WORLD FAMILY TRADING

If we would only give, just once, the same amount of reflection to what we want to get out of life that we give to the question of what to do with a two weeks’ vacation, we would be startled at our false standards and the aimless procession of our busy days.

                                                                          –   Dorothy Canfield Fisher

Suppose you were to be informed that … tomorrow – your life would end.  And the messenger explains – that you are receiving this information … as a Courtesy.  So that you would have time to reflect … some time to compose your soul.

Now, for the purpose of this exercise, let us disregard all the Practical issues (which, of course would arise if the situation were real, and not hypothetical) … issues such as debts (both financial and social/interpersonal … chaos that you’ve created, messes which you’ve never cleaned up … is your Last Will & Testament in order? … things like that.

Let’s just focus on this question – “If I had to put my life down … and walk away from it … how would I FEEL about the way I’ve lived it?” …  Would I be satisfied? … Or would I wish I had lived it in a ‘better way’? Would I change any of the choices I made?

[If I were in this situation …(I will tell you this) … I would feel far from satisfied.]

Also … even though I’m about to quit on this idea, I don’t want you to quit on it.  

(You have my permission to take some time … right now … and deal with it.  And (if not now) … then come back to it in a day or two. And get what you can   out of it.

And, before we move on, let me offer a couple quotes –

My contemplation of life and human nature in that secluded place [cell 54 of Cairo Central Prison] taught me that he who cannot change the very fabric of his thought will never be able to change reality, and will never, therefore, make any progress.  … I discovered my real self in Cell 54.

                                                                                                    –   Anwar Sadat

If you want to identify me, ask me not where I live, or what I like to eat, or how I comb my hair, but ask me what I am living for, in detail, ask me what I think is keeping me from living fully for the thing I want to live for.  Between these two answers you can determine the identity of any person. The better the answer he has, the more of a person he is.

                                                                                        –  Thomas Merton

(Also) – Merton says that – ‘Solitude is a way to defend the spirit against the murderous din of our materialism.’

(So  … take whatever alone-time you need.)

For the purposes of this essay … I want to shift (the same question) … to the societal level … that is –

Suppose we were Really Smart … how would we restructure our culture?

Someone said (I don’t recall his name … a Canadian, maybe) – that

What Americans have in place of a culture … is – a fast-moving economy.

Personally, I think there is truth in this.

Suppose that we (Americans) were to spend as much time talking about our Society … as we do talking about our Economy.

(Maybe we think our economy is our culture.  Mmm?)

Anyway, if we did … that would increase our ‘culture talk’ by at least 1,000 %.

Culture (as you know) … is a sort of soup … the main ingredients of which are –

Language

Customs

Music

Beliefs (shared paradigm)

Values

A sense of belonging … a sense of – WE.

(and so on)

And – the way that an individual might take on (as a project) – the development of his or her own character … and strive to live life in the best way they can think of …

just in that same way … a Culture might take on the responsibility of becoming the best Society they can (collectively) think of.                Mmm?

What do you think? … Would not this be a Wonderful Development?

Surely one of the Best Films Ever is –  “La Belle Verte” (French, 1996, Coline Serreau)

Here is a summary (from IMDB):

The “Green Planet” belongs to another solar system. Through the simplicity of their lifestyle those who live there are a real step ahead of us: they spend their time concentrating their knowledge, strength and energy on the development of their minds and bodies in a natural environment which they dearly preserve and care for. Once a year, they gather in the crater of a dormant volcano to decide which planets they ought to send messengers to. There are volunteers for every planet except Earth, which is considered too polluted and too dangerous. One woman alone, Mila, decides to go there to seek out her identity, as Osam the old sage has revealed to her that she was conceived there during a previous trip by her father.

If you haven’t seen this film … I hope you do.

Anyway … as it is … the group, on this planet, which (currently) takes the prize … for taking responsibility for the shape and structure of the culture we live in … is the One Percent … the Super Rich.

Solzhenitsyn comments that our modern age is characterized by hurry … and by superficiality; and this is (of course) true.  But how did this come to be?

It is the result of the (deliberate) work of the Super Rich.

They do this, of course, as occupiers; they (most certainly) do not want us messing around with their world.  They do not want us to reshape the culture into something sane and humane.  This would not serve their (perverse) purposes.

But

It seems to me … If they can do it  (reshape the culture) … we can do it.

Perhaps you’re wondering – what you could do?

Well ….  (if you can’t think of anything else) … how about organizing a (weekly) neighborhood potluck … right where (wherever) you are?                

                                     [ref: my blog postings of July 4th and of July 18th  2018]

I don’t know …

No one knows what you can do.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.thrivemovement.com/

http://www.thrivemovement.com/

 

Don’t argue.

It isn’t necessary.

          –   Al Jenkins

 

I would like to be able to say something half-intelligent about how Reality is structured  – which allows us to be able to understand (anything) deeper … and then deeper again.

Or maybe it will turn out to be (largely) a phenomenon of the WAY we come to understand things.  (It’s too early for me to tell. However, I intend to make progress in this area.)

 

Meanwhile

here are some examples –

 

 

Look beneath racism and you’ll find materialism.

 

Look beneath economic activity and you’ll find cooperation (giving) and emergence.

 

Look beneath the ethics of the super rich and you’ll find arrogance, delusion,alienation, power addiction, and tunnel vision.

 

Look beneath the rug and you’ll find all the dirt we’ve swept there.

 

Look beneath the surface level of society and you’ll find there are planners … and plannees.

 

Look beneath water and you’ll find hydrogen and oxygen.

 

Look beneath light and you’ll find an interaction between the electric field and the magnetic field.

 

Look beneath differences and you’ll find lots of similarities.

 

Look beneath a religious pursuit of financial wealth and you’ll find rebellion ‘self-sufficiency’.

 

Look beneath the acting out of a child and you’ll sometimes find a parent trying to repress that same pattern.

 

Look beneath paternalism and exploitation and you’ll find a sense of impunity.

 

Look beneath our failure to take care of our ecosystem (our planetary life-support systems) and you’ll find a sense of exemption (pathological optimism).

