
From Fannie Mae's corporate website:
Fannie Mae provides stability, liquidity, and affordability to the nation's housing finance system under all economic conditions. We are a shareholder-owned company with a public mission. We exist to expand affordable housing and bring global capital to local communities in order to serve the U.S. housing market.
From this morning's New York Times (July 14, 2008):
"The president has asked me to work with Congress to act on this plan immediately," the Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., said Sunday [in above photo, July 13, 2008] on the steps of the Treasury building. "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac play a central role in our housing finance system and must continue to do so in their current form [emphasis mine as a point of this article] as shareholder-owned companies. Their support for the housing market is particularly important as we work through the current housing correction."
While senior Democratic and Republican officials in successive administrations have for many years repeatedly denied that the trillions of dollars of debt Fannie and Freddie issued is guaranteed, the package, if adopted, would bring the Treasury closer than ever to exposing taxpayers to potentially huge new liabilities. The two companies could face significant new losses this year as the wave of housing foreclosures continues. Officials seemed to suggest, however, that they had little choice but to intervene...
***
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are government sponsored corporations that go back to the 1930's. Freddie Mac (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation) came into being in 1970. Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association), established as a response to the Great Depression, was privatized in 1968 to help balance the US budget at the height of the Vietnam War. We now have another war that has distracted our attentions to the real problem that never went away.
Most of the various native societies which the European waves of exploration, and later cruel exploitation, traditionally have in common is a ritualized mystical understanding of the interconnectivity of the whole of nature. The local symbols and rituals might look and feel very different, but essentially it is exactly the same symbolic understanding that one finds within the roots of even our own Judeo-Christian/Islam heritage, once we sift away a history of various political agendas that have diluted away perhaps our own biblically-relative reservoir of this mostly unconscious wisdom - a wisdom based on a flow of social evolution that goes back prehistorically. Genetically, and imprinted or expressed in the most ancient recesses of our central nervous system, this "wisdom" theoretically goes back to the most basic one-celled creatures of our oceans over 3 billion years ago, which learned to adapt to and then slowly transform over geological history an environment that would today instantly kill any complex organism. In a more fundamental way, the intuitive wisdom of our deeper symbolic universe expresses how all energy and mass in the universe is inextricably entangled. Carl Jung made a deep study of this underlying wealth of symbolic understanding found within the core of most cultures, and suggested through his theories of psychology that the quest for one's fulfillment can be found by taking a personal, mystical journey to the soul.
Let's for a moment free the "soul" from anyone's local religious and sociopolitical relativity.
Now, it may not make a whole lot of logical sense to a European when a Cherokee sends forth a prayer to the spirit of the white-tailed deer along with the arrow he has sent into its chest. Equally, it may not make scientific sense when a traditional Navajo clan performs rituals that includes returning to the harsh environment of the US southwest symbolic bits of their sustaining corn. Potlatch ceremonials certainly threatened the economic agendas of the Europeans wishing to exploit the resources of the Pacific northwest. Thus the fledging Canadian and US colonial governments tried banning this Nootka and related societies' practice of wealth redistribution. In a Potlatch, the wealthy in the local society often gave away some of their most prized possessions, either into a community pool or into a ritual fire, as a way to reduce the local stress of extremes in personal wealth accumulation. In the cultures that evolved out of the Vedic Creation Stories, including Buddhism, the common way in which one greets another holds this old wisdom: "Namaste!" Which is an informal expression of "namaskar,"and means, "The divine in me acknowledges and respects the divine in you." The placing of the right palm (represents divine nature) to the left (represents physical nature) into a prayer pose in these every-day, unconscious greetings among local people symbolizes the integration of this duality of one's true nature. This ancient Indus Valley culture also gave us the concept of "karma," whch is not to be confused with the "cause and effect" mechanics relative to energy systems in physics, though it's a close analogy. If we go back to the more pagan or mystical roots and influences of Christianity, we find the exact same expression. It is these bits of a symbolic universe that helps preserve a memory of how interconnected anyone's activity is within an ecosystem The economic policies that are entrenched in the G-8 is unfortunately but an expression of an old attempt to subjugate nature, the classic "devil or egocentric archetype." At some point in the evolution of the human brain to adapt and survive socially, we met up with the classic issue of either identifying with the ego formation of that brain or the underlying nature of consciousness.
