Author: Chris Krause

That night Cato lodged in the house of the chieftain. In the darkness he found the girl rifling through bins of purple leaf, stuffing the plant into her mouth with fever. Cato rose and she lunged forward to attack, punching him in the chest and scratching first at him then at her own eyes. She tried to eat more of the plant and Cato held her arms and pulled her in closer. She screamed that Cato had taken her father and husband and Cato said nothing, holding onto her tightly so she could eat no more. She said that she had not taken enough for the pain to go away, that she would still be here when the gouging started. Cato said I know. Endure and be reborn. She was in a rage now, punching the knight and scratching at his face. He did not release her. He shook the leaf from her clenched fist.

For a time the punching stopped and she grew silent. Her eyes were milk white like a shark before its death blow. She thrust her mouth toward his his with passion and he turned his head away. Use me she screamed. She turned her head angled to catch his lips agape, while tearing her clothes off. Cato imagined the horrible ritual that must have happened behind closed doors every night and pain shot through his heart. Fuck me she screamed, hurt me. He stayed with her in that house as day came and went, holding her as the fight turned to sobs. Soon she was not being held by Cato, but clutching to him, and he redressed her wounds and combed her hair as she loosed the spirits which had coiled around her encumbered soul.

She sat staring at a bin filled with purple leaf as Cato cooked at the hearth. The pain has not left. It will not. Yet it will change. Know its nature and you will know the way to throw it away as a hot coal. She looked at him with hopeless, terrified eyes. What is my nature? Cato sat beside her with a cask of millet and looked deeply into her eyes. Divine, beautiful, a part of the sublime Nature which comprises all things. If I am as you say, she said looking away with tears in her eyes, why do the men take me? They do not know their Nature. As we share thought, that makes us beings of reason. And if so, we are bound by a common law, and thus are fellow citizens. And this fellowship is the world. They are ignorant to these ties, as they consume poisons which blind and possess them. Such a man is vicious, and knows only vice. They will soon know this. Eat, the knight said. She was still half naked. Her bosom was exposed to the open air. She sat with a distant stare, the look of a soldier who had spent too many months slaughtering on some terrible winter campaign. He dressed her and then walked out. But he did not stride far. He peeked through the cracks in the timbers of that house.

The girl sat shoveling the millet into her mouth. After minutes she rose and walked to the bin of the purple leaf. She stood for awhile over the poison, her hand hovering over the vibrant throng. Finally she knocked the bin over and began to sob silently. Cato wiped his eye sockets and tended his mount. He checked the shoes for splinters and massaged the beast’s mane. When he was satisfied that there was enough grazing ground to sustain it, he called for the villagers to assemble.

The chief stumbled out of his hut in a stupor. The girl cast her eyes down. The chief grabbed the girl violently off the mount and began to molest her saying thank you for bringing back my whore of a daughter. Eat this, it will make you feel lighter, he said, forcing  a purple leaf toward her agape mouth. Cato took off the chieftain’s head, holding it by gnarled locks toward the other villagers. Cato thought of the decaying cedar. The tree had fallen and his father had dug up the soil, revealing termites amidst the roots. He thought of the tomato plant and the aphids. I am your king now, if no man has virtue to oppose it, he said. None answered. Some circled the body like wolves circling a wounded elk, picking for his bag of gold. Cato showed them his sword and stood over the carcass, calling for wood.

Burn him so that he returns. He is not taken by the conflagration, he is given back. The chief was burned and his ashes blew into the wind. But Cato did not ward off the birds as he did the savages. He ordered the village to chip off pieces of that black snow angel and to feed them. Cato was warmed by the sight, he knew that the way would not be forgotten. There would be hope for the coming generations.

When she awoke they mounted Cato’s horse and rode to her home. Coming upon a path leading to her village, Cato saw savages digging into the soil with bare fingers. They were scourging the earth for flecks of gold, but the rider knew it as pyrite. When one digger would find his treasure in the earth, the others would beat him and take his findings. Others would strangle and stab with hidden blades. Other groups lay prostrate across the path, eating a blackish purple leaf which sent them into a euphoria to tear and scratch at their eyes. Heaps of spasmodic flesh. Cato felt the hands wrapped about his stomach tighten and a quaking.