 

Look beneath the trees and you’ll see the forest.

 

Look beneath the forest and you’ll see the web of life.

 

Look beneath the fear of death and you’ll find a fear of life.

 

Look beneath activity and you’ll find the laws of nature.

 

Look beneath your thoughts and you’ll find silence.

 

Look beneath fundamentalism and you’ll find ignorance.

 

Look beneath fear and you’ll find a dangerous person.

 

Look beneath love and you’ll find someone who’s trying to make the world better.

 

Look beneath our preoccupation with consuming, sports, and fashion, and you’ll find The One Percent pulling our strings.

 

Look beneath the belief that cheating & exploitation are necessary and you’ll find it is not true.

 

Look at “I can change things” and “I can’t change things” and you’ll find both are right.

 

Look at “My happiness comes from the outside” and you’ll find that it does not.

 

Look beneath “I’m not responsible” and you’ll find it is not so.

 

Look beneath rebellion and you’ll find lack of trust.

 

Look beneath the lack of trust and you’ll find a lack of knowledge.

 

Look beneath selfishness and you’ll find a lack of desire for the truth … and poor taste.

 

Look beneath humorlessness and you’ll find a lack of balance and authenticity.

 

Look beneath (what is commonly agreed upon to be) reality and you’ll find a great deal of folly.

 

Look beneath a lie and you’ll find a desire for advantage and control.

 

Look beneath any form of mistreatment and you’ll find it is not sustainable.

 

Look beneath sustainability and you’ll find that it is our only path to survival.

Continue reading To Be a Human Being … is Tough

 

My name is Richard Brautigan.  I am twenty-one years old.

I am an unknown poet.

That does not mean  I do not have any friends.

It means mostly my friends know I’m a poet

because I have told them so.

Let us pretend that my mind is a taxi

and suddenly (“What the hell’s coming off !”)

you are riding in it.

 

 

 

There was a certain young man (a high school lad) who was about to go on his first date.

 

When his best friend learned of this, he felt (because he had more experience) that he should offer his friend some counsel.

 

So he explained to him –  “Look, when you have your date, don’t think that you can just talk about anything.  Do not try to talk about politics or religion.  Talk about food … or family … or philosophy.

 

So – the big day comes.  And when the young man is with his date (and the time has come for some conversation)  he recalls his friend’s counsel … and says to the girl – “Do you like applesauce?”

 

She says …  “No.”

 

Then he says to her, “Do you have a sister?”

 

And she says, “No.”

 

Then he says,  “Well, if you had a sister, would she like applesauce?”

 

And what is the butt of this joke?  It’s PHILOSOPHY itself!

 

Now, I want you to know – that I did not make this joke up!

It had been repeated … from one person to another … many times before someone told it to me!  This means that lots of people think it’s funny.  (I think it’s funny, or I wouldn’t be telling it to you.)

That this joke has made the rounds … means – that this is what our society thinks of philosophy:  (“If you had a sister, would she like applesauce?”)

 

The people of this culture … think that philosophy is a joke.

(and [personally] I can feel this realization push me [a little further] into invisibility)

 

But really – I am not writing this essay to whine.  It is not intended as an appeal for sympathy. It is  offered (as usual) as a small beam of light … as from a flashlight.

If you have ever had to pitch camp (in the wilderness and) in the dark, with perhaps only a flashlight for illumination … you well know – that ‘broad’ daylight is much preferable.

 

I reckon that our (common) efforts to figure out how to survive … (how to survive our own collective folly) – is rather like trying to set up camp in the dark.

Any light is welcome.  

Mmm?

 

Allow me to offer a rather unusual definition for philosophy.

 

At ‘the center’ is the experiencing self.

“Out there” … is ‘the world’.

 

We are connected to ‘the world’ by our perceptions (of the world) and our ideas of it.

But we are not in direct contact with it … [as it seems to us that we are.  This is an illusion.]

(Refer to my blog of 13 Jan. 2018 … in particular, to my “Talk 1”, mentioned there.)

 

Anyway, the entire ‘zone’ between us and reality … this is the realm of philosophy.

 

[For context / contrast … where we draw the boundary lines between word meanings … this is the realm of semantics.

 

How we feel about this event … or that part of the world … this is the realm of emotions.]

 

Let me offer an example – [of a philosophical issue] :

 

If you are driving your car somewhere … and it breaks down …

chances are about 80%  – (assuming you have with you: a crescent wrench, a screwdriver, a pair of pliers, some bailing wire, and some duct tape) … that you will be able to fix your car (enough to be able) to drive away from the situation … if you can figure out what you need to do.

 

The situation you face is fundamentally a philosophical problem.

 

There are two cars. One is the car you drove there in (and in which you hope to be able to drive away in) … the other one is the car in your head … your thought car.

You need to make your head car resemble the real car … enough  … so you can fix the real one.

 

If you can adequately understand how your car works … and what’s wrong with it … the chances are quite good – that you’ll be able to fix it and drive away.

[if you’ve thrown a rod … and a connecting rod has poked a hole in your engine block … you’re probably not going to be able to drive away, but]  there are lots of things that can cause a breakdown, which you can fix … if you can figure out what needs to be done.

 

This is philosophy.

 

Our situation now – with our (multiple) planetary crises is quite similar.

 

There is no doubt that our very survival hangs in the balance.

 

There is (also) no doubt … that WE are the problem.

(as Pogo possum says – “We have met the enemy … and he is us.”)

 

If we keep on as we are … we’re done … I have no doubt.

 

We must figure out how to do better … and do it.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlfqsL3hTK0    (trailer to my ‘Talk 1’)

 

http://www.thrivemovement.com/home

 

 

The Sun is a powerful man!

If he dies, everybody dies!

                     –   Dersu Uzala

 

One of my earliest mathematical insights (or realizations) happened one Sunday morning on our way to church.  Actually, I’m not certain that we (my brother Dan and I) were actually heading to church … but I AM certain that it was NEAR the church.

Dan was running (which was nothing unusual) … and I was off to the side, observing.  And it came to me (suddenly and clearly) – that his speed was (simultaneously) dependent upon (both) the length of his stride, and the frequency of his strides.

