Letters to The Editor
Not Quite the Last Word
To the Editor:
In "The Last Word" ["The Supremes Rock Quantitative Methods," OR/MS Today, August 2003], Cary Shaw bemoans the Supreme Court's lack of appreciation for the use of quantitative aids to ensure racial diversity (but no other kind) in the assessment of university applicants. From there, he applies a form of numerical reasoning to the issue of the Pledge of Allegiance. He notes that 14 percent of Americans are irreligious but are compelled to pledge allegiance to the United States "under God" in order to satisfy the other 86 percent. And then he asks, "Wouldn't it be better if the Pledge of Allegiance were for all Americans, not just 86 percent of Americans?"
Quantitatively, it is not clear how the dissatisfaction of 86 percent accommodates all Americans. Or, are we to assume that if 14 percent get their way it automatically satisfies the entire population. If that were the case, one could as easily assume the reverse, and then rest comfortably with the assurance that what he calls "quantified common sense" has been observed.
Joe Silverman
San Diego, Calif.
Silverman, a former Tech Director at the Navy Personnel R&D Center, has spent the last 35 years "in the chasm between managers with problems and analysts/programmers with solutions."
To the Editor:
I found Cary Shaw's discussion of the Pledge of Allegiance to be highly inappropriate and quite confusing.
In introducing the topic, the column refers to the Supreme Court's "impact on INFORMS' values." What is this impact? While persons may disagree with a ruling of the Court or find their actions made illegal, the Court cannot change their values.
The column's list of values is the author's personal view and does not represent INFORMS. INFORMS has never made explicit any values beyond the organization's mission and vision (www.informs.org/Join/Informs.html). The debate over the Pledge of Allegiance is not related to this organization's goals.
The column refers to Jefferson's statement that government should not control belief. The Pledge of Allegiance is not an instrument to control belief. It is instead a statement that acknowledges the historical fact that religious values have guided America's leaders and citizens during the nation's founding and throughout its history.
For instance, George Washington clearly expressed the importance of faith in his Farewell Address: "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports."
Washington went on to note that, "reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle." In other words, a society will slip into totalitarianism without the guiding light that God provides.
Secularists who dislike public acknowledgements of God have the right to disagree with this. But it is dangerous, not "better," if our society, in the Pledge of Allegiance and other traditions, denies the faith that inspired our rights and has always strengthened this nation.
Jeffrey W. Herrmann
College Park, Md.
Herrmann is an associate professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering & Institute for Systems Research at the University of Maryland.
Cary Shaw responds:
No one is asking that any American deny faith. Just don't make the assertion of faith to be a pledge asked of all Americans.
Puns & Roses
To the Editor:
Today I glanced at the August issue of OR/MS Today in my boss's office. The cover was the same as mine, but the title was different: "Weapons of Mass Instruction." Mine says "Weapons of Mass Destruction." No! My mind had filled in the expected word. The mailing label was carefully placed to cover only the two letters that distinguish between those words, while the boss's copy was bulk mailed without a label.
Good job!
Ron Hebron
Seattle, Wash.
To the Editor:
I enjoyed your Inside Story column ["Weapons of Mass (Insert Pun Here)"] in the August 2003 issue of OR/MS Today. I thought you'd appreciate an interesting version of the "weapons of..." puns.
My brother, a professor of Mathematics at Rhode Island College, refers to (some of) his students as "weapons of math destruction."
Phil Abrahamson
Atherton, Calif.
|
OR/MS Today copyright © 2003 by the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences. All rights reserved.
Lionheart Publishing, Inc.
506 Roswell Rd., Suite 220, Marietta, GA 30060 USA
Phone: 770-431-0867 | Fax: 770-432-6969
E-mail: lpi@lionhrtpub.com
URL: http://www.lionhrtpub.com
Web Site © Copyright 2003 by Lionheart Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved.