THINKER'S ALMANAC - December 24

What does the strategy of applying reinforcing armor to airplanes in World War II have to teach us about effective thinking?

Subject:  Problem Solving - Feature-Positive Effect

Event:  Christmas Eve

 

Vision is the art of seeing what is invisible to others. -Jonathan Swift

 

Translate the letters below into a single holiday-related word:

 

OUCDE FGHIN KJMAZ VRSTB QWXYP

 

In solving the above problem, the typical approach is to try to rearrange the 25 letters into some kind of coherent word.  There is, however, no single holiday-related word that can be formed from all 25 letters.  If a person persists with the problem, he or she might notice that there are both a total of 25 letters and that each letter is different (no single letter of the alphabet appears more than once).  This might, then, lead a person to notice that the single letter of the alphabet that is missing is the letter “L.”  People who get this far into the problem are very close to a solution, for in this case the key to solving the problem is using not the letters that are present, but instead using the single letter that is not.  Because there is no “L” present, the holiday message is, therefore, “NOEL.”

                                                                        Image by Victory from Pixabay 

The holiday card problem illustrates an interesting insight into human perception that’s called the feature-positive effect:  People tend to focus on what is present rather than what is absent.  As we saw in the word problem, however, often an absent element can be just as important if not more important than what we see right in front of us.

One classic example of how the feature-positive effect can limit our thinking comes out of World War II.  Scientists were at work trying to reinforce the armor in allied plans to prevent them from being shot down.  Examining planes that returned to base after a mission, some scientists recommended applying extra armor to cover the spots where most of the bullet holes were found.  The scientists were blinded, however, by what they were seeing.  It was a classic example of the feature-positive effect in action.  Rather than looking at the bullet holes that were present, the scientists should have been looking at the parts of the plane where bullet holes were not present; these areas would be the best places to reinforce with added armor because it’s in these sports where the planes that didn’t make it back were shot (1).

The simple but profound lesson of the feature-positive effect is to expand your perception by thinking about more than just what you see in front of you.  Try to consider what you don’t see and how that might be significant.  For example, as a target of marketing and advertising, consider what features of a product or service are being highlighted; then, try to consider what features are not being highlighted.  Certainly, these non-highlighted areas might be just as important as the highlighted areas.  If, for example, you are buying a new home in an unfamiliar region, write down the features that are being highlighted by the real estate agent, such as the home’s view, the home's square footage, or the quality of the local schools.  Make sure, however, to also create another column of things that are not obvious or that are not being highlighted, such as, why the owner wants to sell the house, the layout of the kitchen, or whether or not the basement leaks in winter.

 

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What is the feature-positive effect, and how can it blind us to finding solutions?

Challenge - Looking But Not Seeing:  The feature-positive effect reminds us to consider what is not present before our eyes.  Sometimes, however, we are blind even to things that are within our field of view. One form of this is called inattentional blindness (See THINKER’S ALMANAC - November 19).  Take a few minutes and study a painting or other work of art.  You can also just look out a window.  Try to be mindful of seeing what you might not ordinarily see by spending time to notice details.  If you haven’t read it before, read the short story called “Look at Your Fish” by Samuel Hubbard Scudder.  It’s a story about a student whose first lesson as a biologist is to critically examine a fish.

ALSO ON THIS DAY:

December 24, 1414:  On this day in 1414, the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg made a grammar error that went down in history.  Speaking to the Council of Constance in Latin, the Emperor called for the gathered assembly to eradicate the Papal Schism, a division in the Catholic Church in which three separate men claimed to be the true pope.  Unfortunately for the emperor, he mixed up the gender of the Latin word schisma using it as if it were feminine instead of the correct neuter form.  When the error was respectfully pointed out to him by a monk, Sigismund responded angrily saying, “I am the Emperor of Rome!  Even if the word is neuter, it will be feminine from now on.”  In response to Sigismund’s decree, a monk stood and proclaimed, “Caesar non supra grammaticos” - or “The Emperor is not above the grammarians.” Ever since Sigismund’s historic fail, the expression “Caesar non supra grammaticos” has been used to remind us that the rules of English grammar and spelling are not given to us as authoritative decrees from on high; instead, they are based on the conventions of writing that are followed by actual writers.  They are also inherently democratic in that they apply to everyone, and no one individual has the power to arbitrarily change them.

Sources:

1-Dobelli, Rolf.  The Art of Thinking Clearly New York:  Harper Paperback, 2014: 284. 

