Will getting lost become a lost experience?

NPR aired a story this morning about how this holiday season has really ushered GPS technology into the mainstream. 'Millions of people will never get lost again ... ' was one of the first lines of the story. 'Horrible!' I thought. Getting lost can be aggravating, for sure, but think of all the great things it opens up to you. Running into unexpected places, interacting with strange, interesting people when you stop for directions, finding otherwise hidden treasures that necessitate a little non-sheduled recon. I want to continue getting lost once in a while, enjoying the pleasant bi-products of not knowing exactly where I am. And I want other people to too. 'A compass and a map should be plenty for the regular old Joe,' I said to myself.

However ... the reporter then started talking about how you can jog or hike or whatever with the little GPS do-dad and then go home, hook it up with google maps, and see where you ran, what landmarks you were close to that you’d like to venture to next time, etc. And about how there’s a company making tour-guide-like informational commentary for certain areas so that when you drive through these areas, it’ll automatically start up a little educational spiel about it. Drive on a stretch of highway near a civil war battleground, the device will come on and tell you that you're close to this site and describe the historical significance. I'm sure it gives directions on how to get off the highway and visit, too. Cool. Very cool.

Now, my cell phone may be from 2002 and I may watch fuzzy tv picked up by bunny ears, but I wasn't oblivious that GPS technologies go beyond spitting out directions to drivers. However ... it's always sounded annoyingly yuppy-ish to me till today. Like a really, really manicured lawn that kids aren't allowed to play on. Or store-bought, pre-rolled, pre-cut sugar cookies. Something cool, but that takes some of the fun out of life. I didn't really let myself see how it actually opens up opportunities for adventure and exploring. So, my apologies, GPS. You aren't so bad after all.

Donut drosophila

Today I brought in a box of donuts for my coworkers, and as I went to open them I saw a fruit fly trapped inside, flying around under the cellophane. I didn't tell them. It's just a fruit fly. The donuts were delicious.

I finally got my laptop today, to join the rest of the modern world. My nice neighbor Jonah accepted delivery of it today while I was at work. He's from Singapore, and they raise 'em right. After the surprise of such speedy shipment, my evening got even better when I discovered I have a wireless connection for now, something several attempts with university laptops failed to provide. Bad, bad university wireless cards. Shame on you. The only slight downer in this new chapter of Suzanne's personal computing is that in sitting here trying to figure out what I can do online instead of going to bed, I realized ... well ... that I was sitting here thinking really hard trying to come up with something I wanted to do online. Which means I'm probably not too hip when it comes to embracing technology. Oh well. Whatever. I'm sure my web surfer's block will have lifted by the time I get to work tomorrow.

Our fascinating brains

This story was on the radio this morning, and I think it's amazing. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16956039

Besides how interesting it is in terms of autism research, it also a.) reinforces my belief in how behavior is powerfully affected by chemicals/hormones/proteins/name-your-own-substances and b.) deepens my fascination/frustration/confusion with the notion that people do not always have control over their own feelings, thoughts, motivations, and ultimately behaviors, as they cannot control the levels and effects of these substances. Most people are accepting of this notion when it comes to something like autism—an identified disorder. If there's a name to go along with it, it seems more 'understandable.' Perhaps we'll even feel sorry for the person; certainly we will if it's a child. No one (hopefully) would blame the autistic kid in this article for outbursts at his parents or for running into furniture during tantrums.

But when it comes to physiological idiosyncrasies that do not have an identified name b/c they are just that—idiosyncrasies —when it comes to these very person-specific chemical imperfections that may cause people to ignore right from wrong, to lack motivation to care, to act out ... we have much less grace for those folks. I'm not saying dismiss every person's culpability for their acts because of the possibility that a less-than-ideal bodily make-up is at fault. But is it a possibility?

I'm hard pressed to rule it out. I know, though, that it's a pretty scary thought. It would completely change the way we interact with others, how we judge others, how we deal with deviance ... it would change everything, if we would allow ourselves the empathy to let it: The question is, if we were able to identify specific genes, chemicals, etc. as causes of specific patterns of thought/behavior (as they've already done with alcoholism, e.g.), would we, as a society of people so indoctrinated with a 'personal responsibility' mindset, ever be willing to extend grace not only to groups of people with identified, common disorders, such as the kid with autism, but also to the individual who cheats on his wife over and over b/c he's low in a particular combo of chemicals that help with regulation of urges, or to the jobless woman who sits at home letting her kids play in squalor and eat rubbish because her particular combo of chemicals and brain firing keeps her from building up enough motivation to change her lifestyle? Would we ever get to the point where we'd extend caring understanding to people who do things that we currently find despicable? Would we try to help them rather than punish them?

I'm really not crazy, I swear. But I don't think the notion that our thoughts and behaviors—things we're currently held completely responsible for unless we have some medically categorized disorder—are very mediated by physiological factors beyond an individual's control. Articles like this one on autism make me think that perhaps science is in the nascent stages of lending this notion more validity.