When I was in secondary school, I took a class in ancient history. I have a vivid memory of one particular section on the Egyptians that ended with s particular test that included three bonus questions which I answered as follows:
Q: How many slaves did it take to build the Great Pyramid of Cheops.
A: A lot.
Q: How many bricks did it take to build the Great Pyramid of Cheops?
A: Just enough for one would have been too many and one less would have been too few.
Q: Who said, “What’s a cubit?”
A: The little kid in Battlestar Galactica when learning from his father about the interstellar monetary system (it was cubits).
Surprisingly, I received full bonus marks for my answers. I would like to think it was because my teacher understood that there can be other, equally valid answers to the questions he had posed only he had not thought of them. But, I learned the truth. When formulating the questions, my teacher treated them as seriously as I did. He explained that “What’s a cubit?” was part of a comedy routine on a Bill Cosby album.
I think there is something to learn from that moment, something that goes beyond the writing and logical abilities of smartasses in the classroom and something that goes beyond childhood yet is definitely applicable to the adult world. It is this: sometimes there may be more than one solution to a problem. But I think there is also an interesting corollary that can be derived from Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity – i.e. “doing something over and over again and expecting different results”. For example, when people are unable to address the problem or do not take the questions seriously, sometimes the sane approach would be recognise that the issues are unsatisfactory and it is better to reframe or change them entirely rather than punish those who can’t or won’t find a desired answer.
In today’s world one problem has been on people’s minds for one hundred years and it is about bringing peace to the Middle East. However, the real question that is asked over and over again is how do we arrive at a two state solution that will bring peace to the Middle East?
Of course, the playing field (or battlefield) has changed over the decades even without the Oslo Accords. Brains, bigger than mine, have tried to come up with different, unique answers on a related topic. But the international community is fixated on a two state solution, even when the region is currently controlled by three different governments. Yet the international community continues to insist that these three governments arrive at a two state solution and then cast blame (rightfully or wrongfully) when (again) they don’t.
So it seems to me that the issue of peace in the Middle East is suffering from a dearth of creativity and, perhaps Einstein might agree, a dearth of sanity. Maybe it is time to reframe the question to something with which the parties could actually engage.
Albert Einstein is broadly credited with exclaiming “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”. It truly doesn’t make a difference that there’s truly no proof that Einstein really put forth this expression; it’s still an awesome quote! Perhaps there is no solution and admitting that is sanity.