Skip to main content

Sorites Paradox and Other Small Things

Sorites paradox, sometimes called the paradox of the heap or paradox of the pile, asks us to consider how many small things might be needed to add up to something substantive. The typical version of sorites paradox starts with a heap of sand. From that heap, grains of sand are removed one at a time. 

Obviously, removing a single grain doesn't change the nature of the heap. It will still be a heap of sand. But what happens when we repeat the process? What if we were to keep going to the point that only one grain remains? Is it still a heap? If not, at what point did our collection of grains change from being a heap to not being a heap?

A picture of a sandy beach, taken from ground level and looking out towards the ocean.

A common variant of sorites paradox starts with a single grain of sand and prescribes adding granules one at a time. Adding one grain won't make a heap, nor will the addition of two or three. Through repetition though, we know that a heap of sand will eventually emerge. This is the variant of sorites paradox that interests me right now.

Since the U.S. election in November of 2024, I've found myself making a number of small but deliberate changes in my life. I've quit certain social media platforms. I've donated money to local independent media outlets and mutual aid groups. I've donated to our local food pantry. I have attended marches and been more vocal in supporting the causes I believe in. I have been intentional in thinking of the ways I can build community. All of these acts align with my values and reflect the world I want to see. 

These changes have been modest. They are largely personal and quite possibly futile. Meta will not suffer for my absence, nor will Amazon. Poverty will not be eradicated because of my donations to Neighborhood Services Inc. My small actions - like grains of sand if the analogy isn't obvious - don't appear to be adding up to much right now. I have to believe though, that if I continue adding small actions, something substantive will eventually emerge; a heap of actions if you will, and one that wouldn't exist otherwise.  

A black and white photograph shows a crowd of people marching with signs. The U.S. Capitol dome can be seen in the background.

And maybe if my modest heap and your modest heap were to somehow get pushed together, and then some others too...well...who knows?

I guess the point is this, even if you don't see immediate results and even if your small things don't seem to add up right now, keep doing them. I promise you I will. 
   


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Ohio Historical Center: A Defense

A couple weeks ago I was contacted by Carrie Ghose at Business First to share my thoughts on architecture in central Ohio. The recent controversy surrounding the new Student Union at Ohio State had apparently sparked a number of conversations regarding what constitutes "good" building design. Carrie was following that story , and developing a second piece to get feedback on other notable Columbus buildings. At the time I offered a staunch a defense of what I believe might be the most maligned and misunderstood building in central Ohio, the Ohio Historical Center. Business First wasn't able to run the whole piece, so I've decided to turn it into a blog post. photo courtesy of OHS/ www.ohiomemory.org The refrain is a as old as the building itself, "It's ugly. It's just a giant brown box. It doesn't even look like a museum". Sadly, it's that exact line of thinking that poses the greatest threat to the building Architectural Record referre...

The Problem With Librarian Problems

So it's come to this; a curmudgeonly blog post about the state of the profession (complete with finger wagging, tsk-tsking, and even a little SMH thrown in for good measure). "Shake your fist at 'em Pops. These kids don't know from librarianship". That's how you do it, right? Oh, the irony. I've spent 15 years in the profession deriding Will Manley and his hectoring ways. Now I've apparently become him. Point being, I'm acutely aware of all the contextual layers of this post. I know the implications and risks of saying, "Hey, that's not cool". I've been around long enough to know how easy it is to dismiss the contrarian stance; to push back against even the slightest hint of correction (Trust me, I've done it plenty of times myself). More to the point, I've been around long enough to know how easy it will be to dismiss what I'm about to write. Please don't. It's important. It's important to us individua...

Can Retro Design Be Great Design?

It appears that Spyker (the high-end Dutch sports car company) is making plans to develop a car based on the original Saab 92 (1949-1956). If you've been following the tales and travails of the Saab brand you'll recall that Spyker saved t he car maker from almost certain liquidation after GM cut the Swedish niche-brand loose last year. Having been a Saab loyalist for nearly 20 years, I'm thrilled by the idea of a resurgent Saab entering the market with a new direction and focus (most Saab fans look on the GM years as time lost in the wilderness). And while I've always understood the 92 to be a lovely little post-World War II car (and quite innovative for its time), it raises an interesting question about what constitutes great design. Namely, can retro design be great design? It's a question worth asking since we're clearly living in a time when re-manufacturing the past has become a common practice. Whether it's cars (like the MINI Cooper , VW Beetle , a...