The Paradox of Our Age

Yes, the Dalai Lama is a very wise man. What do you think of what he says here? What's your favorite line?

We have bigger houses but smaller families;
More conveniences, but less time;
We have more degrees, but less sense;
More knowledge, but less judgment;
More experts, but more problems;
More medicines, but less healthiness;
We’ve been all the way to the moon and back, but have trouble crossing the street to meet the new neighbor.
We build more computers to hold more information to produce more copies than ever but have less communication.
We have become long on quantity, but short on quality.
These are times of fast foods but slow digestion;
Tall man but short character;
Steep profits but shallow relationships.
It’s a time when there is much in the window, but nothing in the room.

Bookmark the permalink of this post.

5 Responses to The Paradox of Our Age

  1. cashel says:

    Nice post, Mike!

  2. Anonymous says:

    just. awesome.

    Nicely played.

  3. lr_khaimovich says:

    I am not sure what “It’s a time when there is much in the window, but nothing in the room” means. Look at the tendency of settling in Stockton, Tracy, or ultimately in Las Vegas. I would say that the opposite is true.

  4. Mike Lanza says:

    lr_khaimovich – I’ll take a stab at what that line might mean, although I agree that it’s rather vague. I’d say that the window/room reference is figurative rather than literal, and that it implies that we have many things that are all show, but little actual substance (e.g. a good-looking man or woman who has no depth of character).

  5. lr_khaimovich says:

    Yeap, that’s probably what it means. Though interesting, how the interpretation depends on the direction in which one is inclined to look: inside->out or outside->in. I wonder if it can be a good test for introvert/extrovert dichotomy. 🙂

    Also, your interpretation reminded me of Strindberg’s Ghost Sonata, where a medical student is coming to the town’s central square to catch a glimpse of a beautiful young lady, who now and then appears in a window of a most opulent house fronting this square. Then, one day he is invited in… to find a family of ghostly personalities.

    I think, somewhere Strindberg, while writing about this play, made a point that everyone has to be grateful to those who are making an effort to hide there real selves from their neighbors. Goes against some of the playborhood values, doesn’t it?