I’ve been chastized lately for a lack of sincerity in my search for the meaning of life, and if you want to get caught up on the discussion you need go no further than my last post. Irrespective of the opinions of the haters and naysayers, however, I am most sincere, and just because I tend to trivialize the whole activity when I occasionally write about it (equating it to a Jimmy Buffet song in one case and appearing to expect God to appear on a chariot from on high in another), it doesn’t reflect on the depth of my sincerity. Or does it?
Getting complacent about things isn’t acceptable when one is searching for truth, any truth. For instance, a good friend, albeit a bit misguided, told me recently that it doesn’t matter what economists I quoted to reinforce the obvious truth that Obama’s economic polices are working and are rapidly bringing us back from the economic slide-to-suicide begun with Reganomics and carried blithfully forward even into “W”’s ignorance-as-a-virtue day, he could quote a different, more conservative economist that thinks the big O’s policies are akin to devil worshop.
He may be right, of course, but can we both we equally right? It doesn’t mean that these opposite points of view can co-exist, does it? It seems there has to be ONE truth in there somewhere, especially when the two points of view are fundamentally so different.
One risk is that we, as Americans, seem to be inculcated in believing that ALL viewpoints are healthy, that there is NO absolute truth, that everything should be considered a respectful shade of gray, that things that are labeled theories are therefore still devoid of fact and are unproven (while the scientific meaning of theory has nothing to do whatsoever with whether anything is based on fact or PROVEN or not, it’s just more ignorance making it’s way into the maintstream). This is wrong, and it brings me around to the real point I’m making here, which is really about a definition of pimping that I think is really beneficial for society at large.
Ignoring the classic or even Wikepedian definitions of pimping, that the word has mostly to do with the act of soliciting women into prostitution, either on the street or in a brothel, and managing them for profit, an activity that may have social good in it somewhere but I wouldn’t know about that, having only been in a brothel once in my life and that time only to see if Al Kalgren and Frank Marino could really trade trout for sex, a classic entreprenurial endeavor if I had ever seen one set up and something I wanted to see play out, although as it turned out it didn’t. Pimping as I’m using it doesn’t even have to do with adding a third or fourth TV set to your recently renovated 1987 Cadillac Hearse, although I applaud the activity generally.
No, the definition of pimping I’m refering to here has to do with the activity of trolling things by people in the hopes of stirring them up, knocking the complacent pins from under their tired feet and making them think differently about something, ANYTHING. I believe in pimping in this sense because I believe there ARE absolute truths out there…not ALL points of view are created equal, we do NOT have to give equal weight to all silliness, and we would be far better off as individuals and by extension as a society if we DO THE MATH (a nifty colloquialism I’m using here as a metaphor for “Do The Work”…whether math is involved in the research or not).
I love pimping people out of complacency and into the light, and once they finally get moving I love it when people do the work. That’s why when 0ur financial advisor, Kevin Hatch, calls and we discuss our portfolio for two hours and I question him about everything I inevitably take his recommendations almost without question across the board because he has DONE THE WORK. It’s when Jack and Diana Reynolds call and say, hey, there is a start-up that we want you to invest it, we say “where’s the checkbook?”, because they(and their own advisors) have DONE THE WORK. It’s why, when I go back and read Darwin’s Voyage of the Beagle and understand from that how he came up with the remarkably fully-featured philosophy of evolution that tends to explain our world’s existence better than the thousands of years of sacrificing virgins (assuming that’s what they really were), or the reading of chicken entrails, or the placement of the pillars at Stonehenge by (assumably) the Druids or somebody like them, ever did…it isn’t because his shit is newer, it’s belycause Darwin, bless his soul, DID THE WORK.
However, and admittedly, this doesn’t mean that there isn’t somebody out there on the other side of the equation that isn’t doing an equal and opposite amount of work, is there? No, I suppose it doesn’t…..