 

Simultaneous dual dependency.

 

There is a (very) large family of algebraic formulae which share this basic pattern.

 

One that we are all familiar with (those of us who drive a car) is –   d = rt … which says that the distance (d) that we will travel will be a function of two other things: the rate (r) at which we travel, and the time (t) that we spend moving at that rate.  If we go for two hours at 60 miles per hour, we can get somewhere 120 miles away. If we travel for twice as long, we can cover twice that distance. If we average only half the original rate (maybe because we get stuck in rush-hour traffic) then we will cover only half the original distance.

 

The reason, though, that I chose f = ma (as the title for this essay) … is a little ‘to one side’.

 

F = ma  says that the force is equal to the mass ‘times’ (that is, ‘multiplied by’) the acceleration.  (which, by the way – is the same thing as saying that the force is simultaneously proportional to both the mass and the acceleration)

 

But, let’s divide both sides of the equation by ‘m’…

Then we have  f/m = a … or a = f/m.  

This says that the acceleration of a body will be simultaneously (directly) proportional to the force … and (inversely) proportional to the mass.  

Suppose you were to mount a small jet engine (something which will generate a uniform force) to a model railway car and give it a little brick (as a load) to accelerate … then you measure what happens.  Then you do the same thing again, only you double the load. You put two bricks on the car, instead of only one … and you observe what happens. You will find that doubling the mass reduces the acceleration by the same factor [of two].  (this is inverse proportionality.  Direct proportionality is simpler:  If you increase the force by some factor [say, 2 … by using 2 jet engines instead of one] then you will increase the acceleration by that same factor.

 

I am bothering with these explanations, though, simply because I do not want  these formulae to be meaningless.

 

In my view (I’m a philosopher really, not a physicist) the statement f = ma is a philosophical assertion … because it says something about the nature of reality.  (the physicist might regard the same expression as a kind of Law … a rule which is always ‘obeyed’ … and also as an explication of how these various components are inter-related)

 

Anyway, HERE’S what I want to say about this expression [f = ma … or a = f/m]  …

‘a’ (acceleration) is behavior.  And this behavior is determined by two things – the outside (the ‘environmental’ forces) … and the inside (the mass of the object itself).

 

I’m interpreting it this way –     a = f/m means that behavior is a function of two things: the outside and the inside.

 

So

Here’s the deal:

 

We do not have to continue being the brats that we have been our whole lives.  

 

Why do New Zealanders regard the plastic grocery bag to be the (unofficial) ‘national flag’ of their country? / Why is there so much trash along our roads?  Why is there a floating ‘island’ of garbage in the Pacific Ocean [between Oregon and Hawaii] that’s the size of Texas ?

 

If I do not love … whatever keeps me alive and/or makes my life better – then how can I claim that I am not a brat?

 

Do you know the name of the person that made the favorite pair of shoes that you wear?

The clothes that you wear … do you know what the face looks like of the person who made them?

Probably not … but

are we even grateful?

 

Do we believe so much in the omnipotence of money that our sense of absolute entitlement is merely confirmed by our owning of them?

 

We would be better off (and closer to the truth) if we would admit that money  (while a legal societal invention) is fundamentally an illusion. The goods that we buy with money have a level of reality which is higher than that of money.  Mmm?

 

But even if we are completely willing to allow our sense of entitlement to rob us of a grateful heart – with regard to the ‘basics’ –  of food, clothing, and shelter …

 

what about those things (both inside us and outside us) which keep us alive and ticking

day in and day out?

 

The sun

Rain (and all water)

The soil … the earth itself

The air (the atmosphere, the delicate membrane surrounding and protecting our planet.  Think about our airless moon!)

The hydrosphere (three quarters of the surface of the earth is water)

The lithosphere (soil and rocks)

The biosphere (that part of the earth which is comprised of living things – plants and animals)

 

Shall we allow ourselves to feel entitled to all these things as well?

 

The earth’s crust (the hard, crusty part) is about as thick (proportionally) as is the skin on an apple.

The amount of water comprising our hydrosphere is (proportionally) about as much water as there is on a wet basketball, once you’ve shaken off the excess.

 

 

And what about the INSIDE?

 

Should we imagine that we could even live without –

 

our heart (and circulatory system)?

brain (and nervous system)?

lungs (respiratory system)?

liver?

and the digestive system?

bones (our skeletal system)

muscles?

skin (the largest, heaviest organ in our body … the integumentary system)?

                       excretory systems?

endocrine system?

lymphatic system?

 

Shall we take these things for granted as well?

 

I (just now) found a piece of construction paper

drew a (rather large) circle on it

and listed the various things which are vital

to my life.

[and tacked it to the wall, where I’ll see it every day]

 

Inside the circle, I wrote : heart, lungs, brain, etc.

and

outside the circle (and above it) I wrote down things such as:  sun, air, water, soil & rocks, and so on.

Below the circle, I listed things which benefit me which are provided culturally, through the big economy: water systems/delivery; food (production & distribution); shelter, electricity, etc.

 

I color-coded the entries in order to distinguish between things without which I simply can not survive … and those things for which I am grateful, but which (only) make my life better or easier.  [And I’ll make changes to this little ‘poster’ … as my understanding (or my heart) grows.]

 

Why did I do this?  [make this little graphic and put it up on my wall]?

Because – I would like to suggest that YOU do it too …  (and nobody likes a hypocrite).

 

I also think it’s worthwhile – to include these (vital or beneficial) things in routine meditation.

(I do this.)

 

Also – when I hurt some part of my body (if I stub my toe, for example) then … I apologize to my toe.

It was (though unintentional) my fault, after all.  [It wasn’t the toe’s fault!]  It serves me day in and day out; and I should take care of it.  When I fail to protect it, I should apologize.  (I have done this for many years.)

 

We should do whatever we can to strengthen a heart connection (love, gratitude) from our own consciousness toward the things which uphold our lives.

 

If we don’t –

we may be brats our entire lives

 

and we’ll be more likely to

continue to destroy our only planet-home … (or to allow it to happen)

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

http://www.thrivemovement.com/

 

For about a decade, I lived in a cooperative household (about a mile west of the University of Washington, in Seattle).  It was highly educational.