Any social institution - be it religious, scientific or even economic & political – that inculcates this deeper understanding and respect for behavioral patterns that are in harmony with the underlying ecology of nature will naturally yield unfathomable dividends. But since these "dividends" cannot by their very nature "belong" to anyone in particular but to the whole of the temporary natural system that wrought it, this of course threatens the narcissistic point inherent in the economic policies of the G-8, and of course the banking structures that frame these policies.
This echoes also with Socrates' philosophy on economics. He stated that wealth does not produce goodness but that it is goodness which brings about wealth, even in how one's nation accumulates wealth and vitality. Socrates further suggested that goodness consists of caring for one's soul. If one cared for one's soul, one would be intuitively unable to act against the flowing laws of nature. The wealth from investments based on that understanding - which includes what climatology is beginning to teach us and a history of economic collapses, war, intentional ethnic destruction & pandemics... and dark ages that have yet to teach us anything - won't crash like Fani-Mae and Freddi-Mac.
In another article, someone suggested in a comment that with the Internet, perhaps many of the issues now plaguing us will in a few decades become past history, due to the free and almost instant exchange of information. The Internet in effect can become a tool to learn from everyone's mistakes on this planet almost in the moments as they occur. It is that historic inability to link a watershed of past actions with current issues that has plagued western civilization for many centuries, and no economic policy coming from this White House or the G8 has yet figured that one out.
Allied to all this, and I keep saying it and I'm going to again in this article. Simply due to genetics, the female brain better communicates between its hemispheres. As the first comment below suggests, this is perhaps a naturally selected characteristic of that gender most invested in nurturing life into its fullest potentials, ie: to feel the possibilities in the future. The male ego in this gender-equal dynamics ought to be there to protect that essentially female nurturing of the possibilities in the future. We ought to better understand what female intuition is all about, and not feel so threatened by it, but rather learn how to better develop it in the male brain.
Cutting edge research in neurobiology seems to indicate that under the right conditions of nurture through the childhood stages of brain development, these more dense synaptic connections can in many ways be equally expressed in both the male and female brain. Many societies have incorporated into their cultural patterns the very mechanical processes this requires, such as the meditation and yoga practices of the far East and the rituals and vision quests found in many African and native American societies.... well, in fact, from all corners of the world. Just like learning to walk, it is a process of continuously but gently pushing the envelope a bit against the resistance of the status quo. In matrilineal Navajo society, a pregnant mother and all her "aunts and grandmothers" talk to the unborn fetus to explain how the day-to-day activities of home and hearth relate to the cosmos. This traditional transmission of society's underlying wisdom then continues seamlessly once the child is born.
I feel quite certain that had something like an ERA succeeded in getting past 2/3 of the US states long ago, many of the issues now threatening society would never have occurred. CG Jung suggested that the very point of human life is to learn how to better integrate within ourselves the archetypal male and female characteristics. I hope Obama choses a good woman as his running mate.


Comments: 71 ( 1 removed by Bent Lorentzen )
All we need to do is breathe, take a step out of our bubble, and see that all will work out for the better in the long-term.
Great piece, thanks for posting it.
Hope you don't mind that I integrated your comment into my article's final paragraph.
Interesting concepts, some good facts. Thanks for sharing!
I thought we were speaking strictly about the "housing correction". Great term used by Mr. Paulsen, sounds so much less painful and places the proper amount of distance between the people in power and those who live with the implications.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are sacrosanct - no matter what, there will be a bailout with the bill presented to the American tax payer.
