If you could go back in time and witness any 24-hour period in world history, what event would you choose?
I’m offering you a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Here’s the deal.
You are about to travel back in time. You get to pick any 24-hour period in history and witness what happened. Think of what this means. This is your one and only chance to satisfy any curiosity, observe a monumental historical event, or perhaps solve a great mystery.
So — which event would you choose to experience, and why?
This is the topic of a new Facebook discussion group I created, called “An Unconventional Convention.” A few times each week, different questions are asked on Facebook and readers respond. Although only three questions have been asked so far, more than 300 replies have been posted Many answers we far more intriguing than anyone might have expected.
Today’s question is on a serious topic. Accordingly, here are a few helpful hints: You might choose to witness an epic moment in history. Perhaps you’d like to experience a past religious event or spiritual revelation. Maybe you’ll select a scientific breakthrough or moment of great discovery. Or, you could opt for a more personal experience in your life, or perhaps a family-related event that’s meaningful. You hold the key to pass through any closed door. There are no wrong answers.
Let’s agree to some rules: You must remain on the earth. The time span allowed is any 24-hour period since the world began. You cannot travel into the future. While you observe, you will not participate or be noticed in any way. You cannot alter the course of history. You are prohibited from profiting from your time travel. For instance, you can’t return to the present and write a book or go around giving TED talks, afterward. You are given the opportunity to bear witness purely for your own knowledge, amusement, and satisfaction.
Click the link below to respond and/or to read the responses from other readers.
This should be both fun and interesting.
By the way, I still haven’t made up my mind what I’m going to post and how I will answer. This is a really tough question.
Should social media posts be banned if they offend a vast majority of people?
Most of us probably believe the answer is no. We should all be allowed freedom of expression. After all, free speech is a fundamental right. Besides, who’s to determine what’s acceptable versus objectionable?
However, let’s also agree that social media posts widely considered offensive should be accompanied by consequences.
The late conservative icon William F. Buckley, Jr., founder of “National Review” — worthy of both admiration and loathing
What troubles me most when discussing important issues is close-mindedness. Call it a cancer on communication. This seems to be an epidemic right now.
People who insist their minds are “already made up” and can’t be changed annoy me. Surely, unexpected events and unforeseeable circumstances may come about that should make us re-evaluate what we think. The acquisition of knowledge isn’t finite. One’s personal belief system is more of an evolution. What we believe is true today might prove demonstrably prove false tomorrow. People and institutions we trust at this instant could violate our confidence later. If history has taught us anything, it’s that unpredictable events can (and do) alter the way we look at ourselves and the world. Just think of revelations in your own life which changed your perceptions about things. Recall those you once trusted who later turned out differently than expected. Indeed, our most profound memories are not necessarily confirmations of beliefs we think to be true. More often, enlightenment stems from unexpected discoveries of something new.
Something seemingly insignificant happened today at Starbucks Coffee, which actually ended up leaving quite an impression on me. And, I’d like to tell you about it.
At the airport in Fort Lauderdale, I waited inside the terminal and stopped to order my usual cafe latte. Most Starbucks have lines, especially in the mornings, and this was no exception.
While about a dozen or so travelers stood in line, bored and indifferent to our surroundings, we couldn’t help but hear and observe what can only be described as a spirited employee bouncing around, working joyously behind the counter. It seemed like the happiest day of his life. While two cashiers rang up the orders, the young man — whose name I soon learned was “Evans” — made the coffee drinks.
Are some books so gravely perilous — both to the reader and to society — that burning them could be construed as a righteous act?
What about books throughout our history that have triggered terrible political tyrannies, or world wars responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of innocent people? What about books with highly-objectionable content we might consider revolting? Are there books on subject matter so vile, that torching them would be acceptable?