Paul Robeson singing the praises of Stalin's Soviet Union...
HT: M.J. Roesenberg, who has a good point w.r.t. Paul Robeson (who if you don't know who he was, well, it's worth a trip to Wikipedia).
Rosenberg's point is be very very careful of whom you have agreement and disagreement. They could be stark raving mad bloodthirsty butchers.
And that's today's nugget of wisdom.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Zen Craziness
I'd missed this bit in last week's magazine...
Sitting on a cushion mindfully does not mean being absent. Studying a koan in a way that closes one off from human contact and experience isn't helping beings that well. You know, 80% of life is showing up, as Woody Allen said.
It is not surprising to me that someone can practice Zen for decades and not realize fundamental parts of one's life where they're stuck.
I myself experience a lot of stuckness, much of it the accretions of decades of mutual stupidity of myself and others.
But for some reason I don't experience not being without tools to become unstuck, because I have become unstuck in some ways.
But it is always time to get unstuck in as many ways as one can, using whatever means are available to do so that saves beings, including the one in your own skin bag, whether that means takes a shrink, a physician or whatever. And the justification of this as Buddhism makes sense if only because of the moral imperative of the famine rescue worker: if the rescue worker doesn't eat many more will starve.
...Sometimes he was the Zen master Mitsunen (the name meant “Now Mind”), who got up before dawn each morning to sit selflessly for hours in meditation. Mitsunen received dharma transmission, by which teachings are passed from master to disciple, in the Soto school of Zen and was ordained a Zen monk in the Soto and the Rinzai schools. He served as head monk at the International Dai Bosatsu Zendo Kongo-ji in upstate New York in the 1970s; for years he has led Zen retreats in Florida and North Carolina.
Other times he was Louis Nordstrom, a 63-year-old professor, poet and essayist with a round face, a shaved gray head and a shaky grip on whatever guise it was that people employed to navigate train stations and grocery stores. He earned a Ph.D. in philosophy at Columbia (his thesis was on Sartre’s theory of evil), and after giving up the monastic life he chose over tenure, he scraped by on teaching gigs at half a dozen schools, including Yale and N.Y.U. But the anxiety he was mired in in the summer of 2006 seemed deeper than what might be expected from financial or professional insecurity, or the infirmities of growing old, or even the aftermath of a busted marriage — his fourth. For two decades he lectured on the emergence of Western lay Zen, arguing against what he saw as the antiemotional bias of monastic Asian Zen in favor of an approach that integrated psychological experience into meditation practice. But as a pioneer of Zen in America, he had little success practicing what he preached. An antidepressant hadn’t helped much...
ith a wraithlike air, the Zen master accepted a seat on a black leather couch below the colored tumult of a de Kooning print and a photograph of a stone path vanishing around a bend in Kyoto. Lou Nordstrom later said he felt better almost the moment he met Jeffrey Rubin’s gaze. He had come as someone would to an emergency room for a therapeutic intervention.
“I left that first session with tears of joy on my face,” he told me one day last October as we sat with cups of coffee in the mica light of Bryant Park in Manhattan. “What Jeffrey did that first session saved my life. He listened empathetically and nonjudgmentally. He encouraged me to see my fears of acting out as symptoms of an unconscious desire to be seen.”
As the months went by, measured out in 50-minute sessions twice a week, the motifs of his history emerged. There was the surreal and horrific childhood of parental neglect, abuse and abandonment. There were those aspects of old trauma he was unwittingly reinflicting on himself, contriving to be abandoned by wives, disillusioned by mentors, seemingly incapable of taking basic care of himself. And there was the paradoxical role of Zen, which had enabled him to cope with the pain and alienation of his purgatorial youth but which he was now beginning to understand was implicated in his difficulties and may even have been making some of them worse...
Six months into therapy, the psychoanalyst and the Zen master had mapped the abandonment and neglect in Nordstrom’s past. They had explored how the themes were re-enacted in his professional and personal lives and how the same patterns began to surface even in the dynamics of the therapy itself. Nordstrom missed an appointment after a big snowstorm, then missed another because he wasn’t feeling well. Rubin held three sessions with his patient over the phone.
“Please don’t abandon me!” Nordstrom said during the third session.
“I’m staring at an empty couch,” the psychoanalyst said, trying to keep some velvet over the steel in his voice. “You are the one doing the abandoning. Are you abandoning yourself the way you have always been abandoned?”
Sitting on a cushion mindfully does not mean being absent. Studying a koan in a way that closes one off from human contact and experience isn't helping beings that well. You know, 80% of life is showing up, as Woody Allen said.
It is not surprising to me that someone can practice Zen for decades and not realize fundamental parts of one's life where they're stuck.
I myself experience a lot of stuckness, much of it the accretions of decades of mutual stupidity of myself and others.
But for some reason I don't experience not being without tools to become unstuck, because I have become unstuck in some ways.
