You know Members, when someone gives the impression of being something or having a particular quality, the verb used for that is “seem”. And when one gives the impression of being something or having an a particular quality that is deemed improper, the verb used is “unseemly.” Note, the only difference between these states is the demarcation of that which is appropriate from that which is not appropriate – which can be argued both objectively and subjectively. To that point, let’s examine Hugh Hefner. He’s a man that has a reputation for wearing pajamas all the time. Just look at him with his pipe and his business shoes and his red satin dream regalia in the picture above. Now, if you had to discuss tax implications of particular investments, or go over the days agenda of doctor’s appointments, travel itineraries, and grocery shopping lists, or advise about the latest contractual negotiations with an individual dressed in such a manner, you may find yourself doubting the existential worth of your college education. But then again, he is the founder of Playboy Magazine, he resides in the Playboy Mansion, and he’s on his seventh sub-zero lady friend – so it seems appropriate for someone which such a dossier to wear bed clothes throughout the day. And yet – Playboy doesn’t feature full frontal nudity anymore, nor does Hugh Hefner own the Playboy Mansion (it was bought by the owner of Twinkies in January of 2016), and you know – the guy is 90, an age where pajamas during the day seem to say “infirm” rather than “virile”. Point is Members, seem does not seem to be the best you can do when understanding character, quality, or states of being. Nor does “unseemly” seem to be something agreed upon universally. So this week, when confronted by the demand that you equate “seem” with “is” or “unseemly” with “dogma,” get off your ass, do some fact checking, and find some evidence for those things proffered as givens.