During this time, someone who lived in the house … decided to rent a piano. And I happened to be around when it arrived.

Two (professional) piano movers loaded it (an upright grand) onto a piano dolly, and brought it down the ramp from their truck, up a sloping concrete driveway, through the “garage” and into the basement bedroom – its requested destination.  Now, this whole time, the piano was on its end (to make it easier to get through doorways, and so on. However … when they tried to turn the piano upright, they found that the ceiling was too low. The distance between the floor and the ceiling was less than the diagonal of the piano’s back –  [upper right corner to the lower left corner]

So …

The movers put the piano back onto the dolly, took it back to the truck the way they had come, and rolled it back onto the truck.  This was the easiest way to get it into the living room (the 2nd preference) … because of the long flight of stairs from the sidewalk up to the front door.  They maneuvered the truck so that they could take advantage of their [long] loading ramp – to get the piano up the stairs. I believe they were able to reach their ramp all the way to the top landing.  But whatever they had to do, they managed to do it. They were, after all – professionals.

They put the piano in our living room.

 

But, you know what?

 

They could have saved themselves most of the work – if (when they had gotten the piano into the basement room) they had simply laid the piano on its back … and then stood it upright.  If they had thought of that possibility, they would have been quickly successful.  But they didn’t think of it.

I measured it the next day … it would have worked.  

The diagonal of the bottom was less than the ceiling height  … which means they could have rolled it onto its back (from its on-end position).  And, of course, the diagonal of the end of the piano was well less than the ceiling height.  So – once on its back, they could easily have stood it upright.

 

As I mentioned in a previous post – we sometimes make a mistake because we come to a conclusion about the nature of our situation – which conclusion turns out to be erroneous – despite the fact that there was evidence supporting our conclusion.

 

But – the mistake the (above) piano movers made … was a bit different.

Sometimes we make a mistake because we fail to explore our options.

The professionals could have put the piano in its preferred destination … if they had simply done one more step. Though they could not roll the piano from on-end to upright directly, they could easily have righted it from a lying flat position.

 

This is pertinent … because – the handful of (super-rich) people who own MultiNational Corporations which (mainly) determine how things are currently being done in this world … (apparently) believe – that it is necessary to exploit in order to get rich.

But – what it that’s wrong? (by which I mean – “erroneous”) … Then what?

 

What if – giving and service are actually the basis of wealth?

 

 

And – if we fail to make the connection between Sustainability … and Survival?

 

It’s not like we’ll just have to load our piano back onto our truck and work hard to put it on the main floor.

No.

 

We’re talking about cockroaches – as the Dominant Life-Form !

 

 

I suspect that the Tunnel Vision responsible for our current way of doing things … is rooted in Selfishness and Self-Absorption.

 

And the fact that these things (selfishness & self-absorption) are common … does not make them any less deadly.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtBwEetB-oU    (Simon Sinek  – The Key to Success)

 

That time of year thou mayst in me behold

When yellow leaves, or none, or few, do hang

Upon those boughs which shake against the cold,

Bare ruin’d choirs, where late the sweet birds sang.

In me thou see’st the twilight of such day

As after sunset fadeth in the west,

Which by and by black night doth take away,

Death’s second self, that seals up all in rest.

In me thou see’st the glowing of such fire

That on the ashes of his youth doth lie,

As the death-bed whereon it must expire,

Consum’d with that which it was nourish’d by.

This thou perceiv’st, which makes thy love more strong,

To love that well which thou must leave ere long.

 

                                            –    William Shakespeare

                                                                                     Sonnet 73

 

 

 

 

 

Today happens to be Halloween (2018).  Let’s try to understand what this (very interesting) holiday is about.

 

If you’re interested in how ideas and customs evolve, you should probably watch the History Channel’s production:  ‘The Real Story of Halloween’ –

 

                             https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9ltwRDR_4E

 

(I intend to draw upon it quite considerably, here.)

 

The ancient Celts divided the year into – the Light Half … and the Dark Half.  And, in the fall, this transition was observed by (what they called) – Samhain … [which is pronounced “Souwen”, which starts off like you’re going to say “south”].  And they believed that at this time of the year, the “veil” between our world and the spirit worlds was at its thinnest.  There were many stories about spirits (including the dead) wandering into our realm … or about regular people wandering into the spirit world, and (even) getting lost there.

 

These people lived mainly by agriculture.  They always did their best to grow enough food, so that they could survive the winter.

Harvest-Time was (naturally) associated with Death … because – soon after the harvest, the plants themselves died.  It happened every year with the onset of winter.

And also, the people themselves entered the Dark Time (winter) with hopes of Survival.  Whatever food-stores they were able to put aside … these would see them through the winter … or they would not.  There was no way to go out and get more. So – knowing the (very real) possibility of death (in the Dark) from simple starvation … meant that the harvest time was always associated with Death Lurking – (the prospect of death).

 

 

We humans are wonderfully symbolic.  We are highly susceptible and attuned to symbols and myths (symbolic stories).  Mmm?

 

Well, Shakespeare (in the epigram) points out the connection between death and sleep (which he refers to as “rest”).  So, (for us humans) – the sleep (of a single night) … as well as the Rest Time that our whole world (seasonally) goes through – (the Dark Time, or Winter) … these (both) become metaphors for Death.

 

Ernest Becker, in his (Pulitzer Prize) book – “The Denial of Death” notes – that we have an expression – “Holy Terror”.  Well, he says – that TERROR is always HOLY.  Terror is that special feeling we have … when confronted with Death.

[There may be many things which horrify us.  But Horror is extreme ‘disgust’, Mmm?]   Whereas … the Face of Death itself –  this induces TERROR.]

 

We have many fears. (And, of Death – we are Terrified.)   But our ‘normal’ mode of dealing with these fears – is to turn away from them.  (As Mark Twain says – ‘Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.’)

 

On Halloween, however … we have evolved customs which allow US – to put on the Face of Death.  WE pretend to be those things we fear the most. WE become the Boogieman.  WE become unruly and mischievous spirits.  We become the Grim Reaper (death itself).  (And so on.)  And thus, we make sport of our fears.