But it is always time to get unstuck in as many ways as one can, using whatever means are available to do so that saves beings, including the one in your own skin bag, whether that means takes a shrink, a physician or whatever. And the justification of this as Buddhism makes sense if only because of the moral imperative of the famine rescue worker: if the rescue worker doesn't eat many more will starve.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Why we need a truth comission...
I haven't blogged much about politics here lately; it's better handled on Kos, and when I have something political to say, I usually do it there.
But Paul Krugman's right, and his point deserves wide dissemination:
We - and I mean Americans collectively - most certainly did not torture because of some twisted ticking time bomb "24" scenario, and we did not torture to prevent attacks on Americans. We did not torture because there was no other way to get the truth. In fact, the Bush regime tortured for the precise opposite reason - because they wanted detainees to say anything to make the suffering stop, including anything that might justify an invasion of Iraq.
We Buddhists generally don't bandy the "e" word about, but frankly, if anything's evil, this is evil. Not to the degree of Babi Yar and Oswiecm (Auschwitz), but it's certainly in the same direction.
If you still think there's no need, consider Liz Cheney's denial of torture:
She uses fill-in words which mean everything that torture means, but she will not say the Word, because admitting the Word admits guilt, and describing the act somehow does not bring the guilt that admitting the Word does.
And that's in a nut why we need a truth commission. Because we need to use the Word and its power and apply it where it ought to be applied.
We in America should not torture, not only because it's morally repugnant, but because it is not useful for gleaning information - we learned that in World War II.
And we need to make sure those who ordered such torture are imprisoned.
But Paul Krugman's right, and his point deserves wide dissemination:
[T]he only way we can regain our moral compass, not just for the sake of our position in the world, but for the sake of our own national conscience, is to investigate how that happened, and, if necessary, to prosecute those responsible...
Still, you might argue — and many do — that revisiting the abuses of the Bush years would undermine the political consensus the president needs to pursue his agenda.
But the answer to that is, what political consensus? There are still, alas, a significant number of people in our political life who stand on the side of the torturers. But these are the same people who have been relentless in their efforts to block President Obama’s attempt to deal with our economic crisis and will be equally relentless in their opposition when he endeavors to deal with health care and climate change. The president cannot lose their good will, because they never offered any...
Sorry, but what we really should do for the sake of the country is have investigations both of torture and of the march to war. These investigations should, where appropriate, be followed by prosecutions — not out of vindictiveness, but because this is a nation of laws.
We need to do this for the sake of our future. For this isn’t about looking backward, it’s about looking forward — because it’s about reclaiming America’s soul.
We - and I mean Americans collectively - most certainly did not torture because of some twisted ticking time bomb "24" scenario, and we did not torture to prevent attacks on Americans. We did not torture because there was no other way to get the truth. In fact, the Bush regime tortured for the precise opposite reason - because they wanted detainees to say anything to make the suffering stop, including anything that might justify an invasion of Iraq.
We Buddhists generally don't bandy the "e" word about, but frankly, if anything's evil, this is evil. Not to the degree of Babi Yar and Oswiecm (Auschwitz), but it's certainly in the same direction.
If you still think there's no need, consider Liz Cheney's denial of torture:
She uses fill-in words which mean everything that torture means, but she will not say the Word, because admitting the Word admits guilt, and describing the act somehow does not bring the guilt that admitting the Word does.
And that's in a nut why we need a truth commission. Because we need to use the Word and its power and apply it where it ought to be applied.
We in America should not torture, not only because it's morally repugnant, but because it is not useful for gleaning information - we learned that in World War II.
And we need to make sure those who ordered such torture are imprisoned.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Reincarnation
There's no good evidence for any kind of a literal reincarnation.
The kids who "remember" their "past lives" were likely led to believe such.
On the other hand...
There are unexplainable aspects of consciousness, which I've seen. They might be mass suggestion, they might be universal consciousness, but for now they're unexplained.
Awareness itself brings about "rebirth," in a sense.
But literal reincarnation?
I don't think it's necessary.
The kids who "remember" their "past lives" were likely led to believe such.
On the other hand...
There are unexplainable aspects of consciousness, which I've seen. They might be mass suggestion, they might be universal consciousness, but for now they're unexplained.
Awareness itself brings about "rebirth," in a sense.
But literal reincarnation?
I don't think it's necessary.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Still around...so here's a comment:
Warner's kinda right and kinda wrong.
He's right: Zen brings up lots of repressed crap. He's also right when he says, "It’s also true that zazen is different from other forms of meditation (if zazen is even a form of meditation) in that it is not directed at any ideal condition."
But he's slightly wrong when he says, "In zazen you allow whatever comes up to just come up as it will, rather than attempting to move the mind toward a specific desired state as most forms of meditation do."