The village came into sight and Cato dismounted, calling for the chief.

The exile tended his garden, freeing the roots of the broad oaks so that they might breath easy again. The weeds withdrew to the edges of the vale. An owl passed overhead and perched on a tree limb which protruded over his camp. He removed his helmet and looked into the bird’s eyes, dropping to his knees and reciting a prayer under his breath. The wise one cocked its head toward the mouth of the vale. A bloodied girl in the rags of a savage wandered hastily toward him, as if running from that old hateful wave. Cato knew he was not the last one.  He raised his hand as if to calm a spirited charger and spoke in a melodic and deep voice, saying come and eat, let your wounds be tended. She spoke in a dialect which Cato could barely comprehend, for the tongue was harsh and primitive. Cato dressed her wounds as the owl looked on. He fed her the last of his rations. She shook when Cato moved to tend her bruises and cuts. She said that she was molested by the men of her tribe, and that this was the way of her people. She had in the past come to hide here under the thick underbrush of weeds. Cato fixed his bedroll against the tree’s trunk and motioned for her to rest. He promised to return and walked down to the base of the mountain, where there was a clear spring.

Cato stripped naked and washed the ash from his hair and the dark stains from under his eyes. He rubbed the grime from his steel. He looked to the south, the country of his ancient fathers and saw it was gone. He continued to scrub the spots where there was once ash, until blood was drawn. He dressed and returned to the girl. The owl took flight toward the north, deeper into the mountains. He squat near to the girl, watching the edges of the vale and looking upon her, pain shot through his heart.

A knight rode north with a hateful wave of scoria and ash at his back, the remnants of his homeland devoured in his step. Entering into the wild Cato sought refuge in the mountains overlooking the vale where he wed his wife. What Nature had given it was now taking away, as it does all things. Cato entered into the shadow of the mountains and came across a glade with broad trees, their roots manacled by a mass of weeds. This shall serve as my new home until Nature take me too, thought Cato.

In this post I hope to criticize and examine the notion of amoral librarianship, by commenting on another student’s post. The views expressed within this post represent the status quo, mainstream professional opinion on the topic of information access and librarian duty. I attend to the post dialectically, examining the propositions within as would a pair in Socratic dialog.  [A student] wrote:

If a patron were to come up to me and ask me for materials on bomb making, I would reply by helping them find the information that they seek. Why is that you ask? If I were to refuse to answer the patron’s query due to my personal beliefs or any other moral/ethic based reason, I would be going against the basic principals that libraries are built on. It is the library’s task to disseminate information and make it available to all patrons. Esentially, information should be made available to all patrons, regardless of what may be done with the information received.

By either refusing to help the patron or prying into their privacy by asking them for their reasons for wanting that information, we could be placing ourselves, the library and its staff, as well as the patrons in harms way. In this way, I am indeed taking into consideration the many types of ethical codes that have been put into place. Ethical codes are not clear cut, but instead are grey matter. It is important to remember this in addition to remembering to respect all patrons regardless of the information that they seek. In this case, item one of the ALA’s code of ethics (Figure 8.2 in Rubin’s book) is very important to remember: “We provide the highest level of service to all library users through appropriate and usefully organized resources; equitable service policies; equitable access; and accurate, unbiased, and courteous responses to all requests.” (348)

Therein is an effective and succinct summary of Rubin’s, and by extension, the standard professional opinion on the topic. Yet something about this response is deeply disturbing to me. It is one thing to look the other way when a strange man in a trench coat asks you to help him access BDSM zines, we might write that off as eccentric and expediently provide guidance. We are not to judge morally those who inquire for their own personal entertainment or intellectual stimulation, but we are to judge and act against those who intend to injure others, not only as librarians, but as human beings; it is an entirely different sort of engagement when we assist a criminal in his research to slaughter innocents.

