Entropy's Forgotten Factor

A conversation between Big Simon and Tiny Terror on doing good
Big Simon: Tiny Terror… I’m callin’ you out!
You’re fond of pointing out how we’re fighting a losing battle, how the notions behind the theory of entropy describe a situation in which we are little more than hindrances to a certain outcome. I’d like to take a moment to point out a flaw in that idea.
Entropy is the measure of increased disorder in a closed or isolated system. In a system with no change in variables, chaos is the rule. The common example is that you cannot put the ingredients for a cake mix into a bowl, seal it shut, and expect it to make itself into a cake. Order doesn’t come from nothingnesss – in fact, it’s just the opposite. With no outside force working on those ingredients, the liquids will soak unevenly into the powders, and eventually you’ll just have a big, gloppy mess.
On that point, I think we agree. But that’s as far as your theory seems to go.
What it’s missing is that there is an outside force. Us. People doing good things. I don’t care if you call them “Real Life Superheroes”, “Costumed Activists”, “Crimefighters”, or “Good Samaritans”, these people are the ones who mix up the cake mix, who slide it into the oven and bake the cake, who take it out and frost it, then serve it up to the rest of the world. This force, this human force, doesn’t just consist of people in this movement; it consists of everyone who believes doing good things is right; it’s made up of uncorrupted cops, daring firefighters, brave soldiers, caring nurses, precise doctors, teachers who challenge their students, and students who take their challenge. It’s made up of next-door neighbors, complete strangers, open-source programmers, faithful missionaries, honest politicians (as rare as they might be), lawful judges, and courageous public defenders. It’s the essence of the most positive side of human nature, and it’s real and alive.
The world is a better place than it was two hundred years ago. It’s more complex, not less so. It’s more ordered, not less so. We have better communication and a more widespread understanding and acceptance of our differences. No, we’re not perfect, but we’re closer than we’ve ever been in all of history.
We may never reach that perfect utopia, but we aren’t getting worse, because we’re not a closed, isolated system.
All it takes is a little hope, and a little more action.
Tiny Terror: Don’t head off to Ponderosa just yet, Big Simon. After all, it’s open ’til 10 PM at the very least and although you might miss the lunch buffet, you certainly won’t miss dinner.
Just in case no one gets the joke, Ponderosa is an all-you-can-eat buffet in Pennsylvania.
Ha.
Anywho, I’m aware of my flaw in arguing on behalf of entropy; a flaw I’ve ignored up until this point because no one else seems to be capable of pointing out the fact that we do not exist in a closed-system…Where entropy doesn’t have to be the norm. I can admit that things have gotten a heck of a lot more civilized since our days as mammoth-hunting neanderthals and I can also admit that things have become better regarding levels of violent crime and hate crimes and all of that.
How interesting, however, is it that you’ve gone and proven that the RLSH’s existence is one that is fleeting?
Things are better, A LOT better, than they ever were in the past even if they could stand to make continued leaps forward. And this is a trend that has carried on regardless of you folks doing what you do. The world becoming better does not weigh upon your shoulders so much as it weighs upon everyone and I think the general consensus is that things have not become worse.
And as far as our caring for fellow man goes, it continues to get better.
Innately, we’re driven to sadism and altruism…Although that other side of us exists, we seem to be suppressing it quite well in favor of treating one another with more generosity and kindness than we have displayed in the past.
Yes, I was wrong and flawed in my arguments for entropy. Congratulations on being the first person to either look it up or recognize the flaw first-hand. However, noting the world continues to get better and has continued to get better, showing a trend, does sort of dispute the RLSH’s existence. Why have such a movement if things are getting better?
Big Simon: Just because things are generally getting better doesn’t mean there are pockets and places that couldn’t use a helping hand. We get better, on the whole, because people are inspired by the actions of others. Scientists become scientists because somewhere along the line a teacher really grabbed their interest. Firemen become firemen usually because something – or someone – in their lives convinced them of the need to save, or the raw goodness of saving, lives. Same with paramedics and EMS workers. We may not all stand on the shoulders of giants, but most of us have been given a leg up by someone who provided a catalyst for change, a challenge to be better.
No, the RLSH movement isn’t necessary. But you’re right at one point: It is fleeting. This moment, this tiny chronological span, is the only time it would work. The American entertainment industry has created for us (and the world!) a new mythology, an distinctly American mythology. Superheroes have gone mainstream, due to big-budget films like Iron Man, Spider-Man, and The Dark Knight, and it’s created an environment in which people who wish to stand up for their communities can take on the semblance of the inspirations they had long before the new mythos became a public phenomenon. I won’t say everyone in the movement was inspired by comic books, but a large number, even the majority were, and if they want to do their good deeds dressed like those fictional characters who instilled in them at a young age the desire to to right, now is the perfect time to do so.
But we live in a thirty-second society. We like our McDonald’s. We like our news served up in soundbites and flashes of pre-edited video. We like our short speeches and catchphrases. Nothing holds our attention for long, and the RLSH movement will be the same. It’s fleeting because in twenty years we’ll have stepped it up. Maybe we’ll move to a whole different mythology. Maybe people will see the need to do this sort of thing all the time, and there won’t be a purpose to do it with a costume and a mask. Maybe they just won’t care anymore.
Yes, the RLSH movement is fleeting, in the grand scheme of things. But people inspiring others is not, and that is what is going to be the legacy of the movement, if it’s done right. That is what will be remembered.
Tiny Terror: Mm, fair enough.
Not much I can say in regards to this, save for the fact that I hope you’re right. I hope inspiration is the legacy of the movement.
On the other hand, its legacy could be one of crazy, if not civil-minded people that liked to play dress-up. Make sure that people remember what you were fighting for, not who was fighting.
Other than that, curse you Big Simon, for pointing out the flaws in my argument.
I’ll be back, hasta la vista, foiled again, and all of that other, villainous jazz.
 