Strictly speaking, the last thing is for those who do shikan taza only, and most of us have to be able to put the mind in a place where we can do that in the first place, at least in the Rinzai tradition.
He's right: Zen brings up lots of repressed crap. He's also right when he says, "It’s also true that zazen is different from other forms of meditation (if zazen is even a form of meditation) in that it is not directed at any ideal condition."
But he's slightly wrong when he says, "In zazen you allow whatever comes up to just come up as it will, rather than attempting to move the mind toward a specific desired state as most forms of meditation do."
Strictly speaking, the last thing is for those who do shikan taza only, and most of us have to be able to put the mind in a place where we can do that in the first place, at least in the Rinzai tradition.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Synthesis of the last 2 posts:
I can't tell you that you need a cure if you don't think you're sick. And if you do feel like crap, I don't see much percentage in trying to make you feel worse. Your own sense of being stuck itself is, you know, a noble truth.
On the other hand, I do know what helps me. And I think it's horrible that there's folks who would deny that help to themselves and others in order to use religion to manipulate others for the sake of cultivation or conservation of power by a few. Which, if you didn't click through, is the business model of the "Institute of Religion and Democracy," whose folks have been criticizing folks who are Episcopalian Zen Buddhist Bishops.
I don't of course, see myself as a Christian Buddhist by any means.
Nor ultimately, would I kick some of the folks I think might be hucksters out of the temple.
When you see your own suffering as evidence of being fundamentally OK, (OK, much more than OK) and when you can use that suffering and its amelioration without shoving it in people's faces and telling them how good you are or they should be, then perhaps you're getting somewhere.
And therefore, since I'm not there yet, I could perhaps shut this blog down, but then again I've never claimed that this blog was about anyone who had a zip code in nirvana.
On the other hand, I do know what helps me. And I think it's horrible that there's folks who would deny that help to themselves and others in order to use religion to manipulate others for the sake of cultivation or conservation of power by a few. Which, if you didn't click through, is the business model of the "Institute of Religion and Democracy," whose folks have been criticizing folks who are Episcopalian Zen Buddhist Bishops.
I don't of course, see myself as a Christian Buddhist by any means.
Nor ultimately, would I kick some of the folks I think might be hucksters out of the temple.
When you see your own suffering as evidence of being fundamentally OK, (OK, much more than OK) and when you can use that suffering and its amelioration without shoving it in people's faces and telling them how good you are or they should be, then perhaps you're getting somewhere.
And therefore, since I'm not there yet, I could perhaps shut this blog down, but then again I've never claimed that this blog was about anyone who had a zip code in nirvana.
On the other hand, there are Episcopalians ....
to whom I might see eye to eye ...
And evidently there are some Episcopalians that have a problem with helping one cultivate mindfulness to alleviate suffering...
The issue, to me, at least is efficacy, and if the practice is effective, it is monstrous to use force or coercion to abjure one to abstain from the practice, save for the fact that such a coercer might be ignorant of the effects of what he might be doing.
And yeah, the practices of Zen are effective. Cultivating mindfulness and acting from mindfulness is effective to help people.
Call it Christianity, call it anything you want, but if you're doing this practice, it's probably helping and if you're trying to get people to avoid or stop the practice you're probably not helping, but you might need some help.
“The lay ordination was a welcoming rite for me to commit myself to the path to discover why I suffer or why other people suffer,” Rev. Kevin Thew Forrester told the Times of London shortly after his election as bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Northern Michigan on February 21. Forrester went on to explain that he took jukai—the lay ordination rite of Zen Buddhism—“[T]o use the practice of meditation to help that suffering.”
And evidently there are some Episcopalians that have a problem with helping one cultivate mindfulness to alleviate suffering...
“The bottom line is that Forrester has embraced something foreign and contradictory,” wrote Greg Griffith, a blogger at the conservative Anglican Web site Stand Firm in Faith. “Call it a faith, call it a philosophy, call it what you will but it is not Christianity. One simply cannot embrace the doctrines of Buddhism—Zen or any other flavor—and simultaneously embrace the doctrines of Christianity.”
“The reality is that this particular meditative practice is not in step with Christian doctrine,” concurred James Tonkowich, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, a think tank with ties to the neo-conservative movement and a history of exploiting wedge issues in order to widen rifts in mainline Protestant denominations. “The issue is not whether meditation is good,” Tonkowich said, “it is what is being meditated on.”
The issue, to me, at least is efficacy, and if the practice is effective, it is monstrous to use force or coercion to abjure one to abstain from the practice, save for the fact that such a coercer might be ignorant of the effects of what he might be doing.
And yeah, the practices of Zen are effective. Cultivating mindfulness and acting from mindfulness is effective to help people.
Call it Christianity, call it anything you want, but if you're doing this practice, it's probably helping and if you're trying to get people to avoid or stop the practice you're probably not helping, but you might need some help.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Happy Easter...