 

This is worth something, don’t you think?

 

 

And – how did these customs come about?

 

It turns out that the Christian Church had quite a hand in it.  The church regarded Paganism to be ‘the enemy’ (reasoning that the pagan beliefs must have been instigated by the Devil … and so, must be evil).  

The Church was (clearly) aware of ‘the Great War of Ideas’, and they participated in it quite consciously and deliberately.  They realized that the Pagan customs and observances could not be gotten rid of easily.  If they found ‘ignorant’ people worshiping a tree, they would consecrate that tree to Jesus Christ, and tell the people to continue to worship the tree as they had been.  If they came across a pagan temple, they would tear it down, and ON THE SAME SITE erect a Christian Church.

Knowing they could not (simply) eradicate pagan observances, they would co-opt them.  This is what happened with the observance of Samhain.  The church declared Nov. 1st to be “All Saints Day” (or All Hallows Day) … and then soon declared Nov. 2nd to be All Souls Day.

 

The day before All Hallows Day was called All Hallows Evening (or All Hallows Eve, or All Hallows E’en), which became ‘Halloween’.

 

In the 16th century (well after the Dark Ages) there arose a Witch panic in Europe.  Witch hunting devolved into quite the Industry.  Eventually, if you were to report (turn in) a certain neighbor as a Witch (and she were to be tried and convicted of witchcraft … and consequently drowned or hanged or burned)… you might well end up with a portion of her estate!

Our (still used) phrase – ‘the third degree’ comes from the 3rd round of torture (with its highly specialized tools … the application of which invariably brought about [the desired] ‘confession’)

 

If you have not already seen Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible” … you should.  (The 1996 film stars Daniel Day-Lewis & Winona Ryder.) It’s about a witch trial (in Salem, Massachusetts) in 1692.

 

The Witch (that is – a stereotypical version of the Witch) has of course become indispensable to our modern-day Halloween.

 

The tradition of Jack-O-Lanterns is quite interesting.  But I think I’ll let you watch the video for that.

 

On Nov. 5th, 1605 – a pro-catholic terrorist, by the name of Guy Fawkes attempted to blow up the House of Lords. (and for this he was tried & executed)

 

                         https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes_Night  

 

And this was close enough to Halloween, that these two became associated.  Guy Fawkes night is still observed in England.

 

The American Civil War saw the death of 620,000 soldiers (a number nearly equal to the losses of all our other wars combined).  And many of these (civil war) deaths were ‘unknown’ (the bodies remained unidentified).  This was very Hard to Take. And this culture-wide event brought about a marked increase in the telling of Ghost Stories (many of which were about the ‘dead’ returning home.)

So, ‘ghost stories’ (which had been with us [at least] since the Ancient Celts) became much more popular after the Civil War.

 

By around 1900 American artists began to combine the main elements of Halloween, and portray them visually – witches, black cats, cauldrons, bats, ghosts, Jack-O Lanterns.

 

The first third of the 20th century saw a considerable amount of Halloween pranks and vandalism.  (Due, considerably, to the rowdy Scottish & Irish [young male] immigrants.) Pranksters would remove gates … and livestock would escape.  They would remove front steps from houses, so that when people came out, they would hurt themselves. Stones broke windows. Arson.

The Halloween of 1933 became known as “Black Halloween”.  This was during the Great Depression; and people could hardly afford to make the repairs, clean up, and rebuild.

 

It became clear (especially to property owners) that Halloween needed to change its ways.  It would have to be brought out of the dark and into the light … into the main-stream of the society.

 

So adults came up with the idea of ‘buying off the pranksters’.  Offering them treats – of popcorn balls, and candied apples, etc.  

Parties.  

Games.  

Parades.  

Costumes.

 

It worked.  

A little before 1930, paper Halloween costumes were being manufactured and retailed to the public.  Then (because of injuries due to flammability) more durable costumes followed … along with MASKS.

 

With the participation of Movies and Television, Halloween began to morph very quickly.

It is now a major Cultural Phenomenon.

 

 

The phrase “Trick or Treat” is really fairly new.

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Some other cultures have recently adopted our (American) Halloween.

 

A note I received today from Ukraine began – “Сладость или гадость?”  ( [Sladost’ ili gadost’?] … Sweetness or meanness?)

 

… and one from Russia, which began – “Сладость или… шалость?”   ([Sladost’ ili… shalost’?] … Sweetness or … prank?)

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Of course, if you have not yet seen the (delightful) film – “Coco” (Disney/PIXAR, 2017) … you should.

We ‘Americans’ can benefit from the Mexican culture. It is less materialistic, and the people are less alienated. Their ‘Day of the Dead’ festivities are friendly and humane … more like a family reunion. Deceased family members are still regarded as valuable (and loved) members of the family. We people from ‘the north’ tend to fear cemeteries … and the dead. Mexicans still (simply) love their dead relatives.

Americans might put up a (plain) white cross – where a relative died on the highway.  Mexicans do that too … but they will (lavishly) decorate those markers.

[Here, I will (again) refer you to (and recommend) the film – “Bella” (by Alejandro Gomez Monteverde, 2006).  If you are awake, you will discern what it has to say about our two – (the ‘American’ … and the Hispanic cultures).  It is based on a true story.

We Americans do not realize how (severely) alienated we are.]

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Her Kind

 

I have gone out, a possessed witch,   

haunting the black air, braver at night;   

dreaming evil, I have done my hitch   

over the plain houses, light by light:   

lonely thing, twelve-fingered, out of mind.   

A woman like that is not a woman, quite.   

I have been her kind.

 

I have found the warm caves in the woods,   

filled them with skillets, carvings, shelves,   

closets, silks, innumerable goods;

fixed the suppers for the worms and the elves:   

whining, rearranging the disaligned.

A woman like that is misunderstood.

I have been her kind.

 

I have ridden in your cart, driver,

waved my nude arms at villages going by,   

learning the last bright routes, survivor   

where your flames still bite my thigh

and my ribs crack where your wheels wind.   

A woman like that is not ashamed to die.   