THINKER'S ALMANAC - December 23

How can the wording on a form be changed slightly to increase people’s willingness to become organ donors?

Subject: Default Effect - Organ Donation

Event: First organ transplant, 1954

If you want to encourage some activity, make it easy. -Richard Thaler

On this day in 1954, the first successful organ transplant operation was performed; it was a kidney transplant.  Today advances in medical technology have made transplant operations routine, including transplants of the heart, the liver, and the lungs.  Unfortunately, the supply of healthy organs for donation is much lower than the demand, and many people die each year before they can acquire a needed organ.

One possible solution to the problem can be found by examining how states acquire consent from potential donors.  Most people are familiar with checking a box to become an organ donor.  This is usually offered to people when they renew their driver’s license.  This method of signing up donors is called “explicit consent”: in order to become a donor, a person must take a specific action.  The problem here is that although roughly 97% of people support organ donation, only 43% take the explicit step of checking the box to sign up.  

An alternative method for signing up donors is called “presumed consent”: all citizens would be automatically signed up as organ donors; however, each would have the choice of opting out by checking a box when renewing their driver’s license.

                                                            Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay 

Based on research by Eric Johnson and Dan Goldstein in 2003, participants were offered the opportunity to become organ donors in both the explicit consent condition and the presumed consent condition. Under the explicit consent condition, only 42% opted in.  In contrast, under the presumed consent condition, where participants had to opt out, 82% agreed to become donors.

More than just an issue related to organ donation, explicit and presumed consent have something to teach us about the default effect, our human tendency to accept default options.  We are basically indecisive individuals, and most often select the easiest option.  For example, many people own an iPhone, but few take the time and effort to customize their phone’s settings; it’s much easier to just stay with the default options.

Economist Richard Thaler and law professor Cass Sunstein wrote a book analyzing how governments can use the default effect to guide the choices of citizens while at the same time not restricting their freedom.  The term they use is “nudge,” which also happens to be the title of their book.  An example of the difference a nudge can make comes from two European countries: Germany and Austria.  In Germany, organ donation is an opt in program that requires explicit consent; as a result, only 12% of citizens sign up.  In Austria, however, citizens must opt out because their program is based on presumed consent; in Austria, 99% of citizens are organ donors.

Of course, we should not always assume that governments will nudge their citizens towards the most benevolent options.  Therefore, we should be more alert when we are making decisions.  Consider not just what the default option is, but also why it might be the default option.  It’s more cognitive taxing to examine options besides just the default, but often it allows us to expand our perspective and to take advantage of opportunities we wouldn’t have considered otherwise.

 

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What is the default effect, and how does a country like Austria use it to nudge citizens to become organ donors?

Challenge - Wink, Wink, Nudge, Nudge:  The example of how Australia nudges its citizens to become organ donors is just one example of how a government might influence its citizens towards positive action.  Do some research on nudges.  Write a paragraph defining the term for a reader who is unfamiliar with it and give a concrete example to illustrate it.

ALSO ON THIS DAY:  

December 23, 1923:  Today is the birthday of Leonard B. Stern (1923-2011), American screenwriter, producer, and director.  Stern will probably be best remembered, however, as the co-creator of the game Mad Libs, the classic game where players insert randomly generated words into a passage based on the words’ parts of speech. Speaking of parts of speech, the story of the creation of Mad Libs begins in 1953 with two simple adjectives:  “clumsy” and “naked.”  At the time Stern was working on a television script for Jackie Gleason’s pioneering television show The Honeymooners. One day Stern was sitting at his typewriter, searching his mind for a precise adjective to describe the nose of one of his characters.  When Stern’s best friend and fellow word-lover Roger Price showed up, Stern asked him for help, and as Stern explains, the rest is history:

I said, “I need an adjective that --” and before I could further define my need, Roger said, “Clumsy and naked.”  I laughed out loud.  Roger asked, “What’s so funny?”  I told him, thanks for his suggestions, [my character now had] a clumsy nose  -- or, if you will, a naked nose.  Roger seldom laughed, but he did that time, confirming we were onto something--but what it was, we didn’t know.  “Clumsy” and “naked” were appropriately inappropriate adjectives that had led us to an incorrect but intriguing, slightly bizarre juxtaposing of words.