You may not know or care who Ray Comfort is...and frankly, your life hasn't been all that different either way, most likely.
But this guy, who seems so earnest, does have, I think, the most cogent rebuttal to the "your defective" brand of Christianity I've seen in a while...
But this guy, who seems so earnest, does have, I think, the most cogent rebuttal to the "your defective" brand of Christianity I've seen in a while...
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
Some findings:
Pride is not an entirely bad thing...
Pepto-bismol contains bismuth subsalicylate, and is therefore ...radioactive...OK, kinda sorta radioactive...
Now, that 1/2 life is admittedly older than the age of the universe, but still!
(HT: Starts with a bang.)
This news about bismuth is apparently not new, but when I read the above post in Starts with a Bang, it said lead was the heaviest stable element, and I knew bismuth was heavier, therefore...
A feeling of pride, when it’s convincing, acts something like an emotional magnet. In a recent study, Ms. Williams and Dr. DeSteno of Northeastern had a group of 62 undergraduates take tests supposedly measuring their spatial I.Q. The patterns flashed by too fast for anyone to truly know how well they did.
The researchers manipulated the amount of pride each participant felt in his or her score. They either said nothing about the score; remarked, in a matter-of-fact tone, that it was one of the best scores they had seen; or gushed that the person’s performance was wonderful, about as good as they had ever seen.
The participants then sat down in a group to solve similar puzzles. Sure enough, the students who had been warmly encouraged reported feeling more pride than the others. But they also struck their partners in the group exercise as being both more dominant and more likable than those who did not have the inner glow of self-approval. The participants, whether they had been buttered up or not, were completely unaware of this effect on the group dynamics.
“We wondered at the beginning whether these people were going to come across as arrogant jerks,” Dr. DeSteno said. “Well, no, just the opposite; they were seen as dominant but also likable. That’s not a combination we expected.”...
Therapists say that in time, people usually do better when they come clean...
But in the short term, projecting pride may do more than help manage others’ impressions. Psychologists have found that wearing a sad or happy face can have a top-down effect on how a person feels: Smile and you may feel fleetingly happier. The same most likely is true for an expression of pride. In a 2008 study, the Northeastern researchers found that inducing a feeling of pride in people solving spatial puzzles motivated them to try harder when they tackled the next round.
Pride, in short, begets perseverance. All of which may explain why, when the repo man is at the door, people so often remind themselves that they still have theirs, and that it’s worth something. Because they do, and because it is.
However much pride may go before a fall, it may be far more useful after one.
Pepto-bismol contains bismuth subsalicylate, and is therefore ...radioactive...OK, kinda sorta radioactive...
Although bismuth-209 is commonly thought to be the heaviest stable isotope that exists in nature, theory suggests that it should be metastable and decay via alpha-particle emission to thallium-205. This decay is not easy to measure because the alpha particles generated have very little energy, which means that the isotope decays at a very low rate.
The equipment used by the Orsay team consists of two “heat and light” detectors that are enclosed in a reflecting cavity and cooled to 20mk. The first detector- containing bismuth-209, germanium and oxygen – undergoes a slight temperature rise when it absorbs an alpha particle. This temperature change is measured in the form of a voltage pulse whose amplitude is directly proportional to the energy released. The second detector, made from a thin disk of germanium, registers the light flashes from alpha-particle events.
The team performed two measurements, one with 31 grams of bismuth in the detector and the other with 62 grams. The scientists registered 128 alpha-particle events over 5 days and found an unexpected line in the spectrum at 3.14 MeV - now attributed to bismuth-209 decay. The half-life was calculated to be (1.9 +/- 0.2 ) x 1019 years, which is in good agreement with the theoretical prediction of 4.6 x 1019 years.
Now, that 1/2 life is admittedly older than the age of the universe, but still!
(HT: Starts with a bang.)
This news about bismuth is apparently not new, but when I read the above post in Starts with a Bang, it said lead was the heaviest stable element, and I knew bismuth was heavier, therefore...
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Fair and Balanced Picture Time...
Well, sort of...in addition to the outing at which I got to roam around Seoul for about 4 hours (at most), I did manage to get to Yasukuni Jina...which was quite a trip, to say the least.
Below are some shots from Jogyesa, one of 24 "head temples" for the Seon (Zen) sect in Korea.
Next came Yasukuni shrine; it was a pleasant day, and maybe it was the North Korean missles, or perhaps it was the cherry blossoms, but the place was packed.
That's about all the sightseeing one can do on the trips I take.
I'd recommend, though, if you're ever in Tokyo, to visit Yasukuni Shrine, and if you're in Seoul, to visit Jogyesa.
Regarding the latter, the reasons are obvious. Regarding the former, forget the propaganda (which alone is worth the visit). Look at the Heian era swords.
And if you ever get the chance, visit the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and look at the swords from Europe at about the same time.
It.
Is.
Unbelievable, the difference.
Too bad they don't let you take pictures of them, though, you wouldn't believe it.
Below are some shots from Jogyesa, one of 24 "head temples" for the Seon (Zen) sect in Korea.
Next came Yasukuni shrine; it was a pleasant day, and maybe it was the North Korean missles, or perhaps it was the cherry blossoms, but the place was packed.
That's about all the sightseeing one can do on the trips I take.
I'd recommend, though, if you're ever in Tokyo, to visit Yasukuni Shrine, and if you're in Seoul, to visit Jogyesa.
Regarding the latter, the reasons are obvious. Regarding the former, forget the propaganda (which alone is worth the visit). Look at the Heian era swords.
And if you ever get the chance, visit the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and look at the swords from Europe at about the same time.
It.
Is.
Unbelievable, the difference.
Too bad they don't let you take pictures of them, though, you wouldn't believe it.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
More awareness then we had thought?
Still on travel, but I didn't want to let this story slip through the cracks:
So even though their existence is fleeting, is it the case these animals also exhibit to some extent altriustic behavior?
BTW, evidently these things can be up to 0.8mm in length, or about 0.031 inches.
After producing superlatives like the world’s biggest statue of a jackrabbit and the nation’s most unpopular modern-day president, Texas can now boast what may be its most bizarre and undoubtedly its slimiest topper yet: the world’s largest known colony of clonal amoebas.
Scientists found the vast and sticky empire stretching 40 feet across, consisting of billions of genetically identical single-celled individuals, oozing along in the muck of a cow pasture outside Houston...
Scientists say the discovery is much more than a mere curiosity, because the colony consists of what are known as social amoebas. Only an apparent oxymoron, social amoebas are able to gather in organized groups and behave cooperatively, some even committing suicide to help fellow amoebas reproduce. The discovery of such a huge colony of genetically identical amoebas provides insight into how such cooperation and sociality might have evolved and may help to explain why microbes are being found to show social behaviors more often than was expected...
Meanwhile, as impressive (or even threatening) as a colony of a couple billion amoebas might sound, it has turned out to be surprisingly fragile.
“Just one week later, it had rained a lot and then it basically was gone,” Mr. Gilbert said.
Apparently, such is the fleeting nature of grand amoebic phenomena, for the Texas clone is not the first to dwindle inexplicably into nothingness. Scientists say that the last traces of what at one point may have been the world’s largest individual amoeba — and the star of a highly productive research program — shriveled in their laboratory last summer until it disappeared.
So even though their existence is fleeting, is it the case these animals also exhibit to some extent altriustic behavior?
BTW, evidently these things can be up to 0.8mm in length, or about 0.031 inches.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Free Will, Behavioral Determinism and Buddhism
I used to be concerned about the Free Will versus Determinism issue. I'm not really that concerned anymore. Humans are not exactly controllable and observable in a systems theoretic with today's technology, and even if they were, the question still wouldn't be answered, because humans would still be doing the experiments.
Maybe we have to wait for the Robot Overlords to take over before we can get an answer.
Regardless, everything's densely interconnected.
Practicing mindfulness to achieve good behavior might not pay off every time like a slot machine, but it beats alternatives.
All that said, as long as you can make any kind of gesture purposefully, it appears that it is an absolute purposefulness, which can be forgiven as being taken as the appearance of freedom.
But it's not absolute in the sense that it can really stand apart from the 10,000 things.
But a lot of gestures equivalent to wiggling one's toe can add up after a while.
It's kind of like going to the gym: don't overdo it, but if you go regularly there will be results.
That probably didn't clear things up, so how about this: Whether or not we're purely meat machines or whether there's other metaphysics involved is outside the category of useful things that Buddhism discusses. (A useful thing that Buddhism might discuss is: I'm suffering! Must be an attachment somewhere! What's the way out? [Followed by a purposeful behavior.])
Maybe we have to wait for the Robot Overlords to take over before we can get an answer.
Regardless, everything's densely interconnected.
Practicing mindfulness to achieve good behavior might not pay off every time like a slot machine, but it beats alternatives.
All that said, as long as you can make any kind of gesture purposefully, it appears that it is an absolute purposefulness, which can be forgiven as being taken as the appearance of freedom.
But it's not absolute in the sense that it can really stand apart from the 10,000 things.
But a lot of gestures equivalent to wiggling one's toe can add up after a while.
It's kind of like going to the gym: don't overdo it, but if you go regularly there will be results.
That probably didn't clear things up, so how about this: Whether or not we're purely meat machines or whether there's other metaphysics involved is outside the category of useful things that Buddhism discusses. (A useful thing that Buddhism might discuss is: I'm suffering! Must be an attachment somewhere! What's the way out? [Followed by a purposeful behavior.])
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Seoul...