The professor’s thought experiment does not involve an engineer visiting a library to look up a special formula to clear abandoned buildings; it clearly implies that the would-be researcher is looking to commit arson or terrorism. This becomes not a matter of ethics for a librarian but a matter of ethics for a human being. Before you help our would-be destroyer kill his neighbors you must first address the question of whether or not this sort of collaboration is befitting a citizen of the community. Doctors take an oath not to harm, but those who aided the Nazis in whipping up Zyklon B were still considered criminals, even though they may not have dropped the tablets themselves. By aiding a would-be terrorist in committing acts of terrorism, you are an accomplice in those crimes and violate your sacred trust as a guardian and conduit of knowledge. I can think of no way to reason out of that conclusion.

It is your duty as an American citizen to pry into others privacy when they relate to you that they are planning to slaughter others. The proper reaction for a virtuous individual would not be to aid the criminal, but to immediately report him or her to law enforcement, and then ensure that an escape is not possible, performing a citizen’s arrest if need be. Terrorism leaves the domain of “personal beliefs” and enters into the realm of action. It is unacceptable for a librarian to plead neutrality on this topic.

Librarians should instead serve as wise guides to knowledge, steering the ignorant, confused and curious toward materials which would enrich their mind and character. Take the example of a distraught individual who is looking for books on how to kill oneself. I might comply with that request, but I also might suggest other volumes which might be more befitting of wholesome, skillful knowledge. I suppose that complies with a general ethical maxim of mine, that one with power and knowledge should be a steward and caretaker of those without either. In this sense it is my responsibility to act against the terrorist, so that others may be preserved. If that course of action is incompatible with the ALA doctrine of librarianship, then chances are I won’t be working as one.

Reply

Firstly I’d like to say that I respect everyone’s opinion in this discussion. I firmly believe that as human beings we’re all entitled to draw our own conclusions. However, a valid difference of opinion and accusing someone of aiding and abetting terrorists are two very different things. I must agree with [the student’s] original post. This thought exercise did not specify the patron’s true intent and I believe that was the ultimate point the professor was trying to convey. As librarian, you will encounter situations like these. While we may be the “stewards and caretakers of information”, we are not the gatekeepers.  Therein, it is not our place to assume or even pass judgment about what the patron’s intent may be. We are there, simply to provide information to those who seek it.

This is not to imply that if someone told me specifically that they planned on taking part in a violent act, that I would not report it. However, that was not the scenario used for this discussion. Furthermore it is not our job to seek out why this patron may need this information. The second we start letting librarians make these kinds of determinations, is the second we hinder people’s access information. Let’s take this idea of offering potentially harmful information to patrons and apply it to something less violent. There are many people out there who regard some of the most classic forms of literature as harmful to children. Would they be performing their “American duty” by denying access to these?

In your post you claim that we should “serve as wise guides to knowledge, steering the ignorant, confused and curious towards materials which would enrich their minds.” While yes, we do guide people, there is a line we cannot cross. We shouldn’t, nay we mustn’t allow our own personal beliefs to play a role in this. Some believe that all you need is a little religion to enrich your mind. Once again these are not our determinations to make. We are there to ultimately point people in the right direction, whether it is bomb making 101, homosexuality, or any other topic they seek.

And finally, the tone of your post paints a picture that [the student] was somehow seeking out terrorists and providing them with sensitive information, which I don’t think was the case. I don’t think her post reflects that of an amoral librarian. You assume that we violated some moral standard because we provided the patron the information he sought. Let’s be straight here, we violated your moral standards. There is a difference. I believe it is my moral obligation as a librarian to provide equal and unfettered access to information.

The professor’s exact words:

“As a reference librarian you are approached by an individual asking that you provide him with information for building a bomb, that would enable him to blow up a suburban home. What should you do, and why? Do you blindly serve the patron, discounting any moral obligation, or is it your primary duty to think of the collective ‘good’?”

Also you are confusing the purpose of my post, which was not a personal attack on the writer, but as I said, a dialectical exercise. When you say “I don’t think her post reflects that of an amoral librarian” I think you are confusing immoral with amoral. I mean to refer to a librarian who does not consider morals or ethics in his or her behavior and duty, not a librarian who is unethical or of questionable moral disposition. I propose that librarianship should be moral, and I mean this is in a technical sense: it must be guided by ethical principles and standards. In other words, my reasoning is a classical refutation and criticism of sophistry, the position that all morals are relative and of no account in the professional setting.