The name of the game and its publication didn’t happen until five years later.  Sitting in a New York restaurant one morning in 1958, Stern and Price overheard a conversation between an actor and his agent.  The actor said he wanted to “ad-lib” an interview; the agent responded, saying that he would be “mad” to do it.  Stern and Price now had a name, Mad Libs, but no publisher.  Unable to find anyone to print their game, they decided to do it themselves, paying to have fourteen thousand copies printed.  To publicize the game, the creators arranged for it to be used for introducing guests on Steve Allen’s Sunday night television show.  Within three days of the game’s appearance on television, stores were sold out.  Soon Stern and Price joined forces with their friend Larry Sloan to form a publishing company called Price Stern Sloan (or PSS!).  Before long Mad Libs became a bestseller, and PSS! became the largest publisher on the West Coast (1).

Sources:

1-Thaler, Richard H. and Cass R. Sunstein.  Nudge:  Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New York:  Penguin Books, 2008.

2-Price, Roger and Leonard Stern.  The Best of Mad Libs:  50 Years of Mad Libs.  New York:  Price Stern Sloan, 2008.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - December 22

How did a failed doomsday prophecy in 1954 lead to an essential psychological insight into how humans rationalize failure?

Subject:  Cognitive Dissonance - The Seekers

Event: Dorothy Martin’s Prophecy, 1954

 

We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. -George Orwell

In 1954, psychologist Leon Festinger saw an intriguing headline in the newspaper:  “Prophecy From Planet Clarion Call to City:  Flee That Flood.”  The article explained the strange beliefs of a Chicago cult called the Seekers, led by housewife Dorothy Martin, who claimed to be receiving communications from the planet Clarion.  Based on these communications, Martin revealed that on December 21, 1954, the world would end.  Prior to the event, however, Martin also explained that aliens would come via flying saucers to collect her faithful followers and take them to safety on Clarion.

Assuming that Martin’s proclamations were incorrect, Festinger arranged for some of his students to infiltrate the Seekers in order to observe them up close.  Festinger was especially interested in how the group would react on this day, December 22, when they learned that the flying saucers did not arrive as scheduled and that the world did not end.

As Festinger expected, the morning of December 22 dawned without the arrival of any alien visitors.  Early that morning at 4:45 AM Martin called the Seekers together to deliver her latest message from Clarion.

Martin’s message totally reframed the Seekers’ situation, turning it from tragedy to triumph.  She proclaimed that because her people had shown how much faith, the earth had been spared:

 “…by his word have ye been saved -- for from the mouth of death have ye been delivered and at no time has there been such a force loosed upon the Earth.  Not since the beginning of time upon this Earth has there been such  force of Good and light as now floods this room.”

Festinger documented the story of the Seekers in his 1956 book When Prophecy Fails, and he called the phenomenon of clashing beliefs experienced by the Seekers cognitive dissonance.  And as he further explained, cognitive dissonance is a type of thinking all humans experience:  facing incompatible beliefs, we rationalize a situation or justify a failure. Who hasn’t, for example, gone on a diet one day and then gone on a junk food binge the next.  We might be disappointed with ourselves, but we are also capable of buoying our self esteem by rationalizing our behavior by explaining it away as a minor indiscretion.

                                                                    Image by Maddy Mazur from Pixabay 

To establish the reality of cognitive dissonance under experimental conditions, Festinger set up a study that he called “The Boring Task.”  It began by giving subjects an hour-long task:  simply turning pegs monotonously on a wooden board.  Once that task was completed, he offered half the subjects one dollar to tell the next person waiting to complete the task that it was fun and interesting.  The other half of the subjects were offered twenty dollars to tell the next person in line that the task was fun and interesting.  Finally, all participants were interviewed by researchers and asked what they really thought about the task.  The results showed that subjects who had been paid one dollar reported that the task was enjoyable, while subjects who were paid twenty dollars reported that the task was terribly dull.

Festinger interpreted the results as consistent with how ordinary people adjust their beliefs when faced with cognitive dissonance.  The people who were given just one dollar to lie experienced an uncomfortable clash of belief between their true feelings about the task being boring and the fact that they had told someone else it was fun.  This clash of beliefs was resolved by simply altering their beliefs and reporting that the task was actually fun.  In contrast, the people who were given twenty dollars felt no need to alter their beliefs because they had been fairly compensated to lie and thus felt no need to justify their actions (1).

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  How did Festinger’s boring task show that ordinary people experience cognitive dissonance?

