Search Pandora’s Box and moral lesson together in Google it will point to sites that say the myth is a condemnation of curiosity.‘Curiosity kills the cat’ was even among those results.

In case you have forgotten your childhood tales, Pandora is the girl who unleashed trouble/monsters into the world because she could not control her curiosity to open a box (a jar in earlier versions).

There is a reverse version by Theognis who suggests that good creatures were contained in the jar.The fly in the ointment as it were was curious Pandora who opened the jar releasing the goodness until only hope remained inside. Unlike the unleashed evil which lurks the world, this version, the good spirits having escaped the jar have moved on to another.

The tale in its raw form of myths and monsters has been told mostly to the young.No different from telling a rather restless child that mumu, ghosts, and all sorts of monstrosities are around the corner to prevent them from straying.Unfortunately as a metaphor, the myth has made its way to adults.

Pandora’s Box has been used to describe the evils of ideas in the hopes that like children they may be scared to ever moving at all.It’s like saying this idea may look harmless to you now, but wait till you make the next step; when you ‘open the box’ so to speak. The RH bill, Sex Education, Nuclear Energy, Stem Cells, Homosexuality among others have been associated with the tale.

In most cases it doesn’t seem to matter which side you are on those views, the point of the tale is not to take the next step; perhaps more to the point, the message is not to ever look.Not unreasonable with monsters lurking under the lid. So end of story?

Well not quite at least not for me.With just monsters under the lid albeit imagined the story would have made sense, but it did not stop there because underneath it all there was Hope.Why is it there, an odd mix of monsters and a flicker of something good?If opening doors to knowledge declared as forbidden is evil why was there Hope at the end of it all?

So here I started think another way of seeing Pandora’s Box, maybe not the first to do so with many versions of the myth, but most certainly a minority.

We start at the heart of the story, Pandora, the curious girl who started all the trouble.

Of curiosity Albert Einstein said, “The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.”And if you still doubt his support of curiosity he also said “It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education,” perhaps in reference of adult tendency to tell the young to shut up with all the questions.

There is even a support of the dead cat by Arnold Edinborough: “Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly.”

If you are in subscribe to the traditional meaning of Pandora’s Box then perhaps the Wright brothers should have accepted that man does not have wings or Pasteur should have accepted diseases as a curse from the Divine.Rizal should have just accepted the Church and Spanish abuse.Where would we be if not for people who dared open their own personal and societal boxes?

Perhaps you will say it is different because Rizal, the Wright brothers have always been heroes; that they were right.Curiosity is not always about right and wrong but more about asking questions; trying; or as the story goes, it’s about looking under that jar lid or box cover.Curiosity is a prerequisite of discovery.

Which brings us to the next stage: the monsters.After the numerous curious souls throughout history have opened their boxes was it always perfect once that lid was breached?Rizal ended up as dead as that proverbial cat for daring to question the church and Spain.And I am sure in the age of pre-flight; those early attempts to get off the ground have resulted in broken bones, bruises, and certainly death (if they got high enough).It seems at least for these two cases it was right, the box should have been closed.

But can it be closed?The evil unleashed version would seem to indicate this as a bad option because the monster is already out.No use turning back.Admittedly the Theognis version were good was released and they left the world is a difficult fit for this analogy.Perhaps the question in this case is that would it be of benefit if the box remained closed with all the good inside.

The key piece in the story is Hope.In the context of the myth if Pandora were to close the box the monsters would still be there.As a gift of the gods we can assume it can never be destroyed especially by a mortal.Closing or burying in the hopes that it can be forgotten only postpones the inevitable; the fact it exists means anyone else is bound to open it again unleashing only more monsters.

So there nothing to do but to brace for the monsters until the bottom of the box is reached and only Hope is left.

Pandora’s Box I believe is an analogy about knowledge and ideas.A person gets knowledge, ideas; creates something entirely new because of curiosity.It is by no means a walk in the park as is pointed out by the monsters.

To close any particular area of knowledge or idea is not an option because the mere fact it existed means that the idea exists.If one can open it and unleash monsters means others can.The discovery of something new is by no means perfect.There is really nothing left to do but to keep it open for all to see, add to the ideas, provide solutions, discuss, experiment, until finally you find meaning in those ideas and see Hope.

Rizal ended up dead but Filipinos not closing the box on independence eventually won it and him National Hero. Airplanes have made the world smaller.Pasteur is considered one of the pioneers of microbiology.If the box that was closed prematurely we would not be where we are now seeing Hope.

Sure the Philippines may be in deep shit now but who knows; maybe this isn’t the end of the box.Powered flight is doing well which leaves outer space as the next box in that area.There have been new diseases since Pasteur but his way is simply better than relying that the ‘divine curse’ be lifted.

Now how is the RH bill, Sex Education, Nuclear Energy, Stem Cells, Homosexuality the same as Rizal and powered flight? How are you sure that it is not?Maybe all that is advertised by the naysayers is not the end of the box.

All are ideas opened up by the eternally curious human mind and as such they will never be closed.Nothing left but to brace for the monsters real and imagined because it is certain there will be mistakes and rough seas so to speak.But never close that box and wish that it will be buried and forgotten.Open it wide and understand it until the end where Hope is found.