I have been her kind.

                                     –  ANNE SEXTON

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you’re feeling hardy & well rested, you may want to watch the film – “Brother of Sleep” (1995); but be warned – this is, in places, a rough movie … not a Disney movie.  And definitely not for children.

 

The temptation to moralize is strong; it is emotionally satisfying to have enemies rather than problems, to seek out culprits rather than flaws in the system.  God knows it is emotionally satisfying to be righteous with that righteousness that nourishes itself on the blood of sinners. But God also knows that what is emotionally satisfying can be spiritually devastating.

                                                           –      William Sloane Coffin

                                                                                  The Courage to Love

 

 

 

In this (American) culture – fundamentalism is (to put it mildly) – disliked.  Let’s have a look at WHY we hate and fear fundamentalists.

 

The word ‘fundamentalist’ has come to be (inherently) a pejorative label.  (About half of what we mean, when we use the word, indicates that we DO NOT LIKE – who [or what … whatever] we are talking about.

 

We should understand that (the same as with any pejorative) – the word carries a ‘regard’ which will (likely) NOT be shared by the one we are describing.  Non-Mexicans do NOT call themselves ‘gringos’; it’s a word Mexicans use for “others“.  Non-Jews do NOT refer to themselves as ‘goyim’ or ‘gentiles’; it’s a word that Jews use for “others“.  There is an ‘us and them’ perspective, which is essential to this way of regarding the world – and which gives rise to the use of such terms.

 

I have (more than once) accepted an invitation … and allowed myself to be talked at by Christian Fundamentalists.  Only, in these cases – I think that the people I’m referring to may well have felt comfortable with the term ‘fundamentalist’.  (And that’s because – from their point of view – it’s very important to acknowledge the ‘fundamentals’ … which, for them, might be – the Virgin Birth … the fact of the crucifixion [and that Jesus died for our sins] … things like that.)

 

But, when people (who, at least imagine – that they are NOT fundamentalists) use the term, what they mean is (and what their objection is) – that the person concerned has taken a stance in the world … because they have come to a conclusion rashly, maybe with Very Little thought … and (possibly) with inadequate education.

 In the extreme – fundamentalists are Ignorant … and Proud of it (proud of being ignorant.  So – there is little possibility that they will seek further education in the area involved.

 

When, for example, Salman Rushdie wrote: “The Satanic Verses” (in 1988) –  the Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa – calling for the death of (and ordering Muslims to kill) Rushdie.  (And this resulted in numerous killings, attempted killings, and bombings.)  And (if what I heard at the time was accurate) the people (the Muslim fundamentalists) who took on this task of eliminating the blasphemer – never even read the novel, nor ever intended to.  They were, apparently, quite comfortable with their ignorance.  And this is the aspect of fundamentalism we find particularly disagreeable and scary.       Mmm?

 

Now, let us consider – whether WE are free of these characteristics and tendencies.

 

In the United States the largest and fastest-growing ‘religious sect’ is Scientism … whose ‘pews’ are populated with people who have ‘traded in God for Science’.  These parishioners look to Science the way people used to look to the Bible … and with the same sort of faith. Most of these ‘modern folks’ are Humanist Agnostic Fundamentalists.  (Humanist – because they consider God to be passé and irrelevant; Agnostic – because they doubt the existence of God; and Fundamentalist – because they DO NOT DOUBT the correctness of their position.  And they are just as starry-eyed toward Science as our predecessors were toward God.)  

I suspect that mostly these folks think that –

 

people who (still) believe in God  … are quaint, soft-headed, and anachronistic.

that the “Death of God” was inevitable … and that when we ‘grew up’ – it was bound to happen.

        and they think that we’ve now outgrown God … that we’ve matured beyond the need for superstition.

 

However … we are now finding out what it is like to live in a society from which the vertical dimension has been removed.

                                                 [ref: Robert Bly’s book – “The Sibling Society”]

 

We now presume – that there is no Higher Authority.   There are now no elders.  (And when someone with greater love & wisdom happens to show up … we have no place for them.  We don’t know what to do with them. We no longer even have a Cognitive Category for elder; so, we have no way to even recognize one.)

And (unfortunately) we now behave like a family of teenagers whose parents are away  … so, now we think (‘good riddance’) – we can do whatever we like with each other and with the Whole House.  We now imagine that (finally, at last) we are on our own.

 

And … what do you think the House is going to look like  … when this ‘long weekend’ is over?

 

Mmm?

 

It’s not uncommon for teenagers to believe that they “know better” than their parents do.  But their confidence in their belief  (about their ‘superior’ knowledge) … turns out to be very much like the confidence the Muslim fundamentalists (who tried to assassinate Rushdie) had in their position.

So, the question is … are we teenagers?

That is – in a decade (or 2) – will we ‘come to‘ … and realize we did not know better than our parents after all?  in spite of the certainty of our position at the time?

 

Whenever Fundamentalism shows up … it presents itself to us as a superb ‘commercial’ for Education.

 

Only – we should learn how to criticize ourselves (that is: to understand ourselves) as well.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

ref:   https://www.quora.com/God-made-man-in-his-image-Looking-at-the-Earth-today-could-God-possibly-be-behind-the-worlds-outlook/answer/Stephen-Spyker

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Oh! ……. Привет, Эрика.   Добро пожаловать.

 

 

                                                              Physics learned more from the steam engine

                                                                  than the steam engine ever did

                                                                       from physics.

 

 

 

I think about how ideas move.  And, for some reason, I also think about thermodynamics – how heat moves.  (and other things)   I think about the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

 

The 2nd law is – that in a closed system, spontaneous changes will result in an increase in entropy.  “Closed system” means – that no energy or material can go in or out. Entropy is “disorder”, or chaos.

So – the 2nd Law is generally thought of as – the (inherent) “drive” toward Disorder.

 

When I was a kid, I (even so) had a ‘connect’ to the realm of SCIENCE.  This is because I had an older brother (Dan. He’s still older than me; and still more of a scientist) and our next-door neighbors (Sam and Bud Bitler) were a little older than Dan.  The Bitlers had a ham radio (which we could hear through our television) and were scientifically inclined.