Nicole said it best, so I will just say that I concur wholeheartedly. Thank you Bent for revving up my brain as I have my first cup of coffee, my scalp is tingling:)
The Final Potlatch
Join the Peace Wave
A great article and I'm glad to see that someone recognizes the contributions of matriarchal societies. In truth, a matriarchal society is a more balanced society because it gives value to the universal feminine without forcing a female to, in essence, become a "short man".
Thanks again for a great article and lots of food for thought!
"" This echoes also with Socrates' philosophy on economics. He stated that wealth does not produce goodness but that it is goodness which brings about wealth, even in how one's nation accumulates wealth and vitality. ""
Well said Bent, America is the result of the greatness of the goodness of it's Souls ... something we will easily and surely lose with the types of leadership and attitudes held by those without Soul awareness.
I have read where CG Jung made the assumption that all women were "feeling" and that all men were "thinking." This may have been true of the people he met - primarily people with relationship problems - but the MBTI crowd has shown this is not true. That is, MBTI - where real statistics are kept for millions of people - say that 2/3 of the men and 1/3 of the women have thinking as their primary decision making function. Also, 2/3 of the women and 1/3 of the men have feeling as their primary decision making function.
Personally, when I studied this I came to the conclusion that MBTI is probably wrong, in that the ratio is probably 50-50 in both sexes, but that social pressure tends to make women answer questions as feelers, and men aswer questions as thinkers.
I have observed many people, and have come to a conclusion that the feeling-thinking dichotomy itself is wrong.
Why a government sponsored entity? Because at those times the banks were not consistent in their lending practice for home loans, and it was thought that Governmental sponsorship would give those entities the consistent lending necessary.
Why now are these organizations seeming to fail? For only a couple of reasons.
First they were forced to extent credit at an unrealistic multiple (currently around 68 to 1 ratio) because the home market collapsed.
Second, in 2006 or so when the value of homes ran into unsupportable highs, they started to fall. In doing so the multiple went from around 30 to 1 lending ratio to where it is now and Fanny and Freddy needed to take in the foreclosures, as they insured those loans. There was no corruption at all just a collapsing and falling home values. Fannie and Freddy just got caught up in the insurance side of the collapsing home prices thus extending the margin rate that Freddy and Fannie to a rate, which is thought a not sustainable rate. However, currently it is thought that Freddy and Fannie have enough cash on hand to get through this, if it doesn't get worse.
BTW, where in my article have I expressed anything sexist?
Secondly, I haven't read anything where Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac collapsed yet. So far it's just been Indy Mac, but the government said they would bail out Fannie & Freddie if anything happens.
I thought it was for one thing, then it turned into something totally different.
I can't switch gears that quickly, so I became confused.
My brain shuts off after that. That's the way I am, sorry.
Please stay to the subject at hand. If I am to read the article, that's all I am saying.
Bent, I'm not sure about the feeling/thinking dichotomy either. I do believe in the Cosmic Consciousness that informs all living things, however, which, as I recall, was a concept first put forth by Jung. (Or not...my female thinking area has become somewhat muddled by age). I "think" that women are somewhat more able to access the information contained in the C.C., but that might just be a "feeling". I'll have to feel about this some more.
(:
You might be interested in this article on the collective unconscious. It was the very first article in Gather, translated from the danish article.
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976942905
I would also like to say that Melissa's comment is not only insulting to many women, it lacks intelligence. I hope she, and everyone who thinks like her will familiarize themselves with hormonal issues that affect men.
Maybe it's one of the two weeks out of the month that she can't think clearly.
I regret that Melissa thinks her inability to think clearly applies to the rest of her sex as well. The only one it seems to apply to here is Angela.
Of some significance is that they are "bailing out" the bond holders here but not necessarily the stockholders - thus a cool reception on the NYSE.
However, the current problem still wouldn't even exist if the housing crash hadn't been so severe in the last two years.
By the way Indymac bank in Pasadena is probablly a larger bank than the Dane bank Roskilde Bank that went bust.
Dave, there's a formal sequence here that exists for all common stock companies, that is that the Bond Holders are the first to get their money back, then the Preferred Stock holders then if anything is left it's spread out to the Common Stock holders of the company. This is always how it is, and is no change at all.
