5-4-89 The [Tandy] computer at which I’m writing these words is an amazing thing. In fact, lately I’ve been thinking of it as an extension of my mind. My mind interacts causally with my arms, hands, and fingers. I see the result of my thinking—that is, the expression of my thoughts—on the computer screen. This, in turn, stimulates my mind, which produces more thoughts. Maybe a better metaphor for this phenomenon is a loop. My mind causes bodily movements, which cause images to appear on the screen, which stimulates my visual sense, which causes me to think new thoughts, which causes me to move my fingers, and so on. In this view, the computer is literally part (though not all) of me, since my mind is part (though not all) of me and the computer is part (though not all) of my mind. To test this hypothesis, all I have to do is imagine not having the computer. Would I experience disintegration of my self? Would I feel less than I now am, seated at this electronic marvel? I’m sure I would. If my summer plans are executed, I’ll get a chance to find out, because I intend to leave my laptop computer home. David [Cortner] will take his laptop computer as far as the Great Slave Lake, but while we’re on the water, neither of us will have access to a computer. I hereby predict that I’ll miss it greatly. I’ll feel incomplete, as if an important part of my mind has been shut down. Then again, since I’ll be making notes in a journal, the sense of incompleteness shouldn’t be debilitating.
Oliver North, the Marine colonel who, while an underling of the National Security Council, masterminded the Iran-Contra arms deal during the Reagan presidency, has been adjudged guilty of three of the twelve charges lodged against him by the federal government. The Washington jury deliberated for several days before returning its verdict. Because the verdict is split, commentators on both sides can claim—and are claiming—victory. Those who oppose North and his goals claim that the verdict represents society’s intolerance of deceit and self-aggrandizement. (North was convicted of obstructing Congress, making private use of governmental property, and destroying government documents. All are felonies.) Those who support North and his goals claim that the verdict represents society’s ambivalence about congressional policy in Central America. What I find disturbing is that the jury prayed during its deliberations. That’s right. According to one of the jurors, who appeared on Nightline this evening, there was an impasse in the deliberations until the jurors decided to pray for guidance and support. This apparently caused one or more of them to change their votes, resulting in a unanimous verdict. The very idea of jurors praying revulses me. It makes me sick to my stomach. What is this, a democracy or a theocracy? Do we have rule by law or by God? North will be sentenced in several weeks. I hope he gets prison time, for that will symbolize society’s refusal to tolerate public deceit.
Speaking of North, I can’t resist a comment on a popular confusion. Conservatives such as Patrick Buchanan defend North on grounds that he is a hero. Sometimes it’s turned into a slogan: “North isn’t a criminal; he’s a hero.” But this assumes that one cannot be both a criminal and a hero, and certainly that is false. The more serious confusion, however, is this. If North is a hero at all, it is because he acted bravely during the Vietnam War. His medals of honor are for actions performed many years ago, on the field of battle. As for whether he’s a criminal, that depends on whether he committed the offenses with which he is charged. The jury determined that he did; so it follows that he is a criminal. The concepts criminal and hero have different logical properties. A person is a criminal, if at all, in virtue of having performed certain actions. The same is true of a hero, except that heroism is more of an all-things-considered judgment. Just as good people can do bad things, heroes can commit crimes. And just as bad people can do good things, cowards can obey the law. The issue, it seems to me, is whether North, a so-called hero in the Vietnam War, has committed any crimes in connection with the Iran-Contra affair. If he has, then his heroism is irrelevant. Perhaps, now that North is a thrice-convicted felon, people such as Buchanan will think of him as a criminal rather than as a hero, though logically he can be both.
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 