Bottom line is, if you aided anyone in actualizing an act of arson or terrorism – i.e. blowing up suburban homes, you are committing a crime and also being derelict in your duties not only as a human being but also as a librarian. In the first sense you are endangering others by acting as an accomplice in an act of terrorism, in the latter, you are foolishly throwing caution to the wind in granting unmetered access to all knowledge, whether it be harmful and endangering the public (which as a civic servant, you have been tasked with serving) or no.

It would not be equitable for a librarian to judge the personal morality, beliefs, interests of the visitors to the institution (hence my first example), but it is equitable for one to prevent the harm of others.

CASE STUDY

It’s a Small World

FRANCIS KELLY, one of several librarians at the Lincoln Public Library, struggled patiently to help a patron. The woman understood almost no English and spoke what few words she knew in a heavy accent, making communication between them almost impossible. After a frustrated Kelly had exhausted all hope of assisting the woman, he was rescued by her ten-year-old daughter, who communicated with her mother in the same language and turned to the librarian and translated in perfect English. Kelly smiled, held up a finger, and immediately found the item the woman wanted–a library card application. She happily departed, all smiles. “Thank you,” the librarian said to the child as she and her mother turned to go.

“Okeyday,” said the child, returning Kelly’s smile.

“I never felt like such an idiot in my life,” Kelly said to fellow librarian Roberta Klein. “I feel so terrible that I can’t help these people because I don’t understand them.”

“They should teach languages in library school,” Klein said.

“The old neighborhood is changing fast,” Kelly said. “It used to be you just had to speak some Spanish, but now there’s Japanese, Chinese, Somali, Middle Eastern languages. Forget about it; it’s like the UN in here.”

Kelly’s metaphor is accurate. In the previous decade, the neighborhood around the library, which seemingly forever had been a predominantly Irish, Italian, and Jewish blend, had experienced a great influx of immigrants from Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. The staff principally comprises members of the aforementioned ethnicities, plus a single Hispanic woman, Theresa Rivera, and the lone African American staffer, Assistant Director Elizabeth Washington.

“This is something we really have to start thinking about,” said Connie Mascola. If the patrons don’t speak English and we don’t speak their languages, it’s going to be awfully tough to serve them.”

“This is a concern we should speak to Bill about at the next staff meeting,” Kelly said.

Better than his word, Kelly had approached Director William Sullivan prior to said meeting to request the situation be added to the agenda.

When all were assembled, Sullivan broached Kelly’s request after running down the usual business. “I’ve been told by Frank that several of the staff have concerns over our ability to serve the growing ranks of immigrant patrons. Anyone who has thoughts on this, please verbalize them/’ Sullivan said.

“Since I brought it up.” Kelly said, “I’ll start. To repeat what I said to Bill and what some of us have talked about already, we’re concerned that we may not be prepared to meet the flood of new immigrants into this area in recent years. I had an experience just a week ago. I was completely helpless to assist someone who spoke no English with getting ultimately what was an application for a library card. It was very embarrassing for me and the patron.”

“It’s not just immigrants. There is a large number of African Americans and Hispanics populating this are a, and I’m the only black woman, Terry is the only Hispanic, and there are no Asian Americans on the staff at all,” Washington said.

“And whenever African Americans or Hispanics come in looking for something,” Rivera said, “they almost always immediately come over and ask me.”

“But isn’t that their hang-up?” asked Klein. “It’s not like the test of us wouldn’t help them because they aren’t white.”

“Of course not. I’m not saying that at all,” answered Washington. “It’s just human nature. We also have to make changes in the collection to reflect the needs of the users. Simply having best sellers in English isn’t going to cut it for much longer.”

“Okay, so what do we do then? Fire half the staff and replace them with blacks, Hispanics, and Asians while replacing half the collection with foreign-language materials?”

“I’m not saying that either,” Washington affirmed.

“Then what do we do to address this problem?”