Regarding MBTI. This was not developed by Jung, but was developed based some of Jungs work. That is, Jung covered more than MBTI, but almost all of MBTI is based on Jung. The important point is that MBTI provides actual measurable statistics rather than generalities, which Jung does not provide.
I've always thought of MBTI as a means of dealing with normal people, not people on the extreme (although sometimes the insight given my MBTI helps in understanding people's problems). For example, I have a friend who has an ENTJ personality type. Therefore, I do not get angry with him when he appears to be a bit controlling.
By "The male ego in this gender-equal dynamics ought to be there to protect that essentially female nurturing of the possibilities in the future." I only mean, and both women and men can manifest this attribute equally, that the "male ego" is one which can react rather very quickly and aggressively. There are times when that characteristic needs to be engaged, especially as it applies to protecting what the "female element" (also equally manifestalble by both genders) nurtures into life, and this can be a human infant, or anything else one creates and wishes to nurture into society that is good for everyone. This is a very Jungian approach to issues...
great article Bent - thank you!
Salud,
Mariana Titus
I am disappointed Hillary is not in the running...makes one reconsider the idea of having a three party system...but a female touch in the political scene would be an excellent touch...I hope Obama is of the intelligence he appears to be and considers his options if we are to have any "change" in our political arena...
Women take their place on corporate boards
By Sharon Reier
Published: March 21, 2008
As the homeland of strong female characters from Nora in "A Doll's House" to former Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland, Norway seemed the natural place to enact a law in 2003 requiring companies to fill 40 percent of corporate board seats with women by 2008.
The 40 percent target has been met, with some companies embracing the change enthusiastically: Domstein, a major seafood company that never had a woman on its board, named Hanne Refsholt, the chief executive of the largest cooperative dairy in Norway, to be its chairman.
But when the law was first proposed in 2002, "all the companies were up in arms," recalled Elin Hurvenes, a Norwegian entrepreneur who founded the Professional Board Forum to help women candidates meet the institutional and wealthy private investors who call the shots when it comes to picking boards in Norway.
"Executives were quoted as saying it was a completely ridiculous law and it would never happen," she said.
Hurvenes, who holds a masters of business administration degree and sits on the boards of two start-up companies, said it never would have happened without the penalties in the law that threatened to shut companies down if they did not comply. In 1993, women took up 3 percent of corporate board seats; in 2002, the figure was 6 percent.
"If organic growth is 3 percent every 10 years," Hurvenes said, "it would have taken 100 years to get to 40 percent."
For ambitious women eager to gain a seat in the boardroom, the good news from Norway and elsewhere is that a growing number of companies are searching for women with qualifications, talent and tact to serve as outside, or nonexecutive, directors.
"The general consensus today is that diversity is very good," said Krister Svensson, who runs CMi, a mentoring program based in Brussels for senior executives preparing to be board members or chief executives. This year Svensson has five women in his nonexecutive director mentoring program; last year he had none.
There is, Svensson said, a new paradigm for corporate governance: "If you have 12 gray-haired men, average age 65, on a board, they tend to think about business prospects and strategy from the same perspective. But if you put a 45-year-old from a hot company and a woman and an international representative on the board, the quality of the debate will deepen."
High-profile corporate governance studies like the Higgs Report in Britain, which in 2003 emphasized the need to "broaden the pool of candidates" for directorships, have also influenced some companies to appoint women to their boards.
But the reality on the ground is that the proportion is still small. Experts say it is constrained by the small number of women executives who have reached the so-called corner suite level, as well as a deep-rooted desire at many boards to preserve traditional male networks and the chemistry and comfort level that go with them.
That is why Norway's five-year process has raised expectations among women jockeying for board seats throughout Europe.
Since women and men often network in different circles, Hurvenes's company, sponsored by corporations like Norsk Hydro and Telenor, offered a forum for companies to meet women who were interested in filling board seats. Women are often less vocal about asking for a higher position, and Hurvenes encouraged them to use the contacts they made. She called the new law "the largest transfer of power to women since they got the vote."
