About this blog

“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion...” John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

This blog is about perspective. It is not about right or wrong, about the best or worst. It is about appreciating that there are few absolutes. Free speech is to be honored, but we cannot shout “Fire” in a crowded theater in the absence of a fire. War is undesirable, but when an enemy bombs our Naval bases in Hawaii, it may be needed. Capitalism seems to work better than other economic systems, but as we have seen repeatedly, it needs to have limits set.

I first heard the aphorism, “I’ve never seen a pancake so thin it didn’t have two sides,” in the mid-1990s from Lee Fritchler, at the time the President of Dickinson College. It stuck with me, perhaps because it fits my worldview.

It summed up my approach to political philosophy, to the business world, and to many of life’s every day issues. It is an extension of the line of thought inculcated in me by S.I. Hayakawa’s classic work, “Language in Thought and Action.”

Seeing the world from both sides now (another formulation, credit to Joni Mitchell) is highly recommended for diplomacy, mediating arguments of all sorts and otherwise leading a stress-reduced existence. It does not work well for advocates, militants, or protest songwriters.

About Me

I’ve been a journalist, entrepreneur, academic, author, and research director. More than you need to know can be found here. As a journalist, I learned to ask questions and search for balance. I often take the role of devil’s advocate. I have a needlepoint on my bookshelf from my daughter: “I’d agree with you, but then we’d both be wrong.” A few years ago a friend who had a small book club that read current political philosophy asked me to join because everyone there was of a liberal bent and they tended to agree with each other. He thought I might stimulate more wide-ranging discussions. At the end of the year he admitted that, though we often indeed disagreed, they found some of my arguments persuasive and thanked me for adding dimension to the monthly sessions. Objective fulfilled.

Why subscribe?

Subscribe to get full access to the newsletter and website. Never miss an update. It’s free.

Stay up-to-date

You won’t have to worry about missing anything. Every new edition of the newsletter—and now the podcast— goes directly to your inbox.