Challenge - Franklin and the Fish:  In his autobiography, Benjamin Franklin recounts the following incident.  Read it carefully, and explain how specifically Franklin experienced cognitive dissonance:

I believe I have omitted mentioning that , in my first voyage from Boston, being becalmed off Block Island, our people set about catching cod, and hauled up a great many. Hitherto I had stuck to my resolution of not eating animal food, and on this occasion I considered, with my master Tryon, the taking every fish as a kind of unprovoked murder, since none of them had or ever could do us any injury that might justify the slaughter. All this seemed very reasonable. But I had formerly been a great lover of fish, and when this came hot out of the frying-pan, it smelt admirably well. I balanced some time between principle and inclination, till I recollected that, when the fish were opened, I saw smaller fish taken out of their stomachs. Then thought I, "If you eat one another, I don't see why we mayn't eat you." So I dined upon cod very heartily, and continued to eat with other people, returning only now and then occasionally to a vegetable diet. So convenient a thing it is to be a reasonable creature, since it enables one to find or make a reason for everything one has a mind to do.

 

ALSO ON THIS DAY:

December 22, 1944:  On this day in 1944, American soldiers of the 101 Airborne Division at the Belgian town of Bastogne were surrounded by German forces.  In what later became known as the Battle of the Bulge, the American forces were caught off guard when Hitler launched a surprise counteroffensive.  At 11:30 on the morning of December 22, German couriers with white flags arrived at the American lines, delivering a letter demanding the surrender of the Americans.  The acting commander of the 101st, Brigadier General Anthony McAuliffe, read the letter.  After pausing for a moment to reflect and to ask for input from his subordinates, he scribbled the following laconic reply:

 

To the German commander:

 

Nuts!

 

The American commander

 

The German couriers spoke English, but they were puzzled by the general’s reply.  As U.S. officers escorted them back to the defensive line, they explained to the Germans that “nuts” meant the same thing as “go to hell.” The soldiers of the 101st continued to hold their ground under the attacks of the Germans for the four days that followed until the siege was finally broken with the arrival of U.S. tank forces of the Third Army, led by Lieutenant General George S. Patton. The laconic reply has a long military tradition that dates back to the Spartans of ancient Greece, who were known for their blunt statements and dry wit.  In fact, the word “laconic,” meaning “concise, abrupt” is a toponym originating from a region of Sparta known as Laconia.  In Spartan schools, for example, a boy whose reply to a question was too verbose was subject to being punished by having his thumb bitten by his teacher (3).  When Philip II of Macedon - father of Alexander the Great - invaded Greece in the third century BC, he sent the following threat to the Spartans:   “You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."  The Spartan’s replied:  “If.”  (4).

 

Sources:  

1-Grimes, David Rober.  Good Thinking.  New York:  The Experiment, 2019.

2-The Electric Ben Franklin.  The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin (1793).

3-Cartledge, Paul.  Spartan Reflections. University of California Press, 2003:  85.

4-http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=laconic. https://www.army.mil/article/92856

THINKER'S ALMANAC - December 21

Subject: Creative Thinking - Functional Fixedness

Event:  The story “Angels on the Head of a Pin” appears in The Saturday Review, 1968

Children must be taught how to think, not what to think. -Margaret Mead

On this day in 1968, Alexander Calandra published a story in The Saturday Review magazine entitled “Angels on the Head of a Pin.”

In the story, Calandra recounts his interaction with a physics student who was referred to him by another instructor who requested that Calandra referee the student’s unconventional answer to a test question.

The question on the exam was “Show how it is possible to determine the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer.”  

The student responded to the question as follows:  “Take a barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower the barometer to the street and then bring it up, measuring the length of the rope.  The length of the rope is the height of the building.”

Although the student’s answer was correct, it clearly did not reflect the instructor’s expectation that a student answers the question in a way that reveals a competence in physics.  A correct answer would involve using the barometer to measure the difference between the pressure at the top of the building and the bottom.

Offering the student a second chance to answer the question, Calandra gave the student six minutes.  This time the student-generated the following answer: 

"Take the barometer to the top of the building and lean over the edge of the roof. Drop that barometer, timing its fall with a stopwatch. Then using the formula S = ½ a t2, one could easily calculate the height of the building.”

Intrigued by the student’s thinking, Calandra asked him what other solutions he had to the problem.  The student then proceeds to give four more possible methods.  One, involving a comparison of the shadows cast by the barometer and the building; two, using the barometer as a ruler and marking off the length of the barometer on the wall while climbing the stairs; three, using the barometer on the end of a string to make a pendulum; and four, knocking on the janitor’s door and asking him the following: "I have a fine barometer which will be yours if you tell me the height of this building.”