 

There was a point in time – when the scientific community realized certain implications of the 2nd Law.  The reasoning went like this – “The Universe must be a ‘closed system’ (since, by definition, it includes everything) … and therefore – it MUST BE DECAYING.  The Second Law of Thermodynamics SAYS that IT MUST be.

 

I remember, (when this notion was still Fresh and Hot within the Scientific Community) that – in my own basement – it was discussed … in HUSHED TONES.

 

The tones were hushed because we felt trapped.  We felt we had been FORCED to conclude something very unpalatable – that we somehow lived in a world which is DECAYING … Dying !

 

Well … I think this conclusion turned out to be a bit rash.

 

At this (early) point, not much thinking had been done – regarding how the Drive to Chaos (the 2nd Law) contributes to the Drive toward Complexity.

 

If you put sand into a box, putting white sand in one end and black sand in the other end, then you (randomly) stir the contents, the sands will get more and more mixed together.  And eventually you will have (what appears to be) just a box full of grey sand. In the beginning there was order. Here it was white, and there it was black. Then you subjected the system to (nothing more than) random perturbations … and the order was lost.  This is the functioning of the 2nd law.

 

If people walk into your house, they’re going to bring a certain amount of the world (whatever’s on the ground, outside – dirt or snow) INTO your house … and your house will (automatically)  get dirty or wet. This is the 2nd law at work.

 

Now let’s think about what happens when we wash our clothes.  (Many people in this world do not have a machine which will automatically wash their clothes for them … but many of us do.)

We put our dirty laundry into our Automatic Washing Machine, add some soap (and whatever),  turn the machine on … and after a while, the clothes are “done”.  They’re clean. (and we didn’t have to wash them!)

Our clothes (pretty much ALWAYS) get DIRTY through the functioning of the 2nd Law … and (when we throw them into our Washer) they get CLEAN through the same law.  How is this possible?

It’s because our laundry gets ‘systematically processed’.

The machine (automatically) fills with water.  And when it’s full, the twisty post in the center of the tub (called the ‘agitator’) begins to move (according to the design of that particular machine).  In any case, its job is to subject the clothes to (many and moderate) acts of random violence. (Remember that time when you didn’t set your machine on ‘Delicate’ … but you SHOULD have?)

Then they go through a similar cycle … only THIS time – with no soap – the Rinse Cycle.  Then they are centrifuged – to remove as much water as possible. Then they are “done”. Clean!

But what would happen if we filled the machine with (instead of CLEAN water) – water that was Very Dirty?  

In SUCH a case – your clothes would come out – about as dirty as the water you washed them in.  They may come out DIRTIER than when they went in. Mmm?

 

In THAT case – the 2nd Law would still have been functioning faithfully; it’s just that the GRADIENT got reversed. (The clothes were ‘clean’ compared to the water … so they came out dirtier than they were when you put them in.)

 

The 2nd Law functions BECAUSE OF A GRADIENT.  And it always works “downhill”. Mmm?

 

If you never cleaned the floors of your house … eventually they would cease getting dirtier.  As much dirt would get tracked OUT as was being tracked IN.

If your house had a dirt floor (dirt inside, dirt outside), you wouldn’t have the same problem that you have – if your house has ‘clean’ (non-dirt) floors.

 

The 2nd Law is functioning all the time and everywhere (like all the other Laws of Nature).

 

Our clothes get dirty (and our bodies get dirty) because of the 2nd Law.  And we make these clean again … also by the 2nd Law.

 

I suspect that there are important Contextual Realities which are Unacknowledged by physicists:

particularly (I am thinking) – the door.

 

If you build yourself a house, it will have walls and a roof … and (no doubt) – a doorway.  It will have an opening so that you may come and go. And (if you are serious about the walls) that doorway will have a door.

A door is essentially ambiguous.  A door (when closed) is part of the wall.  And (when open) it’s a hole in the wall. When it’s open, there’s a ‘doorway’.  Then you may walk through your wall. Then you may close it again … and again it’s a wall.

 

The valves in your washing machine (and the lid on the top, or the front) are doors.  The lid (on top) or the door (on the front) are important. They allow us to put clothes in … and take them out again.  The valves are important. They are ‘doors’ in the plumbing, which open and close as needed (for that cycle). Within each cycle – the machine and its contents comprise (for practical purposes) – a Closed System.  Between cycles – it’s an Open System.  Clothes are going in or out. Water is going in … or it’s being pumped or is being thrown   out. The status of the System is in a continual state of flux – Now open. Now closed. Open again.  Closed again.

This is what allows the laundry to be (systematically) processed.

 

The copper bottom on (some) cooking pots – is there as a special sort of ‘door’.  It is put there to facilitate heat transfer – from the stove top, through the pot, and into whatever you are cooking.  And it does this while maintaining its integrity as a container.  Water does NOT escape through the walls or bottom of the pot, yet heat passes through.  That’s why it’s a kind of ‘door’.  It’s selective:  Water, you stay here. Heat, you may come through.  Mmm?

 

Doors are important.

 

What about the mouth?

 

If we’re thinking about the 2nd Law, the mouth is very important.  And it’s also a door, Mmm? Everything with a mouth – is an Open System (at least sometimes).

 

So, the 3rd Law is All-Pervasive … but does it not offer us the recipe for Spontaneous Evolution?  I think it DOES. Perhaps this would be a corollary to the 2nd Law – “Spontaneous Evolution must occur through Open Systems – systems which throughput material and energy.”

 

After all – the Universe is big.  (Surely physicists have also noticed this.)  There is plenty of room for creation to exist in hierarchical layers.  Plenty of room for Open Systems. Plenty of room (and plenty of time) for interaction and for evolution.

 

It took a long time for single-celled organisms to appear.  Then, a long time again – for cooperation (multi-cell organisms) to occur.  But once they did – this was a whole New Ball Game!

Now!  Just have a look around!  It’s out of control!

Creatures exist which we would never think of.  Yet – HERE THEY ARE.

 

As G. K. Chesterton ably points out –

“The whole order of things is more miraculous

than any miracle which could presume to violate it.”