Superheroes are real

By Big Simon
I know what’s going through your head. That’s crazy talk. Silly talk. Foolish talk. Superheroes are the stuff of comic books, not reality. People can’t move faster than a speeding bullet, leap tall buildings in a single bound, teleport from place to place, or lift city buses over their heads. Capes, tights, boots, and gadgets can never make a human being what we see on the big screen or find flipping through graphic novels. Not only is it impossible, it takes a certain degree of childlike naivete to imagine it.
You’re right, of course. It does take a degree of certain childlike qualities. Maybe it’s naivete, but I’d rather like to imagine it’s something else entirely. Hope. Trust. Faith. The empowerment which comes not from outside, but from within. You see, despite the fact that super powers and enhanced abilities may not be available to those entrenched within the real world, there are those who believe being a superhero means more.
The dictionary claims a superhero is “a figure, especially in a comic book or cartoon, endowed with superhuman powers and usually portrayed as fighting evil or crime”, and this is a fair description for those who want to learn more about the comic book subculture. It’s a definition we can start with, because it’s familiar, it feels right. After all, who of us has not seen a larger than life character on the big screen, bullets bouncing off his chest, and wished we could be a hero, too? Real superheroes, the ones who walk the streets of our cities now, in this very real world, lack the powers and abilities, however, with which those in comics and movies are endowed. How, then, can we really call them “superheroes”?
The dictionary has more to say about the subject. A hero, for instance, is “a person of distinguished courage or ability, admired for brave deeds and noble qualities”. So we can see now, a more normal individual might be a hero, might be possessed of a certain degree of bravery uncommon in our world. Anyone might summon such courage, given the right circumstances, as courage is little more than standing up to act despite one’s fear.
Anyone might become a hero.
Can anyone be super? When discussiong the superheroes who have become our modern myths, super can be defined as “to an extreme or excessive degree”. Certainly the ability to rip trees from the ground to use as weapons, the power to fly around the Earth and even into space – and beyond! – or being able to shrink to the size of a molecule, these are all extreme and excessive. But super can mean more; it can mean “of the highest degree”, a definition that seems apt. The highest degree is what we should all expect of ourselves, after all.
‘Super’ and ‘hero’ are both suddenly accessible, and together mean something like, “a person of the highest degree of courage or ability admired for the highest degree of brave deeds and noble qualities”. Both words, and even the two words combined, fit, and we become not the classic tights-wearing two-fisted superheroes of the comics, but something else, something more real; paragons of nobility and dignity who represent a degree of goodness and rightness which might inspire the public. Masked and costumed, the real life superhero becomes a symbol, a beacon of promise offering something to those who experience the hero’s positive effect on the community: the knowledge that a single person can make a difference.
Never let anyone convince you otherwise: Superheroes are REAL. And if you’re part of this movement, working toward making the world a better place, you’re one of them.

