter treatment of promiscuity and drug use among adults. The film was distinctly dated, with the encounter group (a bit like EST, with some Gestalt therapy elements), the emphasis on delving deep into one's psyche, being honest and not "copping out." The main characters explore their sexuality within and outside of the marriage, moving past feelings of jealousy to a (presumably) more mature understanding of sexual freedom. The idea of monogamy is framed as square and uptight, and yet the post-encounter group honesty is also portrayed as extreme and ridiculous. Yet, at the end of the film, all four friends end up in bed together, which seems to finally cross some line -- they just can't do it. The end of the film seemed enigmatic to me; what is the message of the film? I have no idea. Actually, I have no idea what either of these films is trying to convey. And frankly, I'm not sure I would really recommend either of them. Kids is gripping, in its own way, but I found the experience almost repellent at times, and Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice, while perhaps meaningful at the time, seems less relevant today.

Creature feature

I think these echidna are really cute. And echidna are in the same order as the Platypus. Cool.

Sewing habit and weird dreams

I swear, when I look at a tiny box of thread or beads and think about how much it costs, I wonder whether a drug habit wouldn't be cheaper. . . and these threads were on sale!

Last night I dreamed that a large group of students rang our doorbell at 1:00am to perform a show (I think it was supposed to be Shakespeare, or maybe Star Wars). I had just woken up and wanted them to leave, but they ended up doing the show in our living room. The show consisted of overlapping variety acts and random dialogue, with some of the performers arriving in the middle of the show and talking as they did so. I had trouble focusing on the performances, as there was so much competing for my attention. It was pretty bad, as theater goes. Then the performers all raided our kitchen for anything they could find to eat (mostly cupcakes and cookies, which we actually don't have at the moment). I also noticed an invasion of ants in our dining room while the performers ate. The rest of the dream was only loosely related, but this part was quite vivid.

I have no idea what it means.