The truly fascinating thing about Calandra’s parable is that it is the student who is being tested who becomes the teacher, supplying Calandra and the reader with a powerful lesson in flexible thinking.  Too often students are taught one, supposedly acceptable way to solve a problem, rather than being encouraged to use their creativity to explore multiple correct possibilities.  

The student was courageously resisting functional fixedness, the type of thinking that limits solutions to conventional, acceptable answers and discourages new ideas and innovative thinking.  

For example, try the following brain teaser:

What is the capital of Antarctica?

If you Google the question, searching for a city, you’ll discover that Antarctica has no cities, let alone a capital city.  However, if you look at the question with a bit more of a flexible mindset, you might realize that the word “capital” can also refer to letters; therefore, the answer is capital A.

Challenge - Defenestrate The Box:  As the student illustrated in the story, functional fixedness can hinder creative thinking.  Do a bit of research on creative problem solving, and write a public service announcement that encourages people to think outside of the box.  What are important characteristics and habits of creative thinking, and how can people apply these habits to think more creatively?

 

Sources:

1-Calandra, Alexander. “Angels on a Pin.” Saturday Review 21 Dec. 1968.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - December 20

What can people’s willingness or unwillingness to eat chocolate molded into the shape of dog poop tell us about human thinking?

Subject: Thinking - “Aliefs” and Beliefs

Event:  Birthday of philosopher Tamar Szabo Gendler, 1965 

Today is the birthday of philosopher Tamar Szabo Gendler, who is the Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Yale.

With the coining of one simple word, Gendler has provided insight into human psychology.  We have all heard of “beliefs,” but how many of us know about “aliefs”?

                                                                Image by John Hain from Pixabay 

According to Gendler, aliefs are our automatic, instinctive, attitudes toward our world.  Unlike our beliefs, which are conscious and rational, aliefs revolve around words beginning with the letter A: affective, associative, automatic, and irrational (1).

To illustrate the difference between aliefs and beliefs, and to show how they interact, imagine you are riding up to the top of a skyscraper in a glass elevator that runs on the outside of the building.  The elevator has been in operation for years, is maintained frequently, and is safe.  Nevertheless, you have a fear of heights, so as the elevator rises and you look down on the city below, you become fearful.  This instinctive fear represents an alief because it is not rational and springs from instinctive emotions.  Internally you are also experiencing belief since the rational side of you knows that you are safe and that there is no danger of falling.

Aliefs explain why we get scared at horror movies:  even though the rational part of us knows that images on a screen cannot hurt us, our aliefs still trigger our brains to feel fear.

Psychologist Paul Rozin has completed research that gives interesting insights into aliefs.  In one study, he offered subjects a delicious sample of pure chocolate; there was one hitch, however: the chocolate was molded into a dog poop shape.  Despite the fact that each subject knew that they were being offered pure chocolate, 40 percent refused the offer. Rozin got similar results when he asked subjects to drink apple juice out of a sparkling new bedpan (2).

The interaction of alief and beliefs also help us to understand the nature of prejudice and bias.  While we may believe that we harbor no racial prejudice against any group, it is possible that we hold aliefs that reflect implicit racial bias.  Similarly, we may claim to be progressive when it comes to eschewing stereotypes about gender roles; nevertheless, we should realize that our aliefs might reflect stereotypes about the acceptable roles of men versus women within the home or in the workplace.

 

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What is the difference between aliefs and beliefs, and why do they matter?

Challenge - Simple as A and B: Write a public service announcement that explains the difference between aliefs and beliefs. Also, explain how each of us experiences both of these types of thinking on a regular basis.

ALSO ON THIS DAY:

December 20, 2022:  On this day in 1946, the movie It’s A Wonderful Life premiered in New York at the Globe Theatre.  Seventy years after its release, the story of how George Bailey arrived at his joyous epiphany is still one of the most popular holiday films ever made. The film was based on a short story by Philip Van Doren Stern called “The Greatest Gift.”  After unsuccessful attempts to get the story published, Stern mailed 200 copies of the story to friends and family during the holiday season in 1943 as a Christmas card.  After the story came to the attention of executives at RKO Pictures, they bought the rights to the story for $10,000 (3). One rhetorically interesting aspect of the film is the dialogue of its protagonist George Bailey.  In one of the film's most famous scenes, George pleads with his antagonist, the scheming misanthrope Mr. Potter:

Just remember this, Mr. Potter: that this rabble you're talking about, they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath?

Notice the intentional overuse of conjunctions here.  This rhetorical device is called polysyndeton.  The added conjunctions slow the list down, emphasizing each individual item.  The repetition of conjunctions gives the reader the feeling that things are piling up and creates a tone that is more formal than a typical list.