Q and A: Isn't Good 'Ol Fashioned Beat 'em Up Necessary

SamaritanCitizen
PostSubject: Isn”t Good ”Ol Fashioned Beat ”em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Tue May 12, 2009 7:15 pm
This topic is a little heavy because while I’ve read a decent amount on you guys in the past solid hours of surfing the general philosophy is non-violence. (Which is good. I don’t what a whole bunch of vigilantes running around.) I don’t want to trap anybody in a what if scenario, but for people who do frequent ‘patrols’ some of you are bound to come across scenarios like the ones that I’m about to present…
At any rate, I’ve some questions about you fellas and gals. First off, wouldn’t there be a darker side to ya’lls work? Like, if you were patrolling the streets of Albequerque on a nightly round and noticed a rapist violating someone in an alleyway? Or a daily round of your suburban neighborhood caused you to be witness to a gang mugging in someones house? That is, through the window you see someone who’s life is seriously in danger from being severly assaulted.
Thanks guys, I look forward to your answers.
Dark Guardian
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Tue May 12, 2009 7:40 pm
I do what is necessary to defend myself and others
Moonlight Cicada
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Tue May 12, 2009 7:52 pm
If I seeing a violent crime being occured, I will do what would be expected of me, and that would be to help at all costs.
Big Simon
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Tue May 12, 2009 8:50 pm
There’s no doubt in my mind many of the people here would do something in any of those cases. While non-violence is the general tenor of what most of us believe, we also understand that there are certain situations which require immediate action, as opposed to waiting for the police to arrive after a call. Many of us are martially trained – though not all of us. I, myself, have no martial arts experience other than a bit of wrestling. But there are others here who have a tremendous amount of training. Some of us carry devices and weapons to help do what we do.
Me, personally, I’m not on the street, patrolling. But if I ran into a violent crime being committed? Yeah, I’d do what I could to stop it and protect the victims.
Clockodile
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Tue May 12, 2009 9:35 pm
I have been involved in a crime where I was attacked.
Just use your head and keep your fists in front.
Moonlight Cicada
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Tue May 12, 2009 9:37 pm
Most people are predictable and clumsy when fighting. Very easy to call moves and catch off guard.
Clockodile
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Tue May 12, 2009 9:39 pm
I think out of all the people I know, there is only one that knows how to fight properly and could probably kick my ass.
Moonlight Cicada
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Tue May 12, 2009 9:42 pm
Exactly. Even if one overpowers you in strength, you could predict their movements, and strike first.
TheChaplain
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Tue May 12, 2009 10:11 pm
Only in dire situations.
winter knight
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Tue May 12, 2009 11:00 pm

Dark Guardian wrote:
I do what is necessary to defend myself and others

I second that… priority one: preserve life, render aid to victims, and serve and protect others.
Statesman
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 5:10 am
I believe it would be short sighted of me to go out of my front door with my mind set on violence.
I believe that most conflicts can be resolved with confidence, sense and a feel for what is fair.
I will never allow harm to come to myself or any innocent, and will fight until I fall in defence of the good.
But in my experience, prevention trumps punishment every time.
Big Simon
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 9:16 am

Statesman wrote:
I believe it would be short sighted of me to go out of my front door with my mind set on violence.
I belive that most conflicts can be resolved with confidence, sense and a feel for what is fair.
I will never allow harm to come to myself or any innocent, and will fight until I fall in defence of the good.
But in my experience, prevention trumps punishment every time.

Exactly. If we can put the problem to a stop before it happens, we’ve done everyone a service. And we do a disservice to the people we claim to serve if we go out spoiling for a fight. The mindset is that of the defender, not the vanquisher. Like Hunter Outlaw, however, I agree that violence is sometimes necessary. It’s best if you have some experience, and some skill in fighting, even if you haven’t taken a single martial arts course. There’s value in knowing what you’re body is capable of, and what you are going to be able to accomplish, and the confidence imparted is priceless.
As the old adage goes, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”. A little effort expended to avoid a fight will serve you and the community better than going in, fists flying, but if there’s no other option, it’s best to know what the hell you’re doing.
Statesman
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 9:25 am
I’d go a little further, even- our duty to the world is to make it a better, safer place for people to live in.
With excessive aggression, we become another thing to fear on the streets rather than a source of confidence, and inspiration.
Hunter
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 11:08 am
Big Simon, I think you meant Outlaw, not Hunter.
Big Simon
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 11:41 am

Hunter wrote:
Big Simon, I think you meant Outlaw, not Hunter.

