Wednesday, August 15, 2012


Say for the sake of argument I exist under constant scrutiny -- not hard to believe considering that the poor would be watched the closest as they tend to be the source of any unrest. As such, I worry for myself, as I seem to possess very dangerous qualities:  intelligence, a reverence for life, for freedom and for truth, skepticism, religious conviction, artistic leanings, no criminal record, am not materialistic or avaricious, and am kind and honest.  What saves me are my aversion to conflict and complacency -- I am near impossible to anger, meaning I am not some potential rebel or frustrated young revolutionary.  Then again, perhaps my even temper and emotional maturity are most threatening of all, for they leave few options for those looking to manipulate my behavior.  The best bet short of simply killing me (a stupid idea to kill someone so much as minutely accomplished in the arts and letters) is to manipulate my perception of reality.

My most dangerous attribute is that I can never help but ask the obvious.  The biggest risk I take is maintaining an antagonistic relationship to power.  My best defense and greatest vulnerability is my poverty.

Monday, August 6, 2012

Medical Ethics

I once had an argument with an ancient ex about the Hippocratic Oath, which includes, "Do no harm to anyone." He believed the Physician's Oath of 1948 supercedes it and is superior, which leaves behind the humble, simple ancient Greek wisdom to allow wide latitude to the physician in question's personal feelings, morals, ideology, and political beliefs. It allows him to, for example, prescribe something harmful like pain if he thinks it's healthy. Such a perfect shelter for the closet sadist, IMHO. It's like medicine becomes his little psychosexual playpen, hidden among nice-sounding platitudes that assuage the consciences of any possible onlookers. What do you think? I stick to my guns, and prefer the more restrictive Hippocrates.  After all, I found it very telling that the physician, upon observing his patient, just might not trust self-inflicted pain.  But of course, it wouldn't be about him or her...
It's ironic, really:  the 1948 Physician's Oath was written with Nazi atrocities in mind, yet nothing in its wording precludes their being repeated.  What was his point, I wonder?