Made it to Seoul, and in a couple of days hopefully will post some nice pictures and all that. Made it to Jogyesa. Korea's not bad, actually, but there's certainly more corporate heaviness here (or if you like, vertical integration from the chaebol taken to absurdity) than probably anywhere else in the world. I mean, they have Samsuing Life Insurance and Hyundai Department Stores. But it's not all that bad. Or, as a Korean colleague working for me used to say, "It's stupid, but it's OK."
The other thing I hope to get though is a post, of all things, on the death of the mall, and implications of malls you probably haven't considered.
On edit: Actually, no I'm not going to post on this, because to do so would be kind of an anti-mitzvah, if there were such a word.
The other thing I hope to get though is a post, of all things, on the death of the mall, and implications of malls you probably haven't considered.
On edit: Actually, no I'm not going to post on this, because to do so would be kind of an anti-mitzvah, if there were such a word.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
The last word on miracles from spirituality...
I'll credit Douglas Adams, from The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy, with the basic line of reasoning:
The point is: if you hail from a religious tradition in which faith is paramount, in which it is required, indeed any "miracles" will render faith redundant, which undermines the religious tradition itself. The minute you point to some special transcendent activity of a supernatural being, that is the very minute you have declared that faith in things unseen is not required, and that is the very moment you betray your allegiance to the faith-based religious tradition.
If, however, you plead that one must have faith in the miracle, then you're back to square one, and you must admit that there is doubt that the transcendent has left a calling card.
And so, if for a moment you accept that what you have observed is not a miracle, admitting the doubt that it is not the transcendent activity of said supernatural being, then the possibility of alternative explanations presents itself. And the ethic of sincerity would demand, I would think, that these alternative explanations be examined. And if there is more support for the alternative explanations than for a miracle, what then? Do you become like Nietzche's madman in Thus Spake Zarathustra and proclaim the death of god from rooftops? Really? Is your faith that weak? Allow me to present some middle ground that is accessible, I think, to all.
"It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists," I think (the Christian) Wittgenstein said. You exist. You live and breathe and have various senses. You are aware. Why would you want something more? Why is that not sufficient to help beings?
To Buddhists, greed, hatred, and ignorance are the three poisons, the source of all suffering; and the strongest poison in this regard is greed. (Christians could translate that to pride, itself a form of greed.) Trungpa Rinpoche, his character flaws and extreme alchoholic behavior aside, rightly pointed out that spiritual materialism is a form of greed. Spiritual materialism and spiritual hucksterism intersect at the point where the transcendent is entreated to make a show of itself, when the very breath being breathed makes anything else look like the existential equivalent of a McDonald's Happy Meal compared to the fare at a Michelin-rated eatery.
Why would you want anything more?
The Babel fish is small, yellow and leech-like, and probably the oddest thing in the Universe. It feeds on brainwave energy recieved not from its own carrier but from those around it, It absorbs all unconscious mental frequencies from this brainwave energy to nourish itself with. the practical upshot of this is that if you stick a Babel fish in your ear you can instantly understand anything said to you in any language.
Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so
mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some
thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:
"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. Q.E.D."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove
that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.
Most leading theologians claim that this argument isn't worth a pair of fetid dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid from making a fortune when he used it as the central argument in his book Well That About Wraps It Up For God.
Meanwhile, the poor Babel fish, by effectively removing all barriers to communication between different races and cultures, has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation.
The point is: if you hail from a religious tradition in which faith is paramount, in which it is required, indeed any "miracles" will render faith redundant, which undermines the religious tradition itself. The minute you point to some special transcendent activity of a supernatural being, that is the very minute you have declared that faith in things unseen is not required, and that is the very moment you betray your allegiance to the faith-based religious tradition.
If, however, you plead that one must have faith in the miracle, then you're back to square one, and you must admit that there is doubt that the transcendent has left a calling card.
And so, if for a moment you accept that what you have observed is not a miracle, admitting the doubt that it is not the transcendent activity of said supernatural being, then the possibility of alternative explanations presents itself. And the ethic of sincerity would demand, I would think, that these alternative explanations be examined. And if there is more support for the alternative explanations than for a miracle, what then? Do you become like Nietzche's madman in Thus Spake Zarathustra and proclaim the death of god from rooftops? Really? Is your faith that weak? Allow me to present some middle ground that is accessible, I think, to all.
"It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists," I think (the Christian) Wittgenstein said. You exist. You live and breathe and have various senses. You are aware. Why would you want something more? Why is that not sufficient to help beings?
To Buddhists, greed, hatred, and ignorance are the three poisons, the source of all suffering; and the strongest poison in this regard is greed. (Christians could translate that to pride, itself a form of greed.) Trungpa Rinpoche, his character flaws and extreme alchoholic behavior aside, rightly pointed out that spiritual materialism is a form of greed. Spiritual materialism and spiritual hucksterism intersect at the point where the transcendent is entreated to make a show of itself, when the very breath being breathed makes anything else look like the existential equivalent of a McDonald's Happy Meal compared to the fare at a Michelin-rated eatery.