Now Norway's initiative is being followed elsewhere. In Spain, the Socialist-dominated Parliament has passed legislation calling for 40 percent board participation by 2015, although so far it does not have the kind of enforcement measures that accompanied the Norwegian law.
In the Netherlands an organization called TopBrainstorm is preparing a voluntary charter for corporations to sign that would commit companies to meet targets for getting women into the kind of senior executive positions that make it possible for them to become board candidates. The initiative will be presented to the Dutch government on May 28.
Marieke Bax, a former Sara Lee executive who founded TopBrainstorm, said that in addition to corporations pledging to promote women, there needed to be a government initiative to smooth the paths and build the image of women who choose to devote a large portion of their lives to corporate careers. In the Netherlands, Bax said, 85 percent of women with children work a maximum three days a week because of social norms - mothers are expected to bring their children home from school to eat lunch, and hiring a nanny is prohibitively expensive because of the tax code. "When career women go to pick up their children after school, they are ostracized and practically spat at," Bax said.
Then last year, back-to-back medical emergencies helped push her over the edge. She could no longer afford either her home payments or her credit card bills. Then she lost her job. Now her home is in foreclosure and her credit profile in ruins.
Ms. McLeod, who is 47, readily admits her money problems are largely of her own making. But as surely as it takes two to tango, she had partners in her financial demise. In recent years, those partners, including the financial giants Citigroup, Capital One and GE Capital, were collecting interest payments totaling more than 40 percent of her pretax income and thousands more in fees.
--by GRETCHEN MORGENSON NYT
Now, if the board rooms of America were more populated by women, who have by nature a brain more invested in ensuring the survival of her children... a brain that is better predisposed to see the patterns of cause and effect of one's actions into the future... do you honestly think some women would not have objected to such irresponsible speculation, and the hierarchical hedging of those risks, on home and hearth?
From NYT
Male and female brains process challenges differently. Below are a couple of scientific abstracts that help illuminate why it is important to have an equal representation of women as with men within the decision making apparatus of any global multinational corporation or government. Pay particular attention to the scientific description of "empathy."
Although women's brains are slightly smaller on average than men, Jill M. Goldstein and co-workers have found that certain areas in the frontal cortex and emotional limbic system, including the hippocampus, are relatively larger in women, while parietal regions dealing with spatial orientation and the amygdala dealing with emotional impulses are relatively larger in men. Moreover Sandra Witelson and colleagues have found that language areas in the temporal lobe and in the frontal lobes have a greater density of neurons in women (Cahill R99). Such variations are likely connected with steroids in development as they contain some of the highest levels of sex hormone receptors. ...
...Baron-Cohen (R43, R44) suggests the female brain is adapted to 'empathy' while the male brain is adapted for understanding and building systems. These differences are at least partly innate. Even at 24 hours after birth sex differences emerge with girls looking longer at faces and boys longer at inanimate mobiles. This appears to relate to pre-natal testosterone with higher levels correlating with less eye contact and slower vocabulary development at 12 and 18 months respectively. Of course parents tend to reinforce such gender stereotypes in their boys and girls often claiming male maths skill is 'a whizz' while female achievement is 'hard work', but the innate differences still appear to exist. Similarly the preference of boys for action toys and girls for dolls is reflected in similar choices made by monkeys...
...The empathic factor also appears to relate to networking. In "The First Sex", Helen Fisher contrasts step-by-step analytic thinking, which discounts extraneous data to get at the essential principles, with a web-based associative networking mentality that gathers together disparate facts and nuances and integrates them into a coherent social process. Although both sexes do both, she claims from a host of studies that across disparate cultures, men more naturally assume the former and women the latter. ..
...Changes of educational trends [the same would occur with a change in the hiring trends within corporate CEO structures] from male preferential patterns have seen girls leap ahead in university admission rates. Compare figure. Female adolescent literacy surpasses that of males ..