Pandora’s Box: no longer should be a box that should have never been opened but, for the Philippine setting at least, a balikbayan box with a really annoying package protection.

Battleplan is not the Art of War. Certainly it is not as poetic, insightful, or as comprehensive as Sun Tzu’s work.

While many say the Art of War can be a great philosophy for both war and life in any age, the History Channel production, Battleplan, is still one of a kind for having clearly defined the steps of well known battle plans in the past 100 years.

One episode is one battle plan: a specific approach for the defeat of the enemy or for the achievement of specific objectives.And for each battle plan there are two examples.

If for example the attacker wants to use the navy, for that there is the episode Battle Fleet Action. Assault from the Air, is deploying ground troops through the air. Control of the Air, involves defeating the enemy air power first through one’s own air power.An Assault from the Sea is an amphibious assault like the Leyte Landings. Blitzkrieg, a term made popular by World War II Germany is a lightning approach to war, speed having the top priority.There is even an episode on guerilla war, with its most popular example in Vietnam.

Each plan is explained in a thesis like approach which the narrator describes as requirements.But like in a thesis those requirements seem more like stages since they need to be answered in a specific order.Like in a thesis, each chapter or stage needs to be well thought out.

Lining up the requirements are among others, Objectives, Means, Force Ratio, Intelligence, Follow Through, and Exit Strategy.

The narration then goes about defining each in accordance to the situation at hand, arranged almost in a FAQ (frequently ask questions) manner.What is an objective?What do you need to look for in making an objective for planning, for example, an Assault from the Air?

After defining and asking the questions for those requirements or to use some thesis writing parlance, chapters; the two examples for that battle plan are measured up to what is an ideal.Or if not explained in detail why it failed or succeeded or where it could have been improved.

The big surprise for me in this series is the requirement of Force Ratio which is a comparative analysis between one’s enemy force and the enemy.It’s not all about numbers but can also include among others training and morale.

I find it a surprise because even with a culture such as the military and in a war footing at that, some consideration still has to be made regarding the troops.Not necessarily for the sake of holding hands and being soft, it’s a war obviously; but the point I think is to leave no stone unturned.If the troops are not in the ideal physical and mental conditions it is still possible that any advantage in technology or numbers may be offset.

It’s not always about rank and orders.It’s about planning meticulously every single detail.

Honestly my dream documentary as far as war is concerned is about tactics especially those wars fought in antiquity by the likes of Caesar or Alexander, or as recent as Napoleon.I’ve been curious if armies did fight in neat formations like they do in diagrams of the ancient battles.

While Battleplan’s is not anything like my dream war documentary, it is better in the sense that it is all about preparation and strategy.Indeed the series is not the Art of War but being direct to the point and having examples of real battles, it works really great in its own way.

Yesterday I was googling “divine right to rule” at work.  Politics was on my mind for many reasons other than the Nonoy Aquino for president campaign getting a boost. The term just came to me out of the blue, weird as it is.

One of the sites identified by google led me to a firewall warning that says I have accessed an inappropriate website.  Why; read the category and it has the answer: plagiarism.

Again I googled but this time for the word plagiarism and the top choice in the search was a plagiarism.org.   Catering primarily to the academe, the site has tips for detection of plagiarism and the use of proper citation but most importantly a definition.  It cited from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary which says that plagiarism means:

•    to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own
•    to use (another’s production) without crediting the source
•    to commit literary theft
•    to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source

What the definition does not state is reading, which was what I was really trying to do in the first place.   Perhaps it is a case ala-Minority Report where I was charged for a crime (plagiarism) I may or may not commit.  Then again maybe the plagiarism was meant for the site.

Now I can understand the banning pornography.   I can understand banning social networking sites; they are a chore to maintain as well as being a lot of fun.  Youtube is tantamount to television so off with that distraction in the office.  But what I don’t understand is this reason my IT department calls the site plagiarism.

Could it be because they know that I am a student at the PUP Graduate School?  Still even a student has the right to read but what he puts on in the paper that can be plagiarism.

Perhaps that’s the reason, reading outside of work.  If reading is disallowed other that the office papers then the policymakers should just say so or they could just ban internet altogether; some corporations have been known to do that.

But plagiarism?!?

Is there anything more hurtful than this caption to a sitting president?

Photo and caption was published on the August 6, 2009 issue of Manila Bulletin at the back cover, lower half.

August 7, supplemental:

I tried in vain to search for an office copy of said picture, using the paper in the library, knowing it will be a nice topic over lunch or later that evening for drinks.  Alas internet chatter says the Bulletin management had removed it in succeeding batches.

Floods like this in the DBM parking lot and perhaps most of Malacañang come in seasons; mostly starting in June.  Pasig overflows by rising back into the gutters and up to most of areas surrounding the river which unfortunately includes my office. It is subject to the tides and at times the amount of rain.

Here is one unlucky guy yesterday.  Came to office to pick up the office car only to find it stuck.  Good thing the guard was strong. hahaha