****

The case study highlights one of the failures of the traditional library: a lack of willingness to collaborate with the community to address the new obstacles of the modern, “flat world.” The tone of the meeting in the presented case is that of “what can we do to help them,” it represents a doctrinaire, old guard and ineffective way to deal complex problems. In this age, libraries must adapt, as the open source software and web 2.0 worlds have, to marshal volunteer and collaborative forces to produce content and to solve problems.

Mr. Kelly is ill equipped to interface with the non-English speaking visitor, so what are some ways he could have overcome the divide besides relying on accidental help from a child? It is implied in the study that over the past decade the library had become aware of the influx of this demographic. Why then did they not expect the new citizens to arrive at the library to request services? Having become aware of the new population, the library could have called upon the community for volunteer translators and cultural liaisons, and in the absence of an interest, may have requested funds from local government to hire the temporary services of a professional to create some basic documentation for would-be visitors. At the very least the public library must provide enough guidance to visitors so that they may service themselves – anything less would not nourish the public trust.

Alternatively, the library team could have been tasked by the director in partaking in a seminar on the history, culture and languages of these new peoples; a basic course study could have been mandated as a required assignment of professional development. Salary or tax incentives could be offered to librarians who agree to become proficient in the new languages, as presented to local officials as a public service.  Ultimately, librarians (at least in public spaces) are civic servants, and thus by duty must attend to the evolving needs of the community.

Yet these latter courses of action are not the ideal, for they rely on the professional caste of the library itself and is thus by nature constrained in resources. Rather the ideal course instead would be for the librarians to become community pillars, rallying the support of these new demographics to help empower themselves. With a little bit of rigorous networking with demographic non-governmental organizations, impassioned individuals and community groups it is possible to summon volunteers to do the work that the professionals would do traditionally, at no expense to the public and specifically suited to those in need. The people are willing to do good things; they just must be marshaled by a pillar of wisdom and virtue: our new breed of civic librarian.

This is the sort of interaction we observe in the web 2.0 world, which is increasingly spilling into our offline world. A few skilled administrators bring together a creative project by presenting a well constructed blueprint, and the project is accomplished by the modest and volunteered contributions of the many rather than the costly works of the few.  This is the effective model for tackling our biggest problems, many of which are now outside the scope of professionals and may not be economically solved without the collaboration of the wider public community, from the library to matters of government, to humanitarian efforts (see: Bill Clinton’s newest pet project Kiva). As the information age becomes realized (rather than theorized), a massive influx of data saturates and bombards the community, which could not possibly be handled by a small staff of professionals.

Rather than panic and lament in private meetings, as those in the case study did, open the process to the public, and allow them to offer their resources. The librarians may act as architects, designing the systems that the community accesses to ensure their safety and wellbeing, organizing the disorganized and serving as marshal of public resources, rather than the portal of all knowledge. In this new age what the professional knows and what the common man knows, as far as knowledge is concerned, is leveling due to the broad proliferation of all knowledge. What will keep the librarian separate and valuable will be his wisdom and vigilance, his ability to see flaw and dysfunction within an information system and institution and his expedience to correct it by leading those who cannot lead themselves. While the new librarians are less authoritarian in their job posts, they are still invaluable as guides and Platonic guardians, ensuring the harmony of the institution.

Let us now propose a practical scenario. A community which was once composed primarily of English speaking people has over time become a multilingual community, the most prominent language other than English being Korean. The library is having similar problems to the ones in the case study. After a seminar and new mandate to address the situation, librarians are tasked with seeking out volunteers to interface between the Korean community and the library staff. One librarian notices a particularly erudite student who frequents the library and approaches him with a proposition to volunteer on a “by need” basis as a translator and liaison. With his cell phone number and agreement, the library now has a translator. Or perhaps a similar volunteer is located through a public awareness campaign designed by the library staff, calling upon local Koreans to help their communities. This opens up the possibility of not only empowering new citizens with the knowledge housed within the library, but also welcoming them into the American culture at large, in a non-intrusive and voluntary fashion.