Why would you want anything more?
So you think you know heaven and hell...
Hakuin in one of his writings mentions the existence of heaven and hell, and asserts their reality. His reasons are not quite logical, and with the writings, at least as translated, there's more than a bit of defensiveness.
What to do with that?
Accept him at his word?
I do tend to subscribe to the ideas, as expounded by other Buddhists, that heaven and hell are what you make your life here and now. To be fair to Hakuin, he could be read that way, but that could just as well be a clever way around some statements that are hard to defend. It could be historical revisionism.
Generally, I tend to take a nontheist view of things; it is not important to the work of transcending suffering, curing the 3 poisons and so forth to speculate deeply about metaphysics. This comports with Buddhist viewpoints going back millenia, going back to the Buddha himself, who when asked about such things is said to have responded with a noble silence.
Hakuin couldn't have been totally ignorant of this, he was very learned to say the least, but his writing though could as well be informed by the Lotus Sutra, in particular where doctrines of upaya are presented. Quan-Yin/Kannon/Avolkitesvara will assume any form needed to accomplish compassion, if compassion is sought. Hakuin understood that there was a "popular" Buddhism that lay people followed because they could not afford the learning and leisure to practice zazen of the clerical class.
Hakuin was not above criticizing some of the abuses and decadence he saw in Buddhism of his time and place however.
I guess the difference is that between "thought leaders" - people who decide where to take culture by their unique position and leadership, and the masses, who don't have the time and leisure to consider deeply the spiritual, religious, political, psychological and otherwise "technical" (medical, scientific, legal...) aspects of the life they must live now.
So I want to make myself a bit clearer: I have nothing against any individual who decides to practice a 12 Step program, for whatever reason, if they think they need it. I even have nothing against those who, for want of a better solution, recommend a solution to a problem known to be suboptimal. But for those who are peddling known suboptimal solutions, based on snake-oil as some kind of universal optimum I modestly dissent, to use the words of the Scottish Calvinists in response to the Jacobites. When adherents of a sect claim some kind of metaphysical reality being breached uniquely to that sect, I have to respond: what is my experience, chopped liver? And when someone claims that their sect and its supporting structures has science behind hit, when there is none, I am compelled morally, I am acting ex cathedra, so to speak, from my vows to bring up what science is, why there is no science in the organization. And if there's a dodgy history behind the sect I will have to mention it. There's dodgy history in my sect, and I bring it up, should hucksters get a pass because they claim they "help people?"
The answer to my questions above, by the way, is to respectfully disagree with Hakuin's positions on heaven and hell, at least insofar as a noble silence on such subjects is disagreement.
What to do with that?
Accept him at his word?
I do tend to subscribe to the ideas, as expounded by other Buddhists, that heaven and hell are what you make your life here and now. To be fair to Hakuin, he could be read that way, but that could just as well be a clever way around some statements that are hard to defend. It could be historical revisionism.
Generally, I tend to take a nontheist view of things; it is not important to the work of transcending suffering, curing the 3 poisons and so forth to speculate deeply about metaphysics. This comports with Buddhist viewpoints going back millenia, going back to the Buddha himself, who when asked about such things is said to have responded with a noble silence.
Hakuin couldn't have been totally ignorant of this, he was very learned to say the least, but his writing though could as well be informed by the Lotus Sutra, in particular where doctrines of upaya are presented. Quan-Yin/Kannon/Avolkitesvara will assume any form needed to accomplish compassion, if compassion is sought. Hakuin understood that there was a "popular" Buddhism that lay people followed because they could not afford the learning and leisure to practice zazen of the clerical class.
Hakuin was not above criticizing some of the abuses and decadence he saw in Buddhism of his time and place however.
I guess the difference is that between "thought leaders" - people who decide where to take culture by their unique position and leadership, and the masses, who don't have the time and leisure to consider deeply the spiritual, religious, political, psychological and otherwise "technical" (medical, scientific, legal...) aspects of the life they must live now.
So I want to make myself a bit clearer: I have nothing against any individual who decides to practice a 12 Step program, for whatever reason, if they think they need it. I even have nothing against those who, for want of a better solution, recommend a solution to a problem known to be suboptimal. But for those who are peddling known suboptimal solutions, based on snake-oil as some kind of universal optimum I modestly dissent, to use the words of the Scottish Calvinists in response to the Jacobites. When adherents of a sect claim some kind of metaphysical reality being breached uniquely to that sect, I have to respond: what is my experience, chopped liver? And when someone claims that their sect and its supporting structures has science behind hit, when there is none, I am compelled morally, I am acting ex cathedra, so to speak, from my vows to bring up what science is, why there is no science in the organization. And if there's a dodgy history behind the sect I will have to mention it. There's dodgy history in my sect, and I bring it up, should hucksters get a pass because they claim they "help people?"