Well, of course I did. I’m just sometimes not quick enough to catch these things, myself. *chuckles*
nemo2000
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 12:41 pm
Hey Chaps & Chappettes,
I am with Zen on this one, prevention is always better than the cure, in tactical terms it is known as “The Combat of the Collective Conscience”.
The best way to fight crime is to work to re~unite fractured communities, by opening new channels of communications and aiding in building bridges amongst them.
Active R.L.S.H. do this by being a visable figure head that is prepared to do lots of minor good deeds to show it can be done and inspire other members of there communities to get out there and do the same.
This techqnique of promoting the “The Collective Conscience” within broken communities has been scientifically proven time and time again to be the single most effective way of combating crime ridden communities quickly and effectively.
Sure most of us will come to the assistance of any Citizen being abused or attacked, but then again so would mostl civic minded citizens we are only doing the same as they would.
It is in repairing these fractured communities that we as R.L.S.H. can really make a big difference to them.
Basically quod erat demonstrandum, de oppresso liber et fortis est veritas.
Kind Regards, Everyone ~ Nemo.
nemo2000
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 1:56 pm
Hey Outlaw,
It’s very simple, R.L.S.H. is about the point I made above, not neccesarily about, how well you can fight, Repairing broken communities and reastablishing there internal cohesion is scientifically proven to be the most effective way of reducing crime in a given area.
I have been practicing martial arts since I was 7 years old, and have black belt in Aikido and currently hold an E5 Expert Level Military/Special Forces Instructor rating in Krav-Maga, so I think that qualifys me to know what I am talking about.
Also I am a former Diving and Clearance Officer – (1st Lt), in the British Royal Navy and saw active service in Iraq, Leading my unit alongside the S.B.S. on the initial push, so I truly know what it is like to be in combat and under fire, but I do not totally agree with your points of view.
R.L.S.H. is about public spirited individuals choosing to try and make a difference and doing the best they can, to help repair the community that they have come to care about, we should encourage support them not put them down, as long as what they are doing is legal and does not bring the Name of the R.L.S.H. community into disrepute.
Best Wishes ~ Nemo
Big Simon
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 2:50 pm

Outlaw wrote:
I’d also like to point out that everyone proposing violence as an absolute last resort do not enjoy their Batman movies because of how he gently talks criminals into peaceful resolutions.

Watching a scripted and choreographed fight on the big screen is a bit different than what happens in the real world. You’ve been in numerous fights, so you should know that. That said, you’re not too far off the mark: Once violence is in play, there’s little that will bring it to and end but equal force. I think what everyone else is talking about is peaceful resolution before violence comes into play.
Hunter
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 3:05 pm
Outlaw, I gave you a positive vote on your first post in this thread. Because while I also believe violence to be a last resort, I would totally be down for an RLSH fight club Smile
the visitor
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 8:36 pm
I agree with outlaw on this subject. I know we are trying to make the world a better place and the best way to do that is with peacfull actions. However, I would like to bring up an observtion. People who opose violence say that “we live in reality and violence wont solve anything”. Well they are right about living in reality, but if you take a look at both sides of that coin, ours is a violent reality. Their are two sides to everything and I believe strongly that violence will be a part of any RLSHs career at one time or another if they are doing crime prvention/patrolling and that you must be prepaired to meet that violence with your own less you risk your life or that of an innocent. You want to handle things peacfully, great, do it, just be prepaired to use violence if necacerry.
The Outcast
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Wed May 13, 2009 11:13 pm
I’m good to go when the time comes (if it has to). Only as much force as necessary though. I fought in MMA once and had a hard time hurting a guy that I didn’t dislike. But it also taught me that given a chance, a knuckle head will try to beat your brains in, so you better be ready to pound him first.
Sentinel
PostSubject: Re: Isn’t Good ‘Ol Fashioned Beat ’em Up Neccessary For You Guys? (In Dire Situations.) Sat May 16, 2009 6:52 am
I am a firm believer in using the only amount of force necessary to protect a victim, or myself. I did have a run in a while back with a man selling drugs, a very large man. I have been training in Ninjutsu for many years and as their rep preceeds them, we use whatever means necessary to complete the job.
I was new at being a crimefighter, but always very aware of my surroundings. I did confront the man who proceeded to walk away as I made enough of a scene to make him leave. Stupid me, I did turn my back, not completely, but he was VERY fast and put me in a chokehold that I could not break out of because of his sheer strenght, nor would my own help. I did struggle for air, and the only option I had to make him leg me go was to take out a throwing spike (spike shuriken) and impale it firmly into his forearm. He DID leg go, and swept his legs, and flexi cuffed him, and retrived my shuriken, called 911, and left the scene. Sometimes we have to use the weapons and gadgets we carry. Mine are for specific needs and situations, I never carry anything that is just for “looks” or to be “cool” as that is not my goal.