Another issue brought up in the case study was functional racism: the librarians appear to be lamenting the preference of visitors of one race to only ask for service from librarians of the same race. It is implied that the Caucasians estrange or intimidate many people of other races who attend the library. Two sarcastic solutions are proposed: firing and replacing Caucasian personnel with non-Caucasian personnel, and also replacing “half the collection” with “foreign-language materials.” These solutions are fallacious in that they propose a false dichotomy: an extreme case of “either or.”

Let us begin with the second proposal, as it is more rational. It is not necessary to replace the collection with “foreign-language materials” to appease the new face of the community if it is at all possible to simply add to it. If no space is available that could be addressed with an additional plan of action, to make better use of the space or to renovate. If those options are not economical, at the very least the library could offer a computer to access the internet, the services of a volunteer translator/guide, and also offer logistical support for inter-library loan of foreign materials.  The first proposal reveals the reason why the non-Caucasians are acting as they do: with such arrogance, “us or them” mentality, and veiled racism it is no wonder that the foreign community feels estranged. This ties into my initial arguments: it is essential that the library open itself up to the community rather than attempt to muscle itself through using old guard doctrine. A library which offered an amenable face to the foreign communities might be better received as cosmopolitan rather than simply an institution by whites for whites.

The issue of finding the manpower, time and resources to catalog documents was brought up in the readings as a hurdle to overcome. A solution to cataloging the influx of data may not be found in librarians, or other professionals, but instead in gamers and voluntary user collaboration. Take the GWAP/ESP game, pet project of computer scientist Luis von Ahn, a simple multiplayer experience in which players have to describe an image using metadata (descriptors) while also matching what the other player picks. This game is behind the recent vast improvement in Google Image Search queries (which, as you may have noticed, now allows you to do all sorts of advanced searches), as the logoi derived from the game play has been imported into the search engine. The task of cataloging millions of images based on verbose descriptors would have proved impossible for a professional team, not to mention economically impractical. Yet, give the users of the internet a fun game where they have to guess what other people are thinking in describing an image, and you can catalog vast amounts of information for free.

Herein I think lies the most compelling prospects for integrating new technologies into libraries. As the digital age has brought an influx of new information to bear, a colossal task for small groups of professional librarians to manage and catalog, we must create a forum or capacity for visitors to join a community and engage in a collaborative work at the benefit of our objectives. This may only be implemented by posing some fundamental questions about the nature, function and “good” of libraries. We cannot envision what technologies to create or adopt if we are mute to the ultimate overarching goals of our enterprise. This might sound as a pedantic point, but under close scrutiny I do not believe that it is when considering the vast wealth of technological resources. As public funding dwindles under economic woes, we must have the wisdom and foresight to pick our projects carefully. Essentially, as another poster put it, what is the central mission of the library?

I believe that Wikipedia represents the most exemplary case. Therein we have an institution, staffed completely by volunteers through love of knowledge, who quest to offer the sum of all human knowledge for free. Wikipedia bridges the old school of library (the collection of knowledge) with the new school of technology (collaborative creation). This I believe is key if libraries hope to exist. They must become universal, digitized and creative; creative in the sense that they are bastions of creation. Librarians might serve as professional guides to perceiving and searching for knowledge, a service which Wikipedia cannot offer. We must act as Plato’s guardians, Dante’s Virgil, ensuring the spiritual wellbeing of the visitor as they trudge through the sometimes intimidating and dangerous morass of knowledge. We are the conduits for technology to be used ethically and effectively, and guides for the ignorant to learn in a safe and reliable fashion. If we do not adapt more specifically to this role, I believe that our days are numbered, as within a decade’s time we will offer nothing that services like Wikipedia, Google Scholar, Google Books, Project Gutenberg, Librivox etc do not already.

This week’s discussion is a review and criticism of Clifford Lynch’s article “Searching the Internet.” This article contains a number of fallacies, or more precisely anachronisms, which sap the central claim that the internet is not similar to a library.