The answer to my questions above, by the way, is to respectfully disagree with Hakuin's positions on heaven and hell, at least insofar as a noble silence on such subjects is disagreement.
Monday, March 16, 2009
The awe and fun of engineering...
One of the more amusing aspects of something I read about this Ken Wilber guy is that, from what I've read, he regards much of science and scientists as "flatland" or "flatlanders," or whatever, as if he wants to relegate scientists to a "less-than full number of dimensions" of existence.
It's amusing because Wilber clearly is displaying his lack of knowledge of a vast variety of fields; I have looked for a definition of the opposite of polymath, but haven't been able to find one.
Why?
Well, here's why:
There's a lot of electrical and mechanical energy spent in the Buddhist blogosphere (and elsewhere) on spiritual and religious issues; elsewhere many want for something or someone beyond what is here now, and what pervades the whole universe. But when you can take the facticity of "A," (whatever "A" is, though I could go off on a nice Buddhist tangent here) and exploit it so that time, energy or bandwidth is conserved, you know you are reading the mind of god, as an atheist professor of mine mentioned in a similar context. There simply is no way to critique such a spirituality if you haven't been there and done that or something similar. And it fills a practical need. People all want to make sense of why they are existing in this time and place, in ill-fitting finitude to all appearances. But nobody wants to do that while paying through the nose for energy or for their cell phone bill.
I have mentioned elsewhere that my intellectual property is or will soon be on track to be more widely disseminated than Michael Jackson or Madonna. It's the economics of it all that are the reason of course as to why a) my IP is more widely disseminated and b) why pop music intellectual property is more widely known. But that's somewhat of a pity, because there's a certain elegance in extensions of Shannon's work that just can't be appreciated without a technical background. And unlike certain other forms of intellectual property, it will work as advertised.
So, I'm very grateful to be doing work that gives great fun and great awe. And when folks give advice as to how "limited" my work/outlook/philosophy/etc. is, my advice is, get a doctorate in a field like systems engineering, patent a few things and get back to me. Or do something similar, even if it's in Sculpey-Clay. Or at least try.
It's amusing because Wilber clearly is displaying his lack of knowledge of a vast variety of fields; I have looked for a definition of the opposite of polymath, but haven't been able to find one.
Why?
Well, here's why:
- The term "flatland" goes back to this book, developed by a guy with a mathematics background, to say the least. Ken Wilber did not choose to express concepts claiming us tech types were limited without using terms tech types invented to broaden expression!
- Wilber evidently has never had any experience in science or engineering, because if he did, he might understand the appeal, which comes from knowing something is true to a metaphysical certainty, with no chance of there being disagreement. My recent work is based on a fundamental theorem of information theory. The main theorem was proved by someone else; I am simply not that bright or don't have the time. However much of the ancillary design was based on "little theorems" or through brute force experimentation that was developed by myself, some of which was not obvious to my main collaborator. The feeling one gets when one designs something based on a theorem being true (especially that you yourself have engineered and proven) is awe and humility. It enables one to imagine the feelings going with being the first person to see the sights from Mount Everest. It is "one taste" that no one has tasted before, but thanks to efforts by one's self and others, all can taste now. It is a big responsibility and serious business, too.
There's a lot of electrical and mechanical energy spent in the Buddhist blogosphere (and elsewhere) on spiritual and religious issues; elsewhere many want for something or someone beyond what is here now, and what pervades the whole universe. But when you can take the facticity of "A," (whatever "A" is, though I could go off on a nice Buddhist tangent here) and exploit it so that time, energy or bandwidth is conserved, you know you are reading the mind of god, as an atheist professor of mine mentioned in a similar context. There simply is no way to critique such a spirituality if you haven't been there and done that or something similar. And it fills a practical need. People all want to make sense of why they are existing in this time and place, in ill-fitting finitude to all appearances. But nobody wants to do that while paying through the nose for energy or for their cell phone bill.
I have mentioned elsewhere that my intellectual property is or will soon be on track to be more widely disseminated than Michael Jackson or Madonna. It's the economics of it all that are the reason of course as to why a) my IP is more widely disseminated and b) why pop music intellectual property is more widely known. But that's somewhat of a pity, because there's a certain elegance in extensions of Shannon's work that just can't be appreciated without a technical background. And unlike certain other forms of intellectual property, it will work as advertised.
So, I'm very grateful to be doing work that gives great fun and great awe. And when folks give advice as to how "limited" my work/outlook/philosophy/etc. is, my advice is, get a doctorate in a field like systems engineering, patent a few things and get back to me. Or do something similar, even if it's in Sculpey-Clay. Or at least try.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