 

 

Let us consider the arrival of the Luscious Fruits.

 

I suspect that the luscious fruits (plums, apples, cherries, oranges, grapes, bananas, tomatoes, blackberries, persimmons, peaches,  pawpaws, mangoes, etc.) these did not show up … till there were “customers” – creatures who wished to eat them – (raccoons, ‘possums, mice, bears, pigs, deer, goats, etc.).

With the arrival of a Customer Base – there was a pressure for the plants (fruit trees, etc.) to produce seed-coverings which were tasty and nourishing.  These fruits became (more and more of) a bribe – to entice the customers into assisting with seed dispersal.  

The berries are the specialists who “want” their customers to eat their fruit (seed and all) … then poop the seeds out somewhere else.  Good for the plant species.  Good for the ones who eat the fruit.

 

Now it’s a new situation.  Living creatures (including humans) do not operate merely through the functioning of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.  Such laws do not go away, but new laws come onto the scene … and join in.

The mammals I have mentioned are sentient beings, creatures with consciousness.  We have needs and desires.

 

Tony Robbins says – We’re going to find a way to get our basic needs met.  Then, down the line some, desires become important.

 

No doubt – there are thousands … millions  of vital processes within our own bodies  which make use of the 2nd Law.  But in the complex interaction between hungry and discriminating customers and the plants which are feeding them … pushing the plants to produce fruits which are ever more luscious, tasty, and nourishing … there’s a lot more happening than just the 2nd Law.

Such interactions are highly complex and tend to push the whole world … in the direction of heaven.  Mmm?

 

So … the idea – that the universe must be a Closed System and (therefore) it must be heading toward entropy – is wrong for the same reason that many of our ideas are wrong:

The conclusion was drawn in the direction of the evidence.  But the conclusion turns out to be wrong, because it imagined a world which was (much) simpler than the real world.

 

John Burroughs says –

It is good that fire should burn, even if it consumes your house; it is good that force should crush, even if it crushes you; it is good that rain should fall, even if it destroys your crops and floods your land.  Plagues and pestilences attest to the constancy of natural law. They set us to cleaning our streets and houses and to readjusting our relations to outward nature. Only in a live universe could disease and death prevail.  Death is a phase of life, a redistribution of the type. Decay is another kind of growth.

 

So what? – if we have to wash our clothes pretty often, and our bodies daily?  We can handle that.

 

The 2nd Law gets us dirty … and it gets us clean again.

Not a bad deal, really.

 

And the 2nd Law is certainly NOT sweeping us to our doom.

 

WE … WE are the ones we need to be worried about.

 

What would happen if one woman told the truth about

       her life?

    The world would split open.

                                  –   Muriel Rukeyser

                                               (from her poem – Käthe Kollwitz)

 

 

 

Businessmen, they drink my wine

Ploughmen dig my earth.

There’s not one among any of them

Knows what any of it is worth.

                              –    Bob Dylan

                         [from “All Along the Watchtower”]

 

 

 

 

In the Minoan civilization (re 2700 – 1600  BC) – men and women were equals. Women (as well as men) owned businesses.  They vaulted bulls in the arena (as did the men).

There was a lot of art (and none of it was signed).  There was elaborate plumbing. Tall palaces. The people there were happy.

 

It would be nice if we could say – that we live in a gender-balanced world … only we don’t.

 

According to NPR – in this world

         women   do ⅔  of the work,

                              bring home 10% of the pay, and

                                   own 1% of the property.

 

It was not all that long ago – that women were regarded as property.

 

Western Civilization is a Warrior Cult and an Old Boy’s Club.  Mmm?

 

Our relationship with the Feminine (with women) – is reflected reliably into our relationship with the Earth … the Great Mother.

These things are all bound together.

 

As it is, everything is run by (a handful of) multinational corporations.  And THOSE are run (I’m pretty certain) – by a few MEN.

 

And these men live in ‘a world’ wherein MADNESS is commonly accepted as the ‘Normal Way We Do Business’.

 

Our laws favor the super-rich (the Ruling Corporations).  The future of our grandchildren is being sold … in favor of short-term gains to the 1% … (probably a TENTH of 1%).  We are handing over the welfare of our planet … for profit (simply). And that profit is going to people who do not need it anyway.

 

It is unclear – who is the more insane :  the Super Rich (for ruining the earth) … or WE (the 99%)  – for ALLOWING IT.

 

We should NOT THINK … that there are NO ALTERNATIVES !!

 

Here is a little excerpt from Ernest Thompson Seton’s “The Gospel of the Redman” –

 

The Old Onion Seller

In a shady corner of the great market at Mexico City was an old Indian named Pota-lamo. He had 20 strings of onions hanging in front of him.

An American from Chicago came up and said: “How much for a string of onions?” “Ten cents,” said Pota-lamo.

“How much for two strings?” “Twenty cents,” was the reply.

“How much for three strings?” “Thirty cents,” was the answer.

“Not much reduction in that,” said the American. “Would you take 25 cents?” “No,” said the Indian.

“How much for your whole 20 strings?” said the American.

“I would not sell you my 20 strings,” replied the Indian.

“Why not?” said the American. “Aren’t you here to sell your onions?” “No,” replied the Indian. “I am here to live my life. I love this marketplace. I love the crowds and the red serapes. I love the sunlight and the waving palmettos. I love to have Pedro and Luis come by and say `Buenas dias’  and talk about the babies and the crops. I love to see my friends. That is my life. For that I sit here all day and sell my 20 strings of onions. But if I sell all my onions to one customer, then my day is ended. I have lost my life that I love – and that I will not do.”

 

You see?  

 

Sanity is a possibility.

 

We should all commit – to (truly) loving our women … and loving the Great Mother

(‘cause – if Mama ain’t happy … ain’t NOBODY happy)

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Chris Hedges says he lived with the Super Rich.  He watched them. He found out how they think.

[If you haven’t watched it yet, you should watch his talk  –

       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6unS2JF8TA  

               (Chris Hedges –  The Pathology of the Rich)]

 

 

Also … you may wish to see the film – “Iron Jawed Angels” (2004, w/ Hilary Swank).