...It seems clear that the sex differences in cognitive patterns arose because they proved evolutionarily advantageous. And their adaptive significance probably rests in the entire period of say 100,000 years during which Homo sapiens has emerged, and not just the cultural phase of the last 10,000 years, although this too will be having a cumulative effect. The organization of the human brain was determined over many generations by natural selection. ...
...In an ironic reflection of these differences, a study by the Pew Internet Project found that as of late 2005 roughly the same percentage of men and women in the US are serious internet users, but use it differently. Men value the net for the freedom it gives them to try new ways of doing things. By contrast women like the opportunities the net gives them to make and maintain human connections
--Courtauld Institute, London
It so happens that an unusually large number of brain-related genes are situated on the X chromosome. The sudden emergence of the X and Y chromosomes in brain function has caught the attention of evolutionary biologists. Since men have only one X chromosome, natural selection can speedily promote any advantageous mutation that arises in one of the X's genes. So if those picky women should be looking for smartness in prospective male partners, that might explain why so many brain-related genes ended up on the X.
"It's popular among male academics to say that females preferred smarter guys," Dr. Arnold said. "Such genes will be quickly selected in males because new beneficial mutations will be quickly apparent."
Several profound consequences follow from the fact that men have only one copy of the many X-related brain genes and women two. One is that many neurological diseases are more common in men because women are unlikely to suffer mutations in both copies of a gene.
Another is that men, as a group, "will have more variable brain phenotypes," Dr. Arnold writes, because women's second copy of every gene dampens the effects of mutations that arise in the other.
Greater male variance means that although average IQ is identical in men and women, there are fewer average men and more at both extremes. Women's care in selecting mates, combined with the fast selection made possible by men's lack of backup copies of X-related genes, may have driven the divergence between male and female brains. The same factors could explain, some researchers believe, why the human brain has tripled in volume over just the last 2.5 million years.
--Nicholas Wade, dept. Anthropology, University of Nebraska
Then there is the scenario sketched by philosopher Peter Singer. Evolution, he suggests, bequeathed people a small kernel of empathy, which by default they apply only within a narrow circle of friends and relations. Over the millennia, people's moral circles have expanded to encompass larger and larger polities: the clan, the tribe, the nation, both sexes, other races, and even animals. The circle may have been pushed outward by expanding networks of reciprocity, à la Wright, but it might also be inflated by the inexorable logic of the golden rule: The more one knows and thinks about other living things, the harder it is to privilege one's own interests over theirs. The empathy escalator may also be powered by cosmopolitanism, in which journalism, memoir, and realistic fiction make the inner lives of other people, and the contingent nature of one's own station, more palpable—the feeling that "there but for fortune go I".
--Dr. Steven Pinker, Professor in the Department of Psychology, Harvard University
"Congress ought to recognize that these firms [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] are insolvent, that it is allowing these firms to continue to exist as bastions of priviledge, financed by the taxpayer."
--William Poole, St. Louis Federal Reserve President
"The Federal Reserve has been unable to find any credible purpose for the huge balance sheets built by Fannie and Freddie other than the creation of profit through the exploitation of the market-granted subsidy."
--Alan Greenspan
"Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are beginning to seem like an arrogant, two-headed monopoly, controlling 90% of the market."
--Jim Leech, Iowa Republican, who has been trying for 2 decades in Congress to make the Fannies behave like they are in the real world.
Umar, 2nd quarter 2008 foreclosures jumped to the highest level in the entire history of US home mortgages. 250,000 extra homes were repossessed in the USA, and most experts, according to RealtyTrac Inc, suggest that 2.5 million homes in America will be in foreclosure this year. In Stockton, CA alone, 1 out of every 20 homes is in foreclosure.
Aside from giving the Treasury Department the power to extend Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac an unspecified line of credit and to buy their stock, a bill before Congress to save Mae and Mac will also create an independent regulator to oversee Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The regulator will establish minimum capital requirements for the two companies and limits on their portfolios. It would also have approval power over the pay packages of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac executives.
As you state, Umar, everything is just fine with the US mortgage market.