Sources:

1-Santos, Laurie. “CRITICAL THINKING - Cognitive Biases: Alief.” YouTube 15 Sept. 2015.

2-Tsouderos, Trine. “That's disgusting! But we love it.” Chicago Tribune 27 Oct. 2005.

3-http://failuremag.com/feature/article/its_a_wonderful_life/P2/

THINKER'S ALMANAC - December 19

In 18th century America, what was the one publication that most homes had hanging on a hook in their kitchen?

Subject:  Proverbs - Poor Richard’s Almanack

Event: Benjamin Franklin publishes an almanac, 1732

Almanacs are cyclical, a reminder that things happen in their time and place, and we can prepare and make plans, but frost might come anyway. Or a coyote might eat our chickens. But there’s next year. And regardless, we can still count the acorns and avoid killing the spiders. -Jess McHugh

On this day in 1732, Poor Richard’s Almanack was first published.  The publisher and writer was Benjamin Franklin, who wrote under the pseudonym Richard Saunders.

                                                            Image by Tumisu from Pixabay 

Poor Richard’s Almanack was just one of many almanacs published in the United States.  In a country that was primarily agrarian, an almanac was an essential tool for attempting to forecast the weather.  Many homes did not have a single book, not even a Bible, but they did have an almanac.  Typically almanacs had a hole in the top left corner so they could be placed on a hook for easy access (1).

In 1758, Franklin published an essay where he summed up the success of his almanac and explained his purpose in publishing it:

 In 1732 I first published my Almanac under the name of Richard Saunders; it was continued by me about twenty-five years, and commonly called Poor Richard's Almanac. I endeavoured to make it both entertaining and useful, and it accordingly came to be in such demand, that I reaped considerable profit from it, vending annually near ten thousand. And observing that it was generally read, (scarce any neighbourhood in the province being without it,) I considered it as a proper vehicle for conveying instruction among the common people, who bought Scarcely any other books. I therefore filled all the little spaces, that occurred between the remarkable days in the Calendar, with proverbial sentences, chiefly such as inculcated industry and frugality, as the means of procuring wealth, and thereby securing virtue; it being more difficult for a man in want to act always honestly, as (to use here one of those proverbs) It is hard for an empty sack to stand upright (2)

While full of practical tips and advice, it’s the philosophical content of Poor Richard’s Almanac that has truly stood the test of time. Franklin’s proverbs are models of concise, clear, and cogent wisdom:

 

Little strokes fell great oaks.

A penny saved is a penny earned.

Early to bed and early to rise, makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise.

People who are wrapped up in themselves make small packages.

Well done is better than well said.

If a man could have half his wishes, he would double his troubles.

Love your enemies, for they tell you your faults.

Laziness travels so slowly that Poverty soon overtakes him. (3)

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  Why was the almanac such a prized possession by 18th-century Americans?

Challenge - Wise Words: What is your favorite proverb?  Why do you like it?  What timeless wisdom does it present to its readers?

 

ALSO ON THIS DAY:

-December 19, 1932:  On this date in 1932 the following list appeared in Time magazine under the title “The Ten Most Beautiful Words in the English Language”:

dawn, hush, lullaby, murmuring, tranquil,

mist, luminous, chimes, golden, melody

The list was compiled by author and lexicographer Wilfred J. Funk (1883-1965), who was the president of Funk & Wagnalls, the publisher of the Funk & Wagnalls Dictionary.  Funk was a lifelong proponent of vocabulary acquisition.  From 1945 to 1965 he prepared a monthly feature for Reader’s Digest called It Pays to Increase Your Word Power.  Funk’s monthly Word Power quiz featured a collection of words united by a common theme and was one of the magazine’s most popular features.  When Funk died in 1965, his son Peter continued the feature, which became It Pays to ‘Enrich’ Your Word Power. In 1942, Funk co-authored the book 30 Days to a More Powerful Vocabulary.  The book was a wildly popular bestseller, leading the way for the numerous vocabulary-building books and programs published today (4).

Sources:

1-McHugh, Jess. “The Quiet Mysticism of Almanacs.” LA Review of Books, 11 July 2021.

2-Franklin, Benjamin. “The Way to Wealth” (1758).

3-Proverbs and Aphorisms from Benjamin Franklin's Poor Richard's Almanack. Poorrichard.net.

4-Lexicography:  Words That Sizzled. Time 11 June 1965.