The Flesh Colored Crayon of Reality

 The first box of Binney & Smith crayons, produced in 1903, sold for a nickel and contained eight colors: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, violet, brown, and black (wiki). 

Over the decades, Crayola expanded into many other colors including colors like Indian Red and “flesh” colored.  These two colors were fine through the 1950’s.  The multi-cultural movements of the ’60s changed everything. 

In 1962, Binney & Smith chose to change the name Flesh to Peach in response to the Civil Rights Movement, since not all people are the same skin color. In 1999, the name Indian Red was changed to Chestnut because children wrongly perceived the color to be that of Native Americans, when in fact “Indian Red” had its roots in a dye from India (wiki).

When it comes to interpreting life, we tend to color our experiences with the tools we have.  It makes sense, really.  Afterall, we can’t use something we don’t have and we can’t use information we don’t know.

That is an over-simplified explaination of postmodernist view on science and philosophy.  Postmodernist ask: How can scientists, philosophers and saints know anything when their culture dilutes what they call reality?  These philosophers, and saints and scientists are essentially coloring reality with their flesh colored crayons.  Now, the extreme postmodernist jump straight off of a nilhist cliff and says there is no meaning at all.  I agree with some of what the post moderist have to say, but there is no need to be ridiculous.

It is important to at least realize the cultural bias we use to interpret our Gods, our facts and our reason.  Without that internal check  we will be blinded by the very things that are supposed to free us.

Further, it is important to realize that every word spoken and written and every concept thought or otherwise expressed are merely symbols.  In the case of “God” or “Jehovah” or “Allah” we should note that the words we used to describe the subject of our worship, love, devotion and adoration are only symbols. 

We tend to feel threatend by someone else’s interpretation of reality when in wisdom all interpretations should strengthen us as they tell us more about ourselves as individuals and as a species.  An atheist (for example) shouldn’t be disgusted by a Pentacostal speaking in tongues but be awakend to the spectrum of reality that the human condition can accept.  Reality does not have a cookie cutter approach.  What I see, is not completely what you see.  

Though we should not praise ALL perspectives (they are not all healthy and contructive) we should definitely respect them enough to deal with them properly.  Just like a criminal profiler, they must understand and get into the mind set of a killer in order to predict the predators next move and motive.  In the same way, should we understand our enemies and those who seek to despitefully use us.  It does no good to simply marginalize and use stereotyping beyond what is necessary.

Another example is George Bush saying of Al Quaeda, “they hate us because of our freedom” may be bit oversimplified.  The more we understand the terrorist, the child molester, serial killer, the rapist, the dirty politician, the better chance we have to overcome and subdue them.  A game of Chess is won by paying attention, thinking three steps a head of your opponents most probable movements.  

In the latter part of the 19th century after two world wars and an precedented population explosion, we found ourselves in the waiting arms of multiculturalism and globalism.  Its forced us to live in a world of dying closed homogenious cultures and vanishing nations. 

As with the mythological phoenix, the new firebird will rise out of the ashes of old.  Now we are forced to draw reality not only in new colors but in different dimensions.