Your attempts are commentary are contradictory (re-read your first two quotes) and sad. Niether organization has asked for relief. Each organization claims it is under capitalized but solvent.
The failures of the mortgate market is due to the outrageous number of loans to unqualified applicants, i.e., greed. No, the mortgage market is not strong but don't place the blame with the loan insurers; its the issuers and the speculators that have caused the declines in the market.
Why are there so many rude people on this site?
Who's being rude, and how?
I have.
Once you do that, then we can have a reasonable conversation.
Perhaps you can even show me the error in my thinking.
Most anyone who is a good student of economics and related politics can see that in these inflationary times where the true earning ability of the average American has not kept pace with the cost of living for a few decades, compounded by the utter stupidity of wasting vast domestic and international resources and cooperative knowhow on the Iraq Invasion and allied issues of foolish aggressive reactions - well, we are approaching a historic recession at a most critical time. A time when the inertia of a whole history of similar stupid mistakes finally is coming into conflict with many other issues that economic theory as practiced until now cannot possibly tackle without a miracle, like global warming, pandemics, and people simply loosing their homes, etc.
Those seemingly more natural issues, often a consequence of bad geopolitical behavior, could so easily be resolved were we to better pool our world's collective knowledge. I'm reminded of Kennedy inspiring us to go to the moon at his speech before Rice University:
"...No man can fully grasp how far and how fast we have come, but condense, if you will, the 50,000 years of man's recorded history in a time span of but a half-century.... Only last week did we develop penicillin and television and nuclear power, and now if America's new spacecraft succeeds in reaching Venus, we will have literally reached the stars before midnight tonight.
This is a breathtaking pace, and such a pace cannot help but create new ills as it dispels old, new ignorance, new problems, new dangers. Surely the opening vistas of space promise high costs and hardships, as well as high reward....
...We set sail on this new sea [to space] because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people... Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man...
...We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.
And we did it, didn't we?
If we can go to the moon on such a notion of creative inspiration, then by all that's good in the world, we can make this history of stupid mistakes come to an end, and for that to occur, we need to enlist the minds of all good peoples, using entirely new ways of tackling problems, and that will not occur until women are equally allowed to problem solving this wonderful opportunity which which natural history's innertia is challenging the globe.
I was taught a brilliant problem-solving course by a very well known scientist decades ago, whom NASA, GE and countless other industry and governments far and near, even the old USSR, hired to help them problem solve everything from washing machines that leaked to a rocket that wouldn't launch, to interpersonal issues, and he was not a rocket scientist. One of the most brilliant of his 6-phase problem-solving technique after *defining the problem* (a whole ball of wax in itself) was to have all involved parties in a *problem* gather in a board room without regard to education, gender or any other hierarchy - from the worker on the factory floor to the corporation's CEO's. He would have all of them shoot-form-the-hip with anything that popped into their minds as a possible idea to a solution. And no matter how off the wall an idea might be, no one had the right to critique anyone's ideas at this phase, for he suggested that the answer to a problem often lay behind the shadow of a so-called stupid idea, and unless the stupid ideas had a chance to express them,selves, the true solution would never burst out. And each attempt to judge an idea in this totally and absolutely fun and creative, random idea-generating phase only served to further bury the solution. It's called often, brainstorming.
I remember how he one time described a meeting, I think at a GE factory in the early 1960's, over a bad dishwasher. A woman who worked on the floor, in this brainstorming phase, after being urged on by this professor, suddenly was brave enough to say, "Let's pee into the machine."
Of course the technicians and upper echelons in the factory, and even her own peer, guffawed and said, "What!?"
And the professor hushed everybody, and said something like, "What she said. That's exactly right. No one judge, or you stifle creativity. And it is that random creativity that propels the ultimate answer to the surface."
There would be a later phase when good science would, through one layer after the other of discriminating nonsense from the stuff of solutions, be employed to arrive at the answer. Well, GE got their answer, and of course it had nothing to do with urinating into the machine, but the point of his lesson was learned by GE. I think it was GE.