Upon initial reading of the article I was struck by the presence of anachronistic web sites and technologies. Yes, Altavista and Lycos, the two mentioned internet search engines, do in fact still exist, but since the presumed writing of the article have been absorbed by larger companies and have fallen into relative obscurity. Google, the most advanced (in terms of discrimination, ambiguation, aggregation etc) and prolific engine is not even given lip service, presumably because it did not exist when the article was written, and Netscape Navigator is mentioned as the most common HTML client.

While this article is an interesting look back on the fearful Terminator 2, Skynet fearing days of the early internet, I believe that it is counterintuitive to base our opinions of the internet today on such outdated commentary. Why? Since the late 1990s there has been a fundamental revolution in the nature of the internet: while during those former years the internet was un-policed, today the largest and most commonly accessed bastions of knowledge are policed. They are policed in the sense that the community can evaluate, to help discriminate, false and unreliable content from good, quality content. See: Wikipedia, WebMD, Amazon.com, Twitter (to a lesser degree).This capacity for interaction did not exist in the 1990s, and it is understandable that Mr. Lynch feared that the democratic chaos of the internet would misinform those using it. Today, if someone wants to learn about something and puts keywords into Google, the first links will most likely be high quality and trustworthy, thanks to the nature of the reliable technology behind our modern search engines.

Google discriminates flimflam from gold by using a number of principles. Sites which have been in existence longer have precedence over newer sites, and sites which have other quality sites linking to them have precedence over those which do not. You do not get a random dump of links when you search using Google; you are being returned an examined list. Notice if you search for “cancer treatment” nothing on Faith Healing comes up. Why? Because Faith Healing does not work, and Google knows this algorithmically and quantifiably. So to summarize: the software we use to discriminate data today also qualifies what is returned to us, and it is buttressed by the collaboration and oversight of an interactive community.

And who can discount the amazing abilities of Google Scholar or Google Books? I know that I would have been unable to envision, write and complete my BA thesis without using both of those engines on a daily and constant basis. A traditional library does not allow me to “ctrl-f,” and even the most wisely structured library information databases do not allow me to search for obscure single words or sentences inside the text of a document. I guess this only becomes apparent if you research truly arcane topics, such as those contained within my thesis. Truth be told, at least 75% of my sources for my thesis derive from using the scholastic engines provided by Google.

While one could still posit the claim that the internet as a whole is still not evolving toward “organized publication and retrieval of information” and in that sense, is not becoming more like a library, it would be hard pressed to make that argument about Wikipedia. While many of the old guard of academia still are suspicious over Wikipedia, as a longtime contributor myself, I can say without any doubt, that similar collaborative systems will one day replace “curriculum” learning and lectures as we know it. The nature of knowledge is such that one expert is never sufficient to explain the case, regardless of how honed their skills of deduction and research are. No, in order to truly understand a topic, we must have the fluid and dynamic input of all of humanity’s experts. This, in a philosophical nutshell, is what Wikipedia aims to do: to offer freely all knowledge, and to present knowledge in such a fashion that it cannot be censored or made static by the old technologies of print. One cannot demand a citation upon reading a traditional book, or amend the text to make more sense, but on Wikipedia, and as a corollary, the other Wiki projects including Wikibooks, this is possible.

While we might fear the ignorance of the mob, their inability to discriminate data as experts do, it is not the casual viewer which typically edits articles, but professionals. If a random, ill-cited edit occurs, it is usually reverted within a manner of minutes to hours. The slanderous and fallacious claim that “you can put anything on Wikipedia” is easily discounted by practical examples: attempt to vandalize any article and you will be amazed at how fast it is reverted. Wikipedia is the future, and it is the library we have all been hoping for: one which is manned 24/7 for free by professionals who edit it for love of knowledge rather than for love of money.

Show me a man who is still in control of his faculties when his wife is stolen from him by misfortune, when his house is destroyed by storm, when his leg is lost to disease, and you have a leader. And why is this so? In most situations, whether there be a figurehead or no, people govern themselves to whatever end is decided by their inclinations, opinions and aversions. In this fashion we might have a “boss” at our place of work, but ultimately, we decide how much work we are going to do, and how we will respond to certain commendations or reprimands. A leader is nominal in these environments, merely functioning as an organizer and as a streamliner, but in times of distress, he is needed more than anything else: he serves as one of the few and strong sober voices amongst the panic and confusion, cohering the purpose and action of a group from chaos to order. As our economic woes intensify, this manner of leader is needed the most. Those who have been appointed and we expect to lead us fade during times of crisis, and the true leaders, those with temperance, prudence, courage and justice, emerge to the fore. One who wishes to become a crisis leader takes heed to fortify his spirit now, so that when the time comes in which he is actually needed, he is able to steer his charges clear of the shoals and ensure their wellbeing.

Thus becoming a leader is not a casual task, nor one to be taken lightly. It means becoming a minister of others, charged with ensuring the healthy operation of their lives when they themselves are powerless and in need. The qualities of leadership cannot be ascertained in business school or any other place where morals are relative and in some cases irrelevant. An effective leader is not a politician, not a smooth talker, but a soldier, a strong and inspiring center to which others are attracted by the majesty and excellence of their character. For some such as James Stockdale, a navy officer who spent years in squalor and filth as the community leader of a colony of distressed American prisoners during the Vietnam War, the meter of good character was found in virtue philosophy, chief being the school of Stoicism. Whatever the source of a leader’s wisdom, they have certain key qualities in common.
A leader must be respectable, honorable and moral. Yet he must not simply be of moral devotions, but must be a moralist, a judge of what is straight and what is vicious. In this sense a leader cannot maintain himself unless he has a knowledge of the good, and the virtue and perseverance to see to that end in his own behavior and that of his charges. Without a firm sense of right and wrong, and the conviction to stand behind it, how can he possibly be grounded in times which decide the fate of others? A leader knows when his charges are in danger and when they are being irrational, and he has the capacity to assuage their fears with rational solutions.

A leader who is corrupt or deceitful will not inspire confidence in his charges, fearing the seemingly arbitrary and unjust nature of his decisions, and so is not suitable. Finally, as the leader knows what is good, and what is not, he must be able to enact justice. The scene in Kenneth Brannagh’s adaption of Shakespeare’s Henry V in which King Harry judges Bardolph after he was caught looting a church immediately comes to mind. In fact, that play, and the preceding Henry IV, perfectly depicts the transformation of a common man to a leader in the character Henry V. Henry is at first a brash, indulgent and undisciplined youth, yet through a vigorous classical education, and startled by the call of duty and the death of his father, comes into his own as a capable and just steward.

Stockdale argues that an effective leader must also be a philosopher, one who is able to realize the essential truths that virtuous conduct will not necessarily be rewarded or that evil will be punished. He must recognize this himself, but he must also be able and willing to explain this compassionately to the dejected and grief stricken, in order to raise the spirits of those who have been dealt misfortune by the capricious winds of fate. The philosopher realizes that this is the cause of discomfort and grief in the people, and detaches from expectations about things outside of his control. This is the doctrine of Epictetus, and it comes into great use when dealing with disgruntled charges. Take the example of an exemplary staff which over the years has produced one of the finest libraries in the country, only to have their funding cut without warning. This is a reality of life, an injustice that is unrelated to our own behavior and action. The leader would be tasked with convincing his charges that they did not fail in their duties, but instead that this was simply a consequence of things outside of their control.

One who is hoping to temper him or herself into a leader might also do well to be surrounded with the example of betters, especially those who were also captains. In this sense a leader is wholesome, craving for inspirational meter, and is a humble imitator of others with virtue. Leaders such as Marcus Aurelius, George Washington, Cato the Younger, Cincinnatus, Cicero, Stockdale himself come to mind, those who, when confronted with adversity and seduction, chose to sacrifice in service to those who could not serve themselves rightfully. Those men had the same sort of character, and whether senior librarian or a king, we owe it to our charges to act in a similarly exemplary fashion. If no, we drag them down to degenerate and fearful lives filled with misery. The people need leaders during rough patches, whether you exploit or minister that need for guidance is what determines your quality as a leader.

For More:

James Stockdale – Thoughts of a Philosophical Fighter Pilot

http://books.google.com/books?id=OoTkW8YQciQC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA44